Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 31, 2019 - No Agenda

02:49:28

1108: Sarcasm

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I love Clinton.
	You love Clinton.
	There's a song there.
	Adam Curry, John C. Dvorak.
	It's Thursday, January 31st, 2019.
	This is your award-winning Gimbo Nation Media Assassination Episode 1108.
	This is No Agenda.
	We're two woke white guys experiencing aging and broadcasting live from the capital of the drone, Star State, here in downtown Austin, Tejas, in the Cludio.
	In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where the polar vortex can't touch us, I'm John C. DeVore.
	It's crackpot and buzzkill.
	In the morning.
	Sure it can.
	Polar Vortex can touch anybody, anytime, anywhere.
	Well, it's a big dam that broke, according to the Global Warmists.
	Oh, a dam that broke, no less.
	Yeah, it's a dam that broke.
	Well, before we get to that, I'd like everyone to know this show, episode 1108, is dedicated to the memory of Sir Greg Davies, the heavy metal historian.
	He passed away a couple days ago, and I want to read a note from his partner, Dame Jennifer Wieda of the Gypsy Nation.
	John Adam and the No Agenda family, I'm deeply saddened to let you know that my fiancé, Sir Greg Davies, the heavy metal historian, passed away in his home on the morning of January 29, 2019.
	The Barrett's esophagus condition may have indirectly contributed to Greg's death, but the most likely immediate cause was a heart attack, and he was only 41 years old.
	In his short time upon this earth, Greg was a dynamic force in the lives of so many people, many of whom have reached out to me since the news broke.
	From his hometown of Perth, Australia, to the UK, to all around the US, and indeed all around the world, condolences and fond memories have come in.
	I'm touched and honored by all of the support expressed by those who knew him, even if it was only online.
	But the No Agenda community's support has been especially comforting during this difficult time.
	One of your producers had suggested that donations in the amount of $20.99 be made to the show in Greg's honor.
	The reason for this particular donation amount is inspired by Greg's common internet handle, CGT2099.
	He had a huge internet presence and worked in IT, so it's only fitting that a memorial donation in this amount has been promoted.
	He would have saluted this with two horns up.
	Memorial arrangements have not yet been finalized, but his family and I have decided upon a huge party.
	Open to anyone who wishes to come, I will post details online once we have the date set.
	I know Greg contributed several jingles and pieces of artwork over the years, so can we have a 69 Dudes and a Putin Don't Worry Be Happy in his honor, and can we also have some estate settlement goat karma?
	With much love and appreciation, Dame Jennifer Weta of the Gypsy Nation in Lawton, Oklahoma.
	Absolutely.
	6-9-D9, dudes!
	Don't worry.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	You've got karma.
	All right.
	And he will be missed.
	Yeah, I believe he's the one who did the artwork for show, the 10th anniversary show.
	There you go.
	Yeah, I emailed with him just a couple weeks ago.
	Yeah.
	He was only knighted, you know, just around Christmas time.
	Well, fuck that.
	Sorry.
	Yeah, not good.
	No.
	All right, well.
	Oh, wow, you just got real loud all of a sudden.
	What are you doing?
	Why are you doing this to me?
	Easy.
	Easy, partner.
	You can back off.
	Just back off, man.
	Just a bit.
	Yes!
	Back to the polar vortex then.
	Yeah, the polar vortex apparently is freezing everybody.
	I do have some weather reports, including some that include the...
	Well, here, let's start with the...
	Weather, weather, weather.
	Let's start with...
	I got bad weather, global warming report from NBC. Yeah, do the bad weather, then global warming report.
	Across the globe, the weather picture is one of fire and ice, bone-numbing record cold in the Midwest, fire and record heat in Australia, 120 degrees and hotter this month.
	What that really means is that fires will be uncontrollable, they'll be fast moving.
	And yo-yo weather cycles.
	After the deep freeze in the U.S., a 50 degree rebound in some cities within days.
	Hard to believe when you're frozen like an icicle, but experts say that Arctic blast is in fact further evidence of climate change.
	In response to President Trump's skepticism, the weather experts at NOAA tweeting, winter storms don't prove that global warming isn't happening.
	Here's why.
	At the North Pole, scientists say the melting sea ice and ocean temperatures have caused the walls of the jet stream, or polar vortex, to break open like a dam in places.
	That has allowed Arctic air to escape rushing south into the Midwest.
	Not only is greenhouse gas warming impacting the planet, but it's really beginning to kick in.
	And it's kicking in in the parts of the planet that are most sensitive, in particular Arctic sea ice regions and the Arctic.
	You know, I just believe it all.
	It's fine.
	Perfect.
	I'm all in.
	Does anybody note that it has the elements of...
	You know, 1984 where good is bad and bad is good and that jingle we used to play.
	You mean Newspeak?
	Yeah, Newspeak, that's it, yes.
	What was the jingle we used to call it?
	Oh, doublespeak is I think what we used to call it.
	And we had a jingle for that.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, well, isn't that the same with just pretty much everything?
	So that, what clip was that?
	That was Bad Weather Global Warming.
	Bad Weather Global Warming.
	Hold on.
	Here's the jingle you were talking about.
	It's the double, double, double, double peak of the week.
	The double, double, double, double peak of the week.
	There you go.
	Yes, I have horrible weather NBC on deck.
	20 seconds.
	Yeah, play that.
	...text holds millions at a dangerous and icy grip.
	A blast of Arctic air sweeping across the upper tier of the country, now rapidly pushing toward the Northeast.
	The weather blamed for at least six deaths so far.
	Wind chills are dipping as far as 50 below zero.
	So cold in Chicago that fires were actually lit to keep commuter rails from freezing.
	Yeah.
	You know, there was this story that happened over the past two days about this actor who's in the, I think it's, what is it, Showtime or HBO's Empire?
	Jussie Smollett?
	Yeah, it's at Fox.
	Oh, Fox.
	What do I know?
	So, you just heard Chicago was 40, 50 below zero.
	Let's make it 20 below zero when this happened on Tuesday, just to make it easy.
	He was out in Chicago, in Streeterville, by the way, which is a very affluent neighborhood, Streeterville.
	It's not the south side of Chicago.
	20 below zero, and he's in a subway shop, and then something happened, and they can't find any evidence of a so-called lynching, because he had a form of rope around his neck.
	Oh yeah, guys with Trump hats.
	Yeah, MAGA hats.
	I'm thinking...
	You know, you and I, let's just be racist for a moment.
	Hey man, I got an idea.
	Let's go wrap a rope around some black guy's neck.
	It's 20 below zero.
	It's 2 in the morning.
	You ready?
	I'm all in, you!
	Come on.
	Well, it's pretty sketchy, and it's a shame that he got so much attention.
	But back to the weather, I do have one last clip, which is Amy, since she's the one who would promote the global warming stuff the most on the Vortex.
	Yes.
	Back in the U.S., the polar vortex enveloping the Midwest is causing record lows across the region with temperatures in some areas, including Detroit, dipping below temperatures in Antarctica.
	The wind chill temperature in Chicago hit 49 degrees below zero.
	That's Fahrenheit this morning.
	President Trump used the extreme weather to once again deny climate change, tweeting Monday, in the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded.
	In coming days, expected to get even colder.
	People can't last outside, even for minutes.
	What the hell is going on with global warming?
	Wei Ming, he wrote.
	W-A-M-I-N-G. Please come back fast.
	We need you.
	Meanwhile, raging wildfires in Australia have caused record-breaking heat, bringing about widespread power failure.
	The science is in!
	I do have two clips regarding this, should you be interested.
	I do have an actual NOOA scientist who appeared on NPR, and I've chopped a little bit of that so we can listen to the official explanation of the polar vortex and how it has nothing to do with anthropogenic climate change slash global warming.
	Oh, that's unusual.
	Those guys, they're all in on the...
	Anthropogenic stuff.
	Well, maybe I'm just being facetious.
	So the point is that scientists...
	And don't you love her already?
	Yeah, I do.
	I really do.
	She's great.
	So the point is that scientists in general have been referring to the polar vortex in the stratosphere, but because they cause these colder outbreaks in the troposphere, the term polar vortex has been...
	It's somewhat adopted to explain this cold weather outbreak.
	But it's really just a part of our weather system that we get.
	Sometimes we get these cold extremes due to these lobes of the jet stream that get separated from the main flow and bring down this very cold air.
	Are you following?
	So it's really not polar vortex at all.
	This is what piqued my interest with the cube.
	Okay.
	So here's the key question then.
	How related is the phenomenon that we're experiencing now?
	How related is it to climate change?
	Hold on a second.
	Stop.
	So instead of listening to this woman give us a nice explanation and maybe...
	Shed some light on the situation.
	We immediately jump.
	Yes.
	So who cares about that?
	Let's talk about climate.
	Hey, you're taking up valuable NPR airtime, lady.
	Get to the propaganda.
	Yeah, so what's been interesting is that there is some agreement that over the past 30 years or so, the polar vortex in the stratosphere has weakened somewhat.
	However, what's less clear is whether that's been caused by climate change, in particular sea ice loss.
	Oh.
	Or whether it's just some longer-term variability.
	I love that the climate scientist is kind of 3% uncertain about this.
	Well, that's a plus.
	One of the reasons that we wonder whether it's really forced by increased greenhouse gases is because the climate models running into the future...
	Do not see significant or agreed upon changes in these cold air outbreaks occurring more often.
	In fact, they overwhelmingly see that we'll experience fewer and fewer cold air outbreaks.
	Okay, write this down.
	Write down January 31st, 2019.
	You heard it here.
	Less polar vortex in our future.
	Into the future.
	Fewer and fewer.
	Okay.
	Can you help explain that?
	Can you get back on script?
	To be perfectly honest, I feel like I'm not quite caught up with you on...
	Yeah, on the script.
	Where are you in the script?
	I'm not quite caught up.
	I'm looking at the script here, and I don't quite see exactly where you are in the pages.
	Could you please, you know, get back?
	These cold air outbreaks occurring more often.
	In fact, they overwhelmingly see that we'll experience fewer and fewer cold air outbreaks into the future.
	Fewer and fewer.
	Okay.
	Yes.
	Can you help explain that?
	I mean, to be perfectly honest, I feel like I'm not quite caught up with you on why that might be.
	So could you explain that?
	Yeah.
	So in general, the response to when you put more CO2 into the atmosphere, you're going to warm the atmosphere.
	And that's going to be true in all seasons and in winter as well.
	What some people have proposed is that maybe because you're also melting sea ice, that that can weaken the jet stream and you get some more of these cold air outbreaks.
	But whether the models just don't have these processes modeled correctly or whether this really isn't going to be a big influence, we generally don't see any weakening of that vortex in these climate models.
	Okay.
	Because I guess what I'm saying is, as you almost certainly know, every time we have one of these extreme cold weather events, there are people out there, including the President of the United States, who say, you know, like, global warming or climate change, what gives?
	Like, how can we have these extreme cold events if we also have climate change?
	But are you saying that there is some kind of relationship between the two?
	I'm saying it's possible.
	It's an interesting idea.
	I think it's a...
	It's an interesting idea.
	You know, we're already into spending hundreds of billions of dollars on this bullshit.
	Interesting.
	...area of science where there's not a lot of consensus right now in terms of what will happen in the future with climate change and colder outbreaks.
	What?
	In general, I think there's going to be less cold extremes than there are, but the weather is noisy, and so you're still...
	Weather is noisy.
	Now, this is new.
	I like this.
	We're also going to have these very cold extremes occur on occasion.
	It's just going to be fewer and fewer of them.
	Weather is noisy.
	Okay.
	Since we're on the topic, she mentioned the models.
	You know how everybody talks a little bit more than they should when they're on podcasts?
	It's always fun to listen.
	And Freakonomics, the Freakonomics podcast had a...
	Let's see.
	Kate Marvel on.
	She is a climate scientist at Columbia University and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
	And she...
	We don't know exactly how hot it's going to get.
	And a lot of that is because of human behavior.
	We don't know what humans are going to do.
	But even if you take out all the uncertainty surrounding humans, there's still uncertainties in the physical climate system.
	And this is really embarrassing because people are like, come on, climate scientists, you had one job.
	And we're working on it, right?
	But the wild card is really clouds.
	Because when we talk about global warming, we mean climate change.
	And a lot of stuff is going to change when it warms up.
	And one of those things that's going to change is clouds.
	And clouds are really important in the climate system because they both warm the planet and they cool the planet at the same time.
	So why is it such a wild card?
	What will be the variables that change the behavior or the proliferation, whatever, of clouds that might dictate temperature?
	So clouds are so hard to understand.
	They're really hard to shove in a climate model because they're both really small, right?
	They're nucleated by tiny, tiny grains of sand or dust.
	But at the same time, they're really, really big.
	They cover a giant, giant portion of the earth.
	And it's really hard within a computer model of the climate system to simulate something that's both really small and really big.
	So basically, we suck at it.
	We are really, really bad at modeling clouds.
	Yeah, that's all right.
	You know what I'm sensing?
	Mm-hmm.
	Because you had an NOAA person, now this one, and then the, of course, the gung-ho woman from NPR and this guy.
	Is this a blitz?
	A PR blitz?
	No, I don't sense that.
	What I'm sensing is the slowly backing off.
	Oh, backing off.
	It's like, let's do this.
	Let's just weaken it just a little bit.
	Shut up already!
	This reminds me of time.
	When I was a chemist at Union Oil, I was doing testing on certain things, and I made some factor of 10 mistake, which is embarrassing as hell.
	Oops.
	It's just like, keep all the records.
	I'm always afraid they're going to catch up with you.
	So you make this mistake, and you send this back to the...
	Whatever facility it was that was looking for this information, it's off by a factor of 10.
	And then they all panic because it's like, oh no, this is no good.
	And so then you retest it and you go, oh my god, I was wrong by a factor of 10.
	So you start doing the bit that I did.
	Which was what?
	Wait a minute, can we learn from this?
	Do we need to take notes?
	Which is, yeah, this might be useful for somebody.
	Instead of just admitting failure...
	Now, hold on.
	Ten times what?
	Can you just tell us what this was?
	I can't remember.
	It was sulfur content, probably.
	But it was off-spec.
	That's the main thing.
	And once it's off-spec, they have to fix it.
	And so you start giving them test results back on the new – because they start throwing stuff back at you.
	And you know that you're wrong, so you give them fake results that are less and less and less and less.
	Over a period of maybe six to ten samples.
	You just try to bring down your goof.
	You bring down your mistake.
	Gradually.
	A little bit at a time, and then boom, you're good to go.
	Yeah.
	And this all takes place within a couple of hours, so it's not like a killer, you know, horrible.
	But, I mean, I don't know how much money they lost on this, because I don't know what they did with this stuff.
	But that kind of thing which happens...
	You have to back out slowly.
	You can't all of a sudden say, hey, you know, we realize that these climate models, these computer models that we're basing all this stuff on are bogus.
	And they don't work now that we've got more and more data and we're looking at data from the last 20 years.
	None of this stuff works because the computer models are notoriously bad.
	Yeah, for all kinds of stuff.
	What are we going to do?
	No, don't make that admission.
	It looks like we scammed everybody, so let's just back out as slowly as we can.
	That could be possible.
	We'll keep our eyes on it.
	Well, that was two examples.
	Yes.
	Just in this week alone.
	Of course, kids in America and some kids from Sweden are severely, and some politicians even, AOC, severely traumatized by the most recent report that we had from our own government saying within 12 years, what they really said, within 12 years, if we haven't severely traumatized by the most recent report that we had from our own government saying within 12 years, what they really said, within 12 years, They were all going to die.
	It kind of didn't say that.
	But it doesn't matter.
	The trauma is there and there's enough repetition of the message of we're all going to die.
	However, in Belgium, the kids are loving the global warming climate change.
	They're on their third week of protest.
	Yeah, they don't have to go to school.
	Yeah, and this is just a little bit of tossing back and forth between the Euronews studio and a guy in Brussels.
	And these kids are all, you know, they're like, they're happy.
	You know, they're jumping around.
	They have written on their cheeks, save us.
	They've got peace signs drawn on their cheeks.
	And by the way, we should mention, we've been doing this report on pretty much every show.
	We should mention, it's freezing there, and they're all bundled up.
	They have hats on, big scarves, and they're all hooting and hollering, and they're hamming it up in front of the camera.
	The guy can't even hear the studio, because they have the day off yet again.
	It's not fair!
	Gregoire, apart from kids and students missing school, why do you think this protest has attracted so much support?
	I'm sorry I can't hear you, but what I can tell you is that for the first week in a row, the students came in the streets of Brussels.
	There were, according to the police, they're guessing about 30,000 students would be here in Brussels.
	They come from all over the country to march for the climate.
	They got vuvuzelas now.
	They're blowing in the guy's face.
	They're ready to come back as often as necessary.
	Once they will see the government moving forward into a more ambitious policy for the climate.
	They're loving it.
	They're having the time of their lives.
	This may be another element of trying to back out of this.
	Ooh, my goodness.
	Interesting.
	This is now becoming a nuisance.
	Oh, yeah.
	They're not to be taken seriously as protesters.
	They're truants.
	Well, this is – yeah, we have a truancy problem.
	Now we have these kids completely out of control.
	We overdid it.
	We turned the knob up too high.
	Yeah.
	Some of them are committing suicide and some of them are just not coming back to class or anything.
	They just become, you know, truant vagrants.
	These are unintended consequences that they have to deal with.
	You're so right.
	These are the things you can freak people out about.
	So there you go.
	That's our weather report for the day.
	It's getting a little warmer in Texas, though.
	We're around 50 degrees.
	We're right underneath the vortex, so we're all good here.
	Yeah, if another dam broke, you'd be flooded with cold air.
	Someone's got to stick his finger in the dam.
	Oh, no, it's dyke.
	Oh, that too.
	We've had some rain, even though a couple weeks ago they said, no more rain.
	We're done for this year, but no, we got rain.
	Weather is not climate.
	Weather is noisy.
	So I was listening to a bunch of obscurities, too, and we talked about this a little bit on the DHM Plug Show, but we didn't play anything.
	But I thought this would be a good little piece of educational information, because I didn't really fully understand some of the elements that had changed with the cost of living.
	Oh, you mean that people live paycheck to paycheck and are in debt because of stupid shit they're told to buy?
	No.
	Oh, sorry.
	This is more about how the inflation rate is calculated and how it doesn't really match what we...
	With wages?
	What we think is...
	Well, no, it doesn't match what we think of as inflation.
	In other words, it costs more to do stuff.
	Because of the true M1, 2, and 3 money supply.
	Yeah, well, that's...
	You're talking about the money supply.
	But that's the government telling us that...
	No, no, no.
	Everything's fine.
	Everything's fine, yeah.
	Well, so John Williams, who's this guy, statistician, economist, he's in San Francisco, he does shadow stats, and that's the ones we refer to once in a while when we bring up the real unemployment numbers and other things such as that, and such.
	And such.
	Good use of and such.
	And so I got this little clip of him on some podcast with some guy.
	Love that.
	Doing a very good job of interviewing you.
	But I thought this would be something for this show because I thought it was a very good explanation of the cost of living and how inflation works and how the calculation has changed.
	And I didn't even know this stuff myself.
	In the 1980s, they wanted to change the way the cost of living adjustment was calculated for Social Security recipients, among others.
	You had to screw everybody.
	I think the way...
	Newt Gingrich put it was, well, we can only get a more accurate CPI in there, meaning a lower rate of inflation.
	It'll help us get the budget deficit.
	Well, that's nonsense.
	What they did, historically, and you have inflation, cost of living indices that go back literally a couple of centuries.
	The whole concept behind the CPI was to measure the cost of maintaining a constant standard of living.
	So that you could use a very crude example.
	You might take a gallon of milk, a loaf of bread, a gallon of gas, and say a pound of steak.
	You price those out in one year, then you price them out the next year, and whatever that basket had gone up by, Would be the increase in the cost of living.
	What Greenspan argued was that, well, that's not the way to do it.
	Again, this is the way most people view it.
	It's the way it had been for centuries.
	He said, well, if people find that the price of steak goes up, they're going to buy more chicken or hamburger.
	And if they do that, then their cost of living isn't rising as much.
	But guess what?
	I don't view eating a hamburger instead of a steak because I can't afford the steak as maintaining a constant standard of living.
	The whole idea of introducing substitution there knocked a couple of percentage points off.
	And then they changed the quality assessment of things.
	They had computers to just Quality and things that people really don't notice.
	Okay, let me see if I understand what he's saying.
	He's saying that when inflation goes up, people eventually resort to cheap shit.
	Living the mac and cheese life.
	Mac and cheese.
	Something like that?
	Yeah, exactly.
	But the argument was made, and this was in the 80s, because Newt Gingrich decided that, hey, the Social Security people, we keep jacking up what we have to send them.
	Is there any way we can knock this number back to CPI, the Consumer Price Index?
	Knock this number down.
	Somehow, so we don't have to keep giving Social Security recipients more money.
	I laugh, but it's funny.
	That's what they did, but they did it with this cheating, this, oh, well, look, your standard of living hasn't changed any.
	You're just eating chicken.
	You're eating, John, that now we understand.
	Bugs, bugs, now we know why bugs is coming.
	And oh, those wool sweaters?
	Cotton will work.
	Yeah, but this is the whole theory behind bugs.
	Yeah, eating bugs.
	Yes.
	Your standard of living hasn't decreased because you have to eat cockroaches?
	No!
	It's not cockroaches, John.
	It's, uh, it's protein.
	We eat bugs.
	You eat bugs.
	Mmm.
	Nothing like freshly caught bugs.
	You want to try?
	I love bugs!
	Bugs, bugs, bugs.
	Yummy, everybody!
	That's what happens with your, uh...
	Tastes like poop.
	Inflation.
	I didn't realize.
	I kind of knew some of this, but I didn't know the substitution angle, which I thought was genius.
	It's a great angle, yeah.
	Hey, you're still eating meat?
	You're still eating bugs?
	We went from big American cars, and then we got the plastic Japanese cars, which eventually turned out to be really good.
	And now it's like, well, I can't really afford the Japanese car.
	Let me go back to the cheap-ass American car.
	Yeah, a G-O. The GEO. The GEO. I raced in a GEO. Did you now?
	Yes.
	MTV, we followed the indie circuit one year, and it was one year they had the race in Denver, the street race in Denver.
	And they had the celebrity race.
	I'm sure that wasn't a Grand Prix or an IndyCar Grand Prix style thing?
	If it was on the streets, it would be Grand Prix more than Indy.
	Well, it was the cars.
	It was the same cars.
	Yeah.
	Except for you.
	You had a Geo.
	So it was like the drummer from White Lion, Johnny Gill.
	I'm sure one of the Motley Crue guys was there.
	And I had the in-car camera.
	I've got to find that footage.
	Of course, I went around the corner and crashed into the wall and kept going.
	You did?
	Yeah, yeah.
	The stick shift had come up about two feet.
	But otherwise, it still drove.
	But the commentary, because when you're in the car and you're skidding around and you hit the wall and you bounce off, it feels like, wow, man, this is spectacular.
	Then you see the footage on TV and the commentator, it's literally like, because of Geo.
	They go, you know how slow it looks then.
	It looks like I'm a grandma who's lost control.
	Yeah.
	And the guys who are going to call the official race are like, oh, there's Adam Curry from MTV! Oh, okay.
	I was like, dude, can't even hold on to the wheel.
	My geo story.
	There you go.
	My geo story.
	I have one clip which I think is important for something that has dropped off the radar a little bit here in the United States of Gitmo Nation, which is the wall.
	The president's wall.
	And we know that what has happened now is he has caved.
	He said, oh, we'll negotiate.
	We'll talk about it.
	You know, he's threatening a little bit there with his state of emergency.
	And, of course, judges, everyone's getting like, oh, this can't happen.
	He can't do this.
	Just a lot of noise because weather is noise.
	And I think I know what his plan is.
	And it came out in a hearing, a congressional hearing, with Representative Mo Brooks, I think he's from Alabama, and he was questioning the Undersecretary of Defense, John Rood, About a very specific law, which explains, when you listen to this, it's about a minute and a half, which explains the President's consistent push about the drugs that are coming across without a wall, the drugs.
	I think there's a couple of big fentanyl busts, although they may not have been Outside of the course of entry.
	Right?
	So there's a very specific law, and it's explained here, and then we can walk through some of the details.
	I want to direct your attention to 10 United States Code 284.
	Which authorizes President Trump to deploy the military to the southern border, to build fences, and to do a lot of other things.
	And for clarity, if you look it up in the dictionary, the word fence includes the word barrier, and the word barrier includes walls made of a variety of different materials.
	So that having been said, it seems to me that 10 U.S. Code 284 can be used by the President of the United States to direct the United States military to build a wall.
	Now, as of today, you've mentioned military forces along the southern border.
	Have any of them been deployed pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 284?
	Congressman, I don't believe any of our forces have been deployed pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 284.
	You are correct, however, that that use of authority would authorize the Secretary of Defense to wreck barriers, roads, fencing, those type of materials to disrupt drug smuggling.
	Does...
	Do 10 USC 284, as you understand it, require the declaration of a national emergency before it is implemented?
	No.
	It does not?
	No.
	Has President Trump, to your knowledge, ever used 10 USC 284 to direct the military to build the wall that is necessary for border security?
	No, not to my knowledge, Congressman.
	If President Trump were to wreck the Pentagon, the United States military, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 284, to build such barriers as are necessary to secure our southern border from drug trafficking and international crime cartels, would the United States military obey that order?
	If we judge it to be a lawful order, yes, sir.
	And I assume it would be.
	I love how they do these hearings because it works.
	The whole intent of this kind of questioning, not like Mo didn't know what he was asking, is to get it to people to pay attention.
	And it looked up 10, United States Code, Section 284, Support for Counter-Drug Activities and Activities to Counter Transnational Organized Crime, And just to give you an idea, the Secretary of Defense may provide support for the counter-drug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of any other department or agency of the federal government or any state, local, tribal, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Agency, if any of the purposes set forth in the following subsection.
	So the President can call upon this.
	And indeed...
	What can be done with it is quite broad.
	Let me see.
	Here we have...
	Hold on.
	Did I just mess that up?
	Yes.
	Here's the types of supports.
	We have the maintenance and repair of equipment that's been made available.
	Okay.
	Preserving potential future utility.
	Maintenance of anything.
	Transportation of personnel of the United States and foreign countries.
	And the transportation of supplies and equipment.
	So this is what the Defense Department can do when asked.
	The establishment and operation of bases of operations or training facilities for the purpose of facilitating counter-drug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime.
	We have detection, monitoring and communication of the movement of air and sea traffic within 25 miles outside the geographic boundaries.
	Surface traffic, construction of roads and fences.
	And installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries, establishment of command, control, communications, and computer networks for improved integration of law enforcement, active military, and National Guard, aerial and ground reconnaissance.
	I mean, it goes on and on.
	All you have to do is say, it's just safe for drugs.
	We've been set up.
	We've been set up.
	Bamboozled.
	Now, I want to ask a couple of things here.
	Yeah.
	Now, obviously, this whole thing was theater for the purposes of, hey, we already did it in a hearing.
	You should have been paying attention.
	Yeah, where were you, morons?
	And so the mainstream media, of course, doesn't pick up on this, only the No Attenda Show does.
	Why would they?
	That doesn't sound right.
	They're still talking about national emergency.
	When this particular section of the U.S. Code was put in place, does it have a date when this was actually made into law?
	Let's see.
	Let me see.
	Source credit.
	What do we have?
	Maybe.
	Of course, these things change over time.
	Yeah, but I'd like to know when it was initiated.
	I see a lot of 2016, quite honestly.
	Just look in here.
	These are when changes were made.
	I don't know which ones, but a lot of changes were made in December of 2016.
	You caught me off guard.
	I need to look at that.
	Well, I wouldn't expect you to be expecting that question, but I'm guessing, if it's 2016, then we've definitely been hoodwinked.
	We've been bamboozled.
	No wonder he was so confident.
	Yeah.
	Now, I'm sure that the Ninth Circuit and everybody else will just be all over this.
	Hey, it's been sitting there for two years.
	You didn't do anything about it.
	Yeah, better than that.
	It's in law.
	You can't just go change it.
	It's codified, as they like to say.
	And all that, and there's, I don't even think there's, from what I could tell, there's no, there's no real budget.
	The only thing...
	No, it's a military budget.
	It comes right off the top.
	The Defense Department, all they have to, yes, right off the top.
	They get the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
	It's a rounding error.
	A lot of those guys are sitting behind desks as we speak.
	It's a rounding error.
	They do have to make a report to Congress and say, here's the budget, and that's what we're going to spend.
	Let me guess, about $5.7 million.
	Stage one.
	But just change it.
	Just say, okay, well, this is why you hear him going towards drugs, drugs, drugs, the drugs, the drugs.
	And he's been saying this from day one.
	So I think you're right.
	I think this was set up.
	I have to look at the history of the bill.
	Maybe one of our trolls can do that, one of the producers in the troll room.
	See if there's any significant changes made.
	Maybe it's been around forever.
	I don't know.
	But it looks like there's a lot of...
	I doubt it.
	Don't you love it?
	Wow.
	Yeah.
	Again, everyone's flat-footed.
	Yeah.
	Well, he gets to make the point that I think here's a couple of points he'll make.
	He says, well, you know, we had to do a government shutdown.
	they still wouldn't agree to the wall, so we can't credit them with the wall under any circumstances, and we lost $3 billion in unrecoverable costs to do the shutdown, and that $3 billion could have been put toward the and we lost $3 billion in unrecoverable costs to do the shutdown, and that $3 billion could have been put I mean, he's playing a long game if this is the case, which is a good game to play. - Well, what other game is there?
	It's so much better than a national emergency.
	This is clearly set out.
	You just say, oh, got it.
	I mean, transnational organized crime, the coyotes, you could argue, are that.
	Yes.
	It's transnational, it's organized, and it's a crime.
	Yeah.
	It's not El Chapo, but it's a crime.
	No, it's not at the level of El Chapo.
	Yeah, exactly.
	So, very good.
	I'll give you...
	Nah, it's not that good.
	It's just a good clip.
	Yeah.
	Well, I was on the switchback...
	You mean...
	What do we call it?
	We used to call it the whipsaw.
	The wraparound.
	The wraparound switchback whipsaw.
	Whipsaw.
	Mm-hmm.
	So there was a good example that I thought was the most shameless and probably...
	Explain what a switchback is.
	Okay, this is where you...
	And today Adam Curry admitted that he hates dogs.
	And then I... Here's a clip of him.
	And I go to the clip of you, a quote from you going, Hey, I don't hate dogs.
	Yeah.
	No, I don't really hate him.
	Something like that.
	Yeah, anything.
	Anything that's got nothing to do with what I just said.
	Yeah.
	So I say one thing.
	It's extra points if I'm talking about a completely different topic.
	Right.
	Or you say, I like cats.
	Exactly.
	You know, or something.
	I mean, it's extra points.
	It's put in there to fill up the report and to solidify in your brain the information they're giving you, which is marginally correct.
	I consider it dishonest reporting.
	And this is coming from you, a reporter, a journo.
	Yeah, I was actually at some level.
	But it's dishonest.
	I think it's very dishonest.
	So we have example after example of this.
	It seems to depress some of our producers.
	I love it.
	I like it anyway.
	So this is Hallie Jackson, who's one of the best at this, doing a piece because they had this, the left had picked up on this Trump's intel advisors all disagreed with everything he's ever had to say.
	Yeah, what the heck was this?
	I mean, they just say, let's give it one more try, boys!
	I don't know what it was because it was – out of the blue is one of the many things that he doesn't listen to advice.
	I guess it's part of the Trump rotation or he's headstrong and he's got these great intel people and he doesn't think – of course they're out to get him, which I think is one good reason not to believe anything they say, but – which I don't think helps their cause much.
	So Halley has not – what I'm going to play is a series of clips that are continuous, but I'm only going to – I'm chopping them up to show the switchbacks.
	Okay.
	And – So it's going to be, it seems a little herky-jerk, but in fact, if you put them all back to back to back to back to back, all five of these short clips, it would be the report.
	And so I'm going to start it off with clip one, and it's going to end with, and each one of these is another example of saying one thing and then exemplifying it with a quote from somebody that doesn't To his own intelligence chiefs publicly contradicting the president on his threat assessments of North Korea and Iran.
	The president lashing out, president lashing out, telling them to go back to school.
	And Hallie Jackson has that fallout.
	The president calling the intelligence officials he hired passive and naive, suggesting in a tweet today they go back to school after they publicly contradicted him, not just on Iran.
	I withdrew the United States from the horrible one-sided Iran nuclear deal.
	At the moment, technically, they're in compliance.
	What?
	Okay, besides the lashing out, which is a giveaway code word.
	Yeah.
	He said, she brings up the, she says that, or Hallie says that they've contradicted him on his Iran pullout.
	You know, he wants to, he killed the deal.
	Right.
	And they quote Gina, I think is her name, the head of the CIA, as saying that you're in compliance with something.
	I don't know where that came from.
	It's like, so what?
	Sorry, I want to play that one clip again.
	Hold on, hold on, hold on.
	Let me just roll back that last bit of the clip.
	Here we go.
	After they publicly contradicted him, not just on Iran.
	I withdrew the United States from the horrible one-sided Iran nuclear deal.
	At the moment, technically, they're in compliance.
	Okay, so what should have happened here on Iran should have gone straight to Gina Haskell with her quote, but instead they inserted Trump yelling his opinion on Iran.
	And then to be contradicted.
	Even if he didn't yell his opinion on Iran, they're in compliance of what?
	The old deal?
	I had no idea.
	We don't know.
	Hey, it's NBC. Fact, true, Trump's dumb, idiot, orange man bad.
	Orange man bad.
	Onward to two.
	But on ISIS. We have won against ISIS. We've beaten them and we've beaten them badly.
	ISIS is intent on resurging.
	Intent on resurging.
	Oh man, this is so good.
	They're intent on resurging.
	Of course they are.
	Everybody's intent on resurging.
	They've really done a...
	They've formatted this, whereas the switchback or the callback or the whipsaw used to be a clip of Trump saying something unrelated.
	No, no.
	It used to be somebody making an assertion.
	An assertion.
	Reporter says this, then they play that.
	Right.
	But now they're doing two together.
	This is more advanced.
	Yes.
	Because this makes it even worse.
	Yes.
	She says this.
	Yeah.
	Trump then says kind of something along the lines of what she said, and then they have the switchback quote that has nothing to do with it.
	Well, we have to call it – it's like a switchback reach around because it's too – that's what we're calling it from now on.
	The switchback reach-around.
	Because that's what it is.
	So we have Hallie coming up with one thing.
	Okay, so let's go on to number three.
	It might be a better example.
	On Russia.
	We expect Russia will continue to wage its information war against democracies.
	Wait a minute.
	I couldn't hear what the first part was.
	It was just something about Russia's, you know, is...
	They didn't have a good Trump clip that time, so they played that muddy clip you heard.
	We can play it again.
	It's very short.
	On Russia.
	I can't hear.
	What is it?
	I don't know.
	It's just a muddy clip of someone saying something Russia?
	Yeah.
	And then they have the other guy saying, we think the Russians are going to continue their...
	Attack on democracies using computers.
	If we were in the meeting, we would have both said, okay, we like it, but not that one.
	You've got to kill your darlings.
	One of these has to go.
	This is not the best switchback reach-around you've done.
	What's her name again?
	Hallie Jackson.
	Hallie.
	It's not so good.
	So we'll drop that one.
	Let's go to four.
	And on North Korea.
	North Korea's working out very well.
	The capabilities and threat that existed a year ago are still there.
	Behind the scenes, multiple sources tell NBC News intelligence officials felt frustrated by the president's tweets and debated a response, but in the end, decided that would be counterproductive, so stayed silent.
	Republicans did not.
	It's the best we have, and of course we need to rely on them.
	Man, now, this was advanced.
	Because, hold on, they start with Trump.
	And on North Korea.
	North Korea's working out very well.
	Okay, so, just, uh, orange man bad.
	Can't believe he said that.
	How can he say this?
	And then?
	Capabilities and threat that existed a year ago are still there.
	Is that Morrell?
	It sounds like Morrell.
	Who was that?
	No, no, I think it was the Navy guy.
	But it was like, uh, he says, yes, of course they do, because the deal, none of this has been finalized.
	He's working with North Korea.
	So how is this, you know, I don't get what they're trying to get at here.
	Yeah.
	To me, it's unbelievable.
	Then they bring out this Republican who really says nothing at all.
	The capabilities and threat that existed a year ago are still there.
	Behind the scenes, multiple sources tell NBC News intelligence officials...
	I like the behind the scenes, multiple sources.
	...felt frustrated by the president's tweets and debated a response, but in the end, decided that would be counterproductive, so stayed silent.
	Republicans did not.
	It's the best we have, and of course we need to rely on them.
	It's the best we have, therefore we need a realignment.
	So she makes the assertion that the intelligence crowd wanted to do something about Trump's tweets and then they didn't.
	Of course, you can always, you know, great reporting, you got nothing.
	Yeah.
	But the Republicans didn't stay silent.
	And they bring some Republican guy out who doesn't really say anything at all.
	And I'd hardly say that's an exemplification of the Republicans shaking their fist.
	So she finally gets to wrap it with what they wanted to do all along, which was kind of bring out Adam Schiff the term.
	Oh, yes, of course.
	And let him say something.
	And the Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee warned rhetoric like the president's is downright dangerous.
	My advice to the president is you've got the best intelligence agencies in the world.
	Listen to what they have to say.
	When you ignore them, you do that at our country's peril.
	Hallie Jackson, NBC News, the White House.
	Yes, we're going to die.
	Well, he says it's downright dangerous.
	He never says it's downright dangerous.
	He kind of hints that it's not a good idea.
	So this was just, to me...
	Poor.
	It was dishonest to the nth degree.
	And I believe NBC has the most dishonest reporting of all the networks.
	And I think you see that on MSNBC. I'm surprised that they haven't gone after Comcast.
	This is just very dishonest.
	And what I think is happening here is, you know, obviously the intelligence community, which is certainly not all of the people who work in intelligence, but these pencil pushers at the top, they all like, they hate Trump, they work for a different group of shadowy bankers, and the other ones, and they...
	And they sit there and they try and pull all this apart by having this transparent hearing.
	But for the news media, it's very boring.
	And they don't really have the time to play anything in context.
	So instead of, like, what we would do is, like, play, you know, like, like, like.
	It'd pay two minutes of Representative Moe over there about this law.
	They'd chop it up into these 20-second soundbites, you know, with your whipsaw switchback reach-around.
	And you just wind up being confused.
	And they're trying to make it entertaining, I guess, or just trying to ram home the...
	It's really soundbite reporting to an extreme.
	Well, make it dramatic.
	They're trying to make it dramatic.
	Which is entertaining.
	Yes, that's what you do.
	Dramatizing something is for the purposes of entertainment.
	Exactly.
	And that's why...
	Tell a story.
	Hey, you're doing Wizard of Oz.
	Pretty good.
	That was Scarecrow.
	I liked it.
	Dogs are people, too.
	Hey, we have some important, since you brought it up, you brought up how I hate dogs, which I don't.
	I love dogs.
	Adam Curry hates dogs.
	I don't.
	I just don't like them in the amount that they're in.
	Too many dogs.
	Too many dogs.
	You may be the canary in the coal mine here, you know, warning us about the dog takeover.
	Well, so here is, stuff is happening.
	You know, my biggest complaint is I live in a smoke-free, pet-friendly building, which is fine.
	I'll smoke my weed on the balcony.
	No one's ever really given me any problems.
	But we have, you know, instead of a couple people have a dog, we have 75% of all apartments in the building have at least one, sometimes more than one dog.
	And we have carpeting in the hallway, so everything reeks of urine.
	All the hallways, the front door, you have to be careful you don't slip and have to clean it every day.
	It's just, it's a nightmare.
	It's just too much.
	There are now apartment buildings in California and in New York.
	Upon moving in as a part of your lease agreement, you always have to have some, or usually you have to have some kind of deposit, pet deposit in case your pet, I don't know, destroys the carpeting.
	They will also require doggy DNA so that if something turns up in the hallway, And you can, as a concerned fellow dweller, you can grab a little sample and you can hand it to the rental office and they will, within 10 to 14 days, come back and prosecute the dog.
	Or the owner, I guess.
	So that's...
	I think that's great.
	I'm all for it.
	I'd like rapid DNA. It should be, you know, 20 minutes.
	This is where rapid DNA is important.
	And then the second one, dogs are people too.
	This is something that we, it's almost there.
	We talked about it just a couple of shows ago.
	Since we have so many dogs, I think we're at 90 million in the U.S. We have so many dogs.
	Let's help combat climate change by feeding them bugs.
	So we're not quite there yet.
	Because, you know, less beef is less CO2, less farts and whatever, cow farts.
	So now we have Purina, who are big manufacturers and makers of pet food.
	They are going to come out with dog food created from crickets and fish heads.
	Wow, crickets and fish heads.
	I bet you that poop smells fabulous.
	And they are doing it indeed to help combat climate change.
	How good is that?
	Fish heads is my favorite part, even though it's not...
	I don't guess fish don't...
	What do fish do for CO2? Are they good or bad?
	They don't fart like cows.
	I don't know.
	They rot and give off methane, I guess.
	And then the final trend amongst...
	Where do they get the...
	Let's stop for a second and consider this.
	A lot of people never want to even...
	It's like numbers you can't even imagine.
	They have a processing facility where they make millions probably of pounds of dog food that gets packaged.
	You can imagine the facility and there's bags going flying by and the thing's been filled and wrapped and palleted and sent off on a truck.
	And in the process of making the pellets, the kibble, they have to bring in probably tons and tons of smelly fish heads to process.
	And they have to cook them down because it's dry.
	It's a dry food.
	They don't make a wet food that we're talking about.
	So they have to dry it.
	That plant must stink to high heaven.
	And it's probably getting into the area where the plant's located.
	Obviously, there's no residences around there or people would be suing them for odor problems, odor abatement issues.
	This is just disgusting.
	And then the bugs, they got to bring in a bunch of bugs?
	Crickets.
	Crickets specifically.
	They're bringing in crickets and fish heads.
	It looks like it's got to be disgusting.
	Yeah.
	I want to hear from somebody.
	Somebody must know somebody that works at a Purina facility.
	That's a good point.
	Yeah, we've got to get some inside scoop on this.
	Doesn't the Mars company own Purina?
	I don't know anymore.
	They've switched hands so many times, I can't tell you.
	I was suspicious of a candy bar manufacturer that makes pet food.
	I never really quite liked that.
	Well, I know they owned Jack in the Box for a while, or there was some connection there, too.
	And the final trend in today's dog ownership, and I think we've reached peak dog ownership with this, is glittering your male dog's testicles.
	What?
	Yeah, I've got to send you this link on the Skype, man.
	What?
	Who's doing this and why?
	It's so cute.
	Yeah, you can see the picture just popped up on your Skype with the blue glitter and the gold glitter.
	Oh, this is gross.
	It's creepy.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	Dogs are great.
	It's the people that are the problem.
	Putting glitter on your dog's testicle is a trend now.
	Yep.
	Oh, brother.
	Dogs are people, too.
	Oh, man.
	A couple of things going on.
	So one of the things that happened after the last show was, I think it was after the last show, Kamala Harris, Kamala Harris, Kamala, or Kamala.
	She pronounces it Kamala.
	Okay, well, Kamala like Pamela.
	Yes.
	That's why she's doing that.
	Okay.
	It used to be Kamala.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Well, she announces she's going to be running for president.
	And then she went on one of those great CNN scripted town halls.
	Yeah.
	Where everyone has their question ready.
	Yeah, they were not going to ask her about her affair with Willie Brown.
	By the way, when you look at her, you see the pantsuit, you see that when she claps, her arms are fully extended, palms flat.
	Very good, very good.
	You know, like she's clapping for a seal or something.
	Yeah.
	Hillary 2.0.
	Yeah.
	No, she's got all the earmarks of Hillary.
	She's copying her.
	Complete Hillary 2.0.
	It's uncanny.
	Hillary, who I've never considered to be a very good speaker because she speaks every word as a single word.
	And this Kamala woman doesn't quite...
	She doesn't even got that much skill.
	Allow me to say something.
	I think she's got a lot going for her.
	Not from my, obviously, my personal perspective, but she's good looking.
	She does have a good rap.
	She's got all the arrogance you need.
	She really has a great air of arrogance superiority about her.
	District attorney arrogance.
	Yes.
	Oh, yeah, because she has a badge.
	You know, she can throw people in jail.
	She's very powerful as a district attorney.
	Okay.
	Hey, you got a badge?
	Man, I'd be walking around a little more cocky.
	You got a badge, right, baby?
	You got a badge.
	So she says a lot of crazy stuff, but I was listening to her speech, the Oakland speech, and she does stuff like, this is going to be her downfall, I think.
	Okay.
	Well, besides, I think she used sex to get to the top.
	Her downfall, yeah.
	Now, Willie Brown was...
	Willie Brown runs California.
	Wait, really?
	He runs California?
	Pretty much.
	Who the hell is he?
	He used to be the Speaker of the House, the State Assembly.
	He was a top guy, and then he became Mayor of San Francisco.
	And he brought her up.
	He groomed her by giving her a bunch of jobs when they were kind of dating, even though he's married.
	He was 60-something.
	Scandalous!
	And she was 30, and then she got a bunch of...
	So you immediately accuse her of sleeping her way to the top.
	Way to mansplain, Dvorak.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	I do.
	All right.
	And Brown was mayor, and then the mayor after him was, I believe, Gavin Newsom.
	Anyway, the whole thing, the whole problem is really Willie Brown's got a lot to do with it.
	But he's a very powerful character.
	He knows where all the bodies are buried.
	He knows everything about California.
	And I've talked to him a couple of times.
	He's around and about.
	You see him.
	And he'll chat with you.
	Have you chatted with him?
	Yeah, I've chatted with him a couple of times.
	I've just run into him.
	Oh.
	Because you'll see, if you go to a really good restaurant, once in a while, there he is.
	And you could just, you know, you see Roman and I chat with him.
	Yeah, you go over there and say, hey, Willie, how was that piece of asshole?
	Yeah, well, you don't do that.
	Oh, okay.
	Now, so this is, I think the bigger problem is that I think she's a dingbat.
	And...
	And this dingbat comes through with this particular, she's given a speech, and this is an excerpt from the speech where she asks a question and then answers it.
	And I am going to play it in two parts.
	I got her asking the question for 15 seconds and then her answering it.
	And then you tell me, you explain to me what the answer really means.
	First, I would like to say the official definition of dingbat is stupid or eccentric person.
	So I think you're right on both counts.
	We are here at this moment in time because we must answer a fundamental question.
	Who are we?
	Who are we as Americans?
	So, let's answer that question.
	Who are we as Americans?
	Okay?
	That is kind of an essay question, isn't it?
	It's not multiple choice.
	Yeah, but she's going to answer it in kind of an offbeat way, I'd say.
	But let's remember the question is, who are we as Americans?
	Part two.
	Okay.
	Let's answer that question to the world and each other.
	Right here and right now.
	America, we are better than this.
	You know, even though I've heard this speech, I never really deconstructed it like that.
	Who are we?
	Well, we're better than this.
	Yeah, hooray!
	And then the crowd goes wild.
	Yeah, we love that.
	Hmm.
	Yeah.
	Whatever it is, we're better than this.
	Yeah.
	But she never said whatever it is.
	She just said, who are we?
	We're better than this.
	That's who we are.
	Wait a minute.
	You left something out, lady.
	That's funny.
	So then she did the CNN town hall.
	And she had...
	She was taking questions.
	These things...
	Well, we know they're scripted because Matt Lauer...
	The start of the downfall of Matt Lauer is when he deviated from the questions with Hillary...
	Yes.
	As you'll recall.
	And she got quite angry.
	There's no proof of what was said backstage.
	But then Matt Lauer is now between U67 and U69 somewhere on the UHF television band.
	It's there.
	So they bring it.
	Podcaster.
	Woo!
	That's quite a drop.
	He's not even that.
	So they bring in these people who are given questions and they just read their question.
	And this, I thought, was very well done.
	It was another get the crowd all riled up and excited and hooting and hollering question.
	Senator, many Democrats that I've spoken with agree that the primary objective for 2020 is to nominate the candidate that has the best shot of defeating Donald Trump.
	Some have also said that, given what occurred in 2016 and the current political climate, that a male nominee will have a better chance this time around than a female nominee.
	Would you please respond to this so that this man has a response ready the next time a man tries to mansplain why a man would make a better nominee?
	Woo!
	Yeah!
	Oh, screw man!
	Men go home!
	You could not virtue signal any better than that guy just did.
	He got sex from somebody.
	Yeah, probably another guy.
	Well, maybe.
	It's irrelevant.
	I mean, that was just, hey, I suck.
	Tell me how I make sure no one like me ever becomes president or whatever.
	Yeah.
	I'm surprised you didn't get the white thing in there.
	Now, we followed Sandy Hook The Newtown tragedy very closely and we feel that there was quite a lack of evidence.
	I don't want to get into it too deep because it's just such a hot button, but we've discussed it ad nauseum.
	The most interesting thing about Sandy Hook was the, if you recall, Wayne Carver.
	He was the medical, what's the proper term, examiner.
	Yeah.
	He was the chief medical examiner.
	And you remember that press conference he did where he had, everything was contradictory, had all the wrong answers, was talking about wrong weapons, hadn't really looked at anybody, hadn't done autopsies on all of the victims.
	It was really, really odd.
	And one thing we know for sure, well, here's what Kamala Harris says about gun laws and what she thinks should be done in relation to the Sandy Hook.
	Twenty six- and seven-year-old babies were massacred in Connecticut.
	They failed to act.
	Here's what I think.
	I think that somebody should have required, and this is going to sound very harsh...
	I think somebody should have required all those members of Congress to go in a room, in a locked room, no press, no one, nobody else, and look at the autopsy photographs of those babies.
	And then you vote your conscience.
	This has become a political issue.
	I'm all for that?
	This has become a political issue.
	I'm really for that because as far as I know, there are no photographs.
	There are no autopsy photographs.
	I would love for some representatives to go in to a skiff, I presume, see these pictures and then tell us what they saw.
	That was one of the biggest problems with this thing is there's no photographic evidence of anything.
	And then they flatten the building.
	Oh, well, hey, it's what we do.
	It's what we do with all big tragedies, like 9-11.
	The rubble was gone so quick.
	So, and this Camilla, Camilla, Camilla, Camilla?
	Camilla, Camilla, Camilla.
	Camilla.
	Camilla.
	So I was listening to Ben Shapiro, who is going on and on about, and we have mixed feelings about him on this show.
	He was going on and on about the Willie Brown situation, thinking it should be answered.
	Can I just say...
	I am becoming so disinterested and I really don't feel like we can survive two years of this bull crap.
	The American people, they're going to turn TVs off.
	Yeah.
	I think it's way too much, way too early and Ben Shapiro should know better.
	Well, Ben Shapiro is going on and on, and there's some basic reason I don't like Ben Shapiro.
	Because he's an outrage whore.
	It just hit me.
	He's an outrage whore.
	He may be right, but he's always on the outrage tip.
	No, he's a little bit like that.
	I agree.
	I'm not going to argue about that, but this is the thing that I think is his problem.
	He has a problem.
	And a lot of right-wingers have the exact same problem, and I only discovered it by deconstructing this stuff that he just did about her when he's going on and on about Willie Brown, is that – and he's not the only one who does this.
	And we kind of do it, but we don't do it like these other guys do it.
	Right.
	He uses sarcasm to excess – Oh, yes.
	Yes, you're right.
	This is a trend.
	I agree.
	And it's not well done.
	That's the problem.
	In fact, it's just very poorly done.
	And in fact, I'll take it one step further and say that it actually produces reverse messaging.
	You know, before you play your clip...
	Hold on, where is it?
	Here's that iso, because you're right.
	That whole baby Hitler thing, that was also kind of trying to be sarcastic, but here's how it came out.
	Would you kill baby Hitler?
	And the truth is that no pro-life person on earth would kill baby Hitler.
	Because baby Hitler wasn't Hitler.
	Adult Hitler was Hitler.
	Baby Hitler was a baby.
	What you presumably want to do with baby Hitler was take baby Hitler out of baby Hitler's house and move baby Hitler into a better house where he would not grow up to be Hitler.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Icky.
	That's one of the great clips we have, by the way.
	Icky.
	It's a great clip.
	Icky, yeah.
	Well, this is a little more extreme than that.
	And this is what he does all the time.
	And a lot of guys do this all the time.
	And when you just hear it straight up, like, I'm going to play it.
	I'm taking all the context away.
	How big is this clip?
	24 seconds.
	Okay, 24 seconds is a long clip.
	Even without context, if you just take the long clip, you start to see what the problem is when you use sarcasm constantly to make your points.
	Let me conclude.
	What It is that happens is that you don't make the point.
	You assert something that should not be asserted.
	And in fact, you state something as fact.
	If you don't hear the sarcasm, it sounds like, what is this guy's nuts?
	But let's play this and I'll explain later.
	And she should have to answer questions about that.
	And she shouldn't be able to shy away with answers like, oh yeah, I fell deeply in love with Willie Brown when he was 60 and I was 30.
	Yeah, that's a thing that happens all the time.
	And there are lots of 60-year-old men.
	You know how many of them who are, you know, kind of middle-class schlubs who aren't powerful men in politics are getting 30-year-old up-and-coming law student girlfriends?
	Tons of them.
	Tons.
	Just, it happens all the time.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, explain it.
	Yes, I totally understand what you're saying.
	He said, what he said is a lie.
	Yeah.
	But what he was trying to do is be sarcastic about The notion that she was – her and Willie makes some sort of sense.
	But he didn't do that.
	He just decided to become sarcastic and make that crazy commentary and he ended it there.
	He didn't say – after it was over, he didn't say – and I'm kidding, of course, because this never happens.
	Right, right, right, right.
	He doesn't do that.
	He just assumes that you get the joke of his sarcasm, which is very poorly executed.
	The guy is not a comic.
	You have hit on something.
	It's important to me.
	I don't know if it's important to anybody else.
	But yes, this is the problem I have with Laura Ingraham, with Sean Hannity, with the horrible host who's on One America News, kind of the cheap Tommy Lahren knockoff.
	Tommy Lahren, another perfect example.
	The sarcasm is so poorly executed and not necessary.
	And it's almost...
	It's condescending.
	Like, everybody knows this.
	You know that.
	Don't you know this?
	You listening to me, you know that.
	That's kind of the feeling I get from it.
	And I think you're right about this.
	I agree 100% with everything you just said.
	It's condescending.
	It assumes that you're on the same wavelength...
	It's never explained.
	And most of all, it is unnecessary.
	Sarcasm is really a technique used for humor.
	It's very weak.
	It's bad broadcasting.
	Yes, it's very bad broadcasting.
	Even Limbaugh, I don't believe, does it.
	No.
	No.
	It's the guys and gals I don't listen to.
	You're right.
	That's why I tune out.
	If we disagree, if there's a question, we'll actually stop talking about it.
	Who is this?
	What do you mean?
	And by the way, you had the other groups like Pod Save America.
	They do this all the time.
	And I think, hey, you know what?
	What if we just...
	Everyone stopped the sarcasm.
	Stop with the sarcasm.
	Maddow is mis-sarcasm.
	It's also something that is on Twitter.
	This is, you know...
	This is so important what you've hit on here.
	Everybody thinks they're a comedian.
	And the way people who are not funny exude their comedic stylings is through sarcasm.
	So sometimes it's kind of funny.
	So a tweet that says, well, a reply to something, well, this didn't age well.
	It was funny the first 8,000 times someone used it.
	But in general, because the time is, you know, you have limited character space or whatever, people can't write anymore, they always throw in sarcasm, and it's not funny.
	It's not helpful.
	It is something that people, if you find yourself agreeing, this is what I would assert, if you find yourself agreeing with sarcasm like this a lot, you should check yourself.
	You should say, wait a minute.
	It's negative.
	You're being pulled into sarcastic crap.
	I think it's like a warning sign if you find yourself listening or watching a lot of sarcastic opinions.
	Yeah, and all the right-wing guys, and I think a lot of the lefties, at that level that you mentioned, the Hannity's and this guy.
	This guy's the king of it.
	Because he uses it, I'd say half of his show is just sarcasm.
	Yeah.
	And also shuts out any other thinking, because, you know, if you have a different opinion, and he said, well, this is just, we all know that that doesn't have, you know, yeah, sure, normal guys get, you know, 30 or younger.
	You know, it's like, well, maybe I have a different opinion, but I'm like, well, shoot, you know, I guess everyone knows it because he's even sarcastic about it.
	I must be an idiot.
	Yeah, there's that.
	That's an element, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Well, thanks.
	So I'm wondering when I play this, I would like to play that clip again, by the way, just so people get a clue.
	Let's do that and then I would have a comment.
	And she should have to answer questions about that.
	And she shouldn't be able to shy away with answers like, oh yeah, I fell deeply in love with Willie Brown when he was 60 and I was 30.
	Yeah, that's a thing that happens all the time.
	And there are lots of 60-year-old men.
	You know how many of them who are, you know, kind of middle-class schlubs who aren't powerful men in politics are getting 30-year-old up-and-coming law student girlfriends?
	Tons of them.
	Tons.
	Just, it happens all the time.
	Yeah, his sarcasm is not even good.
	Do we employ a lot of sarcasm on this show?
	I don't think so.
	I think we try to avoid it.
	I think usually if...
	No, I think we do.
	I think we avoid it and probably...
	If I try it, you get irked.
	Yeah, I was just about to say, if I do it, you get irked.
	So I guess we keep each other in check.
	Hey, thanks, friend.
	Don't make me look like a douche.
	And the other thing is if there was sarcasm on the show, it would be – if it was done and it was humorous like Shapiro is not, it would – the other person would laugh and that would give clue to the fact that it was a sarcastic comment, not a factual comment.
	Because the way Shapiro presents that little statement of his, he says it as – If you don't hear the sarcasm, which is hard to do because he has a machine gun approach to speaking, and if you don't notice it was sarcastic, you could take it as him telling what he thinks is the truth.
	And you could say to yourself, does this guy actually believe that?
	I don't know anybody that's 60 that's...
	It's a problem.
	It is, and it's a very poor way to make a point.
	And I just realized one other place where sarcasm really irks me.
	And it's the troll room.
	If people are in there going, you know, sarcastic one-liners...
	It really...
	Well, I shouldn't have said it now because, you know...
	Here they come!
	The troll is going to do it.
	But you can really...
	It's like a Reddit thing.
	That's Reddit.
	It's all sarcasm.
	Social media is sarcasm.
	It's not humor.
	It's poor.
	And it's not healthy.
	How about that?
	Yes.
	And with that...
	I'd like to thank you for your courage and say in the morning to you, the man who put the sea in condescending, John C. Dvorak.
	Well, I can't find my tube, so in the morning to you, in the morning all the ships and sea, all the boots on the ground, the feet in the air, also the subs in the water, and all the dames and all the knights.
	All the dames.
	All the dames.
	All the knights.
	All the knights.
	All the dames, all the nights that are out there.
	And in the morning, too, our very own trolls in the troll room, which is noagendastream.com.
	How many people we got in there today?
	See, we got a lot of people on the stream.
	Yeah, we're about a thousand.
	That's nice.
	People always check in, listen live, hit the chat room, which we, of course, know is the troll room.
	Drop their sarcastic comments.
	They drop a sarcastic comment or two, see if they can rile me up.
	It's cool, you know, they're kind of like, I guess it's everyone's way of being the president, where he'll sit at home, or at home, in the White House, he'll tweet something, he sees it show up on TV three minutes later, and I think that's what people in the troll room are trying to do.
	Hey, let me see if I can Irk Curry, see if he says something about it.
	It's kind of the same mechanism.
	Irk Curry.
	Irk Curry.
	That's a good show title.
	And also, in the morning, to Darren O'Neill.
	Darren brought us the artwork for episode 1107.
	The title of that was Carbon Budget.
	And we had a hard time.
	There was a lot of different things we were looking at.
	I'm not quite sure what it was.
	Yeah, Darren, you can tell when Darren comes in to...
	Riley won the week before.
	And I think there's a competition between those two and maybe some other.
	This is kind of like the competition between Martin J.J. and Nick Durrett.
	Oh, yeah.
	And you know it's a real competition when they're complimenting each other after the show on Twitter for the person whose artwork did get chosen.
	Great work.
	Here's mine.
	Great work.
	But you know when Darren's out to win because he doesn't submit a great piece.
	He submits like 40 pieces.
	Eight pieces in one go.
	All good.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, this was the NBC logo, which he dubbed nothing but crap, the Peacock logo.
	We also go for art.
	It doesn't always have to be funny.
	It doesn't always have to be...
	Sometimes it can be just pretty.
	Just a pretty piece.
	The Rams Head one, we picked it for that.
	Rams Head, yeah, sometimes it's just for the art.
	But most importantly, this is a part of the value for value system that we've created here.
	We're 11 years strong.
	We're hundreds of thousands of producers.
	Everyone's a producer.
	Lots of people produce things like artwork or like jingles or clips or just information.
	We have lots of stuff to talk about that from boots on the ground everywhere.
	And, of course, we also need producers who finance.
	And that's the ones we'd like to thank right here in our executive producer and associate executive producer segment.
	Just like Hollywood, we do it up front, more or less.
	It's not the end show credit, so we're very happy to thank the following people.
	Well, the guy on top is the only executive producer that came in this show was Sir Carl of the Lavender Blossom, 333.33 from Northville, Michigan.
	Sir Cal.
	Yeah, yeah.
	At a recent Local 1 meetup, it has come to my attention that douchebags are amongst us.
	Please blast them all with the proper calls.
	He's got different people.
	Ready?
	Oh, he has a list.
	Okay, yes.
	He's got a couple.
	Two different ones.
	Douchebag!
	And Kelly of Michigan Local One.
	Douchebag!
	I'm sorry.
	Michigan Local One, I'm calling you out because I care about you.
	See, it's a loving douche.
	It's a love douche.
	Love douche.
	Thanks, Serkow.
	Serkow, lavenderblossoms.org for all your fine CBD products.
	Yeah, it makes good products.
	Great operation.
	Go public.
	Sir Up in Seattle, 233.37.
	I've stopped show 1107 at 203.40 and broken out the PayPal to make my biannual donation one month in advance based on the fantastic deconstruction of the government shutdown loan reporting scandal propagated by the M5M. That was in the last show.
	People should go back and listen to it.
	It was absolute dynamite.
	I'll be shocked if your cup doesn't run it over from the great work.
	Well, that's interesting, isn't it?
	Yeah, it is.
	Because it didn't.
	No, it didn't flow over.
	But it's okay.
	How disgusting these high-paid media shills are.
	You two should be getting all these M5M dumbholes aggregate salary.
	Well, I can't disagree with that.
	But we're...
	They may not be paid to be news people.
	To all who don't donate, just give a five spot.
	It'll make a difference.
	No jingles, no karma for this donation.
	Just a hearty thank you!
	And thank you, syrup in Seattle.
	Appreciate that.
	Nice words.
	Anonymous 209.90.
	Now this was a came with a note about Sir Greg and he this guy who revealed himself at some future point.
	A lot of people gave a $20.99 and that started coming in.
	We had quite a few.
	And we want to thank all those folks for doing that.
	But he gave $209.90 and we want to thank him for his heartfelt note.
	Yeah, should I put that note in the show notes?
	You could.
	I think I can do that, right?
	Yeah.
	Okay, we'll put it in the show notes at the top.
	Yeah.
	Under Greg.
	That's a good note.
	It's a heartfelt.
	Yes.
	He does have some, wait, he does have some, he may want some, he does have some call-outs for jingles.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Who you have to deal with.
	He says he needs a douchebag call-out directed towards myself and a swift dedouching as I made my first contribution to a 209.90 in honor of my amazing friend Greg.
	Douchebag.
	You've been dedouched.
	Now I'd be absolutely furious with me.
	He would be absolutely furious with me if I remained as sad as I am.
	So I encourage everyone to join me in true Greg fashion by taking a shot of bourbon, lighting up a joint, and saying to all, may the force be with you.
	If I could get any of Greg's jingles you can find, but namely his Putin, don't worry, be happy, or the fake news with the ping pong ball and a classic karma for good measure.
	Keep up the good work.
	Uh, with the ping pong ball.
	I never, I don't know what that one is.
	Um...
	Fake, fake, fake.
	That's not it.
	Fake, fake, fake.
	You are fake news.
	This is fake news.
	No, that's not it.
	Writing up some fake news.
	No.
	Ah, wait.
	Trying to get cheap clicks and top page views.
	Writing up some fake news.
	I got it, I think.
	Oh, it's propaganda time!
	Fake news.
	Made up.
	False stories.
	Fake news.
	Unreliable sources.
	Fake news.
	Sound bites and snippets.
	Fake news.
	Fake news.
	Fake news infects the left and the right team.
	No, that's not it either.
	I don't know where the ping pong ball went.
	I feel bad now.
	You sure it's not the one where he's maybe some comment about fake news and Trump going bing bing pong ball?
	No, no.
	There's an actual...
	I remember there's a ping pong ball that pops.
	Oh, okay.
	You know it's true.
	This is fake news.
	You know it's fake news.
	We got a lot of good ones.
	Yeah, we do.
	We're loaded.
	Well, you can play the Putin Don't Worry, Be Happy.
	Wait, maybe it's this one.
	This is the last one.
	The last one.
	We already played Putin Don't Worry, Be Happy at the top, remember?
	Oh, right.
	Hey, hey, hey.
	You read that.
	Thank you.
	Nailed it.
	There it is.
	Okay.
	Good.
	Worth it.
	I don't even know that I ever heard that one.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Alright, he wants a karma at the end.
	Okay, here we go.
	You've got karma.
	Sir Isaac Knight of the Firearms Instructors, $202.02.
	He's, I believe, up in Tahoe area.
	I have to get a hold of him because I want to take the kids up and go give them some shooting.
	Does he do concealed carry licensing?
	I don't know.
	Get the kids that.
	Uh, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Mimi's got one.
	Of course she does.
	In Washington State, at least for now, you can just go and sign up with your local police department and get one.
	Oh, you don't even need the class?
	Some laws, because the place has been taken over by Democrats, and you and I have to actually show that you can use a gun.
	Yeah, we have to take a class here.
	Yeah.
	It closes my sanity check for the best podcast in the universe.
	I don't know how so many people misunderstand you or John when you plainly explain how the show works, such as Adam explaining why he likes AOC. I've been listening since the 200s, and I've never thought you were a fan of Trump, AOC, or any other nut job in any context outside of that person's utility for revealing how the media and political machine operates.
	I like Trump when he provokes the M5M into showing their hand.
	I liked Hillary for the same reasons, and I love the show for teaching me that.
	I sincerely thank you for your courage.
	Many people give up when they go up against such idiocy on a regular basis.
	I have a lot of respect for you two.
	Can I please get a shout out for my website, FirearmsTrainingCentral.com?
	Firearmstrainingcentral.com, a directory for hundreds of firearms instructors across the U.S. and around the world.
	That's good.
	Great.
	Actually, yes.
	The Keeper and I would like to get our CC. So if you've got an instructor, and here in Austin, you can get it at the range, but it's on Sunday.
	All these things are always on Sunday.
	And Tina has an actual job, unlike me, the podcaster.
	So yeah, if you can recommend an instructor, very open to it.
	To all you gun owners in Gitmo Nation, you need to take a training class.
	Adam, I can recommend an instructor in Austin.
	Hello.
	Good.
	Excellent.
	Jingles.
	Two to the head because it works.
	And go Karma for my business.
	Yes, sir.
	Knight of the firearms instructor.
	You've got...
	Karma.
	Karma.
	Was there Because It Works in there?
	I don't have a Because It Works.
	Oh, there is a Because It, where I remember it.
	Oh, hold on.
	I didn't realize that.
	Because It Works?
	I really don't remember this.
	Oh, okay.
	It works.
	If it's not there, it's not there.
	No, I'm sorry.
	I just remember something.
	Maybe it's never been a good person.
	Maybe he's just saying two to the head works.
	Yeah, of course.
	That's how I read it.
	Two to the head because it works.
	Of course it works.
	You shoot people in the head twice and it works.
	I thought it was because it works.
	Lee Olivares, $202.02.
	And he just wants a bunch of jingles.
	Train's good, plus foamer, plus sucking in soot.
	Appreciate your excellent work, my dudes.
	Okay, let's see what we can do.
	Karma, or is it...
	It doesn't say karma.
	I put karma on him.
	All aboard, trains good, planes bad.
	Oh my god!
	Woo!
	Listen to that horn!
	Sucking in soot.
	You've got karma.
	Big Merv in Youngstown, Ohio, comes in with $200, second to the last in this list.
	I want to apologize to both of you for I have been a freeloading man overboard douchebag.
	Well, that ends today.
	Yes.
	I am back on track and caught up with all the episodes and starting to listen when they are available for download.
	I've received, oh, I've realized that the show gives a nice balance to a heavy, hectic work life and is starting to keep me sane again.
	I am traveling today to Dallas for a job interview on Friday and then with some company.
	I like the way he does this.
	And I kindly request a de-douching.
	Jobs karma and some MILF karma never hurts.
	Keep doing what you do.
	This truly is the best podcast in the year.
	You've been de-douched.
	That's one mother I'd like to.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	A jingle fest, I tell ya.
	And finally, that was Big Merv.
	Yeah.
	Finally, Jackson Butler in Levelon, Texas, 200.
	Please de-douche me and knight me, sir.
	Do we have him on the knight list?
	I think so.
	Let's double check.
	We only have two, I believe.
	I believe we got two.
	Yes, he is.
	Yeah, he's on the list.
	He will be Sir Jackson Knight of the Transits.
	Is he on the birthday list, too?
	You're asking me so much today.
	What's his name?
	Jackson.
	Yes.
	He is accounted for.
	He's on the manifest.
	Please de-douche me.
	Because he's not a highlight.
	Well, he is highlight on one side, but not the other.
	Please de-douche me.
	Oh, no.
	I see there's a light yellow there.
	Okay.
	Sorry.
	Please de-douche me and knight me, Sir Jackson.
	Knight of the Transistors in honor of my 40th birthday on January 30th.
	Jobs, karma for all!
	Thank you.
	Yes, we will be doing that later on.
	See you at the roundtable.
	And that concludes our list of associate executive producers and the executive producer for show.
	11-08.
	Oh, hey, guess what?
	We've got two shows left.
	It's going to be 11-11, 11-11.
	Oh, you're right.
	11-11, 11-11, 11-11, 11-11, 11-11.
	I love 11-11.
	I'm always seeing 11-11 on the clock.
	So you've got to make a wish when you see the 11-11.
	Thank you to our executive producers and our associate executive producers.
	This is the value that we desperately need to keep the show going.
	Thank you for that.
	And we'll be thanking more of our producers, $50 and above, in our second segment.
	And we have another show coming up on Super Bowl Sunday.
	Remember us at Dvorak.org.
	And now that you have the definition of dingbat, go out there, spread the knowledge and the formula.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	I should make one quick statement.
	Okay.
	Bernie Sanders is a dingbat.
	Yeah, I think, yeah.
	Eccentric and stupid.
	I just wanted to get that out of the way.
	Do you have any idea why I'd want to do that?
	Because you have a clip of Bernie Sanders saying something dingbat-y?
	No, he is a dingbat, though.
	Because dingbat is considered, at least around these parts, a sexist term only referring to women.
	Oh, really?
	It didn't say that in my dictionary.
	Well, you've got to get a newer dictionary.
	Well, then let's play a dingbat.
	What was the definition again in California?
	It's a sexist term only applying to women.
	Oh, good.
	Here is Kirsten Gillibrand.
	Well, yeah.
	Another one.
	And she did this speech for her announcement of her candidacy for president like an Oscar speech.
	It was so passionate.
	She only forgot to thank the Academy.
	Listen to this.
	Dr.
	Martin Luther King Jr.
	continues to inspire us every single day because he believed in a set of values that transcends time and movements.
	He knew that only light can drive out darkness and that we are all called to fight for others until now.
	Until this person in the White House, until our president has chosen to tear this country apart.
	On every line, every division, every racial line, every religious line, he chooses to divide us community by community.
	He has inspired a hate and a darkness in this country that I have never witnessed myself.
	He is tearing apart the very fabric of who we are as a nation, our very common decency.
	And that is what we are being called to fight against.
	My God.
	Wow.
	Yeah.
	Maybe a little exaggerated.
	Just a tad.
	Just a tad.
	Hey, and then we had...
	Jeez, get a grip.
	Yeah, well, no one's getting the grip because Howard Schultz, as we know, the Starbucks billionaire, is going to run, and he would be perfect.
	We love billionaires.
	We love people who don't like Trump.
	What?
	What?
	You're not going to run as a Democrat?
	What?
	What?
	This was a problem for the M5M. And, well, I have to give them props.
	Supercuts did another compilage, if you want to hear that, of M5M freaking out about...
	Definitely.
	A lot of Democrats are freaking out.
	Absolute gift to Donald Trump.
	Growing controversy swirling around the billionaire visionary behind Starbucks.
	He could take away votes that would go to the Democratic nominee.
	Handing President Trump a second term.
	Many Democrats fear that could be disastrous.
	Help elect Trump, you egotistical billionaire s**t.
	What scares me is that your entry into this race will guarantee Trump another four years.
	Number one, are you still a Democrat?
	And number two, why are you doing this?
	Even if it means hurting the Democratic candidate and helping to re-elect Trump, and that's just a f***ing awful thing to do.
	Running as a third-party candidate only helps Trump and maybe Putin.
	Two words for you, just don't.
	Doesn't get to be king just because he's so rich.
	No, I don't think you should run.
	Votes are so precious as we saw last time.
	I really do not think that this is the time for us to have an independent in this race.
	It would provide Donald Trump with his best hope of getting re-elected.
	He doesn't quite grasp the depth of the impact that that decision would have.
	Donald Trump was not all that concerned about the Republican Party.
	He ran because of hubris.
	Howard Schultz is suggesting he's going to run.
	You do realize that millions of people register as independent, and yet they still tilt one way or the other.
	I'm not for third-party candidates that could hurt the Democratic ticket.
	It is not the time.
	2024 is your year.
	2020 is not.
	What he's doing right now, I do believe, is very dangerous.
	We cannot allow this to happen.
	Billionaires, you need to find new hobbies.
	Now some Democrats are threatening to boycott Starbucks.
	Really?
	Vanity projects that help destroy democracy are disgusting.
	So he's there for the right reasons, in your view.
	Without any party infrastructure, any party backing.
	I have respect for Howard Schultz.
	If he chooses to get in the race, I hope he gets in the Democratic Party.
	We'll treat him very fairly.
	And the last time this happened, it unleashed a tragedy the likes of which the world has never seen.
	Oh, what a mistake.
	You foolish man, you, thinking that you can represent the people of America.
	You can, but you have to do it the right way.
	You're holding it wrong.
	You're holding it wrong.
	Now, there's a lot of incorrect noise, certainly in the European reporting on this.
	People are very baffled, and maybe in the U.S. as well, like, wait a minute, I thought you only had a two-party system.
	Well, no.
	Anyone can run to be president.
	The parties is their parties!
	That's where you get your power and your money from.
	And so this is competing agendas.
	You know, I don't know why they don't bring up that Bernie Sanders is an independent.
	Yes, and he got bamboozled into running as a Democrat.
	He would have run, but he was too good.
	He got suckered.
	He was too good, so they had to screw him over.
	And that wasn't just the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the Clinton clan and the hag...
	The Hillary assassination group.
	It was the media.
	Well, that is Hag, I guess.
	They completely ignored him.
	He had crowds as big as Trump.
	So anyway, so now you have Howard Schultz.
	I didn't know much about his background.
	Delighted to see that he came from the projects.
	I didn't even know that.
	He's got a great background.
	It's not like I recommend everyone coming from the projects, but for a guy who made himself a billionaire, his background is pretty hard to beat.
	But that's no longer...
	There's no Donald Trump's dad involved.
	Yeah.
	So he has everything going.
	I have not heard anything about his policies.
	All I hear is...
	I have no idea what he stands for.
	He's not getting asked any questions that are being shown anywhere of any importance.
	It's just...
	He's wrong.
	You're wrong, man.
	Boycott Starbucks.
	Try it.
	Let me see the millennials boycott Starbucks.
	they'll go into shock from withdrawal syndrome.
	I'm going to go.
	I'm going to get a latte.
	So, sorry.
	Sorry, Howard.
	You're from old America, my friend.
	Because if he does successfully run, I think people are right.
	It would split enough votes to give Trump the upper hand.
	Well, you know, I think he took a lot of votes away from Trump.
	Well, of course.
	That's the whole point.
	But who will then be left over?
	Maybe this guy's a great candidate.
	I'd like to know more about him.
	I'd like to see him speak and let the guy talk a little bit instead of pounding his head down immediately.
	Yeah, it's pathetic.
	I mean, Ross Perot was the last one.
	Of course, this happened.
	Disastrous results.
	The world has never seen before because we got Bush.
	No.
	What?
	No.
	When did Perot run?
	Yeah, but that was with Bush.
	I thought Perot first ran against Clinton and H.W. and we got Clinton.
	Now I'm confused.
	Well, then what are they yapping about?
	That would be the strategy.
	I thought that it was that one of the guys...
	I don't know if they're talking about Perot.
	I think they're talking about Nader.
	Yeah, but Troll Room confirms.
	Ross Perot gave us Clinton.
	Well, that's the model right there, then.
	What's their problem?
	Yeah, one billionaire.
	I think that's what Schultz is even thinking.
	Huh.
	No, the reference, they never said Perot.
	Oh, I thought Perot.
	They're talking about Nader.
	Ah, see, I didn't know this.
	Ralph Nader ran it, and he's the one who gave us Bush.
	Okay.
	I wasn't in the country at the time.
	That's why there's holes in my memory there.
	That's fine.
	Right, so it's disingenuous to say it was disastrous where it worked really well another time.
	I think everyone was pretty happy with Clinton when he got in.
	I love Clinton.
	I love Clinton.
	You love Clinton.
	There's a song there.
	Yeah, don't worry.
	It's time code.
	It's a song, all right.
	It'll be in some mix in your future.
	Well, that's odd because, you know, just shut up.
	No one has, they don't have a candidate.
	Is it so important that it has to be someone who's a member of the Democrat Party?
	Is that, is it unthinkable to, I mean, isn't just the idea, get Trump out no matter what?
	Who cares?
	Nothing could be, anything is better than Trump?
	Isn't that the general idea?
	They should glom on to this guy.
	What is the party these days?
	I have no idea.
	I'm looking at these headlines, though.
	Why Schultz is the new Ross Perot?
	Howard Schultz would not be a spoiler for Democrats the way Ross Perot was for the GOP. Could Howard Schultz be the next Ross Perot?
	Nobody's talking about poor Ralph Nader.
	I'd like to switch topics to Venezuela for a moment.
	We have a number of boots-on-the-ground reports.
	We got quite a few, actually.
	I have some official clips.
	Yeah, but before we get to that, just to set the stage a little bit, I love that we were talking earlier about Venezuela's oil, not on a previous show, but Venezuela's oil.
	And I'm not quite sure what came out of our mouths, but ultimately, yes, the Venezuelan oil is, in fact, heavy, high-sulfur crude.
	It's not the light Bolivian crude.
	And the refineries here in the U.S. are kind of set up to mix that with our much lighter crude.
	No, to get it through the pipes.
	But we get this from one of our knights, Sir Ryan the Refiner, and I've checked his credentials.
	He absolutely knows what he's talking about.
	And I will mention the reason you checked his credentials, because we, I think about six, seven years ago, we had some guy who claimed...
	To be in the oil business on a rig.
	Yeah, I remember.
	Remember that guy?
	On a rig, yeah.
	But here's a brief summary.
	We received multiple similar reports, boots on the ground, people who live in Venezuela or other parts of Latin America.
	And I kind of liked how...
	How our first producers start off by saying, hey, you and John really don't know anything about Venezuela.
	That's okay.
	I don't expect you to, but here's, you know, boots on the ground.
	Executive summary.
	In Latin America, what's been going on from the 60s to the present day is a battle between the civilized world and the Castro in Cuba with help from Russia.
	I don't think there's any dispute about that.
	All guerrilla movements in Latin America have been and continue to be financed, trained, and supported by Cuba and the Cuban G2, now with Venezuelan money.
	Today, Venezuela is being run by Raul Castro and the Cuban G2. What's the G2, the Cuban G2? I don't know.
	I'll look it up while you keep reading.
	Maduro legally cannot be the Venezuelan president because he was not born in Venezuela.
	He was born in Colombia.
	Six years ago, the elections were stolen, but because...
	It's the intelligence agency.
	Ah, thank you.
	Six years ago, the elections were stolen, but because they had money, they bought the international silence.
	That would be the M5M, and everyone's complicit with that, and military-industrial complex, oil, etc.
	Got it.
	In last year's fraudulent election, most opposition candidates were either in jail or in exile.
	Since they no longer had any money to buy the conscience of the world, the world said, we don't recognize these elections.
	According to the Constitution, the elected president must be sworn in to the National Assembly, and that did not happen.
	Today, the situation is that there is no president who was elected properly because the elections were rigged, so the president of the Assembly is, according to our Constitution, the president in charge with the mandate to make new election processes as soon as possible.
	Thanks to the efforts of President Trump and guys like Marco Rubio, with the support of the international community, it seems that the days of the dictatorship of Venezuela are over.
	So in this case, yep, believe it or not, the U.S. are actually the good guys.
	And he has a whole bunch of other things and other points that he makes.
	This is very consistent, and I don't know if it's consistent because everyone who is emailing us is some kind of agent and is giving us false information.
	Sounds right.
	I pulled off of YouTube Joanna Hausman, and she lives in Venezuela, and she gives a version of that backgrounder, but better than I just did it, shorts.
	In 2017, the Supreme Court that was hand-picked by Nicolás Maduro's party nullified and stripped the National Assembly, or Congress, of their powers.
	The National Assembly was chosen by vote and was the only government institution that was run by an opposition majority.
	Imagine when the Democrats took the House, if Trump was like, no, I don't like this anymore, the House is no longer a legitimate part of government, and here's another House that I made up with everyone that agrees with me.
	Americans would be furious.
	So too are Venezuelans.
	Venezuela erupted in protests.
	Hundreds of protesters, most of them teenagers, were detained, some of whom were tortured and murdered.
	Meanwhile, despite these protests, Maduro made his own Congress that he could control.
	Just like that.
	Fast forward to May 20th, 2018, where this illegitimate Congress calls for presidential elections.
	Now, during these elections, the most popular opposition candidates are either jailed, exiled, or banned from running.
	In other words, there is no legitimate way for the opposition to run.
	So these sham presidential elections are held anyway by Maduro's government, where only 20% of the population voted.
	However, a lot of the 20% were public employees who were intimidated into voting by threats from the government.
	These were called illegitimate elections, not just by the Venezuelan people, but by the international community.
	Interim President Juan Guaidó has been backed by the international community.
	Yes, this includes the United States, but do you know who else backs Juan Guaidó that isn't Trump?
	Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Germany, the socialist party that runs Albania, Canada's progressive prince Justin Trudeau.
	Australia, Paraguay, Peru, the government run by the Socialist Party of Spain, whose president said what is going on in Venezuela is the opposite of socialism.
	The list goes on.
	Now, for sure, this Guaido, this guy is one of ours.
	He's an asset.
	There's no doubt about it.
	But I think the script that is being followed here...
	By the way, we should mention he went to Georgetown.
	Yeah, Georgetown University.
	Spook school.
	That's okay.
	Spook school.
	It's one of the major spook schools.
	Yes, so this is not atypical.
	But I think they're following the Trump script, which he, interestingly, before he was elected, he was still running.
	This is a video that he shot in his office.
	Remember when he used to be in his Trump Tower office and You know, he'd do crazy little videos, and then he had an eagle that tried to kill him, and then he had the Taco Bowl.
	So this is one of his famous...
	I like Mexican food.
	Taco Bowl.
	Taco Bell.
	Ah, good times.
	It was fun back then, wasn't it?
	More fun than now.
	And so he was talking about Libya and how Libya had been messed up.
	We had done it the wrong way.
	So forget Libya and why it happened.
	Here's the simplistic, straightforward thinking I believe is in play for the U.S. and Venezuela, clearly with our guy.
	But we have to go in to save these lives.
	We should do it on a humanitarian basis.
	Immediately go into Libya, knock this guy out very quickly, very surgically, very effectively, and save the lives.
	After it's all done, we go to the protesters who end up running the country.
	They're going to like us a lot better than they will if we don't do it.
	More importantly, we're going to save lives.
	And we should then say, by the way, from all of your oil, We want reimbursement.
	We should have said, we'll help you, but we want 50% of your oil.
	They would have absolutely said, okay, 100%.
	In fact, they would have said, how about 75%?
	So, and isn't it sad?
	We could have had anything we wanted.
	We could have had 50% of those oil fields.
	You know, in the old days, when you had a war, it's To the victor belong the spoils.
	So we could have had something special.
	When the so-called rebels came to us, we should have said, fellas, we're going to help you.
	We want 50% of your oil.
	They would have said, thank you very much.
	We have a deal.
	Write it down.
	Sign it.
	We have a deal.
	We would have been a rich nation again.
	They have tremendous oil reserves in Libya.
	Instead, we help.
	We get nothing.
	We're very, very foolishly led.
	I think that's your strategy, and from a leadership position of the United States, it doesn't sound very globalist and world-friendly of me, but we have two other parties.
	If we don't do this, then China is going to overrun Venezuela.
	They are already in there.
	They have deals that are not advantageous for anyone but China, and they don't always play fair.
	The Russians, who are in there mining, I think gold mainly, They have thousands of mercenaries, as the reports I'm getting, who are in there.
	I don't know if that's true or what they'll be doing.
	But, you know, it's obvious that this is the strategy, and here is John Bolton, the vicarious leaker on his yellow pad.
	Talking about the plan.
	We're looking at the oil assets.
	That's the single most important income stream to the government of Venezuela.
	We're looking at what to do to that.
	We want everybody to know we're looking at all this very seriously.
	We don't want any American businesses or investors caught by surprise.
	They can see what President Trump did yesterday.
	We're following through on it.
	If you think of a company like Citgo, which is owned by PDVSA, which is the state-run oil company there in Venezuela, we have a lot of those Citgo assets right here in the U.S. Is that something, for example, sir, that you're looking at?
	We're in conversation with major American companies now that are either in Venezuela or in the case of Citgo here in the United States.
	I think we're trying to get to the same end result here.
	You know, Venezuela is one of the three countries I call the troika of tyranny.
	It'll make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.
	It'd be good for the people of Venezuela.
	It'd be good for the people of the United States.
	We both have a lot at stake here making this come out the right way.
	So that sounds like the plan.
	Troika of tyranny.
	Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela.
	The Troika of tyranny.
	Had not heard that phrase.
	So Bolton, just as an aside, John and I have done some research on him, some unrelated to this research.
	Now we know why a mustache like he has is called a pornstache.
	I mean, the guy is a little odd in his hobbies.
	Porn stash.
	Yeah, he has a 70s porn stash.
	Totally.
	That's what it looks like.
	There's something he knows.
	By the way, I'm all in on the guy who gave us the original briefing that's in the refining business.
	Mm-hmm.
	And it's possible he's in the information refining business.
	As so many of our friends.
	He works for some information refining operation, but I would say that I'll buy that whole thing.
	You know, I like this.
	The Central Information Refinery.
	Yeah.
	I like that.
	The SIF. Central Information Refine.
	Sir.
	Sir.
	Refine.
	So being in the refining business doesn't...
	It seems to me to be so geopolitical, but apparently it is.
	Now...
	But I buy that.
	I believe that he is someone who is designed to give us this information properly.
	So now we have it.
	And I... Yes, I agree with that.
	A totally buy-in.
	Yeah.
	I totally buy it.
	So I'm not having a problem with that information.
	I'm just questioning the real origins of it.
	Now, the we've had other people.
	And I also think is assertion that we don't know what we're talking about, about Venezuela is probably true at that level.
	Sure.
	And now that's been corrected.
	Yeah.
	And I'll say it's been corrected in one show.
	So it wasn't that we've been dragging it out.
	So it is the central information refinery who we deal with.
	I like this.
	This is new.
	This is very good.
	Information refinery.
	Perfect.
	So we refined it and we got it, which is a plus.
	So let's listen to what the mainstream media has to say.
	Oh, yes.
	But let me, before we play the quick Venezuela hit, and by the way, NBC made this a very quick 48-second hit.
	I have the whole thing.
	It's very short.
	But before we do that, let's listen to the 43-second at the UN, the UN-Venezuela ambassador blasting the United States, pulling everything out that he could.
	Venezuelan ambassador to the United Nations, Jorge Valero, blasted the U.S.'s hypocrisy on Tuesday.
	Blasted!
	That's a little different than slammed and it's way different than lashed out.
	Blasted is...
	Venezuelan ambassador to the United Nations, Jorge Valero, blasted the U.S.'s hypocrisy on Tuesday.
	What does this government want?
	This government that doesn't recognize treaty, that doesn't recognize any of the agreements made around Iran and signed by various European countries, that launches a trade war with China, that threatens Russia with a nuclear war?
	That attacks in a very sadistic manner migrants from Central America who arrived there?
	That has built a wall, a criminal wall, that sequesters children to make them suffer?
	Children of migrants?
	And this government, this U.S. government, would have any moral authority to impose any diktat on Venezuela?
	Wow, man.
	He went to the wall.
	That's great.
	Oh, this guy, he just let it all hang out.
	I liked it.
	So here's the quick...
	This is the update from NBC and...
	I think they just want to keep the public this much informed and no further.
	Tonight, massive crowds supporting opposition leader Juan Guado calling for the ouster of Venezuelan's embattled leader Nicolas Maduro.
	It's a Cold War showdown.
	Guado, supported by the U.S. and most of Latin America, challenging Maduro, bankrolled by Russia, appearing on Russian state television thanking Vladimir Putin.
	Maduro even accusing President Trump of ordering a hit squad to kill him, trying to show military strength.
	U.S. officials again warning Maduro against any violence toward Guado or Americans.
	President Trump tweeting that he called Guado and reinforced strong United States support.
	This is not a U.S. initiative.
	This is an initiative for which all the credit belongs to the Venezuelan people.
	Tonight, the White House is tightening the financial squeeze on Maduro, blocking him from getting any revenue from his state-owned oil company.
	Oh, horrible.
	Orange man bad.
	Well, the Venezuelans that are refining information to us seem to be very happy with it.
	And noticeable is that none of them defend Guaido.
	They don't even talk about him.
	It's unimportant to them.
	Yeah.
	This narco state led by Maduro, it's pretty bad.
	Oh, it's been falling apart for a while.
	Yeah.
	It started with Chavez when we tried to do deals with him, and then He went nuts and started doing a TV show.
	Well, you remember Obama went over there and hung out with him?
	Didn't he?
	Oh, yeah.
	And so did Charlie...
	Not Charlie Sheen, but Sean Penn and all these people were hanging out with old Chavez.
	Yeah.
	And then, as per Chavez, the United States Intelligence Services gave him cancer and he died.
	That's what he was always saying.
	Yeah, he said, the CIA gave me cancer.
	Is that what he said?
	Yeah.
	It's possible.
	How old was he when he died?
	I don't know.
	Let's take a look.
	I really don't know.
	Not that old.
	He was 70s?
	Early 70s?
	Yeah.
	Still.
	He died at Hugo Chavez.
	Funny looking guy.
	Blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Now we don't laugh at appearances here on the No Agenda podcast.
	Do you have it yet?
	How long is this taking?
	I am sorry.
	Consult the book of Lolland.
	Okay, he was born 54 and he died in 2013.
	Usually they put his age, but for some reason they don't do it with him.
	That was in his 60s.
	Yeah, so he was 64, 63, 62.
	Yeah, it was not old at all.
	No, it would be 69, I think.
	Or it's 59.
	59.
	59.
	He also...
	That's young.
	He also knew about the earthquake machines that we deployed.
	He talked about that a lot.
	You know, weather modification.
	He was very open about what the tools that the elite...
	In fact, he didn't get to his birthday to age 58.
	Oh, poor guy.
	Yes, a very interesting piece of information came to me.
	As you know, I have a hard time believing that we landed on the moon, and this is not going to be the whole segment about that, but there's enough things that point in the direction of no proof.
	There's this issue with the Van Allen belts.
	You can look that up if you're interested.
	I think the thing that bothered me the most is that 10,000...
	Tapes, including not just all the footage of the Apollo moon landing, but also all the telemetry data.
	10,000 tapes were lost.
	NASA doesn't know where they are.
	It's annoying.
	And so over the years, I'm always looking for these little clues as to what other bull crap have we been told about this if it didn't happen.
	It was just a couple of years ago that...
	I think it was the ambassador to the Netherlands who had been...
	We had a moon rock.
	It was given either to the country or to the ambassador, and it turned out that moon rock was just a rock from Earth.
	Do you remember that story?
	I vaguely remember, but you can't really talk about any of this without playing theremin, at least from the beginning.
	There we go.
	I feel better now.
	All right.
	Well, it's always the truth that is the strangest.
	That's what I would do too, though.
	If I'm giving away moon rocks, which are worth millions of dollars, I would give just a rock.
	I have a lot of rocks in my backyard.
	I'd wash one off and Right.
	Well, you could work for NASA. So now they discover there's a problem with one of the largest moon rocks ever collected.
	Mission brought moon rocks back to Earth.
	Well, now scientists have made an amazing discovery.
	Amazing!
	They think some of that rock came from Earth and could be four billion years old.
	Uh-huh.
	The Earth rock was discovered on the Moon near the edge of the Cone Crater.
	It was part of the largest sample brought back by the Apollo 14 mission.
	It was nicknamed Big Bertha.
	So how did it get to the Moon?
	Well, the theory is around four billion years ago, an asteroid or comet hit the Earth.
	The impact sent rock hurtling through Earth's primitive atmosphere where it collided with the surface of the Moon.
	Back then, the Moon was three times closer to Earth than it is now.
	Researchers say the rock, which is similar to granite, contains feldspar, quartz, and zircon, common on Earth but not on the Moon.
	When researchers took a closer look, they discovered the rock is from the Hadean time, which shaped the solar system during the first billion years.
	It's thought the rock formed about 20 kilometers below the Earth's surface.
	The extraordinary find means there could be other little bits of Earth scattered on the Moon, a discovery that could help paint a better picture of Earth's earliest days.
	Call me skeptical.
	Yeah, there it is.
	Just feeding into your...
	Feeding you.
	It's feeding you.
	I need more of this information.
	I wasn't looking for this.
	We get slammed by an asteroid about once every 75 million years or 100 million.
	There's some cycle involved with that.
	Apparently, there's one of the guys, one of the big shots, one of the superstar physicists up at the Berkeley Livermore Labs or whatever.
	Lawrence Berkeley Labs, LBL, has this theory.
	And because of the nature of the die-offs, because I guess as our galaxy goes through some other galaxy once in a while, it goes through an asteroid belt.
	We get pelted and it kills everything.
	Oh, yay!
	Dinosaurs the last time this happened.
	And it kills most of mankind.
	I mean, we have all these issues.
	We have these kill-offs.
	If the New World Order elitists aren't trying to kill us, then the asteroid will.
	But they don't feel like waiting for 75 billion years.
	No, they want to do it now because they think they can run things with their planned economies.
	Anyway.
	So it's possible that this far-fetched story is true.
	Yeah, sure.
	Okay, that's good.
	I'd like the Central Information Refinery to at least inform me before I die.
	Just say, Curry, you were right.
	That's all I need.
	Wouldn't you rather meet some of the aliens that they have bottled up?
	Oh, I went through that scam already.
	Remember that?
	I was going to meet the alien.
	Oh, yeah, you were going to meet one of them.
	It was just a weird dude.
	Yeah, a weird dude who wanted to get into your pants.
	With tasty signals.
	Oh, gee, I totally missed the signals.
	Why are you touching my...
	Okay, all right.
	Yes, we have to raise our vibrations together.
	Okay.
	You're the alien.
	I'm going to show my sword by donating to No Agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on No Agenda in the morning.
	All right, we have a short list.
	We have a few people that helped us out here.
	Starting with Sir Sean in Mayock, North Carolina.
	Or Mayock, North Carolina, $100.
	Charles Schultz, 8008.
	Jonathan Rose, 8008.
	He's in Illinois.
	And there's only 8008s on here, but I did have an Easter egg on the last newsletter, and he says...
	I missed it.
	The Jew clicks on the Mossad agent meme...
	And discovers boobs.
	Israel Uberales.
	Love you guys.
	Sir Jono.
	Sir Jono of Israel.
	That's funny.
	Yeah, of course.
	The guys in Israel are like, hey, Mossad, click.
	Boobs.
	He's not in Illinois.
	He's in Israel.
	IL is for Israel.
	Yeah, he's in Netanya.
	It worked.
	That was a really good one.
	It worked for one guy.
	So, if we entertain one person per newsletter, I'm happy.
	Yeah, well, that's the old theory of everything.
	William Durkin, $80.
	He has an email that we should read, I suppose, but I don't have it in front of me.
	Brian Klimczak in Naperville, Illinois.
	He is in Illinois, 75.
	Sir Alan of Midlothian, 6173.
	He would like more details of Adam's life.
	Examples.
	Why, where, and how?
	Did he learn to fly rotary-winged aircraft?
	I'd like to know.
	It seems very suspicious to me.
	Oh, yeah.
	Did he ever learn anything?
	Did he really own and drive a Rolls Royce in the MTV days?
	Yes.
	Why did he drive it?
	Well, because I could afford it.
	Shouldn't you have had people for that?
	No, why didn't you drive it?
	Why didn't you have people drive it?
	I couldn't afford people to drive it for me.
	He was CEO of some company, yes.
	Think New Ideas.
	Well, I was CTO of Think New Ideas, but founder.
	Took it public in 96.
	People don't know any of that stuff.
	He was rich for a while.
	How long?
	What is he trying to...
	What is he writing a book?
	He was rich for a while.
	How long?
	How did he become poor?
	Well, back to the rotary.
	Back to flying helicopters.
	This is the point of the show when he says, John, stop blowing on that recorder until you've made some effort to learn how to play.
	What?
	No, that's really mean.
	Wait a minute.
	That's an insult.
	I play this thing like...
	I mean, I'm the Benny Goodman.
	Hit it, baby.
	See?
	We're a well-oiled machine.
	Yeah, no kidding.
	Anonymous, a 6008, the lopsided guy.
	Uh...
	It's Salafism, not Salafism.
	Oh, really?
	Salafism.
	Wow, that's new to me.
	That's what I thought, too.
	I didn't know it was Salafist?
	Salafist.
	That doesn't sound right.
	I need some.
	Back up.
	He says he's the Salafi listener who's no longer a douchebag.
	Well, if he's the Salafi, I mean the...
	Selafi.
	Okay, we need some more input from our dude's name, Mohammed.
	There's plenty of them.
	Yeah, bring it.
	I thought it was Selafi.
	Okay, well, we do have a Selafist on.
	That's good.
	He's keeping tabs on this.
	Sir Knight of the Blue Water Area, 5689.
	And that's...
	He also mentioned Sir Greg Davies there.
	A lot of Greg tributes.
	Robert Bruckner, 55-55.
	Jacob Hagen, 55-10.
	Baron Baba, High Point, 55-10.
	Steven Schnelker, I think, in New Haven, Indiana, 55-10.
	Then we have James Moore in San Pablo, California.
	Hey, San Pablo, one of the best run little cities in the Bay Area.
	So Mexican city, or Mexican, Latino.
	Latinx, yeah?
	But you go there, it's like clean.
	It seems like it's very well managed.
	Especially compared to Richmond.
	James Moore lives there.
	David Oliver in Calistoga, California, 51.
	How does Calistoga compare to San Pablo?
	Calistoga?
	Calistoga's a beautiful little town in the northern part of the Napa Valley.
	Winemaking town.
	They got Hot Springs.
	You can go there.
	It's kind of a tourist place.
	Hot Springs and Loose Women.
	Dynamite place.
	Baronet Sir Economic Hitman in Houston, Texas.
	50-01.
	The following people then are $50 donors.
	Name and location if we have it.
	Including Eric Dutro in Flint, Michigan.
	Michael, I'd like to get some reports from Flint.
	Yeah, how's the water?
	Michael Winget in West Allis, Wisconsin.
	David Becker, Parts Unknown.
	She said, I love it when you guys talk about technology.
	And then a short list.
	We're done.
	That's it?
	No, Iichi Kitagawa over here in San Francisco.
	Oh, that's new.
	He's the last $50 donor and he does it through a check through some system.
	And that's that.
	Okay.
	Very short list today.
	I'm very disappointed.
	Especially after that great deconstruction you did of the...
	Whoever was that complimented you earlier.
	Yes, and we did have a number of 2099s, but because they're under 50, we're always very careful, so we don't want to...
	They're all self-generated.
	Well, there weren't that many.
	One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight.
	There were eight.
	Yeah.
	Nine.
	Nine.
	It's appreciated.
	And everyone who supports the program in our value-for-value system, the only model that really seems to work, we've been doing it for 11 years and we expect to do it for at least another six months, we'll try to make it up to the 2020 election and then maybe a little bit beyond.
	But if the news stays like this, we may just have to give up and buy the farm.
	What farm?
	It's a very small farm in my case.
	Very, very cheap.
	A lot of land out there in Texas.
	That's what I would do if I were you.
	Oh, yeah.
	I'd buy like a 30-acre spread with a farmhouse and then work on building that thing.
	I mean, you could probably get one of those pretty cheap.
	And you'd love it.
	I mean, but you've got to check to make sure they have Google Fiber.
	Exactly.
	Yeah.
	Everywhere there's Google Fiber, there's a corridor of expensive property.
	Matters not.
	Thank you for those of you who are supporting us on one of our subscriptions.
	Those are always great, and it's always nice to see the whole community coming together.
	We have a fantastic network of value, and you can support that for our next program, which will be on Sunday.
	Go to dvorak.org.
	I do have a couple of karmas here.
	One for...
	Let me see.
	Where was it now?
	Oh, Sir Lou the Shoe needed a jobs karma, and we'll also put an F cancer karma there.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	You've got karma.
	It's your birthday, birthday.
	I'm so much.
	It is the last day of January for 2019, and here are the birthdays for the 31st.
	Lauren Kate Mahmood says happy birthday to her boyfriend Chad.
	He's turning 26, I think it's today.
	Jackson Butler turned 40 yesterday.
	Sir Big Johnson says happy birthday to his wife Dame Elizabeth.
	She celebrates today.
	Happy birthday Dame Elizabeth.
	Stephen Schnellker, happy birthday to his smoking hot wife.
	She has a birthday today.
	Josh Myers, also a smoking hot wife.
	She turns 34 today.
	His wife is Dana.
	Baronet, Sir Economic Hitman, turns 30 today.
	And we have a make good from Sir Brian Kaufman, which we missed a couple of days ago.
	And Patrick Wolfe accidentally got a birthday shout-out instead of for his son, Graham Wolfe, and I think we've corrected it with this.
	So, happy birthday from everybody here at the Best Podcast in the Universe!
	Long list of birthdays.
	A lot of Capricorns.
	A lot of Capricorns.
	That's right.
	Okay, we got you right here.
	We got a daming and a nighting.
	Nice.
	A daming and a nighting.
	So step on up.
	Adrian Drinkon.
	Step on up.
	Jackson Butler, both of you have supported the best podcast in the universe in the amount of $1,000 or more.
	That gives you a spot here at the coveted roundtable of our No Agenda Knights and Dames, and you get a title to go with it, so I hereby pronounce the KB Dame Adrian Dreckenhan and Sir Jackson, Knight of the Transisters.
	For you, we have Hookers and Blow, Rent Boys and Chardonnay.
	We've got Cookies and Vodka, Warm Beer and Cold Women, Taquito and Tequila.
	We've got Single Mouth Scotch, Early Times and BF4, Craw Ship and Cane Breaks, Mutt Ginger and gerbils, sparkling cider and escorts, bong hits and bourbon, geishas and sake, breast milk and pablum, and there it is, mutton and mead, a roundtable favorite.
	So both of you, scurry on over to noagendanation.com slash rings.
	Let Eric Schill know where to send said ring, the sealing wax.
	It's a signet ring as well as your certificate.
	Also on the way now that the new rings are out, Sir Greg Davies' ring.
	We'll also be sent to Dame Jennifer, and Dame Jennifer will be attending the Austin Meetup, which is on the 2nd of March, 3.30 p.m.
	in Austin at the Austin Beer Works.
	I don't know if anyone set up a meetup.com for that.
	We do have a meetup before that on the 22nd of February.
	Man, it's like I'm a comedian doing gigs.
	I'll be at Chuckles in Des Moines, Iowa.
	On the 22nd, 445 is when that starts.
	And I forgot the venue.
	I'll put it in the show notes.
	Go to meetup.com.
	You should be able to find it there.
	But again, I'll put it in the show notes.
	It's interesting.
	Des Moines is the place where everyone goes to announce.
	Well, that's because they have one of the first elections.
	The first vote of primary elections.
	Votes.
	They do one of the first early...
	They do voting before anyone else.
	So I'm thinking that me being there, I'll get the temperature.
	I'll know who people are thinking.
	Have you ever been to Des Moines?
	You know, I'm sure at some point in my career I did an in-store appearance for the shitty Top 40 radio station.
	But I can't remember it.
	That's a great little town.
	Yeah, so we have a wedding the next day.
	And so we're going there early to do the meet-up.
	And we have, I think, over 50 people scheduled already.
	I'm very excited.
	It's going to be great.
	Do a head count.
	Make sure to do a head count.
	Yes, I'll do a head count.
	Make sure.
	Okay, we've got a couple of things here.
	Since we were talking about Venezuela, we did mention democracy now, of course, is the socialist news.
	And they're all against everything going on because, you know, leave that guy in.
	He was voted in for after all.
	Yeah.
	Who cares where he was born?
	Yeah.
	Who cares?
	Constitution.
	Who cares about the Constitution?
	But they did bring on this investigative reporter called Alan Nairn.
	And it was mostly to talk about this Abrams character.
	Who's this?
	The guy that Trump just hired.
	Oh, yeah, the guy, the Iran-Contra guy.
	Yeah, the Iran-Contra guy, the war criminal.
	Hey, if you want to do a coup, do it with the right people.
	Get some pros in there.
	So that, you know, bringing this...
	Elliott Abrams, bringing this guy in...
	It's kind of a red flag.
	It makes it look as though, you know, even though you had that clip from NBC where Rubio said, well, you know, we had nothing to do with this.
	And other people say this.
	We didn't trigger this.
	We didn't have Hillary's hitmen go in there and do anything.
	It just started spontaneous.
	Not spontaneously, but the Venezuelan people got fed up.
	But if you're going to make it look like we did it, Do you think that Bolton hired him?
	I still don't understand what Bolton is doing in Trump's orbit.
	I don't either, because he's a neocon and Abrams is a neocon.
	These are warmongers.
	These are the kind of guys that Trump always bitches and moans about.
	Yeah, that's not very de-swampy of him.
	No, not at all.
	But let's listen to what Nairn says about Abrams on Democracy Now!
	He gives us the backgrounder that is worth listening to.
	Abe was the key man in Reagan administration policy towards Central America when that administration was abetting what a court recently ruled was a genocide in Guatemala, when the U.S. was backing the army of El Salvador in a series of death squad assassinations and massacres,
	and when the U.S. was invading Nicaragua with a Contra force, That went after what one US general described as soft targets, meaning civilians, things like cooperatives.
	Abrams later came back during the George W. Bush administration, joined the National Security Council, and was a key man in implementing the U.S. policy of backing Israeli attacks against Gaza when the U.S. refused to accept and was a key man in implementing the U.S. policy of backing Israeli attacks against Gaza when the U.S. refused to accept the
	And instead, Abrams and company backed a war operation to overturn the results of the election, backing the forces of Mohammed Dahlan.
	Some commentators have said, well, Abrams is not a Trump guy.
	He represents traditional, established U.S. foreign policy.
	And that's true.
	Yeah.
	Which, the oil business is also traditional American U.S. policy.
	Yeah, so they brought this guy in for a reason.
	He's obviously a hitman.
	How much do you think Tillerson had to do with this before he got ousted, or did he screw something up?
	Because he must have been all over this.
	This is a Tillerson-type operation.
	I mean, he would be the guy for that.
	I have no idea, because I always got the sense that Tillerson never got any direction, never really took any initiative, just a bumbler.
	But who knows?
	I mean, as the oil guy, you'd think he'd be all over this.
	Maybe he didn't do anything with oil because fearful that someone would call him out for being conflict of interest.
	Conflict of interest.
	Yes, conflict of interest.
	So Abrams apparently was on Charlie Rose in 1995.
	I got this clip.
	And he was with the same reporter, this guy, who apparently had been at each other.
	So I kind of...
	Except this reporter's take on things because if you look into him as being like compromised, you know, went to Georgetown and went to, you know, this Yale Law and then he went – no, he didn't do any of that.
	He was just – his background, he wasn't stationed in Berlin and then stationed in Tunisia.
	None of that.
	He's just an investigative reporter who seems like he doesn't – he's totally disconnected from the intelligence groups that run these guys.
	Hey, you got to fake it until you make it, right?
	So this guy was on with Abrams, on Charlie Rose, and he said he should be tried as a war criminal right there on the show.
	It was dynamite.
	I think you have to apply uniform standards.
	President Bush once talked about putting Saddam Hussein on trial for crimes against humanity, Nuremberg-style tribunal.
	I think that's a good idea.
	But if you're serious, you have to be even-handed.
	If we look at a case like this, I think we have to start talking about putting Guatemalan and U.S. officials on trial.
	I think someone like Mr.
	Abrams would be a fit subject for such a Nuremberg-style inquiry.
	But I agree with Mr.
	Abrams that Democrats would have to be in the dock with him.
	The Congress has been in on this.
	The Congress approved the sale of 16,000 M16s to Guatemala.
	In 87 and 88, they voted more military aid than the Republicans asked for.
	Again, I invite you and Elliot Abrams back to discuss what he did.
	Thanks, Charlie.
	Hold on one second, Elliot.
	Go ahead.
	Do you want to speak to the question if you want to be in the doc?
	It is ludicrous.
	It is ludicrous to respond to that kind of stupidity.
	This guy thinks we were on the wrong side in the Cold War.
	Maybe he personally was on the wrong side.
	I am one of the many millions of Americans.
	Mr.
	Abrams, we're on the wrong side in supporting the massacre of peasants and organizers.
	What I want to do is I want to ask the following question.
	Absolutely, and that's a crime.
	That's a crime, Mr.
	Abrams, for which people should be tried.
	We'll put all the American officials who won the Cold War in the dock.
	You know, it's never too late.
	You know, the funny thing is, this Abrams was...
	And Charlie did nothing about this.
	Abrams made the point that it was the Cold War that we went and massacred a bunch of people in Guatemala and kind of screwed up that country.
	What did it have to do with the Cold War against Russia?
	I mean, and then he says, hey, this guy, you know, he's against the Cold War.
	I mean, he's against being on our side in the Cold War.
	It's got nothing to do with it.
	And Rose said zip about, hey, we're not talking about the Cold War.
	We're talking about Guatemala.
	No, no, that didn't happen.
	But anyway, I thought it was a very funny exchange.
	Nobody's going after Abrams.
	Again, it's never too late.
	We can still do Nuremberg trials.
	They're fun.
	Yeah, they won't do it.
	Nuremberg trials are great.
	Yeah, it's not happening.
	Hey, I come from the front lines of technology to discuss something with you.
	Yeah?
	You know I've been messing around with a pie hole.
	I just think it's a great name.
	Piehole is a software package that's open source.
	You can download it and install it.
	Typically, you run it on a Raspberry Pi, which is a very inexpensive $25 computer that's pretty much complete.
	It's just a board with some chips on it, but you can get it with Wi-Fi.
	You pretty much plug it in.
	You burn an SD card with whatever you need.
	You stick it in, and the thing kind of works.
	I mean...
	Anyone can do this, certainly with a little bit of help from some of the people in the No Agenda value network if you needed it.
	Now, so what this does is you load block lists, which are also open source put together by communities, people who are looking at things that are spying on you mainly.
	So I think it initially started as a way to block ads on your home network.
	And that turned into blocking not just ads, but trackers.
	And it is because I've been watching the logs go by.
	First of all, my internet is sped up by 20% feels like just because I'm not loading all this crap anymore.
	But I was very surprised.
	I was reading on the piehole Reddit that there's also a way to stop Roku from tracking you.
	And I've been reading what the Roku box does.
	Holy crap.
	It scans your network.
	Every minute.
	And reports to Homebase.
	It has 25 different tracking servers it reports to.
	And it reports stuff like your network card, your NIC card information, what kind of devices you have.
	It's reporting a lot of information.
	And so I'm like, well, of course I want to install these.
	And usually the block lists have everything so that it'll just still work.
	For instance, Tina still uses Instagram.
	That doesn't work anymore.
	Facebook, Instagram, that doesn't work in my house anymore.
	You block the tracking server, which is graph.instagram.com, and it stops working, which is fine.
	We're all happy with that.
	But the Roku...
	So I'm looking at this thing.
	The Roku is not activated.
	It's on, but I'm not even watching TV. I'm watching the log file of the piehole.
	John, I touch the remote.
	Immediately it starts reporting back.
	I just touched it.
	There's an accelerometer or something in it.
	Actually, there is.
	The remote on the Roku acts as like a Wii controller.
	Ah, okay.
	You can turn on a pointer on the screen, and by moving the remote, you can move the pointer around on the screen.
	So that, but what it's doing...
	So it does have those capabilities.
	Okay.
	Well, it's also reporting that immediately.
	It's like, hey, someone touched me.
	Pay attention.
	What's he doing?
	How's he holding?
	Is he standing?
	Is he sitting?
	Is he close?
	What's he doing?
	So I'm like, holy crap.
	Pretty much.
	And so you'd be very surprised what kind of spying is going on.
	Microsoft Windows is unbelievable.
	Why does Bing have to be talked to every minute?
	I don't even use Bing.
	My browser's not even open.
	It's talking to Bing.
	There's all kinds of stuff.
	Block, block, block, block, block.
	And then I come across...
	So, you know, this is the world we live in.
	We're tracked just by all kinds of stuff.
	And you have no idea what really is going on except building great profiles of you.
	And then I read a very interesting story, which I want to peg at a timeline in history as maybe a tipping point, very important.
	Facebook is now in some hot water because they had an app in the App Store which included a VPN. And the concept of this app, and it wasn't the regular Facebook app, is that if you downloaded and installed this app, The VPN would, with your knowledge, spy on everything you're doing on your phone.
	So anything that's running all went through Facebook.
	So you have to envision it as your phone's connected to the internet, but it has a tunnel straight to Facebook.
	They analyze everything with every app, you know, GPS information, accelerometer, just you name it.
	And then, of course, it connects you to the internet if you're using it.
	And they were paying people for this.
	Now, Facebook or Apple told them to stop that.
	They stopped and they did it again by putting it into some research app and kind of hiding it.
	And now Apple is like, oh, you're kicked off.
	Their apps haven't been kicked out of the store, but they've lost their developer certificate.
	So there's all kinds of feuding going on for something else.
	That Facebook was very open about.
	They were advertising mainly to teens, millennials, so not just teens but millennials, $40 a month if you install this app so we can track everything you're doing.
	And this is the tipping point.
	There were 10 million people who at one point or another signed up for this program to sell all their data, everything they're doing, for $40 a month.
	And while this has created outrage, I think it is the most wonderful thing that has ever happened.
	Thank you, Facebook.
	Thank you, 10 million people, for putting a price on data.
	I mean, I'm sure that there are companies who would pay $50 for you to do this, or maybe some combination.
	This is turning the model upside down, and I don't think anyone sees it yet, but I feel that it's a very interesting opportunity to turn the spying around into, no, I'll give you my data for X amount and under these conditions.
	I think this is being misinterpreted.
	I think it's a fantastic thing that has taken place.
	It is the first step where consumers may be able to get the upper hand.
	It's almost like carbon pricing.
	You know, we're still waiting for a price on carbon.
	And now we have a price for your data and your life, your digital life.
	$40 a month.
	It's a good start.
	Well, the way you provide us with this information, the way you put it out there, I think you're on to something.
	I like it too.
	I think it's a fantastic idea that everyone got all bent out of shape about.
	This is great, people.
	Are you kidding me?
	We just need more companies doing it.
	And I think that there's lots of people who would say, yeah, I'll give something away.
	For $40 a month?
	I'd take a $40 thing if I could, yeah.
	$500 a year?
	Yeah, exactly.
	I don't even use my phone.
	Exactly.
	Well, the new Johnny English movie.
	With Mr.
	Bean.
	Oh, yes.
	He talks about this.
	The whole movie is about a guy who's a Silicon Valley data monger.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, and he's going to take over the world if we don't stop him in this bumbling spy.
	What's the name of this movie?
	Johnny English something.
	It's the new Johnny English movie.
	It's like this guy, Atkinson, Rowan Atkinson.
	Rowan Atkinson.
	The actor has not done anything from all you can tell for 10 years.
	But I would say this movie just came out.
	Huh.
	Take a look.
	I'd say that this movie...
	Let me see if I can find the full name of it.
	It is Johnny English something.
	I enjoyed it.
	I thought it was a...
	Is it on the Netflix?
	Is Johnny English Strikes Again?
	Is it on the Netflix or the Amazons?
	I don't think so.
	Theaters?
	You saw it in the theater?
	Yeah.
	Johnny English Strikes Again.
	They give it three out of five stars.
	Nobody likes the movie because they hate the actor.
	There are two bits in here that, as someone who admires good writing, there's at least two bits in here, one in particular, that is just like, you go, oh my god, why didn't anybody think of this before?
	Where he puts on a, people will see this, I won't even give it away, but he put, let's just put it this way, this is where the bit starts, he puts on some VR thing, and then it goes from there, and it's very entertaining.
	I thought it was a good movie.
	Excellent.
	Well, also, several people pointed out that, you know, we're talking about 5G, that the Kingsman 2 had a variation of this, you know, everyone has a phone, it controls you, and then a central point can kill you.
	Did you see Kingsman 2?
	Yeah.
	You know, I have not seen Kingsman 2, and I should have because I really like Kingsman 1, which is similar where they put little implantations in everyone's head and you could blow their head off if they were disobedient.
	Yes.
	It's a very good point.
	And the best part, actually, we have so many network admins, dudes named Ben, who have checked in.
	A couple of things I've learned.
	One, 5G is actually the protocol.
	So that's what AT&T is doing, is they're rolling out 5G on 4G radios, which go up to about 6 gigahertz.
	The other thing about 5G is because it's being made into this national emergency, and I have my thoughts about that, if we don't have 5G, we're all going to die.
	Cars will not drive automatically.
	Your fridge won't know how to order the milk.
	All the stuff that we've been promised, the flying cars, all of this will be possible with 5G. It's such an emergency that I think the push is to make it national infrastructure.
	Already it's very simple for the telecommunications companies with today's regulations to put these things anywhere they want.
	And if you make it part of our national infrastructure, they can do pretty much whatever they want.
	So they're just getting their boxes in.
	It's about getting your boxes in close.
	We're looking at some of these higher range 5G cell systems, anywhere from 60 to over 100 watts.
	And at the higher frequencies, that'll be interesting.
	But we do have a possible rollout.
	Yeah.
	It'll be interesting when the birds, when you notice there's no more birds in your neighborhood.
	That's, oh, that'll be great.
	We have grackles here in Austin.
	Oh, grackles are funny.
	No, they're very scary.
	They're annoying.
	They sit on the tree at night.
	They make noise.
	Yeah, but they just sit there looking at you.
	All down 2nd Street.
	Every tree is, it looks like the tree's black, but it's just the birds sitting in there.
	They're creepy.
	Of course, the first people to try...
	Adam hates birds.
	I do.
	No, I don't.
	I really don't hate birds.
	Anyway, the first 5G rollout of some significance.
	Where are we going to fry people first?
	Let's go down under!
	The US unveiled sweeping charges.
	Oh shoot, this one I mean.
	And today we are very proud that we are bringing the very first application of 5G using our new 5G network to provide this new home broadband service.
	We are proud to be able to bring this to residences across Australia.
	Starting right here with two suburbs in Canberra, in the Dixon suburb where we're at, and Manica, and one in Glendening in Sydney.
	And gradually over the next 14 months, in capital cities across Australia and in regional cities, we will be bringing this Optus 5G Home Broadband Service as we deploy 1,200 base stations by March 31st, 2020.
	Alright, Canberra, you'll be on the Barbie.
	You'll be the Barbie.
	You'll be the Barbie.
	Now, I've really been thinking about this 5G. And in the world of growth, where every industry has to continue to expand and grow, and we're seeing the strains of this, like healthcare, you know, prices are so overinflated.
	Why?
	Because these companies need to grow.
	They need to do more.
	Every company needs to grow and...
	I think that this religion, this 5G religion is really going to come down to that and the fight with China.
	Yeah, we have a trade war, but really it surrounds even the trade war, the stealing of technology, all these accusations.
	It comes down to 5G, who's going to be in charge of it, who's running it, who runs whose network.
	And the Wall Street Journal had a decent breakdown of the 5G war, which, as you probably figured out, includes Huawei in China.
	The U.S. unveiled sweeping charges against Chinese tech giant Huawei on Monday, formally accusing the company and its affiliates of stealing trade secrets and violating Iran sanctions.
	Nearly two dozen charges were filed in two separate indictments.
	First, in Washington state, authorities charged Huawei with stealing technology from T-Mobile.
	The investigation stemmed from a civil suit brought by T-Mobile in 2014.
	Back when Huawei supplied phones for T-Mobile, the company said that the Chinese firm stole secrets about its testing robot named TAPI. Huawei entities directed employees to take photographs, take measurements, Now,
	the Justice Department is alleging that the theft was part of an organized effort.
	And that Huawei even paid bonuses to employees who successfully stole confidential information.
	Huawei has denied wrongdoing.
	And second, in an indictment unsealed in Brooklyn, the US alleged that Huawei, its chief financial officer and two of Huawei's affiliates were involved in violating US sanctions against Iran.
	Huawei, through its executives and others, repeatedly claimed to U.S. government officials and various banks that the company, its subsidiaries and partners operated in accordance with U.S. sanctions and export laws and in accordance with EU and U.N. sanctions.
	As charged in the indictment, those claims were false.
	The indictment includes charges against the company's CFO Meng Wanzhou for her personal involvement in misleading financial institutions.
	Ms.
	Meng is the Huawei founder's daughter.
	She was arrested in Canada in December and is fighting extradition.
	The U.S.'s global campaign against Huawei has enraged China.
	And the latest indictments are likely to escalate tension between Washington and Beijing, just as trade talks are set to resume.
	Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross tried to make it clear that these charges are separate from trade discussions.
	To be clear, these indictments are law enforcement actions and are wholly separate from our trade negotiations with China.
	Huawei products have largely been blocked from the U.S., but even without access to the U.S. market, Huawei is the world's largest maker of telecom equipment.
	Huawei poses a threat to the U.S., officials say, because it's positioning itself as a global leader in 5G, the ultra-fast wireless technology that will soon be connected to everything, but that could also be vulnerable to cyberattacks.
	So the more I think about this, the more I hear these types of reports, I think that the move has got to be towards some kind of nationalization or some way to get it subsidized by the Treasury, basically, to print money, to smother the Chinese or whatever it is.
	Somewhere we've got to bring this to a national level.
	And all this other stuff may just be window dressing.
	I'm sure, you know, Chinese have a different culture.
	They don't care.
	Everything's from the people, so they don't see you as stealing, to paraphrase.
	No, this is, I was told this once years ago by a communist when I was in the Soviet Union.
	They said, we believe that all intellectual property is the property of the people.
	Right.
	And that's the Chinese thing, too.
	And they go, okay, well, they only pay lip service to our notions.
	Right.
	But this 5G, there's a lot riding on it.
	It's like, I think healthcare is also, you know, the insurance industry.
	Let's call it the healthcare industry.
	It's big pharma.
	It's bankers with insurance.
	It's all of this.
	I think their version of growth, and maybe this is why it's happening, is let's give everybody free healthcare that the government pays for.
	And then let's let a lot of extra people in.
	It's like, you know who's going to win.
	It's not going to be the taxpayer, but someone's going to make out like a bandit because they expand to an infinite number.
	Free healthcare and bring in all kinds of extra people.
	Let them just run in.
	There's a formula for success.
	It's a winning success.
	But of course, some people also take it a little too far.
	The Sackler family...
	This is not something that is in the news a lot because it's pharmaceutical.
	And I was surprised to see this on Good Morning America, but they did a piece about Purdue.
	Purdue is a company owned by the Sackler family that owns the patents on OxyContin.
	And who, well, the report explains how brazen these people are.
	Michael, good morning to you.
	The National Safety Council says Americans are more likely to die from an accidental opioid overdose than a car crash.
	This morning, the attorney general of Massachusetts is accusing the billionaire Sackler family of contributing to the epidemic, saying they knew the risks but pushed the drug anyway.
	The complaint alleges certain members of the Sackler family, who are worth $13 billion, were aware of the dangers of OxyContin but continued to push sales.
	According to newly filed court documents, when OxyContin was first released, Richard Sackler, Purdue's former president and son of the company founder, is quoted saying at a company event that the launch would be followed by a blizzard of prescriptions.
	The complaint also says years later, as evidence of widespread abuse of OxyContin began to mount, Sackler urged the company to blame addicts, allegedly writing in an email, we have to hammer on the abusers in every way possible.
	They are the culprits and the problem.
	They are reckless criminals.
	Yeah.
	has cherry-picked from among tens of millions of emails and other business documents produced by Purdue.
	The complaint is littered with biased and inaccurate characterizations of these documents.
	Purdue and the individual defendants will aggressively defend against these misleading allegations.
	Now, Purdue Pharma's statement goes on to say that we continue to fight for balance in the public discourse so that society can simultaneously help pain patients in need and create real solutions to the complex problem of addiction.
	The company and Sackler family are facing dozens of other lawsuits across the country.
	That's nice.
	Kill people.
	Blame them.
	Well, the worst part about it was the idea behind OxyContin and their sales pitch was it's not as addictive as morphine or any of the other things.
	Yeah, thanks, guys.
	So they went with the sales pitch.
	This stuff's not as addictive, so you can just go ahead and write prescriptions.
	Write it up.
	This is the thing that also has some ill effects to certain people.
	I mean, Rush Limbaugh got strung out on this stuff.
	Oh, big time, yeah.
	And, of course, he used to be a big talker about people getting strung out and they were criminalists.
	But then he stopped talking about it.
	But it made him deaf.
	Yes.
	And it has the effect of overdosing or taking too much of this stuff.
	It apparently just blows out your ears.
	I didn't realize that that's where his deafness came from.
	That's interesting.
	I didn't know that.
	That's what everybody thinks.
	And I heard his show...
	Before he got his, whatever, he had some operations to get his hearing kind of back, only it's not the same, but there was a period of time where I heard him when he was deaf.
	Still doing his show, but he couldn't hear himself very well, and he did not sound anything like Rush Limb.
	It was really, I'm thinking, who's this guy?
	Yeah, now he has the implants.
	Yeah, he's got some implants, and so now he sounds like himself again, but he didn't sound like himself when he was just flying blind, as it were, and it was a very interesting voice he had.
	It was not It was not as bombastic.
	He's got a great voice.
	I guess you lose the hair in your ears, which is exactly what makes you hear.
	That could be.
	It's not good.
	It's not good stuff.
	What?
	Viagra makes you blind?
	Uh-oh, John.
	What?
	What?
	What are people telling you in that chat room?
	Alright, how are we doing?
	We're done, actually.
	I got that funny one.
	Okay, bring one more.
	This is only, I don't know, eight seconds.
	This is from a man on the street thing that was done by some podcaster.
	Of course, he laughs a lot at the end, which makes it funnier.
	But this is a question, a man on the street question about what is the Cold War?
	I'm trying to find a Cold War question.
	Ah, okay.
	Gotcha.
	Cold War.
	What was that about?
	Freeing the slaves?
	What was her answer?
	Freeing the slaves.
	Cold War.
	What was that about?
	Freeing the slaves?
	Ah, yes.
	We really don't deserve to be a country.
	Freeing the slaves.
	Freeing the slaves.
	All right, nice.
	All right, everybody.
	That's it for today's deconstruction.
	I think we've brought you a lot.
	We didn't get to the...
	The Roe v.
	Wade conversations.
	I'm sure there'll be more outrage over that.
	It's all posturing.
	It's all for votes.
	It's all about the election.
	And it's quite disgusting the way it's being presented on all sides.
	Sunday, I think we should try and shed some light and deconstruct what's going on there.
	And I'm sure you'll be here then.
	Yes.
	You got time?
	Okay.
	I will be here as well.
	I'll be here.
	You'll be here.
	I'll be here.
	I'll be here.
	Will you guys be here?
	Hey, you.
	Will you be here?
	Coming to you from downtown Austin, Texas.
	Capital of the Drone Star State here in FEMA Region No.
	6 on all governmental maps in the 5x9 Cludio in the Common Law Condo.
	In the morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where it's supposed to be three days of rain, we haven't had, it's not raining, so I think they're wrong.
	I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We return on Sunday with another best podcast in the universe.
	Thanks to Mixmaster Rulfi, Tom Starkweather and Alex, and L-O-B-G for end-of-show mixes.
	Adios, mofos, and such. Adios, mofos, and such. mofos, and such.
	And, uh, she says no.
	Breaking point, breaking point, breaking point.
	You know what that means.
	I've never had a fro.
	I've never had a fro.
	I've never had a...
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	Don't worry.
	Be happy.
	Never heard of it.
	Never heard of sugar plastic flakes?
	How much does an 18-ounce box of Cheerios cost?
	An 18-ounce box of Cheerios?
	I don't eat Cheerios.
	Here's the deal.
	Donald Trump, have you ever used a coupon in your life?
	Well, I've never even gone to a, really, a food market with my wife, so...
	No!
	So, yeah, you said, so...
	Why?
	So, yeah, you said, so...
	I don't eat Cheerios, I'm sorry.
	Okay.
	Never heard of it.
	I worked out a lot, ate a lot of Wheaties.
	But, I mean, let's look at the facts of what I've tried to say.
	I don't eat Cheerios, I'm sorry.
	Okay.
	Never heard of it.
	You know, if you go out and you want to buy groceries, you need a picture on a card.
	You need ID. Why?
	You need ID. Never heard of it.
	Why?
	You need ID. I don't eat Cheerios, I'm sorry.
	Okay.
	Never heard of it.
	The best podcast in the universe.
	Mopo.

▲