Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 2, 2018 - No Agenda

02:47:01

1091: Surf n Turf

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang.
	Adam Curry, John C. Devorak.
	It's Sunday, December 2nd, 2018.
	This is your award-winning Gipo Nation Media Assassination Episode 1091.
	This is no agenda.
	Freezing my butt off and broadcasting live from the home of the Jackson 5.
	And here in downtown Geary, Indiana, from the Every Room is a Mini Street Hotel.
	Good morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where he's freezing his butt off and they've banned the song.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	Wow!
	Nice play off of that, Dvorak!
	Thank you.
	It's cold outside.
	That's right.
	Is it banned everywhere now, the song?
	No, it's gonna be.
	We determined this was a creepy song a long time ago, so it's like, okay.
	Oh, perfect.
	We made it.
	I'm very happy about that.
	So here I am in pretty much Geary, Indiana, John.
	Bringing you the show live once again.
	What?
	You're that far away from downtown?
	I'm in Geary, Indiana.
	You are in Geary, Indiana.
	Yes, Geary.
	We say it's Geary.
	We say Geary, Geary, Indiana.
	I don't care what they say, but that's a long ways away.
	From where?
	From Texas?
	Yeah.
	Not really.
	I've been further.
	Is that a crappy area?
	What are you doing there?
	Well, we are here for Tina's sister's celebration of life, a memorial, which took place last night.
	And she lives in Geary?
	She passed away, John, if you remember.
	Oh, I'm sorry, yes.
	But she lived in Geary?
	Close enough.
	Yeah.
	So it's not easy to find, you know, well, actually, this is one of those hotels.
	You know, every room is a mini suite.
	You have a little kitchenette.
	You know what I'm talking about?
	You have a little kitchenette.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah.
	And interestingly, you know, I'm pretty much outfitted for every scenario.
	Oh, by the way, before you go on, I should mention that that room here, the mini suite, It's got a little kitchen, a little front room, bedroom.
	That goes for a million in San Francisco.
	And then you still have to share it with two people.
	You're absolutely right.
	But I'm ready for almost every single situation in hotel rooms.
	Although the Wi-Fi is outstanding so far, knock on wood.
	The only thing that crops up from time to time...
	You know, I have my mic stand and I have a foot for the mic stand, which is a clamp that you clamp onto the table.
	But when you have these tables that have just a little edge and doesn't have enough really to clamp...
	No place to clamp.
	Now, typically, these desks have a drawer, and I can pull the drawer out and then clamp it, but this one could fall off at any moment.
	I'm just hoping it stays on.
	Yeah, exactly.
	So, yeah.
	And it was very interesting that at this memorial last night, and it was fun, you know, as per her sister's wishes, Angie wanted pizza, tacos, and Miller Lite served.
	And a playlist of her songs.
	And it was really nice.
	And then someone came up and gave me a hearty in the morning.
	Oh, that's nice.
	Yes, and I think he or...
	Especially since it was Hardy.
	Yes, I think he or the guy who hit him in the mouth donated for today, so we'll get to that later.
	It was one of those like, oh, wow, who expected that?
	We have a few listeners in the Chicago metro area.
	Yeah, well, this is not exactly Chicago.
	Chicago metro.
	Yeah.
	It's a little further south.
	But, anyways, so it's good.
	Ready to do a show.
	And I was kind of glad that, you know, it may sound horrible, I'm kind of glad that the old bush passed away because, huh, at least I wasn't going to miss any news.
	Because that was it.
	News was done.
	It's like every channel.
	We knew it.
	We were just waiting for this.
	And perfect in the weekend, too.
	This is exactly what you want.
	You don't want it happening during the week.
	It was a little complicated because we had the G20 going on.
	But okay.
	So everyone's just rolling out all their George Bush retrospectives.
	Yeah, and there's very little mention of...
	The pardoning he did to get out of Iran-Contra, all the horrible stuff he was involved in.
	There's no mention of that.
	Hasiography after hagiography on all channels.
	Did they mention his involvement in the Kennedy assassination?
	Well, no, the only thing...
	I wonder why that is.
	It's weird.
	He's, of course, the only man in America of that age who cannot remember where he was on the day that Kennedy was assassinated.
	No, he says he doesn't remember because he knows where he was.
	Yes, he says he can't remember.
	Correct, correct, correct, correct.
	So where to start, John?
	Because there's a lot going on with the G20. We've got...
	Oh, you know what?
	I know where I'm going to start.
	I want to clear up some confusion from our last show, which carried over onto the social nets.
	Social nets.
	I just want to make sure we're all on board here.
	So I played a clip on the last show, which I think you appropriately said, this sounds like it's the onion.
	This can't be true.
	And you were both wrong and both right at the same time.
	And it was the clip, and I now have the full expanded clip, this is a European Parliament member, actually of the, I think he's of the Geert Wilders PVV party, so he is...
	He is not gleefully exclaiming this.
	He's extrapolating and he is making some assumptions to the press about the compact on migration, which is due to be signed on December 10th, and everything that goes along with that.
	And this is also known as the Marrakesh Agreement.
	I'll replay the clip, the longer version of it, so we get full context, and then we'll just discuss what's really going on here.
	Ladies and gentlemen of the press, dear guests, it's nice to have you here on our Strasbourg press conference.
	And I would like to say some words on the Global Compact on Migration.
	On the 10th and 11th of December, there will be an international congress in Marrakesh, Morocco, with regard to this Global Compact on Migration.
	And the participating countries are set to sign this agreement.
	And although this joint agreement isn't binding, it's still meant to be the legal framework on which the participating countries commit themselves to build new legislation.
	And one basic element of this new agreement is the extension of the definition of hate speech.
	The agreement wants to criminalize migration speech.
	Criticism of migration will become a criminal offense.
	And media outlets, and that also concerns you, that give room to criticism of migration can be shut down.
	The compact for migration is legalization of mass migration.
	Alright, so that was kind of in context, and he's extrapolating what's in this agreement, and I have a version of this from a member of the, what is this, the UK, actually a member of the European Parliament from the Movement for Europe of Nations and Freedom, whatever that is, independent UK member of European Parliament.
	Basically the same thing, and it comes from this Non-binding agreement, which to us here in America means, oh, it's non-binding.
	Who gives a crap?
	We won't sign it anyway.
	However, if you heard the guy, he says this will be used as a framework for creating local laws.
	And that is definitely something that happens in the European Union.
	You are making so much noise with that.
	Your chair is just...
	Objective 17 from the document.
	And this is why it's going to be used as a guideline and why I think Europeans should rightfully be worried about what this will become, not what it is.
	Objective 17 is eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to shape perceptions of migration.
	And in this are all kinds of words like enact, implement, maintain legislation that penalizes hate crimes and aggravated hate crimes targeting migrants.
	That can be made into a law very similar to the UK laws now about bullying public figures, I'm sorry, bullying politicians on Twitter, which is now illegal.
	You can't do that.
	You can actually get arrested.
	So here is the British take on this very same thing from Janice Atkinson, who's from Independent UK Party, I think.
	Now listen, voters in the UK, the EU and across the developed world, this is a call to action.
	We need you to contact your heads of state to tell them not to sign the UN Global Compact for Migration.
	UK, get your heads out of the Brexit shambles for a few minutes and listen.
	On the 10th and 11th of December, our heads of state will be signing this deeply damaging document produced by those highly educated, highly salaried and unelected people at the United Nations.
	They have produced this compact that will silence free speech, media freedom, and if you think you're in control of your borders, think again.
	This compact backs the EU and the UN's aim to flood our nations with 59 million migrants.
	Now, I've tried to find this number, this 59 million migrants.
	It's a meme.
	You won't find it.
	No.
	Someone just made it up.
	I'm not sure where it came from.
	Anyway, I'll finish this up.
	2025.
	Yes, you heard right.
	59 million migrants by 2025.
	Yes, the clock is ticking.
	It's nearly 2019.
	Just six years to go.
	Why are they doing this?
	I hear you ask.
	Because in the year 2000, these numpties came up with the idea that our populations were declining and therefore needed replacing.
	But how things have changed.
	EU unemployment is at a record high.
	Some countries have 50% youth unemployment.
	In some areas of Greece, it's even up to 75%.
	Most countries that have taken in migrants are finding they are unemployable.
	On average, migrants have a 13% employment rate, so are a burden on the state.
	Even Merkel's immigration spokesman said that up to three quarters of immigrants will still be unemployed in five years.
	And for many others, we need up to 10 years.
	The statistics are long and grim.
	Voters in the UK, yes, you, pay attention.
	Mrs May will sneak into Marrakesh to sign this dodgy deal, just like Gordon Brown before her did when he sneaked in to sign the Lisbon Treaty.
	No nice group photo, just her signature that binds all of us to uncontrolled immigration.
	Alright, so of course that won't bind anyone and, you know, it's only a guideline.
	But these things do tend to pan out that way.
	When they sign these compacts, it gives the politicians who are eager to do anything...
	Just anything.
	Well, it's like those climate accords.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Like the Paris Agreement.
	Exactly the same.
	They're all just suggestions and they're just bent out of shape and somebody says, I'm not even signing it.
	Yeah, but it's just suggestions but witness Paris burning because the suggestions were taken and put into a carbon tax law.
	So these things do have implications, but as of right now, it's not there.
	But if you look at just the final paragraph of this Objective 17, actually it's interesting, it's paragraph 33, subsection C, promote independent, objective, and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals,
	that's you and me, John, We need to be sensitized and educated on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising.
	What?
	They're going to invest in ethical reporting standards and advertising?
	Well, first of all, That whole paragraph begins with the word promote.
	Of course.
	As opposed to employ or legislate for.
	That's beyond suggestion.
	That's like a suggestion that maybe it'll be a suggestion.
	I find that to be very...
	Yeah, I understand.
	And the debate that we had was largely about this guy.
	Was it real or not?
	Gert Wilder's guy, which I thought the guy himself was like, I saw him too.
	He's like, yes, it was official.
	But it was Gert Wilder's guy.
	What, that means he's automatically no good?
	No, it means it's automatically going to be a hysteric.
	Right-wing hysterics.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	So, of course, it's being used to fear-monger amongst people, but I have to say that there is, you know, you're seeing all these things.
	Remember, we saw in the Lisbon Treaty and the protocols, lots of room for a European army.
	Here we are.
	What, 15 years later, the European army is seriously being compiled.
	I'm not saying that this can't happen.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah.
	But a lot of people aren't going to sign it.
	I mean, Italy's not going to sign it.
	The U.S. is not.
	Obviously, we're not going to sign it.
	We wouldn't sign that.
	We're not that dumb.
	There's one extra thing that we've learned on the show that plays into this, and this is the Kalergi plan.
	Because this does fit in the Kudenhofer Kalergi plan, which is to make Europe brown again.
	Or...
	Make Europe brown for the first time.
	And, you know, Angela Merkel won the Kalergi Award in 2010, 2016.
	It was Junker the Drunker.
	I don't think they've given it this year.
	But this plan, as we read, literally calls for this mass immigration.
	So it's not like this is without precedence and agreed to precedence by the EU leaders.
	I'm not going to argue that.
	I'm not asking you to argue.
	I don't know what they're thinking.
	Well, I mean, a lot of this has this, really, I think a lot of it stems from Italy.
	I think it's funny, Italy being the one rejecting it.
	Because Italy's the first, I think, the first of the EU countries that went into negative growth in terms of population.
	Yeah.
	They decided, all the Italians decided they don't want babies anymore.
	Right.
	And so they started going and they'd rather party.
	And so they went into a negative population.
	So they were going to be dead.
	Their whole culture would be dead in the next 40 years or 50 years or next century.
	And so they had to do something about it.
	You know, these are cycles.
	Everyone panics at the, you know, just the most minor of consequence.
	It's weird.
	But there you have it.
	But the Italians said no.
	Maybe they want to die off.
	So the Italians are not signing it now?
	Is that what you're saying?
	Yeah, they claim that they're not going to sign it.
	Yeah, well, we'll see.
	We'll see.
	Now, the whole thing is a fiasco.
	Yeah?
	What's the point?
	What's the point?
	Who's behind it?
	That's what I'd like to know.
	I mean, why is it called, if you look at one of the papers, it's called the New York Agreement.
	What does New York got to do with it?
	I didn't hear about, oh, because I think it was, the way they do that is, that means that it was first drafted in New York.
	And so that's why this is, although this is called the Compact of Migration, they call it the Marrakesh Agreement because it's going to be signed in Marrakesh.
	So, that's like the Lisbon Treaty.
	What did Lisbon have to do with it?
	Nothing!
	It was just drafted in Lisbon.
	Ah.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, you're probably right.
	By New York, they meant the United Nations in New York.
	Yes.
	So, yeah, well, I guess this is all just more part of the New World Order, which is under the...
	The attempt, you know, I sound like an old fart when I say this, but it sounds to me like...
	They just want to weaken Western civilization.
	People are fed up with Western civilization.
	We brought you autos and highways.
	You don't sound like an old fart.
	That's actually kind of what's going on in a weird kind of way.
	Yeah, I think so.
	Europe is also to blame for everything.
	That's what's being sold there.
	You're horrible.
	You've made Africa horrible.
	We need to have free movement.
	This whole free movement thing, or freedom of movement, let's just switch to Brexit.
	Because now we're getting close to whatever deal Theresa May has put together.
	I've talked to a lot of people who are in the UK, or do business with the UK, or in European states, and a lot of younger people.
	The one thing they focus on...
	You okay?
	You just blanked out completely.
	Oh.
	You there?
	Yeah.
	The one thing that everyone seems to be focusing on, no matter where they are in the European Union, usually if they're anti-Brexit, which I think a lot more people are, Is, we won't have freedom of movement, we won't be able to do anything, can't do business.
	It wasn't all that hard before, was it?
	I mean, you could establish yourself in a different European country, you could get a work permit, at least when I lived there, now we're talking 20 years ago, I don't know how much changed, but it wasn't a horrible ordeal.
	And what are the numbers really?
	How many people really from the UK find it important to remain a British citizen and work in a different country?
	I mean, it just seems like a little over the top, but this came up in the latest questions with the Prime Minister.
	Minister, I have a clip.
	It's a reciprocal agreement.
	So what we do to European nationals, they will do to us.
	Yeah, this is the main driver.
	What we do to the Europeans, they're going to do to us.
	So they're kind of telling Miss May what she can expect.
	So that means that people with both skills from the United Kingdom, young people at the beginning of their careers, will equally not be allowed the same rights of access to the European Union.
	No, well first of all you've jumped to an assumption there.
	What I was talking about was the immigration system that will be independently put My question is, Europe will do to us what we do today.
	Well, you're making an assumption.
	I have to say, I don't think that there's been indications yet as to what the...
	So you're expecting the young Brits to go abroad as they have just now?
	Well, we've been looking at a variety of issues in relation to young people particularly.
	One of the areas that we've looked at is the sort of programmes...
	such as Erasmus, which have enabled the students to take advantage of membership of the European Union.
	But if you look at the section within the political declaration, you will see that, of course, we will be looking at the mobility arrangements that are in any trade.
	It is the case, Prime Minister, that the rights that you and I had to live, work and love across a continent of 28 nations is going to be deprived to our young people because of your obsession with immigration.
	No.
	And I refer you to Article 53.
	The parties agree to consider conditions for entry and stay for purposes such as research, study, training and youth exchanges.
	So you're not ending freedom of movement then?
	Yes, we are ending freedom of movement.
	We are ending freedom of movement.
	Freedom of movement gives automatic rights to people living in the European Union that are not available to people outside the European Union.
	In future, we will end that automatic right that comes with free movement.
	What we will put in place is our system of immigration rules, which will apply across all countries, and it will be skills-based rather than based on the country that somebody comes from.
	No, it seems like a big argument about nothing.
	It's just, doesn't it just revert back to kind of what it was?
	I mean, what's the big problem?
	I mean, that's obviously what no one wants to bring up.
	The other thing is there's no loss of freedom of movement.
	You can still move.
	Yeah.
	I don't know why she goes, yeah, we're going to lose freedom of movement.
	That's what she said.
	She admitted to it.
	She's a terrible...
	She's not doing a great job.
	Certainly not.
	You always have to remember she was against Brexit from the get-go.
	She was an anti-Brexiteer.
	So her heart's never been in it.
	I also fail to see what the deal is going to be.
	If you look at what's really happening in Europe, most young people are not interested.
	I'm generalizing, but don't appear interested in actually moving anywhere for work reasons.
	They're all counting on the living wage, you know, the basic minimum income that everyone wants so desperately in the European Union.
	Just give me some money so I can decide if I want to work at all.
	So I seriously question how many actually are interested in this freedom of movement business.
	And I think there's probably 3 million EU citizens in the UK and maybe a million UK citizens in the EU. So I can see who's more worried.
	But anyway, when does this thing close?
	Isn't it March?
	Don't we have a vote coming?
	What's going on with that?
	I've always...
	Vote coming for what?
	The parliament has to vote.
	Oh yeah, they have to vote.
	I don't know.
	I don't know if there's a timeline.
	I've always found it interesting.
	One time, I ran into some...
	When floating around Europe.
	When you're in Europe...
	The gadfly that you are.
	Floating around Europe.
	In the 60s.
	I don't have a lot of plans, so I float around.
	I've gone to Europe many times with a Eurail pass and ad-libbed.
	Very good.
	I would say that's floating around.
	I ran into this German girl.
	And I strike up a conversation, and I ask her if she's ever been to Paris.
	And she says no.
	Okay.
	Well, how long ago was this?
	The reason I think that's interesting is that in Europe, if you're in Germany, you can go to Paris in a, what does it take, three or four hours on a high-speed rail?
	Five, maybe?
	From wherever you are?
	Pretty much.
	Or you can fly for like...
	No, no.
	The Eurorail is very convenient.
	Yep.
	Yeah, well, Europeans don't have the same access to it.
	But it seems to me that if you're in Europe, if you were in Europe, stationed in Europe or positioned in Europe...
	Or you're in Switzerland or you're someplace central Europe.
	You would be spending a lot of weekends going to Paris and then Berlin to go to the zoo and you'd maybe take the tunnel to London.
	That's what you'd do.
	You wouldn't do it every weekend because it would get a little boring after a while.
	Go to Amsterdam to smoke weed and bang hookers.
	That's pretty much it.
	Yeah, there you go.
	But you'd be doing this sort of...
	Go to Budapest.
	Yes.
	Budapest.
	You do all that stuff.
	They don't do that.
	No.
	Well, the Brits do.
	The Brits love their freedom of movement to Amsterdam to drink and bang hookers.
	Maybe that's what the...
	Or get fights over soccer games.
	Yeah, maybe that's what the Remainers are really pissed off about is, hey, why don't you just make a deal with Amsterdam?
	Better yet, get Elon Musk to build you one of those tunnels.
	Yeah, Hyperloop.
	Yeah, it'd be perfect.
	So meanwhile, we have the G20 taking place, which I've gotten some reporting.
	What do I have here?
	By the way, let me back up to my last comment, since you're looking.
	I will say that's not just a European phenomenon.
	Up in Port Angeles, where you're...
	Pretty much on the Canadian border, even though there's a waterway right in between.
	You have to take a ferry boat and go to Victoria, Canada.
	Probably one of the prettiest cities on the West Coast, if not in the world.
	Mm-hmm.
	Beautiful place to visit.
	They have one of their local parliament building, provincial parliaments there.
	They have a small Chinatown.
	It's a fantastic little big city.
	And you ask people there, have you ever been to Victoria, which is like a boat ride away in Canada?
	Oh, probably not.
	No, probably not.
	Why would I want to go there?
	Well, it's kind of the same, though, being here in the Geary region.
	People say, a lot of people don't know my history.
	I don't look like I used to.
	You actually do look like you used to.
	No, I don't think so.
	If you put a giant fro on your head, you would.
	I've never had a fro.
	I don't know what you'd call it.
	But I'll say, no, I grew up in Amsterdam, and most people are like, holy crap, I used to live in South Indiana.
	The Indianapolis once.
	Honest about it, though.
	It's like, oh, most people don't have a passport.
	Let's be honest.
	America is the king of not going anywhere.
	But maybe it's a little more universal than we think it is.
	I think it is.
	So here's the G20. This is an interesting backgrounder.
	And after that, I have an article that only appeared in the China Morning Post, I think it is.
	But here's a little backgrounder.
	I think it's from CBC. Moments like this told the story critics of Mohammed bin Salman wanted to hear.
	The crown prince largely ignored of the so-called family photo, walking off alone while other leaders mingled.
	This is an awkward summit for Mohammed bin Salman.
	Up for grabs is how the leaders of the democratic world were going to treat him, and everybody was watching Trump.
	But someone else stole the show and bucked the narrative.
	Russian President Vladimir Putin, with a jocular high-five handshake and laughter between old friends.
	There are some similarities between Putin and MBS. Both have allegedly arranged for the assassinations of exiles abroad.
	Both have launched invasions of neighboring countries.
	But it's unlikely this display is about policy, its messaging.
	This is a thumb in the face of all the democratic countries that have been critical of bin Salman for the killing of Khachoggi.
	And it's also interesting because it both takes Trump off the hook, but puts him in the background.
	Both bin Salman and Putin have had friendly relationships with Donald Trump that have actually roiled domestic politics inside the United States and in other democratic countries.
	And Donald Trump probably felt very uncomfortable being outside that handshake with two people that he thinks he has supported.
	I'm glad to see that the Scandinavians reporting of worldly affairs is just as shit as everybody else's.
	And a lot went on at this thing, particularly between Trump and Xi.
	What do you have?
	What have you been learning?
	The thing that bothers me about it was there was a picture going around.
	One of my Lib Joes sent me a copy of it.
	Yeah.
	And it shows Trump in the background looking longingly at Putin and Khashoggi shaking hands and smiling at each other.
	You mean the jocular high five?
	Is that what you're talking about?
	Yeah, whatever.
	Jocular.
	So Trump's back there.
	I think the picture is kind of fake because if you look at the video, Trump is walking in.
	Really, I don't even know if he even notices them.
	The video shows what happened, but the mainstream media keeps showing this picture, this still frame, clip from the video, making it look like he stopped and stared.
	He never did.
	You can go look at the video.
	And I thought it was very disingenuous, and they're all playing this picture.
	Oh, there's Trump, poor baby.
	His two friends are now friends, and now he has no friends.
	That was kind of the message.
	I think this is the same message, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Well, that's not the way it...
	In reality, that's not what was going on, but okay.
	Okay, so what have you been learning?
	I mean, I've got some stuff here.
	I haven't learned anything except there's this meaning that Trump seems to be more distracted by the Bush affair because of the death of the old man.
	And...
	He didn't want to do it.
	He's taking a low-key position at this thing.
	He's not...
	Well, the China Post or the China Morning Post claims that there was an agreement that there would be a 90-day kind of a truce on the trade rift and that China would be purchasing a significant amount of stuff...
	From America, which I don't know what that is.
	Also, China has agreed to designate fentanyl as a controlled substance.
	These are some pretty interesting moves that are happening.
	That's a big one.
	Yeah, and that only showed up in the China Morning Post.
	And I'm not sure what the trade thing means.
	It's a little unclear.
	But apparently some actual things took place.
	Yes, and that's why the stock market skyrocketed on Friday.
	Yes.
	It doesn't play into the narrative that Trump's...
	But he sucks!
	That he sucks!
	He's no good!
	Of course not.
	So that's the only thing they've been showing?
	I haven't seen it, obviously.
	Video of Trump looking longing like a hurt teenage girl?
	No, you missed the point.
	It's not video of Trump.
	It's a still frame.
	Ah, even better.
	Obviously taken from the video, making it look like he's...
	Looking long.
	It looks like he's there staring.
	Oh, no.
	When, in fact, if you watch the video, he never stops for a moment.
	He walks in, looks around, doesn't even see them, and then goes on his merry way.
	And they found one frame where he appears to be looking at them for one frame, which they show now as a photo.
	That's fantastic.
	Good work, guys.
	Yeah.
	Little extra in your envelope this Christmas.
	Yeah, they could use a few hundred bucks, yeah.
	There's no doubt about that.
	Somebody got paid.
	And I think it was, I even think that was doctored.
	It doesn't look quite like it came from the video.
	I'll have to take a look at that.
	I'll send you a copy.
	The one that the Libs Joe sent me is the one that is the best one.
	And what was...
	And it looks, you look at it and you go, what?
	This doesn't look right.
	For one thing, the guys in front, here's one giveaway for you photoshoppers out there.
	The guys in front are in focus.
	Then it goes slowly out of focus.
	It bouquets a little bit.
	And then way in the background is Trump somehow in focus.
	That's great.
	Thank you.
	Yeah.
	So your Photoshoppers, when you got that, you got that little picture of Trump.
	Hit the blur button a couple times.
	Put him out of focus.
	It may take a little of the drama out, but it won't look so fake.
	Yeah, send me that for sure.
	I thought the story about Merkel's plane was pretty funny.
	So, David, a lot of moving parts here in Buenos Aires.
	One of the things we're going to be watching for is Angela Merkel of Germany, whether she makes it here or not.
	Some weirdness around her flight departing Germany and then having to turn around with some communications problems.
	She's going to apparently fly commercial from Spain to try to get here.
	Not sure whether that affects her slate of meetings or not.
	That affects her status.
	Got you.
	Moving pieces here.
	A lot of confusion and, of course, a lot of high-stakes economic diplomacy as well.
	So, for some reason, this story was going around about her plane was bugged and that's why they landed because she didn't want whatever she was doing on the plane to be eavesdropped.
	I don't know where that story came from, but I saw it a lot.
	Huh.
	Yeah, I'm not sure where...
	Again, I don't know.
	People start saying, oh, it looks like something with the plane being bugged.
	I don't know.
	But what kind of leader are you if you don't have a backup plane?
	Yeah, fly commercial?
	That's kind of upsetting.
	It's like, hey, Angela, you're on your way out.
	Here, fly Lufthansa.
	Yeah, the coach.
	We'll buy you three seats.
	You can have the whole row to yourself.
	How does that sound?
	Yeah.
	No, I didn't even hear that story.
	Well, let's see what I got for international stuff since we're on there.
	Well, I see you have Argentina meetings.
	What?
	You have two clips, Argentina meetings.
	Nothing in there?
	Yeah, well, this is the backgrounders.
	This, if you want the whole background on the thing, the way CBS played it.
	Okay, I think we should play them.
	Yeah, I'm interested.
	Yeah.
	They're not too long.
	Is Argentina meeting one?
	Inside the conference, the Saudi crown prince and Russian president high-fived each other, but not President Trump.
	The sudden chill among some leaders made for a few awkward moments.
	Major Garrett is at the G20. Let's just talk for a second about that.
	This high-fiving of Putin and Mohammed bin Salman.
	And what do you make of that?
	It's...
	I've watched it a couple times.
	It's not really a high five.
	It's a handshake, kind of a ghetto handshake.
	Oh.
	Where, you know, you grab the hand high and then you do a bunch of movements with the hand.
	Wait a minute, they're doing a soul shake?
	Yeah, you didn't see it?
	No, I've been in Geary.
	I don't think we have TV reception here.
	Yeah, he goes up, grabs a hand, and they do a bunch of rigmarole.
	No, like a rehearsed thing, like they've met each other before, and they do this, like, boom, boom, boom, boom.
	Yeah, I'm surprised they didn't bump asses.
	That's all it was missing.
	But what are they thinking?
	Like, hey, this is a good thing to do.
	This looks good?
	Well, the funny thing was, it looked as though...
	If you just would have seen it and not known any of the politics, you would have said, oh, there's two guys who haven't seen each other for a while.
	And I don't know if they hugged because they took the camera off it after a while, but it would be like you do that, you do the rigmarole, and then you hug and do a three pats on the back thing, like bros, like two bros.
	Wow.
	And I... But then they both had huge smiles on their faces.
	And the media tried to play it as though they had one over on this idiot president.
	We've got Trump.
	I'm thinking more like...
	Take the still shot of Trump in the background, which never really existed as a still shot, and put that into play.
	It makes our president look like an idiot.
	I think that was the point.
	Yeah, but that's not the point that those guys did it.
	They didn't do it in cahoots.
	I don't know why they did it.
	There was no good explanation.
	Nobody ever asked them.
	Oh, why would we?
	Prince and Russian president high-fived each other, but not President Trump.
	The sudden chill among some leaders made for a few awkward moments.
	Major Garrett is at the G20 in Buenos Aires.
	President Trump avoided both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the ceremonial G20 photo today.
	Tensions with both leaders just one distraction in Argentina.
	For their part, Putin and the Crown Prince appeared to get along famously, shaking hands enthusiastically.
	The White House said Mr.
	Trump and bin Salman, under fire for the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, had a brief encounter where they, quote, exchanged pleasantries.
	Moments later, reporters asked the president what they discussed.
	The president canceled two planned meetings with Putin here to protest Russia's seizure of three Ukrainian Navy vessels and 24 sailors, the most brazen act of aggression toward Ukraine on Mr.
	Trump's watch.
	And hopefully they'll be able to settle it out soon as we look forward to meeting with President Putin.
	But White House officials had to beat back speculation the meetings were canceled after the president's former lawyer Michael Cohen pled guilty yesterday to lying to Congress about Mr.
	Trump's development project in Moscow.
	Russia blamed the scuttled meetings on domestic reasons in the U.S. In a statement, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said the special counsel's investigation probably does undermine our relationship with Russia.
	So you got a little jab in there at the end.
	Oh yeah.
	Part two.
	I don't think there's anything else to talk about.
	The president tweeted that his aborted Russian real estate deal was very legal and very cool.
	Does this lead us into this thing or will it come back around to Argentina in this clip?
	No, I think that...
	I don't know.
	We'll find out.
	The president did celebrate a revamped trade deal with Mexico and Canada, the product of months of tense negotiations.
	It's been long and hard.
	We've taken a lot of barbs and a little abuse.
	And we got there.
	It's great for all of our countries.
	All right, Major, the big meeting, though, is tomorrow with the president and the president of China, Xi Jinping.
	What should we be expecting from that?
	Well, today here in Argentina, Jeff, both senior and Chinese officials expressed optimism about averting a trade war and reaching some kind of progress between the United States and China.
	And the Dow jumped nearly 200 points on optimism that a feared trade war can indeed here be averted.
	I love that.
	So they do spend at least seven seconds on something important, and the rest is just making our president and our country look stupid, like boneheads.
	And the president, you know, I wonder if the president is doing these, what I would consider to be somewhat double entendres of a sexual nature.
	Oh, really?
	Which I think a double entendre is by definition.
	Yes.
	When he says long and hard, taking barbs, a little abuse.
	Sounds like a little S&M scene that he's creating.
	Interesting.
	He has sex on the mind, perhaps.
	He's thinking about it.
	Maybe.
	I don't know.
	When I heard it, I said, that's kind of interesting.
	He said that way.
	He could have put it in a million different ways.
	And maybe it's just me.
	Yeah, it's possible.
	It's possible.
	But I do like what the media is doing, at least from a media perspective, making the president look stupid for the home team.
	He's locked out.
	He's not important.
	He's envious.
	He's like the little girl who doesn't belong in the club.
	And when Bush passed, almost the first thing on the New York Times homepage was an article about, well, will he be invited to the funeral?
	We're going to have that now.
	Will he be invited to the funeral?
	Maybe the Bushes don't want him because he was so mean.
	Yeah, well, there's no way it can be not invited to the funeral.
	It's going to be a state funeral, for God's sake.
	But the New York Times loves printing that stuff.
	Well, an example of that sort of thing is in this Amy Goodman story.
	Okay.
	This is a story about Deutsche Bank, the new, you know, there's a big scandal going on.
	Oh, yeah, they got, for money laundering, they got raided.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, big raid.
	So here's the Deutsche Bank story.
	Now, it's all about Deutsche Bank, the money laundering, and somehow...
	Let me guess.
	Can we bring Trump in?
	Bring Trump in.
	In Germany, Deutsche Bank's headquarters were raided on Thursday as part of a probe into money laundering.
	The probe stems from the 2016 Panama Papers affair, which revealed mass money laundering and tax evasion schemes set up by the Mossack Fonseca law firm.
	Deutsche Bank is President Trump's largest lender, with Trump reportedly owing hundreds of millions of dollars to the German bank for real estate loans dating back some 20 years.
	Yeah, I think that's factually incorrect.
	I mean, she's just parroting whatever she read somewhere.
	You know, the former New York banker worked there.
	He says, we did two deals.
	Man, we all made money on it.
	It was perfectly fine.
	Of course, he sued us and we went to court and we still made money on it.
	So I don't think that's true.
	That he still owes money.
	It's just a myth.
	He parroted his news.
	This is the problem with these people.
	And Amy Goodman is very susceptible to it.
	It shouldn't even be in the story, though.
	It's about Deutsche Bank and their money laundering.
	It's got nothing to do with Trump under any circumstances.
	Just because you're going to name everybody who's had a bank account at Deutsche Bank, whether they borrow money or not, doesn't make any sense.
	Well, also, in all of these reportings on money laundering, except way after the fact HSBC, for which no one went to jail, Jim Comey made sure of that as a member of the board of directors.
	They never really talk about what the money laundering was.
	And the same with this Deutsche Bank story.
	Have you been able to find anywhere what or who they were laundering for or where the money came from?
	You'd think if you can find out that they were money laundering, you'd have to be able to find out who they were money laundering for.
	You wouldn't have a case.
	Yeah, but that just seems to not be important.
	I don't know why they don't bring it up.
	Is it one of the Mexican cartels?
	Is it European interest?
	Is it some African despot?
	I mean, we don't know.
	Drugs, typically.
	Isn't it just drug money?
	That's what it was at HSBC. They always say drug money, drug money.
	Okay, who's drug money?
	Well, it was Mexican drug money with the big one.
	I remember that.
	But again, that's also just, yeah, whatever, fine.
	No one cares.
	Just drug money.
	Be quiet.
	Be quiet.
	Well, then there was the best Trump slam came, and this is your beat.
	I don't know if you have the clip.
	The now apparently canceled Murphy Brown reboot.
	It's been canceled, I believe.
	Well, it stinks.
	Have you seen it?
	And thank you to all the Norman Lear folks for helping that show get off the ground by screwing them with these thematic, you know...
	Anti-government stories.
	Well, it's not...
	Anti-government, anti-Trump.
	Yeah, it's not just anti-government.
	I don't know if you saw this.
	This is...
	I think it's a trailer or just a piece of it, so I haven't seen the whole episode.
	I don't know if this aired or not.
	It's Murphy Brown, and one of her journalists has been beaten into a hospital at a Trump rally.
	And so his face is all mashed up and beaten.
	She comes in.
	When has that happened?
	And we start with the scene.
	I guess when you major in journalism these days, you have to minor in kickboxing.
	Hey, Uncle Frank.
	Hey, guys.
	What happened to you?
	I thought you knew how to duck.
	You should see the other hundred guys.
	How bad do I look?
	Not bad.
	If you're a pinata.
	So I guess the takeaway here is next time you cover a rally, hope the president doesn't give you a shout-out.
	When Trump left the stage, I decided to leave the press pen and go interview some of the people.
	Next thing I know, I'm surrounded by a sea of red hats.
	Oh, God.
	No big deal.
	I'm just milking this for the Jell-O and sponge baths.
	There you go.
	A journalist got beaten within an inch of his life at a Trump rally in the pretend Murphy Brown series.
	Yeah.
	Keep on sucking!
	Hmm?
	When does that happen in real life?
	No, it hasn't happened in real life, but I think that...
	A bunch of Trump supporters have had the crap beat out of them.
	Yeah.
	In California, that's why Trump never came here.
	I mean, it's just, it's unconscionable.
	Hmm.
	And they had to put the red hats in there, too.
	Like, they're going to be wearing the red hats.
	Of course.
	Of course.
	Well, it got canceled, so that's what you get.
	Well, that show was doomed from the first episode, the clips I played from it.
	But, John, hold on a second.
	We know how television works.
	And, okay, it's CBS. CBS? Yeah, CBS. But still, to get anything on the air at any network, any television network, That's quite a process.
	There's a lot of people and a lot of money involved.
	And how can they still...
	It's unbelievably hard.
	I mean, how can this happen?
	I mean, that must mean that at its core, CBS is so hateful and so rotten.
	Otherwise, you just don't put this on the air.
	Because you know it's not going to be successful.
	It's like Harakiri.
	You know that it's not going to draw all the audience you need for a primetime show.
	Well, there's a couple of possibilities to put our executive hats on.
	Okay.
	It had to be at Moonves Greenlight because that's when he was in the...
	Right.
	Because this thing was greenlighted long before he got kicked out.
	Right.
	Moonves may have green-lighted it knowing it was going to fail, but it was a quid pro quo to the CIA or somebody else who's got a lot.
	Their claws are all over CBS, as we've pointed out before.
	And it's gone way back to the early days.
	They've always been very closely connected to that network.
	And it may have been just a nod to them with it in mind that it wasn't going to work out because, you know, but it was going to get a lot of attention for not working out or make some point.
	Maybe the point that you just played is the point that it was trying to make and it was, that's fine, it was canceled, so what?
	We put other things on that we expect to cancel right away.
	Anyway, ABC did it with Roseanne.
	They were looking for any excuse to get rid of her.
	So...
	You know, I mean, there's some note of insincerity about the whole thing.
	I mean, Murphy, for one thing, Candace Bergen, she's lost whatever acting shop she once had and seemed to be faxing in her performances.
	And the whole thing seems somewhat fake.
	So, I don't know.
	Just saying.
	That's a long answer to I don't know.
	Yeah.
	I don't know, but I suspect there's something more to it than just going through the process and then just crapping out.
	Okay.
	Well, it shows no business acumen in the decision-making, or at least not business acumen that these executive producers would adhere to.
	Or the network at the time, because now that Moonvest is out, Moonvest may have also been, there's a lot of these guys who run these networks that can say, yeah, it's not making it now, but it will.
	I mean, there's numerous long carrying shows.
	MASH, I think, was one of them.
	Cheers was another one.
	It was a bust.
	And oddly, Baywatch only was successful in Deutschland.
	But boy, was Hasselhoff right.
	He was right.
	I think the word bust has a different meaning with Baywatch.
	Yes, gotcha.
	Alright.
	Does that bring us to Me Too?
	Does that bring us to Neil deGrasse Tyson?
	Well, no.
	Not quite.
	But we're going to get there.
	I'm just going to get this one out of the way.
	Because we talked about the Trump and the Russian deal and all the rest.
	There's one little tidbit that Amy...
	And I don't know if it's bull crap or not, but it's pretty funny.
	But the way it's presented is kind of disingenuous, another example.
	You have to listen carefully.
	This is about a penthouse that Putin was supposed to get.
	Yeah, the $50 million penthouse that was supposed to be a part of the collusion deal.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	BuzzFeed News is reporting the Trump...
	Anything that starts off like that, I mean, you could pretty much...
	When it starts off with BuzzFeed News, I'm going to click other channel.
	BuzzFeed News is reporting the Trump Organization plan to give a $50 million penthouse at the proposed Trump Tower Moscow to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
	Okay.
	So what?
	It's just a room.
	I mean, the top floor of the place, you're going to give it to somebody because usually it's a gift to someone as a bribe.
	It's a bribe.
	Yeah, well...
	And you can price it at anything you want.
	It could be...
	If it was in Emeryville over here, they had these penthouses.
	They're a million.
	A million dollars, so...
	Yeah.
	It's a little different in Moscow than Emeryville, but still.
	Right, but I mean...
	I just thought that was just a who-cares thing, personally.
	Yeah.
	It wasn't like he was giving him $50 million.
	No.
	But this has been a story that I've heard all weekend about this penthouse and the collusion.
	Well, actually, I'm going to play this now because I think it makes a lot of sense.
	Collusion!
	Collusion, yeah.
	Any collusion.
	So, the background to all this is Michael Cohen flipped.
	He flipped.
	He's done something.
	It's, oh wait, I have the backgrounder.
	What am I thinking?
	I have the backgrounder from The View.
	I gotta tell you, this news about Michael Cohen, we always knew when Michael Cohen flipped that he probably had some significant information.
	Now he's pled guilty to lying in front of Congress about the Trump Tower plans that the Trump Tower was going to be built in Moscow.
	So, he...
	Okay, so you've got to write this down to follow it.
	So now he's been caught lying to Congress, apparently.
	He's got to write down Congress.
	He said, you know, everything ended when Trump became president in January of 2016.
	Now we know those conversations continue through July 2017.
	But that means that Michael Cohen lied to the public, to the Congress, and the president lied to the American people about his financial feelings.
	I love this.
	This is the revelation.
	He lied to the American public where they have been giving us actual counts of how often he's lied to the American public.
	But this one is a little different somehow.
	I know.
	But the thing is, and we've talked about this before.
	Yeah, but Trump says.
	This is what I saw him two minutes ago.
	Yeah, Trump just spoke.
	Going on and on, bloviating on and on because he's so nervous.
	Bloviating?
	But he said that there was no deal.
	There was no Moscow Trump Tower.
	Yeah.
	So it never happened.
	So what's the big deal?
	What do you say to that?
	It is a big deal because if it happened, if these negotiations were going on while he was president, it's precisely what the framers of our constitution wrote in to protect the American people again.
	What she's referring to is our old friend, the emoluments clause, which will pop up again and you will be hearing incessantly because somehow a deal that never completed is enriching yourself.
	It's because we want to make sure that this president, any president, is not putting his self-interest before the interests of the country.
	And is there a smoking gun here, do you think?
	I think so.
	There'll be documents, you know, negotiations.
	This is a common theme, is the legality of the charges and what it will entail.
	I hear a lot of...
	Brain frying.
	Orange man bad.
	When these questions are trying to be answered.
	Documents, there could be tapes.
	That's the funny thing.
	When people lie to federal prosecutors, don't they know that federal prosecutors usually don't even ask questions they don't know the answer to already?
	Like, they have the Federal Bureau of Investigation working for them.
	The best investigative tool in the world.
	In the world!
	Usually asking questions they already have the answers to.
	We always do that.
	That's why not having Manafort, I don't think it's a huge deal for Mueller.
	It's not.
	Also, sadly, it doesn't surprise me that...
	I just love this...
	It's a huge deal.
	This deal, this armchair quarterbacking is great when it comes from the ladies from The View.
	Cohen has lied to Congress and that Manafort lawyers, I mean, Trump forces, these are bad guys.
	It's not like he surrounded himself with...
	But that's not what Trump says.
	Trump says that they're very brave, that Michael is not brave.
	Not Michael Cohen.
	He called him weak just a moment ago.
	The others, because the other ones are not flipping.
	Those are ready to get pardoned.
	But there's also a chance that the public doesn't even get the results of this report.
	I think there's this idea that Mueller's going to stand in front of the camera and he's going to, you know, list a bunch of things that they found.
	But ultimately, Mueller gives it to Whitaker.
	That's why his role is so important, because Whitaker, the Attorney General, can then decide to just keep it quiet, just give an outline to Congress.
	It'll leak.
	Today is a good day for Donald Trump to resign.
	I really believe that.
	I would wager that your Lib Joe friends have very similar scenarios in their head as to what's going on.
	Of course they do!
	We don't have to defend it.
	Hell froze over.
	And Jake Tapper, of all people, disgraced from ABC News, lowered down to CNN... And he has incoming chairman, or he's now currently the ranking member, which means he's of the opposition party, but the Democrat, his name is Jerry Nadler.
	So he will be the chairman.
	Nadler is the worst of the group, by the way.
	Well, this is the best thing.
	The worst.
	So he's going to be the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
	Yeah.
	Oversight over the Justice Department.
	And Jake Tapper, God bless him, I don't know what happened, I don't know if it's smart of him to do this, because, of course, a guy like Nadler will come on CNN thinking, home game, no worries, I'll just punt, just, you know, bop it around like we always do, and I'll score some goals and I'll go home.
	What?
	Well, first of all, I think Nadler is not well-liked.
	By...
	By anybody.
	And so I don't think he's going to get that treatment.
	Well, he did not get that treatment, but that's what he was thinking.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Well, then he was very poorly...
	No, I'd say, yeah, he's an idiot, but that's what he would be thinking.
	Yeah, that's what he would be thinking.
	So Jake Tapper states the obvious, not once, but maybe five times in this interview.
	He says, yeah, what Trump did may not, may stink, I think he says, may stink, but it's not illegal.
	But listen to the brain fry and subsequently the...
	Just word diarrhea coming out of his pie hole.
	And this guy is going to be the chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
	It's baffling.
	Congressman Jerry Nadler of New York, he's the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, expected to become the chairman of that committee when the Democrats take control in January.
	Thanks so much for being here.
	Appreciate it.
	So this is, look, this is clearly not welcome news for the president.
	I don't want to pretend that it is.
	But once again, I look at these documents and I don't see any evidence of Well, first of all, the president obviously has to be feeling very upset and angry now that we know that Michael Cohen was lying to Congress on his behalf.
	And he has to be upset about what Michael Cohen I'm just realizing that this is really how this guy thinks.
	He's really thinking, oh man, I bet Trump is really pissed off about this.
	I bet he's really just steaming.
	He's so mad about Cohen flipping on him.
	He's got to be worried.
	He will admit to.
	And what he's admitted to is that he was negotiating a corrupt business deal in Russia on behalf of the president during the campaign.
	Now, you and I would probably say, hold on a second.
	What do you mean corrupt business deal?
	This is new, what you're putting in here.
	Was there any reporting of it being corrupt?
	And lo and behold, Jake Tapper does just that.
	When the president was saying there was no business deal...
	You call it a corrupt business deal?
	Well, the fact that it was negotiating with a foreign power of business deals while you're running for president...
	Not illegal, you mean like more just colloquially corrupt.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	But still no conspiracy.
	Now the guy's brain is on fire.
	Well, wait a minute.
	It certainly tends to indicate, it's one more piece of evidence.
	Remember, so now we know, Cohen testifies that Trump, during the campaign, at the same time that he is dictating a change in the Republican platform to favor the Russians, at the same time that he can find nothing negative to say about Putin.
	Wait, here are the charges.
	Number one, Apparently, negotiations were going on with the Russians.
	While he changed the platform to favor Russia, which is debatable, but the platform was changed, but the second item on the list is he wasn't saying anything bad about him.
	It's actually an offense to not say something bad about him.
	What they're doing is in fact negotiating with the Russian government for personal business profits.
	He's mixing his personal business profits with respect and perhaps putting them over the interests of the United States.
	So this is the case, I love this, that Trump, as everyone knows, is such a narcissist, cares so little about America.
	That he only wants to enrich himself during the campaign and during the election and today.
	Right now, all he cares about is getting richer himself and not about America.
	That is the claims.
	And lying to the electorate about it.
	Sure, it stinks.
	I'm not saying it's not, but it's not conspiracy is all that stuff.
	Does Jake Tapper want to be fired?
	Well, it may be conspiracy.
	Not to interfere with the election.
	There's no evidence to that.
	No, but now you have another...
	You have another piece of evidence of active business dealings conspiring by Trump with the Russian government at the time.
	At the same time that you have other people who are agents of Trump dealing with all the things we've seen about hacking with Guccifer 2 and the WikiLeaks and everything else.
	WikiLeaks, Guccifer 2.
	It's like that other clip that we played, John.
	Where it's like, give me some examples of how he's undermining democracy and people just start yelling, FBI! NSA! FBI! This guy, he's just throwing WikiLeaks at Guccifer 2.0.
	You have another piece of evidence of...
	Evidence!
	...of active business dealings and conspiring by Trump with the Russian government at the time.
	At the same time that you have other people who are agents of Trump dealing with all the things we've seen about hacking with Guccifer 2 and the WikiLeaks and everything else.
	Roger Stone.
	It's another point of Trump's close relationship with the right.
	No, this is great.
	Yeah!
	But Jake Tapper is hanging in there!
	And it all tends in the same direction.
	So, President Trump responded to basically what you said earlier today.
	Let's play that.
	He basically says he wasn't president.
	He was just a candidate.
	He can do what he wants.
	Take a listen.
	orange man bad even if he was right it doesn't matter because I was allowed to do whatever I wanted during the campaign Is that true?
	Well, no.
	He's not allowed to do whatever he wants to in the campaign.
	He is allowed to have private business dealings with the Russians.
	He is not allowed to have private business dealings with the Russians and lie to the American electorate about it.
	And at the same time, change the Republican platform with respect to the Russians.
	In other words, to mix his public policy and probably the public policy going forward into his presidency based on dealings.
	When you say he's not allowed to, I'm not disputing that it stinks.
	It's not illegal, right?
	It's not illegal to have business dealings with the Russians.
	It's not illegal to change the Republican platform.
	It may very well be illegal to take that public...
	And it's certainly illegal if he's done anything as president based on his business relationships with the Russians.
	And this is another piece of evidence going toward that conclusion.
	Well, it's clear.
	Impeach him!
	What the hell was he saying?
	He wasn't saying anything, but here's another question that could have been asked.
	Why was it in Putin or the Russian government's best interest to get him elected when if they had not gotten him elected, Putin would have benefited with a $50 million penthouse?
	I don't think Jake had read BuzzFeed at that point, so maybe he didn't have that information.
	But what is...
	I mean, Tapper, all of a sudden now he's just asking...
	I just don't think he likes Nadler.
	Hmm.
	Now there's an unlikable person.
	But I think he puts his reputation on the line with stuff like this.
	Well, he's doing hard-hitting news.
	That's what it is, hard-hitting.
	He's rolling it out real hard.
	Hard-hitting.
	Barbed.
	And with that, I'd like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, John C., where the C stands for, I can't come up with something in Geary.
	Dvorak!
	In the morning to you, Mr.
	Adam Curry.
	Also, in the morning to all the ships at sea, boots on the ground, feet in the air, and subs in the water.
	And all the dams and knights out there.
	That is the new tube, everybody.
	It's a new sound effect we're testing on the No Agenda Show.
	And in the morning to the troll room at noagendastream.com.
	I've been looking at the troll room and very unhelpful.
	Cracking one-liners that aren't funny.
	But okay.
	Thanks for being there.
	NoagendaStream.com where you can always witness our show live and also a big in the morning to once again Darren O'Neill who brought us the artwork for episode 1090.
	The title of that was Truth Tell.
	And I remember why we chose this.
	This is the...
	So this is the logo that is going to be used for Al Gore's 24 Hours of Reality.
	And he changed it significantly to make it 3 Hours of Reality, the No Agenda show.
	And we felt it was appropriate since the...
	Yeah, there was actually a number of pieces there that were usable.
	There were.
	We picked out one because it was the most...
	Some of the other ones...
	There's a little tip.
	Some of the other ones that are, sometimes you'll turn something that maybe even is the better piece, but there's something that's more timely.
	In other words, it can't be used again in the future.
	The one piece that we thought was also really good could be used in another show where we have no art.
	Right, right, exactly.
	And also, we wanted to remind everybody, what, to not use us?
	Was that something we needed to remind everybody?
	Oh, no, yeah, you can't put our pictures in the art.
	Because the reason is because the first two or three years of art, at least the first two years of art, every artwork had our pictures.
	It was like the theme.
	And then one day, we got sick of it.
	We got really tired of it.
	It was basically the same two or three images.
	And so we said, no more pictures of us, period.
	We're not going to Right.
	And so we stop.
	So if there's a picture of either one of us, it could be one or the other, sometimes just one.
	It immediately gets overlooked.
	Immediately.
	It just gets kicked.
	Yep.
	So you're losing out.
	You're wasting your time.
	Yep.
	Can't be done.
	Let's start with thanking a few executive producers.
	We've got three of them.
	Kevin Silverman is the top of the list from Severn, Maryland, or Severn.
	Please de-douche me.
	You've been de-douched.
	Please deduce me as I've been donating this for donating after, for finally donating after listening for one whole year.
	You guys are highly entertaining and are much needed in this downward spiraling society.
	My birthday is on December 14th and I'll be passing 40 years on my odometer.
	So, happy birthday.
	Karma would be appreciated.
	Thanks for all you do.
	Kevin, the retiring sailor.
	Okay, very nice.
	You've got karma.
	Hey, here's our buddy from Cary, North Carolina, for $33.
	Sir Crash EMT. Oh!
	And he's the one who can get the information on these different drugs that you guys have available for use to bring people out of a coma.
	ITM Jensen, JNK, please add me to the birthday list, as today is my 46th trip around the sun.
	Ah, we will certainly do that, and thank you for your courage and for your support of the show.
	Newsbar!
	That's right, everybody.
	Here he is once again, your Grand Duke of the Pacific Northwest.
	I thought Melanson was the Grand Duke of the Pacific Northwest.
	I have no idea!
	You told me that we didn't do this on the last show.
	I'm like, I thought I had to play a Nussbaum thing.
	I don't remember now.
	No, it was Melanson you left out of the thing.
	Did he produce on the last show?
	I thought it was Nussbaum.
	Yeah, he was the top guy, and he didn't get a jingle.
	Oh, man, and so I gave Nussbaum one.
	He's the Duke of the Pacific Northwest.
	I'm confused.
	I don't know what I'm doing.
	I was trying to be ahead of the curve.
	Well, you were doing fine until you gave him a false credit.
	What am I thinking?
	Okay, yeah, you're right.
	Now I see what I did wrong.
	Ladies and gentlemen, I present the Grand Duke of the Pacific Northwest, Sir Dwayne Melanson.
	So that was meant for the previous show.
	Okay.
	You know, one of these days, it's going to be robotics.
	I won't even do the podcast.
	Anyway, Thomas is nuts, but it'll sound the same.
	It'll be just as crappy.
	Thomas Nussbaum, 3-14-59.
	He's the Duke, Grand Duke.
	Much love to Citizen X, Brain, Raven, and all the Twitter folks.
	Stand by for all the fun in the Middle East, Pipeline, Stearny, and MBS. Oh, my.
	Yes.
	Oh, my.
	We're waiting for it.
	Thank you, Thomas, Sir Thomas Nussbaum.
	Let's give him a karma.
	Even though he didn't ask for it, I totally agree.
	You've got karma.
	Sir Dave, Sir Dave, becomes our first associate executive producer.
	And curiously, we have three.
	So it's a balanced show, three and three.
	That's what I like to see.
	Sir Dave, 201-02.
	Gents, F Cancer Karma for my buddy Brad seems to have taken...
	MRI last week shows no more tumor, so that's a good thing.
	Excellent.
	Thanks for doling it out and request some goat karma for good measure.
	Thank you for your courage, Sir Dave KCMO. Well, we can't take credit for what happens, but these karma things, man, when it works, it always feels good.
	Very happy to hear that.
	You've got karma.
	Thank you, Sir Dave.
	Sir Kevin McLaughlin, the Viscount of Luna.
	He's $200.33 in Locust, North Carolina.
	In the morning.
	In the morning.
	And thank you for your courage, gentlemen.
	John's follow-up email was a call to action.
	F Cancer Karma for my Uncle Huey and others fighting cancer.
	Thank you for keeping my amygdala in check.
	Fucking cancer!
	You've got karma.
	I want to talk about that for a second.
	So, about the newsletter.
	Now, I subscribe through two different accounts, both at curry.com, and I got all, essentially, four emails.
	I got both of them twice.
	But a lot of people didn't get the newsletter, and it seems that things are going on, and I wonder if you had any forensics on what's happened.
	Well, I'm looking into it, but here's what my indicators are, and I'm actually talking to MailChimp guys.
	They think there's nothing.
	Every week I send a newsletter out on Thursdays and Saturdays, or Wednesdays and Saturdays, the day before the show.
	And last Thursday is the one that really concerned me because it was only a 25% open rate, which means there was, but it wasn't any different than any of the other newsletters in terms of the headline or the tease or anything else.
	Can I ask questions?
	Do you typically expect a higher open rate?
	I expect to be about 47%.
	Which is extremely high in the newsletter business, is it not?
	Yes, but there's a lot of reasons for that.
	I'm just asking questions.
	Something somebody's subscribed to, it should be higher.
	When I do my wine newsletter occasionally, the open rate's about 85%.
	Hey, how can I get on that list?
	I'm not on that list.
	Let me explain my concern.
	So I send this thing out and the first thing that happens when it immediately goes out to MailChimp, I get, I don't have the number in front of me, but it's five or six.
	I have these cheat indicators that I use and people who have ever been in the mailing list business have these, they have all these tricks.
	This is one of mine.
	I get five or six immediate Bounce backs from people with automated messages.
	They just, it just crops up immediately.
	Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang.
	Five.
	Or six.
	And in every week, and every time I send it out, I'll get back either, I'll either get all those back, just immediately, or I'll get maybe two of them.
	I wonder where the other four went.
	But this time on Thursday, I got none.
	I got zero of these.
	On the Saturday newsletter, I got three or four, so it was better.
	But I didn't get what I'm expecting to get.
	So the people that are supposed to send me the automated reply, this is an automated reply.
	We're not at the desk right now.
	Okay, I got you.
	That's your trick.
	That's a good trick.
	Yeah.
	Very good trick.
	So these automated replies don't show up at all.
	And they're automated.
	Now, were these Gmail addresses?
	Are these Gmail addresses primarily?
	Or what is that?
	Well, I'm looking into all the details.
	Because it might...
	You know, Gmail doesn't necessarily mean it's about Gmail.
	I think it is about Gmail, by the way.
	I think it is, too.
	And I think they keep changing their algorithms, and so I think now I'm doing something I shouldn't be doing.
	But a lot of people have company names, but they're actually Gmail.
	Right.
	Ah, yes.
	Yeah, Gmail for business.
	Well, I have two thoughts about it.
	One...
	Is it possible that because there was some email virus going around attached to your domain name that is not anyone's fault necessarily or solvable, but a lot of people were receiving it, probably also in Gmail, that maybe Gmail went, something's up with this, so let's just route everything to spam, if it comes from anything related to Dvorak.org?
	It's always possible, but there's no...
	For one thing, if they're looking at Dvorak.org, they're not looking at the sender.
	Right, I'm just saying.
	I'm just saying that that's a possibility that Google has its stuff set that way.
	The possibilities are endless.
	I'd accept that as a possibility, even though there's no evidence of it.
	Here's the most important thing.
	People who use Gmail...
	How long are you going to let Google determine what you can see and what you can do?
	How long until you really are missing things that may be important that Google deemed not important to you?
	How long are you going to stand for that?
	For something as, I think, critical as email?
	Ask yourself, what the hell are you doing?
	Why are you letting some company do this for free?
	Because you know they're doing it for free.
	There's a reason for it, and it's probably not to help you out.
	Think about it.
	It's my new sign off.
	Think about it.
	A message from Uncle Adam.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	All right.
	Last.
	It's one of these things.
	I think it's a, I think they've changed something.
	I've got to figure out what it is because I, here's a, I'll give you a, here's a tip for you mailers.
	I always give me, I give away because it's the nature of this show.
	We give away information.
	That's good to know.
	If you're doing a mailing, for example, to a mailing list, and you do everything you can not to get it bounced back, one of the things you want to avoid, of course, is things like using all caps in the subject line.
	That's like five points against you.
	Oh, yeah.
	That's immediate.
	Baba.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Now, I've been using all caps in the send line because it seems to be very effective.
	That may actually be not working against me now.
	I have to experiment some more with an A-B test.
	Let me just stop you there.
	Interesting you say that because I have always found the all caps, the no agenda, whatever it is, it's all caps.
	And to me, it always gets my attention.
	I'm like, oh, shit, there's the newsletter.
	Yeah.
	So that's just a small trick you're using that may be outlawed now.
	It's on the front end.
	Yeah.
	But you can't put it on the subject line because I know that's outlawed.
	Right, right.
	So you've got to minimize.
	Two things about the subject line you've got to know.
	One, you can't use all caps and keep the exclamation parts to a minimum.
	Oh, wait.
	No exclamation marks.
	Ever.
	No, that's a bad one.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	There was one other tip I had that I wanted to throw out.
	Well, that was only three.
	In those three, you promised five.
	Did I promise five tips?
	I think you said five tips.
	I promised five tips.
	I got three.
	I want five email tips.
	Okay, here's the last one.
	This is the third one.
	This is the one I want to start with.
	For people doing emailing, you need to know this.
	All right.
	Never, I got burned on this one and it didn't take me long to figure it out.
	Never, ever use the same link in the email note.
	Go here, go there, go here.
	Twice.
	Never use the same one twice.
	And so to get around it for the show, because I'm always pestering people to donate.
	You have a randomizer?
	No, you can't even create a randomizer.
	You just got to go to PayPal.
	PayPal's not going to put up with that.
	You just create second and third links that are pretty much the same thing.
	So the URL to donate to noagenda is...
	URL A. If I want to say it again at the end of the note, I can't use that exact same URL. I can't.
	Huh, because that's an automatic spam buster.
	Yeah, you're done.
	Not going to happen.
	That mail's not going anywhere.
	Alright, so what do you do?
	I just create another URL that's pretty much the same thing.
	A shortened URL. No, you can't do that either.
	All shortened URLs are checked.
	Well, how are you making...
	What URL? I don't understand.
	I create a URL. I go to PayPal.
	Here, donation URL. Donate to the No Agenda show.
	Here's the...
	Create a button for me.
	Boom.
	Here's your URL. I go back to PayPal.
	I say, donate for a good cause to the No Agenda show or just anything.
	They give me a different URL every time I create a new button.
	Hey, John.
	Thanks.
	That's what I was trying to figure out.
	I... You sound exasperated.
	I didn't know how it worked.
	I thought you were sending people to dvorak.org slash NA differently.
	Now I understand what you're doing.
	You're sending them straight to PayPal.
	I actually have no alternative than to do it straight to PayPal because you don't have a different link.
	To the noagenda slash NA. I can only use that once and I have to be careful I don't put it in there twice.
	Well, you know what?
	This is an Amazon giblet if I've ever heard it.
	A little emailing trick.
	That's only a few of them.
	I don't even know all of them.
	There's tons.
	This is useful stuff.
	Because I know for a fact from time way back when, when Matt Cutts was still there and I was getting into trouble.
	Yeah, the Cutts man.
	I know that they change these things and they don't tell anybody.
	No.
	Of course they don't.
	They changed it and I don't know what I'm doing wrong.
	Wow.
	Okay, well, good on you.
	I mean, that's a tough beat, and I appreciate you diving so deep and making it work, and let's see how we do for Thursday's show.
	Hopefully, we can figure it out.
	Well, yes, it's a personal thing with me about this whole thing.
	Good.
	And we got our last associate executive producer, who should be mentioned.
	He's been sitting there on pins and needles, but he's in Victoria, B.C., one of the prettiest places in the world.
	So good for him.
	Charles McPherson, 200 bucks.
	It is dynamite.
	Everyone should visit it.
	Please accept my donation of $200.
	I will kindly refuse one for one for the Canadian dollar as I know your cost of living is in American dollars.
	This is my third...
	Well, that's sweet.
	That is nice.
	This is my third donation after listening over 300 episodes or 900 hours.
	I've received much more value than I have given, so here's a couple of hundos.
	To help make up for it.
	I've recently returned from a trip overseas in Tibet and Nepal.
	No agenda is blocked in China.
	Uh-oh!
	Yeah.
	Why am I not surprised somehow?
	No, why is it blocked?
	Because we're evil Westerners.
	But fortunately, I was able to access the show in Nepal.
	The Wi-Fi was available, yet horrible while hiking in the...
	And a Perna circuit for three weeks.
	An outdoorsman.
	Yeah, our people get around.
	I mean, the internet bandwidth was very low in remote areas, as you would expect.
	Band Podbean was not able to download new episodes.
	Horrified.
	Wait, Podbean is our go-to.
	I can't believe it.
	No agenda light to the rescue.
	Oh, yeah, this is great.
	Name band that created noagendalight.glump.net.
	Yes.
	I'll give you that again for anyone who wants to know about this.
	It doesn't show up in the search usually.
	Noagendalight.glump.net, which enabled me to download the podcast over low bandwidth.
	Yes.
	A great resource for any traveler.
	Yes.
	Yes, we knew about this.
	We haven't mentioned him for a while.
	No intent to help me keep updated on my long days of hiking in relative isolation.
	Let me tell you, Nepal is goat-oriented.
	As I write this, my smoking hot spouse is questioning why you donate to a free podcast...
	For the value!
	Yes!
	Thanks for all you do, Charles and Victoria, BC. That's great.
	There's a frugal Canadian woman, you know, giving it away.
	Why pay for a cow and the milk is free?
	You know, the low bandwidth, no agenda low bandwidth started...
	I think that started with Australia 10, 11 years ago, as the bandwidth was very expensive, and it was really crappy bandwidth.
	I think it was the Australians who really couldn't get the show in regular fidelity, or a lot of them.
	And I think most of the problem was cost, if I recall.
	Well, it's been going on in the background.
	Like everything else on the No Agenda show, we have a lot of people who are...
	Kind of doing their own thing on behalf of the show and its listeners.
	Yeah.
	And we appreciate that, to say the least.
	Well, thank you.
	GoGlump.net.
	Thank you all very much for supporting the program.
	This is episode 1091 of the No Agenda Show.
	You are now officially executive producers and associate executive producers of the show.
	For this episode.
	And you can use that credit wherever credits are recognized and accepted.
	And it does seem to be very useful for getting gigs through the LinkedIn.
	So thank you again.
	And a reminder that we have another show coming up on Thursday.
	Please support us at...
	I think we are bringing you all the deconstruction you need.
	All you have to do is go out and propagate it.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Well, in our never-ending understanding of how people work and what in our never-ending understanding of how people work and what makes them tick, whenever you say something that is strange, people will email me.
	And whenever I say something that is off-kilter or whatever, people will email you.
	And even when I say, hey, email john at dvorak.org about something, Somehow, they still email me.
	And this is regarding your Australian accent.
	Ah!
	The steak and shrimp incident.
	Steak!
	Steak and shrimp incident.
	Well, as it turns out, not only are you really pronouncing it horribly, but you shouldn't even be using these words.
	All right, Dvorak.
	You want to practice your Australian accent?
	I got a little bit of advice for you.
	Normally, we have five vowels.
	A, E, I, O, and U. But in Australia, they more or less have two.
	And it's I, I, I, I, and OI. Talk like that, you'll sound like an Aussie in no time.
	So that is some advice from Matthew Bigelow.
	Now we move over to Martin from Queensland.
	G'day, John.
	How they hanging?
	Mate, let me tell you about the Aussie accent, because bloke needs work.
	Firstly, no true blue Aussie heads down the pub for a steak and shrimp.
	We call them prawns.
	Because in Australia, a prawn is almost as big as your forearm.
	And a shrimp is little tackers running amok around the house.
	Okay, I'll translate.
	So, they don't say shrimp.
	They say prawns.
	Because prawns are what you eat in Australia.
	And shrimp, apparently...
	I've gotten this note from a number of people, but they don't eat shrimp.
	They don't eat prawns.
	But yet, it's the Outback Restaurant, an Australian-themed restaurant that sells steak and shrimp.
	And is that restaurant in Australia, or is that restaurant in America?
	This reminds me of the first time I went to the UK in the 70s, and I found the California burger.
	And it was like, it was the worst thing.
	There was no relationship to any sort of normal hamburger.
	It's like a meatball sandwich.
	Would you like to hear the rest of your critique?
	Yes.
	As everyone knows, I'm very open to this.
	A steak is a steak.
	You can be freaking huge or just a big sucker.
	Either way, you're testing the dunny the next day.
	So if you're out with the missus down the local for a meal or a stubby or two and you splash out, you might order a kilo monster rump with a prawn topper.
	Mate, this is called a surf and turf.
	Ask for a steak and a shrimp and the sheila behind the bar will drop you on your ass quick as look at you.
	Fair dinkum.
	Anyway boys, in the morning.
	So I think the clue here is, or the lesson is, you just ask for surf and turf.
	Then you're safe.
	So nothing can go wrong.
	But in case you don't know how to do it after this advice, we always have Chris Wilson to remind us in song.
	So I've been working on my Australian accent.
	Want to hear it?
	Sure.
	Steak and shrimp.
	That's as far as I've gotten.
	So John, you want to speak some Aussie.
	So I figured I'd write you this song.
	But when you say steak and shrimp, to all of us Aussies it sounds kind of wrong.
	Because the shrimp we call a prawn.
	And prawns and steak, they rather swank.
	So simply order a surf and turf.
	And you won't sound like a douchebag yank.
	There you go.
	Your Australian lesson, courtesy of the producers of the No Agenda Show.
	Yes, all from Australia.
	Yes, they would know.
	I guess I heard some good voiceover talent in there.
	That's Chris.
	No, I mean, besides Chris.
	Oh, the guy from Queensland?
	Maybe.
	Yeah.
	You mean Martin.
	Martin in Queensland.
	Maybe.
	Could be.
	Yeah.
	I didn't take notes, but maybe Martin in Queensland should send me a note.
	We'll give him something to do.
	Okay.
	Good idea.
	I mean, it was really thick.
	That's what I like.
	Thick.
	That's what she said.
	Borderline not understandable.
	All right.
	So we had a big earthquake in Alaska.
	I got the report on it just so we can get a little, so at least we talk about it.
	There's not much to talk about.
	It's a big earthquake.
	Good evening.
	I'm Jeff Glorister, an edition, and we are going to begin tonight with the major earthquake that shook Alaska today.
	Jamie Ucas is following all of this.
	The major earthquake rocked buildings like this courthouse and seemed to go on and on.
	Roads collapsed all around Anchorage, including this ramp near the International Airport.
	A lone car was left on an island of asphalt.
	Just walking up after this earthquake.
	Holy smoke.
	Food flew off store shelves and windows were shattered.
	The quake struck just seven miles northwest of the downtown area of Alaska's largest city.
	Our Anchorage station, KTVA, took a big jolt.
	This is what their newsroom looked like after the quake.
	All of these are TVs and computers.
	This is a camera.
	Over here we have this pile of broken, shattered glass.
	This is our conference room.
	It's our break room.
	Oh, man.
	Oh, that's terrible.
	We've got a whole bunch of food stuff.
	This is a TV in the break room fell, ripped off the wall.
	This is going to be a mess to clean up.
	Students dove under desks.
	Holy s***!
	At the Anchorage airport...
	Earthquake!
	How often have they had earthquakes there?
	I can't really recall any.
	Well, they had a Whopper in 63-64 that was a 9, the biggest recorded on the globe ever, I think.
	And that was on the old system, on the old scale, the real Richter scale.
	Yeah, so it would probably be a 50.
	Yeah, now we're on the momentum scale, which is purposely jacked up to make everything look worse.
	And their earthquakes have a lot of uplift, so you end up with not just a bunch of shaking, but all of a sudden a highway will be...
	Just buckles.
	You know, you'll be going, and it'll be 10 foot of dirt is lifted up 10 feet.
	Yeah.
	You know, things will get thrown around.
	It was just a...
	They have bad earthquakes up there, and they have...
	At the end, I think they have something like...
	I might be wrong on this number, but I was looking at this number, I said, this doesn't make sense.
	40,000 tremors a year.
	Did you see, there's a map, and it has all the seismic, or a number of seismic sensors across the USA. And they show the minute the earthquake hits, and then you see this wave going all the way through.
	Of course, it hits the Pacific Northwest in California.
	And then, I mean, even Texas, there was, I mean, almost the East Coast, there was some measurement of it.
	But as a resident of the People's Republic of California, are you worried that this could kick something off in your area?
	Does this ever come up?
	No.
	Okay.
	It's pretty separated from all the stuff.
	It's almost like they have their own system of faults and it's got the connection to anything in the Ring of Fire, which is the earthquake zone that surrounds the Pacific Ocean.
	That's where everyone's going to die.
	That's where everyone's going to die.
	In the Ring of Fire.
	The Ring of Fire.
	Where we all go down together.
	Well, not anytime soon, hopefully.
	Anyway, so I wanted to get that out of the way.
	We also have another thing going on with Sandberg.
	Yeah, this story just keeps getting worse for Facebook.
	And they're targeting her.
	I think, again, I'm going to just...
	This is my version of conspiracy.
	Once the media got a clue that Facebook is their enemy...
	And they shouldn't be saying, hey, like us on Facebook and pushing people over toward Facebook where they're getting most of their news from Facebook.
	And a lot of people get their news from Twitter.
	They should be getting their news from the newspaper or from the news reports on television.
	They shouldn't be getting – from the perspective of somebody who works in that business, I would say, if I was in the TV business, I would think to myself, why am I promoting Facebook?
	We want to be providing the news.
	We don't want them to be providing the news and then taking our advertising money, $40 billion of it, which is nothing to sneeze at.
	So they've been going, I think they've decided all in concert, go after Facebook.
	And it looks like, now it's starting to look a little fishy.
	But this latest thing, and the one thing I think they're really wanting to do is getting rid of Sheryl Sandberg.
	She may well be so important to the company that she's got to go because she's...
	Well, as far as I'm concerned, I think she is the current version of the company when it comes to the money-making side of the house.
	It was her strategy.
	She implemented it.
	She brought in the connection with the credit card information.
	The data brokers brought them in.
	She really created the business model.
	Lean in and look down your blouse is what she did.
	Lean in.
	Yeah.
	Pay attention to these.
	So I think they're really going after her.
	But if any of this is true, she is really a terrible person.
	But a hard-ass businesswoman, and this is an example.
	The New York Times is reporting Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg requested research on billionaire liberal donor George Soros after he made public remarks critical of Facebook in January.
	In which he said the company was a menace to society.
	Soros is an investor in Facebook.
	The company says the research into Soros was already underway at the time of Sandberg's request.
	Earlier this month, the Times revealed Facebook hired conservative opposition research firm Definer's Public Affairs to investigate and discredit critics of the social networking site, including by linking some critics to Soros.
	Yeah, see, I think there's something else going on here.
	This is a Jew thing.
	I just don't know the way to describe it.
	This is why, you know, Zuckerberg is under fire, Sandberg's under fire, because we just went through this whole thing with the conspiracy theorists to explain that they're all anti-Semites and Jew haters because they're going after Soros.
	There's entire countries, you know, I'm looking at you hungry, entire countries that hate The Jews hate George Soros.
	And then you can't sell it to yourself that Jews running Facebook have done this same thing.
	So I think it's above and beyond the business dealings.
	It's personal.
	Well, what you're suggesting is the Jew hating meme doesn't work if it's Jews.
	Correct.
	Yeah.
	So you've got to get rid of the Jews at Facebook to make the meme work to get rid of Facebook.
	Facebook is a threat.
	It's a menace.
	I love that quote.
	It's a menace to democracy.
	I think it is.
	It's not the only thing that's a menace to democracy, but yeah, it's definitely the frontrunner, or was the frontrunner.
	Yeah, for sure.
	Yeah, for sure.
	Well, I think this is getting really deep.
	There's definitely something up.
	Well, they've been trying to blame this on...
	I think her deputy or someone is trying to take the fall or jumping on the grenade for everybody, but I don't think the media is having any bit of it.
	We need better reports.
	We need more in-depth.
	It's funny, but this also reflects your old thesis.
	And I've never been against this thesis.
	Of...
	If the media builds you up, they're the same people that bring you down.
	And they build her up with that book and, oh, she's great.
	She's on all the talk shows.
	She was like 60 Minutes.
	They build her up to be a superstar.
	So the theory I have...
	Yes, I'll reiterate the theory that I have, which I've witnessed myself, is whenever you use the media for your own personal gain or for promotion or something that you want to accomplish, when it's time and you don't know when it's going to happen, something will take place and it always comes back with equal force.
	Sometimes it may feel even stronger to you.
	And this happens to everyone who uses the media for promotion.
	Everyone.
	And in little...
	In increments, it happens to people on Facebook the same way.
	You know, I got all these likes and these likes and everyone loves me.
	It's fantastic.
	You do one little thing wrong, you get hammered down into depression.
	You want to go kill yourself.
	This is just the nature of media.
	And I think that's exactly what we're seeing with Neil deGrasse Tyson.
	Ah, segue!
	Hey, now!
	Woo-hoo!
	Finally did one!
	And this is where you take over.
	Well, Neil deGrasse Tyson, yeah.
	I don't know if I have any clips on this.
	I should.
	Do I? I thought you had a clip.
	But Neil deGrasse Tyson cracks me up because now all of a sudden he's a rapist.
	But didn't we know this?
	Wasn't this story about him at UT in the 80s?
	Wasn't this well known?
	This is not a new story.
	I mean, I'm pretty sure we've talked about this.
	Well, if you look at old, old pictures of him where he looks like, you know, Superfly.
	That's at UT. He does look like Superfly.
	He actually kind of looks cool.
	He looked, you know, it's like he could fit right in with the Mod Squad, you know, got kind of that Link haircut.
	Yeah, Mod Squad-ish.
	That's, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	He looks very cool.
	Apparently two or three women have accused him of harassment and one accused him of rape.
	And so now everyone's, apparently these are not new accusations, they've just been swept under the rug because these, you know, National Geographic and one of the networks, you know, the big...
	Yeah, hold on a second.
	It's Fox, I think it was, oddly it was Fox and National, does Fox own National Geographic?
	Yeah.
	No, they don't.
	I don't think it was Fox.
	Was it Fox?
	Yeah.
	Let me see.
	I have the story here.
	And I thought that was odd, too.
	Why was Fox looking into...
	I think Fox ran his show, the clone of the old Carl Sagan show.
	I think Fox, that was the network for that.
	Hmm.
	Let me see.
	I have the report.
	You never see him on Fox News.
	No.
	No, absolutely not.
	I'm trying to...
	I'm sure I read that somewhere.
	Let me just see.
	No.
	Well, maybe not in this report.
	I read it somewhere that it was also Fox News.
	Well, Fox.
	Oh, Fox stations.
	Okay, that makes sense.
	Yeah, Fox is not Fox stations.
	But then I guess the other accusation is that, and this comes from 2009, that Dr.
	Caitlin Allers, Associate Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Bucknell University, said she was, quote, felt up by Tyson at an after-party following a meeting of the American Astronomical Society of And then he actually has some photos of her and him.
	He's looking at her tattoo and apparently he moved his fingers up the tattoo.
	I don't know.
	But someone's out to get in for sure.
	It's sketchy.
	I think that's been out for a long time.
	I don't know.
	Someone's out to get him.
	But who and why is unclear to me.
	But I'm always thinking, if they're going to the National Geographic Channel level and Fox Station level, does this have to do with an acquisition?
	Is there some other business dealing that could be in trouble?
	Here it is.
	In exchange for $725 million, the National Geographic Society passed the troubled magazine and its book, map, and other media assets to a partnership headed by 21st Century Fox, the Murdoch-controlled company that owns the 20th Century Fox movie studio, the Fox Television Network, and Fox News channels.
	Thank you, DigiGuru.
	And...
	That would make sense since this is all in play.
	Maybe it's to knock the price down a bit.
	Is the Disney deal all done?
	Is there still something that has to happen?
	This has something to do with devaluing the asset to some degree.
	That's what it feels like to me.
	Yeah, well, that's what you want to do.
	Yeah.
	Well, it's working, I think.
	The story's catching...
	Well, it doesn't help that guy out, but I mean...
	No, who cares?
	Is he a douchebag or not?
	That's the question.
	No, I think it's can we lower the price of the acquisition?
	That's the question going on here.
	Please.
	Please.
	Degrass Tyson's unimportant in this.
	Maybe.
	He wouldn't say that, though.
	So the Miami Herald's reporting on the Jeffrey Epstein story continues.
	It's a multi-parter.
	I didn't realize.
	They keep publishing new video of these girls.
	Seems like they're going after Bill Clinton more than anything.
	Yeah, so...
	At first I thought this is clearly going to go after...
	Who's the guy, Acosta, who works at...
	Where does he work in the Trump?
	Bob Acosta?
	Yeah.
	Yes, the sports guy.
	He works at the...
	He's in the Trump administration.
	He's in some...
	I forget which department he's in.
	And he's the guy that basically helped...
	Epstein, you know, get this really reduced sentence.
	But then they pull in, and this was the best, Alan Dershowitz, who's in the filings of whatever lawsuits are coming out or whatever expose is taking place before our eyes.
	One of these girls claimed she had sex with Alan Dershowitz six times.
	Either on Lolita Express or on the island.
	She was counting?
	Dude.
	I mean, yeah.
	That's Mr.
	Dershowitz you're having sex with.
	Oh, really?
	That's been...
	I'm number five.
	Health and Human Services, that's a cost.
	You must really like me.
	But that's sick, man.
	I mean, Alan Dershowitz.
	So this guy and then Bill Clinton.
	But Trump was also on the plane.
	He's in the logs.
	Yeah, but Trump was on the plane once.
	There's no evidence he ever hung out at the island like Clinton did.
	True.
	And also, but what's interesting is that there's no mention of Trump in this expose at all, ever, anywhere.
	And it's so easy to at least bring him in.
	I think it would discredit the report.
	Yeah, so it's real reporting is what you're saying.
	Yes, which is weird, but true.
	Well, this has to be a hit.
	I would have to say then if Dershowitz, who, like, It's to me, why do I care who Dershowitz, what he's up to in his spare time?
	It has to be a hit piece.
	I think ever since Dershowitz turned into a Trump apologist...
	That's where the hit piece comes in.
	I think that they say, okay, well, Alan, we've been counting on you to be just a progressive, because he's always been a progressive, like hyper-liberal progressive with really strong legal reasons for taking his positions.
	Now he's doing the same thing, but he's on Trump's side?
	Mm-hmm.
	No, no, no.
	This isn't going to fly.
	Let's get it.
	You know what?
	He seems like the obvious one.
	Absolutely.
	He also defended Epstein in the initial 2008 trial, I think it is, and helped get him the fantastic deal of...
	Well, it's possible that all he was was a lawyer going back and forth with Epstein, never took part with anything, and they just found one girl who'd say anything.
	And there are plenty of them.
	Of course, of course.
	But either way, then it's...
	I mean, the six times thing is the thing that gets me to say, really?
	You got a notch on your belt to six times or Dershowitz.
	I don't even think these girls, not to demean them, but I don't think any of them knows who the hell Dershowitz is.
	Let alone keep and count.
	Right.
	Come on.
	14, 13, 14, 15-year-old, you know, in some...
	Well, but they're also...
	These accounts are coming 10 years later.
	So now is when they're talking about it.
	And this is 10 years later?
	Yeah, they're talking about it now.
	So this is a...
	I don't believe...
	I'm just not buying it.
	I just think that you can't remember from 10 years ago and then remember the exact number of times or even remember anything because you're probably in a drug stupor.
	Mm-hmm.
	Do you remember that you had sex with Alan Dershowitz six times ten years ago when you were a drugged, stupid teen who didn't want to be having sex with anybody or maybe did?
	John, why are you really going hard and heavy on this?
	I got it.
	Well, I'm going hard because I just think this is a setup to get Dershowitz.
	This doesn't make any sense.
	I agree.
	I agree.
	I don't care what...
	I'm just trying to break it down a little bit.
	I know.
	It's just like, wow, okay.
	All I know, I was never invited to the island.
	Good.
	That was going to be my next question.
	Thank goodness.
	Well, while we're on the promotion or demotion of public figures, we have a very poor showing at the Bill and Hillary show as they are going around the nation on their, I think it's 13-city tour.
	And the first stop...
	They had like a 15,000 seater and they only had 3,500 people in the arena, which is just never good no matter what kind of show it is.
	But NPR had an interesting piece that this tour, the Bill and Hillary tour, as well as Michelle Obama's tour, are being organized by the same outfit.
	Can you wager a guess as to who is managing these tours?
	One of the Worldwide Wrestling.
	That's one of the big tour organizers.
	Close, close, close.
	One of those types of guys?
	One of those big entertainment companies?
	It's Live Nation.
	Yeah, Live Nation.
	That's the one I was going to guess.
	Yeah, but that's a big change.
	This used to be done by, you know, very...
	I think Trump still organizes his own...
	But, you know, this is typically done by book agents or, you know, but to have live agent, live nation, to have them do it.
	Live nation's a huge operation.
	Join president.
	Number one concert promoters in the country.
	Yes.
	I mean, if you want Jay-Z and you want to, what's her name?
	Beyonce.
	Beyonce, thank you.
	Rihanna.
	Join President Bill Clinton.
	And they got all the cool commercials, too.
	And former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in an up-close and personal live event.
	It's a one-of-a-kind conversation discussing the important moments in modern history, how they shaped our world today.
	John, can you speak that low?
	No, I can't.
	Only in the morning, maybe.
	So give us some more details about the Clinton events.
	It sounds by that voice like they'd be very expensive.
	They can be very expensive.
	It's a 13-city tour, mostly in friendly territory.
	Live Nation says it's onstage conversations with the two sharing stories and inspiring anecdotes.
	For $59 to as high as $2,000, you can participate.
	So that's even more than Taylor Swift.
	It can be, yeah.
	The VIP packages are pretty expensive.
	The VIP packages are off the hook.
	There's not merchandise for the Clintons.
	They're not out there selling a book or a charity.
	But wait for it.
	There's a kicker to this.
	No merch.
	They're selling themselves, basically.
	I mean, Bill Clinton had that book with James Patterson, but that's kind of old news.
	You know, what they're doing is promoting themselves.
	To greater or lesser degree, they haven't been selling out the venues, but they've been getting reasonable crowds.
	How about Michelle Obama?
	Michelle Obama is a total rock star.
	She's on a 10-city tour that is taking her all over the country.
	And she's got all kinds of sponsorships.
	She's got merchandise.
	She's got a Find Your Flame and Keep It Lit candle for $35.
	I mean, this is basically a celebrity entertainment tour as much as it is a book tour.
	Is the money generated, any of it going to charity, or is it all going to Live Nation and the speakers?
	Live Nation says 10% of ticket sales are going to community groups in the cities that Michelle Obama is appearing in.
	They're also giving tickets out to those groups, some free tickets out to those groups, so that those people can experience the evening as well.
	So why is this happening?
	How does it benefit Michelle Obama and the Clintons to have Live Nation promoting the tour?
	Because it costs them money to pay Live Nation, obviously.
	Live Nation gets part of the revenue, but they are looking at themselves as able to sell out big venues.
	And if you go into a big venue, you need somebody who can handle the logistics of that.
	And Live Nation is the one that does that kind of promotion.
	How about Michelle with the merch?
	Was it the Keep It Lit candle?
	Yeah, $35 for a candle.
	She's got sponsors.
	She's doing it right, man.
	That's perfect.
	Setting a precedent.
	Those are the two slackers.
	They don't know what's going on.
	They're over the hill.
	Nobody wants to see Bill in this condition he is.
	He looks like he's half dead.
	And Hillary's coughing again.
	Hillary's coughing and she's got the same...
	She's blaming Trump for everything.
	She's not funny.
	If they had Kara Swisher as part of it, maybe that would help.
	Yeah, well that...
	But she does all that stuff for free.
	That's her mistake right there.
	Yeah, duh.
	But I love that Michelle Obama is just completely nailing it.
	Well, I'm going to give you a clip of the day because I didn't know that any of this was going on like that.
	Thank you.
	All I knew was that they weren't selling out the venues at the Clinton thing.
	I didn't know anything about Michelle and Live Nation.
	That's very interesting.
	Isn't that cool?
	I got a note from Sean C. in Las Vegas.
	Adam and John, the story you discussed about parents who were upset that they cannot join their kids at school lunch Reminded me of a personal experience with this at my daughter's elementary school a few years ago.
	You and I both had not heard that this was a thing, John, that apparently today's helicopter and bulldozer parents go to the lunchroom where their kids are, which quite rightly you remarked both you and I would have found extremely embarrassing as kids.
	And today that just seems to be normal.
	It's a little worse than we even realize.
	No.
	As Sean says.
	Yes.
	My daughter won some contest in her class where a parent could join her for lunch at her school.
	My thoughts were along the lines of JCDs where I would have been mortified as a child to have one of my parents show up.
	But my daughter really wanted me to come to school for lunch.
	So I did.
	When I got to the school, I saw three to four other parents in the lunchroom and asked my daughter if they won the same contest.
	My daughter said, no, no, no, they're here almost every day for lunch.
	In one part of the lunchroom, there were two parents with two giant pizzas handing out slices to some kids.
	I asked my daughter if that was normal.
	She said, yeah, their parents show up once a week and bring pizza for him and his friends.
	I asked him and his friends.
	My daughter said, yeah, if you're nice to him, he might invite you over to have pizza when his parents come in for lunch.
	This just totally blew my mind that this was happening and that the school allowed it.
	My daughter is now a middle school and thankfully this school doesn't allow any parents in the lunchroom so instead some parents started bringing special lunches from the fast food places and even some fancy places and dropping them off at the school's front office at lunchtime to have them delivered to their kids.
	The special lunch drop-offs got so bad last year, the principal finally sent home a letter saying that they will no longer accept non-medical necessary items being dropped off at the front office.
	The letter stated that in the previous year, parents had dropped off 3,600 non-necessary items and lunches at the front office to be delivered to their kids.
	Whoa.
	This kind of shows it, doesn't it?
	Well, I think what's interesting is that I thought the helicopter parent phenomenon was from like a couple of decades ago.
	And this is worse.
	It's much worse.
	And I think it's born out of some guilt or something, and it's clearly my generation.
	A little bit younger.
	People are now 35, 40.
	Yeah, I would say.
	Well, no, we're a little younger.
	Probably a little.
	It would be nice to have, in fact, a letter writer.
	We should ask him what his age is, because he will be right in the middle of that.
	Okay, Sean C. will let us know.
	But isn't that concerning?
	I mean, this kind of shows you what's wrong.
	What happened to four cents for milk and a peanut butter and jelly sandwich?
	Here, see you after school.
	I don't know about the peanut butter and jelly.
	We used to have pretty good lunches when I was a kid.
	No, I'm talking about the lunch my mom would make.
	Oh, yeah.
	Sometimes they make a little hat sandwich.
	Yeah, because I didn't get a school lunch.
	I got four cents for milk.
	Hmm.
	Poor kid.
	I was just thinking about that.
	I'm like, damn.
	I was deprived of school lunches.
	You're getting pieces of pizza.
	Yeah.
	So there's this story going around, and this is a Texas story.
	All right.
	This is a Texas story about...
	There's a couple of things going on.
	I got three clips that relate to this.
	This is the Texas story about the kid, James...
	Who whose mom insisted he become a girl and and he calls him Luna and he acts like a girl and dresses like a girl around her.
	They got divorced.
	The parents got divorced for obvious reasons.
	The boy is James with the dad and Luna with the mom who insists that he'd be.
	And she's suing for custody and the state of Texas is kind of siding with her.
	And it's possible that the guy's going to lose the kid to the mom.
	And where in Texas is this?
	Do you know where in Texas?
	I don't have the...
	I'll look it up while you play the clip.
	Okay.
	But this is a...
	Play the gender dysphoria Luna and James.
	This is a psychologist or a person who's the head of the American Pediatrics and she's discussing the details.
	Uh...
	Dr.
	Critella, first, your observations about James and his wanting to be Luna with his mother and James with his dad.
	Is this gender dysphoria and can a six-year-old struggle with this?
	A six-year-old child can certainly have gender dysphoria, but James' case does not really fit that definition.
	A young child who has gender dysphoria Persistently and consistently will insist they are not their biological sex.
	But in this case, James is quite happy being a boy with his father and seems to behave and act like a girl with his mother.
	So there's some red flags there.
	How does this differ from children this age simply being curious about gender?
	There's some overlap, but Generally, a child with true gender dysphoria is so upset, so emotionally upset by their biological sex that they will reach the point where they insist it's not who they are.
	Whereas a child who's just experimenting, they may try out different sex stereotyped playing or cross-dressing, things like this, but it's It's not a persistent or consistent habit.
	What do you think would be the best thing for James in this situation?
	The ideal approach here should be with a therapist who will objectively look at James and the very difficult situation they're in.
	This is a divorce situation.
	And, um, basically assess what's different about when James is with mom and when James is with dad.
	Um, there are cases now I don't, obviously I don't know these parents personally, but there is definitely, um, the case in which some mothers in particular can experience gender mourning.
	Moms who so desperately wanted a girl, um, but never gave birth to a daughter can enter, uh, a deep depression and that depression is only lifted when one of their sons acts a deep depression and that depression is only lifted when one of their sons acts in an effeminate way or allows the mom to So there are cases like this in the literature.
	Wow.
	This is all-round psychosis.
	This is a very interesting case.
	Apparently the dad's living in Carrollton and the mom moved to Dallas.
	Okay.
	So it's right in the middle of Texas proper.
	Yeah.
	Meanwhile, another secondary thing that's going on...
	I'm going to skip to this.
	This is the trend of some parents...
	To allow the, not to call their kids boy or girl or let anybody know about it, even after they're born, and they're referred to as theybes.
	Yeah, I think we talked about this, the theybes, but we didn't have a clip.
	Yeah, well this is the, right, this was on Tucker Carlson, I hate to play this clip, but I want to play it, then I can get back to that pediatrician after this clip plays.
	This is Tucker, of course, he just makes light of this whole thing, thinks it's idiotic, but Play the babies clip.
	But doesn't this mean if you're going to raise a baby, how would you be able to change your child's diaper?
	Because the second you change the diaper, of course, you'd no longer be able to pretend that there was a question about whether this was a boy or a girl.
	You would know.
	Well, it's not about pretending.
	This is this liberal Sherpa girl, which is starting to become an unfunny bit, I think.
	It definitely knows the gender.
	It's about not necessarily labeling the baby.
	It's about allowing the baby to decide what gender that baby wants to be when that baby can decide, which is around four years old.
	So from zero to four, the baby will not be labeled.
	The labeling theory will not apply from zero to four years old.
	The baby will be a baby, neither a boy nor a girl, whatever gender that baby.
	What other what other what other profound life decisions do we think people are to be making at the age of four?
	Are there any others?
	Whether to get a tattoo, whether to get married, enlisting in the military, voting, drinking vodka, smoking Marlboro Reds.
	Is there anything else that we think four-year-olds are ready to decide?
	This isn't actually a profound life decision.
	I mean, biologically...
	There's nothing really going on from zero to four in that area that affects a person's life.
	Biologically, the experts say that boys and girls, all genders are alike.
	The boy's brain, the male brain, might be a little larger.
	The female's language might be a little bit more advanced.
	But, John, isn't that the...
	Anyway, it goes on.
	But isn't that the liberal Sherpa girl who does that?
	Because I find that to be a very disingenuous bit, they do.
	But the point is made.
	The point is about the babies.
	Now, the thing that gets me about this is the term baby.
	Yes.
	Now, why do I find that peculiar?
	Because this reminds me of that story I've told on the show over and over again about the liberal copy editors at PC World Magazine who didn't like a person using the word representative and preferred they used the word spokesperson.
	Because, and the rationale was spokesperson is not sexist.
	And representative is?
	He said, well, wait a minute.
	Representative isn't sexist.
	It's got no indication of anything.
	It's just representative.
	And she said to him, oh, yes, that's true, but we want to make it clear that people note that the spokesperson makes it clear that we're not sexist.
	Representative just doesn't mean anything.
	Oh, I see.
	So it's actual, you need to virtue signal in everything you say to not only have a politically correct word, but to make sure everybody knows you're politically correct.
	Exactly.
	Okay.
	That's exactly right.
	And it is virtue signaling.
	And that's what babies is.
	Because what is a baby?
	It could be anything, a boy, girl.
	Hermaphrodite, for all you know, it's a baby.
	Why do you have to use the word baby?
	Ah, your point being you could just say baby.
	Yeah.
	Ah, yes.
	Yes, no, I totally agree with you.
	And you know, when you think about it just in simple terms like that, yeah, it makes sense.
	Why don't you just call it a baby, which is what it's been called for a while now.
	But to virtue signal, yeah, that's it.
	It's kind of sick.
	That's totally sick.
	Now, here is the woman from the pediatrics asking about this situation, about this gender-bending, pre-adolescent gender-bending.
	This is gender truth commentary.
	What are your thoughts on allowing children to choose their gender?
	It's outrageous.
	Look, we...
	Our sex is determined at conception by our genetics, by our DNA. When children are born, we as physicians recognize the sex that they are by their physical bodies.
	And that's what children need to be taught.
	Some people, most of us, use sex and gender interchangeably.
	Unfortunately, we're now in a culture that is heavily dominated by transgender activists.
	Who are teaching children as young as preschool that sex and gender are two different things and that they can be at odds with one another.
	So as parents and honest physicians, we have to teach our kids the truth.
	People have a biological sex, determined at conception, and that never changes.
	It's with you for your whole life.
	Dr.
	Michelle Cortella with the American College of Pediatricians, thank you so much for your insight.
	Yeah, this is a real problem and it's going to...
	I blame Facebook, by the way.
	I blame the internet in general, but I think Facebook creates these groups where people get into this circular thing and just keep going around and around and around and that's where the virtue signaling takes place and it's all happening because of the internet somehow.
	I think you're absolutely correct.
	I've been...
	The internet is ruining us.
	Yes.
	That's the real menace to democracy, not Facebook.
	Yes.
	It is the internet in general because we as humanoids, some reptile, we still have tailbones.
	We have no idea how to handle what people actually are.
	We're just learning now what people are, how they interact with one another, and how incredibly easy it is to manipulate people and get them on your side for anything.
	And I think that I have, although I am right on the cusp of being a part of the problem, I think I definitely screwed up with my kid in some areas, which is totally relatable to my generation.
	I think because I didn't go to college, I didn't get the programming.
	I lucked out.
	Well...
	I got the programming because I went to the University of California at Berkeley.
	Yeah, but it was early.
	It was early days.
	You know, this is pre-internet.
	You didn't get the internet programming.
	I'm not convinced of that.
	Okay, well...
	Maybe it was an experimental period.
	I'm not sure.
	You seem to be doing okay, though.
	Well, I snapped out of it.
	I was the unreconstructed hippie as the guy who didn't snap out of it.
	Most of the guys who went to these...
	Well, actually, most of them.
	My generation has a lot of people.
	Every time I run into people from my high school class and others and people that went to the colleges during my era, I find it very interesting.
	You're going to find this weird.
	I'm the optimistic one.
	I don't find it weird.
	They're so negative.
	They're depressed and negative.
	Yeah.
	The negativity of this group, all baby boomers, it's like it takes me back and go, oh my god, I hope I don't sound like this.
	Well, you know they do call you the cranky geek and the buzzkill.
	Yeah, and I compare myself to the true models of this, and I don't even hold a candle to these people.
	Wow, this is like your Lib Joes too, I guess.
	They also have the same depressed feeling, and they're negative, and...
	I think so.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	So, well, I know that the programming I got was pre-internet, but it was definitely, you know, different.
	What would have been that Amsterdam programming?
	Totally the Amsterdam programming.
	Absolutely.
	Yeah, look at them now.
	Yeah, I got out in time.
	I'm actually just a lucky sumbitch, aren't I? You are.
	I'm really lucky.
	I'm going to show myself old by donating to no agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh, yeah, that'd be fab.
	Let me read this first one, John.
	And the story of Adam and John will continue in the future.
	And Sir P. Funk is the top of the list.
	And $150.
	Let me just address Sir...
	It's actually Sir P. Funk.
	And this is weird.
	It says P. Funk.
	I know it does.
	Yes, last night at the memorial, at Angie's celebration of life, there was the Noah Jenner listener.
	And Brian, his first name was Brian.
	I can say that.
	And maybe I misunderstood, but what I thought is he told me...
	That he had been hit in the mouth by Sir P. Funk, and Sir P. Funk always gets a kick out of the fact that we say Pa-Funk, which is apparently incorrect.
	It's Sir P. Funk.
	And that Sir P. Funk is also the person who clipped the Orange Man bad jingle.
	Orange Man bad.
	And he would love getting a credit for it.
	And I'm like, oh, sure, that's no problem.
	I'll do that tomorrow.
	That's really nice.
	But now Sir P. Funk donates and says, hey, Adam, thanks for aiming to Chicago and hanging out with me.
	So did I misunderstand it?
	Was he Sir P. Funk?
	Does he have a split personality?
	Is it two guys?
	Well, you said, what is his name?
	Brian.
	Here's a note from P-Funk.
	Please use my knighted name, Sir P-Funk, and not say my real name, and it's not Brian.
	Wow, so maybe Sir P-Funk was there too, and only I didn't know it.
	In fact, his name is, the letters are the same as P-Funk, or P-Funk.
	Hmm.
	Well, that's really strange.
	So I'm confused.
	Well, anyway, I want to say in the morning to Brian and also in the morning to Sir P-Funk for apparently hanging out with me.
	It's P-Funk.
	P-Funk.
	P-Funk.
	He writes it.
	I got it written down here.
	I know, but I was told last night that it's P-Funk, not P-Funk.
	I think we're dealing with two different people.
	Look, in Puffunk's note, he says, Thanks for aiming to Chicago, hanging out with me.
	I had such a good time.
	John, what can I say to the light of my life other than keep trolling Adam?
	Maybe it's trolling.
	I don't know.
	But anyway, thank you.
	And nice to meet you, whoever you were.
	Ron Woodbury comes in second with $125 from St.
	George, Utah.
	He also has...
	Wait a minute.
	Oh no, he thinks he should be qualified as a producer because he put in a bunch of money that didn't add up.
	We'll put you on the associate executive producer list.
	Okay, because he says he got in with a 33-33.
	A few minutes ago and then a 50.
	Yeah, we'll take your word for it.
	We'll take his word for it.
	Rod goes up to associate executive producer.
	Thank you for your courage.
	Ron.
	Yep.
	Michael Conte, Mansfield, Texas, $111.11.
	Darren Turboville, $111.11.
	Wesley Clark, not that one, I don't think.
	Probably not.
	No, because he just had a kid, Brennan.
	Stanley, North Carolina, $111.11.
	Do we have a...
	No.
	David Kaye in Tempe, Arizona, $111.11.
	He needs an F mental illness karma, I guess.
	Something like that.
	For who?
	For his buddy.
	Oh.
	For his friend.
	All right.
	For his friend CJ. Okay.
	Doing the best she can.
	All right.
	All right.
	I didn't mean to make light of it.
	We'll take care of that, of course.
	CJ. Brian Herzinger in Elgin, Illinois.
	100%.
	He's actually surveilled of Nebraska nuts.
	Although he's not in Nebraska anymore.
	I think that's what he meant.
	Jonathan Dennison, Blaine Washington, 100.
	Baron Latican in Houston, Texas, 100.
	David Wynn, 8008.
	My third boob donation.
	Please de-douche me.
	You got it.
	You've been de-douched.
	You know, you could have asked for the first time.
	Doug Murray, maybe he's already asked.
	Missoula, Montana, 7777.
	Surgat, Nate in Sebastopol, California, 6969.
	Kim Muir, M-U-H-R, 6611.
	He's also going to be a knight today, I guess.
	What we don't have is an email.
	It's me or M-U-R-I. Yeah, I looked for that, but I don't have an email from Kim.
	Do you have it?
	I'm looking.
	Because when you become a knight...
	I got a bill.
	I got Dan.
	You got a bill?
	Oh, from Bill.
	Okay, not a bill.
	Got it.
	Yeah, it's very strange.
	And it says, see, email, and I looked through my email.
	I couldn't find it.
	Let me take another look.
	No.
	Eric couldn't find it?
	It's Kim Dot.
	Okay, let me just see if that works.
	Let me try one more search.
	Yeah, I just tried that.
	I didn't get it either with that.
	Sometimes the dot, you know, these things.
	Yeah.
	If I had my Squirrel Mail jingle with me, I'd play it, but I don't know.
	It's not on the mobile rig.
	Give me some time.
	I can hum it.
	Okay, this is one last shot at this.
	Nope.
	Nothing.
	No.
	Okay.
	Something got blocked by your buddies there at your Gmail operation.
	Yeah, so we also don't know what Kim's...
	It's going to be Sir?
	Sir Kim?
	You don't even know if it's a girl or a boy.
	This is an ambiguous name.
	It's Kim.
	It's probably one of those modern kids.
	I think it's a guy.
	I'm hoping it's a guy.
	Because I'm going to do it as a knight.
	Okay.
	Jonathan Gibbons, St.
	Petersburg, Florida, $60 even.
	Robert Bruckner, don't do that.
	Robert Bruckner, $55.55.
	Von Glitchka, $55.55 with a big thank you.
	Sir Tom Darry in DeForest, Wisconsin, $55.10.
	And the following people are $50 donors, name and location, starting with Stephanie Sprague.
	A member of the MSM. Oh, she's in...
	Does she want her name used?
	I don't know.
	She's got a birthday coming up.
	I hope it's on the list.
	She's a member of the...
	Ex-member of the MSM. Okay.
	And who is this?
	Yes, Stephanie.
	Yes, she's on the list.
	Bradley Ledin, 50.
	Robert Drikason, 50.
	Jeremy Cartwright, Rockford, Illinois.
	Tyler Schimpf in Bothell, Washington.
	George Oberhofer in New Brunswick, New Jersey.
	And last but not least, Sir Brian Watson in Raleigh, North Carolina.
	I want to thank all these folks for helping us out to produce.
	Yes.
	Show 1091.
	Yes.
	On our way to show 1100.
	That's right.
	And thank you all.
	Also, under the $50 level, this is for anonymity when people want it, or usually it'd be $49, $49.99.
	But we have our subscriptions, your 33s and your 11-11s, your 12-12s.
	And I actually got a nice note from producer Robert.
	It becomes interesting to me how we see knights and dames, or just producers in general, trying to hit their spouse in the mouth and get them to listen to the show.
	And this one stuck out.
	Greetings, gents.
	I finally hit my wife in the proverbial mouth during a long holiday road trip.
	At the end of the podcast, my wife said...
	Wow!
	It's all become very clear now!
	Now, Robert, of course, thinking that your words enlightened her, that would be us, to the manipulation and general bullcrap of the world, inquired as to what she found most interesting.
	And here's what she said.
	Well, I received a call this week from the boys' elementary school principal.
	He had concerns about the boys running around the playground de-douching and knighting kids who gave them dollars to do so on the playground.
	Do you think that's true?
	What?
	Do you think that's true?
	So they were de-douching and knighting kids who gave them their milk money, apparently.
	Hopefully this is just a joke.
	I think the wife has got a creative idea there, but there's no way this is going on in any school.
	I need to know for sure.
	This is fantastic.
	You've been de-douched.
	Yes, thank you all.
	You've been de-douched.
	Now give me your milk money, dammit!
	Visit avorak.org slash N-A. Go!
	That's what I'm talking about!
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	Karma.
	Karma.
	It's your birthday, birthday.
	I'm so much younger.
	And today is the 2nd of December 2018.
	As we wind down the year, we have three birthdays for today on our list.
	Kevin Silverman turns 40 on his 40th trip around the sun on the 14th, nice and early.
	Sir Crash EMT turns 46 today, I believe.
	And Stephanie Sprague, former MSM, our 50th birthday today.
	We say happy birthday, and of course, from all the staff and management at the best podcast in the universe.
	Yes, yes.
	And we do have this one nighting, and if it's wrong, we may have to do a black daming.
	You never know what'll happen.
	I have my travel sword.
	How about yours?
	I got it.
	Yes.
	Perfectly.
	All right, Kim Muir, step on up to the table here.
	You are very welcome at the round table, the No Agenda Knights and Dames, and we're going to put you in a knight harness.
	That's what we've decided collectively since we couldn't find your email, but we are very proud to thank you for your support of the show and the amount of $1,000 or more, and, pronounce to Kate, you...
	Sir Kim Muir, Knight of the No Agenda Roundtable for you.
	We have hookers and blow, red boys and chardonnay.
	We got taquitos and taquilla.
	We got de melises, limoncello and salmon.
	We got trophies and tire smoke.
	We got fish pie and fellatio.
	Redhead and ryes, organic macaroni and plasticizers.
	Beer and blunts.
	We got Brazilian hotties and cachacha.
	And we have breast milk and pablum, ginger ale and gerbils, and of course...
	Mutton and mead all at the round table go to noagendanation.com slash rings and Eric the Shill will help you out.
	And you give me your measurements for your ring.
	We'll get that off to you as soon as possible.
	And this is all part of our value for value model that seems to be working good enough for us since you know you can't really...
	Monetize the network, and we're seeing that now with a big article in the Wall Street Journal about HuffPo.
	HuffPo.
	You know, all these things were purchased by Verizon.
	AOL and HuffPo and Engadget.
	What was it, $7 billion they spent on this?
	And it seems like they can't really make the advertising work, and now they're trying to do subscriptions for stuff.
	Oh, good luck with that.
	Yeah, it's going to fail so poorly.
	It's going to fail bigly, I mean, because it's not going to work.
	It's not going to work.
	No, people don't want to subscribe to anything.
	I mean, we have our subscribers.
	It's a voluntary system, which is really sustaining donations, not a true subscription.
	It's sustaining donations.
	And we have a moderate number, and I would say moderate is not a lot.
	But we do have a lot of $5 and $33.33 sustaining donations.
	We do.
	But it's not enough to, you know, if it wasn't for the big donors and all the random donations, it really would not be enough to sustain the show.
	No, no.
	I'm not dissuading anybody because I think it's a good baseline that you can add onto, but it's not.
	And I see these other people try it.
	You can, you know, we'll just keep doing the show if you give us a $1 a month is all we ask.
	Chip in!
	We already saw that when we started doing this show, we had $2 a month, I think was our initial thing.
	It was obvious it wasn't going to work.
	You know what's interesting?
	We're talking about the internet.
	And they get cancelled automatically, that kind of thing.
	What has happened is people have taken their old world thinking pre-internet And I've just kind of, you know, transposed that onto the internet world, and the thinking that people would give you money, random amount, based upon what they value your product at, is seen as nut job.
	Are you crazy?
	What a head shaker, these morons.
	But...
	Little did we know that once you do that, the guy that you were previously, or gal, were previously asking for $1 to chip in, you say, what was it worth?
	You say, well, it was worth $5.
	Oh, I didn't know that.
	And people really want to do it.
	It's a sustaining model for the future.
	Now, does it keep you on your toes because you and I don't have a regular income?
	Of course it does.
	Every single time I sit down to prep and do this show, I'm thinking about, I've got to do the best thing I can do.
	I have nothing else to go on.
	I have to do the best because I can't get fired by any organization.
	People just stop sending money if they find no value in the product.
	It's real simple.
	But for some reason, people can't get over that hump of seeing that human beings are not just drone money payers, you know?
	They're little piggy banks.
	You'd be surprised what people want and what they will do.
	Well, you can't use the old models and the old models before the internet, which is what the newspapers had nothing but struggled with, is you can't With a newspaper or a magazine, when I was writing for PC Magazine, they'd have 500, 600-page issues that were loaded with advertising because the whole thing was like a world in itself.
	And those ads were selling for $20,000, $30,000, $40,000, $50,000.
	And they were making millions and millions of dollars a year, which was great because you get to travel a lot and there's a lot of things you could do with that money to make the magazine better.
	But when you then go to online, it's not a little world anymore.
	It's a page, one lone page, and maybe you go to another page and something interests you, but you're not opening a magazine and you're not going through it.
	The whole thing is so different.
	You can't make that kind of money.
	No.
	Well, that's also the realization is that, you know, the idea of, hey, I'm a radio guy doing a podcast.
	I'll make a million dollars a year.
	That's just not going to happen.
	But it turns out I can pay rent.
	I can eat.
	You know, and so I think we get exactly what we deserve.
	And it's okay.
	That's the model.
	That's the postmodern media model.
	If you don't mind me patting ourselves on the back for it.
	Yeah.
	It's alright.
	We've done well enough to keep doing it.
	So, I want to go back to...
	There's this clip here that I thought we played, but this is a Janice Atkinson clip is the one you played.
	I have another...
	I hate to revisit, but I'm going to revisit this.
	This is...
	Because I don't know what's on this clip.
	It's probably the same clip.
	It's probably the same clip.
	No, no.
	The Janice Atkinson...
	No, because I have the Janice Atkinson clip.
	Oh, okay.
	This oddball speech about migration compact 2025 is...
	Ah.
	Is different.
	Let's see what it is.
	Okay.
	Listen, Vogue, the EU and across the developed world.
	No, it's the same clip.
	Never mind.
	I'm noticing the time is exactly the same.
	So I clipped it twice.
	And you just named it differently.
	That was bad.
	No, that's okay.
	Well...
	Yes?
	I do have an oddball report on something.
	This is a Democracy Now!
	story.
	It's one of those baffling stories.
	Why is this a story?
	I never heard of these companies.
	I don't know anything about it.
	Is this something, is this virtue signaling or is this some code?
	I don't know what it is.
	But this is the oddball report on Mike Digital.
	The digital news publisher Mike has laid off most of its staff after being acquired by Bustle Digital Group.
	The company, which positioned itself as a video-driven media outlet for millennials, has been steadily losing viewers over the past year.
	The company employed around 100 people.
	All right.
	What did they publish?
	Tell me about Mike.
	M-I-C. I don't know.
	Is this a publication issue?
	I never heard of it either.
	And why is this a news story?
	I don't know.
	Huh.
	Other than we're doing fine over here at Democracy Now.
	I mean, what else could it be?
	I have no idea.
	I find it to be the screwiest story they've ever, or that they've done probably in the last few months.
	Just a non-story.
	It's a bubble media.
	Somebody bought them out.
	I've never heard of them either.
	And then they fired everybody.
	Yeah.
	I mean, there's lots of little companies that are in this, you know, that are trying to make a living.
	Right, but the first thing I thought was, oh, neener, neener, look, this millennial stuff ain't working.
	We're still good with our geriatric ads.
	That's the first thing that came to my mind, for democracy now at least.
	Well, they don't have, as far as I can tell, any advertising.
	What, they don't have sponsorship?
	Not that I know of.
	Isn't it on PBS? I've never seen an ad ever.
	I think they try.
	It doesn't air on PBS? It airs on PBS and Free Speech TV. Yeah, but on PBS they have ads.
	I don't know what Democracy Now...
	Yeah, they do have them, but that's just for the network.
	I don't know if the individual...
	I don't know.
	At the end they have a huge list of donors they never thank.
	I demand an investigation into this.
	They just do credit roll for the donors.
	I want to know who Mike is.
	I want to get to the bottom of this.
	To the gate, to the gate, to the climate gate.
	Hello, climate gate.
	Yes, it's that time again, ladies and gentlemen.
	For the eighth year running, Al Gore will once again try to save us in the upcoming days.
	December 3rd through 4th will be the 24 hours of reality.
	And this will be about the reality of climate change, how we're all going to die.
	This is, well, I have a little intro from NPR. Al Gore was kind enough to drop by and to tell us.
	And when I say tell, I mean tell us, because what have we learned?
	When he chuckles, that's his tell.
	Next week, former Vice President Al Gore's Climate Reality Project will broadcast a 24-hour streaming video special calling attention to the public health impacts of climate change around the world.
	In the decades since Gore started sounding the alarm about man-made global warming, global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to grow despite warnings from reports like last week's National Climate Assessment.
	Al Gore joins us now from New York.
	Vice President Gore, thanks for joining us.
	Welcome to Here and Now.
	Well, thank you very much, Jeremy.
	It's my pleasure.
	So this is going to be the eighth annual 24 Hours of Reality broadcast.
	Do you feel like, as a planet, we've made a lot of progress since you started doing this eight years ago, or are we basically in the same position, or worse?
	Well, we have made a lot of progress.
	One has to add, unfortunately, that the climate crisis is still worsening at a faster rate than our progress in developing.
	We love the tell.
	So what was the lie here, that it's going at a faster rate?
	Is that the lie that he just told, according to his tells?
	Well we have made a lot of progress.
	One has to add, unfortunately, that the climate crisis is still worsening at a faster rate than our progress in developing solutions.
	But we're gaining momentum, and as the late economist Rudy Dornbusch once said, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
	And we're seeing exponential change now in renewable electricity generation, electric vehicles.
	And what we really need are changes in policy to accelerate these positive developments that have begun.
	Right.
	So it's all about policy to accelerate everything positive that has been done, which is pretty much solar and wind power.
	And I think if we are going to watch this 24 Hours of Reality, and I will definitely check in, it will probably be a lot like this second segment.
	So then how big of a problem is it that the President of the United States says that he is not a believer in man-made global warming?
	Well, it's certainly a problem when he tries to dismantle the clean power plan and the auto mileage improvements and Although I think Volkswagen did just fine enough on those.
	Thank you very much.
	It eliminates the study of particulate pollution, which is a deadly health threat connected to the pollution that is generated along with global warming pollution.
	Okay, hold on a second.
	Particulate pollution, global warming pollution, these are terms that are, I don't know if we've heard them exactly like this, but certainly not all in a row from Al Gore.
	Remember that the basic premise is too much CO2, carbon dioxide, now we have particulate pollution and global warming pollution.
	John, help me out.
	Sorry.
	This is really egregious what he's doing here.
	He's just spooning up all kinds of terms.
	The auto mileage improvements and eliminates the study of particulate pollution, which is a deadly health threat connected to the pollution that is generated along with global warming pollution.
	And it's a problem when he says to the rest of the world he wants the US to pull out of the Paris Agreement.
	But there is another dynamic underway.
	Donald J. Trump is now the face of climate denial.
	His is the voice of climate denial.
	And for the minority in the country that still invest their hopes and faith and trust in Donald Trump, they're not likely to be a part of the solution to the climate crisis for some time yet anyway.
	But for the two-thirds and more who are signaling that they have had enough of Donald Trump, I think it is making it easier for people who associate him with the nonsensical views that he articulates to reexamine the facts and to say, as some conservative columnists have done recently, whoa, wait a minute, we've taken another look at this climate crisis and it's an existential threat.
	We've got to do something about it.
	I'm hopeful that the Trump years will be over sooner rather than later, at the very least, that he will not have a second term and that the groundwork will have been laid for a dramatic improvement in our policies to accelerate progress.
	No way to go, Al!
	Well done!
	So I like this.
	I like the idea that because he certainly has convinced most of the world, certainly also conservative journalists, that Trump is nuts, that they're now re-looking at the information.
	I'm going back in to check it and see what's going on.
	And let's just wind it up with the third.
	Well, before you go too far away from that, I do have my Australian climate change protests.
	Can I play the last gore clip?
	No, you play it whenever you want.
	I just want to make sure you don't ignore it.
	Oh, shoot.
	Let's interrupt it right now.
	No, I'm saying that because you're about to end the show.
	No.
	Your hand was slow so I could hear it.
	Your hand was crawling toward the button that plays the theme.
	No, I have one more Al Gorklis.
	But we're gaining momentum and we're getting closer and closer to one of these political tipping points where public opinion changes significantly.
	We saw that in the civil rights movement earlier, the women's suffrage movement in recent years in the fight for gay and lesbian rights.
	And when these.
	This is fantastic.
	So he's equating this to these other big fights we've had that we all have agreement on, apparently.
	Moral issues are revealed to be a binary choice between what's right and what's wrong.
	Public opinion can shift pretty quickly.
	And in this case, Mother Nature is speaking up pretty powerfully with the tragic fires in California.
	Not only the ones earlier in November, but also earlier in the year, Hurricane Florence in the Carolinas, Hurricane I thought it was, and it was explained to me many times, it was started by a campfire on Campfire Road.
	What is it?
	Is climate change that's the problem now?
	Pretty powerfully, with the tragic fires in California, not only the ones earlier in November, but also earlier in the year, Hurricane Florence in the Carolinas, Hurricane Michael, a year ago, Hurricane Harvey.
	The list of catastrophes that are clearly linked to climate and linked to climate in the minds of the public are persuading more people than any of us who are advocates for solving the climate crisis could hope to do.
	You know, I'm always...
	For one thing, I guess we had to revisit some of the climate gate stuff, which really took it off the track right away when these guys were faking their numbers.
	Yeah, that didn't help.
	Or revisit how computer simulations work and how they can't be trusted under any circumstances.
	Models, the models.
	We don't want to bring that up too much.
	Or any of these things that are kind of contrary, or the fact that there's like 30,000 scientists signed a note about this being questionable and should be thought about differently, or the...
	Or forcing certain networks like PBS to not take anybody on as an expert that might have some other opinion.
	Or the guys who have testified before Congress and shown that one thing that you think is going on is not going on.
	Just ignore every one of those things and just listen to Al Gore, who's not a scientist by any means.
	And it's just to me, I think there's some sort of a test going on.
	Of intelligence?
	Gullibility.
	Yeah.
	If we can sell the public on this...
	And so they go all in and they screw themselves by, you know, removing...
	I mean, that's like what's going on in France, shutting down those nuclear reactions.
	That is crazy.
	That's the craziest thing I've ever heard.
	Backbone of France.
	Yeah.
	It's like, you know, okay.
	Did you hear...
	Just to stray a little bit off topic, and I will play your Australian clip.
	The Germans apparently...
	I think I have a clip of it.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	The German finance minister, Olaf Scholz, proposed that France give up its permanent seat on the Security Council at the United Nations.
	Absolutely.
	This is an absolutely scandalous idea for the French mission here at the United Nations, although the French mission doesn't want to comment on the record.
	Gérard Arrault, the former French ambassador to the UN and current French ambassador to the United States, has tweeted about this, though, and said that it's actually legally impossible because it would run counter to the very charter of the United and said that it's actually legally impossible because it would run And so changing it would be politically impossible.
	So that is on the record.
	But I can tell you that the French mission here finds this a very touchy subject.
	They certainly would not want France to give up its veto-wielding seat, may I point out, on the Security Council.
	Can you believe that?
	I mean, is Germany looking for World War III by suggesting these kinds of things?
	Well, this is showing the true, what's really going on with the EU, which is rebuilding the German Empire.
	The mistake they're making, and they even suggest this, is that with France, just about the Security Council, with France and Germany both on, I believe Germany's on it, Both on the Security Council, which is a very small body.
	You can look them up how many countries are on it.
	They right now have essentially two EU members on the Security Council, and that gives them two votes instead of one.
	So why would they want to get rid of that second vote?
	I mean, it doesn't make any sense if you think about it logically, if the EU is what it purports to be.
	But if the EU is just a rebuilding of the German Empire, Germany is not on the council.
	China, France, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, United States are the permanent members and currently for the two-year term of non-permanent members, Bolivia, Cote d'Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, the Netherlands, Peru, Poland and Sweden.
	Well, that makes it even more interesting.
	Doesn't it now?
	So besides the floating members like the Netherlands, you have France as really the permanent representative of the EU. Yeah, which is exactly what Germany is...
	So what's the point of this?
	Germany is proposing that France give up their seat to the EU. Which means giving it up to Germany.
	Of course it does.
	It's interesting moves, a lot of stuff going on, including climate protests, climate change protests in Australia.
	In Australia, thousands of students walked out of class today to demand action on climate change in a nationwide student strike.
	Well, I think our government needs to take more action on climate change so that our generation and our kids' generations and their kids can have a future that's sustainable and healthy and a planet that we haven't destroyed.
	Students of all ages are calling for their government to stop the construction of new coal mines and move towards 100% renewable energy by 2030.
	The protests come as eastern Australia is experiencing record-breaking wildfires with close to 200 separate fires identified this week.
	So here we are, I have the same situation that's somehow been goaded into this.
	I don't know, I don't even have any comments to make anymore about the whole thing.
	You're going to break the back of the poor.
	This is an anti, you know, break the back of the poor by having these energy sources that are extremely expensive.
	Yeah, removed.
	And it's just like, it's not affordable.
	I mean, it's affordable to, you know, anybody that's in the upper middle classes, sure.
	But the rest of the world is just can't afford these.
	Wind power and solar is not a cheap mechanism.
	No.
	Ever.
	Yeah, you put some solar panels on your house in Arizona and you can probably beat out the local power lines.
	That's true.
	Mm-hmm.
	Those panels aren't cheap to begin with.
	Let's end on a high note, John.
	We'll end on a high note for this show, and we'll take it home with a promotion for a rival.
	A promotion for a new CNN series that we'll all be watching.
	Impeachment.
	Designed to save our democracy.
	But now, it is a political weapon.
	Impeach him!
	It's dangerous.
	CNN's Fareed Zakaria asks, what happens when the country really needs to impeach?
	The President's under fire.
	Sunday at 9.
	Yeah!
	The Impeachment Show!
	A full series on CNN. Yeah, it's going to be fantastic.
	Okay, it's yours.
	It's my beat.
	I'll take it.
	All right, everybody.
	That's it for today's Deconstruction.
	We, of course, return on Thursday.
	And there seems to be lots going on.
	We'll pull it apart for you as best we can.
	Oh, football?
	All right.
	It's football.
	All right.
	Well, you can do a football report.
	And, yeah, we're flying back tomorrow, so I'll be back in the Cludio in FEMA Region 6 on Thursday.
	And until then, coming you from...
	The home of the Jackson 5, right near Gary, Indiana, in the Every Room is a Mini Suite Hotel.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where I probably have closer access to a Chicago hot dog than he does, I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We return on Thursday right here on No Agenda.
	remember us at Dvorak.org slash NA.
	Until then, adios mobiles!
	This is exciting.
	We've come to a position where we're in a new world order.
	Toughness, fiber, strength, perception of the strengths of this country.
	I've got it.
	I understand it.
	And I do think that you can't turn the White House into the Waffle House.
	You gotta say what you're for.
	Some people say he's just too nice to be president.
	This is exciting.
	This is New World Order to me means freedom and democracy.
	This is New World Order.
	Peace out.
	The best podcast in the universe!
	Adios.
	Mofo.
	Dvorak.org.
	Slash.

▲