Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 30, 2018 - No Agenda

03:02:59

1055: Tongue Jammin

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Nick Pickles, Investigator.
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	And Sunday, July 29, 2018, this is your award-winning Game of Audition Media Assassination, Episode 1055.
	This is no agenda.
	Now, with twice the hearing power and broadcasting live from the capital of the drone, Star State, here in downtown Austin, Tejas, in the Cludio, in the morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, if you go any further north, the place is on fire.
	I'm John C. DeVore.
	It's Crackpot and Buzzkill!
	In the morning!
	Yeah!
	I guess we should have done something for the rain stick there, huh?
	Well...
	It seems like everywhere else it rained, including Norway.
	Which is what we were targeting.
	We were targeting Norway.
	So Norway, we got Norway.
	I see nothing but tweets about just torrential rains everywhere.
	What?
	We don't have that many people with their speakers on up there.
	No, you don't have to have the speakers on.
	I think you do.
	No, no.
	It's just the number of people listening.
	You hear it.
	The person who hears the stick becomes the transmitter.
	That's your theory.
	No, this is not...
	Okay.
	I only deal in scientific facts, my friend.
	The science is in!
	Yes, it is.
	Don't you dare be a denier.
	Yeah, so how far is the fire from where you live?
	A couple hundred miles.
	Are you laughing because it's kind of close or far away?
	Yeah, it's kind of close.
	That's not even anywhere near here.
	How fast is this thing traveling?
	It's not headed my way.
	Okay, I'm just asking.
	This is a comic strip blogger, one of our artists who comes in.
	You should get out of California now!
	It's like he has no clue that California is like three Francis stacked on top of each other.
	Yeah.
	In terms of his size, which is why I make three good states.
	Taking that off the ballot.
	Yeah.
	That's not going to happen.
	Why take a chance?
	Yes, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Alright, but it is bad.
	I mean, there's little skirmish fires all over the place, especially in the Napa Valley.
	And Montecito, I saw Montecito got evacuated again this morning.
	Yeah, but that's down in Southern California.
	That's 400 miles away from me.
	That's eight hours of driving.
	That's the other way.
	Yeah, gotcha.
	It's cold here.
	If you look at the map, oh yeah, California is 199, 98, even though it's not unusual.
	We have all these high temperatures.
	But if you look at the San Francisco Bay Area, it's like 65.
	Yeah, it's beautiful.
	Sure.
	Sure.
	Well, it's not beautiful because there's a fog there.
	Oh, right already!
	I got you.
	You're not burning, so who cares?
	Screw the rest of them.
	They should have moved closer to Silicon Valley, where you're safe.
	Silly, silly.
	Silly combat.
	Well, if San Francisco should go, I mean, it's not going to happen, but if it should go...
	It's too wet there.
	San Francisco's too wet from the poop.
	Yeah, but I was going to transition to something else.
	It's just kind of like a way to get to another topic away from the poop.
	Well, there is a city report that is calling for renaming the city of Austin.
	Yes, somebody wants us to do a poll and maybe make some suggestions or do a contest.
	Let me explain first what's going on.
	Austin was named after Stephen F. Austin, the father of Texas...
	But that's a little problematic.
	Oh, why?
	Because he also opposed an attempt by Mexico to ban slavery in the province of Tejas, and said if slaves were freed, they were turned into vagabonds, a nuisance, and a menace.
	So, for this very reason, the city of Austin's equity office, I wonder how you get into the equity office, suggests renaming the city.
	What?
	Yes, we have to rename the city.
	No, no, I'm talking about the equity office.
	What is that supposed to be?
	What waste of money are we talking about here?
	I haven't really looked at it.
	I could look, Austin, I could look at it, equity office, but I presume it's for equality or equity?
	It says equity, not equality.
	It didn't say equality office, it says equity.
	Hmm.
	Well, this is a good point.
	Let's see.
	Austin Equity Office.
	Okay, let's see what we come up with.
	What have they got to do with this?
	Here we go.
	Are they big shots now because they got an equity office?
	This is weird.
	About the Equity Office, and it's just like a broken page.
	Oh, as part of ongoing improvements and maintenance, the City of Austin's website will be unavailable from 6 a.m.
	to 2 p.m.
	Sunday, May 29th.
	Oh, May 29th is July, people!
	It's still down.
	Wow.
	That's pretty bad.
	Okay, so I can't look it up right now, apparently.
	Because the...
	Oh, wait, maybe this will work.
	No.
	The whole website is down.
	Wow.
	Crazy.
	Well, if you're looking for it, it is austintexas.gov slash department slash equity dash office.
	Maybe I can read a little preview here.
	The City of Austin's Equity Office provides leadership guidance and insight on equity to improve the quality of life for Austinites.
	We work to achieve the vision of making Austin the most livable city in the nation for all.
	And then it gets cut off that the office strives to build and sustain a culture of dot, dot, dot.
	And we will never know because the website's been down since May.
	Diversity office.
	What?
	It's been May, June, all of June and most of July?
	Yeah, I guess so.
	Holy mackerel.
	I guess so.
	This is a diversity office.
	They just call it something screwy.
	I hate to slow the show down.
	No, this is worth it.
	Let's define equity and see what it means and see if it has anything to do with these boneheads.
	Golden, golden!
	While you're looking that up, there are a couple of names of street names that need to be changed.
	Okay, here we go.
	I got it.
	The quality of being fair and impartial.
	They have an office for this.
	The value of the shares.
	Fair and impartial is not necessarily the same.
	If we were impartial, then we'd just leave everything the way it is.
	Wouldn't we?
	A brain twister.
	So, besides the city having to change its name, we need to change Littlefield Street.
	Why?
	I don't know who Littlefield was.
	Tom Green Street.
	Tom Green the comic?
	Yeah, he sucks.
	Republican comic.
	Go away.
	Sneed Cove.
	Sam Snead, the golfer?
	Reagan Hill Drive.
	Ronald Reagan.
	Dixie Drive.
	I like Dixie Drive.
	Confederate Avenue.
	Confederate Avenue.
	Yeah, we could name Dixie Drive, Dixie Chick Road.
	Confederate Avenue could be Confidence Avenue.
	Oh, Confidence.
	And then Plantation Road.
	What will we rename Plantation Road?
	Oh, you can't use the word Plantation.
	No, no, it's slavery, boy.
	So it'll cost $5,956 to rename the seven streets.
	The cost of renaming the city would be significantly higher, as you can imagine.
	But I don't know.
	What would we call it?
	Shithole.
	Shithole78701.
	How can I assist you?
	Well, okay.
	That's John at Dvorak.org for all you Texans.
	It's alright.
	The Texans agree.
	I'm with you.
	I'm with you on that one.
	Let's see.
	Well, I'm very tired of journalism or whatever passes for journalism these days.
	Did you see that little tweet somebody put out that...
	They did a calculation and so far this year there's been 455 stories, news stories on MSNBC about Stormy Daniels and not one about the Yemen situation.
	No, I didn't see that.
	It doesn't surprise me.
	They know what their viewers want or what they've trained their viewers to want.
	No, I'm talking about the incredible low-quality shit reporting about...
	Well, just in general, Russian hacking, spear-fishing, phishing...
	You know, the knowledge that is being passed on to people who think they're consuming news is of such low value that we just assume that, you know, the typical...
	I call it a phishing attack, but okay...
	Glitch!
	Glitch, thank you, another one.
	People just accepting these technological explanations as fact have no desire to understand what's behind it.
	Don't really care.
	You will care eventually when shit comes crashing down around you.
	I've said the word shit twice now.
	Okay, I'll stop.
	But this latest one about the Claire McCaskill hack...
	Which is not a hack.
	It was an email that was sent to, you know, grab her password.
	But of course it's from the Russians.
	We all understand that, don't we?
	Well, this is the first known target of Russian interference in the 2018 election.
	It was first reported by the Daily Show.
	It's the first known instance of, what did she call it?
	Did she call it hacking or meddling?
	Well, this is the first known target of Russian interference in the 2018 election.
	This is NPR, my friend.
	This is pathetic already.
	Why do you think we're playing it at the top of the show?
	It's a beaut.
	They found that Russian hackers made an unsuccessful attempt to breach McCaskill's computer system through targeted emails.
	Okay, this is just not true.
	If you're spear phishing, you are not trying to break into her computer system through targeted emails.
	You're trying to break into her email account by her giving you the password.
	It's a little different.
	McCaskill issued a statement last night saying she was not going to be intimidated by these attempts.
	She said she'll continue speaking out against Russia and said it's outrageous.
	Hold on.
	Like five of these a day from the Russians.
	It's not like I don't get any spam.
	Because some stuff comes through and it gets blocked barely.
	But I started saying, hey, what is this bullcrap?
	And it starts off, and you've already said, I told you about this, and you already said, well, I don't even see these things, even though I do.
	Mail, you know, it cannot send mail, it's not a bounce.
	No, you get a bounce, but it's from your account, and you never sent the email, one of those?
	Oh, no, it's from another account.
	That's old, that's years ago.
	This is from another account, looks like it may be a real bounce.
	And then you just scroll down to who you sent it to, and it was some...
	Like, this was like, yeah, it is a bounce back to you because you made a mistake.
	And so you get the bounce back and then you look at the to and from and the to is like, I know who this is, never heard of this.
	And then when you go down to the bottom, there is a link to the message supposedly.
	And the link is titled in Cyrillic.
	Yeah, I'll click on that.
	So, you know, I figure, I don't know, and you're the one that was telling me, you should click on it, you should click on it.
	It's what you said.
	See what's in it.
	And so, I look at this and I go, now would this be considered to be a Russian, and are the Russians trying to hack or spearfish me because of the upcoming election?
	They're interfering with the election by sending this to me?
	They obviously send it to millions and millions of people.
	And it's not necessarily the Russians.
	Well, in this case, it goes a little deeper, and there are some reasons why Claire McCaskill, of course, is being highlighted in this talk.
	I don't know if I clipped it out of this, but what she received was something that looked like something from the Senate IT system.
	So it was targeted towards people inside Congress.
	So there's that at least.
	Which could be an inside job, at least for the creation of the page.
	Who knows?
	Get away with continued interference in U.S. elections.
	Daily Beast reported that hackers sent forged notifications that asked...
	Listen to the loaded word.
	Did you hear the word continued?
	Oh, no.
	I heard the word hackers.
	No, no.
	She said continued as though this is going on as we speak and has always been going on ever since Trump came up.
	Rageous that Russia thinks they can get away with continued interference in U.S. elections.
	Yeah, you're right.
	It hasn't stopped.
	You're right.
	This is a very hackneyed kind of story already.
	Without evidence.
	Without evidence.
	Where's the evidence?
	Daily Beast reported that hackers sent Forge notifications that asked users to reset Microsoft Exchange passwords.
	In essence, it was a phishing scheme in that they were trying to bait McCaskill staff into clicking on a link that would take them to a site where their information could be compromised.
	This is what they've done before, right?
	I mean, the Russians are known to have done this phishing thing in the 2016 election.
	No, it's not just the Russians.
	It's the Indians, the Pakistanis, it's the Bulgarians, it's the Dutch, it's the fucking everybody that...
	Yeah, the reporting indicates that it's really similar to what we saw in 2016.
	Very similar to other ways.
	Very similar.
	It's amazing how the phishing attack was very similar.
	I've never heard of such a thing.
	It's crazy.
	And by the way, they should not target the staffers.
	They should target her.
	She's the dummy that would click on it.
	Russian hackers have attempted to get into U.S. email systems.
	It's the kind of thing that U.S. intelligence officials have been warning about.
	The director of national intelligence, Dan Coats, was saying that there were now we're a minute, like 40 seconds into the report.
	And if you're just a casual NPR listener, you're like, holy shit, the Russians, they haven't stopped.
	They're still doing it.
	They're hacking.
	Really, the report is lie.
	It's just they're lying.
	They're not giving you true information.
	You know, this happens, as you said, every single day people get phishing emails.
	This is nothing new.
	The people listening...
	For the last decade.
	Or already these red warning lights blinking, saying that Russia was going to be interfering in the upcoming election.
	And that is essentially the entire U.S. intelligence community's assessment of what was going to happen.
	But it seems like it would contradict something that the president himself tweeted, which was that if the Russians were going to interfere in the election, he said that they were going to help Democrats, not go against Democrats.
	And it was McCaskill seems to contradict that entirely.
	Okay, so why?
	Oh my god, what a thing to jump to.
	How do they, hold on a second.
	I can't believe these people.
	I can't.
	How do they know that the Russians were trying to hack into a system so they could help her?
	Because the, well, first of all, the Daily Beast did this reporting.
	And they just kind of, just claimed it's clearly Russians doing this.
	And then NPR just took that from the Daily Beast and said, there's no forensics on who sent this.
	Could be Bulgarians, could be Romanians, it could be a fat guy in the basement.
	It could be someone in an office three doors down.
	It could have been anything.
	The Russians were going to interfere in the election.
	He said that they were going to help Democrats.
	It could be right.
	What?
	You're breaking up a little.
	Nothing I can do about it.
	It's just what it is today.
	Go against Democrats.
	And it was McCaskill seems to contradict that entirely.
	Okay, so why her?
	Well, McCaskill is one of the most prominent critics of Russia and of President Trump.
	Oh, that makes sense, John.
	She's a critic.
	That's why she's been targeted.
	So is the entire Democrat Party.
	She is.
	She's very outspoken on this, which she noted in her own statement that this is something that she expects that she would be targeted.
	Oh, crap.
	She's looking for free publicity.
	Well, wait for it.
	Wait.
	Here's the payoff.
	It's also in a really competitive race.
	Missouri is seen as one of those places that could very easily go red in 2018.
	And she's a close ally of Hillary Clinton and has been a strong critic of Putin.
	So this is something that she said that she was prepared for.
	False flag.
	How about that?
	Why don't we just call this what it is?
	Yeah, it's a false flag because she knows she's going to lose and now she has somebody to blame.
	Yes.
	In advance.
	Despicable.
	Really, I'm so tired of hearing this.
	But there's a lot of this, and later I have a little AOC compilage from her most recent...
	Oh, that should be beautiful.
	Yeah, because her entire thinking...
	I mean, you can do it now if you're interested.
	Well, just say what you're just about to say.
	Well, her entire thinking is built on these lies that we have identified over a decade, and things that now are just taken for fact, like 97% of all scientists believe in climate change.
	Yeah, all scientists.
	Yeah, like, well, all scientists, mind you.
	You know, what we just heard in this entire report, you know, the Russians are hacking.
	They're hacking doing this.
	Hacking is phishing.
	No, no.
	It's just, and when you, you know, here's an example for AOC, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is socialism works great in Sweden and Norway.
	I mean, these are the things that people have been led to believe and now it's just fact.
	Yeah.
	So do you want to hear that now?
	I'm anxious to hear it.
	Okay, good.
	Let me just line it up for you.
	So she was on The Daily Show with Trevor Noah.
	And it was a long...
	I think she was the only guest.
	It was pretty long.
	It was about 20 minutes.
	She was the only one guest on that show ever.
	Yeah, but 20 minutes.
	Well, then they have no material.
	They wrote nothing and just brought her on.
	Just brought her on.
	There was material enough.
	For sure.
	And I pulled three segments just to get an understanding of how she's thinking.
	And this is important because a lot of people voted for her in the 14th District of New York.
	Now, of course, she believes that she's already been elected to represent the United States globally, which is just...
	Well, it happens when you take someone like this and you, you know, we call it...
	Well, we call it over the part of the tilt in Holland.
	Like, they put you on the horse, but they pushed you so far that you fell off on the other side.
	Now, I want to mention something before you play the clip.
	I've been watching more and more of her.
	She doesn't know much.
	Nope.
	She's very naive, and she's almost a giggly sorority girl type.
	All of that represented in these clips.
	But the most bothersome thing is, it's not that she doesn't know much.
	She's just ignorant because she's been educated that way.
	She is a product of what we have to offer.
	I'm sad to say, in general.
	So let's start, and I think he asked pretty good questions, and if you watched the whole interview, there were some decent bits in there, particularly about socialism.
	Well, it started off with understanding the term democratic socialist.
	The term democratic socialist has never felt like it has more weight to it than now.
	We hear your name on the news every single day.
	When you use that term, what do you want people to understand?
	Also pay attention to her going, which is, it's like a Hillary thing.
	You know what I mean?
	Oh yeah, this constant hummer.
	It's like a hummer.
	You have to be making noise constantly.
	The term democratic socialist has never felt like it has more weight to it than now.
	We hear your name on the news every single day.
	Stop.
	Stop.
	She's humming to statements like the term democratic socialism.
	He's going to ask a question.
	The term democratic socialism, he's on his way, and she's going mm-hmm before he's even passed those three words.
	Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
	Well, anyway, I find it incredibly annoying if she's going to just keep saying mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
	On everything.
	The sky is blue.
	Moving on to other clips then.
	You're going to hear a lot of it.
	The term democratic socialist has never felt like it has more weight to it than now.
	We hear your name on the news every single day.
	When you use that term, what do you want people to understand by it?
	Well, I think what I want people to understand is that we live in a society that is capable.
	We are capable of ensuring that we have basic...
	Oh, God!
	Bear with me, my friend.
	...works where people can be covered by health insurance, can send their kids to college, where we can pursue a very bold action on climate change and save our future, and that is part of a moral and ethical economy, and that...
	We can legislate from that value and where it is possible, I believe we are morally obliged to pursue it.
	Right.
	Now, when you speak about that, it seems like a logical idea for a politician to have in America.
	The way you are framed...
	The way you are framed is oftentimes the crazy socialist who wants to turn America into Venezuela and into Cuba.
	Now, what I find interesting is, you know, when I think of ideas of socialism, I go, okay, there's maybe Venezuela and there's Cuba, and then I go, but then there's also Norway and Denmark.
	Do you think...
	Excuse me.
	Are Denmark and Norway, are they not kingdoms?
	Am I mistaken something?
	No.
	They're kingdoms, yeah.
	With a parliamentary system?
	Yes.
	But I would not call them socialist.
	And it's nothing like Venezuela or Cuba, which is one-man rule.
	There's a branding disconnect in America.
	A branding disconnect?
	Between some of these policy ideas, between generations, maybe?
	Well, between generations, I absolutely think so.
	I think us as millennials, we grew up in a time...
	Now, this is great.
	This is...
	What?
	I got a couple more things.
	She said, I think, I think, I think, I think she's just a classic millennial.
	But she said something earlier.
	Legislate from the value.
	From the value of socialism, yes.
	Yeah, the idea is that's social justice from the values that it's not fair.
	Everything has to be fair.
	That's what I understand it to be.
	But now listen to how horrible it's been.
	Let me just ask you.
	You have kids.
	I got a kid.
	I got kids around me.
	I've been in the 20 to 30 age range.
	How has their life been growing up?
	Have they grown up in a prosperous country?
	Has it been good times?
	Duck and bullets.
	I mean...
	Okay, Hillary.
	Has it been good for them?
	I'm asking a serious question.
	Just economically seen, health-wise, just life expectancy, everything.
	Has it not been...
	Yeah, they've been doing...
	It's been great.
	Great.
	I think disconnected America between some of these policy ideas between generations, maybe?
	Well...
	Between generations, I absolutely think so.
	I think us as millennials, we grew up in a time...
	We came of age in a time of 9-11 happened in middle school.
	The financial crisis happened in college.
	We have never really known or grown up in a time of true economic prosperity.
	What?
	I'm sorry.
	That's just not true.
	Or am I seeing it wrong?
	Well, I don't know what she wants, for starters.
	She might want, you know, just kick up her heels, get a flapper dress and dance the night away in a speakeasy with free booze.
	I have no idea what she's talking about.
	Yeah, it's not the 50s.
	Well, hold on.
	But she's saying...
	Now, 9-11, I agree.
	Of course, that was very damaging to a lot of people's mindset, and it mind-controlled an entire world into a security state, no doubt about it.
	But to say that nothing ever happened like Second World War, First World War, Vietnam War, Korean War...
	To say none of that ever happened before she was born or before the millennials, that's just not true.
	Certainly not economically, but okay.
	We came of age in a time of hyper-concentration of wealth with the very tippy-top of people in the country and the world.
	And so for us to have access, we also grew up seeing our peers in other countries, like in the UK and Canada with single-payer healthcare systems.
	We grew up with peers being able to go to college without graduating with a mortgage's worth of debt.
	And we know that economically there's a better way because it has already been done.
	Pay no attention to the $1,000 supercomputer everyone has had in their pockets since you were born.
	Also pay attention to the fact that what she's talking about, the student loan debt, was largely brought on by Obama.
	Yes.
	And the trap of it as well.
	Not just Obama, but during the Obama years.
	It was exacerbated during the Obama years.
	Instead of recognizing it for what it was, they kept it going thinking, wow, this is free money for us.
	Yeah.
	And everyone has a big albatross around their neck now.
	The second clip, there was some interesting information in there that we've talked about on the show.
	And this is all about corruption.
	Like, okay, so when you get in, not even if you get in, but when you get in, when you're up there and representing everybody, although she's not been elected yet, aren't you worried about being corrupted by money?
	Do you worry that when you get into the halls of Congress...
	That you may become infected by that money.
	And the reason I ask this is because I've seen many politicians who start out with beautiful ideals.
	And once they get into the machine, they'll tell you that from the inside it's so different.
	You have to get money from big corporations and you have to start working with business.
	Do you worry that maybe your ideals will be met with reality once you get to the capital?
	Well, I think that what makes our campaign and my candidacy a little different is that I've taken a public pledge not to accept any corporate PAC money whatsoever.
	Alright.
	I've taken a pledge not to accept any corporate PAC money whatsoever.
	First of all, the way I understand the rules of PACs or political action committees, not only can they not give money directly to a candidate, they can't even talk with the candidate.
	They can have no interaction.
	Is my understanding correct?
	Yeah, PACs are designed to be kind of independent and they would do the advertising for you without you having...
	But here she is.
	She took a pledge not to take any PAC money.
	She can't, but legally she can't.
	I think they can spend, there's some maximum amount of $5,000, I think, somewhere in there.
	Well, we could look it up, but yeah, she's full of crap.
	And by the way, when he asked that question, her whole answer to the first clip series that you played was all materialistic.
	Yes.
	We didn't have this.
	We didn't get that.
	We didn't get a free lunch.
	We didn't get this.
	We didn't get that.
	We want free medical.
	We want this.
	It's all materialistic.
	She's a materialist.
	Ooh.
	Yes.
	We continue.
	Pledge not to accept any...
	Oh yeah, I also wanted to say, she's saying no corporate PAC money.
	So I guess she's taking non...
	She's taking money, just not corporate PACs.
	But she...
	As far as I know, legally, you can't take any money from PACs.
	You can't even talk with them.
	corporate PAC money whatsoever.
	Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo!
	We are now starting to see a movement in Congress I think there's about eight members of Congress, I believe they're all Democrats, that have accepted that pledge.
	But I actually think I may be one of the only ones that actually got elected for the first time on that.
	Many folks got elected with some corporate money and then they swore it off after.
	But I think I'm one of the first to get elected right out of the gate without any corporate PAC money, which gives me, I believe, a very large degree of independence.
	I am a little, you know, I'm a little afraid because I know that the culture of Congress is one that I think the majority of Americans are just exasperating.
	Now listen to this.
	this she says something interesting we've discussed before John and and to a certain extent you have to be kind of an emissary in that there are ways that you get things done and there's the implication that you need to get committee assignments by purchasing them through fundraising and all of that and uh-huh No, there's not an implication.
	That we know for sure.
	Yeah, it's a known fact.
	So she's hearing, and I can just see what's happening.
	She's been hanging out with Bernie Sanders.
	He's been shepherding her around, taking her everywhere to Kansas, do whatever.
	We're all great.
	Here's the future of your party, ladies and gentlemen.
	And he's saying, now, little girl, you're going to have to buy your committee seats.
	That's really bad, but you have to buy your committee seats.
	And what is it, a million bucks to be the chairman of a committee, or two million?
	For the best committees, it's a million bucks a year.
	A million bucks a year.
	House and Ways and Means, Defense, all these big committees, there's a million.
	But it can't be as low as $250,000.
	So the corruption has already started.
	She's already seeing the implications.
	She hasn't even figured it out yet that, yeah, that's the way it works.
	There are ways that you get things done, and there's the implication that you need to get committee assignments by purchasing them through fundraising and all of that.
	And I think it's one of those things where...
	I think, first of all, I got elected on not taking corporate PAC money, and I have absolutely no intention of changing that whatsoever.
	And so it's really just about learning to navigate that space with that foundation.
	Learning to navigate that space with that foundation.
	Right out of a textbook.
	Nice.
	Final clip.
	This is the one that a lot of people saw around the social nets.
	The big question, how do we pay for all of this free stuff that you're...
	Thinking of giving away.
	But then the pragmatic side of it comes in, as you said.
	How do you pay for these?
	You know, you always see people coming in with economic arguments.
	And they say, look, these numbers don't really add up.
	You know, in order to get health care for everybody, this is what it would cost.
	That's going to be troubling.
	Even if you reverse the Republican tax deal, that's only going to make up 5% of what we need to pay for Medicare for all.
	You know, how do you pay for education for all?
	How do you pay for all of these ideas?
	So, this is an excellent, excellent question.
	And in fact...
	Go ahead.
	Say it.
	Well, the one I have the beef with is great.
	I know.
	I know.
	I said excellent, excellent.
	Couldn't be just one excellent.
	It had to be two.
	Excellent, excellent.
	There's a lot of back of the envelope stuff.
	So I've looked at the economic plans that I've been talking about all in the back of the envelope.
	It's really okay.
	This is an excellent, excellent question.
	And in fact, there's a lot of back of the envelope stuff based on our values.
	So for example, I sat down with a Nobel Prize economist last week.
	I can't believe I can say that.
	It's really weird.
	Okay, so now I think that this is one of these millennial things that she throws in there.
	It could be real, but it could also, I don't know.
	She does these from time to time.
	She goes, a Nobel, I can't believe it, me, little Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
	I met a Nobel economist.
	It's weird.
	I can't believe it's so weird.
	Can I just interject here about this, what you just described?
	You know when the last royal wedding took place?
	Yeah.
	They were covering it on NBC with Meredith.
	Yes.
	Where's the clip?
	Hold on a second.
	Do you remember what it would be called?
	That was a good clip.
	Royal Wedding.
	Yeah, if you can find that.
	But there was one thing.
	I never did get the clip.
	Maybe I did, but Katie Tur and some other woman of another NBC News correspondent were up in some balcony somewhere and they put the camera on them.
	And I think they're kind of in this group.
	I think they're Older millennials.
	They were jumping up and down and screaming like little girls at a Beatles concert in the 60s.
	Talking like this.
	So Katie Tur in particular is squealing and jumping up and down and they're just in paroxysms over this wedding scene.
	They said, oh, there's Megan!
	And then they went nuts.
	And it was like, holy mackerel.
	You're not even remotely mature.
	It's a parent.
	And I think we have the same situation with this woman.
	She's like a kid.
	It's, you know, this isn't, you bring up a point.
	This is a sort of behavior, and I don't think it's bound to millennials.
	It is certainly in the United States.
	Women do this sometimes amongst themselves.
	They talk, whoa, yes, oh, girlfriend.
	You know, I guess it's a female version of dudes doing bro stuff.
	Well, you know, if I have like a top correspondence job at NBC. Well, okay, that's different.
	But she's not a top correspondent at NBC. She's a pre-elected politician.
	Yes.
	I exemplified this, and I'm thinking if I'm that person, why am I presenting myself like this?
	I haven't even gotten mature enough to know not to do that.
	Is that what the message is here?
	And I think this woman's in that same category.
	Possibly.
	Possibly.
	Well, let's listen again, because this is still about how we're going to pay for her great ideals.
	The envelope stuff based on our values.
	So, for example, I sat down with a Nobel Prize economist last week.
	I can't believe I can say that.
	It's really weird.
	But one of the things that we saw is...
	If people pay their fair share, if corporations and the ultra-wealthy, for example, as Warren Buffett likes to say, if he paid as much as his secretary paid, 15%, if he paid a 15% tax rate...
	Okay, so she just got this one wrong, and Trevor Noah does not interject, although I could see in his face that he knew.
	What she's trying to say is, if Warren Buffett paid the same amount of taxes as his secretary, which is not 15%, His is much higher.
	His is 15%.
	Hers is higher than that.
	She's got it exactly backwards.
	Nothing is set.
	For wealthy, for example, as Warren Buffett likes to say, if he paid as much as his secretary paid, 15%, if he paid a 15% tax rate, if corporations paid, if we reversed the tax bill but raised our corporate tax rate to 28%, which is not even as high as it was before, If we do those two things...
	Okay, what she's trying to say is if you took the tax breaks and just reversed them and gave normal people the low corporate tax...
	And then gave the high tax to everybody else.
	It would work that way somehow, I think.
	It's weird.
	And also close some of those loopholes.
	That's $2 trillion right there.
	That's $2 trillion in 10 years.
	And it's one of the wide estimates is that it's going to take $3 to $4 trillion to transition us to 100% renewable energy economy.
	We have to go to a 100% renewable energy economy, and somehow it's going to work by changing the taxes that way?
	Or is there something else she's thinking of?
	We got $2 trillion from folks paying their fair share, which they were not paying before the Trump tax bill.
	They weren't paying that before the Trump tax bill.
	If we get people to pay their fair share, that's $2 trillion in 10 years.
	Now, if we implement a carbon tax on top of that so that we can transition and financially incentivize people away from fossil fuels, if we implement a carbon tax, that's an additional amount of a large amount of revenue that we can have.
	Oh, my God.
	That's an additional amount of...
	If we go to 100% renewable, there's no carbon tax bringing in nothing.
	That's right.
	Once it's over...
	And then the last key, which is extremely, extremely important, is reprioritization.
	Just last year, we gave the military a $700 billion budget increase.
	No, no.
	It was not a $700 billion increase.
	It was $700 billion.
	That was the total budget.
	I'm in agreement.
	That's outrageous.
	But it wasn't the increase.
	Then, the last key, which is extremely, extremely important, is reprioritization.
	Extremely, extremely.
	Just last year, we gave the military a $700 billion budget increase, which they didn't even ask for.
	They're like, we don't want another fighter jet.
	They're like, don't give us another nuclear bomb.
	When has any army anywhere ever said that?
	No!
	No more money for the military-industrial complex.
	We didn't even ask for that.
	Go away with your cash.
	Budget increase, which they didn't even ask for.
	They're like, we don't want another fighter jet.
	They're like, don't give us another nuclear bomb.
	They didn't even ask for it, and we gave it to them.
	And so a lot of what we need to do is reprioritize What we want to accomplish as a nation.
	And really what this is about is saying health care is important enough for us to put first.
	Education is important enough for us to put first.
	And that is a decision that requires political and moral courage from both parts of the aisle.
	And this works everywhere else.
	So why not here in America?
	What an idiot.
	Well, you think that's bad?
	Why don't we go to District 14 in New York and I have to give massive props again to campus reform.
	These guys are very smart what they're doing and I'm happy they're doing this to expose what's happening in our millennial groups.
	A lot of these people who are here are indeed in school, but not all of them.
	But these are the voters from New York District 14 who elected...
	Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
	What are your views on her so far?
	I mean, I've heard only positive things.
	We love her.
	Yeah, we do love her.
	I voted for her because I'm from Queens.
	It was great.
	It's a breath of fresh air and I hope it follows through into November.
	I like her spirit and that she's very different.
	People tend to freak out when they hear the word socialism, like, applied to anything.
	Why do you think that is?
	I think there's this old way of thinking about it.
	it.
	What do you think the government should be subsidizing?
	I love it.
	It's an old way of thinking about it.
	It's the old way.
	Old way, old way, bad.
	New way, good.
	I think there's this old way of thinking about it.
	What do you think the government should be subsidizing?
	So her platform includes free health care, college tuition, the minimum living wage, housing as a human right.
	Are those things that you think the government should be providing for people?
	Absolutely.
	Are those things that you would support?
	Yes, it is.
	Are those all things that you would support the government subsidizing?
	100%.
	I feel like everyone should have free education and healthcare.
	How are we going to pay for those?
	Oh, God.
	I mean...
	Us.
	Us, I guess.
	Who, in your mind, should pay for all of the free things?
	All of the free things?
	Well, some of it should come from taxes, but the government should pay for it.
	But the government is funded by taxes.
	Yeah.
	I don't know where the money would come from, but...
	They can figure it out.
	Okay.
	More taxes on the rich people.
	Yeah, for sure, man.
	Like, they can afford it.
	Tax corporations that's taxed 1% and find a way to support a living wage.
	The people with a good idea and a good reason to spend their tax money wouldn't mind actually paying more taxes.
	There are so many of these countries out there that are employing a lot more socialism in their government and into their politics, and they're doing really well.
	Oh, yeah.
	Is Venezuela doing that?
	I don't know too much about Venezuela, honey.
	I think they need to...
	I mean, are they still communists right now?
	So they're technically socialists.
	Okay.
	Look at other countries.
	It works.
	Like other countries, you pay higher taxes, but your government takes care of you.
	So when you see the social system failing in Venezuela, does that concern you?
	I mean, yes.
	Obviously.
	My family's Cuban and I've seen the downfall of extreme leftism, but also I see how it boosts the community and it has its ups and downs and I think we can definitely learn from history on that terms.
	Our country needs change and if it has to be on the opposite side, on the extreme polar opposite side, maybe it's what we need.
	Privatized healthcare is a huge issue, and if it was a government-funded thing, that would be, you know, when there aren't...
	Do you think the government would run it more efficiently?
	In a perfect world, sure.
	I'm liberal.
	I don't know exactly, like, where I stand, but I know, like, democratic socialism is better than conservative.
	It's just better than, it's a better option.
	In what way?
	Um, when I think of it, I just think of, like, more open-minded people, people that aren't, like, as economically conserved.
	Thanks, Obama.
	We're doomed.
	Well, New York is doomed, that's for sure.
	Isn't that outrageous?
	People really are just ignorant.
	They're ignorant.
	They have not been taught, don't understand, don't read anything.
	It is the schools.
	It is the schools.
	Yeah.
	What are we going to do?
	What are we going to do?
	We're going to do nothing.
	We're just going to sit back and watch.
	Do you think she'll get elected?
	If the Republicans are smart, they could beat her by putting somebody...
	Well, if they're smart, they put her in.
	They help her.
	Oh, that's a good idea.
	Wouldn't you think?
	Yeah, you had this idiot that you can...
	Yeah, a punching bag.
	It would be easy.
	Well, it's in an area.
	It's in a zone that has apparently been gerrymandered to be pure Democrats, so there's no...
	There's no chance she can get beaten.
	Unless the guy who she beat...
	Yeah, he's still on the ballot.
	He can still win.
	If he's still on the ballot and actually decided to run as an independent or something, the way Lieberman did, after he got ousted by his own party and he said, screw that, I can still beat this guy in the general, then he could get in and the whole thing would be over with her.
	Which, if that guy has a brain, I think he doesn't care anymore.
	He was in for 20 years or something.
	He's sick of it.
	Yeah, he probably doesn't want the aggro if he won.
	Or just running against her would cause so much hate towards him.
	Yeah, that could be me.
	He probably wouldn't want to do that.
	Alright, what you got?
	I got lots of other stuff, but I'm curious.
	I see you got clips.
	Well, after those clips, you might as well play this little ISO I have, my favorite.
	I just put it in the rotation.
	This way I can call it up if needed.
	This is your life, Rachel Maddow.
	You're not having a terrible, terrible dream.
	Also, you're not dead and you haven't gone to hell.
	This is your life now.
	This is our election now.
	This is us.
	This is our country.
	Yeah, but we know this.
	We know this clip.
	I know.
	I don't know that.
	I can't reference it.
	Oh, yes.
	This is right after Trump won.
	Yeah, I know where it came from.
	This is after she was crying.
	Yes.
	She's crying like a baby and then she does that.
	No, I don't know because I want to maybe pull it up in the future.
	Okay.
	No, that's good.
	And I don't know that we can find it.
	Well, we certainly can now and we can always find this one now.
	I visited Kenya as the first sitting American president to come from Kenya.
	We have that one.
	You never know when that'll come in handy.
	Woo!
	That one is damning.
	I don't know.
	It's as good as the other ones where he talks about his Muslim faith.
	That's another gem.
	That's another gem.
	I just don't know why people can't pick up on this stuff.
	I do have some more NPR, like 1984 stuff in reference to Trump, if you're interested in that.
	I thought it was...
	Well, I... Yeah, because when we switch to my clips, I'm going to go into the sleazy side of the business.
	Oh, let's go to sleaze.
	Let's go...
	Oh, man.
	This is...
	Hashtag Me Too has just had an interesting revival as we now switch to the CBS network from NBC. Well, now let's...
	Yeah, well...
	I don't know that this was intended.
	Hold on.
	And now it's time for your sexual harassment update.
	I mean, we got the jingles.
	We might as well play them.
	I don't know if this was intentional to start targeting CBS. I don't think Roger Stone had anything to do with it.
	I think this guy just...
	Stepped in it some time ago.
	I don't know whether Redstone's daughter who's trying to make a play for...
	They want to re-merge Viacom with CBS, which they used to be some years ago, and then they split off.
	That was my number one thought, is that that's what this is about.
	It is Ronan, though, and I think he did write it in his article.
	He wrote about it.
	He said, you know, this is all happening under the banner of this take, this...
	Reverse back-end merger happening.
	So it could be.
	Well...
	It's possible that Redstone woman, she...
	And I met Summer Redstone.
	I met him too, once.
	He is a very...
	I don't know how to describe him, but he's not a normal person.
	No, he's a dick.
	I think he's kind of evil, personally.
	Yes.
	But he...
	But this reverse merger they're trying to pull up, it's possible that they had done some investigating because they're trying to get...
	Let's just explain for a second.
	Sumner Redstone built Viacom.
	Did Viacom then buy CBS? I can't remember now.
	I think they may have, because they were buying everybody.
	Right.
	They bought Nickelodeon, they bought Titan Network, they bought BET, all kinds of stuff.
	And then they split it off.
	And Paramount, don't forget the Paramount started.
	Paramount.
	And then they split off Viacom.
	Which had the pieces like MTV Networks, I think was in the Viacom piece.
	Yeah, I think so was Paramount.
	Yeah, but Redstone is majority shareholder in both entities.
	And now his daughter was taking over because he's on death's door.
	Certainly with the amount of Viagra he's popping, as we know.
	Remember that tape, that secret tape of him and his buddy and the hookers?
	I don't remember it, but I do know.
	It was great.
	Do you have it?
	Yeah, we played it on the show.
	It was probably horribly inaudible, but go ahead.
	I'll look for that while you continue about the business side of this.
	They split off, and then Viacom has really struggled in terms of their earnings per share, and while CBS has just kicked butt.
	And a lot of it has to do with Moonvest, but they don't see it that way.
	And so they figure they rejoin the companies, and then they're...
	Book value would go up and their worths would go up and their share value would go up.
	It would be a win-win for the Viacom investors.
	And so they figure, well, let's get, you know, we own a lot of the CBS stocks, so let's put them to two companies back together.
	Moonvest decided no.
	He figures that, you know, why should he give up control?
	He'd lose control.
	And so obviously they put some private detectors.
	I think they dug up some dirt.
	And then they said, what are we going to do with this dirt?
	It's no good, this dirt.
	So they may have gone to Ronan, who was looking for another article to write, and dropped it on his lap and said, hey, you know, you might be interested in this.
	And it could have been done in a very casual way that doesn't look like, you know, he's being set up.
	It's possible.
	But doesn't that also possibly hurt stock prices when you get these kinds of things with shareholders and people running companies and this kind of noise?
	It'll make it easier to do the merger if the stock prices drop.
	Yes, of course.
	Of course.
	Okay.
	But I think he's in a heap of trouble.
	I think Moonves is done.
	And I have two different reports.
	I mean, you can play part of the one that CBS itself actually aired.
	And this is one of the long form.
	And I don't even have the whole thing.
	It's too long.
	But you can start listening to it if you want.
	It's a little soft.
	In his reporting, but then you go to ABC, and they decide to violate the rules.
	Don't mess with the other guys.
	Don't mess with the other guys, because especially Disney has got lots of skeletons in the closet.
	Oh, yeah.
	All right, I'll listen to some of the CBS. Moonves acknowledges but denies sexually assaulting her.
	In another alleged incident, the article says a veteran producer, Christine Peters, met with Moonves in 2006 to discuss a project.
	She told the magazine he was enthusiastic, but then sat down close to her on the couch.
	Then he just put a hand up my skirt, she said, touching her underwear.
	Moonves categorically denies this.
	The article also says 19 current and former employees claimed former CBS News chairman and current executive producer of 60 Minutes Jeff Fager allowed harassment in the news division.
	Fager called those claims false, anonymous, and said they do not hold up to editorial scrutiny.
	In a statement, the independent directors of CBS said all allegations of personal misconduct are to be taken seriously.
	Upon the conclusion of that investigation, the board will promptly review the findings and take appropriate action.
	Farrow said he'd worked on the story for eight months.
	You know, we talked to experts who say this is an opportunity to look at how our most important corporate institutions treat vulnerable people coming forward with these kinds of charges.
	Moonves said this about sexual harassment at a Variety magazine event last fall.
	It's important that companies educate, have an ability to have a dialogue, to know what's going on.
	I think it's important that a company's culture...
	We'll not allow for this.
	As CBS chairman and CEO, Moonves is credited with helping turn the primetime lineup into a perennial winner.
	Can't you just see the lawyers pouring over this script before it went to tape?
	Like, okay, you can say this, you can use this soundbite, only these seconds right here and there, we can't have any other liability.
	I definitely would have them going over everything they did.
	Also, it's such a static read.
	You know, zero emotion.
	Completely out of character for any other type of news report.
	Just reading the facts as they are stated about our own network.
	Helping make CBS the country's most watched television network.
	The allegations against him come in the middle of a battle over the future of CBS. It pits Moonves against Sherry Redstone.
	Who controls a majority of the voting shares in both CBS and Viacom through her National Amusements Corporation.
	Redstone wants to re-merge CBS and Viacom.
	Moonves does not.
	A high-ranking CBS executive who did not want to be identified told us the New Yorker story is part of that battle, calling it corporate hardball.
	Ms.
	Redstone's spokesperson put out a statement denying the allegations have anything to do with the battle in the boardroom.
	It said the malicious insinuation that Ms.
	Redstone is somehow behind the allegations is false and self-serving.
	Moonves is quoted in the article and he says, I recognize that there were times decades ago when I may have made some women uncomfortable by making advances.
	Those were mistakes, and I regret them immensely, but I always understood and respected and abided by the principle that no means no, and I've never misused my position to harm or hinder anyone's career.
	Muvez's wife, Julie Chen, also released a statement supporting him.
	She wrote, Leslie is a good man and a loving father, devoted husband, and inspiring corporate leader.
	He has always been a kind, decent, and moral human being.
	Dandy's a tongue jabber is what he is.
	A creepy tongue jabber.
	I believe he speaks the truth when he says that.
	If you read the whole article with the allegations, once he got no, it was like, okay, that's no.
	But he doesn't ask for a no.
	He starts right away by touching your panties and jamming his tongue down your throat.
	He's a dick.
	Stop these horrible, horrible men.
	And it's not just the corporate culture.
	It is entertainment culture.
	Yes.
	That should be pointed out.
	They're never going to do that.
	You're the only one that will do that.
	Okay.
	So let's go to ABC where I have a three-parter.
	And these are all good.
	And they tend to go – there's a little better reporting than CBS. They have better stuff.
	And this is the Moonves hit piece on ABC 1.
	Wow.
	Now to the explosive allegations surrounding CBS CEO Les Moonves accused of sexual misconduct.
	Dozens of current and former CBS employees reportedly alleging a culture of harassment and retaliation at the network.
	Here's ABC's Eva Pilgrim.
	Tonight, Les Moonves, the head of CBS, under investigation for sexual misconduct and the company he's run for two decades, accused of turning a blind eye to a culture of harassment.
	The New Yorker releasing an expose by Ronan Farrow featuring allegations from six women against the CBS chairman that range from inappropriate kissing to sexual assault.
	These are all stories in which women said one after another that they were terrified and intimidated and that they felt their careers suffered as a result.
	In the article, the Emmy-nominated actress and writer Ileana Douglas, known for her roles in Goodfellas and Six Feet Under, describes what she calls a sexual assault that occurred during a meeting with Moonves for a show she was cast in.
	She claims he held her down and began violently kissing her and even pulled up her skirt.
	Douglas says she tried to talk her way out of the encounter, but afterwards was fired and told by Moonves she would never work at this network again.
	Moonves admits trying to kiss Douglas, but denies sexually assaulting her.
	But the article went further, alleging a pattern of harassment at CBS News, including 60 Minutes, claiming that men on the show accused of sexual misconduct were promoted, even as the company paid settlements.
	One former employee claiming, I had several producers and editors over the age of 60 who would greet me by kissing me on the mouth.
	We did hear from dozens and dozens of current and former employees that they had seen a culture of harassment and retaliation.
	And that flowed from Mr.
	Moonves to different facets of this company, including the news division.
	Yeah, notice it's always women in show business, actresses, directors, producers, writers.
	It's rarely someone within the boardroom or within the corporate culture.
	Yeah, that's probably true, but I think, you know, if you have sexual harassment, I think if the girl's pretty enough, it's going to happen anywhere.
	Yeah.
	Let's go back to what Moonves said.
	There is something when you, you know, first you have to doubt some of these things, but when the guy says, instead of just categorically denying it, which I believe would be my advice, no, I didn't, I don't know what she's talking about, she's nuts, she's a psycho.
	Is this your corporate HR advice?
	Yeah.
	Okay, alright.
	He says, Oh, well, I did try to kiss her, but I don't remember any of the other stuff.
	Oh, come on!
	This is like an admission of guilt.
	It is an admission of guilt.
	Yes, you're right.
	It's not like an admission.
	It is an admission of guilt, and he just soft-pedaled it, but he was obviously a masher.
	He sits at the other girl.
	Oh, beyond a masher.
	I mean, if you read the article, consistently he jams his tongue into their mouths.
	He has, yes, he's beyond a masher.
	He is an assaulter.
	That's an assault.
	Yeah, the tongue assault.
	Yeah.
	Assault with a deadly weapon.
	And he is like, he can't, he's done.
	I don't see how he gets out of this.
	He's a creep.
	Yeah.
	Alright.
	Alright, let's go on to issue two.
	As CBS begins its investigation, Moonves responding to the allegation saying, I recognize that there were times decades ago when I may have made some women uncomfortable by making advances.
	Those were mistakes and I regret them immensely.
	But I always understood and respected and abided by the principle that no means no.
	And I have never misused my position to harm or hinder anyone's career.
	Ah!
	Eva Pilgrim joins us now live in studio.
	And as CBS... That's the whole definition of his position is to harm or further people's careers.
	That's crap.
	...starts their investigation.
	Some are questioning the timing of these allegations.
	That's right, Tom.
	CBS is in the middle of a heated merger battle with Viacom.
	And now some are alleging these claims may stem from that corporate dispute.
	But the head of Viacom responding, saying that any claim she is behind those allegations is false and self-serving.
	CBS saying they will fully investigate these sexual misconduct claims that the board will promptly review the findings and they will take the appropriate action.
	Tom.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	Yes.
	Well, they have a problem because this guy is one of the great programming geniuses that comes around very rarely.
	Yeah, after Littlefield and what was the other guy's name who's dead now?
	What about Zucker who went over to CNN from NBC after he destroyed the network by putting Jay Leno on every night at 10?
	Genius idea.
	And then moves all the law and order stuff off.
	It's just like these guys, this is a tough job to do.
	And it's like picking hits, you know, the same in the record industry.
	There are one or two guys that are just like, they just can't go wrong.
	There used to be some famous guys that did that.
	And this is one of those guys.
	But now you're stuck with the guy because he's, you know, it's just ridiculous.
	And he probably doesn't care.
	He is the highest paid executive in the country.
	He makes some...
	Like $80 million a year.
	Something like that.
	And he's been doing this for 20 years.
	He doesn't need this job or the aggravation.
	He's going to resign.
	And then what?
	Then what?
	Then CBS will do the merger with Viacom, and then the Red Stones will start programming CBS, and it's going to be junk TV just like every other network.
	Exactly.
	It's going to suck.
	It's going to totally suck.
	It will only take two seasons.
	Yes, and I think for ABC to be all over this story like this is very, well, it may be a bit of a distractive move because, whew, at least we're not talking about James Gunn, everybody.
	Let's not look over here.
	Also the possibility exists that if Sherry Redstone had anything to do with any of it, this is like a kind of a, we're going to help you now, you have to help us later.
	They have to assume that Moonves is out, because otherwise he would be a bad enemy to have.
	He's done.
	There's no way he's going to be around.
	I was just kind of saying that if ABC is next in the trifecta of the douchebags in Media Land, man, if Ronan really gets into ABC and really finds out what's been going on since the days of Shirley Temple, the Empire could come crashing down.
	Yes.
	Yeah, that might be a longer.
	It's taking them eight months to do this story.
	This would take years.
	Yeah, I agree.
	Disney is probably the most targetable.
	Yeah.
	All the kitty fiddlers hanging out over there.
	I mean, all the bull crap in their parks where people are cast members so they don't have to pay minimum wage.
	Which is what they developed that idea in Florida.
	And they had the Florida legislature pass some laws.
	They said, look at what we got.
	We got all of Orlando.
	We got this huge bunch of property.
	We're going to develop a bunch of things on it.
	But we have some problems.
	Can you change a law?
	Change a couple things for us.
	And they changed a couple things for us.
	So that's why it says cast.
	Everyone that works there is a cast member.
	Oh, that's a legal thing?
	Yeah.
	Oh, I didn't realize it was for legal reasons.
	Yeah, it's that way you don't have to pay him so much.
	Oh, okay.
	Because it's basically one big stage.
	It's a stage and you're just a cast member and you get to go under.
	That includes the guys who scrape up the gum.
	Yeah, they're cast members, of course.
	They don't want to quit show business.
	And if you look around the park, you'll see these doors that say cast members only.
	It never says employees only.
	The word employee is verboten.
	So in the backdrop of this, we have Kimberly Guilfoyle, which was not being reported on in any equitable way because the accusations are, I don't know if they're credible because no one's really reported on it.
	You've heard about these accusations of Kimberly?
	No.
	Well, she left the Fox News Network to become the vice chairwoman of the I support the president PAC, whatever it is.
	Something like that.
	Like, I'm boning the president's son, so hey, I'm all for him.
	Guilfoyle's departure has been billed as her decision, but it was Huffington Post, no less, who reported last week from multiple sources that said she did not leave the network voluntarily.
	They said Guilfoyle was informed her time at Fox News was up following a human resources investigation into allegations of inappropriate behavior, including sexual misconduct, And that her lawyers have been involved since spring.
	Sources also say that despite being told she would have to leave by July, Guilfoy repeatedly attempted to delay her exit and tried to have her allies appeal to Rupert Murdoch.
	What she apparently did is she was very abusive towards the, I think it's women, in the hair and makeup department.
	Which, I hate to say it, but just looking at her, I can see that she's a total bitch in the makeup department.
	I've been in makeup departments all my life, and I've seen it.
	And some women are just horrible, just rude and mean and abusive with language.
	But the best part is she apparently is going around showing dick pics to everybody and identifying whose dick it is in the pic.
	For some reason, none of this would surprise me because I've always been suspicious of her since, you could almost say since she was married to Gavin Newsom.
	Yeah, that's a red flag.
	But the other moment was she was on during the, remember the TSA scandal about the technicians keeping pictures of the x-rays?
	Yes, yes, of course.
	Naked people in the x-rays.
	Yeah, the naked body scanners.
	No, we're not taking any pictures, but it turns out they were.
	Mm-hmm.
	They were doing a discussion of this on one of the O'Reilly or something, and she was one of the discussors.
	And she says, I don't get it.
	I don't have any problem with this.
	I think I'm glad they want to see me naked.
	I have no problem with that.
	I think everyone's just whining about nothing.
	I don't remember that.
	Did we have a clip of that?
	No, it was just something I watched.
	Oh, that's too bad.
	And I was saying, holy mackerel, what kind of analysis is this?
	I'm proud of my naked body.
	You should be too.
	Yeah.
	So I could see her being, and she looks kind of like a mean-spirited person.
	But walking around showing dick pics, of course these were probably emailed to her, or sexted to her.
	I don't know how she got them, or she took them like a plaster caster.
	But I think we should know, where is the, I would like a little equity on this.
	Just because she's a woman and she's cute, kind of.
	That means that she can just get away with it?
	The press doesn't jump on this?
	They're not doing anything?
	And I don't understand.
	It's Trump!
	How can you not do this when she's directly connected to Trump?
	It makes no sense.
	I think it's one of these things that this gentleman's agreement by the women reporters that we don't pick on each other because we've got enough problems.
	You think so?
	Yeah, it's the only possibility, because what you just said outlines exactly why it should be going on, and so there has to be a reason it's not, and I believe that would be the reason.
	Well, it's disappointing, and I want to know more.
	The war against men requires the women to stick together, and this is what they're doing right there.
	And if the women stick together on this, the men aren't going to jump in, because then they get picked on by the women.
	Well, it's disappointing to me, and I would definitely like to know more.
	I just wanted to see whose dick picture she's got.
	Well, there's that.
	And this concludes your sexual harassment update.
	And with that, I'd like to thank you for your courage and say, in the morning to you, John C. The C stands for, can't think of anything today.
	Dvorak!
	Well, in the morning to you, Mr.
	Adam Curry.
	Also in the morning, all the boots on the ground, the feet in the air, the subs in the water, and all the dames and knights out there.
	Well, this is interesting.
	I had a...
	Normally when I go to...
	I go to Fox...
	Or what do you call it?
	Firefox.
	When you click on the open new tab, it gives you a bunch of stuff that you previously opened.
	I think I have been...
	Ah, yes.
	These idiots.
	Pocket.
	Has somehow invaded my...
	Pocket?
	Yeah.
	What is pocket?
	Pocket is some sort of a...
	Oh, look it up.
	Why don't you look up pocket?
	Well, I go get the spreadsheet.
	Okay.
	But I have to type everything in now.
	Pocket communications?
	Something new coming soon?
	Probably.
	I don't know what it is.
	They've hijacked my browser.
	Oh.
	I just went to the page and they haven't hijacked it, but there's nothing going on.
	Anyway, I can get rid of it.
	Well, while you're looking for that, let me say in the morning to the troll room.
	Yeah?
	Yeah.
	I have no idea what you said.
	It's totally illegible.
	Thank you, Skype.
	And in the morning to the troll room, noagendastream.com, where everyone can listen live to me and John breaking up a little bit.
	I don't know what's going on today.
	It's very annoying.
	Also in the morning, to all of our artists who diligently upload to noagendaartgenerator.com.
	And let me see who we have to thank for episode 1054.
	The title of that was Without Evidence.
	This was the No Agenda Cappuccino, which I have a feeling we've actually used before.
	It was from Marcus Couch, so big in the morning to him.
	I got a couple tweets that say people thought they had...
	Seen it before?
	Yeah, they'd seen it before.
	I used it in a newsletter.
	Ah, that's probably where we saw it.
	Not necessarily.
	We could have used it before because some of the ones that we pull from the evergreens never get tagged as being used.
	Yeah, that's the problem.
	Well, it was a beautiful piece.
	I was surprised that we hadn't used it before.
	If we had, there you go.
	Makes total sense.
	Thank you very much, Marcus.
	Noagenda, artgenerator.com, where you can submit your art for the album art, for newsletters, for t-shirts, for stickers, for mugs, all kinds of stuff.
	And thank you to all of our artists who do that for us.
	Okay.
	So let me thank the three associate and executive producer, one executive producer, two associates.
	Sir Carl with a K from Rochester, New York, $300.33.
	Producing this show has become an annual tradition for me.
	My wife's birthday is Monday the 30th and it reminds me that I need to donate to the best podcast in the universe so that I can have you wish my smoking hot wife, Jen, a happy birthday.
	Alright, she's on the list.
	It's also a tradition that I plug my podcast.
	Who are these podcasts?
	A comedy show that reviews other podcasts by playing clips and And providing analysis.
	It's very much inspired by No Agenda.
	Check out whoarethese.com or wherever you get podcasts.
	Finally, since I'm a producer, I feel it's not totally out of line to give you both a note.
	More media deconstruction, less OTG segments.
	By the way, that gets mixed reviews.
	And we decided that segments are very short.
	I haven't done an OTG segment in four weeks.
	Yeah, he doesn't do that much anymore.
	There's not that much to talk about.
	I'm glad his podcast is great.
	It's fantastic.
	He found his Kyocera and he doesn't care anymore.
	I don't.
	James Thurman.
	Anyway, that is $300.33.
	I want to thank him.
	Carl with a K. Sir James Thurman from San Antonio, Texas.
	Associate Executive Producer for 256.64.
	It's random unless you are a dude named Ben.
	Well, 256-64.
	Of course, dudes named Ben understand these numbers very well.
	These are limitations.
	Sir Andrew, and that's...
	And belated Happy CIS Admin Day, which I think was Friday, was it not?
	I think so, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Thank you, dude named Ben.
	Nobody cares.
	Sir Andrew, NC4AG, $73, $250, $73 to the Potfather.
	Woo!
	And the Archivist Emeritus from your humble St.
	Andrew NC4AG. This donation is for my birthday on the 30th.
	I don't know if he's on there.
	And more importantly, as a thank you to the No Agenda Army for successful jobs karma last fall.
	I heard nothing for weeks after my interview, and the day after I heard my jobs karma...
	My references got calls from the interviewer.
	I love this.
	I got the job, and now I'm listening from one of the ships at sea.
	These are ships at sea.
	I would also like to thank Progo and SubZero for the low-bandwidth version, which I guess is still available.
	Yes, it is.
	At noagendalight.glump.com.
	I didn't know we had all that.
	That's nice.
	Noagendalight.glump.net Yeah, we should put a link in the Noagenda page.
	Glump.
	It helps a lot when your only internet is shared satellite with 70 shipmates.
	Yeah, I can imagine.
	Thanks again for your outstanding product and stay woke!
	My millennials!
	Stay woke!
	That concludes our segment.
	No jingles, no karma, although I would like to recommend a group karma for the threesome.
	Yes, a group threesome.
	And also, thank you for being executive producers and associate executive producers.
	You get a real credit for this?
	This credit, I see it everywhere.
	Actually, the new thing is not just LinkedIn profiles.
	People put it in their Twitter profile, which is an interesting idea.
	And, you know, hey, you also got Jobs Karma to work for you.
	I don't know.
	That's what I'd like to know.
	I'd like to know if Sir Andrew...
	If he had his producership listed on his CV, on his resume, or anywhere, if that helped while he was calling, or while he was getting calls, that would be interesting to know.
	Again, thank you for producing this show.
	We'll be thanking more people, $50 and above, and another program for you on Thursday.
	Remember us at...
	Dvorak.org slash N-A We'll get there eventually.
	With Skype, you can also propagate it.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Water!
	Water!
	Shut up, slave!
	Shut up, slave!
	All righty.
	We have, uh, for a little respite, Respite?
	Oh yeah, I gotta play this.
	This is the hit job on the...
	Tell me this is not a professional hit, then they'll never catch the guy.
	This is a hit job on the Bush doctor.
	There are new developments in a high-profile murder mystery in Texas.
	A renowned cardiologist who has treated former President George H.W. Bush gunned down while riding his bicycle to work.
	The gunman also on a bike.
	And now authorities say it was a targeted attack.
	But Who did it and why?
	We get the latest from NBC's Tammy Leitner.
	Tonight, police reveal a renowned Houston cardiologist was likely targeted by his killer, leaving more questions than answers.
	This is truly a whodunit from top to bottom.
	It's a perplexing case.
	New video shows Dr.
	Mark Hausknecht in his final moments before being gunned down.
	The images, captured from a city bus cam, show the doctor in blue scrubs riding his bike to work, just like he did every day.
	Not far behind him, another man on a bike, trailing House Connect, seen here carrying a bulging backpack.
	Minutes later, police say the gunman rode in front of the doctor and fired three shots while facing him.
	The medical examiner confirming House Connect died of gunshot wounds to the head, torso, and upper left extremity.
	Investigators releasing this sketch of the suspect.
	Friends and neighbors now retracing the killer's path, searching for clues.
	Did you see anything unusual?
	And asking residents to check their home surveillance cameras.
	We want to solve this murder.
	A senseless murder.
	Hmm.
	I did read about this, but didn't really...
	Probably read only the headline.
	Could be a hit job, but why?
	Well, that's the question they don't even ask.
	They don't even consider it.
	No, they don't consider it.
	I guess this happens all the time.
	I don't think so.
	Sounds like a hit job to me.
	Interesting.
	And the doctor probably takes his bike every time to work and he's always probably doing it at the exact same time.
	Very easy to figure out how to get him for some reason.
	But no, they don't bother even thinking of that.
	Just put it in the Seth Rich file.
	It'll be fine there.
	We'll take care of it.
	It's a good place to put that.
	Yeah, Seth Rich.
	And this thing here also triggered a thought, which I mentioned in the newsletter.
	This is Greek fire's arson.
	Ah, yes.
	Paradise lost.
	Off Attica's eastern shoreline, the Mediterranean Sea gleams as blue as ever.
	But onshore, so many of the homes and hotels that once stood here are gone.
	On Monday, the flames charged through here at 60 kilometres per hour.
	Almost everyone fled towards the beaches.
	Only the firefighters had the means to try and resist the flames, often in vain.
	This is the first time in 38 years of my service seeing so much catastrophe.
	Sometimes we can't react because it's something beyond our power to stop this.
	Investigators say the blaze took just 90 minutes to race down the mountain towards the coast.
	Many residents simply had no chance to escape.
	And while Monday was extremely hot and windy in Greece, the government suspects the worst fires were no accident.
	As you've all been informed, the indications that we have and which authorities in charge are already investigating, Read to the conclusion that arson was behind the deadly fires.
	Wow.
	You know, Greece can't get a break, man.
	How long have they been screwed over?
	Is it now going on seven years?
	Yeah, besides the financial screw job.
	Starting with the austerity and the migrants and everything.
	Yeah.
	They can't catch a break at all.
	And now arson, huh?
	Mm-mm.
	I wonder about some of the fires that are going on around the United States and elsewhere.
	It's like a wind kicks up immediately, a fire starts.
	You know, it seems like a thing terrorists could do.
	Yeah, but they've got to claim it.
	If they don't claim it, then it's not good.
	That's the only thing missing, yeah, if they claimed it.
	And then, of course, they could claim it and not do anything.
	You just claim everything.
	Speaking of that, ISIS claimed the Vegas massacre, I think, at least three, maybe four times.
	And we're still completely in the darkest of what actually happened.
	We don't even know if there were...
	Now there's...
	Thoughts that maybe there was a second shooter?
	Because body cam...
	I guess the Vegas police, man, do they just release stuff willy-nilly and not look at it?
	Or release nothing or the wrong thing?
	Because this body cam footage shows police believe there were multiple shooters.
	And that was never discussed in any of the briefings.
	Well, there were two windows broken open.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, what you can see...
	Whatever you see, just don't believe what you see.
	Please.
	That thing is...
	I have no words for that.
	I really don't understand why we have not understood more about what happened there.
	Other than cover-up?
	Yeah, it's cover-up.
	I have one other little topic which is kind of worth discussing.
	Scott Adams brought this up.
	Mm-hmm.
	Uh, and this is the auto-fill-in problem at Twitter that has been, uh...
	Oh, yeah, this is the, uh, this is the whole shadow-banning conversation.
	Yes, Tucker took it on, and I think he did a pretty good job.
	Yeah, I gotta beef with Tucker, but we'll get to that in a minute.
	Alright, so, uh, this is the, what are we, fake accounts?
	Tucker takes on autofillin.
	Ew, hold on a second.
	Yes, here we go.
	Well, Twitter has long denied that it is biased against conservative accounts.
	That's obviously a lie.
	It's always obviously been a lie, and now it is a proven lie.
	A new report by Vice found that Republican lawmakers on the conservative accounts wouldn't show up in the search bar when users searched for them.
	That is censorship, obviously, and it was intentional.
	Congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida was one of those conservatives shadow banned by Twitter.
	It's not censorship if it's not the government.
	I'm sorry.
	That's not censorship.
	No, it is censorship.
	Censorship's got nothing to do with the government.
	Uh, okay.
	But the way he's framing it, I think he's implying that.
	But okay, I rest.
	...obviously, and it was intentional.
	Congressman Matt Gaetz of Florida was one of those conservatives shadowbanned by Twitter.
	He just filed a complaint against the company with the federal election.
	Congressman Gaetz joins us tonight.
	Congressman, thank you for coming on.
	So, I guess the first is a factual question.
	You're certain that this happened to you and it was intentional.
	Well, I'm certain that there were only four members of Congress who had their voices suppressed on Twitter.
	Matt Gaetz, Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, and Devin Nunes.
	So that'd be one hell of a coincidence.
	My suspicion is that if people were effectively communicating a conservative message, they got caught in Twitter's troll trap.
	The reason that I think that that is illegal is because it gives advantages to our political opponents.
	It gives them access to the platform that we don't have.
	If Twitter was a billboard company and they gave Democrats access to their billboards and not Republicans, that would be an illegal corporate donation to the campaigns of Democrats.
	Here, instead of the billboard, it's the auto-fill-in function as a part of Twitter's search feature that wasn't available to me, Devin Nunes, Mark Meadows, or Jim Jordan, and it's available to Democrats.
	Yeah.
	Surprise?
	I think it's a valid argument.
	Yeah?
	It's a valid argument.
	It's an illegal corporate contribution.
	Oh, looking at it that way.
	Okay.
	No, that's an interesting way to look at it.
	It's a good way to look at it.
	Scott Adams says the same thing happened to him.
	He was shadow banned.
	If you try to look at Scott Adams, he's a very famous guy.
	Oh, like me not having a blue checkmark?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Same thing.
	Why don't you have a blue checkmark?
	They hate me.
	Why don't you have a blue checkmark?
	They hate me there.
	Well, don't you think that's a little bit unfair?
	No.
	It's supposed to be a neutral operation.
	No.
	In fact, I see it as a badge of honor now.
	Yeah, you say that.
	I do.
	I mean that.
	But the point is, well, okay, the point is that's how I got in trouble by signing out on Twitter.
	I signed out to see if Scott was right because I click on SCO to get Scott, boom, right at the top.
	And then when I wasn't John C. Dvorak, I was just an anonymous guy coming in on the site looking for Scott.
	He didn't show up.
	On the dropdown.
	Right.
	But Twitter has admitted they do this, and they call it healthy conversation rules.
	Well, they can call it whatever they want.
	I never got a call back.
	I never got a note with my ability to change my password.
	The PR people never responded, which brings up another point.
	Well, how did you get back on?
	I forgot I had a backdoor way of doing it.
	You hacked Twitter?
	Nice.
	I didn't really hack Twitter.
	But I got it.
	I got back on it.
	But I never heard from them.
	They're supposed to say, oh, we'll let you know in a couple of days.
	And I sent notes directly to the public relations operation.
	Oh, please.
	John, okay, here's how that goes.
	Hey, I got a note from this Dvorak guy.
	Oh, that creep.
	Forget about it.
	All right, crazy podcaster.
	Can I read to you the official Twitter statement, setting the record straight on shadow banning?
	I think that's a good explanation or definition.
	We do not shadow ban.
	You are always able to see the tweets from accounts you follow, although you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile.
	And we certainly don't shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.
	We do rank tweets in search results.
	We do this because Twitter is most useful when it's immediately relevant.
	These ranking models take many signals into consideration to best organize tweets for timely relevance.
	We must also address bad faith actors who intend to manipulate or detract from healthy conversation.
	This is their whole mantra now, the healthy conversation.
	The healthy conversation to me is boring.
	Um...
	So as a specific example, if a search result has 30,000 tweets, here's what we take into consideration when ranking it.
	Tweets from people you're interested in should be ranked highly.
	Tweets that are popular are likely to be interesting and should be higher ranked.
	Tweets from bad faith actors who intend to manipulate or divide the conversation should be ranked lower.
	These are their rules.
	So that's very subjective to say bad faith actors who intend to manipulate or divide the conversation.
	I mean, what the hell?
	That means you can't contradict someone.
	That's always going to be political.
	Now...
	They say this last bullet is the basis of our work around serving healthy public conversation.
	Here are some of the signals we use to determine bad faith actors.
	Specific account properties that indicate authenticity.
	So whether you have a confirmed email address, how recently your account was created, whether you uploaded a profile image, etc.
	What actions you take on Twitter, example, who you follow, who you retweet, etc.
	And how other accounts interact with you, who mutes you, who follows you, who retweets you, who blocks you.
	So they're doing it on very, very interesting signals they're using, but the bottom line is if you follow someone, you may not necessarily see their tweets in your timeline because they're pushing that all the way down.
	They say that's not shadow banning.
	I say it's very similar.
	It is shadow banning.
	I'm not following someone like you because I don't want to see your tweets.
	I click on follow for a reason.
	The reason is I want to see the tweets from the person I'm following.
	Some people follow a million people and that's useless, but I don't want them selectively giving me your tweets.
	A lot of your tweets are important to me.
	That's why I don't get, once in a while, I don't get one of your tweets that says the show is shipped.
	What I find strange in this case is we have an actual example of this backfiring.
	This type of newsfeed algoization.
	Which took it from a reverse chronological order, which I think is the best way to go.
	It's how this whole feed idea started going back to RSS. I'm sure you can find even earlier examples, but RSS I think is a mainstay that way.
	Reverse chronological order.
	And then they slowly were adding things, like if you were following someone and they liked something, that would show up in your news feed.
	But they're doing what Facebook proved pisses people off, by tinkering around with the reverse chronologic order.
	Now, I know why they're doing it, because that's part of the advertising model, but now they're letting it, they're confusing it with healthy conversation, whatever that is.
	And so you're going to get this type of action.
	And it backfires.
	It's not going to work.
	It's been proven.
	People don't like it.
	They should just stay simple.
	But I hadn't thought about the campaign contribution angle.
	That's interesting.
	Yeah, and that's the interesting part.
	It's an FEC violation, Federal Election Commission, and I think they should go after Twitter.
	Let's play these fake account clips, which is similar, and it also brings up another point I want to make.
	Okay.
	First one.
	The chair recognizes the gentleman from...
	Idaho, Mr.
	Labrador, for five minutes.
	Now, which hearing was this?
	This was the Facebook hearing.
	Facebook, Twitter.
	Yeah, it was specifically about shadow banning, I think, the whole sitting.
	Thank you, Mr.
	Chairman.
	Ms.
	Downs, you mentioned in your opening statement or sometime in the beginning that there was only limited activity on your side from some of the Russian trolls and some of these entities.
	Is that correct?
	That is correct.
	What did you mean by limited activity?
	Pursuant to our investigation around the 2016 election, we found two accounts that had a spend of less than $5,000 in advertising and 18 YouTube channels with just over 1,000 videos in English that we terminated as soon as we identified them.
	Those were all linked to the...
	Can you tell me who this is?
	Is she from for now?
	Who is she?
	Hi.
	Who is she?
	John?
	Yes.
	Who is she?
	She's the one that was the representative from YouTube.
	Okay, because he talks like that.
	Internet research agency.
	Okay, Mr.
	Pickles, would you consider it limited activity that happened on Twitter?
	We have 336 million users as a proportion of that.
	Yes, this was a small proportion, but the accounts we believe that were linked to the Internet Research Agency did run to several thousand.
	That was too many, and we've taken steps to make sure they can't...
	So there were millions of users, and there were several thousand of these accounts.
	Oh, my God.
	Please let us all remember that all of this bull crap resulted in $100,000 worth of ads that really did nothing.
	And now we're arguing about stupid Twitter.
	Look, Twitter's great for some, you know, to broadcast your message and everything else, you know.
	It's not the point I'm trying to make.
	I know, I know, I know.
	All right, I'm listening.
	And the thing is, by the way, the guy representing Twitter was a guy named Nick Pickles.
	Is he a lawyer?
	Is he a lawyer?
	I don't know.
	It's just who cares?
	You don't put a guy like that.
	I'll put my attorney Nick Pickles on the case.
	Everything will be fine.
	Nick Pickles knows.
	He's the man for the job.
	It's a great DJ name.
	Hey, good morning everybody!
	It's Nick Pickles with you up until the noon hour.
	Nick Pickles, investigator.
	Okay, let's go on with part two.
	She has a kicker.
	Facebook declined our request for an interview.
	The company apologized for what happened and called the Oklahoma Police Department case a mistake.
	Wait a minute.
	Listen to that again.
	Hold on a second.
	Facebook declined our request for an interview.
	The company apologized for what happened and called the Oklahoma Police Department case a mistake.
	Well, what did they apologize for?
	I don't know.
	Was that number two kicker, or is that number three, the results?
	I probably messed it up.
	I don't know.
	Let me see if this is number two, then.
	This comes as Facebook grapples with an even bigger battle of fake profiles, bogus advertisers, and foreign influence ahead of the 2018 midterm elections.
	Jolene Kent, NBC News.
	I don't understand either of those clips now.
	Okay, well, the point that I'm trying to get to here was that...
	We're talking to NBC News.
	And this happened on PBS, if you remember.
	I had a clip last show where PBS is what's...
	We tried to talk to somebody at Twitter and they wouldn't – nobody would show up.
	You try to talk to Google – no, it's Google.
	Facebook.
	Because it was about the EU problem.
	Nobody – no, they don't have no – Twitter has nobody.
	Facebook has nobody.
	Google has nobody.
	These companies have all decided not to have any public face for anything.
	They refuse to send a PR person.
	They won't answer any reporter's emails.
	Once in a while they do them.
	I'm not going to say completely.
	But if you want to get a hold of the head of PR at Google, you have to write an email to Press.
	There's no name.
	Just Press at Google.com.
	It's just the same thing with Twitter.
	These companies, these new companies have all decided not to take the approach that don't say anything, don't have a public relations person coming out to do damage control.
	And the result has been what you're seeing.
	These stocks are They're cratering when they don't have to.
	If I was a shareholder, and by the way, like I said, I lost my password, and they didn't help me one bit.
	Right.
	If you were a shareholder, you would have dumped your stock just in time, by the way.
	Yeah, it would have been a good call.
	These things don't happen.
	You don't have the world's biggest collapse in one day like they did at Facebook.
	If you have...
	have expertise. - Yeah, people managing.
	Yeah, people managing the problem. - If I have, I feel like, what am I defending the public relations operations for?
	Because I'm always complaining about them, but in this case, what's wrong with these companies?
	Facebook, Twitter, Google, and probably a few others, Microsoft still has public relations.
	Most companies that are smart have a public relations company to do damage control, but these companies don't.
	They pay no attention, and when it comes to customer service, it's the same thing.
	I have a clip here.
	Let's see if this is a Facebook sell-off, no big deal on NBC. Play this clip.
	The sell-off was staggering and unprecedented.
	Facebook losing $119 billion in market value today alone.
	The worst single day ever for a U.S. company after this profit warning from CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
	We're investing so much in security that it will significantly impact our profitability.
	Zuckerberg himself lost $15 billion in the sell-off, coming after two years of scandals and investigations.
	It seems as though you turned a blind eye to this, correct?
	Congressman, I disagree with that assessment.
	From Russian election meddling and disinformation to the 87 million users whose private information was compromised by Cambridge Analytica.
	Now Facebook users are tightening their privacy settings and the number of daily users is dropping.
	So you could argue that there's a lot of rage out there against Facebook, but where do people go to express their rage?
	They go to Facebook and Instagram.
	Facebook insists it's making changes to address privacy and security, and it still dominates social media worldwide.
	From London to Berlin, the Vegas Strip to Tokyo, also owning Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp.
	Despite the stock sell-off today, it's only back to where it was in May.
	Now this is an example of an out-of-control story.
	That resulted in this huge collapse of the stock.
	It's, again, because they have no front-facing people that can deal with this kind of situation.
	Do you know if they have investor relations?
	Can you get someone there?
	I've never been able to.
	Okay, you have tried.
	Let's try this last clip.
	Fake cop profile on Facebook and listen to this.
	Hold on.
	This is Jolene Kent.
	The world's largest social network is struggling in its battle against fake profiles.
	The problem has become so big that Facebook says it's disabled 1.3 billion fake profiles over the past year.
	Police officer Justin Turney was killed in the line of duty at just 22 years old.
	A year later, as the community mourned, a fake profile with Turney's photo appeared on Facebook.
	I couldn't believe that somebody would stoop that low.
	They had created a Facebook profile page stating that he was married, that he was from Iowa, and that he was currently working at the Kansas City, Kansas Police Department.
	Chief of Police J.R. Kidney says he contacted Facebook to remove the fake profile.
	Our response from Facebook has been zero.
	This is another example, and this is beyond the PR problem I'm bitching about.
	This is they have no customer service.
	When I can, like for example, we have one of my service providers is Sonic.net.
	Sonic.net has someone you can call.
	This is the guy, they string up actual physical wires.
	It's not a bunch of servers and software.
	You can call.
	You get somebody on the line within a minute.
	They talk to you.
	They're local.
	They know what they're doing.
	These Facebook guys, Twitter guys and Google guys are rolling in money.
	They won't put 10 cents into customer service.
	They won't put 10 cents into public relations.
	They won't put 10 cents into anything.
	These guys are just a-holes at the max.
	It's unbelievable.
	And the fact that the press is giving them crap, but it's more subtle than what I'm doing.
	Well, let's talk about this for a second.
	Having both worked in Silicon Valley at startups with venture capital funding as well, do you think this is a cultural thing?
	Or is it an arrogance thing?
	Or is it a fear thing?
	Or is it a disdain for...
	Do they consider themselves to be overlords of media and don't need to talk to press?
	Although that's not entirely true.
	The problem is bigger than that because they just have...
	You said they have no front-facing representation to their users.
	I'm sure they have plenty to their advertisers.
	I think disdain would come to play.
	I mean, the fact that there's no customer service or this cop couldn't get anybody to take this dead guy's phony profile off of Facebook.
	And when I have another clip, which I don't have with me, I'll bring it on to the next show.
	Let me just ask another question.
	What would it cost them, do you think, to have front-facing, customer-facing people that you could talk to?
	A lot less than the fine they're paying to the EU, which probably would have been, you know...
	Could it also be a culpability thing?
	Like, hey, we don't say anything, so we can't be blamed for anything?
	I'm really trying to get to the bottom of your...
	I think there's an element of that, but it began with Google when they pulled their...
	I don't know who you talked to over there.
	I said press at google.com.
	No, I mean, I got banned from Google ad programs in 2010, 2009, and never got an answer and can never get on.
	Yeah.
	Just done, over and out.
	There's no customer service.
	There's no public...
	No public relations.
	They spend nothing on that.
	They just keep putting money in the bank.
	Okay, but we still don't know why this is.
	I agree.
	The Silicon Valley media companies, for sure.
	I mean, is it the same with SpaceX, for example?
	Or Tesla?
	Do they have PR people?
	It seems like they do.
	I think there's elements of it at Tesla.
	I've never been able to get a hold of a PR person at Tesla, even though I was doing all that work on electric cars.
	And are you sure you tell them that you're verified on Twitter so they know that you're a real journalist?
	I have a good bio that I hook onto those things.
	I also found that somebody I thought would be a good contact at Waymo.
	Waymo is a good example.
	At Google, they won't let anyone talk to them.
	The Google company.
	Well, in your experience as a lifelong businessman entrepreneur, legitimate.
	What do you think the ultimate result will be from this practice?
	It's not going to be good.
	It's not going to be pretty.
	Here's the problem.
	When everything hits the fan, they're not going to have anybody to say, hey, wait a minute, let's look at it from another perspective.
	These guys really aren't bad guys or anything like that.
	It's going to be, yeah, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	A-hole.
	Yeah, kind of like that.
	Yeah.
	It's just not a good, not going to have any friends because they've done nothing to befriend anybody.
	It's, or try to at least give your, get your message out there.
	They probably have a, I mean, Zuckerberg and that's, Zuckerberg for one thing is going to get kicked out of his own company if he keeps this up.
	Oh, that's going to be bad.
	And that would ruin the place because he's like something of a, of a genius.
	Yes.
	I just find it very interesting that these guys are...
	I think arrogance has got a lot to do with it.
	Look at all the money we've made.
	I just started up becoming...
	I'm worth billions.
	I know what I'm doing.
	I know what I'm doing.
	People should love me because I'm rich.
	Yeah.
	It's just baffling to me because I've never seen it before.
	I mean, this is a fairly new phenomenon.
	If you go back 10 years and you look at all these new startups, they were getting ripped off by the PR companies, in my opinion.
	But they had PR and they were at least trying.
	And if a crisis hit, they'd bring in specialists and they'd Clear it up.
	But these guys don't even bother with that.
	It's just like, yeah, too bad.
	You know, so the stock went down.
	Screw the shareholders.
	The shareholders should revolt against this.
	These are public companies.
	They're not private companies.
	Well...
	And then they sent Nick Pickles.
	Come on.
	It's almost like...
	That's disdainful.
	Let's say, who's got the silliest name?
	Ah!
	Send Nick.
	He's got a great name.
	Well, you've been bitching about this lack of customer service since I've known you.
	So this has not gone unnoticed, but I tend to agree that when you see this type of dramatic stock price drop, there was just clearly no one to soften the fall, In Facebook's example, the way the CFO just came out and said, well, you know, because we give people more privacy options, so that's going to fuck us.
	It's like, hey, what are you going to do?
	We're still making billions.
	Who gives a shit?
	Yeah, pretty much.
	I mean, that's the only way you can interpret this.
	Even Microsoft has excellent customer service.
	You can call Microsoft up and they'll talk to you.
	They first have a robot to talk to you.
	If you can find the right number.
	How many times?
	Raise your hand without talking if you've searched for a Microsoft help desk number and got some guy from India who wants to take control of your PC. Well, there's that issue.
	That's a problem.
	Very problem.
	Big problem.
	But at least there's somebody.
	These guys have nobody.
	There is zero customer service for Google.
	Zero.
	And like you said, you got your AdSense thing pulled and that you could never find anyone to do.
	No one would talk to you.
	Because there is nobody.
	I mean, it's either amateur hour, which I don't believe, because they had all these, you know, people that know what they're doing come and go.
	Or it's just this arrogance.
	It's like, eh, screw you.
	So what?
	The stock went down.
	It's fine.
	Ugh.
	You've lost a little value, so what?
	All right.
	I think we get it.
	By the way, this complaint of mine is not going away.
	No, it's okay, but it can go away for now.
	We can go.
	I would like to play a Twitter sports-related segment, which is new for me, as you know.
	I am not the sports guy on the show.
	I saw a great article the other day someone wrote about our show, something on Medium, I think.
	And it was very flattering, but there was a glaring mistake in there that said that they make very accurate sports predictions for two guys who don't care about sports.
	Wow.
	I'm like, no.
	John is very much into sports.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, you know a lot about it and a lot about sports.
	So for me to bring up a sports segment is novel.
	This is from Fox Sports 1.
	Fox Sports 1.
	It's a great show.
	Watch it all the time.
	I guess they're all former NFL players who work at Fox Sports 1.
	But this was an interesting rant about the problems with Twitter when it comes to professional ballplayers.
	I'm Jason Whitlock.
	Colin Cowherd is off today.
	Coming up, I'll tell you why Jerry Jones is exactly what the NFL needs right now.
	And for some reason, this is not the clip I made of it.
	But we begin today with Cowboy star turned Monday Night Football broadcaster Jason Witten.
	The future Hall of Fame tight end penned a column for ESPN.com outlining the dangers of Twitter inside an NFL locker room.
	Witten wrote...
	I've seen the negative impact social media can have, particularly on younger players who grew up with Twitter and Instagram as an integral part of life.
	A player checking Twitter at halftime?
	I've seen it.
	A player tweeting out a grievance with an organization about playing time or how he's being utilized?
	I see it far too often.
	But the most concerning, watching a really talented player corrupt his mind and confidence by reading all the critiques from anonymous football experts around the world.
	Negative social media can ruin a player.
	Reading your mentions, it's poison.
	Thank you, Jason Witten.
	Just a couple of short months after retiring as a player, Witten is already doing more thoughtful, insightful, and impactful journalism than many of my peers.
	I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
	Journalists are addicted to Twitter and afraid to say or write anything that might cost them Twitter followers.
	I'm really sorry about the quality.
	I know I did a better version of this.
	Sounds fine.
	Okay, yes.
	Anyway, this is where I wanted to start the clip.
	Is it this?
	Where journalists are...
	We talked about this.
	They're all trolling on Twitter and they're afraid to say anything or report anything that might piss off their followers.
	This is something I hadn't taken into consideration.
	That the journos themselves don't want to lose their important followers and engagement, so they're very cautious as to what they write, unless they're doing it for effect.
	But the truth is, Twitter is a bigger threat to football than CTE. Ah, what is CTE? That's that head injury that you get.
	Twitter's worse than head injuries.
	Twitter has more influence over many professional athletes than coaches, executives, and ownership.
	The negative impact of Twitter is inflicted most effectively on black athletes.
	There's a Wikipedia entry for black Twitter.
	There's no such thing as white Twitter, or Asian Twitter, or Latino Twitter, or brown Twitter.
	There's only black Twitter.
	When black people create something good, it's quickly appropriated.
	Little Richard recorded Tutti Frutti in 1955.
	One year later, Elvis sang it on his first album for RCA. You see what I'm getting at?
	Black Twitter has been around for nearly a decade.
	No other group is mimicking it.
	Why?
	Because it's poison.
	Twitter baits people into thinking and believing the most ridiculous things.
	Let me give you an example.
	Twitter has black people convinced that kneeling during the national anthem is the cure for police brutality and not a gesture that undermines the success of an industry and a league that employs 70% African American players.
	Black athletes need to get off Twitter.
	Now let's be clear, Jason Witten's column today had nothing to do with black Twitter.
	He was talking about Twitter in general.
	He can see a harmful impact on everyone.
	I can see a harmful impact on us, black people.
	It dumbs down complex conversations and distorts reality.
	Twitter will have you convinced the NFL is the enemy of the black man because the league wants its players to respect the national anthem.
	Witten said it best.
	The Twitter mob is not a reflection of reality.
	All right, joining me now.
	There you go.
	I like this rant.
	It was very good.
	If he wanted to make it stronger, when he talked about Tutti Frutti being expropriated by Elvis, he should have mentioned Pat Boone also took this on.
	Or he could have just said this.
	That's a sure enough money shot!
	Woo, Jesus!
	Woo, Lord!
	Look at that!
	That's a money shot!
	Ken Ann Conway is a money shot!
	That would have been just a little bit better if you'd added that.
	But yeah, it's dangerous.
	You don't think about the implications, but you got guys tweeting at halftime and it's messing with their psyche, what people are saying.
	Well, now that I brought this out...
	I didn't know these football players were...
	This would be great.
	You're a gambler?
	Ooh, yeah.
	You set up about 100 accounts that are, you know, you get them built up a little bit and make sure everybody follows each other.
	Just call the Internet Research Agency.
	They got it all set together.
	Yeah, I just called them.
	I just happened to slam some guy at halftime, some receiver on one of the big teams during a big game.
	Inbound slam!
	Exactly.
	And the next thing you know, he's dropping balls and they lose the game and you're coming home a winner.
	It's possible.
	It sounds like it.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yes.
	Well, that was a good segment.
	That was your best sports segment ever.
	It's probably the only one I've ever done.
	Well, that's what I said.
	Yeah.
	Thanks.
	So here is Jake Tapper brought on to Colbert to slam the president and do all this kind of thing.
	Is Jake promoting a book?
	What's Jake doing on Colbert?
	He was just there to slam Trump.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	So what's the upshot?
	How long is she banned?
	It was just for that one event.
	But the good news is that the White House press corps, including people like Brett Baer at Fox News and others...
	I saw him.
	He said, we stand with you guys.
	And Fox News put out a statement, I guess, you know, speaking for the part of the news division that doesn't spend their entire time trying to, you know, attack the rest of us.
	But the part of the news division that actually is trying to do journalism...
	And said, we stand for, you know, press access.
	We stand with Caitlin Collins and other people.
	Hold on.
	Press access.
	This is new.
	This is new.
	It went from press.
	First is freedom of the press, which means you can print whatever you want.
	That got bastardized into press freedom, which means, hey, man, freedom of the press, but different.
	And now we have press access.
	Yeah.
	So they have the rights.
	They have rights.
	And said, we stand for press access.
	We stand with Caitlin Collins.
	And other people did that, too.
	Who's Caitlin Collins now?
	She was the one who was kicked out of the White House.
	Oh, okay.
	The press conference was over, but she made a big fuss and started yelling and screaming, so they banged her.
	Okay, well, stop, stop.
	If they stood with her, then they'd be outside standing with her, not inside asking questions, you It was good to see.
	But that's it.
	I mean, there's no upshot.
	But then like 45 minutes later, Lou Dobbs said, CNN, who the hell do you think you are?
	It's about time you got called on the carpet or whatever like that.
	Yeah.
	Well, because that's the other half of Fox News that says that sort of thing and is just, you know, ride or die.
	To go after Lou?
	Would I go after him?
	Did you go after him?
	What do you mean after?
	Did I attack him?
	Did you attack him on Twitter?
	Did I attack him on Twitter?
	No.
	You know what I did do, though, is I quoted something that he had said when a conservative reporter asked tough questions of President Obama in, like, 2012.
	And Lou Dobbs, it might surprise you to find out, had a very different take on the situation.
	And thought that Obama was being rude by not answering the questions.
	Wow.
	Yeah, you know, well, hold on.
	So I took the...
	It actually went on at the end there.
	I got cut short.
	So I have the real...
	The actual clip of him going, wow, wow, as though he's really shocked by this.
	I got the ISO for maybe the end of the show.
	Wow.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	And so rhythmic.
	It's perfectly in the beat.
	Well, yeah, this...
	It's interesting how the Gitmo Nation proper media loves to make the story about themselves continuously.
	They believe there's a story here.
	They think it's Orwellian.
	They think it's, you know...
	Well, here's NPR once again.
	This is from their news show this week.
	NPR Jack Beatty.
	Here's the hater again.
	He's going to...
	And it might be in the Trump rotation.
	Orwell?
	Do we have Orwellian 1984?
	Is that in the rotation?
	No, but I can put it in.
	Yeah, we may have to.
	Earlier in the week, during remarks to the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, President Trump lambasted the media, telling the audience, don't believe the, quote, crap you see from these people, the fake news, end quote.
	We have to breathe heavily when we speak these words because it truly is bad for democracy and press freedom and press access.
	From these people, the fake news.
	Just remember, what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening.
	What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening.
	Jack Beatty, your thoughts about that?
	Well, of course, everybody has gone to Orwell's 1984 to dig up quotations like this one.
	Quote, The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.
	It was their final, most essential command.
	Wow!
	Nice way to turn around Orwell, huh?
	In 1984, last time I read the book, it was the Ministry of Truth who would bring you the correct answers, and that was what came up on the so-called telescreens.
	So this is the reverse of what they're saying, whereas Trump is in essence saying what you hear from the Ministry of Truth and you see on the telescreens is not happening.
	But they're turning it around.
	I think we all have to look at what he said there.
	Don't believe what you're seeing.
	Don't believe reality.
	Believe me.
	There's a phrase of Lionel Trilling's, the moral obligation to be intelligent.
	We have a moral obligation, a civic obligation to be intelligent, to try to read the world as it is.
	Certainly not, as a self-interested leader tells us.
	And this is a test of citizenship for people.
	Do they really want themselves to be described as people who don't believe the evidence of their senses and believe a supreme leader?
	And does that idea of citizenship comport with any model of democratic life that we know of?
	It's a scandal that the president could say something like that.
	It's an even bigger scandal that so many people believe him.
	No.
	I have some thoughts on this.
	I think your analysis is perfect, by the way.
	He's telling you that the telescreen's full of crap.
	This was brought up by Anderson Cooper and two Stooges, and I wish I had the clip of it, where they played this clip and they went berserk over this, calling it 1984, and they said, don't believe what you see, who's he kidding, and all that sort of thing.
	And And this guy says it's a moral obligation to be intelligent.
	And when I heard Trump, I knew what he meant.
	I knew what he meant.
	He meant that these guys are faking stories and they're putting them on the air and they're saying stuff that's bullcrap.
	Don't believe it.
	I knew what he meant.
	I'm not a big Trump fan.
	I knew what he meant.
	I knew exactly what he meant.
	And everybody else knew what he meant.
	But these guys don't seem to know what he meant.
	they don't seem to know what he meant he says crazy stuff every once in a while because because you know what he's talking about because you're actually in tune a little bit with what might be going on you're not in dimension b and you're not you're not selectively taking stuff and interpreting it wrong but this was a misinterpretation done by all the guys on the left and it was one after the I'm stunned that you found another one of these clips saying pretty much the same thing.
	And the guy says, oh, I'm stunned that all these people went along with his craziness.
	They knew what he meant.
	Apparently, you're too stupid to know what he meant.
	Maybe not.
	I knew what he meant.
	I like the term ignorant.
	Yeah, I know.
	In this case, stupid, I think, is better.
	Well, he went on with his ignorance.
	Well, I expect that it'll whip up some feeling.
	But, you know, the context here is a historic development.
	This week, we learned in a Quinnipiac poll that a slight majority of Americans are convinced that Putin has something on President Trump.
	Where did they get that idea?
	From 1984, of course.
	Whatever has been true.
	They got it from the media who's been promoting this idea.
	That's why I said this is an NPR news show.
	Putin has something on President Trump.
	That never has been true of any president.
	That belief is just inconceivable.
	To someone like me, raised in the Eisenhower years, it sounds like unbelievable science fiction.
	And this comes when there's talk that sometime in September...
	Mueller is going to send a report to Congress documenting an obvious pattern of obstruction of justice.
	And at a time when the collusion issue is heating up with new revelations from Michael Cohen that he knows of a meeting.
	Any collusion?
	That President Trump knew in advance of the June 2016 meeting where the Russians were coming to share dirt on Hillary.
	And of course, already we know that they were something like, according to one count...
	Hey John, you're banging the drums.
	Sorry.
	82 known contacts between the Trump team and Russia-linked operatives.
	None of these reported to authorities.
	So lots of suggestion of collusion and obstruction as plain as the president's tweets.
	And all of this perhaps coming to a head in the fall.
	I find it hurts my brain, and of course it hurts because we've had so many different versions of the collusion.
	So now the latest is, Trump knew about the meeting where they were going to possibly get information, dirt as this guy said, on Hillary Clinton.
	And that would be somehow bad.
	Versus the Clintons who actually paid a foreign spy to go to Russia, knowing that he has Russian contacts, to get information from Russia to get the dirt on Donald Trump, which then eventually turned into a wiretap FISA warrant and all kinds of other stuff.
	Am I missing a piece?
	No, you're not missing anything.
	These guys are...
	They're deluded.
	I don't know what their problem is at this point.
	This has gone on too long.
	But this comes back to the, you know, don't be stupid.
	You have a moral obligation to be smart.
	Yeah, you have a moral obligation to be intelligent.
	Right.
	Intelligent, yes.
	It's confusing to me.
	I mean, doesn't anyone else see this?
	Well, the fact that you'd come up with something like that always reminds me of my mom.
	My mother...
	I always thought she had a bad attitude.
	She was friendly and she was jovial with people.
	But she was a negative person.
	And all she did was read books about positive thinking.
	And all she said was, oh, you got to think positive.
	You got to think positive.
	This is the same thing.
	It's like you have a weakness and Because you're not intellectual.
	You're stupid.
	And so you start talking about, oh, you know, you got to think more.
	You got to think more.
	You got to think smart.
	You got to be smart.
	You got to be intelligent.
	I think it's the same phenomenon.
	It's like you're an idiot.
	You somehow sense it deeply since you're disturbed.
	Your brain doesn't work right.
	And you get, you know, this kind of dystopian look at everything.
	And so this is what you say.
	You say something like that.
	I would never say a moral obligation to be intelligent.
	I'm just guessing because I noticed that people that I noticed this with copy editors.
	Copy editors are people who want to learn, want to write.
	They all want to be writers.
	Why else would you get into it?
	And they figure by going into getting into the grammar and all the little nitpicking stuff about writing and being critical of everybody else's work will somehow transform you into an actual writer.
	It's very rare.
	Most copy editors are copy editors forever.
	And it's just like you're doing it the wrong way.
	And it's like this kind of thing.
	That's why I think stupid is not a bad word.
	Well, I like that people are bringing up 1984.
	I like that they're showing this again.
	And Animal Farm is being mentioned.
	And hopefully the kids will go and not watch the movie because the CIA edited those.
	Yeah.
	To make the endings different.
	But read the books.
	I'm sure they're available online for free to read 1984 by George Orwell while you're at it.
	It's a good book.
	Yeah, while you're at it, get Adolphus Huxley.
	Adolphus Huxley.
	Is it Adolphus?
	Adolphus Huxley?
	Brave New World.
	It's a good book.
	Get that one.
	Get Animal Farm.
	And read it.
	It's Aldous, I think.
	Now I can't pronounce his name.
	I don't remember now.
	It's Brave New World.
	Because this idea that the press is under attack and, you know, that fake news and just all these things and the undoubted regulations that are going to come from this.
	This is why these hearings are taking place with Twitter.
	It's all about control, because they control television.
	They, I'll just say they, because it's a big circle jerk.
	It's the media companies.
	They're owned by corporate entities.
	They donate to politicians.
	They help with regulations.
	It goes round and round, and now they're reining in the social media networks.
	That's what this is all about.
	It's happening all over the world.
	This is the UK. We have to be slightly careful between a bit of spin and a bit of good image management and downright unmitigated lies, which is what we see on social media time and time again in the political sphere.
	Defamatory lies about politicians, defamatory adverts about me that purport to say, I say, you should put money into get-rich schemes that then people lose money on the back of.
	That's not a little bit of spin.
	Politics has always been about a little bit of spin, and I'm sure it's been about lies in the past too.
	But whether it happened in the past or it happens now...
	What we need to do is look at the medium it's happening with and say, how do we regulate it?
	How do we stop it?
	How do we make it a better and a fairer landscape for people?
	And this report is attempting to do that, and for that I applaud it.
	This is about the crisis in our democracy report by the members of parliament in the UK, and they want a digital Atlantic charter.
	Now, what was the Atlantic charter originally?
	This is Eisenhower days, isn't it?
	I have no idea.
	I'll look it up while you talk.
	Yeah, okay.
	So we're at this place now where we're putting in, and we want to have all kinds of regulation about what, really regulating speech.
	Because whatever you say, if it's not my opinion, it's fake news.
	And it goes both ways.
	And, okay, did you find it?
	Yeah, it was done by Roosevelt.
	It was a charter that would outline what would happen after World War II regarding how we worked to get all the allies.
	So, precursor, like a NATO. It wasn't a NATO because it didn't involve violence.
	Well, neither does this, although, who knows.
	Just, we've gone collectively insane.
	Eventually it became the United Nations.
	Yeah, okay.
	So there you go.
	That makes sense.
	We need a United Nations of fake news or real news.
	God knows.
	It's just as well.
	You brought up Tucker.
	I want to play two Tucker clips.
	One which I thought was really phenomenal.
	Both legal, constitutional topics, which I like.
	And one just so off base and so stupid.
	Could not believe that he let that slide.
	And I don't know.
	I forget if it was Thursday or Friday.
	Let's see if he ever corrects it.
	This first one was something that any constitutional lawyer would love talking about, the birthright citizenship.
	So the generally accepted idea, which is based on the 14th Amendment, is if you're born in the United States, then you are, by birthright, an American citizen.
	And I think that's generally accepted.
	But, as it turns out, there is an alternative interpretation to the amendment.
	Well, you have to read the whole 14th Amendment.
	It says there's a clause in the middle that people ignore or they misinterpret, subject to the jurisdiction thereof, thereof meaning of the United States.
	What they're saying is if you're born on U.S. soil subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, meaning you're the child of citizens or the child of legal immigrants, then you are entitled to citizenship.
	If you're here illegally, if you owe allegiance to a foreign nation, if you're the citizen of a foreign country, that clause does not apply to you.
	If you read the debate about the ratification of the 14th Amendment, all the senators who are discussing what this is meant to do and what it means are very clear on this point.
	I tried to point that out.
	I expected the left would blow up and get angry, which they did.
	What I didn't expect, at least not to this extent, and what was very disappointing was how angry the so-called conservative intellectuals got with me.
	I never considered that.
	That says subject to.
	And I guess interpreting the word subject as you are a subject, a subject of.
	Are you subject to or subject of?
	Well, I don't think it had to do.
	It's subject to, I think, referred to...
	Laws?
	Yeah.
	To the local laws of the way.
	I think this has been discussed before, and I think we've discussed it on the show.
	I don't remember.
	It's very sketchy about the 14th Amendment.
	It was done to make sure that all those slaves largely were given citizenship.
	It wasn't for people to come running into the country, have a baby, and say, look, American.
	Right.
	But that's the result.
	Right.
	Yeah, but they could put the kibosh on that.
	They should just put the kibosh on that.
	I don't see it being a big deal, but everyone's all...
	And if he's right, and the left likes the way it is, and the conservatives are like, why are the conservatives?
	That's baffling to me.
	I don't know what he's talking about, but okay.
	He's not going to do anything about it because you don't want to do anything about it.
	When he says conservatives, he only means politicians.
	They'll say whatever they need to say.
	You can't trust politicians.
	You can't.
	Yeah, I noticed.
	Alright, so here's this bogus claim, which when Tina and I were watching this and we saw this, we were like, holy crap, if this is true, this is an outrage.
	And I never heard it and I went to go look at what was true about it.
	You talk about some fake news.
	This is it.
	Well, I don't understand exactly how that works, and I'm not advocating people going bankrupt.
	I mean, there are moral issues around that.
	But I do wonder why student loan debt is exempted from the normal bankruptcy protections.
	How did that happen?
	How did they get a pass on that?
	Well, you could actually extinguish it in bankruptcy up until 1995, when Congress tightened it up, making it all but impossible.
	However, they did exclude, and you have to love this, Their own offspring.
	So if you are the child of a member of Congress, you can't extinguish your student loans by going to bankruptcy court.
	You've got to love that.
	For real?
	Yes.
	That's unbelievable.
	So was this a lobbying operation where student loan lenders decided, well, why would we want to face the risk of not getting our money back?
	Well, think about who the student loan lender is.
	It's the federal government.
	The federal government has all but run most of all other lending out of the market.
	You just can't compete with the federal government.
	So this woman, who I think is a professor at some college, is completely wrong about this.
	And I listen to them like, are you kidding me?
	I mean, this is the biggest scandal is that they can do insider trading, which no one else seems to care about.
	But this is completely untrue.
	The only thing that she could be referring to is the Federal Student Loan Repayment Program.
	Which, although not what she said, does benefit offspring of those in Congress.
	So you're not denying the fact that you can't bankruptcy yourself out of this debt?
	I'm not denying that.
	That's the scam of scams, as far as I'm concerned.
	Yeah, well, I just wanted to mention that it's not true that the federal employees' kids can get out of it.
	I thought she meant legislature's kids.
	It doesn't matter.
	It's a federal student loan repayment program.
	That's what she's referring to.
	It does not allow you to get out of your loan if you go into bankruptcy.
	There's no loan forgiveness program, but agencies can make payments to the loan holder Up to a maximum of $10,000 for an employee in a calendar year, total of not more than $60,000 for any one employee.
	And I guess that somehow can go to your, you know, if you hold a loan for your kid.
	So as an employment incentive, which is a nice one, by the way, just chopping 10 grand off of it or up to 60 grand is very nice, but it's not like you get out of it if you go into bankruptcy.
	So I just need to call that out.
	It's total bullcrap.
	But the fact remains that at this point we have kids graduating college, universities with a worthless piece of paper that does nothing, you've learned nothing, and they're minimum 50 grand in debt.
	Minimum.
	If they're lucky.
	Yeah.
	And you can't get out of it, which is kind of the definition of slavery.
	It's human trafficking.
	I agree.
	All right.
	This is one more story that just was down in your neck of the woods.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	I want to play this clip because this is one of these clips that we have.
	It's just I don't know why I want to play this clip because it's the same complaint we have with every one of these clips, which is they never bring up what drugs the guy was on.
	But this is the weird Texas shooting rampage.
	The killing spree at a nursing home.
	Texas police investigating a deadly shooting rampage.
	At least five people killed in two different locations.
	The new details from police just coming in.
	ABC's Adrian Banker picks up the story.
	Tonight, nursing home nightmare.
	Five people killed in two shootings in a suburb of Corpus Christi, Texas.
	We just heard, like, pop, pop, pop, and we could see a flash, right?
	City officials say 60-year-old Richard Starry murdered his 85-year-old father and his stepmother before taking his own life at a nursing home Friday evening.
	At the sound of gunfire, some try to get away with the elderly.
	And I saw all these people running and they're saying run.
	So my dad, we just grabbed him in the wheelchair and started taking off.
	Just down the road, more heartbreak.
	A phone call from a relative leads officers to find two more bodies inside the home of Starry's father.
	A 40-year-old believed to be his stepmother's son and a 13-year-old.
	Police believe Starry was the The only gunman committing the first shooting at the home before going to the nursing home where he killed his parents, then turned the gun on himself.
	Nursing home nightmare.
	That makes for a great headline.
	There's never even a remote idea of discussing what drugs this guy was on.
	We don't care.
	This is not a normal thing anybody does.
	No, we don't care.
	We just want to know how many people died.
	We want to have some flashing lights.
	Some sirens.
	That's how you put a package together.
	Well done.
	Perfect.
	I'm going to show myself a little by donating to No Agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh, yeah, that'd be fun.
	Yeah, on No Agenda in the morning.
	So I have the question, what's brown and sounds like a bell?
	and What is brown and sounds like a bell?
	I'm going to have to give up.
	Dung.
	Okay.
	Gee, somehow I could have known that one.
	And how does that relate to our next donor?
	Well, it doesn't, in the least.
	But I just, for some reason, I had this bell, and when I hit it with the soft top on the thing, it sounded like dung.
	The joke came to me, right?
	Because it sounds like dung.
	Yeah, it was a corker.
	Yeah.
	Okay, I won't do that again.
	So DH Slammers, right, at the top of the list, $225.41.
	And it brings Lady Samoa to Damehood.
	Ooh!
	She's going to be Dame of the Purple Goats.
	Ooh, nice!
	Oh, this is fantastic.
	He's handing them out left and right.
	Yeah, he's gone berserk.
	So what does he say?
	Oh, he also wants to remind everybody the Lake Tahoe meetup is tonight?
	Yes.
	29th.
	And this comes from Love, Sir D.H. Slammer, Dame Bang Bang, Sir Andrew, and Master Emmett.
	The whole family is now royalty.
	Yeah, they're all in Tahoe.
	Fantastic.
	Fantastic.
	Thank you very much, Sir D.H. Slammer.
	Sir Zachary in Cordova, Tennessee, one, two, three, four, five.
	He needs a de-douching.
	You've been de-douched.
	Sir Tristan Banning, $100.
	Parts Unknown.
	Sandra Langston in Austin, Texas.
	Oh.
	$99.999999.
	Here's another thing that needs a little announcement.
	Oh, yes.
	Okay.
	Grand Duke of the Pacific Northwest coming up.
	Yes.
	We...
	I'm really not doing well today.
	Ladies and gentlemen, I present the Grand Duke of the Pacific Northwest, Sir Dwayne Melanson.
	All right, there it is, the jingle he deserves.
	He says, Dwayne Melanson from Tiger to Oregon says, 8008, the boob.
	I had a boob, a good boob egg in this last newsletter.
	Nobody picked it up.
	He says, I prefer 6006s, but these cost more.
	Matthew Simpson.
	Wow, that's very deep on multiple levels.
	Thank you, Sir Dwight.
	Yeah, I get it, too.
	Matthew Simpson, who's actually Baron Hey Von Undo Idiot.
	Hey Von Undo Idiot in honor of the First Amendment and boobs.
	Boobs.
	Colin Villanueva, 7777.
	Anonymous in Nebraska.
	I have a note, I think, somewhere.
	The note got moved.
	It's actually a good note, so I'm going to find it.
	There it is.
	And if I can find my glasses, which I can't seem to do.
	I was going to read it.
	Huh.
	Oh, here they are.
	You could have been...
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Please only announce the location.
	Not in my name.
	He's in Nebraska.
	This is a good note.
	Before finding your show a few years ago, I listened to the news on the NPR, which is appropriate for this show.
	During my lengthy commute, I fumed over their bias but became a sustainer for a year because I was a...
	I was consuming their product.
	I wish everyone would think like this.
	However, since finding your show, I've redirected my NPR money to the best podcast in the universe.
	This is my second NPR installment.
	Sorry to hear donations are down because the quality of the shows has been dynamite.
	Keep it up.
	Thank you.
	And that's a fantastic idea.
	Just like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says, we've got to reprioritize.
	That's what I think.
	Christopher Dolan in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
	That's 55-55.
	I haven't heard from him in a long time.
	I think that's Sir Christopher Dolan, actually.
	Oh.
	Well, that's what happens if you don't.
	If you don't donate regularly, we forget about you.
	Michael Leonard.
	And Plainfield, Illinois.
	Double nickels on the dime.
	John Wyatt in Castle Rock College.
	Oh, wait.
	He has first-time donor dedouching.
	Sorry.
	You've been dedouched.
	We love our first-time donors.
	John Wyatt?
	Michael Leonard.
	First-time donor.
	Please dedouche, he says.
	And then John Wyatt, also dedouche.
	You've been dedouched.
	That's good.
	Heather Fucinari in Fullerton, California, Double Nickels on the Dime.
	She's a ham, KK6MME73s.
	88, kilo kilo six, Mike Mike Echo.
	Bradley Shellnut in Walnut, Mountain View, California, 5510.
	Thank you for the great shows.
	Joe Wagner, Double Nickels on the Dime.
	Michael Robinson, 5433.
	Eric Hochul in Mulrose, Deutschland.
	He's using an O. Yeah, he's giving up on the umlauts.
	We appreciate it.
	Robert V. Stotz in San Diego, 50-02.
	And the following people are $50 donors.
	There's a short list today.
	Jeffrey Zellin, I want to thank all these folks for helping us out on Showtime.
	Yes, thank you very much.
	And 1056 will be once again chock full of deconstruction, analysis, amazing life-saving tips you can use anywhere.
	So be sure to remember us at dvorak.org.
	And a big thank you to everybody who came in under $50.
	People giving up all kinds of things that they're subscribing to and just don't see the value anymore.
	And that's exactly how this works.
	You listen to the show.
	If you got value from it, look, if you got no value, if you get no value, don't give us anything.
	Maybe you shouldn't listen anymore.
	But if you do, consider keeping it going.
	You know, Tina and I were talking about just last night, we're walking down 2nd Street, and there was this tapas bar that was some guy's retirement project, which closed.
	And like, yeah, I remember we went in there once, and we liked it a lot.
	Yeah, I remember that.
	Well, see what we did now?
	We didn't stay on it.
	If you don't support these things, they do go away eventually.
	So again, another show on Thursday.
	Remember us at...
	And by request...
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got karma.
	You've got karma.
	Sir Carl with a K says happy birthday with his smoking hot wife, Jen, also celebrating tomorrow, July 30th.
	Sam Garcia turns 22 on August 1st.
	Happy birthday.
	And Sir Andrew at sea celebrates his birthday tomorrow.
	Happy birthday from all your friends and the staff and management here at the best podcast in the universe.
	Okay, then we have...
	Ah, we do have one daming, actually.
	Not a knighting, but a daming.
	So grab your blade.
	Get the pink one.
	Yeah, okay, good.
	Well...
	Lady Simona!
	That's right, we need Lady Simona up here on stage.
	There she is, Lady Simona.
	Wow, Sir D.H. Slammer has really done a number for everybody there in the family.
	And for you as well, I'm very proud to welcome you now to the round table of the Knights and the Dames of the No Agenda round table.
	And, I pronounce the KD, Dame of Purple Goats.
	And for you, we've got hookers and blow, rent boys and chardonnay, early times and BF4, Dr.
	Pepper and a quick handy if you want that, bourbon and bong rips, trophies and tires, smoked loose muffins with butter and honey, Polish potato, vodka, sparkling cider and escorts, bong hits and bourbon, gashas and sake, rubenes, women and rosé, ginger ale and gerbils, and mutton and mead.
	And I'm sure we have a ring in your size.
	Go over to NoAgendaNation.com slash rings.
	Eric LeShiel will take care of you and get that out to you as soon as possible.
	And thank you again for supporting the work, supporting the show.
	The No Agenda podcast.
	Dvorak.org slash NA. NoAgendaShow.com as well.
	If you want to find it there.
	Let's get a little update on the kids.
	We have, I guess, one more day to reunite all the kids at the border.
	Yeah.
	So tonight is the deadline for kids ages 5 and older, and there's been a lot of discussion about the actual numbers and what the government is calling.
	Hey, does she care about the homeless and the people crapping in the streets in San Francisco or anything going on in this country?
	You're not having a terrible, terrible dream.
	Also, you're not dead and you haven't gone to hell.
	This is your life now.
	This is our election now.
	This is us.
	This is our country.
	Yeah, I think she does.
	That was what she had to say about the poop in San Francisco.
	Okay.
	So tonight is the deadline for kids ages five and older.
	And there's been a lot of discussion about the actual numbers and what the government is claiming in terms of their success rate at reuniting these kids with their parents.
	When we hit midnight tonight, when we hit the deadline, how many kids do you think that were taken away by this government at the border will not be reunited with their parents?
	I think we're looking at between 700 and 900 kids who will not be reunified.
	The government's going to claim they made the deadline, but that's only because they took out those 700 to 900 kids and said we can't reunify them by the deadline.
	So we're going to just define who's eligible to be reunified by the deadline, and then we're going to declare that we met the deadline.
	But people should understand that there are hundreds and hundreds of kids who will still be sitting alone tomorrow without their parents.
	In cages, crying.
	Sitting alone?
	Eating tortillas with peanut butter.
	I mean, it's bad enough that they have to make stuff up.
	They're sitting alone?
	Yeah.
	Sitting alone.
	So I guess there's some number fudging going on.
	Yeah.
	Well, what are you going to do?
	I don't know.
	It's kind of off the table.
	The kids in cages doesn't seem to be that important anymore.
	No, they're going to keep saying it.
	It gets a lot of people worked up.
	Yeah, but I guess Trump is now threatening a shutdown.
	Oh, I didn't know this.
	Yeah, if he doesn't get his immigration package introduced, which it's not anything with a wall.
	As long as there's something with a wall.
	Otherwise, he's kind of hinting at shutting down the government.
	Please say that's not true.
	Let's not do that again.
	It's probably bullcrap.
	Yeah.
	You would have shut the government down by now.
	In the olden days, there was like hitchhiking in the 60s and 70s and people would, you know, there was ride sharing.
	It became Uber.
	Yeah, actual ride sharing.
	And then people started murdering and raping.
	Well, news reports started coming out about murdering and raping.
	Well, yeah, they did.
	Well, here's a serial killer rapist using a new technology I think is worth listening to this story.
	Next night, the man suspected of rape and murder using dating sites not to find love, but to hunt his next victim.
	Here's a serial resheft.
	Tonight, this murder suspect accused of using dating sites to lure victims in a string of barbaric assaults.
	This individual uses dating websites to meet women and then victimize these women.
	Police sources now say 27-year-old Daniel Drayton claim to have committed several murders.
	We are actively encouraging any victims or anyone with information on this case because there's potentially more victims out there.
	Drayton arrested in a North Hollywood hotel, where police say they found him holding a woman captive.
	Two independent investigations, as they progressed, led our detectives to one and the same individual.
	That individual was tracked across the country.
	Drayton, already a cross-country fugitive, wanted in New York for the murder of Samantha Stewart, a 29-year-old nurse in Queens.
	The victim's father, in shock.
	I am mourning, heartbroken to me, in pieces.
	Police believe the two met on an online dating app.
	Authorities now also connecting Drayton to the recent rape of a 23-year-old woman in Brooklyn.
	The common denominator in these two cases, one being a murder, one being a rape, is dating websites.
	And Drayton faces a litany of charges, including murder and attempted murder.
	He's being held in Los Angeles on more than a million dollars bail and has not entered a plea.
	And, Tom, investigators are now working to determine if there are indeed more victims.
	Yeah, there's a lot of victims right now.
	There could be even more.
	All right, Ariel, thank you.
	Oh, yeah.
	Ban the dating apps.
	That's next.
	The thing that's interesting about this story is they never named the dating app.
	And why not?
	It's Tinder.
	Yeah.
	Does Disney own it?
	Well, we're not sure it's Tinder.
	There's a couple of other very popular ones.
	There was hints, visual hints that it was Tinder.
	Yeah, so what's your question?
	I'm surprised this hasn't happened earlier.
	We haven't heard about it earlier.
	Well, I think this guy's going to crop back.
	I think this guy's a serial murderer.
	You're going to find him.
	Ooh, the Tinder terror.
	Mmm, juicy.
	Remember the Craigslist stuff?
	Yeah, there's a bunch of Craigslist creeps.
	You know what?
	None of this is good.
	None of this is healthy.
	All these social networks, all these connection places, we're not prepared for that as human beings.
	And we're not prepared to find out how ugly we actually are, all of us.
	Not just in what we say, but in what we do.
	There's my luminescence moment of the day.
	Yeah, there you go.
	Mom.
	Yeah.
	No, it's positive.
	John, stay positive.
	John Charles, stay positive.
	You know nothing good can come of that attitude.
	Well, speaking of the centralized stuff, no sooner had I mentioned it than LifeLock had a security scare.
	Yes, exactly.
	Exactly.
	What a call.
	LifeLock had a security scare, but this was a, I mean, it was customer email, so it wasn't necessarily, you know, it wasn't a breach, but it was definitely something that was not good and was a third-party account.
	But, man, I'm telling you, all of the centralized stuff, it's just, it's where you're most at risk.
	Put it all in one place.
	This was supposed to end with the computer revolution in the mid-70s.
	It was!
	How was it supposed to end?
	Because we didn't have mainframes?
	Centralized control was over.
	Right.
	Mainframes to distribute to the personal computer, the desktop computer, desktop marketing, desktop everything.
	And you'd have your own databases.
	You could do that.
	I mean, why are we putting...
	You can buy, I just went to Costco.
	I think it's $100, maybe $120.
	For a terabyte.
	Six.
	Six terabytes?
	Six terabytes.
	A new six terabyte drive.
	I think it's about $150.
	That's a lot of storage.
	Why would I want to spend a monthly fee to store that and something that can have a breach?
	Yeah, well, it's because people are lazy.
	Look, if we just retrace the history, the personal...
	Yeah, look, hear me now.
	The personal computer, it was a revolution, and we were going to be able to do all these things ourselves and program them and make electric grandmothers out of them, and it would be fantastic.
	And that capability...
	It exists.
	It's never been more available at your fingertips to do all these things that were promised.
	But people are inherently lazy.
	And they say, oh, here's a free thing.
	Well, it does it for me.
	I don't need to set up a database.
	Dvorak, screw you.
	I'll just use these guys' database over here.
	It's in the cloud.
	Free!
	So there's your answer.
	But if people took 20 minutes to learn how to do some of the stuff themselves, they wouldn't have these problems.
	I agree.
	And, you know, and we'd be using some other great open source voice over IP client that would not give us trouble.
	But, you know, yeah.
	There probably is one, but who knows?
	That's the other thing.
	I bitched about this in a recent column.
	I read it.
	There's all kinds of cool stuff, but you don't know what they...
	You know, these guys on SourceForge and GitHub and all the other ones, there's about five.
	You know, they aren't into marketing.
	They're into just having their buddies say, hey, that's pretty cool.
	It's social networking for nerds.
	I have this clip on here that says Cory Booker Clips.
	Did he go nuts somewhere recently?
	Well, it's a very short, I think it's 30 seconds, but I have no idea what this is.
	Okay.
	It's also, it doesn't start until here.
	Here we go.
	Do you remember when Maxine Waters said this?
	If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, you get out and you create a crowd!
	New Jersey Senator Cory Booker now doubling down on that rhetoric.
	Please don't just come here today and then go home.
	Go to the hill today.
	Get up and please get up in the face of some congresspeople.
	Booker's comments at the National Conference on Ending Homelessness come days after he called people who support President Trump's Supreme Court nominee, quote, complicit and evil.
	Yes, well, I'm agreeing with Cory Booker.
	Based on my theory, he is complicit.
	In only allowing himself to be appointed to go through the senatorial review process, where all of Hillary's assassination group crimes will come to light.
	Yeah, I know.
	That's an interesting theory.
	We'll have to see.
	It's coming.
	I want to play this clip.
	We got a very thoughtful email from one of our producers who says he loves the show, but he's always a little bit irked when we say that artificial intelligence is stupid.
	And it's not really artificial intelligence.
	And it was a well-thought-out note saying, well, you know, artificial intelligence, if you do an image search, that's AI. If you search for anything, it's just called search, and that's actually AI. And my response is...
	Well, if you're going to call everything AI, yeah, it's great.
	Yeah.
	And no, it's not great.
	Amazon's facial recognition software is under fire tonight after a shocking test by the ACLU. Take a look at this tweet.
	The ACLU says it used the recognition software to compare photos of Congress members to a database of mugshots.
	They got 28 false matches.
	40% of the false matches were people of color.
	Now at least four lawmakers have written letters to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos asking him to immediately fix the inaccuracies.
	In a statement, an Amazon spokesperson argued that the ACLU didn't use the tool properly.
	They say, we think that the results could probably be improved by following best practices.
	Around setting the confidence thresholds when using facial recognition for law enforcement activities, we guide customers to set a threshold of at least 95% or higher.
	Yeah, because all of the people from Congress should be labeled as criminals.
	So the AI clearly doesn't work right.
	I have done a show before that it's a fairly well-known fact that black faces are not easy to do...
	It's racist.
	Amazon is racist.
	We've always known it.
	I'll go with that.
	Yeah, it's racist.
	Let me ask you this.
	Legitimate news story or product placement?
	We're back now with a deepening mystery over a missing University of Iowa student.
	She went for a jog in her hometown last week and hasn't been seen since.
	Now the FBI is hoping something she's been known to wear can help lead them to her.
	And tonight, worried family members are speaking out to our Ron Mott.
	And also, listen to the mom, man.
	If my kid was missing, been missing for almost a week, I don't know.
	I would be beside myself.
	In the heart of Iowa, a desperate search underway for missing college student Molly Tibbetts, who disappeared a week ago.
	Have somebody recognize her and get her home safely.
	Molly's missing posters showing the sophomore are plastered all over her tiny hometown of Brooklyn, Iowa.
	Her mom, grateful but worried.
	Of course I'm hopeful she's going to be found because she's tough and she's smart.
	She says the 20-year-old was dog-sitting for her boyfriend's brother.
	Investigators say Tibbetts had gone out for a run and sent a Snapchat to her boyfriend around 10 p.m.
	last Wednesday.
	He was the last to hear from her.
	And they're now treating the missing person's case as criminal.
	We're combing through all types of digital evidence, you know, that Molly had and utilized.
	She's 20 years old.
	She's a college student.
	She's well-connected.
	Tibbetts is an avid runner who always wore a Fitbit, a device the FBI is now hoping to use to secure her location through her digital footprint.
	A Facebook page set up to help find her has almost 30,000 followers.
	Sorry, not...
	I mean...
	If she was wearing the Fitbit, then they would already know, wouldn't they?
	Or is this just...
	They just had an idea.
	Like, oh, we just had an idea.
	Yeah, she's very connected, digital, so we should be able to...
	Well, why don't they found her yet?
	I know these Fitbit watches are pretty impressive.
	The new ones.
	Well, the question is a question you asked me.
	Yeah, so is it product placement or a real story?
	I think it's a real story.
	Mm-hmm.
	Product placement stories tend to dwell on the product, and they don't mention other products like Facebook.
	I just don't...
	I mean, it's possible, but it's pretty extremely advanced.
	It's very advanced if it's...
	Too advanced.
	Yeah, I'm giving people way too much credit.
	You're right.
	All right.
	All right.
	Here's this news that I guess we take as positive.
	The remains of what is thought to be around 50 soldiers have now been returned to U.S. soil here at the Osan Air Base in South Korea.
	They were brought out in small caskets onto cars and there were a number, thousands of soldiers here at the airbase who stood in silence and saluted as those remains were carried out.
	They will now be tested to see if they are indeed the remains of US soldiers.
	There are around 5,000 unaccounted for still in North Korea after the Korean War.
	Some of the remains have been returned over the years.
	There has been a lull as the peace process has not exactly gone smoothly.
	All of this takes place on the 65th anniversary of the signing of the armistice.
	That will not have bypassed North Korea.
	This is a major concession by Pyongyang and part of the pledge made by Kim Jong-un to Donald Trump at that summit in Singapore.
	It may be now that Pyongyang is looking for some concessions of its own from Washington, perhaps an easing of sanctions.
	They want the peace process moved forward.
	But the fundamental problem remains.
	North Korea still has nuclear missiles and nuclear material.
	I picked the BBC version of this story specifically so you can still hear this kind of like, well, you know, what we think are the remains of the servicemen.
	Have we seen the story yet that these are fake bones?
	I mean, has that surfaced yet?
	Because I'm expecting that any minute now.
	Oh, who knows?
	That might be just fake.
	I think the thing that, sorry, I keep hearing is that, and this kind of contradicts it, is that Trump gave away the store to the North Koreans, you know, by, Conceding they're not going to do the war games.
	Right.
	And there's no mention of anything else.
	It's just Trump gave away the story.
	He's dumb.
	He's stupid for letting the guy walk all over him.
	It's nuts.
	That's the story.
	That's the story.
	Things are getting very bad in Europe.
	I just want to do two seconds of news from other parts of the world where we don't live.
	Actually, two, if you don't mind.
	This will start in Hungary.
	Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has attacked the European Union, claiming the Western political elite had failed to protect the bloc from Muslim immigration.
	He claimed European Parliament elections next year could be decisive for the future of Europe.
	In an annual speech to ethnic Hungarians in Romania, he attacked the European Commission over its failure to protect the fundamental values behind the setting up of the European Union.
	The Commission must be impartial and unbiased, he said.
	Instead, it's partial because it stands with liberal forces acting against Central and Eastern European countries.
	He went on to say the Commission was not a friend of freedom because it was working towards building European socialism instead of freedom.
	Hungary is glad, he said, that the European Commission's days are numbered.
	The right-wing nationalist Orbán was re-elected in April to a third consecutive term.
	He's been in constant conflict with the European Commission over what Brussels calls an erosion of democratic institutions in formerly communist East European countries.
	Well, there's someone who has the right idea, at least, in Europe.
	One guy.
	Although, of course, he's right-wing, nationalist, crazy junker.
	Did you see that picture on Twitter of the mess that's in this making the claim that Amsterdam after midnight is just a mess?
	Yes.
	In fact, I have that article.
	Police can no longer handle the lawless jungle after dark in Amsterdam.
	I would say that is absolutely true.
	Really?
	Yes.
	Now, the way that is based on CCTV cameras at the Leipzig plane...
	Which, of course, I grew up there.
	That's the central square where people, when you're going out, there's a lot of people walking there.
	It's really all pedestrian areas, of course.
	Scooters are racing around.
	People are crazy.
	Just nuts.
	And what is also true in the article is that there are now 2,000 illegal taxis roaming the streets at night looking for fares.
	Absolutely true.
	There's a whole shadow economy that once you look at it through the CCTV cameras, you see what's going on.
	And it's drug dealing, it's all big cash moving all over the place.
	Yeah, I would say this is absolutely true.
	Absolutely.
	A buddy of mine is on the Amsterdam police force.
	I'll ask him if he feels it's gotten as bad as it appears to be.
	But I think so.
	I hear it from Taxi Eric too.
	It's just...
	Why don't they do something about it?
	Oh man, it's Amsterdam.
	It's like, you know, we want the tourism.
	People are so mad who live in Amsterdam, there's too much tourism.
	Which of course breeds crime too.
	It's just, for some reason, this is maybe the only way the EU can still keep their GDP numbers up, is we need more tourism and please count the drug trade.
	Like in the UK, remember they wanted to count cocaine dealers and hookers into the GDP? Right, for the GDP. Well, there's other stuff going on with Europe, with other parts of Europe.
	I thought this was an interesting report.
	Welcome to Croatia's Dubrovnik, a once-hidden gem that's become a victim of its own success.
	Too many tourists.
	Too, too many.
	I'm living with earplugs.
	The picturesque medieval town, the set of King's Landing and Game of Thrones.
	People flocking to walk the same steps.
	As the tourists flood in, locals fed up with the noise and the overcrowding are moving out.
	There are some moments when I really think we can't stand it anymore.
	We have to move.
	Critics say once thriving communities are now turning into tourist theme parks.
	Tourism has boomed here in recent years.
	A record 1.16 million visitors in 2017.
	Arriving by bus, plane, and gigantic cruise ships that together overwhelm this small city with up to 15,000 tourists a day.
	It's Game of Thrones tourism.
	This is the problem.
	Why did the city of Dubrovnik, I've been there, beautiful place, long before there was a tourist trap, why would the city officials, just for some money, allow them to shoot?
	Yeah.
	End of debate.
	Yeah, for money.
	Of course.
	You didn't care about the town?
	No, it's like Florence.
	Remember when we were in Florence last summer?
	It was horrible.
	It's just wall-to-wall tourists and high-end shops.
	I'm not going to Florence.
	Yeah, oh, there's some museum you can go to.
	You see, you know, David.
	Fine.
	No, it's horrible.
	Yeah, that's no good.
	It's overrun.
	It's all overrun.
	Well, this is ridiculous.
	But you do something like the Game of Thrones.
	It's like this situation over in San Francisco.
	We have a...
	Sorry, just before you continue.
	I think that Florence was also super overcrowded because of the new Da Vinci Code movie, which was all set in Florence.
	I think there's a thing happening here.
	We can probably identify where the next big tourism rush is going to be.
	Oh, an investment opportunity.
	Yes, now you're talking.
	Finally!
	We can buy ourselves a dedicated line between San Francisco and whatever they call Austin next month.
	Will Austin become a place for shooting?
	Movies?
	No.
	That's the idea.
	You want to get somebody in there with a famous show.
	Right.
	Idiocracy was filmed here.
	Well, it didn't work out.
	No, it's not historic enough.
	San Francisco's got an issue with those little Victorians that are near that park, and then there's some house that was used in some...
	Remake of a TV show from the 70s and everybody's stopping there and taking the picture on their...
	Oh, Full House?
	The Full House?
	Yeah, Full House.
	Yeah, the Full House house is like being ruined by these tourists.
	Damn tourists.
	We're just all spending our money in other people's countries.
	But what is the point of, oh, look at me, I'm on the steps of the Game of Thrones set?
	Yeah, and you get to stand there and go, shame, shame, shame.
	Well, John, I think that is just the world we live in.
	I don't even know what you're referring to with this shame thing.
	I've never seen the show.
	Yeah, well, we've talked about this extensively.
	This is where the whole social justice warrior thing came from.
	Shame, shame, shame.
	There's this walk.
	I've seen one episode of the show.
	It's from the show.
	Ding, shame, ding, shame, ding, shame.
	That's pathetic, if true.
	Of course it's true.
	Of course it's true.
	Look around you.
	The people not listening to this program, in general, are zombies.
	So we had, I want to get the one last thing out of the way.
	Cohen.
	Okay.
	Let's start with the Cohen update.
	Now to politics and the growing divide between President Trump and his former fixer Michael Cohen.
	President Trump's legal team warning Cohen both publicly and privately that he is in violation of attorney-client privilege.
	Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani telling ABC News tonight that Cohen has been alerted and that he's in, quote, grave jeopardy of being disbarred.
	ABC's Tara Palmieri is with the president in New Jersey tonight.
	Tonight, the president's legal team firing a warning shot to his longtime fixer and former lawyer Michael Cohen, attempting to silence him.
	We have complained to them that he's violating the attorney-client privilege, publicly and privately.
	This breakdown comes as ABC News has learned that Cohen claims that then-candidate Trump knew in advance about that infamous Trump Tower meeting with the Russians in 2016.
	It is quite a bombshell.
	If it's true and if it can be corroborated, it would mean that the president was willing personally to accept Russian help during the campaign.
	Something President Trump has consistently denied.
	Did you know the time that they had to do?
	No, I didn't know anything about them.
	The president's attorney, Rudy Giuliani, telling ABC News by phone that they've ended their joint defense agreement, another sign of the striking divorce between the two.
	He's in great jeopardy of being dismarred.
	Cohen's legal bills no longer covered by the Trump campaign.
	He's under investigation in the Southern District of New York for financial crimes.
	Now Giuliani saying the legal team has hired audio experts to analyze secret recordings Cohen made of Trump two months before the election.
	The conversation about a hush payment for Playboy model Karen McDougal, who claims she had an affair with Trump.
	What news network was this on?
	That had to be, that was ABC. It's just shameful.
	This is stupid.
	This is not news.
	It's wasting everybody's time.
	It is.
	And by you playing it again, I kind of get mad just all over again.
	Well, then you might as well play part two, which is, this is a different show, I believe.
	This thoughts on Cohen and the bass, which tells me that none of this is important.
	I would have to agree with you.
	It was also reported that Michael Cohen does not have audio recordings of then-candidate Donald Trump to prove his accusation, but you've seen a complete reversal in how the administration is now portraying the president's former personal attorney, Michael Cohen.
	By now, they are attacking his credibility.
	This is a reversal in how they had originally portrayed him, which was someone that they thought they would be willing to work with.
	At this point, though, Kevin, do you get the sense that the base is really concerned about this issue?
	They're not.
	No, I think that's a great point.
	I mean, you look at the polls and the president's base is still very much in lockstep with him.
	The question becomes from a political standpoint is whether or not any of this outside noise will impact Bob Mueller's investigation.
	And we haven't seen proof that the outside noise, so to speak, or the congressional investigations will, in fact, influence him.
	He's operating on his own timetable.
	We don't know when we will get the final results or conclusion of his investigation.
	That said, there have been several folks, including the president's son, Donald Trump Jr., who have testified before the congressional committees.
	So there's that in terms of testimony.
	But the second point that I would make is that just from a mobilizing political force, how this how this is going to mobilize folks to get to the polls.
	It's the complete unknown ahead of the midterm elections, whether this will activate the Democratic base or the conservative base for obviously very different reasons.
	Wow.
	Okay, so they're driving people to the polls, which of course is why all of this is so incredibly annoying, because every story everywhere on the so-called news at the moment is just about persuading people to vote for their party and not for the other party.
	So these guys think that with this dumb, just dumb, it's dumb, there's no legal problem, it's just completely stupid, it makes no difference to anybody's life other than using up cycles to Combined with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is going to create a blue wave.
	Well, good luck.
	It's really moronic.
	How do you really feel?
	You know what?
	I'm pissed in general, but this stuff drives me nuts.
	There's no news to even deconstruct anymore.
	It's just the same blather over and over again.
	Sometimes it's funny because it's so hateful, but it's a huge disservice and it's making people sick, including me.
	Well, it's not making me sick.
	I'm hoping that this does change after the election.
	It probably will.
	I sure hope so.
	No, it won't.
	We'll have two years.
	We're two years to the next, to the general election.
	As long as they put Nick Pickles on the case, I'll be happy.
	Well, we need some more guys with names like that.
	All right, everybody.
	We return on Thursday.
	With hopefully something new to deconstruct, something of use to you.
	Until then, coming to you from downtown New San Francisco, Texas, in the 5x9 common law condo.
	It is FEMA Region 6 on the governmental maps.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where I'm overlooking a fog bank, I'm John C. Dvorak.
	Ah, until Thursday.
	Adios, mofos!
	You have a cyanide pill for me?
	Yes, here it is.
	Donate to a No Agenda They give us shows week after week.
	Donate to No Agenda.
	It's a show that's really unique.
	Donate to No Agenda.
	Listen to John and Adam speak.
	Donate to No Agenda.
	Science is turning into a clique This truth is universal Fox News is a slut The biggest mistake we made in this whole matter Was Obama What is wrong with you people?
	What is wrong with you?
	Manning, you don't have the statue to tell us what to do You know, you just go What is wrong with you?
	What's wrong with you?
	The race is...
	We love that We love that And you'll be president forever To the corporate You're foolish And not Mitt Romney Against Obama?
	What is wrong with you people?
	What's wrong with you?
	Manning, you don't have the statue to tell us what to do You know, you just preach over there At a church over there in Harlem And we like you We think you're amusing When you talk about black people We like what you say about them But when you stop talking about black people You're automatically wrong So, I mean, we love to hear you talk about black people.
	We love to hear you say that they ain't got no honor.
	We love to hear you talk about how they're very bad and all of that, all of that, all of that.
	How they are racist.
	And we love that.
	Racist.
	And we love that.
	But now when you talk about, you only give me credit when I talk about black folk.
	But I'm right.
	And you're right for giving me credit.
	Because God knows when I speak about them, I'm right.
	But I'm right when I talk about white fucking world.
	And I'm right.
	I'm right.
	And I'm right.
	And you're right.
	I done tore that thing up.
	I done tore that.
	Those kids are alone.
	They are in cages.
	They are given peanut butter on tortillas.
	They're given frozen sandwiches that still have ice in them.
	Is that the kind of environment you would want your kid to be in?
	We don't need no immigration.
	We don't need no immigration.
	We don't need no water patrol No peanut butter enchilada Donald leave the kids alone Hey,
	Donald, leave the kids alone!
	All in all, it's all, all for funding your wall.
	All in all, it's all, all for funding the wall.
	All in all, it's all, for funding the wall.
	All in all, it's all, for funding for funding the wall.
	All in all, it's all, for funding for funding the wall.
	All in all, it's all, for funding for funding the wall.
	All in all, it's all, for funding for funding the wall.
	Mopo.
	Dvorak.org.
	Slash N-A. Wow.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	Wow.

▲