Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 22, 2018 - No Agenda

02:44:05

1088: Three Chamber

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	What is going on with those people?
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	It's Thursday, November 22, 2018.
	This is your award-winning Gitmo Nation Media Assassination, episode 1088.
	This is no agenda.
	Stomping on Skype bugs and broadcasting live from the capital of the drone, Star State, once again in downtown Austin, Tejas, in the Cludio, in the morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where we did miss this effort, And it was a unique 10-car train.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	It's Crackpot and Buzzkill in the morning!
	Oh my God!
	Woo!
	Listen to that horn!
	All right, happy Thanksgiving.
	And tell me...
	Happy Thanksgiving to you and you and everyone out there that will be celebrating Thanksgiving.
	Everyone except the Canadians who already had Thanksgiving somewhere near the 1st of November.
	You know...
	The Dutch...
	We've talked about this.
	I just got back from my trip to the Gitmo Nation lowlands.
	The Dutch, you know, they love taking little traditions and just taking...
	They don't really like America.
	They think Trump is horrible.
	And, you know, we're all racist.
	But, interestingly...
	Even though, well, we already know they took Halloween.
	The Dutch have Halloween celebrations.
	They have Halloween parties.
	It's not spelled the same.
	It's Halloween, which is entirely based on the movies.
	That's why they think it's cool.
	Halloween.
	But, of course, the Netherlands has no Thanksgiving since they were not fortunate enough to kill the natives of our country and to eat their turkeys.
	You built the whole thing from scratch.
	But they have a Black Friday now, which is tomorrow, the same day.
	Yes, I noticed this.
	I noticed this was going on in England, too.
	Yeah, so we don't have Thanksgiving because, you know, it's not our celebration, not our country, but, hey, man, we have Black Friday for shopping!
	It's unbelievable.
	Yes, I noticed this last year when we were spending Thanksgiving in London.
	Oh, that's right.
	And they had a Black Friday.
	What the hell is Black Friday?
	What are you guys talking about?
	Can we somehow turn this racist?
	Well, that would end it.
	Why is it called Black Friday?
	What is the actual...
	Because it's the one day of the year that the books go black.
	They go into the...
	Oh, is that really the reason?
	Yeah.
	It's not because we see tons of black people piling on top of each other in the Walmart?
	No.
	No?
	It's about this one day where all of a sudden now these department stores are in a profit mode, making money now.
	Oh, okay.
	I don't think, if you went on the street and you asked anyone, I don't think three out of ten would know or would have that answer.
	I never knew until I looked it up.
	It was some years back.
	I said, why do they call this Black Friday?
	It's kind of disgusting.
	That's when things are supposed to go bad.
	It's Black Friday.
	It's when the market crashes.
	Yeah, it's a black day.
	Black death.
	Yeah, all of this.
	When the books flip.
	Huh.
	I didn't realize that.
	Yeah.
	Interesting.
	Well, they do have that tradition.
	Learn something new on the No Agenda show every time you listen.
	Yes, yes, you do.
	And the 10-car train is part of a...
	There it is.
	I kept seeing these 10-car trains for the last week, and I'm thinking, as I've been looking at these trains again, why are they 10 cars all of a sudden?
	They've always been eight.
	Maybe nine.
	And it turns out that it was like yesterday was the number one travel day.
	Of all time, I mean, this is the time that everyone travels.
	Apparently, yesterday was the big day.
	And I'm thinking to myself, what idiot would travel on a day like that?
	That would be me!
	That's right!
	I came home yesterday.
	Although I was traveling from Gitmo Lowlands through London back to Austin, so I didn't really have the national internal rush that we had.
	And it was actually, it was okay.
	But let me tell you.
	Wait a minute.
	What?
	What do you mean the internal?
	Are you talking about the internal?
	No, U.S., just domestic, domestic flights.
	Why would they be trying?
	There's no Thanksgiving in Europe.
	No, but that's the only thing that was really messed up.
	International flights coming in, there was no real issue.
	Going to a U.S. airport, standing in U.S. airport lines, that's what I'm saying.
	I was at the airport at 5 in Amsterdam to get out.
	Believe me, very calm at that time.
	I hope.
	And then I flew to London.
	You know, in London you go to Terminal 5 and you stay within the terminal, but then you have to...
	No, stop.
	Back up.
	Schiphol, the Netherlands.
	Schiphol, Amsterdam airport.
	As you leave the country, this is new.
	I have not seen this before.
	You scan your boarding card.
	You can see the customs guy right there because there is an exit interview in the Netherlands for your customs when you're leaving.
	They stamp you in, stamp you out.
	But before that, there's this, you know, there's gates and you have to stay, little glass gates, you have to go into a portal, kind of like a subway station, you scan your boarding card, and then it says, look here, there's this light flashing off to the right, you see yourself on the camera, and it's doing a complete, you know, facial recognition scan.
	Almost makes the sound.
	It lasted about 30 seconds before it finally let me in.
	I took my glasses off.
	I don't know, maybe that helped or not.
	They couldn't find me, but it sure got a scan of me.
	You know, if it wasn't scanning, it was making one.
	I don't like that.
	I don't understand.
	That just appeared out of the blue.
	And of course, after you then slide your passport into their little scanner, so they're linking my face with my passport, not that the passport doesn't have a picture.
	Anyway, then you go to London.
	Now you're in Terminal 5.
	You arrive in Terminal 5, and you want to do a transit.
	Again, you go through similar little glass gates.
	You scan your boarding card.
	And then you have to go through security again.
	Have you ever done this security?
	I don't know if I've talked about this.
	Have you ever done this security going back to the U.S. in Terminal 5 at Heathrow?
	Because you have to essentially go through a whole security process again.
	Except these agents are dicks.
	They're rude.
	They're just asses.
	Many of them women, actually.
	Are these American agents?
	No, these are British.
	These are British, and they are rude.
	They treat you like you're an idiot.
	To me, it feels like the very chauvinistic Brits.
	You don't understand this?
	I spit on you, foreigner.
	It's like just assholes.
	It really goads me.
	I've had this a couple of times.
	It gets to the point where, of course, my bag has to be ripped open.
	But they're really cavalier.
	They walk back and forth.
	They say, excuse me, I'm kind of waiting on my bag.
	Then they give you a look and they make you wait five more minutes.
	Then I'm packing my bag in, which they've opened up.
	And they say, excuse me, I need the space.
	You just unpack this and I'm packing it in.
	Yes, I need the space.
	You have to move.
	Fellow passengers are saying, you take your time, you know.
	We'll wait for her.
	It's just their asses.
	And I saw every single...
	I had three hours layover.
	What is going on with those people?
	Huh.
	It's un-British in a way.
	It's very un-British.
	This is why it baffles me.
	But maybe it is actually the real true Brits, but they just treat you with disdain.
	I'm not saying our TSA officers are any better yelling at you, but it's so surprising because you don't expect it.
	In the UK. Anyway.
	There you go.
	So, what was my point?
	Well, you were talking about...
	Well, we were trying to discuss the tribulations of traveling on the worst travel day of the day.
	Ah, yes.
	There you go.
	There you go.
	So, for me, otherwise, it was fine.
	Just took forever to...
	You land in Austin.
	You're good to go, but the suitcase...
	I don't know.
	I think they...
	You've already been pre-checked in London.
	Is that the idea?
	Yeah.
	Checked all the way through.
	Yeah.
	And then you just get off and all of a sudden you're done?
	Well, yeah.
	You wait for an hour and a half because when you are pre-checked, you get that long transit sticker.
	And, of course, they put you, I guess, somewhere way in the front or the back of the plane.
	And so you're first on and definitely last off with your baggage.
	Which is just whatever.
	First world problems.
	However, quick update.
	Sports.
	Oh no.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	The Warriors suck.
	That's the sports news from us over here in the San Francisco Bay Area.
	The Warriors suck.
	The Dutch, as you know, they had trounced and humiliated the World Cup winner, France.
	All they had to do was have a tie score against the Germans, their second game against the Germans.
	And it looked like we were all going to have to jump off the balcony because they were 2-0 down at the half.
	And they pulled it out of their butts and tied the Germans in the last minutes.
	They came for their bikes and they took back a wheel.
	Not the whole thing, but at least a wheel.
	I'm very proud of the Dutch.
	So this was a big deal?
	Yeah, oh yeah.
	Tying a game with Germany?
	Yes.
	Was it nil-nil?
	No, it was 2-0.
	2-2.
	It was 2-2.
	It was 2-2.
	It was 2-0 for most of the game, and then in the very last 10 minutes, they pulled the one out.
	They had to hold their hat.
	That's actually called doing it.
	It's never mind.
	You're just going to scoff.
	It doesn't matter.
	I will no longer talk about the most popular sport in the world.
	I won't do that.
	Why do you think it is the most popular sport?
	Because the actions in the stands are people beating up each other.
	No, no.
	It's a very simple sport that anyone can play.
	You just need a ball and a couple of sticks.
	It's a sport everybody can pick up immediately.
	You can't just pick up American football.
	You can't pick up basketball.
	You don't have to put any effort into anything.
	You need basketball hoops to play basketball, and soccer or football predates so many sports.
	It's an exciting sport, just not on TV. Well, it's never going to be good on TV, as you pointed out before.
	Yeah, no advertising.
	No, you can't put it on TV. You can't put it on TV. They don't stop the game.
	You cannot put it on TV. All right, just back to Thanksgiving for a moment.
	Do we need to do the story of Thanksgiving?
	It's kind of a tradition.
	I can shorten it up a little bit.
	Yeah, I'd like you to give a quick recap, and then I have a quick...
	Let me read from an old column I wrote in 2004.
	Um...
	The term Thanksgiving was brandished throughout U.S. history and officially codified by Lincoln in 1863 at the behest of an activist woman, writer named Sarah Hale.
	Before 1863, there was no Thanksgiving per se, but a lot of proclamations giving thanks for this and that, some called Thanksgiving.
	There were virtually no Thanksgiving events from the Thomas Jefferson administration until Sarah revitalized the dying idea.
	Her rationale was that Americans didn't have enough holidays.
	Really?
	She had the right idea there.
	The Lincoln Thanksgiving was justified as a celebration of the Norse victory in winning the Battle of Gettysburg and had absolutely nothing to do with pilgrims or anything of the sort.
	That nonsense was all reverse-engineered by sentimentalists.
	Even the first supposed Thanksgiving in 1621, which is kind of funny because I was reading on Twitter about how suddenly George Washington is now the inventor of Thanksgiving.
	He had absolutely zip to do with it.
	It never ends.
	It never ends, this changing story of the fake Thanksgiving lore.
	Fake Thanksgiving.
	Anyway, in 1621, there was a three-day, one-shot party modeled after something called Harvest Home.
	It wasn't called Thanksgiving.
	Harvest Home was the end of the Harvest Party, celebrated in parts of the British Isles.
	This party didn't happen again.
	In fact, most of these invited Indian guests to the 1621 event were later butchered by the growing population of settlers.
	Thanksgiving.
	Anyway, there's other examples of these one shots.
	And it was Lincoln who made this.
	Here's the last of the story.
	Lincoln, who made it a yearly event, also made it stick to the fourth Thursday in November.
	Now, get this.
	It only changed for two years during the Franklin Roosevelt administration and moved up a week in hopes of stretching – believe this is a fact – in hopes of stretching the Christmas buying pattern an extra week.
	Oh, I believe that.
	That totally sounds American.
	Yeah, in hopes of helping the economy.
	It was already a known fact that Thanksgiving was the kickoff to Christmas buying.
	A slew of half-hearted traditionalists, and then you get these traditionalists, found the Roosevelt change an abomination since it somehow insulted pilgrims or the DAR or who knows who, and it was changed back after a couple of years of bickering.
	Right.
	So Thanksgiving is bogus.
	And now we have a new thing, which is the addition to the old story of this thing called Friendsgiving.
	What?
	Oh, yeah.
	This is hot.
	Look it up.
	Oh, this sounds like a social justice warrior move.
	Well, what it's supposed to, it's got two things going on with it.
	One of them is slightly, slightly, one of them is extremely disgusting.
	If you look it up in the Urban Dictionary, definition number four, Friendsgiving is where you dip your nuts into the turkey gravy and film it and then serve the gravy and then show people the film like a couple weeks later.
	John, you need to get another column or something because you're spending too much time on the internet looking at weird shit, man.
	This has got to stop.
	So Friendsgiving, which you'll see the term a lot, especially this year, is the idea that you have friends over, as though you never did, friends over for the Thanksgiving feast instead of or in lieu of or in place of family.
	Thanksgiving means family.
	Friendsgiving means friends because you hate your family.
	Yeah.
	Oh, gosh.
	Yeah.
	The balls and the nuts.
	I like the Friendsgiving.
	I'm not going to have any gravy.
	I was not supposed to even do a show today, but seeing as you were only thinking of yourself, here we are.
	Here's how it went.
	I'll tell you the story from my perspective, and then we've got to move on.
	I was pretty convinced we had discussed having a best of interview show on Thanksgiving this year.
	And John had done one interview with the Mooch, and I think we're going to do another one.
	I had a couple lined up.
	It was a little unclear, but we were pretty sure we were going to do a special show.
	And then John was all like, well, I don't have to cook anyway.
	No one's coming over, so screw it.
	We're going to do a show.
	I'm like, yeah, I have people coming.
	Yeah.
	You didn't consider me for one second.
	No.
	The real reason I decided.
	I decided.
	Oh, the real reason.
	You could have just said no.
	I tried.
	I tried.
	You went, no, man, no.
	Okay.
	The real reason.
	The real reason is that we've got show 1089, 33 squared.
	Right.
	Coming up the next show this Sunday, and I think we needed to tease it.
	Right.
	So this is just a promotional episode.
	Oh, okay.
	Yes, exactly.
	It's a promotional episode.
	I forgot.
	Now I understand.
	I'm completely on board.
	Let me then move into this.
	Do you have any idea when the tradition started of the United States president pardoning a turkey for Thanksgiving?
	I'm glad you asked.
	Because I'm assuming now that you know.
	No, I don't.
	And you did some research.
	I know?
	No.
	I believe it's...
	The first president might have been...
	No, I don't know.
	The reason I don't know is because I did not look it up, because I don't care, and it's a totally fake event, and it's something every president does every single year, and it's fun.
	Wait!
	Wait!
	Just be quiet!
	It's fun.
	It's fake.
	It's make-believe.
	It's like Santa Claus.
	It's like Black Pete's.
	It's just fake fun.
	Can the news media today...
	Just play along, just for one day, just play along for one day with the fake that everyone knows is fake without insulting or without pulling some other crap into it.
	You know, the orange man bad.
	No, it doesn't seem to be possible.
	I cut out all the ceremonious stuff.
	Just got you the intro and the outro.
	The president is actually about to take the podium at the White House.
	We're going to go ahead and listen in there at this Rose Garden event.
	It's actually the turkey pardon.
	I mean, you can't make this up happening at this moment.
	Now, the fact that she starts off by saying, you can't make this up.
	I'm like, wait a minute.
	Is this something new?
	Did they not know the president does a fake pardoning of a turkey?
	I mean, you hear that.
	Aren't you set up and very interested as to why this year is different?
	I was.
	With that introduction, it makes it sound very singular that Obama never did it, or Bush never did it, or Clinton never did it, or Kennedy never did it, or Johnson never did it.
	And I was even more surprised by what it was all about.
	The president is actually about to take the podium at the White House.
	We're going to go ahead and listen in there at this Rose Garden event.
	It's actually the turkey pardon.
	I mean, you can't make this up happening at this moment.
	Let's listen.
	Be seated.
	Good afternoon, everyone.
	A very special day at the White House.
	We are thrilled to be joined today.
	And there you have it, President Trump, pardoning the Thanksgiving turkey, the annual tradition, peas, the name of this turkey, and just the most unusual dichotomy here, as this comes on the heels and just the most unusual dichotomy here, as this comes on the heels of a statement that the president has put out, essentially pardoning Saudi Arabia and the crown prince and despite what...
	I mean...
	If you have to now take the pardoning of a turkey and say, what an unbelievable dichotomy, as he's essentially pardoning Saudi Arabia from their atrocities.
	That is the biggest sharp jump I've ever seen.
	Well, let's stop on that subject matter for one second, which is...
	Trump says that he had a briefing from Gina, the head of the CIA, and I guess somebody, the FBI guy or someone, And he says they don't know really what happened.
	No, there's no report.
	Did you see a report yet?
	Was there a CIA report?
	There's no report, but yet all these news media outlets keep saying the CIA, the CIA, the CIA, citing some mysterious report based on apparently someone at the Washington Post saying that it exists.
	The Washington Post published, it exists, it's coming online.
	According to people familiar with the process.
	According to sources who could not be identified.
	According to sources who would not speak on the record because they were not authorized to do so.
	It's so easy these days.
	Just print a headline, say I got some sources, and be the Washington Post.
	And you can do whatever you want.
	And now this has contaminated...
	The fake Turkey pardoning called a dichotomy because he's pardoning a real nation, although there's no actual pardon, there's no presidential pardon going to Saudi Arabia.
	You don't have sovereignty over Saudi Arabia that we can pardon anybody?
	Do they not see the irony of this, or are they just trying to befuddle the public?
	No.
	But it's still not too far away from...
	The sovereignty we must seem to see over Julian Assange, who's not even an American citizen.
	Right.
	We're going to...
	And they've indicted him for something.
	For treason.
	We just indict random people that are Australians?
	Well, we indict random Russians.
	Yeah, we did.
	You're right.
	We indicted a bunch of random Russians that will never show up in court.
	Except for the one...
	Showboating.
	Except for the one guy that actually said, yeah, I'm taking you to court.
	You know, they don't know what to do about that.
	Yes, a couple of questions come over here on the diamond and ask for discovery.
	That'll take care of that problem.
	Yeah.
	So, anyway, being in Europe for a week, you can almost see these little cyclones of outrage that are just spinning around.
	You're in a whole different time zone, so you get the news and it's just very different.
	And I was receiving it in a very different manner.
	I wasn't on Twitter incessantly, you know, just reading some stuff, getting stories from people.
	And you can just see it's so much about nothing.
	And then, you know, it's all like this turkey story.
	It's all like, oh, oh, this, oh, that, blah, blah, blah.
	And now we have...
	I can assure you that if Trump...
	I thought...
	I was actually convinced and I was regretful that he didn't drop this stupid idea.
	And I can assure you that if he had said, no, we're not doing that dumb turkey part anymore...
	He's ruining American traditions!
	Yeah, they would have raked him over the coals.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Hmm.
	Well, I did want to do a little segment here.
	I have two clips because I've noticed a very distinct narrative that's taking place, a conversation.
	And the conversation goes something like this.
	I like what Trump does.
	I hate the way he does it.
	Except it's a little different.
	We're now talking about policy versus style.
	Style, you see.
	And this is now, it's going to be used as a defense.
	So Trump supporters, which by the way are called Trump supporters around the world.
	It's not Trump voters or Republicans or people who like him.
	Even in Holland or in the UK, I was in both over the past week.
	Trump supporters, Trump supporters.
	What does that even mean, Trump supporters?
	Well, they have another term that they use here a lot, which is called the base.
	The base, yeah.
	The base, yes.
	He's catering to the base.
	The base, yes.
	Well, this is policy versus style, and you'll hear people who do favor the president's policy often saying, but I disapprove of his style.
	And this came up in two...
	I'm trying to think which one to play first.
	Actually, I'll do this.
	This was Don Lemon.
	It's a rather long clip, but I really think it's interesting.
	The conversation was between four women.
	We had a white Democrat, a white Republican, a black University of Berkeley professor of history, Stephanie Rogers, and we had black Don Lemon.
	So four women are on the panel.
	And...
	I know, it's just mean of me to say that, but I can't help it.
	They're all coffee-clatching.
	And the assertion from the professor of history, Stephanie Rogers, is that white women actually have been a part of the white supremacy and institutional racism that dominates all things unfair in our country.
	And although not everyone agrees, ultimately it comes down to how he says stuff or what he says versus policy.
	And then we'll kind of wind that up with an MSNBC clip.
	But first, just listen to this because it's the whole conversation is just intense to me when it comes to divisiveness through racism.
	Stephanie, you're quoted in this Fox article saying, "For centuries, white women have invested in white supremacy because their whiteness affords them a particular kind of power that their gender does not." Explain what you mean by that.
	So you see this is a pretty loaded topic right off the bat.
	So, as a historian, I explore white women's economic investments in the institution of slavery.
	I've got to stop this.
	White women's investments in the institutional...
	What did she say?
	The institutional...
	The institution of slavery.
	So, as a historian, I explore white women's economic investments in the institution of slavery.
	White women's economic investments in the institution of slavery.
	Very small minority of people that had slaves in the South.
	Well, not a small minority, but it was a minority.
	But economic investment.
	Economic.
	That means they're putting money into it?
	Well, I think what she might be headed toward is that, well, now you have slaves, you don't have to do the dishes.
	And what that has led me to understand is that there's this broader historical context that we need to keep in mind when we're looking at white women's voting patterns today.
	And as we look at, you know, their support, their overwhelming support of Donald Trump.
	When a professor is trying to explain such a heady topic as this and laughs, right off the bat, white women's support of Donald Trump.
	I mean, this is Berkeley.
	Well, it's a tail right there because the white women's support of Donald Trump was 51%.
	How's that like a major deal?
	Voting patterns today.
	And as we look at, you know, their their support, their overwhelming support of Donald Trump.
	And so she's lying.
	That's a tell.
	That's that laugh tell.
	Yeah, but it's not okay in this topic.
	It's nothing funny.
	But it's a lot, because the white women's support is 51%.
	I'd totally call that a bandwagon.
	To think of white women as primarily focusing on their gendered oppression.
	That because they are oppressed as women, that that oppression will allow for them to ally and to sympathize with other dispossessed and disempowered peoples in the nation.
	But my research actually shows that they long had a deep investment in white supremacy, and not only did they benefit from it, but they participated in its construction and its perpetuation.
	Not just in the context of slavery, not just in the colonial period, but well after slavery was over.
	So Alice, why do you think that white women support President Trump?
	Do you think they identify more with being, as she said, white than they do with being female?
	So here it is again.
	I think we really need to start listening to some of the words because there's a difference between I voted for him and I support him.
	And so they've kind of taken this 52% voted for him into they support him.
	And this is where we start to diverge.
	I think this Stephanie woman, I think she may be the, I don't know if she's the white Republican or the white, we'll hear.
	Period.
	But well after slavery was over.
	Sorry.
	So Alice, why do you think that white women support President Trump?
	Do you think they identify more with being, as she said, white than they do with being female?
	She just said that.
	I think when we're talking about the political arena, voters, women and men, identify themselves as either Republican, Democrat, Independent, or whatever their political party.
	And I strongly disagree with the characterization.
	Let's stop right there.
	I don't identify as anything.
	I'm just a voter.
	I'm sorry.
	I reject that out of hand.
	I'm just voting.
	I do not belong to a party.
	Democrat, Independent.
	Hold on.
	Sure.
	I think because the parties have been so screwy that the independent numbers have increased to the point where everyone has to cater to them.
	You don't cater to the Republicans if you're a Republican because you know you're going to get their votes.
	So you cater to these independent so-called swing voters because they can go either way.
	They're swingers.
	I'm just saying that I reject someone telling me that I have to identify with some party even if it's independent.
	I just identify as me.
	I think when we're talking about the political arena, voters, women and men, identify themselves as either Republican, Democrat, Independent, or whatever their political party is.
	And I strongly disagree with the characterization that women are oppressed, and by nature of that oppression, they should naturally vote for another group of people that are oppressed.
	I think that's just not how politics works.
	I think as a Republican or a Democrat or whatever your political leanings is, You should vote for people that represent those policies.
	I'm a Republican.
	I support this president.
	I voted for this president.
	I did so because of his policies.
	I do not agree with his tone and tenor.
	Don, I've been on your...
	Tone and tenor.
	We've got to write that down.
	That's what it is.
	Tone and tenor.
	I showed dozens and dozens of times discounting his behavior, his tone, his tactics, the things he says about women, his denigrating women, and I don't tolerate that, but his policies are what I stand for.
	Alice, you don't have to support him.
	You could not vote.
	This is the white Democrat, the white woman Democrat, who now says you could just not vote, which is also a way to identify...
	Alice, you don't have to support him.
	You could not vote.
	I mean, that's the thing.
	I could say there's a Democrat who does everything that I agree with, but they say misogynist or racist thing.
	I would not vote for them.
	And I just want to step back for a second and say...
	Look, we spent a lot of time talking about Republican women.
	Look, there's a problem with white women.
	It doesn't matter whether they're Democrats or Republicans or nothing.
	There's a problem with racism.
	Every white person benefits from an inherently racist system that is structurally racist.
	We're all part of the problem, so I'm not trying to point my finger at you.
	No, just, are you white?
	Pointing my finger at you.
	Or at another person.
	But I think we have to recognize that there's institutional racism in this country.
	And by saying, I'm just going to support somebody who, you just said, says racist things and does racist things.
	You see how they're conflating?
	Well, they're just talking.
	They're just saying that.
	They have no examples.
	But they're conflating support with voting.
	And then it's the tone.
	I don't agree with this tone.
	We'll get back to Stephanie here for the last 30 seconds.
	It's a problem.
	Just a point of clarification.
	So I did not say that white women voted for Trump because they were racist.
	What I actually said was that there's this broader historical context in which white supremacy is quite important to white women, not simply as the beneficiaries of white supremacy, but as part orchestrators, part of the builders of white supremacy.
	Women helped build white supremacy.
	Help me understand.
	John, let's just get some terms.
	What is white supremacy?
	It's the belief that the white race, per se, is superior to the other races.
	So what she's saying is that even today, women help build the...
	I believe, I guess, that white people are superior to all other races.
	That's what she's saying.
	But how would you do that?
	I guess by voting for a white guy.
	Okay.
	Yeah, okay.
	In that case, yeah, I guess.
	The kind of beneficiaries of white supremacy, but as part orchestrators, part of the builders of white supremacy.
	So just to clarify that, and I agree totally with what Kristen said.
	This is not about simply conservative white women.
	This is a phenomenon that is spread across the country.
	Whether in the South or the North, you can see that this is, and it's not an indictment against all white women.
	This is about a certain percentage of these white women who do indeed vote for a man who is certainly not speaking to their interests as women or as human beings.
	So I think what she's saying is you can't vote for someone based on his policies if you deem that person to be hateful towards women.
	Or annoying in general, it sounds like.
	Yes.
	So, you know, your point, of course, which you made, is, well, what racism, what misogyny?
	And so now we go to the second clip.
	This was a fascinating...
	No, Face the Nation, MSNBC... No, that's not...
	Face the Nation is CBS? Yes.
	I think so, yeah.
	Meet the press at BNBC. Face the nation.
	Dan, they had four or five of new freshmen coming into the House of Representatives, including Dan Crenshaw.
	And he is the Iraq veteran who was missing an eye, has the eye patch.
	He was a subject of the controversy on Saturday Night Live, which I thought actually was kind of solved in a nice manner the next week.
	Thanks to him.
	Well, of course it's thanks to him.
	And I'm liking this guy now.
	So he's going to call out this penguin, I forget who it is, another freshman coming in, says, well, you know, and we've heard this a million times, he's undermining our democracy.
	He's ripping apart.
	I'm talking about Trump.
	Ripping apart democratic institutions.
	Orange man bad.
	And so Crenshaw says, well, could you just give me some examples?
	And I thought this whole, although it went way over everyone's head, I thought the segment was outstanding to show you just how vapid This argument is.
	But, you know, my experience thus far, and I think Dev can...
	And before we start off, if someone said to you, please give me some examples how Trump is undermining our democracy, would you, I mean, just thinking from any kind of dimension, what kind of examples could we come up with?
	Well, uh...
	I would say that by assigning a lot of super conservative judges on every bench around the country.
	But is that undermining the democracy?
	I'm sorry, yes.
	You're right, you're right, you're right.
	I'm sorry, my mistake.
	Yes, okay, so conservative judges.
	Conservative judges is undermining the democracy.
	Yes, exactly.
	What else is undermining the democracy?
	Rushing through the Supreme Court justices.
	Okay, rushing through, yeah.
	That would be undermining the democracy.
	Belittling and going through staffers.
	Too quickly, he's going through stuff.
	Yes, yes, too much firing.
	Yes, too much firing.
	Too much firing.
	Undermines the democracy.
	Right, right, right.
	Cozying up to Putin.
	Ah, oh yes, any collusion?
	Yes, collusion, yeah, yeah.
	Collusion.
	Cozying up, yes, that's undermining our democracy.
	Going along with not doing something about the American...
	Not American citizen, but the American resident.
	Oh, yes.
	Which is a key term right now.
	Not doing something about that guy getting chopped up into sausage.
	So what we realize here is that none of these are actual things that undermine our democracy.
	And undermining the democracy would be doing something with the, you know, the three branches of government that would really break it, but an actual undermining.
	But, you know, maybe they have some examples.
	Let's listen to this.
	This is a very nice little conversation.
	But, you know, my experience thus far, and I think Deb can touch on this as well as a member of the Progressive Caucus, but no, I don't think that's the case.
	I think we are all working together, rowing in the same direction, trying to save our democracy, to be frank.
	Why do you say save our democracy?
	No.
	Well, look, I think that right now it's important for this majority in the House to engage in some really critical oversight of an administration that is undermining a lot of critical freedoms for folks in our country.
	Undermining a lot of critical freedoms for folks that live in our country.
	That's what we need to remember.
	And so when I say save our democracy, I mean precisely that.
	That I think some of our democratic freedoms and the principles that we live by...
	Heaven, should we try to make a list?
	Some of our democratic freedoms that have gone, that are in harm's way?
	There aren't any.
	No, I think they're all pretty much intact, including the right to go say stupid stuff.
	Still kind of okay.
	I have been under attack for the better part of the last two years.
	Congressman-elect, do you want to respond to that since the president is the leader of your party?
	Yeah.
	Well, I always ask the question, like, what?
	You know, like, what is he undermining exactly?
	You know, what democratic freedoms have been undermined?
	We just had an election where we switched power in the House, democracy is at work, people are voting, and we're in record numbers.
	Sounds about right to me.
	I always ask for examples, and then we can hit those examples one by one, and if it's worth it.
	Now, are you ready?
	So he's going to say, please give me some examples.
	The whole group, including the host, the moderator of this panel, is going to jump in, and it's just like a diarrhea of words.
	And these are all things that are undermining our democracy.
	Criticizing, it's worth criticizing.
	But just kind of this broad brush criticism that the president is somehow undermining our democracy.
	I always wonder what exactly we're talking about.
	I'll be happy to add all of this.
	I'm happy to give you an example.
	The free press, judiciary, CIA, FBI, the voting process.
	Obama indicted...
	You just go like this, FBI, CIA, free pass, blah, blah, blah.
	Everyone's like, I'll be happy.
	And they can't, no one's actually speaking an entire sentence.
	I always wonder what exactly we're talking about.
	I'll be happy now.
	I'm happy to hear about.
	I'm happy to hear about.
	The press, the judiciary, CIA, FBI. CIA, CIA process.
	Obama had many press members under investigation.
	Trump has not.
	So what is the difference here?
	Just this last week, one of the largest media publications in the United States had to go to a federal court in order to essentially regain access to the press room.
	That was for one reporter.
	One reporter.
	Not the whole organization.
	Other media organizations, including CBS, did file amicus.
	That's right.
	And they actually believe...
	That this court case was a First Amendment court case, which it was not.
	But that's okay.
	You know, they really thought Trump really tried to undermine our democracy with that.
	And support.
	Yeah.
	So, I mean, again, I think we obviously would be, it's part of a much larger conversation.
	Because it was disruptive.
	Well, again, highly disruptive.
	I would argue that our president is consistently disruptive in those very same press conferences.
	And I would argue that he takes them with disrespect.
	How is that an attack on the press, though?
	So how is that undermining a democracy?
	And here's an important one.
	How is that attacking the press?
	Because it's literally an attack.
	I've literally been attacked.
	I think it's too bad this kind of just got glossed over.
	The guy's been blown up.
	He was literally blown up by an IED.
	And they have the gall to say, he's attacking.
	I feel attacked.
	And he says, dude, I was really attacked.
	They're all too chicken shit to say anything about it.
	It's very same press conferences.
	And I would argue that he takes them with disrespect.
	How is that an attack on the press, though?
	Because it's literally an attack.
	I've literally been attacked.
	So let's choose our words carefully.
	His language is an attack.
	Okay, so why can't he speak?
	Why is he not allowed to use his own language and freedom of speech?
	Ah, okay.
	Now we get to a very sticky point.
	Why can the President not exercise his First Amendment right and speak freely?
	Well, of course, it's unpresidential.
	Because, and you talked about this, actually.
	It's important that we lead, for example, that we lead from the top.
	Oh, okay.
	And the way that our president is...
	I agree with you there.
	I agree with you there.
	Style is one thing.
	If you want to criticize style, I'm with you.
	Right?
	But to say it's an attack on the freedom of the press, that is a very bold statement.
	By calling the press the enemy of the people?
	Yeah, I don't like that language.
	That is literally...
	Okay, so the style.
	I agree.
	I don't like that language.
	And fake news, of course.
	No.
	Oh, fake news.
	And I'll give you another example.
	Yeah, it's undermining us with fake news.
	His rhetoric about erasing trans people in our country.
	That, to me...
	He's never said that.
	He's erasing trans people.
	Well, it appears that he is discriminating against the LGBTQ community, and I think that's troublesome.
	I think it's worrisome.
	We all have communities across this country, and we mentioned it at the beginning, ripping children away from their parents' arms.
	Those are all things that we...
	That undermine our democracy.
	That I absolutely feel that we have to have oversight on.
	Or how about just, you know, the CIA and the FBI and the State Department and all those important institutions that are fundamental to how our democracy works.
	Oh, wait.
	Intelligence agencies are now apparently fundamental to how our democracy works.
	How about history?
	You're talking about the CIA, which was founded in 1947, is fundamental to the workings of the Constitution.
	Yes, or the FBI that actively sought out people who were communists to shame them and throw them out of the country, ruin their lives.
	That's important for our democracy.
	They keep our democracy working.
	Please, lady.
	Absolutely feel that we have to...
	Or how about just, you know, the CIA and the FBI and the State Department and all those important institutions that are fundamental to how our democracy works.
	What I hear a lot is you don't like what he says sometimes.
	Okay, but then you don't like the...
	Policy disagreements, but you're saying undermining democracy.
	And I am.
	And I want to caution us because those are very bold words.
	If we have policy disagreements, let's focus on those policy disagreements.
	I'm not going to be happy to discuss those at any point.
	But this is what I've been getting at kind of all week, which is we tend to go right at the jugular, right?
	We say you're undermining democracy, you're a bad person fundamentally.
	That's not always true.
	We have policy disagreements on a lot of these things.
	I think it's interesting that we talked about some of the most divisive issues, including immigration, but the thing that set all of you off was the president.
	We have to leave the conversation there.
	Thank you so much.
	Good luck to you in your new work, in your new job.
	So, this morning, Tina, you know, she always gives me a rundown of what she's seeing on Twitter, and she said, I don't know if it was...
	Ben.
	Her boy Ben.
	Who's that?
	Ben.
	Come on.
	Because of the show on Fox.
	Ben.
	Ben Shapiro.
	Ben Shapiro.
	Shapiro didn't have a show on Fox, does he?
	He did.
	He did.
	Yeah, he had a show.
	He's going to be a Fox regular.
	Shapiro...
	Nobody likes him in Fox.
	Shapiro said that, interestingly, Trump...
	Trump's policies, in many ways, are exactly the same as Obama's policies, but, and this is his words, Shapiro said, and I know a lot of people agree with him, that because of the way Trump says it, that's why everyone goes apeshit.
	And I say, no.
	If he did it the same way Obama did it, it would be even worse.
	The press would be up in arms that he's doing it secretly, all this evil stuff.
	And there's no way around this style part of the presentation.
	It doesn't make any difference.
	I agree with you.
	Yeah.
	I mean, there is just such a hatred of this guy.
	Yes, it is.
	They can't do anything about it.
	It's just the way it is.
	What can they do?
	Thanks, Fletcher.
	Let's catch up to the Acosta situation.
	This is the Acosta update.
	That's funny.
	Let's play Acosta update.
	Oops, that misfired.
	Acosta Update.
	This morning, CNN is asking for an emergency hearing.
	This is after the White House has warned that they may pull our colleague Jim Acosta's press pass again.
	You thought this was all settled last week?
	Well, on Friday, the network won a temporary restraining order forcing the White House to restore Acosta's credentials for 14 days.
	But just after that, White House officials sent Acosta a letter saying they may suspend his pass once that order expires.
	CNN chief media correspondent Brian Stelter is with us.
	So TROs, temporary restraining orders, by nature, they last for two weeks, 14 days.
	White House saying, okay, that's all the time you have.
	So CNN wants here the judge to move to a more lasting decision, right?
	A temporary injunction.
	Yes, CNN was victorious in round one.
	I said on Friday, we don't know how many rounds there's going to be.
	Looks like there's going to be many rounds in this legal battle.
	No one seems to be giving any details on the battle itself.
	Because almost as soon as that temporary restraining order was put into effect on Friday, Bill Shine and Sarah Sanders, two of the defendants in the lawsuit, sent a letter to Acosta, a two-page letter that I have here, that essentially lays the groundwork to take the press pass and revoke it again, which would essentially be at the end of the month, 11 days from today.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I really, this is such a, they're such liars.
	This is such a disservice to the viewership, to people who are interested in what's going on.
	And you have to go, you actually have to get through the Wall Street Journal paywall to be able to read actually what's going on, unless you know where to find a docket and actual paperwork.
	Well, if you go to private browser sometimes, or Brave actually is quite good for this.
	No, but I'm just saying that no one seems to want to talk about, you know, what the restraining order was about.
	It was not a First Amendment discussion.
	You know, they're not even at that level yet.
	I know, I just want to make sure people hear it again.
	I want to make sure people hear it again.
	This was not a First Amendment court case, not yet at least.
	But there's a solution.
	There is a solution.
	To this.
	Unless you have another clip, then I'd like to play a companion clip.
	I thought you had something to read in front of you or something.
	No, I have a clip.
	I have a solution clip.
	The solution to the issue of the White House press events.
	Carl Bernstein, very famous man.
	He wrote the...
	No, he didn't write it.
	The great uncovering of Watergate along with Woodward.
	Yeah, all the presidents of him and Woodward.
	Carl Bernstein, who by the way, I put in the show notes again, who has published on his own blog, which still exists today, how many people of the press were working for CIA, including himself.
	But here's his idea.
	It's a fix.
	It will save democracy.
	We need to start thinking of a different way to cover his press conferences and briefings.
	For instance, I don't think we should be taking them live all the time and just pasting them up on the air because they're basically propagandist exercises because they are overwhelmed by his dishonesty and lying.
	So how could we cover them differently?
	Maybe we should Be there.
	Edit.
	Decide as reporters what is news and after the press conference or briefing is over, then go with that story with clips rather than treating the briefing or press conference as a campaign event.
	I think this is a grand idea.
	Isn't that what we do?
	Let's combat propaganda with actual propaganda of editing clips down and presenting it in a certain light.
	Yeah, you would love that, but he's going to take it even further.
	You know, we can still keep democracy alive through this thing called, oh, what is it?
	A website.
	Which they really are, and which we did in the campaign as well.
	We gave them all this free airtime on cable news especially.
	We need to start treating it like a news event.
	And look, in cable, we have websites.
	We can put up the total press conference on our website so that everybody has the chance to see it or the briefing.
	As long as we can provide the spin.
	And it's a matter of record.
	And we can be the place of record so everybody can see every word if they want it.
	But we need to start editing.
	Yes, editing.
	Here's the story, not just give him a microphone, when we know that his methodology is to engage and manipulate us on the basis of lying, propaganda, and agiprop.
	There it is, ladies and gentlemen.
	What was his last word?
	Propaganda?
	Oh, no.
	We need to see his methodology is to engage and manipulate us on the basis of lying, propaganda, and agiprop.
	Anthroprop?
	What the hell is anthroprop?
	I thought it was agiprop is what I thought he said.
	I thought he said agiprop at first, but then I hear it again.
	It's something I've never heard, never heard this word.
	Anthroprop?
	I don't know what he's saying.
	I have no idea.
	Hmm.
	Somebody should put his words on a website so we can understand what he's talking about.
	But this is the guy that many of today's journalists will say, oh, I want to become a journalist because I want to be like Woodward and Bernstein.
	And here he is advocating for editing out any context...
	And just, hey, here's the story and we'll play you a clip.
	Which is, I remember growing up, we were moving towards something very dangerous.
	It was called the news bite.
	The sound bite, I'm sorry, the sound bite news reporting.
	Sound bite news reporting.
	And everyone recognized it as universally bad.
	And this must have been 15, 20 years ago, maybe even a little longer.
	The longer.
	And, you know, this is what it is.
	The problem is the internet has actually given us the opposite of that.
	We can go to a website called, gee, C-SPAN, and you can get the whole, everything in its entirety.
	In context.
	And he doesn't like that.
	No.
	But is he not the bastion of journalism?
	No.
	The funny thing about him, he wasn't even in the news as a high-profile character recently.
	I mean, he wasn't in the 60s and 70s.
	But then he kept seeing Woodward coming up with these thick books.
	He was getting screwed on the whole deal.
	And he wasn't getting this action.
	And so he chimed in as worse.
	He's like a left-wing fanatic.
	It's fascinating to watch him.
	Go on and on about one thing or another because it's all very slanted.
	I just found this to be very...
	It's disturbing that he would suggest that we have to chop it up and just play clips.
	I mean, we know what that means.
	I mean, he's saying it has to be unedited.
	We can't give him a microphone because I guess the people can't parse what he's saying themselves.
	I mean, that's what he's saying.
	Yeah.
	You're too stupid.
	The public's too stupid.
	You're thinking wrong.
	Very common.
	For...
	Monarchical...
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Yeah, for dictatorships.
	Yeah.
	He's advocating for that.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Well, it's insane.
	Coming from him...
	Well, he's been kind of unhinged for quite a while, it seems to me.
	But it goes so unchallenged.
	Brian Seltzerwater is sitting right there.
	Yeah, that's a great idea.
	We should do that.
	They're all in the same boat.
	We can't let people decide for themselves.
	No, no, no.
	This is why they want him off Twitter.
	He'd be a great president if it wasn't for Twitter.
	He wouldn't be president if it wasn't for Twitter.
	That's the point.
	Here I got the AOC. Is this her latest?
	Yes.
	A civics lesson.
	We need a jingle.
	Civics with AOC.
	Yeah.
	To make sure that we take back all three chambers we need is that should we?
	And if we work our butts off to make sure that we take back all three chambers of Congress, rather all three chambers of government, the presidency, the Senate and the House in 2020, we can't start working in 2020.
	Okay.
	First of all, there's something wrong with your clips because I don't know what's happening with the beginning, but it's like...
	That was a mistake.
	Yeah, that's happened a lot lately.
	No, it happened.
	I'll tell you what it is if you want to know.
	Yes.
	When you start up, I'm pulling clips from the internet as opposed to off the old recorder that I used to do it because it's more efficient.
	And...
	It's not every clip, but every once in a while.
	And that clip should have been cut, that beginning part that you're bitching about, should have been cut out by me when I did the edit on the final clip and you wouldn't have said anything.
	But for some stupid reason, I exported the entire audio file instead of just to select it.
	So that was my fault.
	Yeah, but it...
	Okay.
	But now what you're talking...
	I know what you're talking about.
	What you're talking about, because I have left it in on a number of clips because I said, eh, okay.
	I hear it all the time.
	You hear it.
	Well, let's just play a clip and see if it's on there.
	Alright?
	No, let's not.
	Let's deconstruct what she just said so people understand.
	She says, let's just take it step by step.
	I want our non-Americans and many Americans themselves to understand why this is so ridiculous coming from someone who is in the House of Representatives.
	To make sure that we take back all three changes we need is that Is that should we?
	And if we work our butts off to make sure that we take back all three chambers of Congress.
	Okay, so if she starts off by saying all three chambers of Congress, you can say Congress, not the Congress, but you say Congress, which is made up of the House of Representatives and the Senate.
	I do not believe there's a third chamber of Congress.
	Yes, there is.
	There is.
	It's the bathroom on the bottom floor.
	It's a chamber.
	It's a chamber.
	The third chamber of commerce is down there in the basement.
	So now she corrects herself and she correctly says, I mean, it's really the three branches of government, but she tries to make it right by saying the three chambers of government.
	I'll give her that.
	Oh, rather all three chambers of government.
	And the three, I've always learned, branches of government, which is the judicial, the legislative, which is where she is, and the executive.
	Those are the three.
	This is something we learn when we're seven, eight years old.
	Here we go.
	You learn it real early, or you're used to.
	Yeah, well, you used to.
	I don't think it's being taught.
	Apparently, she never learned it.
	Oh, rather, all three chambers of government.
	The presidency, the Senate, and the House in 2020.
	She just kind of forgot.
	She made the Senate and the House of Representatives two of the branches and just left out the one she should be bitching out the most, which is judicial.
	And she leaves this stuff up, too, which I think is brave.
	This is going to be a...
	Pelosi's not going to let this continue.
	She's either going to have a talk to her or something.
	She's going to tell her to stop doing this.
	This young lady has a presidential future, is what I'm going to tell you right now.
	This is the kind of person we elect.
	This kind of person has an absolute chance to become president.
	Not because of this, what she said.
	Just the whole everything.
	Everything about her.
	People love her.
	Love her.
	She is so easy to ridicule.
	She has zero chance of getting any further than she's gotten.
	Okay.
	She is a laughing stock.
	That's what they said about Donald Trump.
	Yes, they did.
	So, all you need is the media, which you are not covering her.
	So that's, you know, once that happens, she has a real good shot.
	She has a real good shot.
	I mean, you have to remember, people say, well, like this, Davinetti wants to run for president, or now who's the latest guy?
	Bloomberg, he's going to run for president.
	Bloomberg, he is Bloomberg.
	Bloomberg, yeah.
	And he is, you know, the difference between A celebrity running for president.
	If you take a look, how many celebrities have been president?
	We have Reagan.
	We've had Eisenhower.
	He was a celebrity?
	Oh yeah, of course he was.
	He was a celebrity.
	I think.
	Yeah.
	You have Trump.
	All these guys had an enormous amount of public profile before they ever became president.
	In fact, Reagan had as much before he became governor of California, which he actually had...
	I think outshone Trump by quite a bit because he was doing, you know, the 60 mule train thing.
	He was doing these speeches.
	He had a TV show.
	He was in the movies for years and years and years.
	And then he became and he was the head of the Screen Actors Guild.
	He's a former Democrat.
	Oh, yeah, that's right.
	That's right.
	He's a former Democrat and Republican.
	However, by today's standards, which is very different, today's media landscape is not the same.
	I would say AOC, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is a big-time celebrity for Democrats.
	Big-time.
	No.
	Big time.
	Jen Briney, who has a level head on her shoulders, if she heard these words come out of anyone else's mouth, including a Democrat, she would ridicule them because she does congressional dish.
	She knows very well how government works.
	She knows her civics.
	She goes on Twitter and says, I love this girl.
	I love this girl.
	So, that's the past, you know.
	It does not matter what comes out of the mouth, as long as it sounds good.
	That's...
	It's just ridiculous.
	Yeah, well, that's America today.
	What you're saying is ridiculous.
	Sadly.
	Now, back to the celebrity thing.
	Trump had this, you know, this TV show that was a big hit, and he was...
	Known forever.
	I mean, he's been always on Letterman.
	He made a lot of TV appearances, bragging about himself mostly.
	But he was doing a lot of work.
	Bloomberg, you know, does not have this profile.
	He does in New York.
	He has zero profile.
	No, he has no profile.
	He's got Bloomberg News Service.
	No.
	But when you see him, he's an annoying guy.
	He's boring.
	He's glib, and he's apparently very short.
	Well...
	I don't want to say anything bad about people that are short, but apparently Bloomberg's like 5'1 or something like that.
	Oh my gosh!
	Petite mail.
	No, but your point, I think your point is well made.
	But in today's world, you don't have to be a celebrity for very long.
	You can't stay a celebrity for very long if you're an AOC. Because it wears thin.
	You're basically an idiot.
	Yeah.
	She is not a bright girl.
	She has got big eyes and a nice smile and she's photogenic, telegenic, and she's excitable.
	And so she's kind of, you know, attractive to the camera.
	And people will follow her just like they follow other people on Instagram.
	They will follow her and they will love her for it and they will vote for her.
	When PewDiePie runs for president, then you're talking.
	Alright.
	Look, we don't have to agree.
	I think she is a definite candidate for presidency in our lifetime.
	She is a celebrity and she is a modern day celebrity and as long as she has an Instagram account will remain a celebrity and people will love her for it.
	It's the political version of the Kardashians.
	It works.
	That's just my opinion.
	I don't think it's comparable to previous times.
	She got that job because she went pretty much door-to-door condemning the other guy who was never even in the neighborhood, and it didn't take long for her to win.
	It's not going to work.
	Instagram bullcrap.
	See, the thing is, I respect what you're saying.
	You just can't say, okay, maybe you're right.
	You say you're wrong.
	No, I can't because you're not right.
	Okay.
	No, and in this case, no, I've done it a million times.
	Don't give me that.
	You've heard me say, well, yeah, you could be right.
	I think you make a good point.
	No, when it's not even possible, I'm not going to give you the benefit of the doubt.
	She's an idiot!
	I will just remind you, I'll go back and I'll get the tape, because we have actual reel-to-reel tape of this show, and I will play you the segment where I said Donald Trump is going to become president, and you say, nah.
	Okay, you find that, I'll be stunned.
	You got it.
	Moving on, I would like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, John C, where the C stands for, can't be president, Dvorak!
	Hello?
	Hello?
	Huh?
	I thought you were saying in the morning.
	I did.
	I said thank you, and I did the whole thing.
	You didn't hear me?
	No.
	This is where you say in the morning.
	Oh!
	In the morning.
	In the morning.
	In the morning, Adam Curry.
	Also, in the morning, the little chips.
	See booths on the ground.
	Feet in the air.
	So I was in the water.
	All the Davis Knights out there.
	Best as I can go.
	In the morning to the troll room.
	That is noagendastream.com where we still have some trolls hanging out on this Thanksgiving Day show celebration.
	Good to see you all here.
	Are you cooking a meal tonight?
	No, John.
	I'm not cooking the meal because, you know, I have to do a show because you're not cooking a meal.
	Remember?
	Somebody's cooking the meal.
	Yes, it was supposed to be me.
	Oh.
	In the morning to Darren O'Neill, just stop.
	I'm annoyed about it.
	Stop.
	Just stop.
	I'm not cooking the meal.
	Tina's cooking the meal because I'm not cooking the meal because of you.
	In the morning to Darren O'Neill, who brought us the artwork for episode 1087.
	Hippie hummus is how I pronounce it.
	Thank you to every Jew in the world who sent me an audio clip of how to pronounce hummus in Arabic or in Hebrew.
	We're in America here, so I'll say hummus.
	You know how many I got?
	You're not pronouncing hummus right!
	What are you supposed to say?
	Hummus!
	Chumas!
	Yeah.
	Sir, I think, was it Sir Brian of London?
	Maybe, I think every Jew producer we have in Israel, and I'm saying it that way specifically, sending me, you're not pronouncing it right!
	Like...
	Or how do you say Germany?
	Deutschland!
	Of course!
	Chumas!
	Chumas!
	Well, we say hummus in the United States, and we say Germany.
	Only our show says Deutschland is kind of a gimmick.
	I want to thank Darren for his artwork, which there was a lot of things we could choose from.
	But we really liked it.
	Of course, a lot of people had hippie hummus as artwork.
	So we went with No Agenda Sports Radio, your number one resource for sports ball news.
	Yes, it's a tribute to your changing your whole attitude about sports.
	Yes.
	Including a sports report today.
	Yes, yes, yes, right.
	Yeah, I had another sports report.
	It's fantastic.
	And I defended the sport I follow and I report on.
	I defended it.
	Okay.
	Yes.
	I think you have every right to defend the sport that you report on.
	And thank you to all of the artists who have...
	We've submitted artwork.
	We use it for a variety of things.
	I think we may even have a little note.
	I think we got a note from the NoAgendaShop.Guys.
	Did you see that come in?
	No.
	I'll have to see if it's in here.
	Well, they're changing the way they split the money because the way it works is if you upload something to NoAgendaArtGenerator.com, If it's used for any of the NoAgendaShop.com schwag and goodies, oh shoot, there you go.
	Tony Cabrera, number one on the list.
	We can read it verbatim.
	There he is.
	I'll do that right now.
	We thank our producers, associate and executive producers for show 1088, leading to show 1089, which is 33 squared.
	33 squared.
	So anything you can come up with for a donation that...
	Represents 33 squared is welcome.
	Tony Cabrera, $914.96.
	That's a good amount.
	ITM, John and Adam, I finally got time to calculate your latest share of the Noah's Agenda shop.com profits.
	After spending 10 hours this weekend calculating totals, I realized I had to modify the 33%.
	Which, by the way, times squared is $10.89.
	Instead of calculating net profits on each item, which vary on item types.
	Let's read this slowly.
	Let me do it, because I've already read the whole note.
	It's important, because we have this model where artists, show, and the no agenda shop, Tony, I guess, guys, we all split this, and we have nothing to do with it.
	We believe it.
	We don't look at your accounting.
	We trust it.
	914.96.
	Love it.
	Thank you very much.
	Here's what's changing.
	He says it's important.
	After spending 10 hours this weekend calculating totals, I realized I had to modify the three-way split model of 33% for 33 for the show, 33 for the artist, 33 for no agenda shop.
	Instead of calculating net profits on each item, which vary depending on item size, type, color, and region ordered from, and then dividing by three, the shop is switching to a fixed royalty system.
	It's not a big difference, but it is important to understand.
	For each item sold, the show, no agenda show, receives $3.33, and the designing artist will receive $3.33.
	This will literally decimate the time to calculate the profit split, which sadly is not the definition of literally decimating, but we understand what you're saying, Tony.
	Now I can simply count the items each artist sold and multiply by $3.33, then send that amount to the show and the artist.
	And I think I totally understand and I think everyone's delighted that they're doing this at all, so I'm okay with it.
	But it is a change from the way it is.
	Pretty much can do whatever he wants.
	Yes!
	He didn't have to give anything to the show.
	Or the artists.
	Technically, no.
	So, very happy.
	Thank you, Tony.
	We love it.
	We love the shop.
	I spend any money I get from the shop, I think I've spent it on the shop.
	I love getting the Space Force t-shirt.
	I love all the stuff from the shop.
	Space Force!
	So it's another part of our value for value network.
	And there you go.
	There we have the noagendershop.com.
	Tony Cabrera coming in as the top executive producer, thanks to the value that he's adding into our network.
	Love it.
	Just love it.
	Followed by Paul Love, who came in at $333.33.
	A lot of 33s there, which reminds people that there's a 1089 show coming.
	Listeners since show one, he claims, and I use the word claims, came in as an avid fan and producer submitting many show intros of the DSC and voice and over DSC guy and follower of John from tech TV and tech mag columns.
	It was a glorious day when the two of you combined to create the best podcasts in the universe.
	It was a glorious day.
	It was a glorious day.
	I appreciate the shout-out from Adam recognizing my early involvement in podcasting.
	I'm certainly not a major player from the early days or fun times with a great group of people.
	It's interesting to see here how, as with much of the world, history is being rewritten by those in the present to mold to their wants.
	In other words, the credit for podcasting is being taken over by a bunch of posers.
	Yeah, well, that's how it goes.
	It always goes that way.
	With this donation, I complete my knighthood records below.
	I've not kept track well, but recent history hits the mark.
	I would like to be titled Sir Daddycast of the Love House.
	That's right, the Daddycast, I remember.
	The Daddycast.
	While giving this time of year seems appropriate to express thanks for what you do, value for value, this date also commemorates my oldest son's 18th birthday.
	I think he's on the list.
	Let me check.
	I don't know.
	Yes, keep going.
	Would love to hear the full version of R-E-S-P-I-C-T at the end of the show and a Too Delicious to Believe followed by Don't Eat Me Hillary.
	And that combo always cracks me up.
	Yes.
	I'll do the short version.
	I'll do the long version of R-E-S-P-I-C-T at the end.
	And I do want to say that it is true that the history of podcasting is just being hijacked and ripped apart.
	As someone sent me a link.
	Do you remember Keith and the girl?
	Yeah, Keith is a girl.
	So I guess...
	They're one of the earliest, earliest of earlies.
	They're very early, but I didn't listen to the segment that was sent to me because the title of the show was Fuck Adam Curry.
	I'm like, okay, great, I'm sure.
	So it's Keith and the Girl, I think, invented podcasting, so we have to be very thankful to them.
	R-E-S-P-I-C-T. It's almost too delicious to believe, my friend.
	Don't eat me!
	You've got karma.
	Fuck Keith and the girl.
	They hate me so much and it's so stupid.
	It's so stupid.
	That's from the pod show days, I'll bet.
	Yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	But I guess now, I don't know.
	I didn't listen to it.
	Well, you should listen to it.
	No.
	No, it'll get me.
	You probably would do the Friendsgiving.
	Hey, Keith, would you like some gravy?
	You're right.
	You're right about that.
	David Slyker in Calgary, Alberta, $315.40, and he will be the last executive producer.
	This donation is equal to $4.33, Canadian.
	$1 for the $3.97 American Thanksgiving, plus 36 months of listening to the show.
	Thanks for being my only source of news.
	Happy Thanksgiving, gents.
	De-douche me and play Donald Loves Nazis for the end of the show.
	I'm going to play it now.
	It's short enough.
	You've been de-douched.
	Donald loves Nazis.
	Donald loves Nazis.
	CNN say that he's KKK and he shall sing hail with it.
	Wow.
	Love that.
	One of the better ones.
	Uh...
	We have a balanced show today.
	We have three executive producers and three associate executive producers.
	I think that's kind of interesting.
	Very nice.
	And the first one is Chris Stewart.
	He did send an email and I didn't.
	You didn't grab the email?
	I do have it.
	Oh, good, good, good.
	You don't actually have it.
	Boots on the ground.
	It's okay.
	Here we go.
	It's a long one.
	I'm not going to read the whole thing because it's really long.
	Good afternoon, John.
	My apologies.
	I forgot to put my donation in the mail back in the summer, and I've been a man overboard for some time.
	However, today with the Canadian Post strike, I will forego putting a check in the mail and make a donation using PayPal.
	I've made the donation in the amount of $270.
	This should help pick up the slack in donations over the holidays.
	How much was this donation for?
	$2.70.
	Yeah, right.
	That's right.
	To give you and Adam an update on the outcome of the USMCA trade agreement.
	And now he makes a long...
	I'll send you a copy of this.
	Does he have a conclusion?
	I'm interested in a conclusion.
	Yeah, it's bull crap.
	So, really, it's just a rebrand?
	Just a rebrand?
	Well, he says that the dairy thing is not a big win for either side.
	I agree.
	I think I agree with that.
	It's not a phony deal.
	Yes.
	And he has a long explanation.
	I'll send it to you and you can read it, Julie.
	You can soak it into our general knowledge base.
	Okay, and if there's anything in there I think we should talk about, I'll bring a report.
	One final note, another Canadian politician to watch would be our Minister of Foreign Affairs, Throughout the new NAFTA talks, a Rhodes Scholar, I might add.
	That means she's a globalist.
	She's one to watch as she plots her course within the Liberal Party.
	If Trudeau and the Liberals go down in flames in 2019, we can expect her to come through unscathed, a definite front-runner in the next leadership race.
	Feel free to share some of all of this note on tomorrow's show.
	And we'll read over the dairy stuff, and then we'll discuss it later.
	He would like a douchebag call-out.
	You can give me a douchebag, followed by a prompt de-douching.
	He feels he needs that.
	Douchebag!
	You've been de-douched.
	He needs some karma.
	He says, my brother Matt is still a douche.
	Douchebag!
	He hit me in the mouth.
	Years ago and hasn't donated for some time.
	John, the recent series of newsletters have been outstanding!
	I thought I'd read that.
	Yes, of course.
	Give him a karma and we'll be out of here.
	And just the...
	Wait, didn't someone want to...
	No, okay, just the karma.
	You got it.
	You've got karma.
	There we go.
	Yes, got it.
	Got it, got it, got it.
	Carrie Lynn Latour.
	Do you think she's of the Latour familia?
	No, maybe.
	Send us some of your wine.
	Send us some bottles of Latour.
	Yeah, send us some Latour.
	40 cents.
	She's in Nova Scotia.
	This donation is being made on behalf of my smoking hot wife, Carrie Lynn's 40th birthday.
	I believe she's on the list.
	Yes.
	This was on the 21st.
	I asked her if she wanted anything special to commemorate her fourth decade.
	Let me take who this came in from her.
	I think it's Renee.
	Yeah, it's her husband, clearly.
	Yeah, it's Renee.
	I asked her if she wanted anything special to commemorate her fourth decade on the planet, and all she wanted was not to mention it was her fourth decade on the planet.
	Go back.
	Go back.
	Read that sentence again.
	This donation may be on behalf of my Spogenhoff wife.
	You've got to read it slowly.
	This is a big deal.
	40th birthday.
	Which was on the 21st, which is yesterday.
	I asked her if she wanted anything special to commemorate her fourth decade on the planet, and all she wanted was a no-agenda producer credit.
	There you go.
	Huh?
	That was her...
	I mean, fourth decade.
	I was going to read that eventually.
	I just made a joke comment in there.
	It's just fourth decade.
	And all she wanted was a no-agenda producer credit.
	That's how I... You know what?
	There'd be no war if everybody felt that way.
	Thank you, John Lennon.
	The whole family loves the program, and the media deconstruction has been critical in maintaining our sanity in the post-Trump era, where it seems sanity is in short supply, as Adam pointed out earlier, with everybody jumping in on that Face the Nation thing.
	Thank you for existing.
	Thank you for existing.
	And thank you for all the artists whose unique cover art drew me to the podcast many months ago.
	Did you hear that?
	I did, yes, of course.
	Please dedouche.
	Yes, see, dedouche, foamer jingle, best jingle ever conceived, some karma, and then there's some administrative stuff.
	Of course, thank you so much, and we will also be celebrating Carolyn Latour's birthday later on in our segment.
	You've been dedouched.
	Oh my god!
	Woo!
	Listen to that horn!
	You've got karma.
	We have a balance of three execs and three associates.
	Mark Valentine being the last one.
	Two, three, four, five, six.
	And he's from the UK and he just needs to find a list.
	He's a UK guy with a list.
	And I'll read the list and we can execute.
	Well, actually, the first one, probably right off the bat, is de-douching.
	You've been de-douched.
	See, note to Adam entitled, Money Laundering.
	Yeah, I read it.
	He says, we're right.
	There's money laundering going on there.
	It's a little longer than that.
	What?
	Gambling?
	Yes, thank you.
	I appreciate your note.
	And then he has a final F cancer karma.
	F cancer karma for my friend Fiona Holland.
	You've got karma.
	Alright, nice balanced list.
	Uh...
	Three executive producers, three associate executive producers.
	If this is your first time in a donation segment, you already know that this is part of our value for value model.
	You've probably heard about it, but this is how it works.
	Just determine what it's worth to them, and this is the result of it.
	And it's all across the spectrum.
	From $1, there's always one guy giving $1, lots of 4s, 11s.
	We got tons of them under 50, which are sustaining producers.
	We really appreciate that.
	But you see this.
	This is what people really think that, you know, This is their value they want to provide to the program.
	People do jingles.
	People do all kinds of stuff.
	We also need the money, and thank you very much.
	It makes it work.
	And these credits also are real.
	Anywhere credits are recognized, you can use now the title of executive producer of the No Agenda Show or associate executive producer.
	Put it anywhere you want.
	It does get you work.
	We'll be thanking more people of $50 and above later on our second segment, and of course another show coming up Sunday.
	Please remember us at...
	Dvorak.org slash N-A And take...
	Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
	Sorry, sorry, sorry!
	Take that turkey knowledge and propagate it!
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Water! Water!
	Shut up, slay!
	Shut up, slay!
	Orange Man Bat.
	Did you ever read that piece I sent you?
	I think it was from 1983, a New York Times article talking about the CIA and how they recruit out of college and where they recruit and it has all the colleges listed.
	Was it recent?
	No.
	Yeah, it was recent.
	It was in the last few days.
	Well, not yesterday, but...
	They have all these colleges listed.
	No, I would have remembered.
	I haven't seen it yet.
	Yeah, well, go find it and read it because it's really good for our spot to spook.
	In fact, I think the name of the email is spot to spook.
	Oh, yes.
	No, I did see it come in.
	But we didn't tell everybody that I spent almost two hours this morning just trying to get Skype started on my machine.
	And then it started by itself.
	That was the scariest part.
	Yeah, this is Welcome to Windows.
	Oh, yeah.
	You should tell that story because, not the whole story, but just the basic...
	Short story.
	Okay, I've had it.
	I've had it.
	You threw your arms up in the air and you said, I'm going to have to use the Amsterdam rig, which is just a smaller version of what he's got.
	And then as he started hooking it up, the other machine got jealous.
	Yeah.
	Yes, it did.
	It went, wait, wait!
	You're not going to make that little HP laptop compete with me and miss the big Dell desktop.
	No.
	But it's a...
	I'm not the only one with this problem.
	Skype has, for some reason, people have an issue where you start it and it crashes immediately.
	Now, I've had issues with Skype before I left where it just crashed, remember, during the show and then I couldn't get it to come back.
	And then the mobile rig...
	It exhibited the same behavior in Amsterdam.
	I was able to circumvent it by disconnecting all USB audio devices, then starting it up, then setting the devices.
	And this morning, I only started this computer, been off all week.
	There was no update applied.
	That at least didn't tell me any update was applied.
	Just started up normal, and Skype would not start.
	And I spent, you know, updating video drivers.
	Could it be this?
	Could it be that?
	And then I called you, and I mean, listen, when I call John and say I need Windows help, you know it's bad.
	It's bad.
	It's really bad.
	And so the ultimate advice was, hey, why don't you just turn on the mobile rig?
	And then, as I was turning on the mobile rig, plugging everything into that, all of a sudden Skype came back.
	Voila.
	I knew this was going to happen because you were cussing out the machine.
	And these machines...
	Yeah, they're sensitive.
	They're very sensitive.
	Very sensitive.
	You have to be nice to them.
	I guess you're right.
	It's like a car.
	Sensitive.
	Very sensitive.
	I bought a lemon.
	And, you know, they sell it to somebody else.
	The thing's fine.
	It's not a lemon at all.
	It's a lemon for you.
	Mm-hmm.
	Since we talked about Bloomberg, I do want to...
	And since I mentioned that...
	One of the schools that was mentioned in that article, along with Georgetown and all these major...
	You got to read this article.
	It's very funny.
	But there's one of the schools mentioned is Johns Hopkins as a place where a lot of recruiting is done.
	And so what got me into this, finding that article, was this piece here?
	Is Bloomberg giving all this money to Johns Hopkins for some reason?
	He yesterday did something extraordinary.
	He gave $1.8 billion dollars.
	To his alma mater, Johns Hopkins.
	And he said that he did it for scholarship funds, for financial aid, for people of low or middle income.
	He doesn't want them to be saddled with student loans after college, as so many people are.
	And this means that they will sort of forever be able to give financial aid for a long, long time to their students.
	So that's a wonderful, altruistic move.
	Is he running for president in 2020 or what?
	I think he is running.
	I think this particular gift follows a pattern.
	He has given hundreds of millions of dollars.
	You can't go on that campus and look in any direction and not see a building that, you know, it's the Bloomberg Center for this, which is all great.
	I think this one's a little bit different because it goes to the idea that education should be available to everyone.
	I think the really interesting thing about Bloomberg, though, is not education.
	It's his big issue is climate change.
	And there hasn't been a politician that's been able to turn climate change into a successful political victory.
	I mean, Al Gore came close.
	And a lot of what he did came after the election.
	But I think that's what you're going to see him move forward on, because that's what he believes.
	Well, he'll never, never win with that.
	That's dumb.
	Yeah, that's what he's doing.
	You know, there was – the evening before I left, there was a big talk show in the Netherlands, a nightly talk show on the public broadcaster.
	And I told you that these politicians in the EU are all just getting jitty with it because of the IPCC report.
	And this main – the minister of infrastructure in the Netherlands, she has – I don't know if they've actually passed this yet, but she's saying, we need 600 million euros to save us from dying from climate change.
	I'm paraphrasing, but it's not far off.
	And so she's in this talk show, and people are like, oh, yes, we have to do all this for...
	Oh, because, you know, you never know what's happening.
	There's either too much water, not enough water.
	We're not going to...
	Our children are going to die.
	And there's this older guy sitting across the table, and he just rips into it, and he says...
	There's a hospital that went bankrupt, and people were wheeled out on the streets to find other hospitals, and you want to give $600 million to this bull crap?
	It was so beautiful to watch.
	Yeah, because people are going, well, shit, that guy's kind of right.
	It's like, oh, you're complaining about the future and this climate change, but we got people actually with IVs strapped to their gurneys on the streets trying to figure out which hospital to be wheeled to.
	They're loving it.
	But I don't think the public will eat it.
	I don't think Bloomberg can get far with it either.
	It's just not a winning strategy.
	It's just that it hasn't worked, I don't think, for anybody.
	No.
	Well, we'll see how it goes.
	He's not going to get past the debates.
	I don't think I've ever seen the guy smile.
	Yeah.
	He's dour.
	He's going to have to stand on at least two Apple boxes.
	You know, you really don't like him being that short.
	No, I don't care about him being that short.
	This was a running gag that Letterman used to use.
	Oh, I didn't realize this.
	Oh, yeah.
	Letterman used to go on and on about how short he was, and then he'd put his arm out, you know, like how tall he was, and then he'd lower it and lower it and lower it.
	He'd just keep doing this.
	He'd keep riding to Bloomberg's height, which, of course, he won't do now.
	I think Letterman really got out of the TV business, the evening talk show business, right on time, because the politically incorrect nature of him, I think, would have hurt him eventually.
	Yeah, probably.
	I think he's hurting all of them.
	Oh, of course it is.
	I just don't know if...
	I don't think he would have been able to do the same stuff.
	No.
	It's alright.
	I'm happy to report it's the same in the Netherlands.
	It's the same in the United Kingdom.
	It's a little different, but it's all, you're racist.
	You hate women.
	You hate Jews.
	You hate whatever it is.
	Everyone's yelling.
	Everyone's just yelling at each other.
	We're at the end of civilization.
	We're at the end.
	I'm telling you.
	We're at the end.
	The exact thing was going on in the 20s.
	Oh, of course.
	But this is not the 20s.
	We have Twitter.
	It's different.
	It's different now.
	It's different.
	This is where we fundamentally disagree on things.
	Yeah.
	Big time.
	Yeah, we do.
	Now, this is something that we probably agree on.
	Here's Mike Lee, and I got turned on to this speech.
	He gave a speech.
	He's the senator of Utah.
	Oh, okay.
	All right.
	Yes.
	I got turned on to this speech.
	He gave a speech at the Federalist Society.
	People are telling us what judges do.
	And who is Mike Lee?
	Mike Lee.
	You know him.
	No, but I'm asking for the other people who happen to be eavesdropping on the conversation.
	He's the senator from Utah.
	And he's very conservative.
	He was a never-Trumper, I believe.
	Was this the guy who wanted to...
	Is he ex-CIA, or is that a different guy?
	No, no, that's the guy who tried to run.
	Oh, he's a Democrat.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, okay.
	And he'd been running against Romney, because Mike Lee is not in this cycle.
	Okay.
	So they said Mike Lee predicts a civil war because of a bunch of things.
	This was some hysterical headline, and so I went and listened to the whole speech, and it was bullcrap.
	The headline was a lie.
	But I got this one clip out of here that I thought was pretty good.
	This is Mike Lee talking about the economy.
	Our economy is at full employment, and it's growing fast enough to distract us, at least temporarily, from our $21 trillion national debt and our $800 billion annual deficit.
	Perhaps it shouldn't be enough, but for the time being, it is.
	But my big concern is, what happens when the next bubble bursts?
	When the next recession hits?
	When the multi-trillion dollar debts accrued by state and local pension funds come due?
	What happens when next we face a genuine international crisis?
	What happens when Treasury yield rates return to their historic average?
	And we see our National Debt Service payments go from where they are today, which is about $300 billion a year, which is not that much higher than they were 20 years ago, when our national debt was, what, one-seventh of its current size, to where they'll go within a couple of years after Treasury yield rates return to their historical average, which will be around a trillion dollars a year.
	Yeah, we're just waiting for the catalyst, aren't we?
	I mean, I'm pretty convinced that it's going to happen very soon.
	Yeah, we're waiting for the catalyst.
	And it's never the same, so you can't use history.
	It doesn't work with the market.
	And this always crashes slightly different ways.
	Slow death is what Horowitz and I kind of think.
	Well, hold on.
	Fundamentally, the things that are really weird right now is we have oil going down rapidly, but natural gas spiking up.
	Which is weird.
	That is weird, but natural gas has been in a depression probably for about a decade, so it's going up under any circumstances.
	This is all manipulated.
	I mean, the price of oil definitely manipulated, but then who's manipulating the natural gas?
	I mean, here's the bottom line.
	I think Trump is out of his depth.
	I don't think he can bring this economy.
	I don't think he's got the momentum anymore that he had.
	It was really running on pure adrenaline.
	I mean, just fundamentally, I can't see it.
	I really can't believe that it's sustainable.
	You?
	No, of course not.
	I would have said that five years ago, and it's still going well.
	Yeah, but...
	I'm not like the guy...
	I mean, I'm reminded of these guys, and there's a bunch of locals or...
	A lot of them were writers and they became other things since public relations guys.
	But when there was the boom, not the dot-com boom, but the real estate boom from probably 85 to like 2007, When it collapsed, there were guys in way early going, oh, this real estate prices are too high.
	It's going to pop.
	The bubble's going to pop.
	It's going to pop.
	It's going to pop.
	And then during that almost a decade of saying the bubble's going to pop, if any one of them would have bought any piece of property, they'd be millionaires.
	But they kept saying it's going to pop.
	It's going to pop.
	And yeah, everything pops eventually.
	And it did pop.
	And now it's recovered actually beyond where it was, at least in some parts of the country, which were a lot of boom areas.
	And, you know, I don't know where it's going to pop again or not, but You can't necessarily stay out.
	Yeah, but you're looking purely at real estate.
	I think it might be multidimensional.
	No, I'm looking at the market.
	I'm looking at the market more than real estate.
	I'm just saying, I'm just exemplifying this mentality where it's going to pop, it's going to pop, it's going to pop, and meanwhile it's going up and up and up and you could have made some money if you had just been in and got out.
	If you were nimble, which unfortunately people...
	I take a lot of this back to what I just said because unless you're...
	With real estate, it's not so much of a problem because it doesn't move that much.
	But with the stock market, unless you're in it daily, you're a day trader or something, you can't get out fast enough.
	You wake up, you go to work, you come home and the market's crashed.
	So that's just a small percentage of the population.
	I mean, yes, of course you can make money speculating on stuff, but the previous economic collapse that It was just such a perfect storm where people could not pay their mortgages and that just dominoed all the way through until we just had to create all this fake money and give it to the banks so that they could be good again.
	And then we put all the bad stuff somewhere else.
	Who just did that?
	Some other country just did that.
	I think it's Greece.
	Yeah, Greece just created a new special purpose vehicle, which has all the hallmarks of a junker.
	You know, it's got no wheels, doesn't go anywhere.
	And it's an accounting trick.
	Just put the bad stuff in there.
	And didn't we do the exact same thing?
	Kind of.
	Yeah.
	So it would have to be something like that.
	Now, if it's slow by a thousand cuts, like DH Unplugged says, I think that's, on one hand, it's not being able to pay student loans.
	That's pretty big.
	That's what, 1.5 trillion?
	That's pretty big.
	But that's a slow process of people not paying back.
	It's not really like, you know, you run out of money and you go bankrupt.
	No, you're in school.
	You still get your loan.
	Right.
	Well, you're not paying back your loan while you're getting it.
	I understand.
	But I'm saying the people who are supposed to pay it back, or hook or crook, are paying it back.
	Since you can't get out of it.
	Yeah, which is a school scam.
	I think healthcare has got to be the one.
	That's what's bankrupting people.
	Well, I don't think...
	Well, maybe.
	That could be.
	It's bankrupting me!
	Well, it's possible.
	But it seems to be, I mean, if you remember the 2007 and 8, I hope this isn't boring, people.
	The 2007 and 8, do you remember the letters of credit weren't being accepted?
	Yes, yes.
	All this foreboding before that crash.
	Yeah, there were more signals, I agree.
	And there's not anything like that going on.
	But then again, before the 29 crash, I've looked at it enough, I think.
	I might be wrong.
	There wasn't anything.
	It just crashed.
	It happened.
	It bounced right back, but then it just drifted to the bottom.
	When it happened, everyone was, oh, all these, I remember I got the front pages of all these papers.
	Oh, Giannini, head of the Bank of America.
	Oh, this is just bull crap.
	There's no reason, it's ridiculous that this happened.
	We're in sound financial condition.
	Every banker in the world kept saying this, and it was on the front page of all the papers.
	Don't worry about it.
	We're in sound financial condition.
	Everything's fine.
	Well, I already know what the history books will look like.
	When we look back on the huge crash of, let's just say 2020, just to make it a fun number.
	When we look back at the historic crash and the deepest depression of all depressions ever, you'll see hipsters with ratted, tattered clothing dragging a half-dead dog behind them.
	And then there'll just be nothing but piles of e-scooters and other dockless bikes everywhere that no one can afford to use.
	And the companies all went bankrupt and can't afford to pick them up.
	Exactly.
	That's what it's going to look like.
	It'll be the best of times and the worst of times.
	Hey, but at least we can get somewhere cheap on a scooter.
	And if the scooters still work.
	Yes.
	I didn't find that boring, actually.
	I enjoy thinking about those things.
	Well, I know I don't enjoy what it could be, but thinking through it.
	Well, luckily, they're talking about people trying to copy how we do business.
	Play this Canadian.
	This is from the CBC. Apparently, Canada is going into the hole because of us.
	But it wasn't all about economics.
	Tonight, we'll look at the politics involved, the breaks to help some media companies, and we'll ask the finance minister why it's all going to cost so much.
	Because one thing is certain, Canada will be going deeper in the red for years to come.
	The fall economic state will be focused on things like competitiveness and the focus on drawing the benefit from the great trade deals we've been signing and moving forward on over the past years.
	To do this, the Liberals have come up with more than $16 billion in new investments and tax breaks for businesses.
	But that will mean continued deficits.
	Remember that promise to balance things by next year?
	Well, there is no balanced budget for the foreseeable future.
	All of this is essentially a response to an unpredictable U.S. administration, one with protectionist impulses, low corporate taxes, and very deep pockets.
	As David Cochran explains, it's clear the Trudeau government has a lot riding on the outcome.
	The Honorable Minister of Finance.
	Like everything these days, Bill Morneau's fiscal update is a response to President Donald Trump.
	One series of measures to respond to U.S. tax cuts.
	To encourage businesses to invest in their own growth and create more good, well-paying jobs.
	Others to steer Canada away from its dependence on the U.S. market.
	Just because we share a trade agreement with the United States doesn't mean we'll always agree with their approach.
	Those are the goals.
	Here's how the liberals want to get there.
	To stay competitive with the U.S., there are billions in tax cuts for businesses to help them expand and buy equipment over the next five years.
	A 100% write-off for manufacturing and processing equipment.
	A 100% write-off for clean tech investment, tripling the write-off for all other business investments.
	There's also more than a billion dollars to diversify trade, including cash to boost roads, rails, and ports to get goods to Asia and Europe.
	Canadians will get the bill.
	But the Conservatives warn this all comes with a big cost.
	They are putting our future in a reckless state of danger by spending our tomorrow on their today.
	That's right.
	Or tomorrow.
	Now, the funny thing about this is a little thing they slipped in, which I thought was unique.
	I didn't realize how subsidized the media is in Canada.
	Oh, yeah.
	And the CBC, I guess, gets over almost a billion and a half dollars a year, which is a nice operating budget.
	You know, the BBC is multiple billions.
	It's ridiculous.
	Multiple billions.
	But they're apparently going to go overboard and give almost a billion to just any old media company.
	Giving money to the media.
	Hey, can we get in on this?
	We cover Canada.
	We should move the podcast to Canada.
	And in an age when journalists around the world are being accused of producing fake news, the Trudeau government has decided to invest in local news.
	Nearly $600 million over the next five years to support media outlets struggling with dwindling revenues.
	It includes a 15% tax credit to encourage Canadians to subscribe to digital news media.
	Hmm.
	And giving charitable status to non-profit news outlets to help them fundraise.
	But perhaps the most important measure, a new tax credit to help cover the labor costs of producing original news content locally.
	Wow.
	You know the rebel?
	You know them?
	Yeah.
	The rebel media?
	This is a link from the troll room, but I opened it up.
	Justin Trudeau is buying Canadian media.
	They say.
	A key question that remains...
	Apparently the Ramble's not getting any of the money.
	No.
	Well, they say we're not for sale.
	Yeah, they're not getting any of the money.
	Well, they're saying they don't want it.
	A key question that remains unanswered for now is which organizations will be eligible for the new measures and which ones will be excluded.
	I think you're right.
	The government said the package will aim to help, quote, trusted news organizations.
	Yes.
	Let me translate that into plain English.
	There's an election next year, and if you're a journalist who wants in on Trudeau's slush fund, he has to know he can trust you.
	So, no tough questions for Trudeau or his cabinet.
	No embarrassing investigations.
	You must demonize any Trudeau critics as bigoted, homophobic, or Islamophobic, and you have to promote Trudeau's policies on everything from the carbon tax to open border mass immigration.
	So here would be a fun test.
	It wouldn't be too hard for us to do just a little podcast, a weekly one, where we pretty much do the same stuff, except we add A, and then we just do this.
	We just say, hey, Trudeau's great, A. And then we'll say stuff like, man, I can't believe anyone wants to investigate him.
	You can trust the guy, A. And we just do that, and then maybe we'll get some money.
	I think this is a plan.
	However, on the other side, what's interesting, if this would ever come our way, and people never really catch these explanations, we do them all the time, why we are not a 501c3 nonprofit organization.
	There's a number of reasons for it.
	One, which you recently explained on the Grimerica show, which people should go listen to, it's one of the most recent episodes.
	But also...
	313.
	If we signed up for that, we have to have a charter and we have to stick to it.
	And basically, the government would have some elements of control over us.
	Correct?
	So...
	You don't want that.
	And there's a lot more paperwork and you got the IRS on your back.
	Well, yes.
	I mean, that's what I'm saying.
	So they can say, well, we don't think you're really doing the...
	You're not really independent or whatever.
	They could just say, oh, you seem too one-sided.
	So, sorry.
	Can't have that.
	Yeah, Trump apologists can't have no money for that.
	No.
	Did I read that Grimerica got deplatformed from PayPal?
	No, I didn't hear that.
	I think there was...
	What would they ever do?
	I think it happened.
	Hold on a second.
	I don't think so.
	Okay.
	Well, you don't have my opinions in very high regard.
	Not today.
	Let's see.
	They were suspended.
	Yes, they were.
	For what?
	For what?
	Okay.
	Here it is.
	They posted a screenshot.
	You can no longer do business with PayPal.
	After a review, we decided to permanently limit your account as we found potential risk associated with it.
	Therefore, we will put a hold.
	I guess they had a 180-day hold on the money, too?
	Geez.
	Yeah, I've heard that.
	And now I don't know if they're back or not.
	Well, maybe they are back now.
	There definitely was some problem.
	It could have been who knows what.
	But, you know, this is part of what I think is very, well, it's interesting times to live in when you have a lot of services and a lot of fundamental things that we come to rely on are technology-based.
	So the most recent one is Airbnb.
	Actually, I have a clip.
	Let me just share that so we can listen to it.
	Airbnb is going to remove from its listings all homes in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
	The company says it's made the decision because settlements are at the core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians.
	Palestinians have welcomed the decision.
	Israel has called it shameful and threatened legal action.
	Now, whether you agree with it or not is completely irrelevant if you have a house that you kind of count on the income from Airbnb and they just universally decide, we're deplatforming you because you're the wrong person, you live in the wrong place, or whatever their reason is, which is well within their complete right to do that.
	Yeah, they have every right to do that.
	Yeah, so you've got to be careful how much you rely on this stuff.
	Well, this is the same thing.
	This is a fractal of microservices architecture.
	Yeah, except this is the consumer side.
	The fractal goes out.
	This is out.
	It's just a big version of the small problem.
	And it's just a huge problem.
	I think Alex Jones, by being the jerk that he is in this regard, I'm totally convinced that That he pushed the envelope just to get the platform to show what the problem was.
	Yes, I agree.
	I think he did too.
	Yeah.
	Because he actually...
	He called me and said, don't come on the show anymore.
	Did I tell you that?
	No.
	Yeah, this was a long time ago.
	Not a long time.
	The last time I canceled...
	Yeah.
	I said, I don't want to go on the show.
	He said, I don't want you coming on the show because they're going to go after your money.
	That's what he literally said.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	He said, don't...
	It was probably nice of him to keep you from coming on the show.
	Of course it was.
	He only did the show once or twice, right?
	Yeah, but he wanted me to come on the show.
	I can't remember what it was for.
	It was that substitution when he was...
	Oh, yes.
	You're right.
	You're right.
	You remember better than I do.
	Yeah, and I was like, well, and I said, you really shouldn't come on the show, because I was talking to his producer, and then he calls me and said, no, no, they're going to go after you, dude.
	Don't do it.
	It's not what, you don't want it.
	And I think he, yes, I think he's, yeah, he probably does do that on purpose for making a point, and you've got to appreciate that.
	I do.
	I mean, it doesn't help him or anybody else, but yeah.
	I mean, these payment systems, we're going to see.
	It's an issue.
	Bitcoin, baby, I hate to say it.
	Hey, how's that Bitcoin doing?
	Holy crap, people must be jumping out of windows about now.
	Well, I feel sorry for the people last Thanksgiving that were...
	Oh, it was probably 15,000 Thanksgiving last year, wasn't it?
	It was on the way.
	Yes, that was the year that, according, I think it was Horowitz who had this anecdote about all these young'uns, you know, their Bitcoin nutballs, going to their Thanksgiving dinner with their...
	In their Lambo!
	...getting the Bitcoin, get them all jacked up, all the old folks jacked up about Bitcoin, and then this Thanksgiving's going to be a little different.
	You broke me, son!
	I took your advice and now I'm broke.
	Me and your mom are living in a shelter.
	So, what is it now?
	It is now 45, 25.
	It was around...
	42 the last time I left.
	Yeah, it was around 65 two weeks ago.
	Here's my favorite response.
	Let me see.
	Was it really about...
	I think you're right.
	It was near Christmas time.
	You're right.
	That's when it went up to 18,000.
	Almost 20,000.
	Yeah.
	Here's the response I like the best.
	Hey, one Bitcoin is still worth one Bitcoin.
	It's my favorite.
	It's my favorite response.
	Because it's true.
	If you use it purely as a transmission mechanism and you're in and out, yeah, it's fantastic.
	So much more efficient than banking.
	Well, I don't know about the efficiency part.
	Yes, very efficient.
	You're going to argue that?
	That you can send money within 20 minutes to someone guaranteed through Bitcoin versus three days rigmarole with banks?
	But pop money is pretty efficient.
	And not internationally.
	Doesn't work internationally.
	Could be.
	No, it is so.
	I know because I have a daughter and we transfer money.
	Usually the wrong way.
	Usually the wrong way from me to her.
	That's usually the bad transfer.
	Oh yeah, it's because you're financing terrorism.
	Yeah.
	So yes, it's a very efficient payment network.
	Not for buying stuff, but for just transferring money.
	I think it's fantastic.
	So apparently in Canada, they also have a problem with depression.
	Not the depression, which is what we're talking about, but we're switching back to depression.
	And so the Canadians, I get a kick out of this.
	I'm not going to do this Canadian thing forever, but I got kind of a kick out of some of these stories.
	I want you to play these clips about depression and play this one, just another word for lobotomy.
	Oh.
	Close to a million Canadians live with depression that actually resists treatment.
	Shock therapy has long been considered an effective approach, but it can come obviously with serious side effects.
	So doctors are exploring less invasive treatments that go straight to the source of the problem.
	Kasparusi explains.
	It's hard to beat some quality time with your son.
	You can throw it a little bit harder at me.
	For Skye Saslov, it's a welcome break.
	Look at your target.
	For the past several years, she's struggled with debilitating depression.
	I don't even know how to explain it because it's not angering.
	It's frustrating.
	Saslov has what's known as treatment-resistant depression.
	Sorry.
	Interference.
	She has major depressive disorder which has been chronic going on for over seven years and she has either failed to respond or failed to tolerate a number of anti-depression treatments.
	So earlier this year, Saslov tried something different, agreeing to be part of a study at Sunnybrook Hospital in Toronto that uses a non-invasive approach to treating this kind of depression.
	With her head shaved and fitted with a metallic headgear, Saslov was placed in an MRI. Once inside, doctors then used ultrasound beams to heat and disrupt the precise part of the brain that causes depression.
	Think of it as an adjustment to the circuits of the brain.
	And so the MRI-guided-focused ultrasound goes directly to that circuit, makes a cut or a lesion in that circuit, and stops it from firing when it shouldn't be firing.
	Holy crap!
	Is that permanent?
	Duh!
	Oh my god!
	Clip of the day!
	Clip of the day!
	A lobotomy!
	An actual cyber knife modern lobotomy!
	Yes!
	Well, let's go to the next clip.
	Wow!
	This is another one.
	This is another word for electroshock therapy.
	Other ways to treat the illness...
	What you just heard was a very high frequency magnetic pulse.
	One of those is a brain stimulation treatment that uses magnets instead of electricity to induce a seizure.
	Magnetic seizure therapy was really evolved out of this idea that producing a seizure for therapeutic purposes is very effective in depression.
	Damn.
	Just treating myself.
	I like the way they said the lobotomy.
	They said it's non-invasive, thus it's good.
	Yeah, because it just penetrated through your skull with, what was it, infrared laser?
	What the hell were they doing?
	Sonic.
	Sonic.
	Yeah, oh, that's non-invasive.
	Well, I guess technically...
	What is the definition of invasive?
	It doesn't leave a hole, I guess.
	Just a bird mark?
	Yeah, it doesn't leave a hole, even though you're...
	Holy crap.
	Now, this is, to me, is the classic example of calling one thing something else to make it palatable.
	To make it sound great.
	To the idiots who listen to this stuff, say, oh, that's much better.
	It's the same thing.
	Now, I want to just throw this in, but I was looking into the history of vasectomies.
	Not recently, but some time ago when I was doing my vasectomy material.
	And if you look into the history of vasectomies, vasectomies were used as a substitute for what is happening when you cut the balls off?
	It's called a...
	Unic?
	No, you cut the balls off is the name for that.
	Castrate?
	Castration.
	So...
	Apparently in the 20s or I think during our era where we're all in all these eugenics and all this stuff, the Americans in particular, we're castrating people, especially I think a lot of blacks and a lot of other people in the South mostly.
	They'd get into prison and say, well, you're chasing around little boys and so we're going to castrate.
	Wasn't this part of the Eugenic Society of America's program?
	Didn't they do that as well?
	Yeah, maybe.
	So what happened though was when they were castrating people, You know, they knock them out and they cut the nuts off.
	And then they throw a friend's giving.
	Take the nuts and cook them into gravy.
	So then the guys apparently were irked by this.
	And they'd come in and track down the doctor who cut their nuts off and kill them.
	And this is becoming a real problem.
	If you're a doctor.
	Yeah.
	So one doctor who's, I don't have the details because I don't have this paperwork in front of me, but there's a very famous doctor who invented the vasectomy as a substitute for castration because it did the exact same things.
	It calmed the guy down.
	It did all these things.
	It essentially was a castration, but it was done inside the balls, inside the nutsack, so the guy wouldn't notice.
	So he'd look around.
	I'm still good.
	And so he was happy camper.
	He wouldn't go kill the doctor, which he used to do.
	So my commentary about people getting themselves castrated by getting a vasectomy, I don't think is completely out of bounds.
	No.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	I don't want to spend too much time on the vasectomy stuff and castration.
	I'm still at the lobotomy stage.
	And this is seen to be like some breakthrough situation.
	This is not a breakthrough.
	You need to run away from this.
	And is this paid for by the great Canadian health insurance?
	I'm sure it is.
	Well, I have a companion story to that.
	Not as funny, but we do have some issues.
	A well-known drug thought to reduce PTSD symptoms and suicidal thoughts could actually make them worse.
	A new study tracked patients who took prezocin for eight weeks and found the drug worsened nightmares and didn't do much to lessen suicidal thoughts.
	Two of the participants had to undergo emergency inpatient psychiatric care, though no one attempted suicide during the study.
	The results back up a study from earlier this year that also showed Prezosin brought on new or worsened suicidal thoughts in 8% of military veterans suffering from PTSD. How about that?
	Some kind of big pharma thing that is making it worse instead of better.
	Surprising.
	Yeah, I'm stunned.
	How do you find information like that?
	Maybe they should go over to Scandinavia and get you one.
	What's the name of that procedure?
	I don't know.
	Oh, come on.
	Didn't they mention it in the clip?
	I don't remember them mentioning it.
	Yeah, I want to listen to it again.
	Close to a million Canadians live with depression that actually resists treatment.
	I'm going to write it down.
	Shock therapy has long been considered an effective approach, but it can come, obviously, with serious side effects.
	So doctors are exploring less invasive treatment.
	Is shock therapy still really a thing?
	Do people use shock therapy still?
	Well, in Canada, they're using magnets to cause it.
	No, no, but...
	You get a jolt.
	But that still happens today?
	Shock therapy?
	I believe it does.
	...treatments that go straight to the source of the problem.
	Pastor Brucey explains.
	It's hard to beat some quality time with your son.
	You can throw it a little bit harder at me.
	And I'm really appreciating the whole clip now.
	You know, throwing a ball with your son back and forth.
	Just let us do this non-invasive thing.
	This is almost a native ad for this procedure.
	Sky Saslov, it's a welcome break.
	Look at your target.
	For the past several years, she's struggled with debilitating depression.
	I don't even know how to explain it because it's not angering.
	It's frustrating.
	Sounds like Trump syndrome.
	She sounds very, very even-keeled here, though.
	Yeah, but if you look at her, she's totally a candidate for Trump syndrome.
	Okay, Trump derangement syndrome, you mean TDS? It's frustrating.
	Saslov has what's known as treatment-resistant depression.
	Treatment-resistant depression.
	Which means their shit doesn't work on her.
	Treatment resistant, so it's TRD. Sorry, interference.
	She has major depressive disorder, which has been chronic, going on for over seven years.
	Wait, wait, stop a second.
	In the clip, she's throwing a ball back and forth with her kid.
	She's saying, look at the targets.
	She's saying a bunch of dumb stuff nobody does when they play cats.
	It sounds like her kid is a retard.
	That's the problem with the clip.
	She's a little kid.
	And so she throws the ball over his head by mistake and says, sorry, interference.
	Interference?
	Blaming a non-existent entity for her fuck-up.
	Oh, so it's like her treatment-resistant depression interfered?
	I don't know what interfered, but it seems like she's one of the blame persons.
	She's blamed everybody for herself.
	Wait, we need some disclaimers for this treatment.
	Invisible forces may cause you to throw things in weird directions.
	And she has either failed to respond or failed to tolerate a number of antidepressant treatments.
	So earlier this year, Saslov tried something different, agreeing to be part of a study at Sunnybrook Hospital in Toronto that uses a non-invasive approach to treating this kind of depression.
	I like how they've categorized treatment-resistant depression as a kind of depression.
	Isn't it just, you know, just, I don't know.
	Okay, non-invasive approach.
	I'm writing this down.
	With her head shaved and fitted with a metallic headgear, Saslov was placed in an MRI. Once inside, doctors then used ultrasound beams to heat and disrupt the precise part of the brain that causes depression.
	Think of it as an adjustment to the circuits of the brain.
	Adjustment to the circuits of the brain.
	Well, you know, this is pioneering work.
	Because you can treat anybody with stuff like this.
	We're going back to medieval times.
	And so the MRI-guided-focused ultrasound goes directly to that circuit, makes a cut or a lesion in that circuit, and stops it from firing when it shouldn't be firing.
	Fantastic.
	That's just fantastic.
	This is one of the best things I've heard in weeks.
	Wow.
	Seriously, I love this.
	We're going back to medieval times, rebranding it, rebranding it, and then we're just cutting people's lobotomy, you know, we're giving them lobotomies.
	What exactly do you cut out with a lobotomy?
	You cut the frontal lobe.
	Frontal lobe, yeah.
	Wow.
	Yeah, well, they play it all, you know, I'm surprised there wasn't some nice music in the back.
	I mean, I think I might maybe be obsessed with this now.
	Yeah.
	I was noticing you really got into this.
	Well, come on.
	This is crazy.
	Something I did not expect.
	Well, maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but the whole lobotomy thing, I mean, didn't we kind of get rid of that?
	Yeah, it was actually faddish for a while.
	In recent history, how long ago were lobotomies performed?
	I think they were performed into the 50s.
	Huh.
	But don't you usually then become like kind of docile and very quiet?
	Yeah.
	It's a solution.
	It's a solution.
	It's our final solution for Canada.
	I'm going to show my soul by donating to No Agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on No Agenda.
	In the morning...
	I'll start to thank a few people here for $10.88.
	This is a precursor to show $10.89, which is $33 squared, which is a big deal.
	Kalen, this store is at the top of the list, $161.80.
	He says, Happy Turkey Day.
	Donald Borosky.
	Ah!
	This is from Spokane Valley, Washington.
	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and he sent a note.
	Ah, on the Federation paper?
	Federation paper?
	Yeah, Federation paper.
	Hey, guys.
	As we enter the fat season, Thanksgiving to Christmas, I offer some financial nourishment in the no-agenda lean season.
	Let me recommend a documentary, Human Zoos, America's Forgotten History of Scientific Racism.
	Yay.
	Alright, I'll look for it.
	Sounds like a Saturday night rom-com.
	Among other things, the documentary points out that eugenics, which we were just talking about, was the scientific consensus.
	All 97% of scientists agree in the 20s and 30s.
	Cheers and beers, Sir Donald of the Fire Bottles, Viscount of Eastern Washington.
	Gracias.
	I should mention we've got a couple other notes I'm going to just read quickly before I go on.
	The list isn't that long.
	But we do have a Sir Timothy of the No Fix title did a meetup.
	He hosted Local One's first Chinese restaurant meetup.
	I got a box too.
	Yes, we got these fortune cookies that were no agenda messages inside.
	It was really great.
	And it was very funny.
	What did you get?
	What did you get?
	I got some Manning stuff and I got Sharpton.
	Yes, and if you don't, if people just give these cookies to someone, this is not a bad idea.
	You just give them to somebody and don't tell them what the deal is.
	And they look, what the what?
	I mean, Elise, who's with us for the break, she said, I wish I had like a hundred of them.
	I'd be handing them out to everybody.
	Just for that exact reason.
	To say, what?
	What does this mean?
	Meanwhile, Short Comfort sent in a note, a long-time producer.
	It's a little piece of porcelain, a little bird.
	I didn't get one of those.
	A warpling bird.
	It's so loud, I really have to go way away from the mic because I know it's killing you.
	But it's cute, and I want to thank him for that.
	Onward.
	Sir Kevin McLaughlin, the Viscount of Luna in Locust, North Carolina.
	$108.90.
	$108.90.
	Zippy the Pinhead, $108.80.
	Ian Field, $100.
	Thomas Burke, $100.
	Sir Code Monkey in Renner, South Dakota, $100.
	Alan D. Peterson, $100.
	Rose Chavez in Scottsdale, Arizona, boob, $8008.
	And she says, now you have a fabulous pair.
	Boop, boop.
	Sir Jonathan of the Double-Bladed Paddle in Maplewood...
	Maplewood, Missouri, 73 is K-E-0-I-H-T. Mark Annabelle, 70-53.
	Sir Rick in Arlington, Washington, 69-96.
	Sean Florian in Walker, Michigan, 69-69.
	Miguel Lopez, 67-89 in Flanders, New Jersey.
	Sir Tom Beshears in Cookville, Tennessee, 66-60.
	Donald Napier, 66.60.
	Angela Castaneda in Henderson, Nevada.
	Ah, Dame Angela.
	Hey, hey.
	Dame Angela.
	60.
	Andrew Thompson, 56.78.
	Needs a donation from the Knight of the Blue Water area.
	I hope Adam returns safely from the tyranny of the EU. Yes, it was tough.
	They scanned my retinas on the way out.
	Daniel Smith.
	Double nickels on the dime.
	Chris Kincaid, double nickels on the dime.
	Jason Petrie, double nickels on the dime with a happy Thanksgiving.
	J. Robert Ballard in Redding, California, 51.
	Sir Carl with a K, Rochester, New York.
	David Corbinu, 5033.
	Sir Carl was 5033, too.
	Andrew Benz, 5005 from Imperial, Missouri.
	And finally, these are all $50 donors, name and location.
	Starting with Sir Patrick Macomb in New York, Andrew Guzik in Greensboro, North Carolina, Jason Rahn in Shipbottom, New Jersey, Ronald Cedario, parts unknown, George Wojcic, I'm guessing, in Universal City, Texas.
	Where is that?
	Universal City, Texas?
	I don't know.
	Chris Whitten in Millboro, Virginia.
	I think he's a sir.
	Sir Other Brother in Norman, Oklahoma.
	Sir John Hite in Folsom, California.
	Dennis Price in Pine Grove, California.
	Jess Moore.
	Alan Bowes in Langley, B.C. Gary Quinn in Parts Unknown, and last but not least, Daniel Laboy in Bath, Michigan.
	I want to thank all these folks for supporting us and producing show 1089.com.
	The 1088, the precursor to 1089, which is 33 squared.
	That's the big show for Sunday, 33 squared.
	Big show.
	Big number.
	A little bit of housekeeping before we thank everyone under $50.
	We have had a spam issue, it seems, amongst a lot of members of the No Agenda family.
	You're getting blamed for it.
	It's not your fault.
	But I think we've both looked into this.
	People are receiving an infected Word document, apparently coming from you, which it is not.
	Also, your machine is not infected.
	In fact, I don't think it has anything to do with your email, other than they're using your email address as a confidence hack.
	Well, they are using old emails sent into the show and sent from other people from about a year ago.
	I think that's from people's own machine.
	Oh, that could be.
	Yeah, I think once you get the virus in a dock...
	Then you start sending stuff.
	I mean, it goes back and forth between people now, too.
	It's, like, very weird.
	But at no point do I see anywhere in the headers your email server, your service, or any of that used.
	But it's really crap because everyone is emailing me saying, John's got a virus!
	They're emailing me, too.
	Well, no, a lot of people are afraid to email you, and they email me.
	I'm afraid to email them because I got a virus from them.
	Oh, that's funny.
	No, it's not funny.
	Well, I didn't get a virus usually.
	That doc file doesn't work.
	And the thing is, if the document was any good...
	First, let's put it this way.
	If there was a virus, we'd be putting donate to the show in the attached document.
	Good point.
	Just some crappy ass document with a virus that I think goes in.
	It seems to work with Outlook.
	And it goes in and emails people.
	It's an Outlook thing, yeah.
	But somewhere, the headers are being rewritten.
	Or no, the headers aren't even being rewritten.
	Just the reply to or the from field is being rewritten as from you.
	But the entire path of the email has nothing to do with you.
	It's very destructive.
	I don't think there's any way to stop it, really.
	Yeah, I think it's some Dvorak hater, some Mac guy.
	Yeah.
	Let's do this to him because he hates the Mac.
	These people hate me.
	Oh, well, that's not okay.
	No.
	Tell me about it.
	No, that's not nice.
	All right.
	Well, so anyway, just so everyone knows, there's really not much we can do with it.
	Yeah, if you see Dvorak.duck, I'm not mailing anything out that says that.
	No.
	I love when people...
	Hey, I looked at this document.
	There's nothing in it.
	I sent a copy to you.
	Thanks.
	Don't want that.
	Alright, so we can't do much about that, but eventually I think it'll go away if people...
	Stop emailing to other people.
	That's probably a good idea.
	And I would like to thank everyone who supported the show today, including those under $50, typically for reasons of anonymity, but we do have people on our subscriptions.
	You can check those out at dvorak.org slash na.
	It is very important to keep the show, just to keep it running.
	As you can see, we're here.
	Thanksgiving Day.
	Not a holiday everywhere, we realize that.
	So still reason to bring you a show.
	And for the people in America, kind of an extra bonus.
	Although we have kind of a light showing in the troll room today, but understandable.
	And again, another show Sunday.
	Please show your value for our value by going to...
	And a couple of karmas to take care of.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got...
	Karma.
	Karma.
	As we start off with a belated one that's for in the future, we're going to say that Andrew Davis, we didn't do this on the last show, really wants to say happy birthday to his smoking hot wife, Emma, who celebrates today.
	And Paul Love, we heard him earlier, saying happy birthday to his oldest son, who turns 18.
	And Rene Latour says happy birthday to his smoking hot wife, Corinne Lynn Latour.
	Please send some bottles of your product and happy birthday from all your buddies here.
	The best podcast in the universe.
	And then we have one nighting to do.
	So this is always exciting.
	If you can grab your blade, we'll get that done.
	We need to...
	Hello?
	I got it here.
	I need to put some ranch hand.
	Paul Love!
	Podcasting pioneer!
	PD, Paul Love!
	Thank you very much, Paul.
	You have joined the exclusive ranks of the No Agenda Roundtable for your contributions that total over $1,000.
	I know you've done it for a long time.
	We really appreciate it.
	And I hereby pronounce to Kate the...
	Sir Daddy cast of the Love House, and you are welcome at the roundtable where we have hookers and blow, rent boys and chardonnay, craw ship and cane breaks, single malt scotch, early times, and BF4. We've got harlots and hound doll, redheads and ryes, cowgirls and coffin barnes, rouganess women and rosé, geishas and sake, vodka and vanilla, bong hips and bourbon, sparkling cider and escorts, ginger ale and gerbils, and mutton and mead, a big favorite for all the knights and dames at the roundtable.
	You can get your mutton and meat, and more importantly, your ring, your sealing wax, your certificate, all by going to noagendanation.com slash rings, fill in the forms, send off the information to Eric DeShiel.
	We'll get that out to you as soon as possible.
	And thank you all for supporting the No Agenda Show.
	After all, you're producers.
	It's what you do.
	We appreciate it.
	Dvorak.org slash NA. Obama had a big conference, a big hoo-haw.
	The Obama Foundation.
	Oh, yeah.
	Here he goes.
	You saw this?
	No, but here's Obama going in the direction, following in the footsteps of Bill.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	He does...
	Well, he might...
	You know, he can work...
	How much money you can make on one of these things?
	He can make some money on it.
	Now, the Daily Mail, interestingly, had this big headline saying, Obama says Trump has mommy issues!
	So I go and I listen to their little clip there that they've clipped out of context.
	It was not at all about Trump.
	But it was kind of funny.
	It was about climate change and about all of us.
	I mean, I didn't take it as a dig at Trump, but that's what the Daily Mail thought.
	But here's what he said.
	Emissions by, let's say, 30%.
	Without any...
	It's not like we'd all have to go back to caves and...
	You know, live off, you know, fire.
	You know, you know.
	We could have electricity and smartphones and all that stuff, which would buy us probably another 20, 30 years for that technological breakthrough that's necessary.
	The reason we don't do it is...
	Hold on.
	What are you talking about?
	Is there a technological breakthrough that's coming in 20, 30 years?
	Or are we just going to start nuclear now?
	Yeah.
	I don't know what he's talking about.
	Probably another 20, 30 years for that technological breakthrough that's necessary.
	The reason we don't do it is because we are still confused, blind, shrouded with hate, anger, racism, mommy issues.
	I mean...
	So he may actually mean Trump there to the insiders, the people who are chuckling, I guess, but I didn't take it that way.
	He's just...
	Isn't he talking about all of us?
	We're all...
	Yeah, he's basically reading Twitter.
	You know, we are...
	We are fucked with stuff.
	And...
	And so, if that's the case, then the single...
	Most important thing that we have to invest in is not all...
	And look, I'm a huge supporter of science and technological research and social science and evidence-based learning and all that good stuff.
	Good stuff.
	People call me Spock for a reason.
	I believe...
	Hold on.
	When did people start calling him Spock for a reason?
	Nobody calls him Spock.
	He said right there, people call me Spock for a reason.
	Damn.
	...and all that good stuff.
	People call me Spock for a reason.
	I believe in reason and logic and all these enlightenment values.
	I've never heard anyone call him Spock because he's so reasoned.
	He's a brainiac.
	...that really we have to invest in is people.
	We've got to get people to figure out how they work together.
	Wow!
	A breakthrough!
	How do we get people to work together in a cooperative...
	Thoughtful, constructive way.
	Sucking in soot.
	So, I played that clip just to play the next clip.
	Because what he's saying here is we will all die.
	We will not make it out of the climate change hellhole where we all are terminated by excessive heat with our iPhones because we can keep them.
	Because people don't work together.
	Because we haven't figured out how to work together.
	And then he goes in to tell you a history of his political career, in a nutshell, two minutes, and how he worked together with everybody.
	Or did he?
	Here's the interesting thing that happens when you're president, or when you go through the experience of being president.
	I'm not sure why that's funny.
	He said, here's the interesting thing about president or when you're going through the experience of being president.
	Maybe I missed something in the context, but people thought that was funny.
	Here's the interesting thing that happens when you're president or when you go through the experience of being president.
	Why is that funny?
	Do you have any idea?
	I think what he's saying, I think what this audience is thinking he's saying, and he's trying to say it, but he's not saying it, is that I was president, Donald Trump just went through the experience, he's not president, he's not my president, he's no good.
	Got it, got it.
	Remember, we're talking about working together with people you may not agree with, working together to save humanity.
	Here's how he did it.
	So you start off, you know, you're a community organizer, and you're struggling to try to get people to recognize each other's common interests, and, you know, you're trying to get some project done in a small community, and you start thinking, okay, you know what, this alderman's a knucklehead, and, you know, they're resistant to doing the right thing, and so I need to get more knowledge, more power, more influence, so that I can really have an impact.
	And so you go to the state legislature, and You look around and you say, these jamokes.
	Whoa!
	Whoa!
	Using our word.
	Your word in particular.
	Well, I say R because I got it from Tina.
	So maybe it's a Chicago thing.
	Jamokes.
	Maybe.
	Huh?
	Maybe.
	Could be.
	So, you know, he didn't work with people as a community organizer.
	No, he sees her mostly.
	Everyone's dumb.
	Yeah, because they're knuckleheads.
	No good.
	So I needed more power.
	More power.
	So I went to Senate.
	And then there's just jamokes.
	So that I can really have an impact.
	And so you go to the state legislature and...
	Oh, no, it's the state legislature, sorry.
	...go around and you say, well, these jamokes are me and me.
	Not all of them, but I'm just saying, you know, you start getting that sense of, this is just like dealing with the aldermen, right?
	Idiots!
	No, I've got to do something different.
	So then you make sure there's a sex scandal, including a celebrity, so you can get a Senate seat free by getting kicked out, all kinds of backroom dealings, so presto, you're a senator!
	Then you go to...
	The U.S. Senate.
	And you're looking around and you're like, oh man.
	Oh, what?
	What?
	Let's work together, everybody.
	Working together.
	And then when you're president, you're sitting in these international meetings.
	And it's like the G20 and you've got all these world leaders.
	And it's the same people.
	That's how you work together.
	That's how we save the world.
	By calling people names.
	That's perfect.
	Which is really interesting.
	What?
	He thinks everyone's an idiot but him.
	That's exactly right.
	And you've got all these world leaders.
	And it's the same people.
	Which is really interesting.
	Same dynamics.
	You know, it's just that there's a bigger spotlight.
	There's a bigger stage.
	But I'm only partly joking about that.
	The nature of human dynamics does not change from level to level.
	Which is why I've been quoted saying this sometimes.
	What do you think he's about to quote?
	Which he's been quoted many times, apparently.
	W.E.B. Du Bois?
	Most of what you need to learn, you can actually just read Dr.
	Seuss, right?
	That's all we need.
	Dr.
	Seuss.
	Dr.
	Seuss.
	Because, you know, there's the story of the Sneetches, and like, people, the Sneetches have, the ones with stars think they're better than the ones who don't have stars, and they got an attitude, and then...
	You know, there's the Lorax who's trying to tell people, don't cut down the trees because then the fish are going to die, right?
	I mean, it's all pretty much there.
	And the reason...
	No, no, no, I... Perfect example of how working together can save us from the death of climate change.
	With our iPhones, we'll be able to keep them.
	With some technological revolution in 30 years.
	I'm surprised Dr.
	Sousa...
	Well, we'll talk about that on some other show, but...
	He did a lot of racist cartoons in World War II. I miss Obama.
	So I'm watching Democracy Now.
	They have an interview with this guy, Ronan Bergman.
	Mm-hmm.
	And he wrote a book.
	He's an Israeli journalist, investigative journalist.
	He wrote a book about Israeli assassinations.
	Oh, I thought hummus.
	No, not about hummus.
	Hummus.
	And we have a new brand.
	It's Khashoggi Hummus.
	Anyway, and I got a kick out of this bonehead question that was asked him.
	Because if you listen to this question, The guy, this is that Sanchez or whatever the guy's name is on Democracy Now!
	The guy writes for the Post, I think.
	And he phrases this question, as I'm listening to it, I'm saying he's describing our country.
	And this is a bonehead question on DN. From the outside, the Israeli intelligence from the outset occupied a shadowy realm, one adjacent to yet separate from the country's democratic institutions.
	The activities of the intelligence community, most of it Shin Bedim and the Mossad, under the direct command of the Prime Minister took place without any effective supervision by Israel's parliament, the Knesset, or by any other independent external bodies.
	What damage has been done to the democratic institutions of Israel as a result of this almost parallel situation?
	Instead of the civilian controlling the military, it was almost as if the military or the intelligence community controlled the government.
	You mean like the military industrial complex controls Trump or adversely the CIA controls Obama?
	Oh gee, that doesn't happen everywhere?
	I'm so surprised.
	It's so funny to listen to this question.
	Now the guy, nobody sees the irony of this question because it's essentially the same as when Ron Paul said the CIA took over the country in 62 after they assassinated Kennedy.
	And you have this shadow government which seems to be running on its own juices because they're against the president and they have all these issues.
	Right.
	But nobody sees the irony of the way he asks the question.
	So the guy, even the guy Bergman, when he answers the question, doesn't quite see it.
	And he kind of answers it straight.
	Well, few things.
	First, Israel is a liberal democracy in the Middle East.
	But Israel also faces severe threats and living under the trauma of the Holocaust.
	And I think that the new Israelis, the Jews who lived in Palestine, those who came from the Holocaust and established the State of Israel, they drew three main lessons from the Holocaust.
	First, that there will always be someone who wants to kill them.
	That the other non-Jews would not do anything to help.
	And third, that they need to have Israel a safe heaven, a refuge, and guard it with whatever possible.
	Now when you have this...
	At the back of your mind, and every decade, your prime nemesis, your chief adversary, Nasser of Egypt, Saddam Hussein of Iraq, Yasser Arafat, Ahmadinejad of Iran, when they want to eliminate you or call for your destruction and take physical actions to do this, then you are left with basically one conclusion.
	The Israelis were left with one conclusion.
	Rise and kill first.
	Paying very little tribute to international law, international norms.
	And building these two sets of law, one for regular matters, and one for the intelligence community and the military.
	Yes, it's how you undermine our democracy, our democratic institutions of intelligence agencies.
	Yeah.
	Jeez.
	Rise and Kill First is the name of the book, and people might want to look at it.
	I have two more clips from this guy if you're interested.
	One of them is about the assassination of Arafat, even though he wasn't technically assassinated.
	And so they ask him about this, because he documents all these murders, one after the other in this book, claiming that Israel's killed more people.
	And I think he included all the drone strikes that Obama did as being just a kind of a murderous regime.
	And this guy is Arab or Jew?
	He's a Jew.
	Uh-huh.
	Just checking.
	Let's play killing Arafat.
	Yes, it dates back to 1968, shortly after Arafat was appointed not just the chief of Fatah, but the chief of the umbrella organization called the PLO, the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
	And the IDF, Israeli Defense Force, were desperate.
	They were sending, Arafat and the PLO were sending groups of terrorists from Jordan to Israel.
	They couldn't catch them, they couldn't catch him.
	An attempt to invade Jordan and kill them, end up in a catastrophe.
	And then the chief psychiatrist of the Israeli Navy came with what he said is a solution.
	He saw that movie, American movie, The Manchurian Candidate, and said, I can do the same.
	I can take a Palestinian, hypnotize him, Jason Bourne style, program him and send him to Jordan to kill Yasser Arafat.
	And believe it or not, the chiefs of Israeli intelligence, military intelligence and Mossad, took that very seriously.
	They gave him a Palestinian prisoner, who fit the profile that the psychiatrists thought would be suitable for such a process.
	They gave him a training facility with live ammunition, and for months he trained that person, until one night he said, okay, he's okay, he's done, he's fully programmed.
	That Palestinian crossed the Jordan River, and after crossing, he signaled a gun, And okay to his master, to his psychiatrist, and he carried the gun and a walkie-talkie, a wireless communication device, and the psychiatrist said he's now going to kill Arafat.
	This was something like 1 a.m.
	At 5 a.m.
	in the morning...
	The operatives of Israeli intelligence received a report from another agent, said that someone, a Palestinian, came to a Jordanian police station and told the policemen, the stupid Israelis thought that they hypnotized me, but I was just playing a role.
	I'm loyal to Arafat, please take me to Abu Amar, to ask Arafat to swear legion to the Palestinian Authority.
	Now this is a bit, you know, sometimes Israeli James Bond looks more like Inspector Clouseau.
	This is a bit of a funny story, but the other stories were less funny.
	Israel tried to kill Arafat numerous times.
	And Ronan, did they ultimately succeed?
	There are, of course, many questions about Arafat's final death, whether it was natural or not.
	So I thought that was amusing.
	Well, yeah, I was actually waiting for it to be, hey, you know, they tried to hypnotize me, didn't work, take me to Arafat, and then he kills him.
	Yeah, but that didn't happen.
	That didn't happen, no.
	Now, if you want to hear the rest of it, this is another two minutes.
	Yes, yes, I do need some resolution.
	It's kind of another story about killing Arafat.
	Did the Israelis actually do it or not?
	And this is his explanation.
	Just from the top of my head, from memory, wasn't he kind of in some kind of standoff and his camp was surrounded?
	No.
	He died of some strange disease.
	Right, but I thought it was something that everything was surrounded and he died from that disease inside kind of his surrounded compound.
	Am I remembering that incorrectly?
	I don't know that.
	Let me just add that they tried many times and the peak of that was in 1982.
	When Ariel Sharon, Israeli Minister of Defense at that time, ordered to take down a commercial airline with hundreds of passengers on board in order to kill Yasser Arafat, but the chiefs of Israeli Air Force rebelled against him, and they didn't want Israel to be stained in these horrific war crimes, and they didn't want to violate the ethics of war of the IDF, And they prevented the operations from happening.
	To your question, There is an ambiguity and a few different reports about that.
	Let me just tell you that a few months before Arafat demise, mysterious demise, Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon met with President Bush at the White House and the President told him, Mr.
	Prime Minister, we heard that there are plans, that you have plans to kill Yasser Arafat and we want you to promise us, to promise me, that you will not assassinate Arafat.
	And Ariel Sharon said, I see your point, Mr.
	President.
	Now, President, of course, understand this is not a promise.
	He said, I really wish you to promise me that you will not do that.
	To which Sharon said, Mr.
	President, you are making a very strong argument.
	But the President didn't let it go until Prime Minister Sharon promised In his voice that he will not kill Arafat.
	A few months later Arafat dies of a mysterious disease.
	And I think in time we will have the opportunity to tell the story behind that.
	In the meantime the Palestinians are convinced of course that the Mossad or Israeli intelligence killed him.
	The reason to hide The real story was not because of the Palestinians, but because this would be a striking violation to a very clear promise by Israeli Prime Minister to an American president.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	Which reminds me of...
	Is his book about Arafat, or what is his book about?
	No, it's about all...
	It's a document of all the assassinations the Israelis have done.
	And hummus.
	And homus.
	A little homus in there.
	I can read that.
	I'm just looking at the theories of Arafat's death.
	There's quite a number of them.
	Yeah.
	Hmm.
	Interesting.
	All right.
	I don't have...
	I thought it was enlightening.
	Oh, yeah.
	It's light-hearted, too.
	Just a final bit, because the papers were filled with it when I was leaving London, is that MI6 is very worried about what would be...
	Disclose if President Trump should actually open up a lot of this Russia gate investigation.
	In particular, what role MI6 British intelligence played in helping, I think, put together the report that led to Carter Page's wiretap and a couple other issues.
	Right.
	And this is, of course, not being really reported on much at all.
	Not here.
	At New York Times, anyone done anything?
	Wall Street Journal?
	No, no one's going to do anything.
	And what they're saying is it boils down to exposure of people.
	We don't want to reveal sources and methods.
	So somehow the British intelligence appears to have been, I would use the word, meddling in our elections.
	Right.
	I would think so.
	They got their tit in the ringer.
	Yeah.
	As they like to say.
	Right.
	Why do we not have a single...
	I mean, okay.
	Besides the fact...
	You're asking me.
	Of course, you're just joking when you...
	No, no.
	I was going to say, why doesn't even...
	The Washington Post and the New York Times are pretty much dominated by CIA employees.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	So it's professional courtesy is what you're saying.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Well, your No Agenda show is reporting on what we can, but there's not very much.
	In fact, that Guardian article that I got it from is behind a firewall or paywall.
	You can only get it if Yahoo reprinted it.
	And there's also a Telegraph article about it.
	The Brits are talking about it, but we're not doing our typical copy and paste into the U.S. publication.
	But it does seem that there's some fishy business going on.
	Yeah, heads should roll.
	Final clip for me.
	You have a new mayor in San Francisco?
	About three months the mayor's been in office?
	How long has the new mayor been in?
	Yeah, maybe six months.
	Three?
	No, about three.
	You're right, three.
	Yeah.
	So, what's her name?
	I really don't remember.
	Bravo Charlie, I think is her name.
	What's her name?
	I can't remember her name.
	Something crazy.
	Okay.
	She ran on a promise that within three months she would clean up the poop.
	Clean up the poop in San Francisco, and I have a report.
	Earlier this year, we surveyed 153 blocks of downtown San Francisco and uncovered a dangerous mix of trash, needles, and feces.
	The story gained national attention and became a major issue in the mayor's race.
	Then-candidate London Breed promised a cleaner San Francisco within three months if elected.
	I would measure that by, you know, like not having feces, you know, on our sidewalks and also urine and other things that we see, the needles and many of the other challenges that exist.
	That would all be eliminated just at the end.
	I'm not saying that it will all be eliminated.
	I am saying that there will be a significant difference where it's noticeable.
	So we're back on the streets to find out if she made good on that pledge.
	My producer and I resurveyed 20 of the dirtiest blocks in downtown San Francisco.
	Across all 20 blocks, we found 35 used drug needles.
	That's down 39% compared to our last survey 10 months ago.
	But like before, we spotted trash on every block.
	We also saw feces on all 20 blocks.
	In total, we found feces 159 times.
	That's a 67% increase.
	And in a bizarre new twist, someone appears to be using feces to graffiti sidewalks in the city.
	Seriously.
	We compared the mayor's first three months in office to the three months prior and found complaints to the city about needles, feces, and trash have all increased.
	Is San Francisco cleaner today than before you took office?
	I think it is because I'm out there on a regular basis.
	We've invested more resources, we're spending more time trying to get people housed, and we're focusing on those areas we know are the most problematic.
	I am doing everything I can to invest the right resources into making San Francisco a lot cleaner and it takes time to get to a better place.
	So even though complaints are up since you've been elected, you don't think it's because the city is actually dirtier?
	I don't think it's because the city is actually dirty.
	I think it's because more people are reporting the challenges that exist.
	What would you say to people who simply think you didn't accomplish what you said you would?
	I just started as mayor a couple months ago.
	But you made that three-month promise.
	And you see a difference.
	In certain areas, it is noticeable.
	There is a huge difference in certain parts of the city.
	But you would acknowledge the city doesn't actually have data or any kind of metrics to show that definitively.
	Well, we have what we see visually.
	But at what point will walking over feces not be part of the norm in this city?
	I hope sooner rather than later.
	Any idea when?
	I hope sooner rather than later.
	Any timeline?
	I hope sooner rather than later.
	Hey, what are you working for the Austin Chamber of Commerce with this clip?
	Oh yeah.
	I'm just letting them know I'm watching them here in Austin.
	Because you know, we're next.
	Poop will be on the streets.
	And that does help with real estate prices though, let's be honest.
	Alright everybody, we are shutting it down for today.
	On your Thanksgiving Day edition of the best podcast in the universe.
	And I will go supervise some food, which is already well unweighed.
	And we'll be back Sunday with another edition of the No Agenda Show.
	Please remember us at Dvorak.org slash NA. Until then, coming to you from downtown Austin, Texas.
	The capital of the Drone Star State, FEMA Region No.
	6 on the governmental maps in the 5x9 Cludio in the Common Law Condo.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where I want to remind people on this Thanksgiving Day that an electronic thermometer is your best friend in the kitchen.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We return on Sunday, right here on No Agenda.
	Until then, adios!
	Adios!
	Donate to a No Agenda They give us shows week after week.
	Donate to a No Agenda.
	It's a show that's really unique.
	Donate to a No Agenda.
	Listen to John and Adam speak.
	Donate to a No Agenda.
	Science is turning into a clique No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no Come on No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no Come on When I first started college When I went running After five minutes I'd start feeling a burning in my chest And it was just me sucking in soot and smog.
	The smog was so bad, it was like, you might die.
	Barack is an emissary of the devil, but you know that he's black, and that's all you want to know.
	I said this is blatant racism.
	It is destroying the dream.
	It is anti-Dr.
	King.
	You African, you Jesse Jackson, you process head Al Sharpton, you are wicked!
	You are cursed!
	Ha ha ha!
	Yeah, yeah.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	She's getting lunch at Chipotle.
	Hey.
	The tortis in the race.
	Kim Kardashian.
	Siganoi Weaver.
	R-E-S-P-I-C-T. They're all Jenny.
	R-E-S-P-I-C-T. There's no real conflict.
	Resist.
	We much.
	Resist.
	We much.
	We must and we will much about that be committed.
	The best podcast in the universe!

▲