Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 30, 2017 - No Agenda

03:07:34

951: Hard Forking

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I was unaware of this story.
	Adam Curry, John C. Dvorak.
	And Sunday, July 30th, 2017, this is your award-winning Gitmo Nation media assassination, episode 9 or 5, 1.
	This is no agenda.
	Reclaiming our time from the elites and coming to you from the darkest corners of the internet here in the capital of the drone star state, Austin Tejas, in the Cludio, in the morning, I'm Adam Curry.
	Reclaiming my time, reclaiming my time.
	Northern Silicon Valley, I'm John C. Dvorak.
	I guess you saw it too then.
	I think everybody saw it.
	When did she get that hair up her ass?
	Oh my goodness.
	Now we have to play it.
	We have to play it.
	We have to play it.
	This was an outstanding piece of video.
	I watched a lot of C-SPAN over the past couple of days.
	And this was really entertaining.
	Finally, they're back.
	C-SPAN back on top.
	They're beating CNN for entertainment.
	Probably.
	We have our Secretary of the Treasury, Steve Mnuchin.
	The Munch.
	We've got the Mooch and the Munch.
	And this is the Mooch.
	No, the Mooch.
	The Munch.
	The Munch.
	My colleague.
	My Tourette's colleague.
	Although he doesn't seem to have it that bad anymore.
	Have you noticed?
	No, I haven't noticed.
	Well, I do, obviously.
	Yes, you would be more noticing.
	Come on, man.
	Tick away.
	Come on, you can do it.
	How can you sit there with Maxine Waters yelling at you?
	Most people probably only saw a little snippet of this.
	In fact, several people even made clips and sent it to me, which is appreciated.
	But you really have to appreciate what Maxine Waters does here, which is a parliamentary procedure, I've learned.
	Somebody probably just taught it to her, at least not that I know of.
	She's never done this before.
	I have never heard anyone do this.
	And I've watched a lot of C-SPAN. But there's a couple other extra fun bits in here which I'd like to play all in context.
	Maxine Waters grilling the munch, Secretary of the Treasury, over his non-response, according to her, to a letter that her staff sent.
	And he has the obligation, of course, to reply to that, respond to that in due time.
	He feels he has, and she's just not having any of it.
	Given that the Treasury maintains these types of records and given your department's statements that the agency takes responsiveness to congressional requests very seriously and is committed to providing useful and appropriate responses to requests from congressional members, is there some reason why I did not get a response to the letter that I sent?
	Because you're a douche?
	May 23rd.
	So, Ranking Member Waters, first of all, let me thank you for your service to California.
	Being a resident of California, I appreciate everything that you've done for the community there.
	I also have appreciated the opportunity to meet with you.
	Reclaiming my time.
	The time belongs to the gentlelady from California.
	Now, do you understand what is actually going on here with this reclaiming my time bit?
	I kind of do, and what it is is that she's decided on a parliamentary basis, based on some rules, I'm not sure what they do, they probably have their own, that he is talking over her time and she wants it back.
	Right, but he's answering the questions, and he's also confused about...
	Well, that's correct.
	You're right.
	He's not answering questions.
	And she actually plays into that in a very interesting way.
	Let me just say to you, thank you for your compliments about how great I am, but I don't want to waste my time on me.
	I've got to remember that.
	Thank you for telling me about how great I am, but I just don't want to waste my time on me and how great I am.
	See, I think she's kind of sincere in that.
	Come on!
	A little bit.
	A little bit.
	Thank you for your compliments about how great I am, but I don't want to waste my time on me.
	I want to know about the May 23rd letter.
	You know about it?
	Why did you not respond to me and my colleagues?
	I was going to answer that.
	Just please, go straight to the answer.
	Mr.
	Chairman, although it's very weird what she's doing here, I agree.
	I think that all of that pandering and thank you for your courage and all that, we could do without that.
	It would make these C-SPAN bits half the amount of time they usually take.
	I'm not against the...
	Maybe she's creating a...
	This could be a model for the future for these other...
	Because I agree.
	I mean, you listen to that whole thing that he's...
	Because she has a limited amount of time, and he takes up that time.
	I mean, typically in these round go-rounds, they have like five minutes each.
	And so you get to ask a question, and he gets the answer, you get to ask a question.
	And the total time is five minutes, including their responses...
	So if the guy is just stalling, I think this may be setting a precedent.
	I like it.
	I thought when you read the rules, you acknowledged that I shouldn't be interrupted and that I would have an opportunity.
	Reclaiming my time.
	What he failed to tell you was.
	No agenda remixers.
	Please pay attention.
	This is all for you.
	I'll shut up now.
	Because when you're on my time, I can reclaim it.
	He left that out, so I'm reclaiming my time.
	Please, will you respond to the question of why I did not get a response, me and my colleagues?
	And I also kind of love the way she's, could you respond to my question?
	You know, like your mom would talk to you when she's really pissed, and she knows...
	And you're seven?
	Yes, you're seven.
	And you know that you've done something wrong, and she knows it, and they go into that really sweet syrupy, like, I'm going to nail you to the wall.
	Exactly.
	To the May 23rd letter.
	Well, I was going to tell you my response.
	Just tell me.
	Okay?
	So, first of all, okay, let me just say...
	Listen to these performatives from the...
	He fucked up.
	That's obvious.
	Whatever he did, he didn't do what he was supposed to.
	And he's looking at his paper going, okay, let me get to my response.
	Let me tell you.
	Okay, well, here's what I was going to say, right?
	Now, let me see.
	First of all...
	Okay, let me just say that the Department of Treasury has cooperated extensively with the Senate Intel Committee, with the House Intel Committee...
	Reclaiming my time.
	With the Senate.
	With the judiciary.
	Reclaiming my time.
	Okay.
	Reclaiming my time.
	Mr.
	Secretary, the time belongs to the gentlelady from California.
	I think this should become a trend in marriages, even.
	Hey, baby.
	Reclaiming my time, okay?
	I'm reclaiming my time here!
	Perhaps, Mr.
	Chairman, I don't understand the rules because I thought I was allowed to answer questions.
	Reclaiming my time.
	Would you please explain the rules and do not take that away from my time.
	We will give the gentle lady adequate time.
	By the way, the chairman, you can hear in his voice that he's rolling his eyes.
	Oh, yes.
	Yeah, I can assure the gentlelady she'll get her time.
	Your secretary were statements of...
	I mean, her time!
	...and Democratic colleagues on how administration witnesses...
	We should have this feature on television where you can just yell back at your TV, reclaiming my time!
	...should be treated, not necessarily the way they will be treated.
	So the time belongs to the gentlelady from California, but I assure you majority members will allow you to answer the question when it is our time.
	So what I was saying is that we have provided substantial information.
	We believe there's significant overlap.
	As a matter of fact, I would say that we spoke to your Chief Oversight Counsel yesterday.
	We have been responsive, and we are trying to coordinate with you the response, and we've suggested that you get the information through the other committees.
	But I would like to emphasize we believe we've been very responsive.
	Reclaiming my time.
	Thank you very much.
	Oh, she always entertains.
	Well, Maxine Waters 2020.
	Oh man, do you think she's really going to try and do something like that?
	That would be fantastic.
	Maxine Waters, keep on trolling.
	California shills, won't you keep on whining with me?
	Scumbags!
	Good old Maxine.
	Sorry, I don't mean to be ageist, but good, Maxine.
	Good old, good on you, Maxine.
	Yeah, there was a lot of interesting stuff on Spiespan.
	Spiespan.
	Piespan.
	Yes!
	Well, there wasn't much on the regular news, so why not?
	Did you just say yas?
	Yas.
	Yas, queen!
	Let's see.
	I got a couple of things.
	There was some reasonably entertaining stuff going on at the FARA. That's the Foreign Agent Registration Act.
	Yes, that was a good one.
	I watched that one too.
	Did you get any clips?
	I got a couple clips from that.
	What did you get?
	Well, let me see.
	I may have gotten some clips, but it was...
	I don't know.
	I don't have any clips.
	Okay.
	But I did enjoy it.
	Well, the guy who was on the stand who was most interesting is William Browder.
	He's the CEO of Heritage Capital.
	Oh, right, right, right.
	Okay.
	Let me explain a couple of things.
	I had these clips.
	Mark Levin then did a whole special on this guy.
	And I started looking into him.
	And before we play the clips, I just want to put in my two cents worth, which is I... I think some of his generalities are probably correct, but I question his credibility based on the fact that he was a Wall Street douche.
	Besides being a Wall Street douche, he was in Moscow.
	He set up shop in Russia to do a lot of investing, and I don't know if he was doing some tricky dealing or what.
	They kicked him out of the country.
	Now, Russia's always been trying...
	No, it was his lawyer was Maginsky.
	Yes, I know.
	Magninsky.
	Magninsky, I think.
	Okay.
	And he...
	Which is the bills named after him.
	Yes.
	And there was a whole bunch of stuff that came out of this.
	I am very...
	I personally find this guy to be a little...
	A little too smarmy for my taste, but I did watch this, and it was very entertaining.
	So I got a couple of clips.
	Two kind of non-sequiturs, but all this stuff just kind of came out.
	And the reason why I got these clips is I didn't see any of this on the M5M. I saw no report.
	Yeah, I think Fox had one report they may have had Browder on, but really it wasn't prevalent.
	And there were some interesting things being said.
	The first one is about Dana Rohrabacher.
	I'm going to interrupt you again.
	The mainstream media did not cover this at all, I agree.
	And the right-wing people are all upset about it.
	And the mainstream media being so anti-Russian right now, just to humiliate Trump, you'd think they'd cover this.
	You would think so, unless the message...
	Yes, and so I'm convinced that even the mainstream media also knows that this guy is not worth covering.
	So I think I can conclude.
	The mainstream media should be all over this just because there's no logic to it otherwise.
	Right.
	Well, the mainstream media covers everything.
	Hey, reclaiming my time!
	Dana Rohrabacher.
	I can use this a lot.
	Trust me.
	This is my new one.
	Dana Rohrabacher.
	Now, is he a congressman or senator from California, I believe?
	Is he a Democrat?
	He's an old hack is what he is.
	Is he a Democrat or Republican?
	He's a Democrat.
	He's been around forever.
	I believe he's a Democrat.
	He's in California.
	I'm looking him up as we speak.
	I forgot all about him.
	Well, I just like Browder's little offhanded comment about it.
	After you contacted the Department of Justice regarding FARA noncompliance, have you received any updates from them regarding the complaint you sent to them in July?
	And at the time of the complaint, did you have any reason to believe that any of the individuals involved had met with any political campaign people?
	I've received no updates since July.
	And we know for sure that part of their campaign was running around Capitol Hill.
	One of the people that they were able to convince to go along with them is a member of the House of Representatives from Orange County, Dana Rohrabacher, who they have met with on a number of occasions and who has been effectively touting their See, when I heard this, I'm like, okay.
	So he's slagging people off.
	This is obviously also an opportunity for any of the senators up on the panel to make any point they want to.
	And Grassley went for it.
	I liked it.
	I appreciated it.
	It should have come in the form of a question.
	You should have had a shill sitting there ready to answer the question.
	You didn't.
	So, you know, it has no power, but it's still fun to hear.
	I think you said this, but let me make sure about Renaissance Capitals' connection, if any, with the Russian government.
	So Renaissance Capital is connected to the Russian government through ex-FSB employees who are at the senior level of Renaissance Capital.
	This issue is also important to the committee.
	That same Russian bank, Renaissance Capital...
	paid President Bill Clinton $500,000 for a June 2010 speech in Moscow.
	That same month, Uranium One began the application process for a Russian government-owned company to acquire U.S. uranium assets.
	The review of this takeover was done by the Committee of Foreign Investments, and Secretary Clinton's State Department was one of the approval authorities.
	Renaissance Capitol reportedly assigned a buy rating to Uranium One.
	I love that.
	So it raises a number of issues.
	That I didn't know.
	That part I like a lot.
	Yes, this is the best part of the...
	The guys who paid Bill Clinton before the sign-off came for the uranium assets, that they also initiated a buy rating on the assets.
	Great.
	Very good.
	But now we go to the main piece that really was interesting, A, because it was Lindsey Graham, who I don't know if he was getting the answers he wanted, really.
	We never really know what side Lindsey is on.
	Well, the way you can tell if he's getting the answers he wants is the way he asks the question.
	If he starts the question with, would you agree?
	Yeah, that's true.
	And then he asks a question and the guy has to agree to it.
	Otherwise, he's just flailing.
	So what I understand from this is that the infamous lawyer, Natalia, whatever her name is, Who called for the meeting with Donald Trump Jr.
	and the 20,000 people who are now in the meeting.
	That she was working for the Russians.
	Specifically, and we know this because that's what was...
	We know that this is what Trump Jr.
	told us.
	To overturn the Magnitsky Act.
	But, that the same people she was working for, and I believe we're back to Renaissance Capital, they're the ones who funded the Golden Shower Report.
	Yes.
	So what's coming out of this, the way I understand it, and we'll hear Lindsey Graham and we'll hear Browder speak, is that the Russians are actually trying to blackmail Trump through the same people who the M5M claims were trying to collude with Trump and effectively win the election because it's so easy to do.
	You believe that Fusion GPS should have registered under FARA because they were acting on behalf of the Russians?
	That's correct.
	So I just want to absorb that for a moment.
	The group that did the dossier on President Trump hired this British spy, wound up getting it to the FBI. You believe they were working for the Russians?
	In the spring and summer of 2016, they were receiving money indirectly from a senior Russian government official.
	Okay.
	So these are the people that were trying to undermine Donald Trump.
	By showing he had nefarious ties to Russia.
	Is that what you're saying?
	Well, what I'm saying with 100% certainty is that they were working to undermine the Magnitsky Act and the timing of that.
	The Fusion GPS products, apparently, is they hired a guy to look into Trump.
	Yes, correct.
	And the guy looking into Trump was trying to tell the world that Trump's compromised by the Russians, and I won't go into graphic detail.
	Oh, come on!
	That was the genesis.
	Come on!
	He looked at the report.
	Hookers!
	I have not looked at it carefully, no.
	Okay, well that's what's in...
	I have not looked at it very carefully.
	...in the dossier.
	I just went to the good parts.
	So, why is this important?
	The Russians are behind Fusion GPS who are going after Trump.
	What's the Russian lawyer's name?
	Natalia Veselnitskaya.
	Can I just call her Natalia?
	You can call her whatever you want.
	Is she working for the Russians too?
	She's definitely working for the Russians, no question.
	So here's the deal in June of last year.
	Allegedly, she is meeting with Don Jr., And the premise of the meeting was the Russian government's behind Trump and you need to meet with these people.
	They can help your campaign.
	And Donald Trump says, I love it.
	And they met with this lady.
	Is that the general idea of what happened in June?
	That's apparently what was reported to happen in June, yes.
	So she's working for the Russians, and she's trying to communicate with her oligarch friends that the Russians are on Trump's side.
	We got an email to that effect.
	Right.
	Yes.
	This is confusing.
	Is she just basically a double agent?
	I mean, what is going on?
	How about this for an idea?
	This is all bull crap.
	Yeah.
	There was also this message that he said that the way she spoke to Donald Trump Jr.
	was in code.
	I didn't clip that.
	Yes, it was in code.
	And if he understood the code, he'd brighten up and then he'd speak back in some coded language so they know they can lessen the sanctions on Russia because this is all about the sanctions.
	Yes, the code was adoptions.
	Adoptions was the code word.
	Right.
	Adoptions is a code word where we've got to lessen the sanctions.
	And if he knew, and he should have, according to this character, Browder, If he knew, he would have brightened up and he would have acted differently and probably had another meeting.
	And he kept talking about Trump should have had another meeting.
	He probably had another meeting.
	But he wouldn't have had another meeting if he didn't know heads from tails, which is what I believe happened.
	He goes in there, dumb.
	He doesn't know what's going on.
	And they're throwing code at him.
	And he says, oh, I don't know.
	And then he never has another meeting with him, which makes more sense than what this crap Browder guy is trying to get at.
	But I'm not sure.
	I don't know if he's trying to...
	I don't know what side he's on.
	Yeah, besides the side of money.
	He hates Russia.
	Yeah, that's true.
	All it is is he hates Russia to such an extreme.
	He said at one point in this thing, which I couldn't clip it.
	I can summarize a lot of it.
	He said, they're liars.
	Everything they say is a lie.
	Everything the Russians say is a lie.
	And I thought that was interesting because Jim Rogers, the famous world investor that's floating all over the place.
	Who keeps telling us the world is going to end soon.
	But that's what he always says.
	He was just on Max's show and they talked about how he's on a number of boards in Russia.
	He's got big investments in some parts of the country.
	We should lock him up!
	Well, it seems to me that he can't do any of this stuff because the Russians only do it all.
	They never tell the truth according to Browder, ever.
	Right.
	Yet that guy has all kinds of dealings with Russia and it's fine.
	So I have a lot of questions about this.
	Now, if I could summarize the one basic problem that Browder has.
	I have one more quickie, and then let's summarize.
	This is Durbin.
	Can you sort out, I am trying to piece together a few things here, and the steel dossier is something I'm trying to understand as it relates to GPS Fusion.
	Could you put that in perspective as to their role and what that dossier, why it was created, and what I only know about the Steele dossier and this whole thing from what I've read in the press.
	I'm just a bystander in that part of the story.
	What I am absolutely familiar with on a first-hand basis is Fusion GPS and Glenn Simpson's role working on behalf of the Russian government to overturn the Magnitsky Act.
	And there, I think it's The steps they took very much compromised their integrity.
	Okay.
	Okay, let's start with the Magnitsky Act.
	This is designed to punish...
	Certain oligarchs in Russia, specifically.
	And by name.
	And that means you basically lock them out of the world financial system.
	What is it, like 30 guys or something on this list?
	There's a lot of guys.
	I don't know the number, but it might be up that high.
	And the problem is, it's all for Putin.
	It's...
	Here's what Browder's basic thesis is, and I think it's an interesting possibility, except I don't see evidence of it, but it's still a possibility.
	He says that once Putin got in, he saw that the power of the oligarchs was getting a little out of control, and they were making way too much money off of stolen Russian assets that were largely given away by Brzezinski and others, and the mob, the Russian mob.
	And so these guys got very big.
	So Putin decided the first thing he did was he grabbed the richest one, and we know this was a few years back.
	He grabbed the richest guy, the guy that had a big oil company, the absolute biggest of the big oligarchs, and threw him in jail.
	Right.
	For tax fraud and all kinds of things.
	Who trumped up charges, according to everybody.
	And he put him in a cage in the trial because apparently there's some reason to do this for certain kinds of individuals.
	He was in a cage?
	Yes.
	Well, you saw this with the Pussy Riot girls.
	They were in a cage.
	Oh, they were in a cage too.
	Yeah, you're right.
	So they put him in a cage during the trial to protect them, I guess.
	Which may be a good reason if you think about it.
	But he's in a cage.
	According to Brodsky, this sent a signal out to all the other oligarchs is that you can be in a cage, too, at my whim.
	Right.
	What was the deal, according to Brodsky?
	Putin says that, or he says Putin got together with each oligarch individual and he says, I want half of all your money.
	I want you, whatever you're making, I want half of it.
	And he claims, and others have claimed this too, that Putin is actually the world's richest man with a minimum of $200 billion stashed away.
	I have my doubts about that.
	Well, I do too, because even that guy in Ukraine who built his mansion, which is a palace, what's Putin doing with all this money?
	Is it in a Swiss bank?
	Is it invested in Alaska?
	I mean, where is this money?
	But apparently Putin has all this money, and he's getting half of everything these oligarchs make, and they make a lot.
	I think he has it in Bitcoin.
	Well, if he bought low, he's really loaded then.
	Anyway, so then that's the whole thesis.
	And so he sees the Russian system as a mob system.
	With the top, the capo de capo, is Putin.
	And he's getting a skim off of everything all these guys make, so it keeps them out of the cage.
	And that's it.
	Here's what's interesting.
	The Magnitsky Act is Magnitsky Act.
	Okay, I got it now.
	It has 17 people on the list.
	On the list, Natalia Vinogradova.
	She is on the list.
	So this does give credence, according to Wikipedia at least, to the theory that she was let in to the United States by the State Department, which at that time would have been, of course, Kerry.
	But during the election cycle, she was let in under a special waiver.
	And what good is this Magnitsky act if people can just come in?
	You're going to do that.
	I mean, this is what's disturbing.
	Unless she's no longer on the list, but I see her in Wikipedia.
	She's still on the list.
	We could probably go find it.
	Find the...
	This whole thing stinks.
	It does stink, and it stinks of a setup.
	I have to say that that theory is starting to ring a little bit true now.
	And we don't know what...
	So we have this guy...
	And people can go listen to this guy.
	It's very entertaining, but...
	You're listening to a hedge fund manager tell deep secrets about the Russian system.
	And the story about poor Magnitsky, which has been, I think...
	Done on 60 Minutes and maybe some other shows on television in the United States.
	This guy was railroaded, beat up, and his life was made miserable, and he died.
	Killed.
	He was killed.
	And it's just a sad story, but I don't believe we're close to having a handle on any of it.
	Maybe Putin isn't just a gangster.
	Anything's possible.
	We really don't know.
	But where's the money?
	What's he doing with it?
	What's he doing with it?
	I mean, yeah.
	What's he doing with it?
	This then leads into this second special counsel request that came out of the House.
	But if you saw that, I think it came out maybe Thursday, where, again, a large number of representatives are asking for a special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton in Russia.
	It just gets better and better.
	This never ends.
	Oh, well, yeah.
	I hope it does end eventually, because it...
	We need some resolution.
	Well, we're not going to get it.
	And we could talk a little bit about the rents previous situation and all this other stuff that happened, which is very...
	Again...
	I mean, it's not as though we had a lot of time between the last show and this one, but boom, you got all this action.
	But I want to just back up a little bit because I was listening to C-SPAN, too.
	And I have to play some clips that I think is maybe some of the best background.
	We talk about this.
	We've never heard anything so concise as explaining our situation in the United States and the New World Order.
	Or not the New World Order, but the World Order, which I have to assume is the Old World Order.
	Yes.
	uh, So Mark Miley, who's the chief of staff for the Army on the Joint Chiefs, he is the Army guy.
	I've seen this guy.
	He looks like a typical Army blowhard.
	He's got a big head, square.
	He's got bags.
	He looks like Rodney Dangerfield.
	Blockhead.
	Blockhead, we call him.
	He's a blockhead.
	Well, by the way, Rohrabacher, look at his picture.
	Yep.
	So this guy never is, you know, whatever.
	And he comes up, he's huffing and puffing and all this.
	I had, this guy, I had listened to his entire presentation at the National Press Club on C-SPAN. Okay.
	And I walked away thinking, this guy is the most insightful genius.
	It's unbelievable how smart he is.
	And he stood in front of the National Press Club and gave about, I think it was about 30 minutes of Well, it might have been rehearsed, but there was no prompter.
	There was no notes.
	There was nothing.
	And he just rattled off the way things are in such a concise manner.
	I've done a lot of public speaking.
	I could never approximate or come closer to what this guy was able to do.
	I was stunned by this guy.
	Okay.
	That's quite an endorsement from you.
	No kidding.
	No.
	So I want to play a couple of things, and this is a little long, but this is a fascinating take on what is the World Order.
	I got two clips.
	I got the long one, which is Miley on World Order, and then there's a little follow-up that's short.
	But this...
	No agenda listeners really have to pay attention to this because this is what we talk about.
	But I've never heard anybody, especially in the government or the military, put it quite so concisely.
	I heard Mayer talk about the army.
	We don't have a small army.
	But the question on size of forces, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, it's a relative question.
	It's not an absolute question.
	It's a question of what do you want it to do?
	How big do you want it is relative to the tasks you want it to do.
	The United States military is a global military, and we have been for sure since the First World War and with absolute certainty since the Bretton Woods Agreements at the end of World War II, which established essentially the international order.
	Did you say Bretton Woods or something else?
	It sounded like Bretton Waters, you said.
	You said Bretton Woods.
	Oh, okay.
	...certainty since the Bretton Woods Agreements at the end of World War II, which established essentially the international order, the rules and regimes by which the world runs today.
	So for seven decades, the world has had a certain set of rule sets emphasizing things like free trade, international commerce, things like democracy, the quote-unquote liberal world order, things like human rights, and there's a whole wide variety of And then you've got institutions that are rest upon the United Nations and the World Bank and the World Trade Organization and all these things that were developed many years ago.
	And that is essentially what people very quickly refer to as the world order.
	One of the significant roles of the United States military for seven decades has been to enforce that world order.
	To maintain it, to maintain its stability.
	And that's in our interest because in the first half of the last century, there was a bloodletting unlike any that had ever occurred in the history of mankind.
	So between 1914 and 1945, 100 million people We're slaughtered in the conduct of war.
	And that's a horrible, horrible nightmare.
	My mother and father both served in that war.
	My mother in the Navy and my father in the Marines.
	And he hit the beach at Iwo Jima where 7,000 Marines were killed in 19 days.
	34,000 wounded.
	22,000 Japanese killed on an island that was 2 miles by 4 miles.
	There were millions of Chinese killed in belt battle and murdered.
	If you want a real trail of tears, go to Eastern Europe and see what happened in Belarus and Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania.
	It's horrific.
	Nine out of every ten Jews that lived in Poland weren't alive in 1945.
	One out of every three males that lived in the Ukraine or Belarus were dead by 1945.
	It's a horrific picture.
	Picture that occurred.
	And those people who were in leadership positions in 1945 said never again.
	We can't keep doing this.
	This is insane.
	They said the same thing in 1815, after the Napoleonic Wars, and they set up the Council of Europe.
	And that worked well for 100 years, for one century.
	They kept a long peace in Europe, more or less.
	There were a couple of minor flare-ups.
	The Crimean War and the Austrian Royal War and a few other wars.
	But there wasn't a continental-wide war until...
	1914.
	So we tried again in 1945 to set up a system that would try to maintain global peace and prevent war between great powers and great power states throughout the world.
	That system is under stress, intense stress, today.
	That system is under stress from revolutionaries and terrorists and guerrillas.
	It's under stress from nation states that don't like the rules of the road, that were written and want to revise those rules of the road.
	That system is under very intense stress.
	And we're at 70 years now.
	And that system has prevented great power at war, similar to what occurred in the first half of the last century.
	Wow, yeah.
	I don't think I've ever heard that in...
	Well, this wasn't really mainstream, even though the guy is kind of mainstream.
	I don't think everyone ever heard that.
	This little lecture, which was short, if you wanted to know how concise it was.
	And by the way, his whole half hour was just dynamite.
	But this is not taught in schools.
	And if you listen to it, and especially when it regards to the military...
	No, here's the school version.
	Hitler hated the Jews...
	Okay, see you next week.
	And we have an income disparity.
	So anyway, his whole thing, of course, is to discuss the fact that we are the nation's policeman, or the nation's military, really.
	But let's listen to the part two where he discusses a few details about that.
	Similar to what occurred in the first half of the last century.
	So, the question is, how big an army do you want?
	How big a navy do you want?
	Well, how much do you want that system?
	How much do you value that system?
	Is that system worth preserving or not?
	Therein you get to the size and scope of your armies, navies, air forces, and marines.
	And, rightly or wrongly, fairly or unfairly, the role of the arbiter Of that system has defaulted to the United States for seven decades.
	There are other countries, 60 or 70 of them or so, that have allied themselves with their militaries to us.
	And they make significant contributions.
	But it is the United States that's been the leader with that system.
	So, the status of the army as part of the military force that works to help maintain the stability of the world, we're a global military and we're a global army, and we've got right now today about 180,000 soldiers in the United States Army, active duty, reserve, and national guard deployed in about 140 countries around the world.
	I don't think I've ever heard anyone just be, and particularly because he's representing the military, You know, you just say, hey, this is our job.
	We know our job.
	This is when it was all set up and this is what we do.
	But it's getting a little problematic now.
	The thing that's interesting about this little speech, besides being concise and right, apparently telling us what's going on, is it explains the $600 billion budget for the military, why we're in all these countries.
	And it makes these arguments that we hear a lot.
	Oh, let's get out.
	Why are we in Germany?
	It makes a lot of these arguments, if we understand the situation as he explained it, it makes all these bitches very specious.
	If you understand the mechanism and the system, as he likes to put it, that's why we spend all this money.
	That's why it's just to keep the system going.
	You don't like the system, which he says apparently some people don't.
	Not doing too well, yeah.
	That's a different story.
	So, taking that logically...
	When we see our friends and allies and partners in NATO not paying the bill for all this that we do, that's a fair point.
	Yeah.
	Because apparently everybody knows, everybody's on board.
	Yeah, they've all signed off.
	Yeah.
	And when they agree to be a contributor to the budget, they're like, eh, we got other things to do.
	They got to do it.
	Yeah, of course they do.
	Yeah, okay, good.
	Good.
	We got that.
	Now, he did, I have one, two, three, five, I have three more.
	I like this guy as much as you want, please.
	I'm stunned by this guy.
	What's his first name?
	Miley is his last name?
	Mark, I think.
	Mark Miley, everybody, here on WHCZZ100. Mark Miley.
	Now you do it.
	Here in the morning for you, Mark Miley.
	Yeah, Mark Miley.
	A couple of things.
	He does discuss it.
	He does a long exposition on Russia, China, and all the rest.
	His China one's particularly interesting.
	I'm going to tell you what these are going to be.
	I got one on China, and I got one on his use of the word enemies, and he thinks that people just toss out the word enemy.
	Well, we know that.
	We know that.
	Bull crap.
	Russia, enemy, hostile.
	He's...
	He thinks we definitely have to work with Russia.
	He likes the Russians, I think.
	But listen to this little thing on China.
	This is quite interesting.
	China has advanced really significantly in terms of economic development.
	They were clicking off a 10% GDP growth a year.
	They slowed down to 7% here the last couple of years.
	But it is probably...
	And this is open to argument, I suppose, but probably one of the most significant, if not the most significant, economic shift in global economic power in the last five centuries, really since the rise of the West and the Industrial Revolution.
	The Chinese economic...
	Growth over the last 40 years is really, really, really significant.
	What does that mean?
	Historically, when economic power shifts so significantly, military power typically follows.
	And I believe that we're seeing that today.
	Wait a minute.
	Wait a minute.
	I've heard the String of Pearls.
	I've heard the New Silk Road.
	The China Dream?
	Have we heard this?
	No, but he hasn't.
	There's a lot of books about it.
	Chinese have been actually fairly transparent about that.
	They have a thing that they call the China Dream, and their intent is to restore their historical 5,000-year role to essentially be the most significant power in Asia, and they want to be at least a global co-equal with the United States, and they want to achieve that by mid-century, and they're very transparent.
	They write books about it.
	They put articles out there about it.
	They would like to do that peacefully if they can in what they call a win-win strategy.
	And if they can't do it peacefully, that's why they're building that military.
	We're going to look a lot like Africa.
	I'm sure they do it peacefully.
	Here you go.
	Hey, let us take some of that.
	Nice.
	Now, this guy is interesting because he's actually a Princeton guy.
	You find a chief of staff that generally always come out of West Point.
	And this guy went through Princeton and ROTC program.
	And Princeton's one of the great schools of the country that people come out and aren't dumb.
	And so I was kind of impressed by that, that he could work his way up to the ranks and become this guy.
	He must just be able to out-talk everybody.
	That's the only thing I can think of.
	But let's listen to this other thing on the usage of the word enemies.
	So, stand by.
	China is not an enemy.
	I want to emphasize that.
	Neither is Russia for that matter.
	Enemy has, for me, for people like me in uniform, enemy has a very specific definition, and that is a group of people or nation states that you are currently engaged in armed conflict with.
	That's the word enemy.
	Sometimes words like that get used too loosely.
	Neither China nor Russia are enemies.
	We are not engaged in open armed conflict, and we want to keep it that way.
	Competition is one thing.
	But they attacked us!
	Even if it's adversarial, even if there are some things below the level of conflict that happen that are not necessarily savory, but there's a big difference.
	There's a giant difference between open conflict and those activities below open conflict.
	So competition without conflict is probably a desirable goal, especially with those two countries, given the size, capacity, capability of those countries.
	So...
	This was at the National Press Club?
	Yeah, but it wasn't, I don't think it was the big meeting, I think it was a smaller meeting.
	So there were journalists there?
	Yeah.
	And did anyone raise their hand later and say, but they attacked us, they attacked us, they attacked us, violence!
	Nobody said that at all.
	But my last clip is at the end when he's done.
	And I would recommend anyone out there who really wants to go to C-SPAN and find this speech and listen to the whole thing.
	Yeah, I'm going to put it in the show notes right now.
	It's absolutely...
	I'm completely...
	I think this guy's fantastic.
	Anyway, so let's listen to his...
	He gets one question.
	He got a bunch of questions and he's pretty funny.
	He has some one-liners that weren't bad.
	Yeah, it's Mark A. Miley.
	You're right.
	But here he is on the Trump announcement of one of the...
	Trump tweeted about the gender thing, and this became a big news story that nobody knew about it, and Trump just tweeted it out of the blue.
	The military had no idea.
	The Pentagon was blindsided, caught off guard.
	Blindsided.
	That's what the Washington Post, I think they even used that word, blindsided.
	Here's what he says.
	Did you have advanced knowledge that the president would be issuing the ban via Twitter yesterday?
	No.
	I personally did not, but nor would I have expected to.
	And I notice that's been in the media out there.
	I, like I said up front, it's a chain of command thing, and I render my advice through the chain of command, which in my case would be, I'd render it up to General Dunford and Secretary Mattis, and they would render it back to me.
	So, no, personally, no.
	The president would say, hey, Mark, I'm doing this.
	No, he didn't do that.
	But nor would I expect him to do, nor is there any kind of requirement to do that.
	How did you learn of the President's decision when he sent out the tweet yesterday?
	The same way everyone else did.
	But again, we're trying to make this out, or some people are trying to make this out as if that is particularly unique.
	If I could count on, if I had a nickel for every time I read Decisions in the news over the last 10, 15, 20 years.
	I'd probably be a pretty wealthy guy right now.
	So it's not particularly unusual to read about things in the media.
	That's why in my office I have like six screens and I've got the scrolls going every which way.
	And I'm always looking for the breaking news thing.
	I say, oh, did I know that?
	So, you know, the people can say what they want about the media, but the one thing you are is fast.
	And accurate, I don't know.
	Accurate sometimes, but fast.
	Fast all the time.
	Very good.
	So I think it's interesting.
	He's one of those guys with six screens going all the time, like, you know.
	Like a day trader.
	Yeah.
	Hey, man, I've got tweet streams.
	I've got tweet deck.
	I'm all good to go.
	Oh, did I know about that?
	Yeah.
	Hey, before anything, I want to give you a clip of the day for that compilation.
	Thank you.
	Very nice.
	Good catch.
	Good catch.
	While we're on the New World Order, big news out of the European Union this morning.
	This came in from Reuters.
	European Union states are considering measures which would allow them to temporarily stop people withdrawing money from their accounts to prevent bank runs.
	Yeah.
	And this is not law yet, but it is breaking news.
	So go run into bank now!
	Exactly.
	Well, what they're saying is it would be very similar to Cyprus.
	You'll recall what happened there.
	Oh, yeah.
	So, the plan, if agreed, would contrast with legislative proposals made by the European Commission in November that aimed to strengthen supervisors' powers to suspend withdrawals, but excluded from the moratorium-insured depositors, which under EU rules are those below €100,000.
	So, that will be the big question.
	Will it be a level?
	Will it be...
	We haven't seen new EU rules.
	That's kind of like the FDIC in the U.S. where your deposits are insured.
	Up to $250,000.
	Right.
	It's very possible.
	They'll just say, yeah, because they're talking about five days, you know, or 20 days.
	How bad is it that they're even discussing this?
	It must be pretty bad.
	They're planning.
	I mean, Italy must be on deck.
	I mean, Italy must.
	And Schultz.
	Over there at the SPD in Germany, who is running.
	He's running against Angola, I guess.
	Good luck.
	He comes out and says, if Italy is not given aid by the European Union, the refugee crisis will explode again.
	And this harkens back to the Italians saying, look, if you're not going to give us money, European Union, we're just going to give all these migrants...
	And I say migrants specifically.
	You're going to kick them out of the country.
	No, we're going to give them visas for the rest of the European Union.
	That's what I forgot.
	You're right.
	You guys are going to give them visas and you guys are screwed.
	We have passports.
	Yeah, this is really good.
	Passports, even better.
	That would be even better.
	Nice.
	Normally I'd put this in our tech news segment, but I think it's of such importance that I want to bring it up now.
	This is the hard fork.
	Have you heard of the hard fork?
	Have you heard about the hard fork?
	No, you haven't, have you?
	No.
	The hard fork happens on Tuesday, 1220 a.m., by Believe UTC. Bitcoin will be forked.
	What?
	Yes, this has some very interesting implications.
	And let me try and explain, and please hold your fire.
	And no need to tell everyone I don't understand what I'm talking about because I probably don't.
	Talking to me?
	No.
	You're talking to the chat room.
	I'm talking to the people out there who will, whenever we talk about Bitcoin...
	Yeah, I know.
	We get a bunch of grouse.
	A lot of grouse.
	You don't get it.
	So there's been a long-term split in the community.
	And by the way, just looking at Bitcoin as an investment vehicle versus money...
	When you have a community about money, you always got to wonder what that is.
	Is this any good?
	Since it's supposed to be such an anonymizing factor, how could you have a community in the first place?
	Exactly.
	So the community saw one of the major issues of Bitcoin is the speed in which transactions can be done, and this is limited by the block size.
	And, you know, that's really not important to understand how all of it works, but that's currently one megabyte.
	And the community decided, I believe in line with the Sakamoshi Natamoto, hello, Moto, White paper on Bitcoin, you know, the elusive guy who we have no idea who he is, that the way to go was with something called SegWits, and that means that it's just a code name for upgrading this to two megabytes, this block.
	So you can do, instead of six transactions per, was it minute or second, you can effectively double it, or maybe there's a bigger factor in there.
	But that is really the biggest problem that we're seeing with Bitcoin in the Bitcoin community.
	And if Bitcoin being open source, it can be forked.
	And what that means is you can take all the code, including the blockchain, and the blockchain is where everyone's money is, and you can create a copy of that and say, okay, we're over here, and we have all this.
	You're going to love this, John.
	We have all the same stuff.
	All your money is now duplicated here.
	We have a copy of the chain, but we're changing the chain, and our version of the chain will have 8 megabytes of block space, which is much bigger, much better, so this group claims.
	And, I mean, this has now become jihad.
	I mean, we're talking, you know, people are...
	I sent a message to one of our experts...
	And I said, you know, what's the deal?
	Just give me your insights.
	And I just want to make sure I don't misquote him.
	He is very denigrating about the alternative, or derogatory, I should say.
	He calls it, let me just see, I'm just picking it up here, the Shitcoin.
	There we go.
	Shitcoin.
	So you can see that the community, there's a split in the community.
	But here's the interesting thing.
	This is what really boggles my mind.
	When this takes place, and for all intents and purposes, it's taking place, as far as I know, you will actually have a copy of your money in what they're calling Bitcoin Cash, right?
	Which will be the rival to Bitcoin.
	And your money, although it may not have the same value, it could be one Bitcoin cash, which will be known as BCH, because it's already a BCC. But one BCH could be worth maybe $300.
	The futures say maybe it'll be $900.
	And then if there's an exchange where you can turn that into dollars, or if there's a place where you can spend it, I don't think there's any places to accept it.
	You basically got free money.
	But, just to top it off, you're only assured of that happening if you have your own key in your own possession.
	So if you're using Coinbase or some other place, you may not get that double your money or the double your coins.
	For instance, Coinbase, I don't think, is not going to honor that.
	They're just going to say, well, whatever, we're not dealing with BCH. But there's a ton of other places that are.
	So here we have something very interesting with this money that is effectively being duplicated.
	Just duplicated.
	And a new money is created next to the original money, as if the Chinese would say, well, we're going to duplicate all your money, and it may be worth only 50 cents, but here you go.
	You just got 50 cents with our money, which you can exchange here maybe for yuan or maybe for iPhones or whatever it would be.
	This is a very...
	From a community perspective, and Bitcoin is the future of money, this is not good marketing.
	This is very confusing for people.
	Your report is confusing.
	Because it is confusing.
	No, it is.
	You understand the basics of what happens.
	No.
	Okay.
	No, you don't.
	So I'll break it down into one paragraph.
	It makes no sense to me that it would fork in the first place.
	Why not?
	No, I know this is open source.
	No, it's techno weenies arguing about what's better.
	God, how many meetings have we been in about this?
	Oh, I think you should do double space.
	I think you should do tab.
	I mean, that's what it is.
	Right, it's gif, jif.
	Yes, gif, jif.
	Blue dress, silver.
	And everyone has their own technical reasoning.
	But I'll just try to sum it all up.
	If you have Bitcoin, on Tuesday, you will wake up and you will have Bitcoin and you will have Bitcoin Cash if you hold your own keys, if you have that yourself, or maybe you have an exchange or one of these places where you can money change.
	They might do it.
	You'll have another piece of money right next to it.
	And that may be of equal value, more likely to be much less, but it will be probably more than zero.
	They've created a new dimension.
	Yes.
	They've created a new dimension, new money, but just out of thin air, which to me is like, well, holy crap, why don't we do this?
	We'll do the no agenda fork.
	Then we'll be all in on it.
	That's not a bad idea, Nacho.
	If you're going to go that, yeah.
	Well, why wouldn't anybody want to do this?
	Why doesn't everybody do a fork?
	Yeah, why doesn't everybody fork it off?
	It's very, very interesting to me.
	I can't wait to see what happens.
	The question is, will people migrate to Bitcoin Cash because they feel that is a better technical solution and they like the community better over there?
	Or will they stay loyal to Bitcoin BTC? What will happen to the price of BTC? Will it go up past $3,000?
	Will it tank first?
	I think it should tank.
	I think it should tank, too.
	I think it'll tank, it'll run up, it'll run back up past its current high, which I think is about $3,000.
	But most of real interest is the Bitcoin cash.
	Now, by the way, these communities, they're really miners.
	That's who these guys are.
	You know, it's guys who run servers to make the money out of thin air.
	But it's not really thin air.
	It's electricity and computing power.
	And so that may be of interest for people to jump in and start mining Bitcoin cash.
	I looked into this a lot.
	As long as you can get free electricity...
	You can make money on that, but that's very hard.
	I mean, where can you get free electricity except maybe Venezuela?
	Hey, let me move to Venezuela.
	Yeah, go set up a Bitcoin mining operation in Venezuela for the government.
	I think they have.
	I think they have miners in Venezuela for that very reason.
	So, anyway, this kind of destroys the whole notion of Bitcoin as money.
	And every single analysis I've seen, I've watched yesterday for hours trying to understand what was happening.
	No one's talking about this as money.
	It's all about your investment.
	Hey, if you're going to buy in, you know, it could rise.
	This is only...
	It's not about money.
	No, it's just...
	This is the tele...
	This is the...
	What were those little dolls that happened during the crash of 99, the 2000 era?
	Beanie Babies?
	Yeah, Beanie Babies.
	Beanie Baby.
	I find this, by the way, if you study...
	Well, hold on.
	This was your theory.
	I want you to repeat the theory, and then I want to ask you where we are in your theory.
	Okay, well, before we do that...
	I want to play a clip then.
	Okay.
	This is just so everyone gets a feeling for what's going on in this economy of ours.
	There's a Trish Reagan and stocks going up clip.
	Okay.
	But they're not fully employed.
	So I would point out that you are also seeing a decline in the U6 rate, which is very good news.
	So the economy is doing better.
	The stock market, you think, will also continue to do better?
	Or is that completely dependent on tax reform?
	I think the stock market depends upon the underlying economic growth, which we think accelerated in the second quarter and will also pick up over the rest of the year.
	And unless, Trish, there is a recession, which I don't see one on the horizon, not in 2017 or 2018, I think stocks can continue to move higher.
	It's all about, for stocks, growth, and the generation of corporate earnings.
	And things on that front look great.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	It looks great.
	And by the way, Trish should get a clue and stop using so much Botox.
	Alright.
	Anyway.
	So how does that play into the Beanie Baby story?
	There's a number of coincidences that take place during the end of a market run before you have a crash.
	And a lot of them can only be described as crazy investments.
	And there's evidences of this happening before the crash.
	find evidences of craziness like pole dancing and you just have to look at the sociology of the era.
	But Beanie Babies was the phenomenon that took place most recently.
	And there wasn't quite a similar, there wasn't, there may have been a similar phenomenon before the crash of 2008, but the Beanie Babies one was the one that got me more, the most excited because they had an actual television network on cable and satellite dish that showed up 24-7 Beanie Baby trading.
	And this guy was on there with all these different rare Beanie Babies in there.
	Oh, this is going to appreciate in value.
	This is the rare green Irish Beanie Baby.
	And people would buy these things for like hundreds of dollars and they'd have these huge collections.
	There was even one episode I would recommend trying to track it.
	One guy who made like $300 million off of this bullcrap.
	I don't know that, but it's possible.
	I think so.
	Even though that number seems a little high.
	But there was even an episode of Third Rock from the Sun where one of the characters in that show were addicted to collecting beanie babies.
	And the whole phenomenon was just fascinating because these things were worthless.
	They were just little things.
	They were cranking.
	Tie company was just cranking these things out.
	Arguably, they were worth much more than Bitcoin.
	Because there was substance.
	Yeah, it was tangible.
	You could touch it.
	Yeah, you could touch it.
	You could put it on the wall.
	You could put it in a cabinet.
	You could display it.
	So there was an element of value, but that element of value wasn't in the hundreds of dollars.
	But wait, but wait, but wait.
	Was it a store of value?
	No, obviously.
	That's what Bitcoin is always called.
	It's called a store of value.
	Store of value.
	Yeah.
	Now, there was probably something, I haven't traced what it was that took place in 2006-2007 era.
	Somebody out there might immediately know because they were involved with whatever it was that had disappeared off the face of the earth, like the Beanie Babies.
	Mm-hmm.
	And I'm still irked by the fact that I had a rare Beanie Baby and I didn't dump it.
	Damn it.
	Damn it.
	So Bitcoin seems to be taking on some of these characteristics.
	Well, it's faddish.
	It has to be faddish, and this is very faddish.
	It has to be kind of nuts if you stand back a little bit and look at it and you go, why are people doing this?
	There's nothing there.
	It's not like they're investing in a gold mine.
	I think you do the same thing with Beanie Babies.
	You step back and go, this doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
	Well, here's what I learned.
	It's a little bit deeper than I realized.
	Because you hear about all these alternate coins, altcoins being created.
	Yeah, there's a ton of them.
	Well, I kind of dove into this.
	There are entire trading systems, John, with professional technical indicators, web-based.
	You can trade.
	I see, at minimum, 18 different types of coins ranging from one penny to a couple around $1.70, a couple around $30, some around $140, some around $300.
	And these have all been created out of nothing.
	You know, crypto, I guess.
	But the entire ecosystem is your beanie babies.
	It's not just Bitcoin.
	I mean, there are masses of people sitting there trading all of these coins which have, well, I guess technically you could say they have value because energy went into creating them.
	But that's a philosophical conversation.
	Let's go back to one of the original fads that was documented.
	And by the way, it falls right on one of the patterns that I've been following.
	I think it's the 80-year pattern and the 40-year, one of the two.
	It was the collapse in 1648 of the tulip market in Holland.
	Which I'm very familiar with because we have discussed this.
	And we've discussed it in correlation with the dot-com boom.
	But it's different and the same.
	And I think everyone has heard of it.
	It's always different, by the way.
	I think everyone's heard of the tulip mania.
	But tulip mania was the main eye-opener there was the idea that you could buy commodities with just pieces of paper.
	It was really ground zero of the commodities exchange, which later on morphed into a stock exchange.
	And that was the core...
	Well, it created a bubble...
	Well, it was a pump and dump.
	It created a huge bubble.
	Then everything got dumped.
	But it's not technically a pump and dump.
	Okay.
	I'm not going to argue that.
	What I'm saying is, what has happened here, the big thing that's changed is everybody, even though this started right around the dot-com collapse, around 98, 99, when we had E-Trade and all these different things coming online, now we have kids who have developed these coins.
	I'm just going to call them kids.
	But they've also developed this entire ecosystem to trade them around it.
	And it's unregulated.
	It's open 24 hours.
	You know, it's insane.
	It's a Wild West.
	Very interesting to follow.
	And this may be, you know, maybe we get one last run-up and then it correlates with your Beanie Baby theory of the crashes here.
	Well, I would – unless I would – if you were into the Bitcoin thing from the get-go and you were making a lot of money, you got in at $5 and you're just – you're 5,000X right now or whatever – And you're right on it, and you can go in.
	A lot of people can trade in a market that is vibrant and happening.
	As long as there's volatility, yeah.
	And you're making money, but getting out is the issue.
	Can you get out?
	Get your fill.
	And the only people that are in there doing that, this is the problem, I think, with any market that creates a bubble, is that if you're in the market and you're in the bubble, You don't really see it as a bubble.
	You never do.
	You're inside the thing.
	And you're a true believer.
	We can go with our friend over there on RT, Max Kaiser.
	He's a true believer in the Bitcoin world.
	He's created his own coin.
	Well, yeah, but he's a Bitcoin nut.
	And so he is...
	Inside there, and he doesn't see anything.
	The last show he was on, when he was with the character I mentioned earlier, he was talking about Bitcoin going to 5,000, 50,000, Jim Rogers, 50,000, 100,000, and up.
	And Rogers, of course, is not getting involved in any of this sort of thing.
	And he, in fact, he admitted...
	Kaiser says to Rogers, I told you to buy at five.
	And Rogers says, yes, I should have probably, that would have been a good idea, but he's still not going to buy at any price because he sees this thing.
	He's not crazy.
	He's not nuts.
	But if you had bought it five, it would have been a happy camper.
	But that's the same thing with anything you could say that about it.
	Of course.
	Hindsight is dynamite.
	You could be rich if you could back up time a little bit.
	The only advice I would give to our No Agenda listeners who might be in this, if you are on an exchange where you can short Bitcoin, don't do it.
	Do not.
	Do not short anything.
	Don't do anything.
	Maybe just sell.
	Get out.
	Hey, I got an idea.
	Donate to us.
	How about that?
	That's probably a better idea.
	And with that, I'd like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, John C., where the C stands for Coins of Bit Dvorak.
	And in the morning to you, Mr.
	Adam Curry, also in the morning, all ships to sea, boots on the ground, ships in the water, feet in the air, subs in the water, ships in the water, and subs in the water, and all the names and names out there.
	In the morning to the chatroom, noagendastream.com.
	Hello, noagendasocial.com over there tooting away and boosting.
	And in the morning to Nick the Rat, who brought us one of the funniest pieces of artwork, mainly because of its simplicity.
	For episode 9 or 5-0, Race Colon Other was the title of that.
	I believe it's a photographically enhanced photo of Jeff Bezos' eye.
	That was very funny.
	Sorry, Jeff.
	We don't like to make fun of people's physical appearance on the No Agenda show, but we have to.
	In that case, for sure.
	And we want to thank all of our artists who always are diligently creating fantastic art and uploading it to noagendaartgenerator.com.
	It's highly appreciated.
	And that's why we give our artist credits right up front.
	And we do have a few people to thank for being executive and associate executive producers.
	And I get kind of a kick out of this.
	We had like a pretty normal show 949 donation segment, which was on a Sunday.
	Then Thursday comes around for the big show 950, and it was subpar.
	And then we have show 951, which really has no redeeming characteristics.
	I mean, special characteristics.
	And we did much better again.
	It's like ridiculous.
	You know, 950, meanwhile, is the Liger.
	But we do have a few people to thank profusely.
	Starting with Sir Corwin Underwood.
	Now I don't know whether Corwin was ever knighted.
	He says he is.
	Okay, well he becomes a baronet then because he wonders in his notes.
	My brother Sir Metal Mikey writes...
	Initially turned me on to Infowars many years ago.
	Even though some of the ideas and theories presented by Infowars are generally accurate, I can't stand their delivery methods and sales pitches for male vitality potions and diamond gusset blue jeans.
	I don't know about that.
	Those are the ones that protect your junk when you fall off your hog.
	Let alone the outrageous performance, performative rants by Alex Jones.
	Personally, that's, to me, is the best part of that show, is the performative rants.
	Your twice-weekly rational deconstruction of the M5M is the most awesome thing I get to listen to on my daily commute for work.
	It keeps me securely grounded in dimension A.
	I have a sincere question to ask you guys.
	I'm by no means a dude named Ben, and I have no idea how the Internet works.
	And I have no idea how the Internet works.
	I'm a poor slave in the military who works for the Air National Guard as a diesel generator mechanic who has worked his way up the ranks to supervisor of the work center.
	Very nice.
	Why is there not a link on the donation page for peerage?
	You guys mentioned the link at peerage on the show often, but I can never remember.
	Oh, a link on the chart of the donation page would be very helpful.
	OK, it's just Dvorak dot org slash peerage.
	Technically, it's peerage dot HTM.
	But I understand what you're saying.
	Okay.
	Let's put it on the donation.
	I'm going to put it into the show notes right now.
	It'll be on Dvorak.org slash NA. Eventually.
	I would like to get a shout out to Sir Metal Mike who hit me in the mouth around episode 550-ish.
	And Sir Kalashnikov of Queen City who are the only other two No Agenda Knights I know of in the greater Cincinnati area.
	Jingles...
	Can I get a dude?
	I've got some information, man.
	Madonna, we chose love.
	Fuck Trump.
	And two shots to the head.
	We don't have that.
	I've got to make that ISO. I only have half of the Madonna ISO. But here you go.
	I've got information, man.
	New shit has come to life.
	Fuck you.
	You've got karma.
	She's got a totty mouth.
	She does.
	Thank you very much, and we will obviously upgrade your peerage later on in the program.
	Sir Dwayne Melanson, we do have a jingle for him that he created for himself, I believe.
	We need to play, because it's...
	Yeah, okay.
	Keep going.
	Grand Duke of the Pacific Northwest.
	Here we go!
	Ladies and gentlemen, I present the Grand Duke of the Pacific Northwest, Sir Dwayne Melanson.
	I love that. - Nice.
	95033 at Tigard, Oregon.
	ITM, gents, sorry everyone sucks at support right now.
	I hope it improves as the quality of recent shows continues, continues to be exemplary.
	Count me in the 950 Club.
	This is another mystery that we were wondering about.
	Generally speaking, when we do one of these special shows, somebody comes in, usually one of the Grand Dukes or somebody, with a 950.
	You become a member of the 950 Club.
	Right.
	It didn't happen.
	But now it did.
	That's nice.
	And a little 33 added for just some pennies for the next 33 nights.
	So he's actually take a penny, give a penny.
	Beautiful!
	And he needs a little furious freedom and stay woke karma for all nights.
	Fear is freedom Subjugation is liberation Contradiction is truth Those are the facts of this world And you will all surrender to them Use pins in human clothing Hey!
	My millennials!
	Stay woke!
	You've got karma.
	Now we have Seronymous of the Dogpatch.
	Oh, he's back!
	He is quite the patron these days.
	He is.
	He's our guy.
	Very nice.
	And he has a note, I guess, for people out there, and some for us.
	It's a little longer than it's a normal note.
	Serana, Mr.
	Dogpatch, are you confused over news and try to cover up the way you feel, but inside the questions linger?
	Do you find that discussing news outside your social media environment causes red faces and disagreement?
	Do you worry that you may be sharing opinions that may not be true?
	No agenda works with the information sources you're currently consuming so you don't have to give up on social media and the network broadcasting you already use.
	Adding no agenda to your current information sources has been shown to reduce symptoms of confusion and depression.
	Do not listen to No Agenda if you are allergic to fact analysis or any of the ingredients in No Agenda.
	Allergic reactions have included amygdala expansion, dimension sickness, exploding heads, meme recitation, and anaphylaxis, which may include difficulty in breathing, tightness in the chest, or breathing, tightness in the chest, and swelling of the mouth, face, lips, or tongue, and donation constipation.
	Woo!
	In a study in the Psychology of Giving, MRI scans revealed that an area of the brain linked to generosity to no agenda triggered a response in another part of the brain related to happiness.
	Which, of course, we mentioned.
	Random producer comments.
	Episode 948.
	Baby Boomer Angelic Knight's birthday was not included on the list even though that was the basis of the donation.
	What?
	Huh?
	He listens closely.
	Well, I'm sorry.
	You need to make good on baby brothers.
	Well, can we do it now?
	Just do it now.
	Put it on today's list.
	Okay.
	Who am I congratulating?
	Angelic Knight.
	Angelic Knight, yes.
	Happy birthday, says baby brother, I guess.
	Okay.
	Do we have an age or anything?
	This is what I'm always looking for.
	Well, it was 948.
	I just put May good.
	June.
	Happy birthday, June.
	Or July.
	It was 948.
	When was that?
	Yeah.
	All right.
	All right.
	Xenials are the micro generation between Gen X and Millennials who experience both the analog and digital world during their formative years.
	Our five children include older Millennials who use the term Xenial with an X. They are ruthless towards the self-proclaimed digital geniuses a few years younger.
	As the oldest notes, we know the history building blocks Y2K scam and which parts of their world to screw with.
	This came up in the conversation again, by the way, at the dinner table.
	Everybody's in agreement about these two groups.
	About the split in the millennial group?
	Yes.
	It's profound.
	And the split is those who witnessed 9-11 and those who did not.
	Well, no, that's not what they all...
	A lot of people say kind of what he says, which is one group was...
	The internet was in full play when they were born, the other ones kind of caught it.
	Yeah, that makes more sense.
	That makes more sense to me.
	I agree.
	Well, okay.
	It's debatable.
	It's definitely both things.
	It could be both things combined.
	Whatever, they're very different.
	We were discussing, what else?
	Was there some other issue?
	I'm going to have to start taking notes.
	I'm sorry.
	The war on manners is his last comment.
	Manners are accepted and expected everywhere in global societies, yet behaving as a lady or a gentleman in public is increasingly demeaned in Western society.
	This is not a war on men, but a war on manners.
	Real women are ladies, and real men are gentlemen.
	If a woman wants to be respected, stand by a door and wait for a man to open it.
	If the man that opens it will be respectful toward her For that short period and will be pleased to display manners someone taught him.
	Manners are taught by positive reinforcement, demonstrated self-discipline, and instill positive feelings in the person displaying them.
	Rudeness is from the Lord of the Flies classroom and encouraged by government so they can protect us from the undisciplined.
	Wow.
	And I'll add to that that I watched a documentary Friday night called The Red Pill.
	And this is a no-agenda tip.
	This is something you definitely want to watch.
	It was a crowdfunded documentary.
	I think it was a Kickstarter.
	And this girl, a self-proclaimed feminist, goes to find these horrible, hateful hate groups...
	As classified by the Southern Poverty Law Center, who are the pro-men movement, called the Red Pillars.
	And it's very, it was eye-opening to me, some things I didn't even know, but also to Tina, who was watching with me.
	That women are undervalued in society, but men's lives have no value at all in society.
	And when you look at, you know, let's see, it's one out of every three women is abused in their relationship.
	One out of every two men is abused in their relationship.
	Yet there are thousands of centers for women to go and get help.
	There's only one official center for abused men.
	98% of all deaths in war, men.
	98% of people dying six years earlier, men.
	It goes on and on and on and on.
	And a lot of it focuses on family court and how men have absolutely no power whatsoever.
	Something to watch.
	Okay.
	Yeah, I've seen it recommended.
	I'll check it out.
	It's really good.
	And so I'm okay with going...
	I'm okay with being courteous.
	I'm okay with women being...
	Yeah, but does it still constitute running through the door first and then spinning?
	I've been trying to spin very...
	I've been trying to spin versus the course.
	And then do you just sweep with your hands?
	Yes.
	Enter.
	Enter, madam.
	Yes.
	Yeah, I've been spinning.
	I'm liking it.
	I got my spin down, man.
	You know, if you add a little flair to it, you know, people take notice.
	They would, especially with that hand movement.
	Hey, let's give Sir Artemis of Dogpatch some karma.
	He definitely deserves that.
	Thank you very much.
	You've got karma.
	Appreciated as always, sir.
	And I will mention, we do have a meet-up coming.
	It will be on the 12th of August at the Train Museum in Sacramento.
	We'll talk a little bit about that later in the show, I hope.
	Jimmy James, $333.33.
	Jimmy James here, I need a healthy dedouching.
	First-time donor with a super-lucky donation here.
	And I hope it brings more money for you two in August.
	Give me a dedouching.
	Yes, here it is.
	You've been dedouched.
	Love the show, and I hope it don't go.
	Give everybody jobs, karma, and then if you don't mind, I know it's a big list, Adam.
	Ready?
	Yeah.
	Putin, don't worry, be happy.
	Two to the head, Obama, no, no, no, and little girl, yay.
	Keep on rocking, y'all.
	All right, we will keep on rocking.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	Don't worry.
	Yeah.
	Yay!
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	Almost made it all the way through.
	Didn't have enough hands left over.
	Yeah, you only get your three.
	Gareth Edwards in Bournemouth, Dorset, UK, 33333.
	Thanks for the twice-weekly dose of BS-free news.
	Thank you, too.
	I constantly see the influence that the U.S. media has on U.K. news organizations.
	And whilst our news isn't as crazy as the Trump-obsessed M5M, similar stories are watered down and repeated here.
	Also in Australia, I should mention.
	Also, thanks to you both, I can't, and Canada.
	Also, thanks to you both, I can't talk about U.S. politics with my family as they believe I'm a Trump lover.
	Supporter.
	Supporter.
	What?
	It's supporter.
	In the U.K., it's a supporter.
	Trump supporter.
	Oh, when he says Trump lover.
	That's even worse.
	Well, I actually am a Hillary hater, which is different.
	Oh, there you go.
	I would like to request some NA Jobs comments.
	My current contract ends on 731.
	I'd like you to help finding the next project management consulting contracting role.
	Please may I have the following jingle?
	My millennials stay woke.
	I would like this jingle because I answer the phone to fellow No Agenda listener, when it gets local, by saying, my millennials, to which he replies, stay woke.
	Oh, let's try that for a second.
	I'll, uh...
	I'll answer.
	Here we go.
	Let's see.
	My millennials!
	Stay woke!
	I could have done better on that, but...
	Okay.
	Anyway, keep up the good work, and he's got a little note at the end for us, which is worth noting.
	And so let's give him what he's looking for here.
	My millennials, stay woke!
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got karma.
	Nice.
	Now we go to Jaboy.
	$333.33.
	My name, Jaboy.
	I'd like to request some F cancer karma for my good friend Paul A&J. Thanks for all you two do.
	Go podcasting.
	Jingle request.
	Shut up.
	It's science.
	New shit has come to light.
	Two to the head and we came.
	We saw he died.
	Oh, hold on a second.
	I didn't get all of that.
	So, shut up.
	It's science.
	And what was the other one?
	The new shit has come to light.
	Wow, that's twice and twice.
	There it is.
	Random number.
	We haven't heard it for years.
	To the head.
	We came.
	Saw.
	He died.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	Okay.
	I think I can do this.
	But anyway, that was just my little...
	No, that's the wrong one.
	Damn it.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, well, I'm sorry.
	Swing and a miss, strike one!
	There we go, everybody!
	He's working on it!
	Shut up already!
	Science!
	I've got information, man!
	New shit has come to light!
	So, I mean, that is the land of unconfirmed radio.
	Yes, we came, we saw, we died.
	You've got karma.
	Woo!
	Chase McCarthy comes in as an associate executive producer at $250 and he says, this night says thank you.
	And we say thank you, Chase.
	Yeah, we do indeed.
	Does he want to give him a karma?
	I might as well give him a karma.
	I don't care.
	I don't care.
	I'm in a karma kind of mood.
	Yeah, karma.
	Carl Haberger in Rochester, New York, $251.55.
	ITM crackpot and buzzkill.
	It's been a year since I contributed at the associate executive producer level, so I'm well overdue.
	Your show continues to be the best pod on the net.
	This I know because I co-host a podcast called Who Are These Podcasts, on which we clip and review other shows.
	Oh, this is a great idea!
	It's actually pretty funny.
	I went and listened to a bunch of this stuff.
	What's it called?
	What's it called?
	Who are these?
	It's also referred to as WATP. Oh, cool.
	All right.
	I like that.
	WATP in the morning.
	Hey, everybody!
	And in this clip, we review other shows.
	By the way, this is kind of what I was thinking of doing, like, I don't know, it was five or six years ago.
	Yeah, you were doing it.
	Yeah, and you nixed it for good reason, I thought.
	I kiboshed it.
	I kiboshed it.
	Oh, yes, you did.
	You put the kibosh on it.
	But these guys are doing pretty much what I was doing, which is you'll find these guys saying something.
	You take a clip from their show and they're saying something stupid and you just...
	So it made me discover an MTV podcast and I sent you a link to it.
	Oh, you emailed me something?
	No, you never opened your email.
	Well, when did you send it to me?
	Yesterday or the day before.
	I open all of your email.
	Oh, I said listen to this.
	It's an MTV. The title of the email is something like Horse Podcast.
	I've heard for a while.
	Yeah, I just don't see it.
	That's why I'm a little confused.
	Uh-oh.
	Anyway, with this donation, I joined the prestigious Knights and Dames of the No Agenda Roundtable from the county below.
	I like to be known as Sir Carl with a K. For clips, I request, someone's getting cornholed today, followed by the goat scream.
	If anyone is interested in checking out who are these podcasts, they can visit whoarethese.com.
	Oh, that's great.
	Thanks for the show.
	I look forward to it.
	Now, their show is a good takedown of various podcasts.
	They do a whole show pretty much.
	You know what we need to do?
	We need to do a takedown of theirs.
	Well, I'll do it right now.
	All right.
	They need better mics and...
	Well, that's not funny.
	And that's about it.
	All right.
	Get some better mics, boys.
	It's always in the microphone, isn't it?
	A lot of it.
	Yeah, I think so.
	Thanks for the show, he says.
	I look forward to continuing to produce The No Agenda for years to come.
	And we look forward to that as well.
	Thank you.
	Someone's getting cornholed today.
	You've got karma now.
	That's right.
	Yeah.
	That's your clip I want to point out.
	Apparently.
	You thought that that was me.
	You said the guy sounded like me, the cornhole guy.
	Yes, I know.
	He sounds like you in a very...
	I think anyone who's got an ear can hear you in there.
	I still think it may have been you.
	You look a little like you, too.
	Dame Beth Baroness of Baja, Arizona.
	$234.56.
	$234.56.
	Hi, old gents.
	More rain stick action for Baja, Arizona, please.
	Too many acres of forest land have burned this season.
	Thank you, Dame Beth, the Baroness of Baja.
	I will definitely shake the stick for her.
	Before we do that, did you see her tweet where she was flaunting her Dame ring while standing next to the Roger Stone?
	Yeah, I saw that, and I'm wondering if she talked to Stone about the show.
	Well, she didn't mention that.
	I would hope so.
	The Stone would probably like this show.
	Yeah, well, I really don't care as long as he tells more people about it.
	That's the main thing.
	Well, that's the point.
	If somebody likes the show, they usually tell somebody else and then they'll like the show.
	Not whether everyone can tell ten people.
	And we've also said you have to be careful who you tell because some people think you're nuts for listening to this show.
	Crazy.
	Alright, here we go, Dame Beth, Baroness of Baja, Arizona.
	Are you participating in the stick shake, John?
	I'll do a one shake.
	Okay, I think it's a one for you.
	I'll do one, you do one, I do one.
	That's a three shake for Arizona.
	Okay.
	Perfect.
	So we won't get too wet here in Austin.
	Yeah, hopefully.
	Whenever I shake it, it starts in Houston, then it comes to Austin.
	It's that big.
	And thank you very much, Dame Beth.
	Sir Joho, Yoho, $201.33.
	Greetings.
	See email.
	Okay, well I don't have the email.
	Jingle request for Adam.
	See that...
	I'll dig up the email for the second segment.
	Jingle request for Adam.
	See that juice money shot.
	Cut after the woo Jesus.
	Two gunshots and starting my own business karma.
	Uh, birthday July.
	Oh, he's on the birthday.
	I don't think he's on the birthday list.
	Uh, let me see.
	Yeah, I believe he is.
	I believe he is.
	I'm going to double check.
	July 30th, turning 32.
	Uh, yes, he is on the birthday list.
	Uh, yellow on mine.
	All right, here we go.
	Oh my gosh!
	Can you see that juice?
	That's a show of money shot!
	Woo, Jesus!
	Woo, look at that!
	That's a money shot!
	Ted Ann Conway is a money shot!
	Woo!
	You've got karma.
	I'm sorry.
	I realized he asked me to cut it off after the woo Jesus.
	Let me try that again.
	Might as well.
	Oh my gosh!
	Can you see that juice?
	A shoulder money shot!
	Woo Jesus!
	You've got karma.
	Just to prove to myself I can do it.
	You can.
	Miracle Man.
	Um...
	Sir Dave.
	Edge provider.
	Miracle man.
	Edge provider.
	Sir Dave, and in fact, you are.
	No, you are too.
	I have proof.
	I am.
	I have proof.
	Yes, we're both edge providers.
	Do you remember this came up on This Week in Tech?
	No, I didn't watch This Week in Tech.
	Edge providers like me.
	You're an edge provider?
	Anybody who provides content over the internet, you're an edge provider, and you're an edge provider, and you and you and you.
	What?!
	Who put that together?
	One of our illustrious producers.
	What?
	What?
	Edge provider.
	Fact.
	Fact.
	Sir Dave Barron of Kansas City, $201, thinking about, whoops, open that.
	Courage, he says.
	Thanks for a great show.
	You guys are pretty much the only media that does any critical thinking about the ongoing shenanigans going on worldwide.
	Keep up the great work, Sir Dave Barron of Kansas City.
	Thank you very much, Sir Dave.
	Appreciate that.
	Are you going to give him gratuitous karma?
	Okay.
	It's interesting you asked that.
	I was just like, I'm just going to shut up.
	I'm not going to say anything.
	And yes, you have to do it.
	Of course I'm going to give him karma.
	You've got karma.
	And then we have Nicholas Robinson, $200.02, which is a palindrome.
	My apologies for missing the show, 9.50 celebration.
	You can play that horn if you want.
	I'll play it later during this segment.
	Life has been rather hectic.
	I'm moving this weekend, and I will also have to miss the meetup at the train museum.
	Damn it.
	By the way, the meetup's on the 12th.
	I don't think you knew that.
	So maybe he can, maybe he can, because he's moving this weekend.
	Did you have Patrick Coble do all that?
	Did he do all that work for you?
	Yeah, Patrick is a great guy.
	Sir Patrick.
	Sir Patrick, yes.
	I am moving this weekend, which means in two weeks when the train museum happens on the 12th, you can take the Zephyr or drive up.
	He'll be all moved in.
	What?
	He'll be all moved in.
	Good to go.
	He'll be all moved in.
	Anyway, he wants some moving karma.
	Yes, I got that right there.
	You've got karma.
	Richard Bangs, who becomes a knight today in Washington, D.C. Ah, we got Washington, D.C. on board.
	$200.
	Hate seeing donations as poor as they are, he writes.
	Lots of douchiness.
	Donations work.
	My mother just beat cancer.
	Right on.
	I got a new job that pays 35% more than previous jobs.
	Forget new human...
	Forgot new human resource karma in April.
	I'm also glad...
	Wait a minute.
	Hold on.
	So, did...
	Did cancer karma help?
	Did jobs karma help?
	But you've forgotten.
	So you need some human resource karma because he wants to...
	Either that or he's doing a job.
	Or he's happy.
	He's like, whoa.
	Strains of stream of consciousness and he's saying, my mother just beat cancer.
	I just got a new job that pays 35% more.
	And forgot.
	New human resource karma in April.
	Oh, okay.
	So maybe he did get that.
	Well, we're going to give it to him again.
	He was next karma.
	Yes.
	I'm so glad no agenda keeps me woke with your news coverage.
	Hold on, it's very interesting.
	You may not know what this is.
	You see that little 100 in the spreadsheet?
	Do you have that on your spreadsheet?
	No.
	Wow.
	Okay.
	So the spreadsheets, PayPal does everything wrong with every single Unicode double byte encoding issue.
	We can't get umlauts.
	But I see in my spreadsheet here the 100% emoji, the little red emoji, an actual emoji popped up in the spreadsheet.
	Well, nothing else ever works.
	I got a question mark where that appeared.
	Huh.
	Okay.
	I wonder why.
	Because I'm not using the Excel.
	You're using a Mac Excel.
	Yeah, I'm using numbers.
	What?
	Numbers.
	Oh, jeez.
	Well, then why that would work at all is beyond me.
	That's what I'm saying.
	Anyway, he says in DC, dimension B is a must.
	Oh, no, it says, I'm sorry.
	Let me reread this whole thing.
	I'm so glad no agenda keeps me woke with your news coverage in DC dimension because of dimension BDC. It's a no agenda is a must.
	Got it.
	At social events, there's always a little group of us woke, sitting between dimensions, watching and thinking, can you believe this shit?
	Doing my part to shrink amygdalas and grow frontal cortexes.
	I wonder what he does.
	I wonder what he does.
	He's probably a staffer, you know, a congressional staffer.
	We've got a lot of those, believe it or not.
	Oh, that's cool.
	All right, good.
	This is my, he could be a bureaucrat.
	You don't know.
	This is also my knighthood.
	And he goes to parties and sits there.
	Hold on a second.
	If he goes to parties, that means he's probably up a couple of levels.
	You're not just a staffer.
	And he should be sending us more info.
	Well, a lot of these guys don't feel comfortable doing that.
	And many are required not to, so that doesn't bother me.
	Send us stock tips.
	I do like it when once in a while a staffer comes in, you can look them up and find out who they are.
	And gives us a clarification of something we kind of messed up on.
	Or something we don't fully understand, and it will send us a note.
	Well, I would just like him to give us, if he's on staff somewhere, give us the stock tips.
	Yeah.
	Because you know they got him in that.
	Oh, yeah.
	You know they got him.
	And it's legal.
	This is also my knighthood.
	See, attach.
	Do you suggest my nun wedding band hand wiring finger or pinky finger?
	Ring finger.
	Ring finger.
	So he wants to know where to put the finger.
	Don't use a pinky.
	No, no, no.
	Pinky rings are naff.
	What?
	Naff.
	Okay.
	What does that mean?
	It's naff.
	It's not good.
	Is that some street lingo that you picked up?
	That's right.
	That's Austin Eastside, baby.
	Naff.
	I tend to use the...
	He says, I tend to pinky.
	Well, you know, if you tend to pinky...
	I'd like to know your age now.
	I think you could do pinky if you can handle it, because I think it's pretentious.
	Well, you've got to talk like this.
	Hey, hey, I got, hey, we got a deal lined up for you.
	I don't want to hit you in the mouth.
	Well, Scaramooch is in now.
	We can do some business.
	With my pinkies.
	Scaramooch.
	It's the guy who grew up in the Jersey Shore on MTV. Yeah, pretty much.
	Anyway, so we'll give him his, uh...
	Yes, we're going to be knighting him.
	I'll give him some karma right now.
	Just x-ray, never know.
	We've got karma.
	Have another kid.
	Somebody wrote us and said, you know, I love the donation segment.
	It's got more information than many times in the show.
	Sometimes it does, yes.
	Sometimes.
	Yeah.
	Mark Carter, meanwhile, is in for the 200.
	We got a bunch of these today.
	In Moreno Valley, California.
	From Erico 951 for episode 951.
	Ah, there's a gimmick we missed.
	Ah, yep.
	You need some fuck karma for Jay, diagnosed one week ago with stage 4 lung, and Steve, who beats stage 4 throat.
	Job karma for me, and RN, jingle, stay woke again.
	This is the most popular popular one.
	Stay woke, two to the head.
	Look at that juice and little girl.
	Yay!
	This is almost identical to one of the other ones.
	My goodness.
	Okay, so let me just grab the...
	I could have just left all these up in the player.
	Yeah.
	Instead of taking all this time to continue to do this.
	Okay.
	Juice...
	Yay!
	F cancer.
	I think that's...
	No, stay woke.
	Yeah, no, I got it.
	Stay woke.
	Juice.
	Two to the head.
	Two to the head.
	Oh, my goodness.
	My millennials!
	Stay woke!
	Oh, my gosh!
	Can you see that juice?
	Oh, no.
	That's the wrong one.
	You've got karma.
	Karma.
	Well, Mark, you got to witness the botch of the day.
	So we need a jingle for botch of the day.
	That was the best.
	I'm sorry.
	It might actually be really helpful.
	I don't know.
	It was entertaining.
	It was dirty.
	Well, there's that.
	I'm sorry.
	Yeah, why don't you just erase that one?
	No, no, no.
	It's okay.
	I can handle criticism.
	Yeah, well, I've heard that.
	Lance Fisher in Pensacola, Florida, is our last associate executive producer.
	Also $200.
	I've been getting her secondhand job karma.
	Hospitals love their cybersecurity.
	Now, who knew?
	I can see that after those attacks.
	Yeah.
	Here's a pittance.
	$200.
	Thanks for bundling the news and cutting through dimensional fog.
	Ooh, I like that.
	That's nice.
	D-douche if you see fit.
	It's been a year.
	I suck.
	No, you don't suck, but I will give you a de-douching and some karma.
	Thank you very much.
	73s from Kilo 5 Alpha Charlie Charlie.
	For Kilo Charlie 8 Uniform Charlie Alpha.
	You've been de-douched.
	You've got karma.
	Alright.
	That was a big group and a good group.
	Thank you.
	Thank you for celebrating with us.
	It's a good makeup for the show 950.
	You can play the horn.
	950 show celebration.
	It was not much of one.
	I'll play the horn during our next segment.
	Yeah, you can't find it.
	I get it.
	You know, you can't just call for something and just have it magically appear.
	Yeah, I can't.
	Theremin.
	Yeah, if you say theremin, I got that for you.
	Because it's at the ready, I think.
	The horn is not something I have handy all the time.
	No, it's rare.
	You got a point.
	I would like to thank profusely our executive producers and associate executive producers for episode 950.
	950 episodes of the best podcast in the universe.
	We didn't make that up.
	You made that up.
	Supported by you, produced by you, produced by people who do all kinds of things for this program.
	There's no other model like it.
	I don't care what anybody says.
	You are pioneering it.
	Congratulations, particularly to these people who get these credits up front.
	And remember, we do have another show coming up on Thursday, and we need as much support as we can get.
	It's typically a good time to grab yourself an associate executive producer credit.
	Just saying.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out...
	We hit people in the mouth.
	Oh, what happened there?
	Wow.
	Sorry about that.
	Sorry about that.
	Okay.
	All right.
	We're back.
	Back on track.
	Oh, I wanted to read this little piece.
	It was actually, I thought it was an op-ed at first, but it turns out it was an interview in Time Magazine with Uncle Don about Korea.
	When was this?
	July 24th.
	Okay.
	I didn't get to it on Thursday, so I'm going to do it today.
	So it is indeed an interview.
	And Uncle Don, I'll just, it actually, the article has his background, so I will give it to you.
	89, retired State Department and CIA veteran, North Asia specialist, and a recipient of the National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal.
	How about that?
	He's my uncle.
	He was ambassador to South Korea after a little thing called Orion Contra.
	You can look him up.
	Which he was exonerated, but an ambassadorship seemed like a good thing at the time.
	He has been to North Korea five times in the past four years.
	No, six times in the past four years.
	And he has some things to say.
	Here we go.
	He says the absence of direct dialogue between the U.S. and North Korea has to change.
	We can't deal with them if we don't understand them, and we won't understand them if we aren't talking to each other.
	And the article goes on, although Greg's thinking may be out of sync with much of what's coming out of the Trump White House and Congress, both are pushing for more sanctions in response to North Korea's recent ICBM. Then, okay, it gets down to the interview.
	The North Koreans are not suicidal.
	They don't want a war.
	Despite the rhetoric and propaganda, North Korea's leaders are thoughtful, well-educated pragmatists.
	And then the interview actually goes on and talks about knowing Don for a long time, like 35 or 40 years.
	And then he says, Kim Jong-un, North Korea's current leader, is smart, tough, and a risk-taker who sees his nuclear arsenal as protection against a U.S. attack.
	Although he doesn't see North Korea abandoning its...
	Greg says that nuclear proliferation is a bigger problem than just North Korea.
	He is personally more worried about Pakistan's nuclear weapons and war engulfing the Middle East than he is about North Korea.
	And then at the end here, he has a nice quote.
	Because he talks about how pretty Pyongyang is and how functioning it is.
	He says people really don't want to hear that.
	They hate hearing that it's actually kind of a nice city and it looks pretty and it's functioning very well.
	But his quote, which is the headline, he says, For sure, North Korea is the longest-running failure in the history of American espionage.
	So again, kind of mirroring what we've talked about is they just want an actual truce.
	Yes, that's what we've been saying all along.
	A truce, a treaty, because the war is not officially ended.
	We have an armistice.
	Armistice?
	Yeah, I think so.
	Or just a temporary no-shooting rule, which has been going on for a while.
	I don't know what they call it, but it has not officially ended.
	Right.
	Now, of course...
	The reason for all this is so we can sell stuff to South Korea.
	Now let's play what's going on now because there's a number.
	I have two clips.
	That's very interesting, yes.
	A third clip.
	But first of all, I want to play this one.
	This is the CBS clip, which brings Hawaii into the picture.
	Ah, yes, okay.
	This is DPRK Nukes, CBS. North Korea's latest missile test is raising new concerns that they could hit deep into the mainland U.S. On Friday, the North launched its second intercontinental ballistic missile this month.
	It flew for more than 40 minutes, traveling high into space before coming down in the Sea of Japan.
	Carter Evans says officials in Hawaii are not taking chances.
	The latest missile launch drew praise from North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, who said through state media, the test clearly proves the whole U.S. mainland is in firing range.
	Japanese news cameras purportedly captured the missile crashing into the ocean, but experts confirm if it were aimed at a lower trajectory, it could have reached Los Angeles, Chicago, and even New York.
	In response, U.S. and South Korean forces staged joint live-fire exercises, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson condemned the launch, saying, we will never accept a nuclear-armed North Korea.
	I think when we say we don't accept it, what we really mean is that we're in a state of denial.
	Jeffrey Lewis is a nuclear policy expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.
	You may see that that language changes, and we move away from talking about denuclearization towards steps to try to reduce tension on the peninsula.
	North Korea's missile test earlier this month put the Hawaiian Islands in range.
	Because of our proximity, we are 20 minutes away from destruction.
	State Representative Gene Ward wants to reopen military bunkers hidden deep inside Diamond Head to temporarily run Hawaii's government amid a nuclear attack.
	The tunnels were built more than 100 years ago for ammunition storage, says Lieutenant Colonel Charles Anthony with the National Guard.
	So this was never designed to house a lot of people for any period of time.
	No, it was designed to withstand an artillery barrage and also to unleash an artillery barrage in the opposite direction.
	So far, Hawaii is the first state to issue an official emergency plan for a North Korean launch.
	Remembering the last attack here, no one wants to be caught off guard.
	We had no preparation for Pearl Harbor.
	This one, we've had a slow burn.
	If we are sleeping now, when we have a clear and present danger, we are negligent.
	Be afraid!
	Now, new on the scene, I think we talked about this on the last show, new on the scene is Hawaii.
	It's always been Washington, California, New York all of a sudden crops up.
	Well, as you recall, in 2014 is when the Hawaii threat began, because we had that old clip, we don't need to play it again.
	And that is when Tulsi Gabbard got elected, and she's a peacenik.
	This whole thing may be targeting her.
	Perfect.
	Your friend.
	Perfect.
	I like her very much.
	I like her a lot.
	And she won't go for any of this stuff.
	She knows it's bullcrap.
	But she is a devout anti-war peacenik.
	Now, the thing is, if you listen to the Mark Miley exposition on the World Order, you know, one thing he doesn't talk about is the arms sales that go...
	In the direction of South Korea and all these other countries, it's almost as though it counterbalances us being the world's policemen trying to keep things calm by sending all these munitions out there, which have to be used.
	Well, you can only be the policeman if you have conflict.
	So either you trump it up, so to speak.
	With media reports.
	Again, you saw on the European trip, people were really...
	Who gives a shit about Trump?
	They're all worried about North Korea because they've been just completely indoctrinated with this idea that they're going to bomb us any minute now.
	So that's part of the job, is to do that so that we can remain the police with our $600 billion budget and so we can still sell stuff.
	It's all part of the system.
	Now, here's the thing that I thought was the most interesting clip.
	I'm going to skip the next one.
	Which, by the way, if you recall, Uncle Don admitted to me.
	Remember that?
	Like two or three years ago?
	Yeah.
	He said, yeah, it's a military-industrial complex.
	It's just bullcrap.
	Okay.
	Print that, Time Magazine.
	So we still have to figure out what Kim Jong-un is thinking.
	So I was watching...
	This is a...
	Charlie Rose on his interview show, and he's got David Sanger of the New York Times.
	I think in this instance, and listen carefully to what he says, I think Sanger kind of nails the whole problem with North Korea.
	So they're not actually thinking operationally about how they might do this and launch missiles on the United States.
	They know that's the end of their regime.
	It's the end of everything.
	This entire weapons program is all about survival for Kim Jong-un.
	He looks out at the landscape and what does he see?
	He sees somebody like Gaddafi in Libya, who had a nascent nuclear program, no place close to what the North Koreans or even the Iranians had, and gave it up in 2003.
	And we said, don't worry!
	Don't worry.
	Give it up.
	We'll integrate you with the West.
	Come on in, you know?
	The integration was pretty poor.
	And then when his people turned against him, the United States, Europe, and the Arab states all came in and bombed him until somebody pulled him out of a ditch and shot him.
	Kim Jong-un looks at that.
	And he says, not me.
	And we're going full speed with the program.
	And the big difference between him and his father is he really is going full speed.
	And you have to give the devil his due.
	He's been pretty...
	He's shown a sense of urgency that's paid off.
	Urgency, determination...
	I mean, someday, when somebody writes a history of this, it's going to be a history of a dead, broke country with, you know, no Silicon Valley to fall back on that figured out how to steal, beg, hire, and bribe people to build a nuclear arsenal.
	It's interesting.
	I read an op-ed.
	I'm going to say it was the Times or the Washington Post.
	Where this exact argument was used regarding Assad, saying that, well, Assad saw what happened to Libya.
	He said, I'm not going to let that happen.
	I like the bit where he says they bomb him, then pull him out of a hole and shoot him.
	He's our friend.
	And Saddam Hussein, same deal.
	Like, yeah, okay, everything will be great.
	Yeah, can you blame him?
	No, not if you look at it from those terms.
	I think the Qaddafi example, which was orchestrated by Hillary, is the deterrent for all these guys.
	Nobody's going to...
	This is like, you know, you do a favor for the mob, and the next thing you know, they shoot you.
	Let me play the clip, even though it was in the donation segment.
	This is Hillary Clinton.
	When she's doing an interview, I believe with ABC, Uma Abedin leans over, gives her a blackberry, which states that Gaddafi has just been killed, and this was her response.
	So, I mean, that is the land of unconfirmed.
	Yes, we came, we saw, he died.
	Ha ha ha!
	Ha ha ha!
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	That's how she responded.
	He agrees to give up his nuke program.
	Once they integrate with the West, he comes out to the U.S. and stays in a tent on Trump's property and all the rest.
	And then they bomb him and shoot him in the head.
	Unbelievable.
	Yeah.
	Well, I think anyway, I thought that analysis really summed up with what the North Koreans are probably up to.
	Very good.
	I have a couple of ministry of truthing.
	Oh, I got one for you.
	I actually, I clipped this just for you.
	You've been on the David Brooks thing about him.
	David Brooks is the Republican blogger for the New York Times, correct?
	No, he's not a blogger.
	He's a columnist, but he...
	That was a joke.
	Oh, it could be a blogger.
	He's the guy that's on PBS that represents the Republicans.
	On his column, he doesn't really represent...
	He's supposed to be kind of conservative, but he never is.
	Well, no, he's not.
	And there's a reason for it.
	And as witnessed, remember, people say the oddest thing on podcasts, they really feel like they can let their guard down.
	And he was on...
	Not while no agendas around.
	Yeah, we're on the case, man!
	One of our producers sent me a pointer to Waking Up with Sam Harris, episode 89, at the very end of the show, this small exchange between Sam Harris and David Brooks.
	Yeah, and that extends to the media as well.
	I mean, this is the same attitude that imagines that Infowars is the same as the New York Times because both commit errors of fact.
	Yeah, it's the leveling of all values and all truth claims there, so...
	Anyway, David, we have to resist it, and you've been resisting it impeccably in your column for the New York Times, so please keep it up.
	Thank you.
	I have no choice.
	I need the job.
	Exactly.
	He has to resist because he needs the job.
	It's a pretty sad state of affairs when the guy actually states that.
	Now, this happened, I think, last night.
	Gloria Borgia, I've never really understood why she is the senior political analyst on CNN. She doesn't really have a huge background, and she's not married to anybody important, and I've never really understood that, but Man, Brolf raked her over the coals about her sources.
	It was a very embarrassing moment.
	For analysis, Gloria, it is rather extraordinary.
	We've seen resignation now after resignation.
	Sean Spicer, the press secretary, resigned earlier in the week.
	His close friend and ally in the White House, Reince Priebus, is now gone.
	Right.
	And, you know, I think, in a way, the Reince Priebus departure is not a surprise, although we did get pushback on it today, but we had heard...
	When you say pushback, a lot of our viewers don't understand that.
	Are these people simply out of the loop?
	They don't know what they're talking about, or are they lying?
	It could be a little bit of both, and it could also be that the person involved didn't know at that point.
	Well, it's hard to know.
	All I know is you're only as good as your sources, and you have a source that tells you that Reince Priebus will be gone, and then you have a good source that tells you that's not the case.
	Well, clearly the sources that were pushing you away are not good sources, so you've got to be careful with those sources down the road.
	Either they don't know what they're talking about or they're lying, so those sources presumably will go away.
	That's my experience as a reporter.
	Thank you, but I'm not the only one here doing the reporting on this, and when you get differing stories from a White House in which there are competing interests, and you understand, you have to understand, the decider is the President of the United States.
	Who's the decider?
	You know, we were told, or I was told, that the president had made his decision, but you never know until you know in these situations.
	Especially Donald Trump.
	I love Brolf going, well, you should never listen to that source in the future.
	That guy sucks!
	And she's like, no, that was probably the real guy.
	An actual source.
	He's like, don't talk about my source like that.
	He'll never talk to me again.
	I'm reminded of a situation that we had at InfoWorld in 1981.
	You were at InfoWars in 1981?
	InfoWorld.
	Oh, sorry.
	This is a computer story.
	And this is just before the Lisa came out, and this is where the Jobs era, where everything was buttoned down, first episode, first go-round.
	And so somebody developed or gave us a drawing of the Lisa.
	Oh.
	Yeah, the Apple Lisa.
	Yeah, the Apple Lisa, which was a big deal at the time.
	It was the proto-Macintosh.
	And so this guy gave us this drawing, and we had a guy on the staff.
	I'm not going to embarrass him because he's still writing, but this guy, he's one of these analysts, writers, you know, research company guys.
	Oh, Padre SJ. No, this guy's like a well-known writer.
	And so...
	He comes waltzing in for some reason, and we say, look, we got the drawing of the Lisa.
	And he takes one look at it, and he says...
	That's not it.
	That's not it.
	I can assure you that that's not it.
	And we ran it anyway.
	And I was wondering where he got his information, or if he perhaps saw it.
	I'm not sure.
	But what the drawing was, was it.
	It was right on the money.
	It was a real deal.
	And I've always been suspicious of some of these guys ever since.
	And they're always so cocksure.
	Oh yeah, that's not it.
	I've seen it.
	It's not it.
	And it is it.
	So it's a real tough go to have to kind of traverse this minefield of information.
	That's why, like the New York Times always does, here's an example of a New York Times technology article about Apple.
	They'll say, you know, blah, blah, blah, the iPhone, blah, blah, it's going to be great, it's going to have this, blah, blah, blah, blah, and they ended up with, but it could be something different, you never know!
	That's how they always do that.
	I hate that.
	I don't think that should be done.
	Just be a man about it.
	Time will tell.
	Just give your opinion.
	Could go either way.
	You should have done that about the mouse.
	It could go either way.
	I couched that mouse comment.
	I know you did because you said there's no evidence.
	You're absolutely right.
	But it would have been stronger if you'd said, could go either way.
	It wouldn't have been stronger.
	It was not my style.
	I actually really was repulsed by that way of writing, where you end up with a wishy-washy thing.
	You can soft-pedal your whole thesis in different ways, but That particular, it could go either way, comment and some of these other ones that I've seen in the New York Times.
	I just don't like it.
	I just don't think it's a good style.
	It makes you say, here's what it does for the reader.
	You're reading and reading all this stuff and it's, oh, this is interesting, interesting.
	And the guy says, you say to yourself when you get to that, you go, what did I read this for?
	Why are you wasting my time?
	But here's the important analogy or the comparison.
	So what kind of person is it that is a source that does this, I'm certain it is this way, or I'm, you know, just like Borgia was talking about.
	Well, a good source said, I'm certain it's not going to happen.
	I don't think these people are liars.
	I think they find themselves more important than they really are, and they just don't know.
	How about the guy at Infowars?
	It was explained to me by a guy who was...
	A lot of people in the computer business think they're writing or they're in public relations or they're product managers and they all of a sudden think they can become consultants.
	Oh, I'm going to be a consultant.
	This problem...
	And they never make any money as a consultant.
	Even though they have the chops to be a consultant, they can't do it.
	Somebody explained to me once that real consultants, the guys who make the big money, millions of dollars, Those guys, it's the way they present themselves.
	They are so cocksure about everything they're consulting on.
	It's not even a question to be doubted when I tell you this.
	Those are the guys, and this guy that told me that there wasn't the lease, it was one of those guys.
	And so he presents himself with this assuredness that is just overwhelming.
	And most people who go into consulting have to do that to make money.
	And it's a style you develop.
	Right.
	Where everything you say is so absolutely, this is it.
	So do you think that these people are consultants who are passing on this information?
	I think they're maybe ex-consultants or they worked as lobbyists or they're just full.
	These guys are all over the place.
	They're in all the industries, but they're in tech a lot.
	I guess they're crawling in Washington, D.C. They're just guys who are full of crap.
	Yeah.
	And they're sure.
	They're very sure.
	So how did this writer who shall not be named, how did he outlive that?
	He never did.
	I just assume everything he writes is kind of bullshit.
	No, but I mean, he kept his job?
	Oh, yeah.
	Geez.
	It was a drawing, you know, and he said it wasn't the right product.
	I mean, it's like, it's a crapshoot to begin with, because you don't know the drawing guy, the guy who gave us the drawing, exactly right drawing, could have been full of crap, you don't know.
	No, of course not.
	And the guy, you know, because I was misled.
	I mean, I was misled about the iPhone, so that didn't help me much.
	Was that one of your sources who misled you?
	No, it is a long story.
	I wrote it up somewhere.
	I'll find a copy.
	Oh, I didn't realize there was more backstory to it.
	That's interesting.
	Oh, I have a great story behind it.
	Can you tell it?
	Well, why don't you tell us?
	It's too long and complicated.
	I'll put the article together.
	Don't get angry at me.
	It's just like it's a complex structure that I can't really talk about.
	But if you read it, you go, oh, that's interesting.
	Okay, I got you.
	Sorry.
	So I'll find that article.
	Some magazine wanted me to do this article, so I did it.
	And they were very disappointed.
	Somehow, that doesn't surprise me.
	Yeah.
	Thank you, sir.
	Bemrose for this.
	Geez, these guys are fast.
	I know.
	It's the best.
	A couple of things about the Trump shuffles here.
	We got some people moving in, moving out.
	We got the Mooch coming in.
	The Mooch just keeps on giving, man.
	This guy's the best.
	He's the best.
	He's talking about the leakers right now here.
	Undercut and undercover, or out if you will, the leakers in the entire country.
	As the president would say in his own words, the White House leakers are small potatoes.
	I'll talk to you about a few leaks that happened last night that I find reprehensible, but the White House leaks are small potatoes Relative to things that are going on with leaking things about Syria or North Korea or leaking things about Iraq, those are the types of leaks that are so treasonous that 150 years ago people would have actually been hung for those types of leaks.
	I think it's hanged, but he can say hung.
	Maybe he meant hung, if you think about it.
	Maybe he did.
	Here's the background.
	The previous is out CBS tight report.
	Hold on a second.
	Yes.
	Sorry.
	Got it.
	At an anti-gang speech on Friday in Long Island, New York, President Trump foreshadowed his announcement that General John Kelly would replace embattled Chief of Staff Reince Priebus.
	John Kelly, who has done an incredible job of Secretary of Homeland Security.
	Incredible.
	One of our real stars.
	When the President returned to Washington, he made the move official in a series of tweets, then briefly addressed the press.
	Reince is a good man.
	John Kelly will do a fantastic job.
	General Kelly has been a star, done an incredible job thus far, respected by everybody, a great, great American.
	Reince Priebus, a good man.
	The move capped off a damaging week for Priebus, in which newly appointed communications director Anthony Scaramucci publicly insulted him and claimed he was behind a series of leaks.
	Priebus says he's leaving with his head up.
	We'll be working on a transition here for a couple of weeks together with General Kelly, starting on Monday morning.
	So this is not like a situation where there's a bunch of ill-will feelings.
	I have a couple of questions and some follow-ups.
	I'm trying to think how I want to formulate this.
	First, maybe a step back one sec.
	The John Kelly appointment, I finally understood it.
	It took me, I was like, why this guy?
	Trump went to military academy.
	Right.
	That's where he was straightened out.
	That's the story that his dad sent him there.
	If you look at, we have three generals now in the upper echelon running.
	He likes this.
	He likes having...
	Flynn was another one they got rid of.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	He really does like this.
	And I think that says a lot.
	And it may be good.
	I don't know.
	Our military intelligence guys say they like Kelly a lot.
	So I'll take that as fact then.
	I was going to make another point.
	Well, Kellyanne, he also came from Homeland Security.
	I don't know, some of these guys, you know, this whole Priebus thing, and it's interesting because my two liberal friends who we discuss on the show occasionally.
	Now, when do you win this bet?
	The bet's never been made.
	They won't take the bet anymore.
	I think I've abused my position of righteousness or my being right too often.
	But they both were on the, they were kind of amongst themselves saying, I wonder who they're going to fire first.
	Sean or Priebus.
	And I was thinking...
	I was agreed.
	I thought those were the two next targets that were going to go.
	Well, particularly with the healthcare failure, someone had to go.
	I mean, that's just what you do.
	Someone has to go.
	Yeah, well, they got rid of both of them, but it was the order they were kind of wondering about.
	Yeah.
	I think there's a, I may have a clip.
	Well, here's a clip we should play, at least before we start discussing it too much.
	This is the inside the previous firing on Charlie Rose.
	Replaced by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
	You're phasing, man.
	I don't know what's going on with your setup.
	The second clip where it's phased?
	I don't know either.
	The other one did too, but now we had it two in a row.
	I'm wondering if it's the rig over there because it just started.
	It's a coincidence.
	It's hard to imagine.
	...placed by the Secretary of Homeland Security, General John Kelly.
	I just spoke with Jonathan Karl, the Chief White House Correspondent for ABC News.
	There's no question, he was fired.
	The President had made it clear, actually, even before Scaramucci came in, the President had made it clear internally that he was getting ready to make a change.
	Not necessarily on this exact date.
	The Scaramucci fiasco, the back and forth between the two of them, accelerated this, but the president had made it clear he was getting ready to make a change.
	And Charlie, this is an incredibly chaotic six months when you think about it, because not only do you have a chief of staff, one of the shortest-serving chiefs of staff in history, and I believe the shortest-serving first chief of staff that we have seen, But you also had the National Security Advisor who lasted barely a month.
	You had the White House Press Secretary who left just last week, a communications director that only lasted a couple of weeks.
	Six months of turmoil.
	Now he is bringing in a military man.
	He's bringing in General Kelly to try to impose some order on that West Wing.
	It is said that the President doesn't like people that he considers weak and that he considered Reince Priebus weak.
	And I believe that Priebus proved that to him over the last several days, as Scaramucci had gone out and repeatedly undermined him, most outrageously so with that New Yorker interview.
	I know that there were people close to the president that were urging Priebus to take a stand.
	To go in and to tell the president that he needed to fire Scaramucci for what he said in that interview.
	One person close to the president even said to me that what Priemus needed to do was to call Scaramucci into his office and to fire him himself.
	To have the Secret Service take away his credentials and escort him out of the building and, you know, to kind of force the issue like that.
	Of course, Scaramucci had made it clear on day one that he was reporting directly to the president, and it seemed that Priebus was simply unwilling to force the issue, to take a stand, and that's why ultimately the president decided today was the day to push him out.
	What's interesting is it...
	Reince Priebus has people that admire him, people like the Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, but they did not rush to his defense.
	Certainly not within the White House.
	There was absolutely nobody coming to...
	I mean, this struck me, Charlie, being at the White House all week, seeing the way Priebus was undermined at first, you know, more subtly, and then finally with that New Yorker interview, and there was nobody, you could find nobody in the White House who would step up and defend him.
	Here's a question I have.
	Because I think this all ties together, and I'm starting to see maybe what will be going on.
	First question, as a journalist, in any other election cycle with any other president, in your opinion, John C. Dvorak, famous, famous columnist, but I also will give you a journalist moniker.
	If this happened to you, and you were the journalist, and this guy called up, would you print everything that he said?
	Yeah.
	You would?
	Definitely.
	Even if this guy is the new communications director, knowing that will mean that you will never, ever, ever again receive an interview or anything.
	Here's the way I see it.
	And I believe this is what happened.
	First of all, if you're just going to have a private conversation, even if it's your pal, you say it's off the record.
	And you say it right away.
	You don't say, oh God, this is off the record.
	Don't do it later.
	But that's just a bullshit rule.
	Generally speaking, if you're pals with somebody, you can pretty much say it's off the record any time you want.
	And the guy says, okay.
	So he never did that.
	And he didn't want to because he wanted this to go.
	There was an unspoken agreement that this was going to be printed full cloth.
	Because it was a ploy to get rid of Priebus, and this guy was taking part in it.
	The writer.
	Yeah, not just the writer, but so was the Mooch.
	Yeah, no, the Mooch, this was the Mooch's idea.
	Yeah.
	It was, he's the one instigating the situation.
	Yeah.
	And he did it on purpose, and he knew the writer would run with it.
	I think you're right.
	I think you're right.
	And here's what I think is happening.
	Check this out.
	Red book.
	Ready?
	Get the book.
	Get the book.
	Got your pencil?
	Yeah.
	I have a pen.
	It has to be a number two pencil.
	No pencils for the red book that cannot be erased.
	Alright, here it is.
	John Kelly, currently Secretary of DHS, becomes Chief of Staff.
	We have a whole, now a DHS. What is DHS's main mission momentarily?
	Their main mission is immigration.
	TSA, Border Patrol, The Wall, all that stuff.
	Who is Mr.
	Immigration?
	Jeff Sessions.
	So now, instead of firing Sessions, we move Sessions over to DHS. He does his stellar job with immigration.
	We hire a new attorney general who then fires Mueller.
	Come on, baby!
	That's a good one.
	I think that's possible.
	And it would be a mooch setup.
	I give the guy credit if it happens that way.
	Now, he's obviously not, I mean, there's a reason for everything.
	And when Trump is going on and on about Sessions, and then Sessions, I don't have the clip, but we had it.
	I think we played this clip, but it was the clip where Sessions is being interviewed.
	If we don't have it, I'll dig it up in the next show.
	He's being interviewed, and he says, what do you think about that?
	Well, these are hurtful, these are hurtful comments, but I think the president's great.
	That's what Sessions says.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, he wasn't really offended.
	I saw him on Tucker Carlson.
	He's like, hey, you know, I serve at the pleasure of the president.
	Whatever he wants is fine.
	You know, he was not like, just look in his eyes.
	He had the same puppy dog.
	He wasn't like, you know.
	Yeah, no, he didn't feel as if he did not seem offended in any way.
	And he just says, this is the way it is, and I think these are hurtful, but blah, blah, blah, I don't care.
	So that doesn't make sense.
	I give these guys a lot.
	I mean, this is going far, but I give them a lot of credit.
	If this whole setup was done this way, to fire Mueller, I give them some credit.
	Now, the level of involvement that the writer had...
	Is questionable.
	You don't know if he was in on the deal and he was...
	No, no, no.
	Exactly what you said.
	You said you would have done it.
	Mooch knew exactly that he knew he would do it.
	He goes off.
	He just does what he does.
	That distracts everybody.
	Gets Priebus fired.
	Gets Kelly in.
	The trigger is there.
	Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom!
	And guys like Mooch...
	Are big shot Wall Street guys who do this sort of manipulation all the time?
	All the time.
	If you watch the show Billion...
	Well, dude, this guy had his own Wall Street show.
	Some sad-ass Fox Business News cable show.
	But yes, if you watch...
	Billions.
	I love that show.
	It's really funny.
	I love that show.
	But it's all sleazeball, you know, manipulations.
	But they don't have enough sadomasochistic sex anymore.
	They used to have that in the first series.
	You know, I found out.
	I saw that a couple of episodes.
	That turned me off.
	Yeah, I kind of like that part.
	Well, that's you, because you would just have preferred the show be nothing but that.
	But the point is, it's not moving the plot along at all.
	No, it's human nature.
	The storytelling mechanism involves moving the plot along without distracting the viewer or the listener or the reader or whatever.
	And that wasn't doing it.
	That was like, why are they doing this?
	Because it's just so they can get some free equipment that they could take home or that they could do a little research with a real dominatrix and then report back.
	I mean, you could just say it's transparent.
	Just bullcrap.
	Is this how you critique the blacklist with the actual showrunner?
	Or the writer?
	Or the writer.
	Hey man, move the story along, douche.
	It's no good.
	Well, actually, the one thing about the blacklist I have to say is that they move the story along.
	Almost to an excess.
	I almost complain that they get to the point where they're moving along so much that they're skipping all kinds of stuff.
	And what was interesting when I was talking to him about this Plot holes and the skipping as the story moved along.
	I'm telling you, Luke in particular, he had this look on his face like, what?
	What are you talking about?
	We've never had a plot hole.
	I was just talking to a blank wall.
	Of course.
	But as we know, the truth always wants to come out.
	We've seen this time and time again.
	The flubs are always where the truth just trickles out.
	As to what someone's really thinking and what they really mean.
	And the mooch had one.
	And so one of the things I'm going to try to do is speak very transparently to you and the American people.
	Get the President's message out there.
	I have found in my life experience with President Chump, when he's out there himself and he's being his fresh, authentic self, it's President Chump.
	President Chump.
	Good try, Mooch.
	Wow!
	I'm giving you a clip of the day for that.
	You've got to have to clip it.
	Hey, I'm going to clip it right now.
	President Chomp.
	Clip of the day.
	I already have it pre-clipped.
	President Chomp.
	Wow.
	That's going to end the show, I guess.
	I got a...
	Wait, I have one more thing.
	One more thing.
	Just on the leakers briefly.
	Yeah?
	Just kind of a crappy-ass news report about who one of the main leakers may be.
	The FBI's general counsel, James Baker, is purportedly under a Department of Justice criminal investigation for allegedly leaking classified national security information to the media.
	Three government officials with knowledge of the investigation told Circa that Baker, a close confidant to former FBI Director James Comey, is the top suspect in an ongoing leak investigation.
	FBI spokeswoman Carol Kratty said the Bureau would not comment on Baker and would neither confirm or deny any investigation.
	The DOJ official did say Attorney General Jeff Sessions will likely be making a general announcement on the progress of ongoing leak investigations within the next week.
	President Trump.
	Okay.
	Baker.
	Baker, huh?
	Baker.
	I don't know who this Baker is.
	I mean, it used to be.
	It's not the same.
	The name James Baker.
	There's like five or six politicians and chiefs of staff that have been around, floating around.
	But this, I don't know who this one is.
	He's a personal friend, an attorney.
	It's not the Jim Baker that we're thinking of.
	I think this is James A. Baker.
	Here we go.
	American government official, Department of Justice, serving as general counsel for the FBI. He also teaches at Harvard Law School.
	This could be the guy that leaks stuff when he said, oh, he's a professor.
	A graduate of Notre Dame, JD and MA from Michigan, taught national security law.
	Okay, yeah.
	Let's see what else he's doing.
	Federal prosecutor during the Clinton administration.
	Okay, bad actor.
	Anything else here?
	I don't see.
	I don't see anything else.
	He did defend the Patriot Act from a legal standpoint.
	Great guy.
	Thanks.
	Dynamite.
	Holy crap, John.
	It's really late.
	I didn't realize.
	I'm going to show my salute by donating to no agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh, yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on your agenda in the morning.
	Sorry about that little snippet.
	Let's rock through some of that.
	Let's start with a, because this showed up at the bottom of the spreadsheet, and I guess this was something we missed, but let's get, I want to give Kathleen Myers a de-douching.
	All right.
	You've been de-douched.
	Alright, nice.
	Can't complain now.
	Arthur Gobitz in Zondam.
	I think it's Sir Arthur Gobitz.
	Sir Arthur, yes.
	Sir Arthur.
	And also, Sir Donald Borowski in Spokane Valley.
	The same amount.
	1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
	And, whoops!
	He's got a note on Starfleet letterhead, which I must read.
	Get the note.
	ITM gentlemen, Adam often explains how no agenda runs on the value-for-value model.
	A number of producers have stated that no agenda is invaluable to them.
	I agree.
	This presents a dilemma.
	How do I return value for something that is invaluable?
	Here's my feeble attempt to solve this conundrum.
	That's it.
	His attempt is a 1-2-3-4-5 donation.
	W-A-6-O-M-I-73.
	Oh, 73s.
	K-5-Alpha, Charlie, Charlie.
	This is Jordi Ramirez in Cancun, Mexico.
	$111.11.
	I'm not going to read all these notes, but it's been a rough few months.
	He needs some karma for his family.
	We'll put it at the end.
	At the end, for sure.
	And any something...
	Kiki for his son, Nicholas?
	Yeah, we only do that really for associates and execs.
	And we've played Kiki four times today.
	Yeah, we got enough.
	You heard Kiki already.
	Here's one.
	This is Tomas.
	Who knows what his last name is?
	Getz, maybe?
	I'm thinking Getz.
	Gertz, maybe.
	This is where you want the 100% emoji to pop up, but no.
	We got an A with a line above it.
	We got an F, like a function symbol.
	An A with an accent circumflex.
	And then a paragraph break.
	And then a T and a Z. I think it's Gertz.
	Gertz might be.
	Dortmund.
	He's in Dortmund.
	Nice town.
	I've been there.
	$11.11.
	Lorraine Walsh, $100.
	We have a shout-out to Keatington.
	Keatington.
	Keatington.
	Bradshaw, Statesville, North Carolina, $100.
	Luca Asberto in Savosa, Italy.
	And Tyrolia, I think, maybe, or I don't know what part.
	T.I. I think that's Trieste, maybe?
	Trieste?
	Maybe.
	We get so few Italians that ever contribute.
	We welcome you, Luca.
	Ron Jordan, 99.99.
	Sorry, I'm just doing my Italian.
	Douglas Engstrom, or Sir Douglas Engstrom in Sandy Lake, Pennsylvania.
	Bruce D. Hall, 95.
	Wait, John, these are the big 95, 950.
	Oh, these are the 95ers.
	Okay, make sure you do it with two of them.
	Yeah, there's Douglas Engstrom and Bruce Hall.
	Thank you both for joining the celebration.
	That's it.
	There's the love for 950 episodes.
	Sir Von Glitchka, 90.
	A douchebag call out to all listeners that know me but have never donated.
	Baron of Tennessee, Patrick Coble.
	Right on.
	8120.
	He's asking about the date and it will work.
	Hopefully he can make it.
	He's going to fly out from Tennessee to go to the event.
	Fantastic.
	Big event in the train museum.
	Sir Herb Lamb, 808 Boom in Sugar Hill, Georgia.
	Kenneth Boob.
	Kenneth Learman.
	Boob.
	Larry Hay.
	Boob.
	He says, I know you're the only source of common sense in the entire world.
	Sir Mark Hudson.
	Boob.
	Isn't it interesting that we have four people who want to get in on the boobs, but only two celebrating our 950th anniversary.
	We know where your priorities are, people.
	It was to save money.
	Hey, breaking news.
	Of course, show day.
	755 U.S. diplomats must leave Russia, according to Putin.
	This, I think, still has to do with the land grab.
	Yeah, maybe the orphans or the adoptions.
	The orphans, I doubt.
	Adoptions.
	There's a beef going on because we stole a bunch of their property.
	No, you know what the beef is.
	They rightfully owned.
	The beef is Snowden.
	Oh, it's Snowden.
	Yeah, you're right.
	It's always Snowden.
	It's always Snowden.
	Chris Perry, $77.77.
	Jason Verner, $75.
	David Schneider, same amount.
	William Cameron, $69.69.
	Boink, boink, boink.
	Pete Tangney in Randolph, Massachusetts, 66-56.
	David Brown, 60-06.
	Palindrome in Matthews, North Carolina.
	Rick LaBlanca, I think he's a sir, in Hope, Rhode Island.
	Sir Lucas of the Lost Bits, 59-51.
	Sir Mike Roch, Knight of the Pseudonym, otherwise known as Mike Crotch, 55-50.
	The unpopular straight overcompensated white man or something.
	I don't have the end of this.
	White male.
	White male.
	The unpopular straight overcompensated white male from Northbrook, Illinois.
	Yeah, 5510.
	Eric Hochul in Berlin.
	He left the umlaut out.
	It came through.
	Normally it's like a mess.
	I don't have...
	I just got Hochul.
	I don't have an umlaut.
	No, I know.
	There's no umlaut.
	But when there is an umlaut, I always have to guess what his name is.
	It's usually a mess, just like the one above.
	Thomas Domenikowski.
	Domenikowski.
	Domenikowski.
	And there you go again.
	From Poland.
	Yeah, Warsaw, I'm guessing.
	Well, it says L-Blob.
	Warman.
	It says Warman.
	Maybe not.
	I mean, if they can show all these characters, why can't they show a zero with a dash through it?
	They show every other freaking character on the spreadsheet.
	Yeah, they got a euro sign.
	Unbelievable.
	I mean, how hard is it?
	I don't know.
	Chris Sundberg in Mercer Island, Washington.
	Aharm Veenstra in Bourne, Netherlands.
	Yeah, Veenstra.
	Baron Sir D.H. Slammer up there down in Southern California.
	He says, no, you don't need a deduce.
	No, you're a Baron, dude.
	You don't need a deduce.
	Yeah, you can, right, you can coast.
	But don't.
	Sir Dago J, Jason Morella.
	He's not a sir yet, though.
	Oh, he's becoming sir, okay.
	He says, okay, guy, did you call me out as a douchebag and immediately dedouche me for not sending this spreadsheet soon as my donation total is now...
	Oh, this is Barony.
	What does he get here?
	Let me see.
	Sir...
	No, I'm sorry.
	He becomes a baronet.
	He's already a knight.
	So he is Sir Drago Jay.
	I'm sorry.
	Dago Jay.
	Yeah, Dago Jay.
	Exactly.
	No, we're not going to give you a douchebag call-out.
	You're doing fantastic.
	Thank you very much.
	Yeah, really.
	These are all $50 donors.
	I'm just going to go name and location, starting with David Middlebrook with no location, Dennis Brown in Rhinelander, Wisconsin, Dean Kastenko in Jacksonville, Arkansas, Joshua Defabo in Oakland, California.
	That concludes our little group of $50 donors and concludes our group of well-wishers and producers for show...
	951.
	Yes.
	I'd like to revisit two notes briefly.
	One is Sir Dagojay.
	Please finish off some karma for my brother John who struggles with a very severe and debilitating case of Tourette's Syndrome, which I know all about.
	Background story.
	He's been trying to get one of his doctors to sign this form confirming that he has Tourette's.
	The form is required for him to be able to obtain a state-issued card for the legal right to carry CBD low THC oil in Georgia, which does work.
	For Tourette's.
	Really?
	Yes.
	Why do you think I smoke it all the time?
	No, that's not the reason you smoke it.
	Well, that's true, but it helps.
	Neither his general physician nor his neurologist will sign it because they think it's a prescription.
	Apparently they've forgotten how to read.
	Okay.
	Yes, definitely karma for him.
	And I also did want to go back to the unpopular straight overcompensated white male.
	He had a little note here.
	He says, last episode 950 was the best in a while.
	Keep it going.
	I'm in dimension R. I am snarky and there's a reason why.
	This is why I want to read this.
	Yes.
	And we talked about this.
	This is what I identified as a third dimension that people float in and out of.
	From A or B. I've been a successful person all my life.
	However, recently I've come under not ideal situations.
	I'm now unemployed and because of my age, late 30s, my race, white, my sex, male, I'm not desirable.
	I'm not sure my orientation, straight, nor field have anything to do with it.
	I was, however, well compensated my last gig.
	Apparently employers freak out about that.
	I have time on my hands.
	I don't know what to do with it, so I spend my time with something I love.
	No agenda.
	I've been listening since 2007, and the show made my regular daily train commute easy.
	Unfortunately, I don't have that commute anymore, but I still listen from home.
	I've become a critic of what I see as good and bad.
	I've said things I regret.
	I believe I've offended one of you, for which I apologize.
	Anyway, please discuss what to do about being in Dimension R, how to stop the snark, how to become undisenfranchised.
	There's a lot to it there, isn't there?
	I guess.
	It does bring up the point that I was trying to remember earlier, which is what came up in the conversation at dinner.
	Okay, good.
	I get, apparently now, Jay's boyfriend, Nick, started listening to the show.
	And he says, why does Adam say the word retarded so much?
	And I said, I've not noticed this.
	He says, even Dimension R is referring to retarded.
	Yeah, that's where I brought it up.
	And then the younger generation, the older generation doesn't seem to care, and then you take it one step further to the generation X, like Eric, who not only uses the word a lot, but he actually acts.
	He can do an act of mumbling and acting retarded.
	That is always extremely funny, but it's unbelievably offensive to anybody who doesn't know him, I would think.
	But he doesn't do it.
	He only does it around the family.
	Maybe not.
	Right.
	But he's really good at it.
	And the older generation, the older millennials, which is they don't care too much about it, but they know it's not a good word to use.
	The younger millennials said the following.
	You use retarded ever.
	In a group setting, you will be kicked out of the group forever and you would not be allowed back in.
	Apparently, it is the worst word of the moment to use under any circumstances.
	And they refer to it as the R word.
	Yes, yes, I've heard this.
	I've never heard this.
	It's a foreboding word.
	This was one of the first words after the N-word to be banned.
	Retarded.
	And here's my problem with it.
	Retarded is not a medical condition.
	It is not someone with Down syndrome or someone with other developmental syndrome or illness or deficiency.
	I see where you're going.
	I like this word because you use it in aviation all the time.
	You retard the engine.
	This is a word we use, and it actually describes someone.
	What you do with an old gas engine.
	Yeah, that's the kind of ones I fly, with the old gas engine.
	The one you start with a shotgun shell.
	So, you know, but a good point, actually.
	You can retard the ignition.
	I mean, there's a lot of different reasons to use the word retarded.
	And someone who is slow, we have to use this long, oh, they are developmentally challenged, you know, all this.
	No, it's just retarded.
	Retarded as in back slow.
	And I don't know.
	When they started to ban that word and people were like, oh, we call it the R word.
	I decided, no.
	It's a perfectly fine word.
	It's different if you look at someone with, you know, like a Down syndrome.
	Ah, look at that retard!
	That's different.
	That's different.
	It is different, but I'm just...
	I am not going to use the word because I'm going to accept the...
	Limitations put on me by the younger millennials to stay just for the purpose.
	It's like the cussing thing.
	I don't like doing that either.
	I know you don't.
	I mean, I can do it, and people get a kick out of it.
	Oh, John dropped the F-bomb.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But at the same time, I will relent.
	Here's what happened.
	I was very disappointed.
	This was in the, I think it was in the 70s, late 70s.
	A lot of people were disappointed by the 70s, John.
	Well, the late 70s.
	I think disco.
	I had used, I was writing something somewhere and I used the word gal.
	And in the late 70s, the word was verboten.
	You could not say gal.
	Mm-hmm.
	And women would more likely prefer to be called guys.
	Oh, you guys.
	See you, guys.
	Well, we're women.
	There wasn't any of that.
	So I was adamant that the word gals was fine.
	And so I ended up calling Professor Alan Dundas, who I took classes from at Cal.
	I had his number.
	I'd call him once in a while.
	It had to do with a newspaper article I'd written.
	I guess this was in the 80s then.
	So it was in the 80s.
	And so I called Dundas up and I said, what are they?
	Because he's into all this kind of stuff.
	I said, this word, you know, gal, what's the problem with it?
	The editors at the examiner don't like me using it.
	And he said, you know, these things come and go.
	Right now, gals is pejorative.
	You just don't use it.
	What's the big deal?
	And I was very disappointed in that answer.
	I was hoping that he's going to give me some ammunition I could use so I could use the word, but no.
	He said, no, just don't use it.
	It maybe comes back, maybe it doesn't.
	What's the difference?
	Why are you taking a stand on this word?
	And so you caved.
	I caved.
	And if you read my favorite book, It starts off with exactly this example when all the PC political correctness stuff started when we couldn't call women broads or gals or chicks or whatever, and guys would be dudes.
	By the way, we're called bros now.
	I mean, talk about a double standard.
	I think that is very offensive.
	I don't like the word bro.
	I don't like it when you use it.
	I don't like it when anybody uses it.
	Or dude.
	I used to do a couple of podcasts with Brian Brushwood, who overuses the word.
	He constantly says dude.
	Hey, dude, dude, dude, dude.
	I don't need it.
	Chris Perillo is another one who uses dude to an extreme.
	I don't like it.
	The book is The Industrial Revolution and its Future by the Unabomber.
	Go ahead, take a look.
	That is what his book is about.
	It goes way before his book.
	It goes back to...
	He documents that timeline.
	Huxley talks about this.
	But things do change.
	I mean, some words are stolen from the lexicon, like gay.
	Gay used to mean happy.
	Or like retarded.
	Well, retarded has been...
	If there's a group that now refuses to deal with you because you used the word, I'll go along with it.
	Things change.
	I don't care.
	Yeah, I caved.
	I'm not saying that you're at fault.
	I'm just saying that that's what happened.
	That's when it really began.
	Sad stuff.
	There's nothing I can do about it.
	No, there's nothing.
	I mean, we're lucky that we get this show on the air and we get to exchange people's opinions about the way the world operates.
	Yeah, well, that's the way you do it.
	If I need to back off on a couple of words so I can make sure to get the message out, I'll do it.
	Okay.
	Well, good.
	I'm not saying it's a problem.
	I'm just identifying it.
	It's interesting.
	Anyway, so do we have any advice for this guy to summarize?
	No.
	No.
	Jobs karma, that's what I got for you.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got karma.
	And Kathy Meyer says happy birthday to your son, James, who celebrates today karma.
	Carl Herberger, happy birthday to his smoking hot wife, Jen Santoro.
	She turns 48 today.
	Sir Joho, 32 today.
	And Angelic Knight says happy birthday to...
	No, I'm sorry, the Angelic Knight gets a happy birthday from baby brother.
	And that was sometime in July as it made good.
	And we say happy birthday to all of you from your buddies here at the best podcast in the universe.
	Yes, it's true.
	Two title changes today.
	We have Sir Corwin Underwood who becomes a baronet thanks to his extra donation of $1,000 or more.
	And Sir Dago Jay becomes a baronet as well.
	Gentlemen, both of you, congratulations on your peerage.
	And you can go to dvorak.org slash peerage.htm.
	Make sure you do it with your gopher client.
	Get your sword, baby.
	Get your sword.
	Here it comes.
	All right.
	We got it.
	All right.
	Carl Herminger, Richard Bangs, and Jacob Davis.
	Step on up, gentlemen.
	All three of you have contributed to the best podcast, the University of the United 1,000 dollars a more.
	I'm very proud to bring you into the round table of the Noagenda Knights and Dames.
	And, therefore, I proudly pronounce the KB, Sir Carl with a K, Sir Richard Bangs, and Knights of the Deep Blue Sea.
	Gentlemen, for you, we have the requisite hookers and blow, Brent Boys and Chardonnay, Pipelines and Poppies, Ronnie Eggs and Grapefruit Juice, WWE and Dabs, Arrow Gay and Ambien, Espresso and Hemp Milk, Cheap Chili Dogs and Wine.
	We got Raspberry Pis and Breakfast Burritos, Zaki and Sushi, Papua and Winkle Bourbon, Served by a Total Fresh Fowl Line, Ginger Ale and Gerbils, Breast Milk and Pavlov, Bong Hits and Bourbon, and Mutton and Mead.
	All ready for you at noagendanation.com slash rings.
	Eric DeShill will hook you up and make sure everything comes through perfectly.
	I apologize in advance for all the screeds on this particular episode.
	Screeds?
	What do you mean screeds?
	I've done two or three already today.
	That's not good.
	I think it's a feature.
	It is a feature, but not to excess.
	I was going to tie into our donation segment something.
	I followed the advertising world.
	I was in it for a long time.
	And Procter& Gamble just did something very important that is of interest.
	They, yeah, you know, so the old adage in advertising is half of my money that I'm spending on advertising is worthless.
	I just don't know which half.
	That was kind of, that's been the joke.
	Well, Procter& Gamble appeared to have figured out what half that is, and they decreased, they have announced decreasing their marketing budget, and they spent $100 million less than On Facebook and Google, and they said that it had no impact by not advertising there.
	Even worse, in the fourth quarter, this is according to CFO John Mueller, And by the way, none of what you're saying surprises me in the least.
	Of course not.
	And he even hints at what the issue is.
	In the fourth quarter, the reduction in marketing that occurred was almost all in the digital space.
	And what it reflected was a choice to cut spending from a digital standpoint where it was ineffective.
	We either were serving bots as opposed to human beings, or there were a placement of ads that was not facilitating the equity of our brands.
	I.e., bots are getting all these clicks and click-throughs and views, and these ad exchanges and all this.
	Look, this is a scam.
	I'm going to explain the scam one more time.
	You set up a content place.
	Whatever it is, a blog, it's fine.
	You pick a topic, something that'll work with BMW. Then you call up or text or email any one of hundreds of companies with names like Monopoly.com and weird names.
	And you say, hey, I need, I don't know, like 10,000 clicks.
	Okay, that'll be $5 per thousand.
	Okay, here's my 50 bucks.
	And then you go to the advertising network and you say, hey, I've got this cool car site and you should be putting your ads on it.
	What do you do?
	Well, we're going to give you a $7.
	$7 per thousand views of our ad.
	Okay.
	And then you take the $2 in between, known as arbitrage, and you stick that in as pure profit outside of the blog creation.
	That's what's going on.
	That's what's been happening.
	And I am going to point the finger at Facebook.
	They have issues.
	And I keep hearing Google, listen to this term, John.
	You've heard this.
	Their traffic acquisition costs are going up.
	Come on!
	That's code for ClickFarm.
	Yeah, that is code for ClickFarm.
	They actually said that?
	Yes!
	I heard it on CNBC. So this is another, just going back to our Beanie Babies, our Beanie Coin.
	Ooh, that's a good one, Beanie Coin.
	That's what we should make, Beanie Coin.
	Well, you're going to piss them off.
	You might as well go with that one.
	Beanie Coin, that would be, what a fantastic altcoin.
	Beanie Coin?
	You got any Beanie Coins?
	Ha ha ha!
	If someone creates a beanie coin, then, you know, sell everything and move because it's coming crashing down.
	This is a big deal.
	I think this is, you may not have read about the story or heard about it because why would anyone want to talk about that in the digital space?
	But they've got problems.
	And I think 40% of all of this is fraud that Facebook and Google do.
	Fuck it, everyone.
	Everyone who does advertising lies.
	You lie about your download numbers.
	You lie.
	You lie and you cheat.
	And that's what everyone does.
	Yeah, they do.
	They lie and they cheat.
	So how can you expect them to deliver, like, for example, if it's a news site trying to compete with no agenda, in our analysis, how can you trust them?
	You can't.
	You can't.
	They lie and they cheat.
	That's their nature.
	Yep.
	It's advertising.
	Look at what they do.
	Look at what they're selling.
	Hello?
	They lie and they cheat.
	Exactly.
	There's something it reminded me of.
	There's another level to the scam.
	It will come crashing down.
	Oh, yeah, the Twitter thing.
	If you look, there's a website out there, and I don't remember the name of it, and now I feel, you know, you can Google around and try to find it.
	This is a website that looks at all your tweets and all your Twitter followers and all the people you follow, and it tells you how many of them are fake.
	Twitter is loaded with fake.
	And so your number, if you've got a number that's less than 30% of your Twitter followers are not bullcrap, Known fakes.
	That's good.
	Most of the time, and I won't name names, but I know some people that got pretty big numbers, and you run their name because you can run anybody on this thing.
	60% phonies.
	Okay.
	Very common.
	Is it twitteraudit.com?
	I don't know, maybe.
	I'm looking at it right now.
	I have my score 69% real.
	That's high.
	Yeah, so I have 30,557 real, 13,000 fake.
	I think that's higher than mine.
	That's why I usually get a little more reach than you do when I tweet.
	Could be.
	We've compared that.
	Interesting.
	Well, who gives a crap about that?
	I mean, what are those really for?
	There's no benefit, is there?
	No benefit in what?
	Well, I mean, what's the business model behind fake accounts?
	I don't know.
	According to some analysts who looked at the last election, they say there's a lot of Fake accounts that can be controlled by bots.
	Ah, okay.
	I understand how it works.
	The bot follows me.
	The bot sees I have a link.
	The link is relevant to the bot's database.
	Oh, here's one we've got to click on, guys.
	Machine learning, John.
	AI, that's what we call it.
	Yeah, machine learning.
	And then it goes and clicks on the link.
	How about that?
	It could be.
	I know there was a guy discussing this on some show, and he was saying you can direct the, this is a public relations agency, you can direct the bots to go, like for example, say you tweet something, and you always get like, I don't know, 10 retweets, maybe 20, maybe 100.
	But with this operation, they can make that number jump to like 5,000.
	Right.
	And so it looks like you're tweeting something so important that there's 5,000 people retweeting it.
	And then it becomes important and viral.
	And then it shows up on the Twitter, that little list of what's happening list, whatever they call it, on the side.
	Trending.
	The trending list.
	And so now you get something trending that shouldn't be trending.
	I got you.
	And so there's a way of manipulating the public.
	A synonym for retarded is arrested.
	That's also a good word.
	Glad you're multitasking there.
	Yeah, that's what I do.
	So I got a couple of clips I want to get out of the way.
	This one in particular, this is kind of a left-wing Trump hater, but he's interesting because he's a good journalist.
	Except for his bigotry.
	His name is David K. Johnston.
	Who does he work for?
	I don't know.
	He works for one of the big papers.
	But he shows up on Democracy Now once in a while.
	And here he is bitching about something.
	And I'm on his side on this one.
	This is a discussion of the single-payer idea and Trump's attitude toward it.
	And Trump, as you remember, like 20 years ago, was all for single-payer.
	But then...
	This is a very good little back and forth.
	We have no Democrat help.
	They're obstructionists.
	That's all they're good at is obstruction.
	They have no ideas.
	They've gone so far left.
	They're looking for single payer.
	That's what they want.
	But single payer will bankrupt our country because it's more than we take in for just health care.
	So single payer is never going to work.
	But that's what they'd like to do.
	They have no idea what the consequence will be.
	And it will be horrible, horrible health care where you wait in line for weeks to even see a doctor.
	Now, this is very interesting that Trump referred to single payer in this way because, in fact, he hasn't always referred to it in this way.
	David K. Johnston, you've spoken to him over the decades.
	Can you talk about the position he's staking out now versus what he's told you?
	Oh, yes.
	Well, in the past, Donald said to me when I asked him once about health care, it should be just like roads.
	When you need them, you use them.
	And he was, for a long time, a proponent of single payer.
	And the ideas that he's putting forward about single payer are absurd.
	People in France see doctors more quickly than in the U.S.
	They have better health status, and longevity is increasing in the other modern countries of the world that have universal health care faster than America.
	If Portugal, whose median income is half that of America, can afford universal health care with promptly being accessed to doctors, how can America not afford it?
	This is absurd.
	Hmm.
	Bye.
	It's just that simple.
	If Portugal can afford it, what's Trump talking about?
	I think he's talking about the Australian model.
	And he's mentioned this.
	I don't have a clip, but I know he's mentioned the Australian model.
	And the way I understand the Australian model is there is basic, basic health care for everybody.
	And so that means your doctor checkups, all your flu shots, all of that groovy stuff.
	But if you want to do something, if you have something else, even an emergency room.
	But then there'll be another tier that you can get insurance for, which I think is kind of the stuff that the insurance companies want anyway.
	They want the big expensive stuff that doesn't happen all the time.
	Maybe you'll be able to get specific cancer insurance.
	I can see a version of that being his idea.
	It's a straddle.
	You kind of get...
	You make everybody a little bit happy.
	Maybe that's it.
	Just cut the insurance companies out of this deal.
	Yeah, but this is the problem.
	The reason why the Democrats came up with, when they were in power, came up with Obamacare, as we've discussed, is because insurance companies are banks.
	They're part of the financial system.
	They're investors.
	They take your money.
	They invest in other stuff.
	They rip you off.
	They invest in other stuff.
	It's Wall Street.
	Democrats are beholden to it, and Republicans as well.
	Trump doesn't give a shit.
	You're like, hey, what's wrong with you people?
	And they're all going, I want to get re-elected.
	I need my $2 million to get on the Intelligence Committee.
	I need this, I need that.
	That's the problem.
	So you've got to give them something.
	The insurance industry is not just an industry little piece off on an island of its own.
	It is a part of the big system, the big money system.
	Huge, huge.
	So they need to be in it.
	They need to be in it.
	Give them what they want.
	Give them the high margin stuff.
	Jeez, I should run.
	You should.
	I thought you were going to.
	I was too late for registration, remember?
	Oh, right.
	A day late, a dollar share.
	Whatever kind of...
	Health care you have, you may need it for this.
	Chemical used to kill weeds has been detected in Ben& Jerry's ice cream.
	A consumer group says all of the ice cream flavors that tested chocolate fudge brownie and peanut butter cookie, those show the highest levels of the herbicide.
	The amount found in the ice cream are still far below dangerous levels set by the Environmental Protection Agency.
	Yeah, the chemical, glyphosate.
	The herbicide, Roundup ready.
	Roundup.
	Now, the reason why I picked this clip, because first of all, what the hell is Roundup doing in Ben and Jerry's ice cream?
	Are these guys by any chance big GMO, anti-GMO guys?
	That sounds like they would be.
	I would think so.
	You know, I'd be stunned if they weren't.
	So take Chipotle, who didn't they just have another issue?
	I think these companies are under attack and not by competitors.
	I think people look at the stock price and go, this was also in billions, if you'll recall.
	Remember?
	Yes.
	Where the guy had a juice company, and then he hired people to go and puke in the juice store, and then on the day of their IPO, everything goes up, and then boom, and then, of course, everyone puts the short in, and then the puke story comes out, hits the news, boom, it's down to almost below its offering price.
	You know, I look at Chipotle, who were the first company to come out and say no GMO in Chipotle.
	That's the correlation.
	You know, this doesn't...
	It's an American, kind of an American tradition.
	And I used to, well, I was doing some research on...
	Now, this will be your fourth story.
	I just want you to know that you were pissed at yourself.
	Oh, it's not a screen?
	No screen.
	No screen for you!
	I'm reading about the era of the telegraph.
	In the 1850s, 1860s.
	And there was about, I don't know, 10 competitors, 10 different companies to be stringing.
	It's almost like fiber today.
	They're stringing up here and they're stringing up there.
	Western Union was the most aggressive.
	They had gangs of people.
	And they're the ones, of course, if you think of the telegraph, you think of Western Union.
	They survived.
	And their technique, if you read those old stories, they would go out and chop down poles.
	The telegraph system, somebody put it in, it's not theirs, chop it down.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I have heard these stories, I think.
	Send some guy out there with an axe or a saw and a team of people, chop down the poles.
	Cut the wires.
	Chop down the poles.
	Cut the wires.
	Chop down the poles.
	Cut the wires.
	And that was their strategy, the growth strategy, and it worked.
	Okay.
	And this is like over 150 years ago.
	So, I mean, this is not...
	So, what you're saying is it's patriotic, really, in a way.
	It's the way Americans have operated for years.
	So, none of this surprises me.
	I mean, there was a special with some guys dropping rats in some store.
	And there's this recent rodent thing with the Chipotle...
	You know, I'm not buying it.
	I think there's some issues with Chipotle and the fact that people got poisoned by E. coli.
	I think that's the worst thing that could happen to you.
	And that was sketchy because they can't figure out how it happened.
	Yeah.
	But it doesn't surprise me.
	I'm surprised that this doesn't happen more.
	And I know people who work at Chipotle, manager, and they're really, really all over the cleanliness tip.
	They really are, especially after the things that happen, the E. coli break out.
	Yeah.
	So, I'm just thinking, we should look at the chart, really.
	What is Chipotle's stock symbol?
	CPT or something.
	CPTL, maybe.
	I'm not sure.
	I don't remember.
	It's a really high number.
	The stock price is just outrageous.
	Oh, jeez.
	I'm looking at it.
	$350.
	Well, of course.
	Yeah, it was up to $440, I think, at one point.
	I see.
	Well, let me get the one-year chart for a second.
	It was, boy, May 16th.
	496.
	Yeah, there you go.
	And it's been pounded down.
	It's a beautiful short.
	But now it's right.
	It has a W formation, John.
	W formation at the bottom.
	Just remember, kids, if you're looking for a store of value, get Beanie Coin.
	I got the whole business plan already worked out.
	Anyway, so I have doubts about these things.
	But when somebody is being a tech, maybe you should just get out and go along with it.
	Really, you might be up against something you can't handle.
	Short your own company is what I'd say.
	Yeah, you're right.
	We're going down.
	Here we go, people.
	Going down.
	Going down hard.
	Well, that would be terrible if this was related to Monsanto dirty tricks.
	Jeez, can you imagine?
	Can you imagine?
	Well...
	But...
	What do you do when you're pushing an agenda and these jerk-offs are out there countering your agenda?
	What do you do?
	You've got to play a dirty trick on them.
	Hey, check this out.
	So somebody drops dead.
	Too bad.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I mean, killing someone is 50 bucks these days.
	It's not really expensive.
	And we spend a lot more to kill people in sandy areas, so that's all for profit.
	So here's an interesting little clip.
	This is, you know, I guess Austin is one of the centers of attention.
	I know California's got a thing going about these Ford...
	Sanctuary City?
	Ford Explorer cop cars.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, we've got the Ford Explorer cop cars.
	Yes, we do.
	And they're not killing anybody yet, but people are getting poisoned by carbon monoxide fumes.
	I was unaware of this story in my own backyard.
	Yes, it's happening.
	Austin is one of the key points.
	California's got a bunch of municipalities.
	They're just taking these cars off the road, and they don't know what to do.
	Because, fortunately, the regular Explorer doesn't do it, even though there's some evidence maybe it's a problem, too.
	What happens, I guess, at certain speeds or something, the exhaust just...
	Somehow gets into the car cabin and it's...
	Of the Ford Explorer?
	Yeah.
	I had a Ford Explorer.
	Well, you don't have one of the new ones and you don't have the police version.
	I didn't have the good one, obviously.
	The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, says there have been more than 2,700 complaints and 41 reported injuries.
	Though NHTSA says it does not have any proof the injuries were caused by carbon monoxide.
	Ford says drivers of the non-police explorers should not be worried.
	We have not found elevated levels of carbon monoxide in any Ford Explorer.
	Well, there have been reports of exhaust odors in some explorers.
	Those instances are unrelated to carbon monoxide, which is odorless.
	As for the police SUVs, Ford says it has found holes in unsealed spaces in the back of some of the vehicles.
	Wow, that's a problem.
	It's a big problem, and then it doesn't help that this Ford representative, I don't know if he's like the COO or somebody that came on and said, we've heard reports of exhaust fumes in the cabin, but carbon monoxide is odorless.
	It's mixed in with the exhaust fumes!
	Yeah.
	So that was a bad, that was like, when I heard that, I said, is this guy kidding me?
	He was trying to play it off as, oh, it's just some exhaust fumes, it's not carbon monoxide.
	That's what he said.
	He said, did you play it again?
	The guy says, oh, we've heard some reports of exhaust fumes, but carbon monoxide is odorless.
	Yeah, mixed in with the exhaust fumes.
	Yeah, it is odorless.
	Good catch.
	How stupid is that guy?
	I don't know if he's trying to pull the wool over the idiot's eyes or what, but the news media guy should have jumped on that.
	This was a national report.
	You can't let somebody get away with saying that.
	Let's hear it again.
	The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, says there have been more than 2,700 complaints and 41 reported injuries.
	The NHTSA says it does not have any proof the injuries were caused by carbon monoxide.
	Ford says drivers of the non-police explorers should not be worried.
	We have not found elevated levels of carbon monoxide in any Ford Explorer.
	While there have been reports of exhaust odors in some explorers, those instances are unrelated to carbon monoxide, which is odorless.
	Well, seeing as that was written for him, I would say fire your crisis agency because they suck.
	Well, that's some dingbat, I'm guessing.
	Hey, how do we spin this?
	Which turns out to be a sexist term, by the way.
	When I use dingbat, it could be a man or a woman.
	No, no, no, no.
	No, not anymore, my friend.
	Nope.
	Can't use dingbat.
	Well, at least the millennials don't care.
	I got some millennials as a final clip for you.
	I clipped it just for you.
	This is...
	It was a package...
	You're not going to hear any of the regular actors.
	It was a package on The View.
	They only have the package.
	And it was about kids who are sexually fluid...
	And I just wanted to share it with you.
	I use the term bisexual because there really has been no positive bisexual representation anywhere in the media ever since like the beginning of time.
	Well I think one stereotype that comes to mind which has also probably been perpetuated in the media is that if you're bisexual you're promiscuous.
	When I first came out to my mom I came out to her as a lesbian originally when I was like in 11th grade and then after that I told her that I was pansexual and then she was like oh so you can be with men then and I'm like yeah but I don't like men romantically so like sorry mom.
	Wait now just clarify this because you say you're pansexual but you can't be with men romantically but does that mean just men sexually?
	Yeah.
	Okay, so I identify as pansexual homoromantic.
	First of all, do you all understand this?
	Yes.
	Okay, so basically it means that I like men sexually, right, but I don't like men romantically.
	I find that so offensive.
	Yeah.
	Let's turn it around.
	The whole thing is offensive.
	Why don't we get offended once in a while instead of letting people push us around with these bull crap that they throw at us?
	Where does it come from?
	Why doesn't somebody sit there and say, this is offensive to me?
	It is.
	If you used the words men and women in reverse, it would be deemed very offensive to me.
	I really go for men.
	I just have sex with women.
	I don't give a crap.
	I just have sex with them.
	Yeah.
	Now, if I said that...
	Yeah.
	People would be outraged.
	You'd be pansexual...
	Homoerotic.
	Homoerotic.
	Homoerotic, whatever it was.
	Non-binary.
	Non-binary.
	If you flipped it over and it was a guy saying that, yeah, that would be offensive.
	And this is offensive.
	This is just as offensive.
	She's an offensive person.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, there it is.
	And then she's in the 11th grade.
	Did she say she's in the 11th grade?
	She said to her mom, I'm a lesbian.
	Yeah.
	You know...
	Okay, what's 11th grade?
	That is a junior in high school.
	It's a high school kid.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	I just wanted to play it for you.
	Just wanted you to hear what was going on.
	Yeah.
	Thanks.
	You're up to date.
	Alright, I think we can call this one.
	I got some work to do at the end.
	Yeah.
	To get this one out.
	Some technical stuff.
	Ah, it happens.
	It's okay.
	It's okay.
	All right, everybody.
	Thank you very much for listening.
	Thank you for celebrating episode 950 with us.
	On 951.
	Yeah, 951.
	I'm sorry.
	Yeah.
	All three of you.
	Great.
	And remember that we do have a show coming up on Thursday.
	Dvorak.org slash NA is where you want to go to support us for that.
	And, as usual, it's show day, so we'll probably have something fun to talk about.
	It always happens.
	Yeah.
	Coming to you from downtown Austin, Texas.
	Where you don't have to worry about the carbon monoxide, because it's odorless.
	Please.
	Here in FEMA Region 6, in the common law condo.
	The Cludio, to be exact.
	Five by nine.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where there's no common law about it, I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We return on Thursday, right here on No Agenda.
	And until then, as always, adios, mofos. . mofos. .
	Secretary, the time belongs to the gentle lady from California.
	My dream has come true.
	I am free.
	Reclaiming my time.
	Reclaiming my time.
	But now that I'm here, there's a mission at hand.
	Reclaiming my time.
	Reclaiming my time.
	The future of the greatest economic engine of modern times is clouded with uncertainty.
	It's time they came before us and directly shared their positions and answered our questions.
	The time is now for legislative action.
	We stand ready to act.
	We stand ready to impact.
	It's time for Congress to legislate the rules of the Internet.
	It's time for Congress to legislate the rules of the Internet.
	Beater.
	We'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	The time is now for legislative action.
	We stand ready to act.
	It's time for Congress to legislate the rules of the Internet.
	The time is now for legislative action.
	We stand ready to act.
	The future of the greatest economic engine of modern times is clouded with uncertainty.
	It's time for Congress to legislate the rules of the Internet.
	The Internet.
	We stand ready to act.
	It's time for Congress to legislate the rules of the Internet.
	The time is now for legislative action.
	We stand ready to act.
	It's time for Congress to legislate the rules of the Internet.
	The time is now for legislative action.
	We stand ready to act.
	It's time for Congress to legislate the rules of the Internet.
	We stand ready to act.
	Call you out as a douche.
	Douchebag.
	I guess you've been called out as a douchebag.
	A douchebag call out.
	I'm going to call you out as a douchebag.
	A douchebag report.
	Carpet your douchebaggery.
	Such a douche.
	Douchebags.
	Total douchebag.
	Please call him out as a douchebag.
	Douchebag.
	Douchebag.
	Douchebag, of course.
	Douchebags!
	The best podcast in the universe!
	Adios, mofo.

▲