Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 16, 2018 - No Agenda

02:52:31

1051: Liberal World Order

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Well, the whole thing is depressing.
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	It's Sunday, July 15, 2018.
	This is your award-winning Get My Nation Media Assassination, episode 1051.
	This is no agenda.
	Deconstructing Strzok and many other deep-state douchebags and broadcasting live from the capital of the Jordan Star State here in downtown Austin Tejas in the Cludio.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where they've given up on recycling, I'm John C. Devorak.
	It's Crackpot and Buzzkill in the morning.
	I just read an article today about how California is the great hope of recycling.
	The great hoax of recycling.
	You read it wrong.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	You read the same article?
	No.
	Oh, I didn't save it because I'm like, all right.
	Of course you didn't save it.
	Fix the poop and then I'll believe it.
	They've decided that we're over-recycling.
	Huh.
	The little plastic bags that they've, you know, banned, but they're still around, and these are plastic bags.
	Yeah.
	They don't want them.
	Wait, the recycle bags that the homeless people use to poop in?
	Yeah.
	Oh, my goodness.
	They don't want them, and they don't want bubble wrap.
	And they don't want that crap that Amazon stuffs in the packages that you pop the big giant pillows.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	Huh.
	I can't find the story.
	I don't know where it was.
	And they said, no, no, we can't take it anymore.
	We don't know what to do with this stuff.
	What does it amount to?
	I don't know.
	What's the base?
	What do you think's really behind it?
	We sent all of our crap everywhere.
	The Chinese won't take it anymore.
	Yeah, the Chinese won't take it.
	Oh, but we already discussed this.
	Yeah, well, they made a big stink about it.
	Literally.
	Yeah, no, what I remember is our recycling is so poor that the recycled material is too contaminated.
	The Chinese don't want to deal with it.
	That was the article, yeah.
	Well, it was contaminated.
	In other words, they used to have a broader, like, you know, if there's a little dirt in a bag or something, they didn't.
	Now it has to be something like 99% or not that high, like 90%.
	Right.
	Pristine, but we can't seem to deliver that.
	Okay.
	Well, I'm sorry.
	I can't warn you enough.
	But we do need you there on the scene, boots on the ground as the ship sinks.
	That is kind of important for you to stay in California.
	So they're putting all these bags in the dump.
	The way they used to do it.
	Yeah, the good old days.
	Nice.
	Well, before we get underway here today, I think that anyone listening to this program would realize that this would be a very important show, an important episode, in light of the enormous amount of energy spent on going through nine hours of FBI testimony.
	Anything that involves C-SPAN is always a lot of work, and that came in Thursday.
	A lot of things that we need to look at, a lot of hate towards the U.S. from the U.K., just a lot to do.
	I think it was an obvious and important show.
	Would you agree?
	No.
	But I only say that just to be...
	A dick?
	Contrary.
	Just like the U.K. Did you see those photos in the newsletter?
	You're not going to let me finish my statement, because I'm a little pissed off.
	Okay.
	The support we got for this show, I have other things to do with my life.
	Oh, yeah.
	I'm telling you up front.
	No, I'm serious.
	Look, why don't we just take the summer off?
	No.
	Let's just take the summer off.
	It's ridiculous.
	If you take July off, that'd be a bad idea.
	Okay.
	Well, I just need to get it out of my system because it's just going to sit there festering because I'm pissed about it.
	Yeah.
	Everybody, oh, can't wait for the analysis.
	Oh, it's going to be a great show!
	What, like 30 people maybe donated total, including under 50?
	Come on.
	All right, I'm done.
	Yes, I saw the pictures in the newsletter.
	I thought the pictures in the newsletter would get us more donations than it did.
	Yeah.
	Either that or the pictures, maybe the pictures are so depressing...
	That, I mean, it's deterred, possibly.
	We did get a nasty note from some guy.
	I should read it.
	Now, let's just explain what we're talking about here.
	You know, there were protests in the United Kingdom as the president was there, the United States president, And the protests were all about how Trump is horrible.
	He's a dick.
	He's Hitler.
	Shitler was my favorite.
	I had a new jingle for this.
	This is it.
	Here's a short Trump rotation.
	Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it.
	Now, name the voice.
	Who?
	That's Hillary.
	Is that me?
	That's Hillary.
	Oh, that's Hillary.
	That's Hillary slowed down.
	Very good.
	You tricked me completely.
	That's Hillary slowed down.
	Yeah, that was...
	Wait, I want you to remember what that...
	I mean, can you play it sped up at a regular speed?
	No.
	No, I can't.
	Well, Danny, that's Hillary.
	But what did Hillary actually say compared to what did she do after the election?
	I got a clip...
	The Hillary concession, the archive clip played.
	Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country.
	Donald Trump is going to be our president.
	Oh, she offered.
	Doesn't mean she meant it sincerely.
	Just an offer.
	I mean, that's just words.
	She offered to work with him, but what did she do instead?
	Worked against him.
	She worked against him.
	Yes.
	Well, she offered.
	That's a...
	A fantastic American she is.
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	So the president's over there in the UK, and he's...
	Well, before you go there, I just want to make the final comment about those pictures that were in the newsletter.
	Yes.
	Which is, nobody in the mainstream media over here showed any of this.
	They short-sheeted the demonstration, which was massive.
	Yeah, they pretty much only showed the blimp.
	Well, blimp is a big word.
	The pathetic balloon.
	They showed the balloon, and that was pretty funny, but they didn't show any of the demonstrations, which were extremely rude, very un-British.
	Seems to me.
	I saw signs, you know, Americans in the UK, you know, so there's a bunch of expats doing this as well.
	Who, of course, have to endure constant needling while you live there.
	I know, I have British friends, and when I talk to them, it's like, oh, well, you're a guy, Trump.
	You know, there's a lot of that, so I'm sure they're sick of it, but, you know, taking it out.
	Nice.
	And the World Workers' Party made all the signs.
	Well, a lot of them were made by them, but there was also a Liberal Party made a lot of signs There was just a lot of nonsense going on, and it should have been reported on.
	It didn't get reported on.
	One of the reports, and I think you maybe hear it in one of the clips, was just glossed over, like, oh, there was a big protest, but it wasn't as big as they'd hoped.
	That was the report.
	Well, part of the issue, although the protests went on long enough for them to cover it, MSNBC Andrea Mitchell had three screens.
	Because we had the president with the queen, and of course he looked like a buffoon.
	He did it all wrong, didn't do protocol, turned his butt to the queen.
	I'm not sure what he did wrong.
	Then we had the protests, and then we were all waiting for Rod Rosenstein to come out with these fantastic indictments of more Russians.
	And here's a clip of Andrea's hate.
	As we see the president leaving Windsor Castle, so that was a very abbreviated...
	Royal welcome.
	This is not at all the state visit, the overnight, the state dinner that the Obamas and other presidents, Ronald Reagan...
	When I hear this, I think what these people want is they want a fairy tale.
	They want a fairy tale of, oh, there's the queen, it's so romantic, it's so old world, it's so wonderful, and the Obamas knew how to do it right.
	Not at all.
	The state visit, the overnight, the state dinner that the Obamas and other presidents, Ronald Reagan and others, he was at Windsor, the Obamas were at Buckingham Palace.
	He had tea with the Queen, so he can say that there was a royal welcome.
	But this is a direct result of his policies, his pronouncements, his violation of intelligence agreements by announcing things about what happened in Manchester, other offenses that have been made.
	And now, again, with this...
	I like this use of the word again.
	And Andrea Mitchell does it a lot.
	But you'll hear it more and more in the M5M lexicon.
	Again!
	Which is, now we can just concatenate everything that has been said about Trump.
	The entire rotation just goes into the word again.
	Again!
	You see what he's doing?
	Again!
	Manchester, other offenses that have been made, and now again, this visit...
	Again, with this interview that he did with the British tabloid, which so offended and could be undermining Theresa May's prime ministership, we're going to have to leave it there.
	This has been a remarkable split-screen show, a three-way split with the protesters in London, and of course, what's happening at Windsor, and most importantly, in terms of the American election process, what happened here with Rod Rosenstein's announcement.
	Now, Trump did an interview with The Sun, that is the British tabloid she mentioned, and the interview was actually recorded on tape.
	It wasn't just a printed interview, which made it more interesting for our show.
	Here is the offense that our president made.
	And by the way, she's not my queen.
	I just want people to know that.
	Well, if they do a deal like that, it will most likely, because we'll be dealing with the European Union instead of dealing with the UK. So it will probably kill the deal.
	If they do that, their trade deal with the U.S. will probably not be made.
	Because we have enough difficulty with the European Union.
	We're cracking down right now on the European Union because they have not treated the United States fairly untreated.
	If they do that, I would say that that would probably end A major trade relationship with the United States.
	I actually told Theresa May how to do it, but she didn't listen to me.
	What did she say?
	She didn't listen.
	No, I told her how to do it.
	That will be up to her to say.
	But I told her how to do it.
	She wanted to go a different route.
	So you would be prepared to walk away if they didn't give you the right terms?
	Oh, absolutely.
	I think what's going on is very unfortunate.
	It's too long.
	You know, deals that take too long are never good ones.
	It's true.
	What did you mean by the UK being a deal?
	Deals take so long.
	Somehow, they never work out very well.
	I did give Theresa, who I like, I did give her my views on what she should do and how she should negotiate.
	And she didn't follow those views.
	I would actually say she probably went the opposite way.
	If you really look, she probably went the opposite way.
	That's fine.
	You know, she should negotiate the best way she knows how.
	But it's too bad.
	Oh, so offensive!
	Oh no!
	So offensive to say these things!
	And he gave her, he said, here's how I would do it.
	And she went the other way.
	Okay.
	Yeah, the sun made a mountain out of a molehill and everybody got all bent out of shape.
	And then again, there was all these crazy protesters, which were like completely unhinged.
	Yeah.
	With all kinds of mixed messages, which I thought were fascinating, personally.
	Yeah.
	Especially the Brexit stuff.
	Because you can just see, everybody that was in the street marching with Trump as a big piece of poop with red hair.
	Every one of these people are...
	They're all Remainers.
	Trump never went to London.
	ABC reported that he went to London and he met with the Queen, but he didn't mention he met with the Queen in Windsor and then he went to Blenheim, the big castle, to have his fancy dinner that was with May and others.
	He never went to London.
	Yeah, he said in that same interview, he said, I didn't go to London because it didn't seem like people wanted to welcome me.
	And he says, by the way, you're not doing this to Donald Trump.
	You're doing this to the American people.
	You're being rude.
	Which is why, and I mentioned this again in the newsletter, which is why I believe the mainstream media in the United States did not play anything about the demonstration, because it would have gotten under the American skin.
	I mean, yeah, even to people who hate Trump.
	We can hate Trump in our country.
	What business is ever yours to hate him like this?
	I'll tell you why.
	Because this is the remainers who hate Trump.
	As you recall, Trump, you know, multiple times has said, well, you know, it wouldn't be a good idea if you guys stay in the EU because it's going to be hard for us to do a deal.
	We're doing a deal with the big block and then we can't do a deal with you.
	He's friends with Nigel Farage.
	You know, he was like, oh, I can't wait.
	I hope that the people of...
	England speak their mind and that they vote Brexit.
	That was the day before Brexit.
	So, of course, he's complicit.
	He did it.
	This is the great thing.
	People are blaming Brexit on Trump.
	Yes, they are.
	It was very clear in the protests.
	Yeah.
	So I understand what they're doing.
	They hate Brexit.
	Brexit is going to go down to defeat because Farage took his foot off the pedal by quitting.
	Yep.
	And I blame Farage.
	Yeah.
	Well, there was plenty of hate back here.
	If you want to get into it, I have a multi-parter from NPR, which was beyond typical for them.
	I guess the silence means you're interested.
	Yes, I'm all ears.
	Yeah, you're interested.
	This is what I... I'm very interested.
	I'm very interested.
	Well, NPR still has credibility, certainly with...
	A ton of credibility.
	Yeah, they got a lot.
	Even though their news director was unceremoniously fired for being a douchebag in the hashtag MeToo movement...
	Their news is still pretty good.
	But listen, this is on point.
	And Michael Z did a bang-up job of helping me go.
	There was a very long episode.
	We cut it down to just a couple of clips here.
	But it's the way they're speaking, and there's multiple people in these clips.
	I'll try and mention them by name.
	Multiple people who are using existing but also new...
	Memology, I would call it.
	And trying to launch new memes.
	Because what do we have now?
	Not necessarily on his personal being, but about what he does.
	What do we have in the rotation?
	I don't have the rotation in front of me.
	Oh, wait.
	There's a webpage.
	There's a webpage somewhere for this.
	Oh, yeah.
	It's...
	Electric Weenie?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	That's...
	Cosmic Weenie.
	Cosmic Weenie.
	I'm sorry.
	I should get these things right.
	Well, it doesn't matter.
	Here are a couple.
	And the topics...
	This was really about Trump.
	And the topics discussed in this were his visit to the UK, NATO, and, of course, his upcoming meeting with Putin.
	European leaders are finding that there is no way to really understand this man.
	He is unpredictable to the point where they have no faith or trust in him.
	And I think it's forcing them to...
	To consider whether there are alternatives to depending on the United States, at least for the next two and a half years, whether they have to chart more of an independent course.
	I don't think any of them really want to contemplate a closer alignment, for instance, with China, you know, our great rival power.
	And certainly at this point, Russia is out of the question.
	But they, I think, feel like they can't depend on America.
	They don't know what to expect.
	And this is a global political crisis.
	Lisa Lehrer, do you think it's that serious, a global political crisis, or do you think people are just kind of listening to the president and thinking, well, you know, wait 15 minutes and see what he says?
	Oh, no.
	Oh, no.
	I think it's a global political crisis.
	I totally agree with Michael.
	It's a global political crisis we are witnessing, John.
	I'm glad somebody told us because we need to know this for the show.
	By the way, the website is cosmicweenie.com slash...
	Trump, underline, flaws, dot...
	H-T-M? Exactly.
	I love you, man.
	Thanks for keeping with our show format in the style guide.
	That's very important.
	Here we go.
	bureaucrats around the world because of this global political crisis don't know what to do.
	And it's unclear for those mid-level bureaucrats, European bureaucrats, they don't know if what the U.S. side is telling them is true, if it's agreed to across the administration, if those are promises that the U.S. side can keep.
	And that makes getting anything done basically impossible, including sharing intelligence, which is a big point of a lot of these alliances, a big piece of it.
	So this global disruption tour is a big problem.
	Global disruption tour?
	Yes.
	Wow, I love that.
	Isn't that good?
	The global disruption tour.
	He's coming your way.
	Wow, that took a lot of nerve.
	No bias there.
	No, it's just NPR. Those guys are on the up and up.
	In this next clip, there's a term that is used a little differently in general, but they are using it here, and I want everyone to be on the lookout for this, because one of my favorite terms, we're always on the lookout for someone talking about the New World Order, and we have all kinds of variants, but in the past couple of days since Trump went to the UK, I've been hearing the following.
	Jack Beattie, what do you think about this notion that Trump is basically talking to his folks back home, and if a few foreign leaders are bruised in the process, so be it?
	I think that's partly true.
	He is talking to them.
	He's also talking for Vladimir Putin.
	This week, New York Magazine cited an Israeli report that right after Trump's inauguration, the CIA called in Israeli intelligence operatives and said to them, basically...
	Putin has something on the president, and we would advise you not to share any secrets with him.
	Well, then a few months later in the Oval Office, he did share a particular secret about ISIS with the Russian ambassador and the foreign minister.
	You know, if that's what the CIA was thinking about the president then, he has done nothing since to contradict that view that Putin has something on him.
	And what Putin wants, above all, is what the president has been doing.
	Disrupting, trashing the structure, the liberal order, and this weekend, this week, NATO, the cornerstone of American security.
	Okay.
	The term is the liberal world order, typically.
	It's now being used everywhere.
	And this is new.
	I'm glad you caught that.
	I caught something in this little piece that was interesting.
	He used one of these flipperoos that the mainstream media does, where he makes an assertion and then proves it was something that's got nothing to do with it.
	At the very beginning, he says, oh, the CIA and the...
	Well, listen, you stop it when you're ready.
	Jack Beattie, what do you think about this notion that Trump is basically talking to his folks back home, and if a few foreign leaders are bruised in the process, so be it.
	I think that's partly true.
	He is talking to them.
	He's also talking for Vladimir Putin.
	This week, New York Magazine cited an Israeli report that right after Trump's inauguration, The CIA called in Israeli intelligence operatives and said to them, basically, Putin has something on the president, and we would advise you not to share any secrets with him.
	Well, then a few months later, in the Oval Office, he did share a particular secret about ISIS. Right.
	This is something that no one witnessed.
	No, it's no.
	No, it's not it at all.
	What?
	He says...
	The CIA told the Israelis, don't share anything with Trump because Putin's got something on him.
	And then to prove his point, he says, and then it happened.
	Trump told somebody something.
	But wait a minute.
	The Israelis are not supposed to talk to Trump and not give Trump info.
	If Trump says something about something, whatever it is, what's that got to do with it?
	It is not a proof.
	I agree.
	And what kind of convoluted reporting is?
	Why doesn't somebody who's sitting there say, wait a minute, what are you talking about?
	Please.
	They wouldn't do that because then they know that we can't clip it.
	That would be completely wrong.
	So let's go over this again.
	The CIA told Israeli intelligence not to talk to Trump because Trump's compromised.
	Right.
	And then Trump talked about something the Russians did to the public in some closest...
	No, no, no, no, no.
	He mentioned something about an Israeli initiative.
	That's the way I recall the story.
	He told the Russians that.
	He...
	Trump telling the Russians something about the Israelis in regards to ISIS. Oh boy, then play it back then.
	I may have mistaken this.
	I think you might have.
	And if a few foreign leaders are bruised in the process, so be it.
	I think that's partly true.
	He is talking to them.
	He's also talking for Vladimir Putin.
	This week, New York Magazine cited an Israeli report that right after Trump's inauguration, the CIA called in Israeli intelligence operatives and said to them basically, Putin has something on the president, and we would advise you not to share any secrets with him.
	Well, then a few months later, in the Oval Office, he did share a particular secret about ISIS. So, what they're talking about is some highly sensitive Israeli intelligence on ISIS. I may have jumped to conclusions.
	Some of it still holds because the Israelis clearly didn't listen to that advice, and they told Trump some secret.
	About ISIS. Yeah.
	But that could have been planted for a purpose as check Trump out.
	Whatever the case, the way this guy, what is it?
	Okay, the CIA knows that Russia has something on Trump supposedly, which may account for the CIA's being so adamant about screwing with the presidency of the United States.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it would make some sense.
	What is it?
	I have no idea.
	It's the pee-pee tape.
	If there's something, there must be something.
	They must know.
	It's the pee-pee tape.
	What?
	It's the pee-pee tape.
	What else could it be?
	That's the one we all want to see.
	My life will not be complete until I've seen the peepee tape.
	The guy does say something very weird at the end here that I do want to highlight.
	The structure, the liberal order, and this weekend, this week, NATO, the cornerstone of American security.
	Oh, really?
	Is NATO the cornerstone of our security?
	Since when?
	Yeah.
	This is NPR. I just want to point it out.
	Well, I mean, yeah, maybe.
	No, it's the cornerstone of European security.
	Yes, of course it is.
	We can protect ourselves.
	Yes.
	And let's take a call.
	Callers are listening to NPR and let's hear what they have to say.
	Yeah, I wanted to make the point that it's no coincidence that Trump's attack on our European allies, you know, his gift to Putin, that he chose to do it in such a way where he's attacking the two female European leaders.
	And if you put that in the context of what he said about Elizabeth Warren this week, who, you know, I'm no huge fan of hers necessarily, but his implications about gently forcing her to take a DNA test, you know, that's our president talking about our senator, you know, making fun of the Me Too movement, I believe, implying rape.
	So it's clear that misogyny is definitely a tool he's been using.
	And I would also like to make the point that he's using this to also appeal to the right in these European countries.
	So it's not just his base.
	He's trying to build an international group, which I find extremely frightening, given the history of last century.
	The caller's point is that he is a trained misogynist, uses it everywhere to his political advantage, and is attacking female European leaders.
	I thought he was just a buffoon who didn't know what he was doing.
	Now he's some great schemer.
	Now let's go over two things with what the guy said.
	He had this thing about Elizabeth Warren.
	Okay, we'll just ignore that.
	Yeah.
	And it had nothing to do with rape.
	Here, take a DNA test.
	He raped you, I guess is what he's trying to imply.
	Yeah.
	What are they?
	If you take a look at Europe right now, who's the dominant country?
	Germany.
	Was that run by a guy?
	It's uncertain at this point.
	Hey, I'm trying to do something serious.
	I need some proof.
	Yeah, well, there's that.
	He does look a little light.
	Or she...
	So it runs...
	Okay, and then who's our best ally in the EU that's really up at the top of the news right now?
	I think it's the United Kingdom.
	So, Trump's attacking two women out of the blue.
	Yes!
	Misogynist!
	I mean, come on!
	They're the two leaders of the two most important countries in the EU, period.
	It's beautiful.
	Well, but that's just a caller, you know, granted.
	He was pretty professional-sounding, actually.
	I kind of liked it.
	Probably a shill.
	Well, could be.
	I'm going to throw in just another gratuitous, fantastic Trump rotation meme.
	It's just terrible when the federal government is in charge of large numbers of lives.
	It's not efficient.
	It's not fast moving.
	It's not built to be compassionate and humane.
	So your heart absolutely breaks.
	One does wonder why this isn't remaining in the news in a more prominent and visible way.
	I think to some degree it sounds so horrible to say it, but it's a reality that it's, you know, the story's kind of become familiar.
	We know the contours.
	We know how terrible it is.
	People have seen it.
	And related to that is the fact that Trump is this nonstop, you know, chaos, scandal, outrage machine.
	Non-stop chaos scandal outrage machine.
	Oh man, that'd be a great show title if it wasn't so long.
	It's not even a good acronym.
	I know.
	I was just very pleased.
	You can make it into an acronym.
	I think it would catch on.
	Yeah, but it's N-S-C-C-O-M. Non-scum.
	Scum.
	Scum.
	S-C-H. No.
	Scum.
	Scum.
	It doesn't work.
	Now, I want to transition with the final clip into the Peter Strzok testimony, but I want to leave it open in case there's anything else you wanted to do here about Brexit or NATO or anything of that ilk.
	Well...
	Come on here.
	I got too much stuff from the hearings because I guess a lot of it is hilarious.
	Yeah.
	Well, I don't have hilarious stuff.
	All I have, and that's why I want to segue in a transition, is I believe my theory is holding true and that the cover-up is right before our very eyes.
	And some people know it.
	Some people don't.
	But it's very easy to see what's going on.
	I didn't need...
	Well, I did.
	I didn't need to watch eight hours of testimony.
	We needed to watch eight hours just to get the funny shit because it was fantastic.
	And I probably should play this very short clip beforehand.
	Well, before you leave, I do have a clip just to feel the interregnum.
	Well, no, this is going to help you.
	No, it's not.
	Go on.
	Yeah, it is.
	This is former DHS Secretary Michael Brown.
	Remember him, Brownie?
	Oh, yeah, Brownie.
	Brownie from Katrina.
	Good job, Brownie.
	Here's what he has to say about Senate hearings.
	But to go back about just a regular hearing.
	Yeah.
	If an undersecretary or any other government official is going to go testify, his testimony is cleared through the Office of Management and Budget.
	That testimony is given to the senators and congressmen in advance.
	The questions are given to the witness in advance.
	It is a show.
	It is a production.
	I just wanted to make sure everyone remembered that this is a script.
	And it went off script, which is why most people there were pissed off.
	That's why they were yelling and screaming at each other.
	Yeah, they were going off script.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Let me play this last bit from On Point, because that kind of leads into my assertions.
	And there were moments, I've just seen bits of the hearing, but there were moments when Strzok really struck some very noble, you know, I'm a public servant, I represent the FBI, I resent this, the imputation that I have somehow, you know, dishonored my job and so on.
	He came off pretty well in those moments.
	And But on the other hand, the Republicans were certainly right to say they were alarmed to hear how dismissive he was of Trump and of Trump's followers.
	However, of course, those were private communications.
	People are allowed to have political opinions.
	The text messages were private.
	Yes, and they only came to light because they were done on the public email, and that was only done apparently to avoid marital complications.
	Okay, now, I've been saying from day one that these text messages look nothing like two people in a relationship.
	My main thing was I couldn't find a seat, and I did as much work as I could on what we had available with the Unibyte encodings of emojis that were translated into these transcripts of the text messages, and I saw no lovey-dovey talk.
	At all.
	There's just none.
	Not a single heart emoji, no eggplant emoji, no peach emoji, no tongue emoji.
	Hey, I know my emojis.
	And there's a reason for this, and part of it is this.
	Now, you and Ms.
	Page used personal phones and accounts to communicate.
	Have you turned over those communications to the Inspector General?
	No, sir.
	If not, why not?
	Sir, they asked, and working with my attorney, the inspector general, and I arranged an agreement where I would go through my personal accounts and identify any material that was relevant to FBI business and turn it over.
	It was reviewed.
	There was none.
	And my understanding is the inspector general was satisfied with that action.
	Okay.
	So what happened here is Peter Strzok was asked, very similar to Hillary Clinton, by the way, I guess that's how things work in government, could you just go through all that stuff and just give us what you find is relevant?
	Don't give it all to us so we can take a look at it.
	And he says, we had all of this stuff, all this personal stuff on iMessage and Gmail and Gchat and that was not relevant at all to the case whatsoever.
	Right?
	So I guess all of the lovey-dovey stuff was there.
	All of it.
	Yet somehow, all of the official text messages had to be taken in context.
	And the context is incredibly important.
	This is what I've been trying to explain for a couple of shows now.
	And Scott Adams actually helped me come to this conclusion because when the first text came out weeks and weeks and weeks ago, Scott Adams in one of his periscopes said, you know, we have to take into context that these people were lovers and if so, Peter Strzok is saying, hey baby, don't worry, I'll stop him, I'll take on the world.
	Then, you know, you feel a certain way.
	Everyone feels that.
	That was positioned from the beginning.
	From the very beginning, it was their lovers.
	No one asked.
	It just came out immediately.
	That was put out in front, which is against FBI policy as well, fraternizing in that way, I believe, or to some degree.
	So that the conversations they had on their non-private, their conversations that we received, that we've seen, the ones that we've seen, that they would be put into a context of lovers, don't worry baby, late at night.
	But if you remove that context and see it as one colleague to another, and this has always been my problem with text messages, there's no context within text messages.
	But we were given the context right from the get-go.
	They're lovers.
	That's how you have to read all this.
	Trey Gowdy, not only does, I think he knows what's going on.
	Listen to this exchange.
	You're investigating this alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.
	You're the lead investigator.
	You originated the investigation.
	You're the point of contact.
	You drafted the document.
	And here you are before you've interviewed a single solitary witness saying F Trump.
	Then that same day, your colleague, Lisa Page, wrote, Notice how he uses colleague.
	He almost does air quotes to accentuate that.
	Well, he does a two-beat stop.
	Yep.
	And says your colleague.
	Yeah, it's very, very.
	Yeah, well, he'll do it again.
	That same day, your colleague, Lisa Page, wrote, maybe you're meant to protect the country from that menace.
	And you responded, I can protect the country at many levels.
	We're not even a week.
	Into an investigation that you originated, approved, were the contact for.
	You hadn't interviewed a single solitary soul until August 11th.
	And you're already promising to protect the country from that menace, Donald Trump.
	And then on August the 8th, you still hadn't interviewed anyone.
	You're eight days into your Russian collusion with the Trump campaign investigation.
	And you got another text from your...
	Colleague, Lisa Page.
	Trump's not ever going to become president, right?
	Right?
	And you replied, no?
	No, he's not.
	We'll stop it.
	By the time you promised to stop him from becoming president on August the 8th, how many interviews had you conducted?
	Mr.
	Gowdy, so two answers to that.
	One, with regard to how many interviews had or had not been conducted, I have been directed by counsel for the FBI not to answer that question.
	Second, sir, I think it's important to take those texts in the context of how they were written and what they meant.
	And someone may ask you that question, Agent Strunk, but I didn't.
	I ask you how many people you interviewed before you wrote it.
	If you want to get into context, let one of my other colleagues do that with you.
	Here's what I want to know.
	Who's the he and he's not?
	He is then candidate Trump.
	So when you said, no, Donald Trump's not, in connection with the question, going to become president, what's the it?
	We'll stop it.
	Chairman Gotti, that text needs to be taken in the context of it.
	I'm asking, look, if you want to have a debate over a two-letter word, we're going to have to do that some other time.
	What and who did you mean by it?
	Mr.
	Gowdy, as I've stated, that text was written late at night.
	I don't care when it was written.
	I don't care whether it was longhand, cursive.
	I don't care about any of that.
	I want to know what it meant, Agent Strzok.
	It would be his candidacy for the presidency in my sense that the American population would not vote him into office.
	Right, right.
	Well, we hadn't gotten to the will yet.
	Well, I'm trying to cut through the chase and explain the text.
	Your testimony is the will is the American people.
	Is that right?
	That's your testimony.
	The will stop it.
	You were speaking on behalf of the American people.
	Is that correct?
	Mr.
	Gowdy, what my testimony is and what I said during extensive asking of this question during my prior interview is I don't recall writing that text.
	Are you denying writing the text?
	What I can tell you is that text in no way suggested that I or the FBI would take any action to influence the candidacy of Candidate Trump.
	That is a fantastic answer to a question nobody asked.
	That question to you is the wheel you said.
	So, you can hear that Gowdy knows what's going on.
	Or he's just a really good prosecutor and he's...
	I don't know.
	I think he knows what's going on.
	He knows that the context is what's been changed and he's trying to highlight that.
	And I think he's right.
	Because if the public...
	And it's too late.
	It's not going to work.
	Everyone already thinks...
	And by the way, it's misogynist just to go ahead and believe that right away.
	Oh, man, woman.
	Yeah, totally believable.
	No, it's...
	I'm not buying this.
	I think that when you remove...
	This is the cover-up in front of our very eyes.
	You remove the context and you think, hey, these are two...
	If it were two dudes who were not in a relationship, hell would break loose.
	It would be a different conversation.
	Okay.
	Well, I mean, what you're saying is that the guy's just a douchebag lover who Gohmert goes after and is the best.
	And Gohmert has...
	Do you have that clip?
	I have all of Gohmert.
	Good.
	I was going to say, Gohmert is, I think, by the way, completely valid for him to ask this question.
	Completely valid.
	Well, let's play the second half of Gohmert because it's too long.
	Part one, Gohmert goes after the guy for not following up on some early reports about the Clinton server.
	It goes on and on and...
	Struck's pretty evasive and Gohmert gets irked by the way he's not answering anything and he's pretending he doesn't remember anything or saying he doesn't remember anything.
	And then Gohmert starts to get irked.
	And then we go into part two, which is this clip.
	And you do it with a straight face.
	And I watched in the private testimony you gave.
	And I told some of the other guys, he is really good.
	He's lying.
	He knows.
	We know he's lying.
	And he could probably pass the polygraph.
	It's amazing.
	Mr.
	Chairman.
	Mr.
	Chairman, I'm sorry.
	Point of order.
	Point of order.
	The general of state is point of order.
	A member of this committee just asserted that this witness was under oath.
	They should just say off script instead of point of order.
	That would be fun here.
	Mr.
	Chairman, off script!
	Off script!
	...agent of the FBI lied.
	There is no evidence that.
	I ask him to withdraw it.
	I do not withdraw it.
	He is not a member of Congress.
	It's not a violation of the rule.
	And just as you have been expressing bias through your members about what a hero...
	There is not a single person on this committee who has ever characterized a witness as a lie.
	Gentleman from Rhode Island.
	Gentleman from Rhode Island will suspend.
	No, the disgrace is what this man has done to our justice.
	The gentleman from Texas will suspend for a moment.
	There is the disgrace.
	And it won't be recaptured anytime soon because of the damage you've done to the justice system.
	And I've talked to FBI agents around the country.
	You've embarrassed them.
	You've embarrassed yourself.
	And I can't help but wonder, when I see you looking there with a little smirk, how many times did you look so innocent into your wife's eyes...
	Mr. Chairman, this is outrageous.
	The inability of witness shame always is an issue.
	Mr. Chairman, please.
	Mr. Chairman, this is an intolerable harassment of the witness.
	What's wrong with that?
	You need your medication.
	I just need to stop there.
	That was the line of the century.
	You need your medications!
	Oh my goodness, this is good.
	This is still why we do it.
	The gentleman controls the time.
	I ask that the witness be permitted to respond.
	He will be permitted to respond.
	Did you ever talk to Hillary Clinton during your investigation, besides the one questioning you mentioned, before that or after that to this day?
	Point of order, Mr.
	Chairman.
	Point of order, Mr.
	Chairman.
	The gentleman will state his point of order.
	It is, I think, against the rules of the House for a member of the committee to be impugning the character of a witness.
	Oh my God.
	The purpose of this hearing is to elicit information.
	He should ask questions to elicit information.
	He should not be impugning the character of the witness.
	The gentleman is advised the rules of the House only are directed to members of the House and the President of the United States.
	In other words, it is okay to impugn the character of witnesses in any way whatsoever?
	Listen, I've heard many members on your side of the aisle impugn the character of somebody who is covered by the rules of the House.
	But the gentleman...
	The gentleman has 20 seconds left.
	The clock will be turned back on and he can complete his time and then the witness can respond.
	So if you talk to Hillary Clinton other than the time she was examined in front of the witnesses?
	No.
	So after throwing away what you have with all the bias you have, you've never even gotten a thank you.
	I yield back.
	Did you ever see a reaction shot of Strzok when Gohmert was doing that?
	Because I couldn't find one.
	I think there was a couple in there.
	It was during the thing when he really chewed him out, but I don't know.
	By the way, just as an aside, there was a...
	Clip going around the Twitters of Struck making this kind of alien looking face.
	Yes.
	Was that a shop job or was that for real?
	I found it.
	Okay.
	It was for real.
	I don't have the note here, but it was in the 5, I think it was around 5.30.
	Five hours and 31 minutes, that period.
	Right.
	He drops his head and he looks up above and he gives that creepy look.
	It was only a split second, but it was real.
	Yeah, well, shapeshifters can't hold it all the time.
	I mean, shapeshifters are going to shift, baby.
	I mean, it's all there is to it.
	So, Gohmert mentioned something about you could probably pass a polygraph test, and so I was very interested in this, and I did some research on it.
	This is the time that it's valid, that whole sequence?
	Yes, this was...
	I love that.
	Yeah, it was very good.
	This is Raul Labrador, who I believe is from Idaho, and this is Raul Labrador, funny observation.
	I'm curious if this is the first time that Russia tried to interfere with an American election.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	That's not Raul.
	No, it's...
	Who was it that did that?
	Labrador did something else.
	Labrador was good, though.
	That's actually a good, funny...
	It's a very funny clip.
	When was the last time you were subject to a polygraph?
	Approximately two or three years ago.
	To your knowledge, have you ever failed a polygraph or found to be out of scope?
	I've never failed one.
	I was out of scope prior to my last polygraph.
	And that would have been at what time?
	You said two to three years ago.
	Could you be more specific?
	Sir, I think we can cut to the chase.
	I think there's an email that talks about people being out of scope for a polygraph, which generated my last polygraph.
	Oh, don't worry.
	We're going to be cut to the chase.
	So you want to go ahead and say January 2016 when you received a text or an email, correct?
	Sir, if that's the date, I'll stipulate to that.
	I don't have those dates.
	Okay, we'll take that as a stipulation.
	Has an examiner ever accused you of attempting to use countermeasures during a polygraph examination?
	Not to my recollection, no.
	You received your email in January, as you've stated, and you've stipulated to, that your polygraph was out of scope in January 2016.
	To your knowledge, how long was your polygraph out of scope?
	Sir, I don't know.
	I recall it's...
	The penultimate, the second-to-last polygraph I had was when I was a supervisor at Washington Field Office, which would have occurred somewhere between 2008 and 2011.
	My understanding of what out-of-scope means for the FBI is that polygraphs have a kind of five-year span of effectiveness or validity.
	We had several people who were trying to, including me, trying to get read into a particular...
	I'm glad you got this, John, because I was so busy with the other thing.
	I heard it, and I'm glad that you did some research on this, on the out-of-scope stuff.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, there's some good stuff online about it.
	But he kind of tells everything.
	If you're out of scope, parts of your top-secret clearance are taken away from you.
	Right.
	Especially one aspect, special circumstances.
	CS documents or something.
	CS, and it's got a funny name.
	I mean, if you look it up, it means something funny.
	But it has to do with what he was investigating with Hillary and with Trump.
	He had to have that clearance, but because he was out of scope, technically he had to have that clearance pulled from him, so he should not have been doing either of those investigations.
	Right, right.
	Now, Strzok tries to say, well, unless I lied on the polygraph, that's what I understand.
	As the clip continues, did you play all of clip one?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, as the clip continues, this guy makes it.
	This is Doug Collins from Georgia, I believe, from Georgia.
	And I believe he was the ex-basketball player.
	I could be wrong.
	Anyway, I played part two, and then I explained what I found out.
	During the time that you were out of scope, did you have access to SCI?
	Yes, sir.
	Are you aware that it is...
	FBI procedure that a failure or out-of-scope polygraph does not terminate a top secret, but however, a failure of this would require you to be read out of SCI access, although you could maintain your top secret.
	This was a direct answer from a question that I posed and was received within the last week.
	Were you aware that you should have been read out of any SCI information?
	Sensitive compartmented information.
	I believe you used the word failure, which implies, in my mind, a failed poly.
	I am not and was not aware of the fact that an out-of-scope polygraph required a readout of SCI. Then I accept that, Mr.
	Strzok, but I want to get back to the question.
	The answer came back from the FBI and Justice itself.
	That it was.
	That is the procedure.
	So the next question I have is, after the 2618, you did your polygraph at what time?
	You said you were out of scope.
	You were brought in by giving a polygraph.
	When would that have been?
	Again, sir, my recollection is the 2016 timeframe, but after that email, but I don't know when.
	Within a month or two, I think.
	Are you also aware in the publicly stated version of the IG report that there has been some serious questions and issues concerning polygraph information and lack of polygraph procedures At the Department of Justice and FBI that was brought out by the Inspector General.
	I'm not generally aware that there was a report, but I'm not aware of the conclusions.
	One of the general concerns on this is that when you're out of scope, and this is the answer coming back from Department of Justice, you should have been read out of SCI. My concern is, is that during this time frame, you were involved in two very high profile, what would have been, or at least getting ready for SCI information in which you were not read out of.
	Okay.
	Compartmented information.
	So he shouldn't have been doing either one of those investigations, and he pretends to not know what the hell is going on.
	Right.
	So if you look a little deeper, apparently the polygraph test that he took the previous time or during sometime before January 2016 or whenever, actually that's when he got his memo, he did the polygraph test later.
	He had to do – he semi-failed – getting out of scope, according to the documents, means that – doesn't mean that you failed the polygraph, but it means it was something fishy about it.
	Right.
	And, or, you see, there's something fishy about it, or you have gone too long, in other words, over five years without taking a polygraph test.
	That puts you on the scope.
	But that's not what the situation was with this guy.
	I think at some point he mentioned, I don't know how to interpret polygraph lines, I think.
	Yeah, he goes on and on.
	It's full of it.
	It was out of scope during the polygraph.
	That's the way I understood it.
	It's from the affair.
	Yeah.
	It's from the affair.
	Okay.
	So someone asked about that and he lied about the affair.
	Well, you said it earlier.
	You said you didn't know, but it's fraternization.
	You cannot be a superior or working with somebody in certain kinds of situations in most government agencies.
	There you go.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And so he was fishy about the affair, and that put him out of scope, which meant he shouldn't have been doing any of this stuff.
	He shouldn't have even been up there talking today because he wouldn't have gotten himself into getting his tick to ring.
	Good point.
	Of course, of course.
	Ah, didn't even think of that one.
	By the way, can we just stop and say that Lisa Page looks a hell of a lot better than her high school yearbook photo we've been seeing?
	Yeah, she looked pretty good.
	I saw that, too.
	They're hollering.
	She got all dolled up to do the perp walk.
	She got this.
	She got the pumps on for the perp walk, the pumpy perp walk.
	Yeah, I know.
	That's pretty fun.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	So I want to get two things.
	I want to play the chairman of the committee had struck...
	Read from his documents.
	And I thought that was funny, and I think that's worth playing.
	And then I also want to place a couple of things the Democrats did that cracked me up.
	So...
	Let's see, what are we...
	Oh, by the way, I have an ISO here for consideration.
	Okay, I'll give it a listen here.
	I was playing it already.
	Here we go.
	Hi, how is Trump other than a douche?
	Hi, how is Trump other than a douche?
	I'll take it.
	It's a good recommendation for end of show.
	Hi, how is Trump other than a douche?
	That is my ringtone.
	Hi, how is Trump other than a douche?
	That's a great ringtone.
	Hi, how is Trump other than a douche?
	Hello?
	I have that coming out of my flip phone.
	People will totally go nuts.
	Where is this?
	The stroke reading texts.
	Yeah, there you go.
	Or as one congressperson, one senator said, Straszak.
	I forgot who that was.
	In front of you have one sheet of paper that was presented to you a few minutes ago.
	And I'm going to just go to a date and then ask you to read your own words.
	Hold on.
	This is not the chairman.
	This is ISA. Oh, is that Daryl?
	Yeah.
	Oh, good.
	I'm going to just go to a date and then ask you to read your own words.
	March 4th, 2016.
	You want me to read this?
	Yes, please.
	Yes, sir.
	OMG, he's an idiot.
	May 4th, 2016.
	I think that was a poor, very poor reading for this audition.
	I think you could do a lot better than, OMG, he's an idiot.
	Put some soul into it, man.
	OMG, he's an idiot!
	Do you want me to read this?
	Yes, please.
	Yes, sir.
	OMG, he's an idiot.
	May 4th, 2016.
	Now the pressure really starts to finish M.Y.E. July 19th, 2016.
	Hi, how was Trump other than a douche?
	Melania?
	July 21, 2016.
	Trump is a disaster.
	I have no idea how destabilizing his presidency would be.
	August 6, 2016.
	I don't believe I wrote this text, sir.
	Okay, it's been attributed to you, so we'll go on to the next.
	August 8, 2016.
	And I'll preface it by saying this for context.
	Ms.
	Page said, not ever going to become president, right?
	Right?
	No, no, he's not.
	We'll stop it.
	Repeat that again.
	No.
	No, he's not.
	We'll stop it.
	August 15th, 2016.
	I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office, that there's no way he gets elected, but I'm afraid we can't take that risk.
	It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40.
	On October 20th, 2016.
	I can't pull away what the...
	And I defer to the chairman whether or not...
	You can just use one letter if you don't mind.
	Why the F... What the F happened to our country, Lise?
	Okay, read it again that way.
	Sir, did you not...
	Was it not intelligible?
	I just want to hear it one more time.
	You just want to hear it for me to repeat it.
	Please.
	Okay, sir.
	Sure.
	Happy to indulge you.
	I can't pull away what the F happened to our country, Lise.
	I want to go back to the Gaudi bit, because now we're talking again about the who is the we.
	And in the first case, because Gaudi did a pretty good job on this with him.
	In the first case, it's, well, we, you know, that would mean the American people.
	And here's how Gaudi...
	Yeah, I know what you're going to pull.
	It's a good clip.
	Your testimony a couple of weeks ago was the we met the American people, which I found confusing.
	Because on November the 7th, which is the day before the election, you said this.
	You were concerned that those same American people that you were speaking on behalf of might actually elect Donald Trump president.
	So you said, OMG, this is effing terrifying.
	I think we know what effing means.
	I'm pretty sure we have OMG down too.
	What was terrifying about those same American people you trusted to stop him in August not stopping him in November?
	What was so terrifying about that, Agent Strzok?
	Mr.
	Gowdy, I do not have a copy of the transcript.
	We have not been provided that transcript.
	It's your text.
	It's not the transcript.
	It's your text.
	Mr.
	Gowdy, what I would say in that is, one, I was not referring to the American electorate at all.
	The American electorate I respect in their decisions and their right to vote is absolutely a cornerstone of our democracy.
	So at no time did I insult or call into question the judgment or the power of the American electorate.
	What I was expressing in that text is my personal belief and my personal sense of how I saw and what I believed in the potential upcoming administration.
	That's what I find so confounding, because in August, you blamed the we on the American people, that the American people would stop it, because you don't want it to be you and Lisa Page, and you don't want it to be the FBI. I've given five minutes to answer.
	That's when you've got to jump in.
	Oh, shit, they're on to it!
	We have indulged this harassment nine minutes.
	What I find confounding, Agent Strzok, is you were counting on the American people.
	That was the we you referenced in August when you said, we'll stop it.
	But the American people didn't stop it.
	He actually won.
	So then we go to March of 2017, and you're already talking longingly about him resigning.
	We will stop him.
	And I agree.
	If it was two FBI dudes and there was no relationship, it would have been a very different freakout in America right now.
	Well, the whole thing is depressing.
	Now, I do have a couple of counter clips just so we can balance this a little bit.
	Gotten some notes from people thinking that we're just bashing or boosting Trump.
	I don't know what we're bashing.
	But let's say some of the Democrats had a few...
	Yeah.
	You and I could make more money if we decided to just go all nutjob right-wing Republican alt-right a-holes.
	We could make a lot more money.
	Yeah, we could.
	We could do very well for ourselves as a couple of right-wing jerks.
	It's a consideration.
	It's a consideration at this point.
	No, it's not.
	Shut up, man.
	I'm doing a pitch.
	Shut up.
	That'll be the day.
	Frogs are growing balls.
	Oh, man.
	We never went to the moon!
	Oh, wait a minute.
	I say that already.
	Okay, so here's a bunch of short clips.
	This is typical of the Democrats.
	When they get the floor, every other guy's a Democrat, and they get the floor.
	Besides taking the floor by screaming and yelling all the time, the Republicans never interrupted the Democrats.
	Even when they said something like this, this is hearings, Democrats from TB. Okay.
	You can't handle the truth.
	And the truth is, this is the most corrupt administration ever, and it's going to be exposed by Robert Mueller.
	Thank God.
	I yield back, and I thank you.
	Woo-hoo!
	Okay, that has nothing to do with the hearings, but they've got to get their two cents worth in.
	Play hearings, Democrats, from TWOT. He's recognized.
	Thank you, Mr.
	Chair.
	Mr.
	Chair, I don't know where to start.
	If I could give you a Purple Heart, I would.
	This is the same reaction I had the first time I heard it.
	A purple heart is when you're wounded.
	Both my grandfathers have purple hearts.
	It's just a tad insulting.
	Just a little bit on the insult.
	And it also shows, I don't know, ignorance?
	And why did everyone erupt with it?
	I could give you a purple heart, I would.
	Where's the eruption?
	You deserve one.
	This has been an attack on you.
	This, by the way, fits in the social justice meme.
	He has literally been injured according to today's politically correct standards because words do actual harm.
	They really hurt you.
	Like a bullet.
	Yes, it is equal, just like, you know, it's terrorism, really.
	Geez.
	To start, if I could give you a Purple Heart, I would.
	You deserve one.
	You might as well skip.
	I'm going to go to number three.
	This is Nadler, the guy who is the reigning Democrat sitting next to the chairman.
	He would be the chairman if the Republicans take over.
	I must say before I begin my formal statement that...
	This country has a number of emergencies right now under the jurisdiction of this committee which we're not spending any time or any attention to.
	The leading one obviously being the fact that 3,000 children were improperly taken away from their families and the administration seems either unwilling or out of total incompetence unable to return the kids to their families even under court order.
	We ought to be holding hearings about the intentions Or the confidence of the Department of Homeland Security on this question?
	And then...
	And then we have the great, this is the last of these little clips, hearings, Democrats, Sheila Jackson.
	What we have not done is investigated the children being stolen away from their families.
	Nor have we looked at our president meeting with Mr.
	Putin, getting his annual performance review while offending our NATO ally.
	He's getting a performance review.
	I thought that was a great line.
	Now, obviously, she went on and on, and I do have one ISO of her.
	She's condemning everybody that had anything to do with Hillary losing, and then she has this interesting mispronunciation of Julian Assange.
	This is Julian Assange ISO. With WikiLeaks, Julian Assange...
	Wait a minute.
	Now you're competing with your own ISO, man.
	I mean...
	Yeah, that's a good one, huh?
	Let's just see.
	We have...
	Oh, hold on.
	We have...
	Where is she?
	I like that one a lot.
	It is?
	Here we go.
	Here it is.
	Julian Assad.
	With WikiLeaks, Julian Assad.
	Hi.
	How is Trump other than a douche?
	With WikiLeaks, Julian Assad.
	I don't know.
	It's a toss-up.
	It's a toss-up.
	I'd like to come back to my final clip in this series.
	Okay, I have one more series and I'm done.
	Okay.
	I'll just wrap this up because we've had the we.
	Now we understand the we in this case meant between two FBI agents.
	And now we go back to the reason that Strzok was kicked off the, and that is the official term used, is kicked off the Mueller team.
	And it's obvious that Mueller saw this guy and this relationship exactly for what it was.
	Two FBI agents conspiring.
	Whether it was real stuff to back it up or not, we don't know.
	But he didn't see it as two lovebirds.
	We're going to go into one other time period.
	May 17th, 2017.
	Bob Mueller is appointed.
	Your friend Jim Comey's been fired.
	He's already leaked the memos to his law professor friend and Mueller a special counsel.
	Do you remember how long it took for you to start talking about impeachment after Bob Mueller was appointed?
	I don't, sir.
	One day.
	One day.
	And you are talking about impeachment.
	And for anyone who may have missed it the day after his appointment, Agent Strzok, you did it again five days later.
	Now, how many interviews had you done as part of the special counsel team within the first five days of his appointment?
	Sir, again, same answer as before.
	I can't get into details.
	Right, and the answer is also the same.
	It's zero.
	No interviews have been done.
	I don't know if that's true or not.
	No interviews have been done by August the 8th when you're talking about stopping him and how terrifying it would be for him to win and how you can protect the country.
	And no interviews have been done before you're talking about impeachment of the president.
	No wonder Bob Mueller kicked you off of the investigation, Agent Strzok.
	My question is, if you were kicked off when he read the text, shouldn't you have been kicked off when you wrote them?
	Not at all.
	Well, it wasn't the discovery of your text, Mr.
	Strzok.
	It was the existence of your bias that got you kicked off.
	No, Mr.
	Gowdy, it wasn't.
	I do not have bias.
	My personal opinions in no way...
	Well, then why did you get kicked off?
	Why'd you get kicked off?
	Mr.
	Gowdy, my understanding of why I was kicked off was that based on an understanding of those texts and the perception that they might create is something that...
	Well, hang on a second, Agent Strzok.
	Hang on a second.
	Perception.
	You're saying it was the perception that 13 Democrats on the special counsel probe, including one who went to what he hoped was a victory party.
	That's a perception problem, too.
	They weren't kicked off.
	You were.
	Why were you kicked off?
	Mr.
	Gowdy, I cannot speak to Special Counsel Mueller's staffing decisions and reasons why he did or didn't.
	How long did you talk to him when he let you go?
	My recollection is it was a short meeting, somewhere between 15 to 30 minutes, probably around 15 minutes.
	And your testimony is Bob Mueller did not kick you off because of the content of your text.
	He kicked you off because of some appearance that he was worried about.
	My testimony, what you asked and what I responded to was that he kicked me off because of my bias.
	I'm stating to you it is not my understanding that he kicked me off because of any bias, that it was done based on the appearance.
	If you want to represent what you said accurately, I'm happy to answer that question, but I don't appreciate what was originally said being changed.
	I don't give a damn what you appreciate, Agent Strzok.
	I don't appreciate having an FBI agent with an unprecedented level of animus working on two major investigations during 2016.
	Let me kind of take your position and try to explain what you're doing.
	Yeah.
	And you can tell me if I'm wrong.
	Okay.
	What this amounts to is that this was actually a conspiracy between Strzok and Lisa Page, who weren't lovers.
	Maybe not.
	We have no actual evidence.
	I'm sorry.
	I'm sorry.
	Who weren't lovers, but they were conspirators.
	Hence the reason for not giving up any of the texts that were personal, if you notice, from his personal phone, because if you looked at those texts, you'd see no lovey-dovey stuff, because there was no lovey-dovey stuff.
	They weren't lovers, they were conspirators, and that's the reason he failed the lie detector test.
	He may not have even been grilled about having an affair, but this scheming and plotting...
	Against the current regime may have come out in some funny way and there was a lot of hints in the people asking questions including Gohmert who said specifically you could probably pass a lie detector test.
	Exactly.
	And so what we have here is the elimination of a conspiracy by Mueller.
	Yep.
	Mueller saw it.
	He got rid of it.
	But we have to protect the agency, etc., etc.
	And so from the get-go, this lover's thing was dreamed up.
	It was a...
	And no one's questioned this.
	Have we seen an interview or even a paparazzi shot of either of the other spouses?
	No.
	Do we know?
	Has anyone filed for divorce?
	Is there separation?
	There's no reporting.
	I really don't know.
	But you'd think that in today's, you know, shit, man, we're tracking people on airplanes and making up stories about them.
	So why wouldn't someone do that?
	Why isn't it out there?
	I don't know.
	But I agree with you.
	I think that that's the polygraph.
	I hadn't put that together.
	You nailed it on that.
	You nailed it.
	That's the out of scope part.
	But the rest is just two people conspiring.
	And they had Andrew McCabe and all kinds of other people involved in that.
	Insurance policies.
	It just becomes a little more real when you remove the lovey-dovey thing which was given to us as fact from the get-go.
	Yes, it was a smoke screen from the beginning.
	Yeah, that's the cover-up.
	And that's how they can soften all this.
	And you hear everything from the NPR interview.
	That's ridiculous.
	That's his private life.
	Because, of course, everybody feels that way because people are sick.
	People have affairs.
	Probably people who are presenting these programs to you know what that's like.
	Oh shit, it'd be horrible if someone...
	No, that's just my opinion.
	So it's a war of your mind is what this is.
	It's a good one.
	It's fantastic.
	It is one of the best openly covered up things I've ever seen.
	Well, I like this angle.
	I'll subscribe to it.
	Because it does make more things fall into place.
	Your emoji thing is what triggered the whole thought on your part, obviously.
	And you were skeptical about the affair from the beginning.
	I just took it for granted.
	I was mistaken.
	I think, now that I look at it, because it's the only thing that actually makes sense.
	And these two guys, this guy's a bad actor.
	And he looks like one.
	And maybe he is a lizard.
	I have a real no agenda out there alternative theory.
	Okay.
	Peter Strzok's Wikipedia page is incomplete at best, and probably some of it's fabricated.
	Peter Strzok, his son, he's actually Peter Strzok Jr.
	And his father, Peter Strzok Sr., worked initially as a lieutenant, I think lieutenant colonel.
	And I'm looking from old newspaper clippings, actually.
	So it's not just some web page, but it's newspaper clippings.
	And later for Bell Textron, but first it was Army Engineers, and then later, yeah, here we go, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, later in Intelligence, that would be Defense Intelligence,
	and then after retiring, he worked for Bell Textron, and this period happened for six years, With his son there with him and his family.
	Do you know where he was?
	Where Peter Strzok Jr.
	grew up in Iran.
	Oh.
	Peter Strzok Jr.
	grew up in Iran.
	And this is not reflected on his Wikipedia page.
	But his dad, there's a pretty good interview about him that I have here.
	Now, what was the years?
	Do we know?
	Yeah, I think it was...
	It was Shaw years, obviously.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	For sure, Shaw years.
	He actually liked Khomeini.
	His dad was a fan of Khomeini.
	Let's see.
	I'm seeing if there's a date in here.
	It was a judgment error.
	Anyways, it is struck whose job was Bell Textron was terminated when he left Iran.
	He's already making plans to fly to Saudi Arabia early next week to check on a new job with a construction enterprise there.
	Let me see where it talks about this kid.
	Somewhere it says here that his son left when his son was six years old.
	Now, take into account...
	And this is just a really out there theory.
	Yeah, I'm enjoying it.
	It's fine.
	Our listeners, the few of them that helped sponsor this show...
	I would assert that Peter Strzok Jr., and of course he was a part of the whole FBI team and Department of Justice when Obama was doing this off-book deal with Iran.
	Remember, this wasn't something that went through the Senate.
	It was an agreement that he wrote.
	Billions of dollars went over there.
	Valerie Jarrett definitely pushing for an Iran deal.
	There's a lot in the Strzok text and a lot that he says in his testimony.
	I think that there's a distinct possibility, and I have to go much deeper on this.
	I'm going to need help from our producers.
	I think there's a distinct possibility that Strzok Jr.
	was actually a spy for Iran.
	Who knows what this hearing is about?
	Who knows who's involved?
	Maybe, for all I know, Mueller is trying to out this guy.
	I don't know.
	How about this?
	Let's take it a step further if you're going to go in this crazy direction, which is nuts.
	Yes, I agree.
	To do business with Saudi Arabia, a lot of people realize that John Brennan, the CIA director, turned Muslim.
	I would assume...
	It's possible that Strzok Sr.
	turned Muslim and Strzok Jr.
	is a Muslim, thus he could work with Obama quite easily, who I still believe is a Muslim.
	I know it's nuts to think that, but if you read the documents by Daniel Pipes, a very renowned researcher at the Hoover Institute, and he's got essays on this, he says there's no doubt that Obama's a Muslim, and I don't understand why nobody even wants to discuss it in an open forum.
	Or ask him.
	I mean, he's said a number of times that he's a Muslim, but that people are, no, no, no, no, you're not.
	So there's a narrative going on that may or may not be, you know, based on Muslims doing some business.
	And Trump, it looks like he hates Muslims, so you'd go after him.
	Even though he may or may not hate Muslims, you don't know.
	I mean, it's...
	He's just skeptical of Muslims, let's say.
	So there's a lot to be said for that thesis.
	The conspiracy thing, I think, is a little more solid, obviously, than this.
	But the fact that this is all expunged from his wiki page is pretty telling.
	In 2011, there was an Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador.
	Right.
	The FBI special agent who signed the complaint regarding the Iranian Qud forces and this assassination attempt?
	Struck.
	Yes, sir.
	It's a DEA. That's a DEA case.
	I don't know why FBI is in it all of a sudden, but I thought it would be.
	Why would it be DEA? Oh, if you read the...
	It's a very lengthy document.
	Drug Enforcement Agency?
	Yeah.
	It was DEA's case, and it got taken over by the FBI. Look, I'm a little incomplete on this, but I'm just seeing all these different things in Strzok's background related to Iran, not reflected in his semi-official biography.
	We all know what Wikipedia is.
	Um...
	This was Mansour Arabasyar sentenced in New York federal court to 25 years in prison for conspiring with Iranian military officials to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States.
	Who hates the Iranians is the Saudis, who also moved to Saudi Arabia.
	Struck's family after they were in Iran.
	Yeah, it's very spooky.
	Now, it's just an out there theory.
	It really is.
	I don't think it's that far out.
	The only reason I say that is because this information is not in the wiki page.
	But it would give Strzok much more incentive to go so idiotic about Trump because he knew one thing for sure, Trump was going to blow up the Iran deal, and this guy, if he truly was an agent or an operative or maybe just an Iran lover, that would make a lot of sense that he would be so adamant about stopping the guy.
	Yes.
	None of this brought up, of course.
	Except on the No Agenda show.
	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 Context Dvorak.
	Well, in the morning to you, Mr.
	Adam Curry.
	Also in the morning to all the ships that see the boots on the ground, the feet in the air, the subs in the water, and all the dames and knights out there.
	In the morning to our troll room, noagendastream.com, where everybody listens in live.
	And we appreciate you showing up and helping out as you are duty-bound to do so, and to troll, because it is, after all, the troll room, noagendastream.com.
	In the morning, to Mike Riley, two in a row for Mike, brought us the artwork for episode 1049 and 1050.
	The title of that was Chip In!
	And this was Elizabeth Warren...
	Apparently on a San Francisco stoop, begging for money, in her sleeping bag, and holding a sign in a cup, and the sign says, Stop Kavanaugh!
	Anything helps!
	And this was related to her emails that she sent out asking to chip in for three bucks to Stop Kavanaugh!
	So it was great, Mike.
	We got a chuckle out of it, and it was just a good piece of art, and we appreciate your work.
	Noagendaartgenerator.com is where Mike uploaded his artwork, and you can too.
	We don't just use it as album artwork.
	We also use it in newsletters, and it is a big part of the success of the No Agenda show.
	So thank you, and thank you all the artists.
	Well, we only have two people to thank as executive producers and associate executive producers, although from the looks of things, I was predicting we're going to have our annual nobody produce the show, which does happen.
	Now, this has happened every year.
	And this was going to be it.
	But no, luckily, Heather Fucinari in Fullerton, I hope I got her name correct, 33333, comes in, and she's the executive producer for the show, and desperate need for some jobs karma.
	As, when you read this, I will be on hour 72 of IT deployment.
	Wow.
	I recently interviewed for a job that is a perfect fit and desperate times call for desperate donations.
	I'm also 45 minutes away from a call from an IT recruiter.
	This show has saved my sanity for almost a decade.
	Hmm.
	You should put it on your, actually, may I recommend that when you have an executive or associate executive producership, you put that in your profile on Tinder or Match or eHarmony or this could either get, you'll get lucky, very lucky, or you won't have to deal with something that just won't work out in the end after all.
	Right, and it won't.
	Looking forward to hearing Sunday's show as I blankly stare at my beige cubicle wall.
	Can I get some, hey dude named Ben, amen fist bump, as my stepson has adopted this as our formal greeting.
	This is Love and Light, Heather.
	KX6MME. Adam Hilaris, you used the bastardized NATO I-Cow phonetic alphabet in a previous donation.
	Oh, it should be Kilo Kilo Six Mike Mike Echo.
	I wonder what...
	And 73s to you, Heather.
	Yeah, all right.
	73s, baby, and some 88s.
	Baby's just a dude made bad.
	Just a dude made bad.
	I think his first name may have been Ben.
	So a guy named Ben, a dude named Ben.
	Amen.
	Fist bump.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	And our associate executive producer for show 1051 will be Michael Delosier, or Delosier, but Delosier probably.
	And he sent an email in.
	Let me go to that.
	I really hope I'm sending this to the correct address.
	Apparently you were.
	Hello, Zenfear 2.0 and Podfather.
	This is Michael Delosier.
	It rhymes with enclosure.
	Delosier.
	Enclosure.
	From Maryville.
	Pronounce Merville.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	That sounds right.
	Dynamite.
	Yeah.
	Merville Tennessee.
	Merville Tennessee.
	Mervil.
	I'm from Mervil.
	Where?
	Mervil.
	We know from Mervil Comics.
	It closes my second donation, which is composed of the following.
	Two perky boobs donations of $9.009.
	And it added $33.33 to get an associate executive producer credit.
	I had previously donated $9.009, but just wanted to get the new donation meme out.
	To anyone who might like the lift the boobs donation up a bit.
	A boob, an uplifting donation.
	So we got three boob donations.
	We got the Perky's at 909, regular, what is it?
	8008 boob.
	Yeah, 8008.
	That's because it spells boob.
	And then the small boob, 6006.
	I humbly request a dedouching.
	We'll now give him a dedouching.
	You've been dedouched.
	I will now choose a sustaining membership since I'm a poor slave.
	So while you may not hear me much in the donation segments, I will still be supporting the best podcasts in the universe and urge everyone listening to do the same.
	Thank you for your valuable deconstructions.
	No jingles, no karma.
	Yes, and thank you to our sole executive producer, sole associate executive producer.
	Not Nights, by the way.
	The previous show, our Nights came in to save the day, which was highly appreciated.
	So now it really is up to the other people who listen to the show and enjoy it.
	And I think we did our job today to support the program because actual work is involved.
	It was one of those horrible...
	In fact, I went out of my way to find the...
	The shape-shifting at five hours and three minutes.
	Yeah.
	That is appreciated.
	Because that was my first thing, like, this can't be true.
	It looked pretty creepy, but it was only creepy because if you knew where to cut the beginning and the end and you just used that, it was creepy.
	Well, we had a bevy of boobs for our execs today, and we appreciate that.
	We'd like to thank our executive producers up front, just like in Hollywood, although they usually have more executive producers.
	But it's okay.
	Thank you.
	And we'll be thanking more people, just a few, in our second segment.
	And please remember us for our next show.
	It'll be on Thursday.
	Remember us at...
	And I think we've brought you some deconstruction, which you can use to go out there and propagate the formula.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	With WikiLeaks, Julian Assad.
	Updates.
	France.
	The globalists have won the Globalist World Order Cup 4-2 against Croatia.
	Yeah, of course.
	Yeah.
	We had some people writing in.
	I sent you the note.
	You saw that note?
	Yes, I saw the note, but I don't think it really makes any sense now to deconstruct it.
	It's over.
	Well, I know, but I thought the note had kind of predicted this.
	Yes, that the globalists will win.
	They have to.
	Yeah, the globalists would win because they have more immigrants.
	That's a good one.
	They have more immigrants on their team.
	And Croatia is notorious for being pretty Croatian.
	And so, because France had all these immigrants on their team as if...
	They would win because of that.
	So there was a message that, look, we need...
	And it was shown in the pictures.
	The Guardian had this crazy signage on there that they put up all over town during their Trump protest.
	It was a pro-immigrant thing.
	We need more immigrants.
	I'm telling you, this Brexit thing is dead.
	Yeah, I think I have to agree with you.
	It is way over.
	So, nice try, Brits.
	You're just going to be a cog in the new German empire.
	Let's call it what it is.
	Right.
	Which is probably safer for the world, except it's probably going to...
	Germans, they can't...
	Let me get my last couple of clips out of the way, because there was a couple of little items here that were side lights to this investigation.
	Sure, sure, sure, sure.
	And this is Jordan, who's that guy from Ohio.
	Yeah, it was under attack, right?
	He's under attack for hashtag YouTube.
	Oh, he's under a smear attack.
	Yes, smear attack, yes.
	He's being smeared.
	Shmeared.
	Let's play Jordan and PQ. This is a little aside, and I wanted to play it because I heard this.
	I lit up like you would, and you probably heard this too and thought the same thing.
	I haven't done any research, but I think we should keep in tune for Jordan and PQG. Well, we'd sure like to know.
	I want to refer you to...
	I don't know that you have this in front of you, but this is the House Intelligence Committee's report.
	Chapter 6, there's a footnote on page 113, and it says this.
	In late March 2017, Daniel Jones met with the FBI regarding PQG, the Penn Quarter Group, which he described as exposing foreign influence in Western elections.
	He told the FBI that PQG was being funded by 7 to 10 wealthy donors, located primarily in New York and California, who provided approximately $50 million, He further stated that PQG had secured the services of Steel, his associate, and Fusion GPS to continue exposing potential Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
	Are you familiar with this meeting Mr.
	Jones had with the FBI? I'm not, and I don't know if that's accurate or not, but I'm not aware.
	I'm going from the intelligence report that the majority issued from the House Intelligence Committee.
	I'm not aware of that meeting or who that is.
	Have you ever spoke with Daniel Jones?
	No.
	Do you know Mr.
	Jones at all?
	I do not.
	Alright.
	Yeah, I did catch this, and it appears that our internal federal law enforcement, known as the FBI, has outsourced just enormous amounts of work Two former colleagues who go off and start these little independent groups with just phenomenal contracts.
	The same goes for CrowdStrike, which we'll talk about in a moment.
	But this is the same.
	This is a group led by Daniel Jones, and he has been involved in government, specifically has even notes on their own website with the FBI, for years.
	And this is what has happened.
	Just like DHS, we outsource it to ex-DHS a-hole so they can build all the naked body scanners.
	The FBI outsources their intelligence to their ex-colleagues and pays them good money because you know that when they get out, they'll be doing the same thing.
	Yeah, so it's disgusting.
	It's discouraging.
	That's actual corruption.
	It is corruption.
	Yes.
	It's total corruption.
	Now, the other thing Jordan brought up was the Simpson and Korn connection, including the connection with David Korn, the guy who used to be the commentator that was outed as a misogynist.
	The nut job.
	At Mother Jones and he had something to do with this dossier in the beginning apparently.
	I just want to play this little clip because there's confusion over the possibility that there's two dossiers.
	Oops, I'm sorry.
	I accidentally ejected.
	Here we go.
	My direction from the FBI is that I may not answer that question.
	I got it.
	Let's go back to the email that you sent that you won't talk about.
	Are there three copies of the dossier as evidenced by what you said in this email?
	Sir, to be clear, I want to talk about this email.
	I want nothing more than to answer your question because it would leave you sadly disappointed.
	Are there three copies?
	The three copies of what?
	The McCain copy, the BuzzFeed copy, and the one that you got from Cornyn Simpson.
	Sir, the most I can say is we received a variety of copies of and different types of reports.
	Let me ask you one other question.
	Let me ask you one other question.
	Glenn Simpson testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on August 22, 2017.
	He was asked, did anyone from Fusion ever communicate with the FBI? His response, no.
	No one from Fusion ever spoke with the FBI. So here's what I'm having trouble understanding.
	If Glenn Simpson says no one ever spoke with the FBI, how is it that you got a copy of the dossier from Simpson?
	Someone's getting cornholed today.
	Sounds like a recipe for success to me.
	So that came up and didn't...
	And I will say, without any collusion...
	This is the only clip that overlapped that we had today.
	Oh, you had that clip?
	That was the only one.
	Everything else, we had different things we brought to the party.
	Oh, that's good.
	I think we have some second sense about this.
	It's inexplicable.
	Last clip.
	This is just a local analysis done by just a rap clip.
	This is only 12, was it?
	Twelve seconds or so.
	It's the wrap clip after they go through all their discussion of this event.
	And I want you to just listen carefully to this and tell me what you think is wrong with the logic.
	Drew attention for the appearance of bias against the president.
	Strzok testified yesterday that the fact that he didn't leak any information about the Russia probe shows that his political views did not play a role in his work.
	Huh?
	Let me just understand what's being said here.
	Because he did not leak, that proves that he had no bias?
	That's what they said.
	Hey, makes nothing but sense to me, everybody, and in weather today.
	Jeez.
	It's unbelievable.
	And people wonder.
	People wonder what's going on with your news.
	You know, I'm in one of the adult under 40s who's doing exams and stuff, and she's got her final year of school, and she's taking a communications class.
	Who?
	Elise.
	She's one of Tina's daughters.
	Elise.
	Elise, yeah.
	Or Elish?
	Elise.
	Elise.
	E-L-I-S-E. Is she old?
	An adult under 40, of course.
	She's 21.
	Just to give you an understanding of why people are misunderstanding things or take things for granted.
	And she's taking a communications class and she had to get an extremely expensive book, which is just another rip-off.
	A scam.
	Another scam these children go.
	It angers me.
	$100 for a textbook.
	Okay.
	Scam.
	And you could rent it from Amazon for $60.
	You could rent a book from Amazon.
	No.
	Double scam.
	Yeah, scam, scam.
	And I say, I'm in some of those textbooks, and she goes to the index, and sure, shoot, and there I am, you know, about podcasting.
	What were you doing there?
	Yeah, I was hanging out, and, you know, it was about podcasting.
	Was your name in there?
	Yeah, no, the whole history.
	Oh, okay.
	The history of podcasting, which was pretty good.
	It's better than most accounts, but it also wasn't completely right, and so you always have to think, well, if that's not right, what else is not right in the book?
	And so then there's a question on a test.
	I think it was a practice test.
	And she says, okay, what caused the decline of news, of the news business?
	And it was in the context of newspapers.
	Yeah?
	And I said, well, that's really...
	What?
	Do you have the question?
	I can give you the right answer.
	What would be the answer you gave?
	Television.
	Television.
	That would be one.
	But it was more modern.
	You're snapping your lips.
	It was more modern.
	When the internet came along, what was the main thing?
	What brought the newspapers down?
	What did the internet do?
	Fake news.
	No.
	Classifieds.
	Oh.
	Hmm.
	So it all depends on how you...
	That is an element.
	The thing is, okay, here's the history goes like this.
	It was actually television that really brought the newspapers to their knees, required all the stuff that took place in the newspaper business, from joint operating agreements, which were the thing that saved the newspapers, even though it was sketchy, to the decline of the evening paper, all came about because of television.
	Television sent the newspapers into their death spiral.
	Mm-hmm.
	Yes, the classified thing was propping up a lot of papers, and when Craigslist came along, although it was offered to the newspapers directly, even though I'm sure they don't discuss that in there, as kind of a joint venture or whatever, the newspapers...
	We know how to do what we're doing.
	Get out of here.
	And that was the end of that.
	And that really hurt the papers.
	Very badly, because as you say, it was propping up their revenue.
	So I picked up the story and I said, well, I was there when this happened.
	What happened was they lost their classified business, which was propping up the news.
	And then they couldn't make money anymore.
	But the correct answer, according to the test, is the move to digital.
	That's the answer.
	If that's the type of thinking, critical thinking, and historical relevance people are being taught, you've got to question university.
	The move to digital was a Hail Mary to try and save themselves.
	Because of the loss of the revenue of the classifieds, they had to go digital because everyone...
	Well, that and the fact that newspapers weren't producing is...
	You know, it's an arguable position that would be debatable.
	I thought it was highly debatable, too.
	And I think the move to digital is just too short of an answer.
	It's not that important.
	It's a complicated answer.
	It's a series of problems that took place.
	And the move to digital was just the last of what might be another event after the move to digital that further erodes their position.
	I mean, yeah, you could say Facebook.
	Would that be the answer?
	I don't know.
	You could say Facebook or Google.
	This is shallow.
	This requires a little more thought than this.
	So that's why you can get news reports like the ones we just played, and since it's only 11 seconds, I'll play it again.
	I mean, that's an abstraction, you know, and it's an incorrect abstraction.
	If you think about it, at some level it's a non-sequitur.
	It makes no sense.
	Yeah.
	I know.
	I can't help that.
	What does she expect to do with this certificate?
	What is she getting out of this?
	She'll graduate.
	She'll graduate from junior college?
	No, no, no.
	She's going to be a senior.
	Senior in a regular school?
	Yes.
	And they're teaching this?
	Yep.
	Sounds like a To be honest about it, I thought it was like a high school text.
	So what did they say about podcasting that was inaccurate?
	Oh, I'd have to get it again.
	Oh, never mind.
	It's not that important.
	It's not that important.
	And it's also my version of history.
	Who knows?
	Everyone can have a different version.
	It's fine.
	I really don't care.
	So now we have the...
	Oh, well, before...
	So the president's on his way to meet with Putin, and then the new meme is launched.
	He should not meet with Putin because Putin hacked our election!
	I like the fact that the Democrats, various Democrats are coming out and telling the president what he should or should not do.
	I mean, they're just grandstanding.
	There's no way he's going to pay attention to any of them.
	But this is the worst kind of grandstanding and head in front of the 2018 elections.
	I think they're starting to blow it, to be honest about it.
	But the timing, of course, is fantastic.
	I think in the president's favor to have a new 12 new Russians indicted on the very last minute of your business week there on a Friday.
	I have a clip.
	I have a clip you can play.
	Yeah, I'd love to hear it.
	But first I want to play the pre-clip.
	Which is 12 indicted.
	Stunning detail.
	I think it's funny.
	Paul and Dan, the indictment against 12 Russian intelligence operatives is stunning in its detail.
	Spelling out just how aggressively Russia was in stealing huge amounts of data from Democrats to interfere with the 2016 election.
	Stunning amount of detail.
	Stunning.
	I read the stunning amount of detail.
	Which, interestingly enough, at times to the letter...
	Is identical to a lawsuit filed in California in 2017 by George Webb, if you remember that name.
	George Webb is some ex-intelligence guy who was doing video after video after video.
	Remember this?
	We played a couple of his clips.
	He'd still done just like a daily video.
	It could be five, could be 15 minutes.
	And he was mainly talking about Podesta.
	And in 2017, he sued Podesta and other elected public officials, including some in the Justice Department.
	And his allegation was that it was the Awan brothers who hacked into the Podesta system, DNC, the DCCC, CCC, and that it was those guys that did the hack.
	Who obviously, you know, working for Debbie Washington Schultz, probably had access to a lot of things, and we know that these guys were just let off the hook very easily with some slap on the wrist for, I think, a rather outrageous banking fraud.
	I think I would get in more trouble.
	Yeah, you would.
	That's why I think the whole thing was some sort of a CIA scam.
	Well...
	Who knows exactly, but the fact that some pieces of the indictment were, I have both of them in the show notes, identical to the Mueller indictment of the spearfishing setup where they used Act Blues instead of Act Blue to have people click on that.
	I mean, all of this...
	You could say it was plagiarized.
	I don't know if it was.
	But to say, oh, such incredible detail.
	Yeah, it was a lot of detail for a Justice Department who never saw the server...
	They never saw it.
	This is like the WTC7 won't go away.
	We need a jingle for it.
	The server won't go away.
	What's in the server?
	Let me add something to this.
	And this goes back to the PQB that we were talking about.
	CrowdStrike, which has Ukrainian backing, Ukrainian co-founder, Who hate Russians, I might want to point out.
	At least a lot of them do.
	A lot of them do.
	That's what CrowdStrike is about.
	And the CEO is Sean Henry.
	Good friends with Robert Mueller.
	Lunches with him.
	Goes to Symposia with him together.
	And these are the guys that got the server and made all these allegations now cited as a top U.S. security firm.
	So the FBI's indictment, not only is it based upon third party and not any investigating they did, there's also no way to go back and check it because the servers have been wiped clean.
	So this whole indictment can never hold any water.
	There's no proof to show.
	Unless, you know, somehow you're going to say, well, these guys seem okay.
	Yeah, we'll just take their word for it.
	Yeah, it seems unlikely.
	Well, let's play the second half.
	Let's play the second half.
	Russian Command Unit 26165 in charge of stealing information.
	Headquartered in this building in Moscow.
	And 18 miles away, here were Unit 7445.
	5-5 allegedly weaponized the information, posting online, including through WikiLeaks, damaging information on Hillary Clinton and Democrats just three days before the Democratic National Convention.
	Mueller portrayed the Russians as nimble.
	One example in the indictment suggesting they appear to step up their attacks on Clinton on the same day as...
	Nice cyber effect, by the way.
	...this appeal from candidate Trump.
	Russia, if you're listening...
	I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.
	That very day, according to the indictment, the Russian conspirators for the first time attempted to hack email accounts at a domain used by Clinton's personal office.
	Mueller also claims a hacker entitled Gussifer 2.0 reached out to someone close to the Trump campaign, believed to be his longtime strategist, Roger Stone, writing, Do you find anything interesting in the docs I posted?
	And then, please, tell me if I can help you anyhow.
	Stone himself was not indicted.
	He told ABC News that he is the person mentioned in the indictment, but he insists that he's done nothing wrong.
	Any objective person who will read that exchange will see that it's benign, it's innocuous.
	Special Counsel Mueller's indictment list is growing.
	32 people indicted so far with five felony convictions and more than 100 criminal charges.
	Of course, that's brought up on the hearings constantly.
	Oh, there's a hundred people been in charge and done so many.
	These are all for, like, you know, littering.
	Producer Chris Kay attended a private or semi-private demo from the CrowdStrike folks, the people who brought you the Pew Pew map, and he sent us a little report, which I'd like to share.
	Good day to the OG Podfather.
	Sent you a tweet about this a week ago.
	I attended a CrowdStrike demo.
	He sent me a ton of screenshots, which I will share with you, John, and maybe put them in the...
	I don't know.
	I don't know if it's useful for anything, but it's just interesting to see.
	I'll put them in the newsletter.
	It was an eye-opening experience.
	I did get a few jokes in on the Pew Pew map and them doing the DNC server hack job and not the FBI. There's a producer, ladies and gentlemen.
	When I did that, they seemed quite proud that they did the DNC break-in investigation and exposed, oh, those Russians part of the hack.
	They are thoroughly convinced it was the Russians and not an inside job, which is the theory I agree with.
	There was way too much data moved for it not to be done inside the network.
	I can't see them transferring that much info that quickly over an internet connection.
	Throughout the demo, they threw out a lot of buzz terms.
	They said their staff are all, all, all former CIA and NSA. It's the outsourcing of your intelligence.
	The guy who did the demo for me was a seven-year veteran of the NSA. I have no doubt that CrowdStrike is a project of the Intel community.
	And now check this, because we know a lot of people who work at this company.
	They leverage Splunk to build out their product.
	You know, a lot of pod show people went to Splunk.
	Brief me on this again.
	Splunk is a product that you put on, I think, on top of a database.
	It's basically a data mining engine, and it's used a lot for recommendations and for some funky way of using a database.
	Obviously, I'm doing a poor job of explaining it, but it is a data mining tool.
	It's a tool.
	Yeah, and they went public, and everyone made a lot of cash over there.
	They leverage Splunk to build out their product.
	I've used Splunk before, so I'm not surprised this is the route they went.
	It makes me wonder if Splunk is an Intel community project as well.
	Yes.
	For them going public, I would say, yeah, probably.
	They were a very successful offering.
	I'm certain that the NSA is like the CIA in that no one ever truly retires to just move on to another arm of the organization.
	I learned a lot about that from my wife's granddad.
	He's a retired CIA. He has a whole bunch of private stuff here about what he did.
	Back to the pitch.
	At times, I found myself getting caught up in the sales pitch on all the fancy screens.
	Of course, my no agenda inoculations kicked in and pulled me back from going full retard.
	Never go full retard.
	That's what he says.
	We never got to the pricing structure.
	I'm still waiting for that whopper of a number to come back.
	It's a nice product, and I have no doubt it can replace antivirus malware and firewall functions at the desktop.
	Just like the Cisco Firepower product, its strength is in getting enough people to use the product in order to learn and detect new exploits and attacks.
	They talk about machine learning, but they are very much using actual humans since the machines can't learn yet with the so-called AI.
	They refer to the team as the managed hunter team, and they call them their force multiplier.
	They also offer what they call their white glove option.
	This is someone crazy enough to allow them to view all their data and step in when a live attack is detected and to remediate it for you.
	Anyone who chooses that option needs to be fired.
	Below are some of the buzz terms they threw out.
	I'm not sure if this will help the show, but I always wanted to share what I learned as a fellow.
	Dude named Ben.
	Yes, the dudes named Ben make it happen.
	Grew up watching you on MTV and reading John's columns.
	I'm a bit overdue for donations, so I need to rectify that before I fall into full-on douchebag.
	Here's some of the buzzword terms.
	125 billion events a day.
	They only collect metadata, DNA of an attack, nation-states, an indication of attack, or IOA, non-sales staff, all XCIA and NSA, IT hygiene, and built-on Splunk.
	So, nice hyped-up company.
	Nothing there doesn't make sense.
	Led by a guy who was friends with Robert Mueller who just indicted people based upon his buddy's information from his commercial company.
	I'd say shaky at best.
	I'd say the least.
	Yeah, or that.
	Now, that doesn't mean that we didn't have enough people going just apeshit over...
	Trump having the audacity to go see Putin.
	And again, I think if anything, he set it up this way.
	Like, yeah, go ahead.
	Tell him now is perfect before I go over there.
	Let everyone go crazy.
	And ask me to not go or to tell Putin to extradite these people.
	And so it's just all kinds of...
	CNN was just going nuts.
	Oh, hold on a second.
	Was extradition requested?
	No.
	I bet it wasn't.
	No, it's being in the indictment?
	Yeah.
	Ooh, that's a good question.
	Well, I have it here.
	I guess I can do a quick search.
	I don't think extradition was asked for.
	Of course not.
	Let me just see.
	Here we go.
	Let me do a quick search.
	Extra?
	No.
	Phrase not extra not even found, so no.
	Of course not, no.
	No, no, no, of course not.
	I mean, you think you could at least go against the 26165 guys, let alone the 74455?
	Right.
	But also, you know, an indictment is not a conviction, but you'd think it was.
	Anyway, so, you know, Putin is crazy.
	Putin is a nut job.
	Putin is doing all kinds of crazy stuff.
	And somehow he's smarter than that dummy Trump.
	Well, here's Meet the Press from this morning.
	...this report that you and I were talking about before the show.
	It also notes that among the things the Russians did was mining for Bitcoin.
	Now, Bitcoin gets complicated, but basically what that does is you have a computer system that does incredibly complicated computations.
	And by completing them, the system allows you to generate more Bitcoin.
	Which means the Russians generated money to make this happen.
	They literally minted money to hack our election system.
	Now, the president saying, well, I don't know if I'm going to ask for extradition, is stunning.
	If someone broke into the Bureau of Engraving and Printing and stole American dollars to commit a crime against the United States, it would be an immediate call for extradition.
	They are literally minted money.
	Yeah, that sounds like a good comparison to me.
	Wow!
	Is this guy off the rails?
	Is that nuts or what?
	It's like stealing the plates and printing U.S. dollars.
	Um, no.
	No, it's really not.
	Isn't that great?
	That's the funniest thing I've heard for quite a while.
	I'm going to give you a borderline clip of the day for that being so outrageous.
	Well, what say ye from clip number two?
	And listen carefully to what she's really saying.
	This is Cynthia Hooper.
	Now, if Trump actually does go to Helsinki, meets with Putin, and has some kind of cordial interaction with him, or even reaches a deal on something quite concrete like Syria, The Russian press is going to be able to sort of say that any naysayers to this new kind of detente or rapprochement are simply again echoing this old story of Russophobia.
	And that plays very well to the Russian people.
	Okay, so if I understand her correctly, if Trump and Putin somehow arrange to create peace in Syria, that's bad.
	It's bad because then everyone could say, because then the Russians can promote themselves as not being horrible.
	I mean, I'm speechless over this.
	What kind of ill logic do these people deal in?
	And I love that she says rapprochement.
	Okay.
	She says rapprochement and russaphobia.
	Russaphobia and rapprochement.
	I mean, gee.
	Rapprochement.
	Rapprochement, I do tell you.
	Well, then we have this.
	Kimberly, I know you have a lot of contacts in the national security.
	She's going to toss to Kimberly Dozier.
	I believe she is a former CIA operative.
	What do you know about the current threat?
	Well, this current threat is something that is much discussed, much recognized by the intelligence community, by the Pentagon, and it's something that they are daily fighting against.
	So you're getting a bird's-eye view of what President Trump is getting briefed probably nearly daily.
	That said, What Trump hasn't done, to our knowledge, is to declare some sort of war on cyber threats by Russia the same way there was a declaration of war on Al-Qaeda, war on terrorism.
	And while every day you've got national security professionals battling it out in cyberspace against Moscow, What you don't have is a concerted effort with extra resources like we had in the war on terror.
	And that's what they don't seem to be able to get across to the president in the briefings to him.
	And it's a matter of frustration for a lot of people.
	They think maybe it's going to take some major hack before he gets that they are not just adversaries but enemies probing U.S. defenses every single day.
	We're probing our defenses.
	We're not doing enough with cyber.
	It'll take a major hack before this dummy figures it out.
	Stupid, stupid dummy.
	And this one took the cake.
	As Putin and Trump prepare for that face-to-face meeting, the people of Ukraine are watching closely.
	Does this meeting signal a resolution for the Crimean Peninsula where, we should just remind you, there's a war going on backed by Russia on Ukrainian territory?
	What?
	Wait, John, there's a war going on in Crimea.
	I didn't know that.
	There's a war going on in Crimea?
	Did you not hear the reporter just say that?
	Listen again.
	I think it's a war on prices.
	Resolution for the Crimean Peninsula where we should just remind you there's a war going on backed by Russia on Ukrainian territory.
	There's a war going on.
	I think we need to go to our correspondent right now.
	John, John, John, can you hear me?
	Yeah, I can, Adam.
	Tell us what you know.
	John, I'm learning that there's a war going on in Crimea right now.
	Obviously, we have green men, little green men.
	Russians are in Crimea.
	As you know, Putin stole this.
	He stole it.
	Oh my God, there goes an RPG. As you know, Putin stole this.
	There's a war in Crimea, John.
	Back to you in the studio.
	Thanks, Adam.
	Be safe.
	That was Adam Kelly reporting...
	That was Adam Curry reporting from Crimea.
	Where there's a war going on.
	I think it's a war on prices at Ivan's Furniture.
	And with that, I think we should take a little break.
	I need a breather after that big report.
	I got one more ISO for your consideration.
	Okay, sir.
	I'm sorry.
	Yes, not sir.
	Riz.
	Yes.
	New podcast.
	Okay, new podcast.
	Yes, I got a new podcast!
	I'm gonna show my school by donating to No Agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on No Agenda in the morning.
	I think that one takes the cake.
	That is one of the best ones you've ever gotten for me.
	This is my new ringtone.
	Yes, I got a new podcast!
	I didn't know Brian Brushwood could talk that high.
	That's good.
	Well, the after is, you know, what happened.
	Yes.
	Sean DeSantis, $133.33.
	We do have to thank a few people for helping us a little bit.
	We have all of 20 people here.
	Sean DeSantis, Darren Turbaville.
	104.20.
	Thanks for the sanity, right?
	No, Darren Turbill says, Hi, friend.
	Thanks for the convo.
	Oh, that's right.
	I think this is one of your Ukrainian Skype buddies.
	Ah.
	Oh, yes.
	Yeah, right.
	We're plotting against the Ivins because we have our own furniture place.
	Loria Wilson in Sammamish, Washington says, Thanks for the sanity.
	The women appreciate the sanity.
	They do.
	Jackson Butler in Leveland...
	Level in Texas, 7141.
	John Boyd, 6969.
	Ryan Hedlum, 6633.
	Sir Lucas of the Lost Bits is back from Tacoma, Washington, 6432.
	Hey, John, we had one person for Bastille Day?
	Yeah, Jackson.
	Jackson Butler.
	One.
	Yeah, well, you know, we don't like the French in this country, apparently.
	Commies.
	Ah, yes.
	I'm sure your wine will never be poisoned.
	Sir Lucas, I always buy through a third party.
	Sir Lucas of the Lost Bits.
	Sir Daniel Torellio in Charleston, South Carolina, 6407.
	Christopher Dechter, 5678.
	Ali G. Ali G. Yeah, isn't Ali G. Borat has a new show on Showtime starting tomorrow?
	Yeah, it's supposed to be pretty funny.
	It's supposed to be another UK hates America, I think.
	Oh, I'm sure that's what it is.
	Yeah.
	L-E-G. It doesn't mean it's not funny.
	Oh, yeah.
	L-E-G. 5621 Godfrey, Illinois.
	I de-douche my husband last year but feel like I'm still technically a douchebag since I donated in his honor.
	I don't listen regularly, but my husband does and he fills me in.
	I listen on road trips and when we travel, I become a big fan.
	Oh, thank you.
	Please accept my 5627 jobs.
	This represents jobs somehow.
	I don't know how she does that.
	Oh, no.
	It's the digits.
	J is the five key.
	Oh.
	I believe.
	Where's my flip phone?
	No, I don't think so.
	LMN. Oh, no.
	I don't know what she's referring to.
	And send some job comment to her husband.
	We'll put that at the end for you.
	Dane Patricia Worthington comes in from Miami, Florida with $50.
	Jason Zeisler and Renner South Dakota.
	John, stop.
	Yeah.
	On a phone pad dialer, J is 5, O is 6, B is 2.
	Okay.
	Okay?
	All right.
	Yeah, but I was looking at a keyboard or I was thinking of the alphabet.
	Yeah.
	Well, I'm a...
	I know.
	You got your little phone there with a dial on it.
	Yeah.
	I got a flip phone.
	Easy to figure out.
	People sending me messages now because they know I'll recognize it.
	Hello, 1980.
	That's right.
	Proud of it.
	Whitney Simon in St.
	Louis, Missouri, 50.
	And you have a red note here, which means my boyfriend, Matt...
	Whitney's boyfriend, Matt.
	And I live in St.
	Louis and both really enjoy your show.
	He's an avid listener who plans to donate but has not yet done so.
	Huh.
	Since his birthday is coming up and he's a pretty simple guy, I think a perfect gift is beating him to the punch and making a donation on his behalf.
	This is a good girl, this.
	And it would be great if you could give him a special douchebag shout.
	Douchebag!
	Happy birthday, Matt.
	I don't know if Matt's on the list.
	Yeah, he's the only one.
	I know you'll like this.
	I also want to say thanks for the hard work which is put into creating this masterpiece.
	Thank you, Whitney.
	That's very kind of you.
	And you're a great gal.
	Love your man.
	Great gal.
	The following people are all $50 donors besides Whitney.
	Name and location, if available.
	John Holler in Missoula, Montana.
	Keith Yarborough in Austin, Texas.
	Trevor Hoagland in Portland, Oregon.
	Schuyler Visconti in Bakersfield, California, where the high-speed rail goes.
	I think it's Sir Schuyler, actually.
	Could be.
	Sir Schuyler.
	Matthew Hardy in Gold Coast, Queensland.
	Sir Chris Lewinsky, that's a fact, in Sherwood Park, Alberta.
	Walter Zanderberg in Rotterdam.
	Very good.
	50.
	He also thanks us for sanity.
	Yeah, we got a lot of that recently.
	Thomas Starkweather, that's where we can push the envelope on the insanity part a little more.
	Hey, I want to read this from Thomas.
	Thomas is one of our end-of-show mixers.
	Thomas Starkweather.
	Yes, and he did one for us today as well.
	And actually, I want to credit everyone who has a...
	End of show mix today.
	So it's Danny Luce.
	We've got Tom Starkweather and UKPMX is also back.
	So we've got some great end of show mixes.
	And he says with his $50 donation, his donation is in addition to my monthly and is specifically in response to a surprising positive note from John on both DHM Plugged and the best podcast in the universe regarding people using bikes.
	I did not want it to go unnoticed.
	In New York, we face incredible animosity from the cops and distracted drivers in matters of bikes.
	Drivers often get off with no charges for hit-and-runs, and the biker gets blamed posthumously, requesting moving karma as I move in with my girlfriend, a brilliant news producer and NA producer as of this year.
	Yes, excellent.
	We'll have many hours together enjoying the show.
	Many thanks, Tom.
	Congratulations, Tom.
	We look forward to all you guys do that, and all of our producers, but this makes me happy.
	You know, we should mention, we do have a lot of people that are in the media.
	Actually, those photos that were taken and were put in the newsletter, and there was way too many of them, and that was about half the collection, was done by a guy who had to remain anonymous because he is a member of the MSM. And he could be making real money from that stuff.
	Well, he probably is.
	I mean, he just wanted to...
	He probably took us...
	If it was his job to cover it, it may not have been.
	But he knew what the no-agenda thinking was.
	He looked specifically...
	For no agenda style signs, in other words, the nutty ones that have messages.
	That's unusable for M5M, so you're right.
	Yeah, he couldn't use Trump loves Brexit.
	No.
	Trump loves...
	Hey, here's a song.
	Trump loves Brexit.
	Oh.
	As in love and marriage?
	Trump loves Brexit.
	Love and marriage.
	Trump loves Brexit.
	Yeah, okay.
	It goes together like a blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Come on, people.
	I can write the lyrics if you want.
	Yeah, I can tell.
	Bruce, Bruce, Bruce, Bruce Klassen in Valencia, California.
	We know how to pronounce Valencia.
	Oh, he said not Valencia.
	Valencia.
	Yeah, that's the way we pronounce it.
	Valencia.
	It's named after the orange.
	Literally.
	Or the orange is named after, maybe it was a bread there.
	One of the two.
	Good orange.
	Robert Weber in San Jose, California.
	Brandon Savoy in Port Orchard, Washington, I think is the sir.
	And that concludes our list of $50 donors and other well-wishers that helped produce this show.
	A total of 26 people.
	Show 1051.
	Thank you very much.
	Yes.
	I said my piece at the beginning, so I don't have to bring that back up, but you know my feelings on it.
	And in no way can that detract from the support we've seen from these fantastic producers and the ones who are still on our programs, our subscription programs.
	In fact, I just got an email from one of them during the show.
	We said, holy crap, I checked and my subscription had been expired by PayPal, which they typically blame on us.
	And that, of course, doesn't seem logical, nor is it true.
	So if you have a subscription, our 1212s, 1111s...
	Well, I have the explanation.
	Oh, this is news.
	Why we get blamed.
	Okay.
	When I put these together, I have chosen, personally chosen, on behalf of myself and Adam, to not do a trick that PayPal and other collectors do, which is to...
	I think it's rude.
	And so because of that choice, it's our fault.
	Yeah, that's why.
	Okay.
	Right, because we're weird.
	We don't want to be rude.
	Then they say, well, the no agenda show, you got to talk to those guys.
	I see.
	Well, technically they're right, but the wording is annoying.
	Technically, they're right, and that's all we can do about it.
	Yeah.
	Well, again, we want to thank all those people.
	Thank our executive producer and associate executive producer and everybody else who came up on the list here today.
	We got some karmas to hand out, some jobs karma, some relationship karma, some travel karma.
	Anonymous also requested some jobs karma.
	I want to make sure I do that.
	And thank you again.
	Another show for you filled with deconstruction on Thursday.
	Find us and support us at dvorak.org.
	Slash N A. Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got...
	Harma. Harma. Harma. Harma. Well, donations, etc.
	don't get in the way of content today.
	Only one birthday to celebrate, but we do it wholeheartedly as Whitney Simon says happy birthday to her douchebag boyfriend, Matt.
	And we concur.
	Happy birthday, Matt, from everybody here at the No Agenda Show.
	And that's it.
	No nights, no title changes, nothing else.
	No nothing.
	No nothing.
	That's all that we got.
	But there's still plenty more show.
	I've got a couple of things that are kind of interesting.
	Okay.
	I do have another ISO. Another?
	You are just ISO heavy today.
	Well, this one, I'm going through the clips and they're all up on the screen and I go and I close them out.
	And this one just showed up.
	I don't even know or remember cutting it, but this is the crime, terrorism, espionage clip.
	Crime, terrorism, and espionage.
	No, it doesn't cut it by new podcast.
	Well, not by today's standards.
	No, I mean, you should have spread these out.
	I mean, you're just shooting your wad and, you know, it's like, I'm not going to clean it up.
	This is just too much.
	It's one of these things, you either got it or you don't.
	Yeah.
	I'm not going to spread anything out.
	I do have a clip of the day for you.
	You do?
	Well, I mean, I think it's a clip for you.
	It's a clip for you because I know how much you love these clips.
	Yeah.
	Do I have to get...
	Okay.
	Hold on.
	Let me get some jingles.
	I don't even know what it is, but I can guess what it is, so I'm going to get at least one jingle set up.
	Okay, which clip am I playing here?
	Oakland Zoo Gondolas.
	Oakland Zoo Gondolas.
	Some visitors to the Oakland Zoo were stuck high in the air for about 30 minutes this afternoon.
	They were suspended in the zoo's gondolas.
	Zoo officials said a digital glitch was to blame.
	A glitch!
	Shut up about the glitch!
	...to reboot the system.
	The gondolas started moving again at about 2.30 this afternoon.
	A zoo spokeswoman said passengers were inconvenienced, but no one was hurt.
	They are state-of-the-art, custom-made gondolas, Swiss-made, and with state-of-the-art comes a lot of technology.
	They're fully electric.
	They're fully digital.
	There was a digital glitch.
	If you have computer problems, I feel bad for you, son.
	I got 99 problems, but a glitch ain't one.
	That's great reporting, and that comes from the home of Silicon Valley, ladies and gentlemen.
	Yeah.
	San Francisco, California, where everything is just a glitch.
	And it was a double glitch report.
	It was a fantastic double glitcher.
	Yep.
	Double glitches.
	They're rare.
	They're rare, but when you find one in the wild, it's very satisfying.
	Yeah.
	Jeez.
	I'm going to give you, you know, I can't give a clip of the day for that, but I'm going to give you a borderline.
	You deserve that.
	Borderline.
	Clip of the day.
	And then my favorite video from this week, as we've been tracking this progress over years, we even have a nickname for him that apparently now people are using as well.
	I believe we coined the term Junker the Drunker.
	It was a difficult NATO summit for everyone, but none more so than European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.
	The 63-year-old stumbled and lost his balance several times ahead of a dinner on Wednesday evening.
	Junker has said he suffers from sciatica and others confirmed he complained of back pain.
	It's sciatic.
	Just sciatic.
	He doesn't have a serious health problem as far as I'm aware of, but he does have a back problem for some time.
	Do you think that was the problem?
	Because he was smiling and in good spirits, so I just...
	Yeah, but he is good spirit.
	He has a back problem for some time, but for the rest, I think you have to go to the commission to ask for more information.
	Euronews reached out to the European Commission for comment.
	A spokesperson said it's not appropriate to discuss health issues publicly.
	I think we know the answer.
	The guy's a sous.
	You have to see the clip because it was...
	I saw the clip.
	No, not the clip.
	The clip that I just played from Euronews.
	Both people who are answering the question, one of which is the Dutch Prime Minister, Margrethe, when they're saying this, well, you know, he has no official, you know, I don't think there's any health problem.
	They're winking at the camera.
	Oh, are they?
	Yes, subconsciously, one eye, like a little smile, and both, and the first guy, too.
	Everyone knows it's like the biggest secret.
	The guy's a lush.
	Yeah, he's an alcoholic, obviously.
	And he needs to be helped.
	Yeah, if he's in public, representing the EU, and he's sloshed.
	I mean, come on.
	I mean, anyone who denies this should be on the Mueller team.
	That was good, wasn't it?
	I'm practicing for my alt-right career.
	Yeah, well, you might have to go there.
	Uh-huh.
	I have a couple of leftovers from the earlier part of the show.
	I might as well play them, get my stuff out of the way.
	Oh, I do have one news item.
	All right.
	Yeah, I remember the era, and I've always equated the current ride-sharing era with the hitchhiking era of the late 60s.
	Mm-hmm.
	There's a lot of free transportation, but in this case, it's not free anymore and it's controlled because there's an app, so there's less chance of...
	But the hitchhiking era ended because of rapes and murders.
	That's to kind of summarize things, even though I had a friend who hitchhiked from coast to coast, which was a big deal.
	It was like a badge of honor a lot of people did.
	Well, let's put it this way.
	The reporting about rapes and murders stopped hitchhiking.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	That's probably more accurate.
	Well, this is going on with ride-sharing now.
	We're hearing a lot of this sort of thing.
	San Francisco police say they've arrested a man who they're calling a serial rapist.
	The man, authorities claim, fooled his victims into thinking that he was their ride-share driver and then sexually assaulted them.
	Woo-hoo!
	Anyway, that went on for 10 minutes, given this report.
	It's some creep that, I don't know, are they...
	How are they intercepting these calls?
	Are they just driving around looking for someone that looks like they're waiting?
	I read quite an in-depth article about how this is done.
	There's ways that they can spoof The app or spoof with GPS locations.
	There's a number of things that are being done.
	So they can get your ride.
	They can find out if you have a ride.
	They can then drive up themselves and grab the ride.
	Or they can book a ride on your behalf and then have the GPS location.
	You know, spoof the GPS so it looks like you're in the car driving around and then you get charged and they get the money.
	I mean, there's a whole bunch of different things that are possible.
	It's technology, man.
	It's a glitch.
	It's just a glitch, baby.
	Professor Ted moment there.
	And can we please...
	This is your...
	But can we please stop with this bogative ride-sharing moniker?
	It's not ride-sharing.
	And now we have Uber, of course, is invested in Lime in these damn bikes, these scooters, electric scooters, the scourge of Austin on the sidewalks.
	So I looked into this.
	And they call it bike sharing.
	You're not sharing anyone's personal bike.
	You're renting.
	You might as well call it car rental or bike.
	Yeah, call it bike sharing.
	Let's call it car sharing.
	I mean, it's bogative.
	It's not true, and it makes it sound friendly, but it's not.
	It's just scooter rental.
	Just call it what it is.
	It's not sharing anything.
	I'm not sure why we can't get off of that name.
	It worked.
	Yeah.
	You're right.
	It did.
	It did.
	Yeah, go ahead.
	Well, let me play a couple other things.
	I'm listening.
	I don't think I have the whole commercial.
	Maybe I have part of it.
	This product called MBO. MBO? Yeah, MBO is for people who are nuts.
	Is this a psychotic drug?
	It might be, but the point is they got a little piece of information in here I've never heard on any, as a disclaimer, I've never heard anything like this.
	If your moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or Crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change.
	Ask your doctor about Intivio, the only biological development approved just for UC and Crohn's.
	Intivio works at the site of inflammation in the GI tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission.
	Infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment.
	Intivio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious.
	Fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible.
	This condition has not been reported with Intivio.
	Tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores.
	Liver problems can occur with Intivio.
	Nice.
	All right.
	Sounds like a winning product.
	It's for Crohn's disease.
	Well, I gotta say, if you have Crohn's disease, you can be pretty damn desperate.
	I can understand that people would love anything that helps.
	That would be true.
	So this disease, or this disease, this drug could cause this brain virus that I guess will kill you or something?
	Yeah, could.
	But it says there's never been a reported incident of it using Antibio.
	So where do they get this information from and why do they have to disclaim something that's never happened?
	I don't know.
	I've never heard it ever on any, as you know, we both listen to these drug commercials, you know, with our ears perked up.
	I've never heard anything like that.
	I've seen this commercial.
	I've heard this before.
	I never thought to clip it, but you're absolutely right.
	Like, that's what they're saying.
	It's like, this could cause PLM, which could, virus in your brain, you'll die.
	But that's never happened.
	But if anyone, you know, if you're feeling, you've got a headache, call your doctor.
	Maybe this is your old theory.
	Just add on a bunch of horrible things that could happen.
	Add horrible stuff, yeah.
	To get people to take it, because by your old theory...
	Well, the theory is, and this is evidenced with cigarette packages...
	The bigger the warning, the more horrible the warning, the more inclined people are to buy the product and use it.
	And why this is, I can't explain, but this is why the cigarette companies in Europe, in particular where this is mandatory, have the most unbelievable pictures.
	And, you know, it's gotten to a point.
	I know that people in the Netherlands certainly joke about it, saying, I have baby dying of cancer.
	Can I trade that?
	Who has a horrible lung picture?
	I mean, they're playing these games.
	Like, go fish.
	Go fish.
	There's another ball clip.
	Play this walk away, girl, and freedom of thought.
	Yeah, this is a Russian bot, I presume.
	The walk-away movement is just Russian bots.
	You know that, don't you?
	It's not real.
	I can't even remember what it's about.
	Well, you know the walk-away campaign.
	Yeah, walk-away.
	Right.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, no.
	Right.
	Right, right, right.
	The walk-away campaign.
	Right.
	Okay, you don't have to play this clip yet.
	The walk-away campaign...
	Well, I don't know that it's Russian bots.
	Well, it's not, but that's what's being said.
	No, John, that's what's being said because, of course, it's a real thing.
	Oh, okay.
	You have me confused.
	Because I lost track of it already.
	I'm sorry.
	No, we had a couple of things.
	A couple of shows ago, we talked about it a little bit.
	Then I forgot all about it.
	And there's a bunch of people that are kind of getting it kind of kick-started, to use that word.
	Well, it's also a format, which you pointed out.
	It is a new format used on YouTube.
	Maybe not new, but more people are doing it.
	It's confession booth style.
	Hey, y'all.
	A lot of Catholics like this, by the way.
	Hey, y'all.
	Let me tell you about my walk-away moment, which is important because that is what reality TV is.
	You see the scene, then you have the confession booth.
	People understand confession booth video very well, so I think it's highly effective.
	I never thought about it as coming from reality TV. But it is.
	Not you mentioned it.
	All these, the scene's the same.
	It's like they're talking, oh yeah, Bill, you know, he left me and I, you know.
	Yeah.
	Interesting.
	Well, this one, girl, I like this one.
	This one had a nice message to it and I thought it was sincere.
	Even though when I retweeted it, I got, you know, Ted's bull.
	She's always been, you know, Republican.
	A lot of people think there's just Republican shills.
	But I don't think so.
	You know, the real issue is that we have a news media that answers to corporate sponsors not to actually conveying real news.
	And sadly, the majority of Americans are getting their news from those sources.
	Somehow, in the last year, advocating for freedom of thought, has become a radical notion and I am sorry to anyone who I tuned out in the past I am sorry to everyone like me who's getting shunned,
	who's getting insulted by friends, by family, just because you want to be able to think for yourself and you want to be able to advocate that everyone should be thinking for themselves.
	Yeah, I'm seeing a lot of that.
	Yeah, I thought that was a good no-agenda message.
	Totally no-agenda message.
	And what I like about the walk away is it doesn't say become Republican.
	It says walk away from this.
	This is not what I want.
	It's very different from become Republican.
	I need to read a little passage here from an interview in The Spectator who interviewed Harvey Weinstein, who at 66 is facing pretty much life imprisonment for him because he wouldn't need much for him to die in jail.
	And a very tasty little quote here that I'd like to share from this interview.
	And this is Harvey speaking to the interviewer.
	Listen, you were born rich and privileged and you're handsome.
	I was born poor, ugly, Jewish, and had to fight all my life to get somewhere.
	You got lots of girls.
	No girl ever looked at me until I made it big in Hollywood.
	Yes, I did offer them acting jobs in exchange for sex.
	But so did and still does everyone.
	But I never ever force myself on a single woman.
	Call me naive or stupid, but in a funny way, I believe him.
	And here is the reporter speaking.
	I've seen Harvey in action during my annual Christmas party, the one I throw every year in New York with Michael Mailer.
	He hits on every young woman, but in a naive way.
	Quote, Will you give me your address?
	I'll make you a star, is the theme of the pickup.
	Some say yes, some say no.
	His reaction is always the same.
	Smile, laugh, and hit on the next one.
	There you go.
	The man needs to be heard.
	There's a very explicit warning there.
	And also, that's going to be his defense.
	He's going to say he dated Asia Dargento, apparently, for 10 years before she claimed that he raped her, which I'm not saying he didn't.
	There's a lot of information that's still coming out, and Harvey Weinstein is a douche and deserves to be in jail.
	But what he's saying, listen carefully, it's still happening.
	Yeah, it's Hollywood.
	Duh.
	I mean, people really want to be on the screen.
	But as you said, it will all go away once they have that one special election with the dude who wrote something in a yearbook.
	Yeah, right.
	That kind of dropped the profile of the whole thing.
	Me too.
	It's gone.
	It's just gone.
	It's done.
	I guess we fixed it.
	Everything's fair now.
	Everything's good for the women.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Now, I need to discuss two quick things.
	Actually, three.
	In context of OTG, off the grid, and that means you're pro-sanity and anti-tracking, more tracking from Silicon Valley.
	Three stories in a clip.
	The first one, the woman who was tracked and made a meme and a Twitter thread on the airplane...
	You remember this story?
	No.
	Yeah, you do.
	I was appalled by it.
	This is where, you know, they switch seats on the airplane and this girl and her boyfriend...
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	And then they start basically taking pictures and making a whole story out of nothing.
	The woman is very upset by this.
	She says, I've been doxxed, shamed, insulted, harassed.
	Voyeurs have come looking for me online in the real world.
	I did not ask for, do not seek attention.
	This is a cautionary tale about privacy, identity, ethics, and consent.
	Huh?
	She should sue him.
	Interestingly, the story here mentions that her lawyer made...
	The statement was made via her lawyer, which, of course, suggests she may have plans to sue.
	She should sue Twitter.
	I think you've got to...
	Based upon the fact that they remove content for other reasons, I think she may have some case.
	But the response from the universe of Twitter is, oh, please...
	Outrage culture is so dumb.
	It was harmless.
	It's over.
	Get over it.
	What's the big deal?
	This is not an invasion of privacy.
	Go more gay.
	More gay on it.
	This is not an invasion of privacy.
	What's the big deal?
	We do it every day to celebrities!
	Like that?
	Or is that Two Valley Girl?
	It's pretty good.
	So there's that one.
	Then there are two...
	Well, actually, there was a hack that just came in this morning, and I want to talk about this particular hack.
	TimeHop.
	I don't know if you've heard of TimeHop.
	I had not heard of it.
	I have heard of it, but I don't remember what it is.
	TimeHop is very popular with the adults under 40, and I'm speaking to them specifically, but anybody who uses these systems...
	You've used that term two or probably three times in the show.
	It's millennial.
	Obviously, for some reason.
	Yeah, well, I've said this previously, which you don't remember.
	I said millennials prefer to be called adults under 40.
	I don't know one millennial that prefers to be called that.
	All right, so it's millennials.
	TimeHop is a platform where you give them access to all of your accounts, your social media accounts, and they track everything so their interface is a way for you to easily hop back in time to see what happened across your social media channels at a specific date or specific time.
	Now, the phallus, and they were compromised, and there's millions, of course, of pieces of information out there.
	You know, it's breached.
	This is what happens.
	But the problem with this is that you gave them...
	A second ago, you used the word phallus.
	Fallacy, I meant.
	You know, why don't you listen to what I'm talking about and stop being...
	Okay, I'm sorry.
	And fucking shit.
	God damn it.
	It pisses me off when you do that.
	It's not funny.
	If it were funny, I could understand.
	You know, just ant-fucking my words.
	For the fucking amount of donations, I don't need to take that abuse.
	Okay.
	Continue, please.
	Uploading your information and your access controls to a centralized platform is stupid!
	You think?
	There's another one, and I'm going to tell you right now, called updater.com.
	And Updater.com is a company that is being heavily marketed to millennials and college kids because it helps you move.
	So what you do is you give them your address, your cell phone, all your subscriptions, your cable subscription, your credit card number.
	You give them everything.
	And when you move, they take care of it all.
	And all the management companies of all buildings in America are now signing on to this system where they have all of your information to make your move easy.
	And I tell you, I've seen this and heard it with my own eyes.
	It's great.
	This is so handy.
	It's so easy, particularly when you're moving around during your college years from one apartment to a dorm, your address changes.
	And I just wanted to read their business model because they're a pretty big company, just so people understand what their business model is.
	Hundreds of the most prominent real estate companies in the U.S., from real estate brokerages to property management companies, rely on Updater to help their clients transition to their new home.
	With significant market penetration of all U.S. household moves, updater enables contextual and personalized communications between relocating consumers and the U.S. businesses spending billions of dollars trying to reach them.
	You are being taken.
	And it's dangerous because these guys get hacked.
	They get a lot more than some token authorization like the TimeHop people.
	And I'll say the same for the...
	What's the name of the company that'll protect your identity?
	Those guys will get hacked too and everyone's identity will be out in the open once again.
	This is a bad thing to be a part of.
	Well, this stems from that...
	I think it was a...
	Financial services company that you'd put all your accounts in with their system.
	The U.S. Postal Service does this too, and all of a sudden you get magazines and all kinds of crap showing up.
	I don't know about the Postal Service.
	I do.
	I've done it.
	What?
	I've done it.
	I've used them, and we've talked about it on the show.
	It doesn't matter.
	You don't remember.
	I've used them, and then they put you on lists.
	You don't think these guys put you on lists?
	Yes, they're selling it.
	That's my whole point.
	Is there a fee for this?
	Not to the college student, no.
	Oh, well, there you go.
	There you go.
	Now your product.
	I just read you the business model.
	Yeah, I know.
	I heard that, but I didn't know that they were just productizing these poor users.
	You mean kids?
	Kids.
	Yeah.
	Well, I'm looking at the users.
	They have a bunch of pictures.
	And there's mostly young women, some old guy, a black old guy, a mom-looking woman.
	So they're not marketing directly to kids.
	Maybe not the website, but they are at colleges.
	You better believe it.
	That's where I got the information from.
	Well, I can see it.
	No, they're not dumb.
	They're just misinformed.
	And they say, oh, this is so great.
	It's so handy.
	But they're giving their credit card numbers.
	Everything's in there.
	Yeah, it wouldn't be a good idea.
	Yeah, you get hacked and boom, you're broke.
	Finally, just to add some more context to the reason why I like my Kyocera flip phone, which does not have an app infrastructure, apps are just evil, and it's not about the GPS. In fact, these researchers from a university in Boston, I forget which one, Did some tests and here's what they learned.
	It's called a side channel attack because it targets sensors in your device that weren't designed to provide location.
	Like the accelerometer, it measures how fast the phone is moving, the gyroscope that tracks rotation, and the magnetometer, which works like a digital compass.
	Guevara Nubier is a professor at Northeastern.
	People don't really realize that their mobile phone with access to all these sensors Is in some sense potentially like the best spying device you can imagine.
	And he says combining readings from the sensors could arm criminals with secret info.
	As they become more and more accurate, this may become a primary means of invading users' privacy.
	They tested it out in cities from New York to London and say it works best in places like Boston, where streets aren't set up like a grid.
	If you were to travel the same path every day, we have extremely high probability to guess where you live, where you work.
	He says hackers could access your device through a malicious app, like this simple flashlight the researchers created.
	You need to have an app installed on the phone, but once that is done, all the other process is automatic.
	And he says some apps may have complete access to some of the sensors in your device without asking for permission.
	As long as you have your phone switched on and the app is already installed on your phone, this would record your information.
	The team used Android devices for the study, but say it would also work on the iPhone because permissions for the sensors are similar.
	Apple declined to comment.
	Google tells us its latest operating system, quote, restricts access to sensors such as accelerometers and gyroscopes.
	And smartphone sensors do not directly provide user location data.
	And this research highlights just how difficult it would be to use these sensors for location tracking.
	Is there currently a way for users to turn all these sensors off?
	Unfortunately, there's nothing.
	The team is now searching for a solution.
	Meantime, the best way to protect yourself is only download apps from Google and Apple's official stores and always keep your operating system up to date.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, I'll get right on that.
	Only to point out that, as I said, it's all the sensors.
	It's not just the GPS. And it's very accurate.
	The Compass app doesn't use the GPS. It uses the accelerometer.
	There's a whole bunch of things.
	I think we have an opportunity for an app ourselves that would counteract this whole thing.
	Maybe put you back on track.
	You mean like shut it down?
	Yeah.
	I don't think that's possible.
	Ah, come on.
	Maybe.
	You should be able to shut down all those sensors.
	Yeah.
	Shoulda, woulda, coulda.
	I'll bet you can.
	Maybe.
	Maybe.
	And then...
	And I have to report something.
	Mm-hmm.
	The, you know, Theodore, the baby?
	Yes, Theodorable.
	His first word.
	No, wait, wait, wait, wait.
	Is it going to hurt my feelings?
	Maybe.
	It wasn't Dada, Mama, or Opa?
	App.
	App, really?
	Yeah.
	His first word was app?
	Yeah, app.
	Oh my God.
	I'm very sorry to hear this.
	Well, it's a fact.
	How do you feel?
	I thought it was kind of funny.
	So they're just giving the kid the iPhone to shut him up like every other parent?
	No, they refuse to do something like that.
	They're not idiots.
	They gave him a taste of the good stuff, though, otherwise he wouldn't be asking for it.
	Well, he points to cognac when he says Al, so it seems unlikely.
	Now he's getting a good education.
	Grandpa's on the case.
	This is good news.
	Hey, Gramps, dip my binky in that again, will you?
	We know what's going on.
	A report from the OPCW, which is worth sharing because, you know, what do we know about Assad and chemical weapons?
	Well, it depends on what we're told.
	I mean, a lot of it is we've had to kind of reverse engineer to know what we know.
	Well, the most recent attack on April 7th was chlorine, was it not?
	It was chlorine and killing people and it was Assad's.
	I remember they had the proof and the thing came through the roof.
	Look, here it is.
	This is all Assad's doing.
	You're talking about Bashir, not Julian.
	Exactly.
	Bashir al-Assad.
	The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, OPCW, issued an interim report on their investigation to date regarding the allegations of chemical weapons use in Duma, Syria, on April 7th.
	The activities in Duma included on-site visits, collected environmental samples, interviews with witnesses, data collection.
	In a neighboring country, the team gathered or received biological environmental samples and conducted witness interviews.
	Hold on.
	Are you going to let me guess what happened?
	Sure.
	It turned out there's a bunch of bull crap.
	OPCW designated labs conducted analysis of prioritized samples.
	The results show that no organophosphorus nerve agents or the degradation products were detected in the environmental samples or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties.
	Along with explosive residues, various chlorinated organic chemicals were found in samples from two sites for which there is a full chain of custody.
	Worked by the team to establish the significance of these results is ongoing.
	So they're going to try and hush up the chain of custody because they know where it came from.
	And guess what?
	It wasn't from Assad.
	And there was no nerve agent involved.
	Gee, did you hear any reporting on that?
	Well, the first time this happened, when they determined those early rocket attacks that were violating Obama's red line, those early reports indicated that it wasn't Assad and there was plenty of documentation to back that up.
	And we didn't hear much about that, if anything.
	So I would guess that no, you're not going to hear anything about it because it doesn't fit into the scheme of things.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	But I'm glad that we have a chance to report these things.
	Just need the headline.
	It's enough.
	It's kind of depressing.
	Well, I think that we do important work.
	It's depressing.
	We've got very little compensation this last round.
	And the news is just worse than ever about reporting real news instead of what, you know, some narrative somebody dreamed up which said the CIA wants them to report.
	And I blame the CIA for this.
	Although they seem to have some sort of a...
	The goods on Trump, or they think they do, about something the Russians have on him, which sounds like...
	It sounds like...
	It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
	I'm sorry.
	Uh-oh.
	Attempting all human resources.
	Now entering the second half of...
	We are in the second half of show.
	You know what that means.
	A trip to the other side.
	Oh, I thought it means we have ten minutes left.
	Go on.
	We have about five minutes left.
	Israel are going to land on the moon in 2019.
	Obviously, just to visit their moon bases.
	But they're just pretending it's a new thing.
	I'm glad they're doing that.
	So now finally we'll get a race and maybe they'll bring back the Saturn V or whatever it took to get to the moon.
	So I'm told.
	But that's not why I break into second half of show.
	Now I bring to you the true...
	Hold on a second.
	Was that some sort of news report?
	What?
	Or is that just something that was on one of those group?
	No, the Israeli...
	No, the Israeli...
	Who announced this?
	Have they even set the satellite up?
	Let's see.
	Space L said they're sending a probe will be launched from Cape Canaveral in a Falcon 9 rocket built by Elon Musk.
	Oh, okay.
	And they're going to land a probe on the moon.
	Not a person.
	A probe.
	And he bets it doesn't make it.
	No, I'm not going to bet because Elon still has a Tesla flying in space.
	Oh, Elon!
	Who, of course, has been unmasked as a top donor to House Republican to a PAC. You may want to think about shorting Tesla tomorrow.
	He's just a Republican douchebag.
	No, the true reason for the second half of the show is finally can tell you why JFK was assassinated.
	Oh, cool.
	Former Washington, D.C. attorney Douglas Caddy was a close friend of E. Howard Hunt, who he represented when Hunt was found to be at the center of the Watergate scandal in 1972.
	Hunt was an officer in the CIA when John F. Kennedy was president.
	Hattie claims that he asked Howard Hunt about the assassination one night and received a shocking answer.
	The last time I saw Howard Hunt was in 1975.
	He called me and said he'd like to have dinner.
	So dinner was finished.
	We went out to the sidewalk, and I thought, well, this may be the last time I'll see Howard.
	He's going away, and I'm moving from Washington.
	And so, in my own curiosity, I said to Howard, I was John Kennedy assassinated.
	And he said, John Kennedy was assassinated because he was about to give our most vital secret to the Soviet Union.
	And I said, our most vital secret?
	I said, what could that be?
	He leaned forward and looked me in the eyes and he said, the alien presence.
	He shook my hand and walked away.
	If the stories about the Majestic 12 are true, and those involved with the top secret group were ready to take such drastic measures to keep its existence hidden, was it ever discontinued?
	Do you think that MJ-12 is still in existence today?
	Well, what I've been told is that they have changed the letters and the numbers probably more than once.
	So it's the same idea, it's the same control, same files, same archives, same power.
	If you look at what has happened in the last 60 years, it's really possible that more decisions have been made inside of our government because of this subject, ETs and technology, than any of us would ever know.
	Yeah, baby!
	There you go.
	Yeah, it doesn't make any sense.
	If you follow the literature, and I'll include the Corso document in that, and in subsequent discussions that have been made public, the most interesting of which, of course, took place in,
	I think it was March or May of 2001, just before 9-11, Where there was something like 40 of these guys from different parts of the government and all over the place making this huge confessional in Washington, D.C. Yeah, it was open disclosure.
	Open disclosure, and they had all kinds of discussions about this.
	It's believed that the literature believes that the Russians know about this.
	There was nothing to disclose that Kennedy was going to tell them that they didn't know.
	Hmm.
	And they were in cahoots with us.
	These guys blasted them once in a while.
	In fact, that famous Russian nuke recently, I think it was three years ago, they blasted a big bomb in the...
	Atmosphere, some 10 miles or 20 miles up or something.
	It was in some obscure part of Russia, and it was in violation of the treaties about blowing up A-bombs above the...
	Yes, yeah, I recall.
	Yeah.
	Nobody made a fuss or said anything about it, because that was obviously done for some deterrence purpose.
	I don't buy this.
	How dare you speak out against the History Channel?
	Well, as soon as you brought that, I could tell it was a history show because that one guy who asked the question is that weird-looking character with all the hair.
	I love that guy.
	The Medusa-looking guy.
	I love that guy.
	That's fantastic.
	So I'm just, I'm going to bring people back up to speed on this.
	So, yeah, it seems unlikely.
	All right, you got anything or can we close this out for today?
	I do have, let's see, I got a Hillary, the Yellowstone.
	I think we have time for one more, one more.
	Uh...
	No, I'm going to put these off to the next...
	No, we're done.
	You said no.
	We do need your support.
	Dvorak.org slash NA for our show on Thursday.
	We will once again put the work in.
	And there will be plenty to do because of the Putin meeting.
	We shall see how it goes in Helsinki, where we have boots on the ground as well, so full reporting for you.
	But since you're still in the second half of the show, is it possible that both Trump and Putin are reptilians, and they're going to bring their two reptilian translators and do some sort of a deal?
	Looking forward to it.
	That'd be good.
	A little shape-shifting, meld into each other.
	Donald, it was good for me.
	How was it for you?
	Coming to you from downtown Austin, Texas, capital of the drone star state, FEMA Region 6 is where you can find me on the governmental maps in the 5x9 Cludio in the common law condo.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where...
	There's something funny going on, but I don't know what it is.
	I'll tell you one thing, though, that the mudflats are still muddy there.
	In fact, it's worse than usual.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	Until Thursday, remember us at Dvorak.org slash NA. Until then, adios, mofos!
	Need a cab.
	Beep.
	And you know.
	It's a show that's really unique.
	Donate to a no agenda.
	Listen to John and Adam speak Donate to a No Agenda Science is turning into a clique Regular order!
	Sure.
	Happy to indulge you.
	OMG, he's an idiot.
	In the future, tear down the underpinnings of what represent law and order in this country.
	I have always told the truth.
	The gentleman controls the time.
	It is a three-wing circus.
	I cannot express to you my love of the FBI. Regular order.
	Please, there's help.
	Mr.
	Chairman, this is intolerable.
	Any collusion?
	Between Russia and the Trump campaign.
	Any collusion?
	I don't give a damn what you appreciate.
	How many times did you look so innocent into your wife's eyes?
	To suggest somehow that we can parse down the words of shorthand textual conversations like there's some contract for a car.
	Chevrolet Cruze, and this is the serial number.
	I did verify that.
	Let's just go through the itemization of amount financed.
	It is a three-wing circus.
	Regular order.
	Why the F?
	What the F happened to our country?
	The alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.
	Any collusion?
	And what is going inside you?
	You need your medication?
	Sure, I'm happy to indulge you.
	And I told some of the other guys, he is really good.
	OMG, he's an idiot.
	My texts have created confusion and caused pain for people I love.
	What the F happened to our country?
	Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah!
	Oh!
	Oh, no, it's a team.
	Oh, no, it's a team.
	Listen to that horn. Listen to that horn. Listen to that horn. Listen to that horn.
	Oh, no, it's a team. Listen to that horn. Listen to that horn. Listen to that horn. Listen to that horn. Listen it's a team. Listen to that horn. Listen to that horn. Listen to Oh, yeah, listen to that bell.
	I've been waiting for this moment for months.
	Yeah, listen to that bell.
	You're finally going to get a heritage of it.
	You're only going to get a heritage unit.
	You're only going to get a heritage unit.
	You're only going to get a heritage unit on camera.
	I've been waiting for this moment.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	All right.
	All right.
	Oh, yes.
	Listen to my horn.
	Are you listening to that?
	You're only going to get a heritage unit.
	Are you listening to that?
	Listen to my horn.
	The best podcast in the universe!
	Mopo Dvorak!
	Yes!

▲