20 Episode results for "Attorney General William Barr"
Friday, June 26, 2020
"On. WHO's behind a series of Justice Department actions that seemed to benefit the president and his allies Attorney General William Barr says he is, but he also says there was no political pressure by there is no such pattern. I'm David, Greene with Rachel Martin, and this is up I from NPR news. The race to find a vaccine for covid nineteen has yielded sixteen promising candidates with cases soaring across the US or any of those new drugs viable. And finally a soldier in Kentucky Faces Federal Terrorism Related Charges. Prosecutors say he was part of a Satanic White Supremacists, network and plan to attack his own unit. We're dealing with a threat thing should. Be More domestic is the military doing enough to route far right extremists from its own ranks. Stay with us. We've got the news. You need to start your day. This message comes from NPR sponsor American media producer plague untold stories of AIDS and the Catholic Church a podcast exploring how lgbt Catholics fought worked and grieved the early days of the HIV AIDS crisis available wherever you listen to podcasts, support also comes from NPR sponsor facebook. It's a challenging time for small businesses across the country. FACEBOOK's business resource have offers free tools to help manage your business and support, customers and employees learn more at facebook dot com slash resource. Attorney General William Barr says he is responsible for a series of actions that appear to benefit president trump, but the attorney general insists there is no political influence in those decisions from the White House now just to recap here. Bar replaced a US attorney, who was thought to be investigating matters of interest to the president. A whistle blower alleged political interference in the sentencing. Sentencing recommendation for the president's friend, Roger Stone an appeals court upheld a move to drop charges against the president's former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn now all of this led to a big question firm. Our colleague Stevens keep. How do you answer a voter who sees a pattern here of continually upholding the personal interests of the President I'd say that there is no such. Such pattern I would say that that is a media narrative that has been adhere to where things that happen. All the time in the Department of Justice are are misrepresented to the public and cast is somehow suspicious. Steve sat down with the Attorney General and the Attorney General's Office yesterday and Steve is with us now How does bar make the case that? That, there is nothing suspicious. Originally wanted to take cases one at a time and said there were specific reasons to justify each action. He said for example it was just a personnel move. When he announced the Jeffrey Berman was leaving as United States attorney. In New, York Jeffrey Berman was interim. He was appointed by. The court has a temporary US attorney holding the Fort? He was living on borrowed time from the beginning, and when a really strong powerful candidate raised his hand. That is Jay Clayton currently. The Chairman of the SEC wanted to go back to New York, but very much would desire this job. I view that as an opportunity to put in a very strong person as a presidential appointment to that office, he said the president has the right to appoint a US attorney, but the thing is Berman. Briefly declined to step aside his critic said the US attorney was working on cases of interest to the president. David said. And his replacement was the guy with no experiences of federal prosecutor. Ultimately Berman did leave after his agreed is trusted, deputy would take over for now, and it does look like by the way under Senate rules. The Senate won't confirm the replacement unless New York senators who are Democrats approve so there is a check on the president's power here right, so does the Attorney General admit that it at least looks bad when the president makes law enforcement. Enforcement moves that seem to benefit him. No, not at all now. Bar has said in the past. The president has the power to supervise law enforcement, even a case where he has an interest, but in these specific cases. He doesn't admit there's any conflict at all. The president clearly has an interest in the election though I. How does bar see his role in making that election? Election secure. He says he's really concerned about foreign interference. Now that Rachel is obviously a bipartisan concern, but there's debate over what bar is concerned about interference with mail in ballots. Some states want to lean more heavily on them. Because of the pandemic, the president is falsely said there's evidence of fraud in mail in ballots. Massive evidence is what the president is falsely, said the attorney. Attorney General knows that a lot of people voted by mail in the past, but he questions doing so many this year I'm talking about comprehensive rule where all the ballots are essentially male, and and there's so many occasions for fraud there that cannot be policed I think I think it would be very bad, but but one of the things I mentioned was the possibility of counterfeiting. Did. You have evidence to raise that specific concern, not obvious, so he says he has no evidence, but that it's obvious there could be a problem. He's faced a lot of pushback here as the president has because there is a track record with mail in ballots Washington State for example, is done elections almost entirely by mail for many years and officials there say the ballots have various characteristics that make them very hard to counterfeit. In fact, the Secretary of State of Washington state invited the president and the Attorney General to come to Washington state. If they'd like and see what the security measures are like I put that statement bar and he said he'd be happy to call her. All right see we appreciate it. NPR Steve inskeep with that. Sit Down interview with the Attorney General thanks Steve to do it. All right after the lockdowns and all the lives lost. The pandemic in this country is getting worse, not better. That's right yesterday. The US actually reached another grim record more than forty thousand new corona virus cases in a single day, and the number of Americans who have been infected with virus is likely ten times higher than our current estimates that is according to the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Robert Redfield despite the surge of covid nineteen cases in the country president trump tweeted late last night that the country quote will not be shut down all the while. Pharmaceutical companies around the world are racing to develop a vaccine for this disease. We've got NPR. Science correspondent Joe Palca with us has been tracking all the information when it comes to the possible Vaccines Hijo Mourning Rachel. So how many vaccines are we talking about? How many are in the pipeline? Well? According to the WHO there are sixteen sixteen that are actually in human trials, there's more like two hundred that are actually being tested at various places this important to understand what a vaccine is trying to do. A vaccine works by showing our immune system something that looks like a virus, and that prompts immune system to make. Let's call antibodies so if the real virus should show up our immune systems ready to fight it off. and Algae I've been using you. Let's say you WANNA. You show somebody a picture of someone and say look. If this person shows up at your door, don't let them in. But. Here's the thing to pursue that picture analogy a little bit further. You have to decide how to present the picture. Do you go door to door? De Show it to people, or can you put it on highway billboards, or do you pop up ads on a computer? So vaccine designers have to choose what picture the virus to us, and how best to show it to the immune system. So what are some different ways that they have done that well? The Immune System sees proteins. The virus surface so most, if not all vaccines are using something, the most prominent protein on the virus surface called the spike protein. Now some vaccines worked by just injecting a Bolles of these spike proteins into somebody. There's actually a synthetic version of spike poteen, some work by taking the actual corona virus, and killing it, rendering it inactive and using that inactivated virus as the basis of a vaccine, some employees what's called a viral vector that carries inspections into the body and some just use the genetic material for making the spike protein. That's either a or DNA inject that directly into somebody. Which vaccine is the closest Joe I mean? This is the question right well. Furthest along is the University of Oxford working with AstraZeneca. It's one of these so called viral vector approaches, and they actually began what's called efficacy testing, which is comparing a group who get the vaccine group who don't and seeing if the vaccinated people are protective and don't get sick There's another vaccine that also works with viral vector by Chinese biotech company. And then there's an American company called Maduna that's using what's called an rn, a vaccine that's injecting the viral genetic material directly into somebody and you know it's possible that we'll have some idea of whether any of these vaccines are. Ones that are still being in early testing. We'll have a good idea possibly by the end of the year. If any of them actually work. Okay, and we know that everyone's working really really hard to get one of these vaccines to work soon, but we just don't know exactly when that will be NPR's Joe Palca. Thank you. You're welcome. All right does the US military have a problem with white supremacists and other extremists. A number of incidents in recent history have raised this very question. Actually this week, the Justice Department labeled US Army. Private Ethan meltzer traitor, calling him quote. The enemy within Meltzer is a twenty two year old soldier from Louisville, Kentucky who is facing federal terrorism related charges, prosecutors say he plotted an ambush of his own unit as part of a satanic white supremacist network. We've got NPR's. Hannah lamb with us this morning to talk about. It Hannah Good Morning. What exactly is private melts are charged with doing. Morning yet? He faces many charges including conspiracy and attempt to murder. US military. And all this is tied to what the Justice Department is calling a plot by Meltzer to ambush his own unit once they were deployed to Turkey the indictment says Meller joined the army in two thousand eighteen at within a year was a member of a UK based neo. Nazi group called the order of nine angles. prosecutors say meltzer found out he was deployed to Turkey and allegedly pass details about that deployment to members of the group, including the location and the defenses. Defenses of his unit the court papers include transcripts of Meltzer saying he's willing to die in this operation that he sees it as part of a greater cause, so authorities consider him an acceleration as someone who believes in violence to collapse society and create a new order, and for White supremacists that end goal is typically an ethnos state. It's a trend we've seen in a series of recent attacks, and now here it is popping up in a high profile military investigation. I mean we've seen several cases right involving far-right extremists in the military in the past couple of years. Can you just take a step back? How widespread is this problem? Well short answer is we don't have a good handle on the scope. Defense officials have reported a slight increase in the number of domestic terrorism investigations involving servicemembers, but that's only one category, and it doesn't address her to the full picture of extremism in the ranks, so there is a need for better data. It's been a frustration for civil rights, groups and extremism researchers who've been asking for years for the military to improve tracking and screening. So. What's a military doing about us? Military officials have said that they are expanding screen, and they are working more closely with their counterterrorism authorities partnering to address Extremism But lawmakers, extremism monitors, and other critics say you know the Pentagon can do much more. One policy often mentioned as the distinction. The military draws between simply belonging to an extremist organization and actively participating in one analysts. I've spoken with say there should be the same zero tolerance policy for violent white supremacist as there is for US llamas extremist. Here's Colin Clark with a Sufen group in Washington loop. This was an affinity for jihadism. They wouldn't say well you're. You're not an active participant. You just have a real affinity for Isis. Go First Hint than anybody expressed sympathy for Reggie Auto Group. They would be done. interesting Hannah I mean we're at this moment when big US institutions are struggling with how to address the stomach, racism is extremism in the military white supremacy part of that conversation. It is and we've. We've seen signs at the Pentagon is making it more of a priority and a case like meltzer's at this moment makes it even more urgent. You know right now. There's a lot of attention to the campaign to change. The confederate names of bases and researchers hope it's also a moment for the military to think about what else they can do to keep extremists out of the ranks. NPR's Hanna Hannah thank you. We appreciate it, thanks. and that is a first for this. Friday June. Twenty-sixth I'm Rachel Martin, and I'm David Greene up I is produced by Lily Than Mattel Gov. Our editors are Katharine, whalen and each J. Social Strategist is Casey new. Knicks and our executive producer is can you young and since the news does not stop when this podcast is over, you can follow us on twitter. We are at first, and we'll give you a daily roundup of the most important stories of the day. Forget up first airs on Saturday to Lulu. Garcia Navarro Got Simon have the news. It'll be here in this feed or wherever you get your podcast. Have a great weekend. Oh. She was once undocumented. Now she writes about the undocumented immigrants. We often ignore day-laborers, housekeepers, deliveryman people who don't inspire Hashtag or t shirts. That's coming up on code switch.
Barr Code: The White House & Police Reform
"It's Thursday July ninth. How much do police need to change? We asked the nation's top prosecutor restart ear. In an exclusive interview, Attorney General William Barr says it's not just a few bad apples. I do think that it is A. A widespread phenomenon, but is the trump administration ready to make substantial reforms to the nation's police precincts. Pierre Thomas has the exclusive. Your employer has to cover contraceptives writes the law will the Supreme Court says not necessarily they don't WanNa. Provide it directly. They don't WanNA provide it through. These accommodations. Don't WanNA, provide it at all a couple of big wins for religious conservatives, and they're called lagging indicators for a reason they lagged. They're heading towards total capacity. And that's really when you'll see death. Start to power why the death count's we hoped weren't coming are finally taking upwards in the sun belt. From ABC News this is start here. Brad Milkey. Full died in Minneapolis after a police officer knelt on his neck in front of. Bystanders, this country has undergone a recommended. We just want peace like. As we just want to stop dying, there was the outrage and the frustration, not just over George Floyd, the other black Americans killed at the hands of police, a new developments in the death of Brianna Taylor. The black woman killed in her home as police served a no knock. Warrant of authority is moving to fire one of the officers in vault. Then the eyes of the world were. Were on them. Some police officers still found themselves in situations where critic said they escalate the violence. One officer is her telling. Cling to stop things escalate McLean allegedly attempted to grab an officer's gone. The officers then subdue him to the ground and place them in a karate control hold that in turn transformed into a wider conversation about symbols of eight whether racists or more emboldened than ever. So essentially these police you see right here and they're advancing again in the middle of was this moment Washington in which just ahead of a presidential photo, walk half an hour. Curfew steady and Now there's just a lot of violence erupting Dan backup back then will police officers plunged into a crowd, dispersing protesters with gas, pepper balls, and shoving stragglers to the ground that advanced by police was personally ordered by the attorney. General himself William Ball. In hindsight, it was at the best way to help the situation. Well I think that the plan of action was to not experience another night of rioting yesterday. Attorney, General. Barr met with leaders of the Black Community in Columbia South Carolina including the only black Republican in the Senate who's been pushing for police reforms. And then he sat down from exclusive interview with ABC's Chief Justice correspondent Pierre Thomas, year joins us now on the road, so he can get back to Washington and time for a good morning America. This morning at Pier. This was fascinating. Members of the trump administration have said that there is no such thing as his stomach racism in policing. But how does the nation's top prosecutor see that? What did he tell you? It was someone new US answer, but he went pretty far in making clear that he believes that this quote, widespread bias against African Americans in how they're dealt with sometimes by police. No I mean well. The word systemic I'm not sure whether people means it's built into the system, so the system inherently has this or whether they mean it's widespread issue. I, do think that it is A. Widespread phenomenon that that. African American. Males particularly or treated with extra suspicion, and maybe not given the benefit of the doubt he is. Defend the police He doesn't believe any money should be taken from law enforcement, but he does acknowledge that additional funds need to be funneled toward things like mental health and social services to help deal with issues that don't necessarily need to be dealt with by police. It's NPR. We've seen in recent days. That president trump is quite purposely perhaps focusing on things like confederate statues, and what he calls a culture war. You ask more specifically how he sees the debate on race in America. Well obviously he. Doesn't want to contradict the President I, asked him about black lives, matter in terms of the proposition that black lives matter obviously black lives matter. I think well allies. All human life is sacred. I asked him about Does he believe to We're in a culture war. His answer was basically yes, but not interest rate setting. It has more to do with things like religion and traditional religious values and things like that. Do you think. Are you comfortable with or do you support? Confederate statues being removed from some of these landscapes well I actually think that the way they've handled it here in south, Carolina's the appropriate way to do it, which has it was a community decision going through? What do you think we are right now? In terms of race relations at this month? I think before the George Floyd incident. I thought we were in a a good place here. I thought it was interesting that bartels you specifically about race relations in the country that he thought we were in a good place before the George Floyd incident as he called it. I would imagine. Activists are like what planet have you been living on? Well I'm sure that he's GonNa. Get a lot of pushback from civil rights, activists and others who who would say that. George Floyd was the latest searing example. Ongoing widespread property, and the FBI is now investigating after these disturbing videos appear to show a group of white men pinning a black man, thirty-six-year-old vacuum booker against a tree Saturday far seemed to be trying to put difference by saying. Yes, there's widespread. Racial profiling, but that in general thought that things were better in based on economics will and so at the end of the day. You ask you ask them about defunding police, but at the end of the day the federal government is not in charge of cities, police budgets right so as far as the federal government's as far as William Bar in the trump administration. What changes might we see? What would he actually be on board with as far as reforms? We talked about the fact that for the first time the Justice Department under. The trump administration's watch brought a pattern in practice a case to the four regarding raw police action on Springfield police. Department in Massachusetts and when you find Sir we found in that case, there was a drug unit in the Springfield Police Department that. Was Engaged in. A pattern and practice of using excessive force said it is a tool that he's willing to use. He's not opposed to it although he wants to be careful about its use, but we pushed him because. The three previous administrations did roughly seventy plus cases. Involving pattern and practice investigations where you're looking entire departments, I mean the Obama administration at a comparable time had done several wrong, but Lily, Area that he is at least thinking about in ways that perhaps his predecessor. Jeff sessions did not in my last question for you. Is the conversation about race and policing and USA? Did you get the sense that it's affected him as a prosecutor as an attorney general and the dat in turn would affect the trump, administration or things. Do Things feel status quo to you look? It's hard to say, but I do think that the fact that Senator Tim Scott is pushing really hard on this issue, the fact that Tim Scott talked about and his talked openly about the fact that in one particular year he was pulled over seven times many times when he didn't believe he was doing a thing on since then asaf several more times the good news. Is this time around because the eight minutes and forty six seconds recorded? America's response the I think that's forced the attorney general and others to acknowledge that there are issues of trust. Outright bias against African Americans wrong. I think it is wrong if people are not respected appropriately intriguing, given their do as I've said before on the air. Many African Americans want to be treated as citizens, I not as suspects Pierre Thomas One on one with William Bar in the Church in Columbia. South Carolina now like I, said on his way back to Washington DC with his team. Let you guys keepdriving. Thanks pleasure. Supreme. Court already laid out some truly huge decisions this time including that landmark decision on gay rights, the Supreme Court declared on Monday that employers can no longer discriminate against their employees, simply because they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. But if you did that to me, that organizations will not have latitude when it comes to personal or religious beliefs, the supreme court had a surprise for you. You yesterday the US Supreme Court on Wednesday handed victory to religious conservatives in the fight over reproductive rights, allowing employers to opt out of covering contraception that was the first in a pair of rulings being hailed by religious groups. Let's get back with Nyu law professor. Melissa Murray who studies reproductive. Case Law Professor Mary. This contraceptive case basically means these are not considered essential medical services why? While, to be clear, they may be essential medical services for women, but according to this ruling, there is no obligation for religiously affiliated employers or indeed any employer who has religious or moral objection to the provision of such contraceptive services to their employees to actually provide the Shelvin to decision is a victory for the little sisters of the poor which Justice Thomas said had to fight for the ability to continue in their. Their noble work without violating their sincerely held religious beliefs. This is one of those cases I mean. We've had a lot of them. Over the last couple of years that pit religious liberty on the one hand against other values whether it be women's health, or in this case, women's health and women's equality and I want to get into the reasoning, but what are the ramifications for women because contraception is tricky in that? It's used by people to not get pregnant of course, but also for for reasons beyond that yet, that's exactly right and to be clear. This case did not get the press coverage that perhaps it should have like. There's a lot of discussion about g medical services. The abortion case that was decided last week. Good Morning. We're coming on the air right now. Because the Supreme Court has made a major decision on abortion rights, this law would restrict the abortion providers in Louisiana, to one in New Orleans for the nearly ten thousand women every year who seek abortion services, arguably this case, actually touches even more women, seventy, five, thousand, one, hundred, twenty five thousand women correct. Your honor yet that number that would be affected by the exemption and again contraception can be for the purpose of preventing pregnancy, but can also be used to treat a variety of other medical conditions like for example poly cystic. Disease can be treated with contraception. Chronic acne can be contracted with contraception. It can be used as a way of regulating really difficult menstrual cycle, so for a lot of women is essential healthcare coverage, and it can also be quite expensive if you're paying for it out of pocket, ensuring that women received full and equal health coverage, including perceptive coverage to you have just tossed entirely to the wins. What was the actual reasoning? Then was this more to do with contraceptives themselves what the court thinks about them or How the affordable care act how obamacare treats contraceptives? What is it so this is actually a straightforward administrative law case, so in most administrative law cases, there is a statute that has been passed by Congress in IT Congress gives some authority to Administrative Agency to administer the terms of the statute, so one of the questions here one. Congress passed the affordable care act. It didn't actually specify that contraceptive coverage would be included in the preventative coverage in screenings that were required cost-free. The statute says that they have to provide additional preventive care as provided for in comprehensive guidelines supported by the health resources and services administration. Well. Read that and you at least some ambiguity. Is it permissible for the agency to conclude that contraceptive services are among those particular services as the Obama. Administration did when it was running the health and Human Services Agency. Show the Obama administration says. To include essential services and the Obama healthcare people will obviously that includes contraceptives, and then the trump administration comes in says yet not not so much well part of what the Obama Administration had done was. Included that contraceptive mandate in its understanding of the statute and its interpretation of the statute, but it also provided exemptions for religious institutions, so churches temples and mosques did not have to provide contraceptive coverage to their employees, but it left open the question of what would happen if you had a religiously affiliated employer so perhaps a parochial school or charity that was affiliated with a particular denomination Mr. comment your clients of the little sisters do not object to their employees happening coverage for contraceptive services right? They don't Chat I. Don't have any objection. If their employees received those services from some other means there Jackson essentially is to have their plans hijacked and being forced to provide those services through their own plan and plan infrastructure, so they don't Wanna participate in any way, shape or form. They don't WanNA provide it directly. They don't WanNa provided through these accommodations. The don't WanNA provide at all. All so this was really a case about whether or not the terms of the statute allowed for contraceptive coverage whether the administration could pass laws that allowed employers to just basically get out of providing contraceptive coverage in Seoul. When you have that kind of broad language, you're going to get different executive. Ranch's who are going to exercise their discretion within that broad language and balance the interests differently. I should say this was a seven to two decision. This was not actually close. Meaning a couple. Liberals cited conservative justices saying listen. We don't have a problem with contraceptives, but if you want them to be specifically protected, just write that into the law. Right into the law the other decision again. Seven to two was in favor this time of religious schools religious institutions. Can you walk me through that one source? Source these were two cases involving teachers at parochial schools in California one teacher sued for disability discrimination after she disclose, she had breast cancer, and her contract wasn't renewed another sued for age discrimination when our contract wasn't renewed her sixties, question was whether they could bring those suits, or whether, because they were employed by religiously affiliated institutions, they fell within what is known as the ministerial exception. It says that the ordinary. Of Anti Discrimination Law does not apply to religious employers who are defending against suits from quote, unquote ministers, their employees who count as ministerial employees. Of course, the question is which employees count as ministerial employees for purposes of this exception. That I think that the fulltime religion teacher is is protected. By this exemption then I think Justice Alito raises a fair point here. It's like well in an elementary school may be. You have to some other subjects, too, so maybe it's the halftime religious teacher, or maybe it's a quarter time where we grow that live. In this opinion, the court said that in this case because these particular teachers taught religious doctrine prayed with their students, and were basically role models of faith. They fell within that ministerial exception. Justice Alito Judicial Review of the way in which religious schools discharge, those responsibilities would undermine. Undermine the independence of religious institutions in a way, the first amendment does not tolerate really big case for both the question of civil rights and anti discrimination law protections for employees and for religious liberty in folks. You've been asking both of US Lynn. We're GONNA learn whether president. Trump's taxes are exempt from a subpoena. We're about to find out later today. The court says it is issuing its final opinions. Ten Am Eastern. That will be one of them. Professor Melissa Mary. We know you'll be keeping an eye on it. Thanks so much. Extra Start Your the worst Cova nineteen curve is trending upward again more after the break. Now streaming exclusively on Disney plus share the journey, the courage and the legacy with the entire family, the original Broadway production, a revolutionary musical Hamilton rated pg thirteen streaming now exclusively on Disney plus. covid nineteen cases have risen across the Sunbelt from Florida to Texas to Arizona and California. One of the glimmers of hope from several governors has been at least most of these patients aren't dying. You're under forty and you don't have significant co morbidity. Fatality rate for this is is pretty close to zero. He's officials say two things are happening one retesting testing more severe cases into even if there is just more spread happening, the spread is mostly among young people which sucks, but twenty one year olds don't die from covid nineteen as easily lake minnetonka in Minnesota and the lake of the ozarks in Missouri packed with people. The bottle is cases and states like Arizona climbing way faster than the testing rate. It's clearly not just. Just healthy people. We know that because people are showing up at hospitals and rising numbers wooden fifty floor to hospitals have run out of space recently, and in these states were desks, worthy silver lining the death. Count's every day are slowly and surely beginning to rise Dr. John Brownstein is at the Deniau allergist with Boston. Children's Hospital teaches at Harvard Medical School. He's also ABC News Contributor so Dr Brownstein glad we have you. Is this just a case of spoke too soon since? The virus doesn't kill you immediately the desk don't happen for a couple of weeks. Yeah when we make statements like we have a lot of cases, but a lot of deaths, it becomes a little bit of a false sense of security, and that's for a few reasons. One cases build up before deaths and we've known this from the beginning of the pandemic takes several weeks before you see the hospitalizations and deaths resulting from the cases where you go back a month, the median age of our cases was in the fifties, now the median age of the cases here in Hillsborough. County, for the entire pandemic, his drop to thirty four and that deal `specially true right now because what we saw initially with cases is. Among young people those that are more mobile than I want more contacts. Those are ones that are going to be much more healthy. And in fact will do fine with the virus Pensacola, making mass mandatory today, but so far the governor is refusing to issue a statewide order. Saying younger people are driving up the numbers. That's fine, but those cases need that. There's transmission happening the community, and ultimately the virus will land on the doorstep of those that are vulnerable. Down our food deliveries are Grosz Steve at any. Grocery store because I have underlying health condition. My friend would. Go Grocery store. Did everything in my power. But just one clear to the layman, it does seem like people are not dying in the same numbers that they were in New York new. Jersey early on I mean that that was catastrophic. Why the change well again I think that we do have some level of capacity and I think that's important. Right? So the was headroom in some of these places a to begin with, and so when patients can be effectively treated they. The likelihood of death gets. Better at this than we were. We know how to do this. We know how to close down parts of the hospital we need to. We have covert units that are set up for outpatients for inpatients. We have treatments ready. We have testing in Arizona. ICU beds are at eighty eight percent capacity hospitalizations have nearly doubled in the past two weeks in hospital systems get at capacity, and then you have to make decisions between which patients can get properly treated. That's when you have increased amount of re like who gets later. Who doesn't get a ventilator like those are real issues that could come a-. There's only so much capacity to handle the influx of patients what we're seeing in many states. Is that they're heading towards total capacity. We have seeing a lot of patients coming. We're playing musical chairs in the middle of the night vision from one side to another. It's. That's really when you'll see death. START TO PILOT WHO? Ultimately. It's not a matter of if schools should reopen. It's simply a matter of how. They must fully open and they must be fully operational. The public's trying to process a lot of information, and it's challenging, and there's different ways you can look at data right now. I think the big question of course is round school reopenings in that keeps coming up and the sort of way that I'm looking at it in many of my colleagues is you clearly can't open up if you have an active outbreak that's taking place in the community Texas governor insisting schools will reopen in the fall, but masks Cova tests will not be required. Required places like Texas and Arizona Florida. Don't have the right setting for reopening, so if you couldn't reopen today, and so there's clearly gonna be a patchwork across the country of places where it will be safe to open up schools and places where Oh, not blended learning means, students will be taught on site in school for part of the week and will attend school remotely on the other days of the week, and it's really about what we can do right now to get this virus under control, which will really determine whether schools reopening fall. So already such high stakes for so many families, life and death striking to remember on top of all that the case load in your state could literally determine whether your kids can go back to school in the fall Dr around seen from Boston Children's Hospital and from Harvard. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Last thing theme parks are opening backup in many parts of the world. Disney the parent company of ABC just opened up Tokyo Disney yesterday. It's opening up Disney world in Florida this weekend, and of course every park has new protocols for social distancing standing in lines and concession stands, but can you change how people behave on a roller coaster? A lot of screaming. Japan officials are now asking rollercoaster riders to refrain from screaming. This is the tallest roller coaster in Japan on a normal day. It's Jonah jobs two hundred thirty feet. Writers are only sitting every other rope. The remember, the louder you talk, the farther infectious breathless travel, which is why they want you silent. In fact, they're asking writers to and I'm not making this quote. Scream inside your heart and to prove it's possible. The company put out this video of two executives a man in a suit and Amanda Bow. Sitting in the front row of one of the scariest coasters on earth. Silently you watch them climate one stories in the air and then plummet to the ground. Dudes just sit there. Absolutely stone faced. Now you might be wondering. Why can't I scream if I'm wearing a mask and protecting other people will masks are great, but it's tough to keep one on when you're traveling eighty one miles per hour. In fact, you see the suit wearing I struggling with his on the biggest drop, which makes me think. Roller coasters are scary, but the scariest thing I can imagine in the entire world right now. Is someone else's used mask floating down from a roller coaster on top of? Videos amazing to watch going to post a link on twitter today. CHECK US out at start here, ABC lots of news unfolding this morning. KEEP ABC News Dot com up in your browser or stay tuned ABC. News App Brad Mielke.
NPR News: 10-26-2019 8AM ET
"This message comes from NPR sponsor xfinity some things are slow like a snail races other things are fast like xfinity X. by get fast speeds even when everyone is online working to make WIFI simple easy awesome more at xfinity dot com restrictions apply scheduled for tomorrow between South Africa and Wales. I'm trial Snyder this is N._p._R.. News from Washington negotiators will work through the weekend to have a unified position Monday for NPR news I'm Teri Schultz in Brussels you're listening to NPR news testimony from Special Counsel Robert Muller's Russia investigation meanwhile Democrats are accusing Attorney General William Barr of attempting to help President Trump amid the impeachment house oversight committee Jim Jordan sent Reeker a letter scolding him for agreeing to reschedule his deposition to Saturday Jordan went onto accused affairs Philip Reeker was scheduled to testify before the House on Wednesday but his deposition was postponed that same day the ranking Republican on the should be given to think about it with British lawmakers unwilling to approve the draft brexit agreement British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was forced by law to ask for instigate whether trump withheld military aid to Ukraine for political gain Windsor Johnston NPR News Washington the Justice Department says it is reviewing a decision rational Democrats upholding testimony on a weekend to limit member attendance and participation rickers testimony comes as the house continues to invade northern and southern California cal fire division chief Jonathan Cox urging people in Sonoma's county to leave their homes if additional evacuations are called for it truck in southeastern England the fourth suspected of human trafficking police initially said they believe the victims were Chinese but now more Vietnamese families are coming Art Major League Baseball World Series Resumes Tonight The Washington nationals hosting the Houston Astros which will be looking to even the series after winning Sir Johnston reports at the unusual weakened deposition drawing sharp criticism from Congressional Republicans Acting Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian a three month extension beyond the October thirty first target date for leaving but Francis Britain should be given only a few days delay and not three months blackout perfect eight hundred fifty thousand homes and businesses and thirty six counties for forty eight hours or longer. PG's warning came as firefighters battled flames is going to be imperative one hundred percent that people heed those and get out early if we've learned anything from the last three years it's that early
Barr vs. the Committee with No Bull
"If someone went down the street to the pretty mean court here that beautiful courthouse, we have right at the bottom of the hill and start breaking windows and firing industrial grade fireworks into start a fire throw kerosene. And start fires in the court. Is that okay? Is that okay now? Now, the US marshals have a duty to stop that and defend the courthouse, and that's what we are doing in. PORTLAND. We are at the courthouse defending the courthouse. We're not out looking for trouble. In a place like Portland, where even where we don't have the support of the the state and local government. We have to take a stand and defend this federal property. We can get to a level where we're. We're going to accept these kinds of violent attacks on federal courts. But what makes me concern for the country is the first time in my memory that the leaders of. One of our great to political parties. The Democratic Party are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal. Courts. Why can't we just say you know the violence against federal courts has to stop. Could we hear something like that? I'm Elena Kagan and this is the Law Fair podcast July Twenty, ninth two, thousand and twenty. Attorney General William Barr testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. Bar was asked about the federal government's response to protest the upcoming presidential election, the dismissal of former US attorney, Jeffrey Berman and much more. The hearing did include a lot of. Grandstanding, but we cut out all the unnecessary repetition, an theatrics to leave you with just the questions and answers that you need to hear. It's the Law Fair podcast July Twenty Ninth Barbara says the committee with Noble. Recognize Myself For five minutes and July twenty second you joined the president is he announced the expansion of Operation Legend Initiative. To combat violent crime in Kansas, city with approximately sixty one, million dollars in DOJ grants. I'm confused however as the purpose of launching Operation Legend at this moment in time. In December of last year, you announced that the department would divert over seventy million dollars in grants to. Cities under an initiative called operation ruined this pursuit correct. That's right. and operation. Relentless pursuit targeted familiar list of cities, places like Albuquerque Baltimore and Kansas City. Correct? Correct. At the same July twenty second press conference. You initially claimed that over two hundred arrests had been had been made under Operation Legend CORREC-. Correct. At that, but you misspoke correct the US Attorney's Office for the western district of Missouri. Later confirmed that only a single estimate under the auspices of Operation Legend correct I know. And the other one, hundred, ninety, nine, other arrests were made under relentless pursuit or other programs. That was correct I. Think you could be forgiven for being confused. Operation. Legend appears to be little more than a repackaging of existing operations in these cities. So I all the drama, why joined the president the White House to announce a bold new operation that appears to be neither bold nor new. Understandably Americans are very suspicious of your motives here. There are those who believe you are sending federal law enforcement into the city's not to combat violent crime, but to help with the president's reelection efforts. The president's made clear that he wants that he wants conflict between protesters and police to be essential claim a central theme of his campaign. So let me ask you directly Mr Bar. Yes or no. Yes or no? Did you rebrand existing projects under the? Legend, in order to assist the president in an election year, I wouldn't. I wouldn't torney general. Would you agree with me at least on principle that it is improper for the Department of Justice to divert resources and law enforcement personnel in an effort to assist the president's reelection campaign now? Mr. Chairman in the fall. We did inaugurate an anti-crime initiative because we were concerned about increasing violent crime and a number of cities, and we call that relentless pursuit unfortunately cove intervened and our agents who were detailed for these assignments could not perform. The operation. So the operation was squelched by it. So we couldn't complete or make much progress on relentless pursuit however, and the intervening time we saw violent crime continuing to rise and a lot of that was triggered by the events after. The death of George Floyd. So we did reboot the program after Kovic started breaking and are we could commit the law enforcement resources to actually accomplish. The mission which is to reduce violent crime. Now I regret the covid interrupted our law enforcement activities, but it doesn't obviate the fact that there are serious violent crime in these cities, these police. And mayors have been asking us for help and we have put in a additional federal agents and investigators to help deal with it. Now yes or no? Have you discussed the president's reelection campaign with the president or with any White House official or any surrogate of the president? Or am I going to get into my discussions with the president? Have you discussed that topic with him? Yes. Not. Not. In relation to this program. I didn't answer that I discussed that I'm a member of the cabinet and there's an election going on obviously the topic. Well the topic comes up and cabinet meetings and other things. Is that the topic of the election I didn't say I was surprised I just asked if you've done that. So as part of those conversations with the president. Or it's people about the reelection campaign. Have you ever discussed current of future deployment of federal law enforcement? In connection with what in connection with what you just said in connection with the with your discussions with the president or with other people around him of his reelection campaign. Have you discussed the current of future deployment of federal law enforcement saying I'm not GonNa get into my discussions with the president, but I've made it clear that I would like to pick the city's based on law enforcement need and based on neutral criteria. You can't tell me whether you discuss not going to discuss what I discussed with commit today that the department will not use federal law enforcement as a prop in the president's reelection campaign. With this thought. You really can't hide behind legal fictions this time Mr Bar. It's all out in the open. Where the people can see what you're doing for themselves. The president wants footage his campaign is. And you appear to be serving up to him as ordered. In most of the city's the protests had begun to wind down before you marched in and confront the protesters and the protesters aren't marks, their mothers and veterans mayors. In this moment real leadership, entail deescalation collaboration, and looking for ways to peacefully resolve our differences. Instead use pepper spray and truncheons on American citizens. You did it here in Washington. Lafayette Square expanded to Portland, and now you're projecting fear and violence nationwide. In pursuit of obvious political objectives. Shame on you. Mr Bar, can I just say McCain on you? Can I just? Expired what purposes mister? Johnson seek recognition. Questions for the witness and you'll the Florida him to responded. Chairman give conflated two different things. The effort like legend. is to deal with violent crime crime minutes committing on the streets of the city again, predatory violence like murder shootings which are soaring in some cities right now. That does not involve encountering protesters as you referred to. Civil disturbances a different set of issues and I. Just reject the idea that the department is flooded anywhere and attempted to suppress demonstrators. We make a clear distinction between demonstrators. This time. And? The fact of the matter is Portland. Portland the courthouse has under attack. The federal resources are inside the perimeter around the courthouse, defending it from almost two months of daily attacks where people march to the court, try to gain entrance and have set fires, dethrone things used explosives. and. Injured police including just this past weekend. Perhaps permanently blinding three federal officers with lasers. We are on the defense. It's not out looking for trouble, and if the state and the city would provide the law enforcement services and other jurisdictions, still we wouldn't have no need to have additional. Marshals in the courthouse, the Democrats have asserted here this morning and they continue to say the media that under your leadership, the Justice Department has become highly politicised. Why is that a totally unfounded allegation? Because actually what I? Trying to do is restore the rule of law and the rule of law has had essence that we have one rule for everybody. If you apply one rule to a the same rule applies to bay and I felt, we didn't have that. Previously the department we had strayed and I would just ask people. Supposedly a punishing the president's enemies and helping his friends. What enemies have I indicted, who who could you point to one indictment that has been under the department that you feel is is unmerited. That, you feel violates the rule of law one indictment. Now, you say I helped the president's friend. The cases that are cited the stone case and the flame case for both cases where I determined. That some intervention was necessary to rectify the rule of law to make sure people are treated the same. I said stone was prosecuted under me and I said all along I thought that was a righteous prosecution I thought he should go to jail and I, thought the judges sense was correct. But the line prosecutors were trying to advocate for a sentence that was more than twice. Anyone. Else in a similar position at ever served, and this is a sixty seven year, old man, first time offender, no violins, and they were trying to put him in jail for seven to nine years and I wasn't going to advocate dad because that is not the rule of law I. Agree. The president's friends don't deserve special breaks, but they also don't deserve to be treated more harshly than other people, and sometimes that's a difficult decision to make especially when you know you're going to be castigated for it. But that is what the rule of law is, and that's what fairness to the individual ultimately comes to being real being willing to do what's fair to the individual. President Obama's Attorney General Eric holder famously referred to himself as President Obama's wingmen. He said an interview quote. I'm still enjoying what I'm doing. They're still work to be done. I'm still the president's wing man. So I'm there with my boy, that's what he said famously, is it the duty of the attorney general to be the president's wingman? No I've already described, but I think the duty of the Attorney General in your office, you are then free to act independently of the president. Isn't that true? That is true. Particularly on criminal cases, it's required and that's exactly what he has asked you to do in that, right? Yes. lofgren. It when the President NCP's executive order. They indicated your department should play all tides. Investigations has your departments starting to get any allegations you're to the executive order that the president issued. which. Executive Order Congresswoman. Order that asks for the deployment of troops to protect the monuments and the federal. Yes the. Sex. Trade troops, but the. We have. Initiated Investigations Yes, WE'VE MADE ARRESTS A. Who people who have been rioting and taken down. statues, but I think your characterization of Portland is completely false. I would like to get into that, but I'd like to ask you a question about surveillance if I may. We reports that cell site stimulators known as stingrays. Dirt boxes are being used to collect phone, call location, and Eve content of phone calls. Grills are be used at more fakes initiative or cell phone interest technology, and that there's bulk collection of Internet browsing. Specific, authority is the department using for surveillance tools. I I really can't speak to the to those instances. If in fact occurred I'm glad to go and and try to determine what you're talking about actually a massive according, not the. Well. The I. Think the most of our cyber activities are conducted by the FBI under their law enforcement powers to detect and prevent crime. Federal. Crime. Miss. Turning Channel? Would it be accurate to say that SID ministrations responsibility? Of course, you're part of the administration to see federal laws are upheld and the federal property. Is Secure, and safe and protected. Is that correct? That's right. Congressman Ed. Sort of distinct missions. One mission is to enforce federal law, and by the way, the federal government is the sovereign of the United States, we have to sovereigns here. In the United, states and we enforce the federal law all over the country, every square foot of the country. We enforce federal law. The other is protecting federal property and specifically US court houses, which are the Hark Federal, property and all ninety three jurisdictions in the United States, and we have the obligation to participate to protect federal courts and the US marshals specifically have been given that obligation federal courts under attack since one is it. Okay. To try to burn down a federal court. If someone went down the street to the pretty mean court here that beautiful courthouse, we have right at the bottom of the hill and started breaking windows and firing industrial grade fireworks into start a fire throw kerosene balloons in and start fires in the court. Is that okay? Is that okay. Now, now, the US marshals a duty to stop that and defend the courthouse, and that's what we are doing in. PORTLAND. We are at the courthouse defending the courthouse. We're not out looking for trouble. So as far as the weapons that you mentioned. Let me get this straight. My understanding is that the people attacking the building head? Among other things, rifles, explosives, knives, saws, sledgehammers, tasers slingshots, rocks. Bricks. Lasers missed anything, or, is, that, about. Cover. You happiness some things, but that's a that's a good list. But you know they have these powerful slingshots with ball bearings that they showed. They've used pellet guns, we believe we have found. Those projectiles at have penetrated. Marshalls to bone. And USE THE LASERS TO BLIND A. Blind. The. Marshals. They do start fires, they start fires if they can get into the fire inside or through the windows and they start fires along the outside of the of the courthouse when the marshals come out to try to deal with the fire they're assaulted. General if local elected officials, mayors and city councils and governors did their jobs and kept the peace. Would it even be necessary for federal law enforcement personnel to be there in the first place? And that's exactly the point look around the country even where there are these kinds of riots occurring. We don't. We haven't had to put in the kind of reinforcements that we have in Portland because the state and local law enforcement does their job and won't allow riders to come in just physically assault the courthouse in Portland, that's not the case. General. Some have derisively referred to the law enforcement personnel is stormtroopers and worse. Does that accurately described them? Would you like to set the record straight? No, they're obviously not stormtroopers. You know. Normally we would have a group of deputy marshals in court that would be. In business suits and ties or regular civilian dress. Those would be the deputy marshals says the protective force the court. But after almost a month of rioting in Portland sent in I, think it was around the fourth of July timeframe. We sent in about twenty special operations. Marshall's. And those tactical teams that are you know our patented and protected? So they could deal with this kind of thing up. Until last week I was told we had our stormtrooper from the Department of Justice amounted to twenty nine marshals in the courthouse twenty-nine marshalls. As of last until recently increased I think there were ninety five I was told. Ninety five DHS federal protective service, and other DHS officers trying to protect the courthouse and three other buildings. That's what we're trying to do. We're trying to protect federal functions and federal buildings, which are very small part of the city, but the rioters go at them and we have gradually increased our numbers there to try to protect those those facilities. If, the state would come in and and keep peace on the street. In front of the courthouse. We wouldn't need additional people at the courthouse. Thank you MS Jackson, league, and so I asked You, this question does the trump justice department seek to end systemic racism racism in law enforcement I just need a yes or no answer. To the extent, there is racism in any of our institutions in this country and the police. Then obviously, this administration is we'll fully enforces. So you agree that there may be systemic racism to the extent in where I let me continue my line of questioning agree that there's systemic racism in police department civically generally in this country and I'm reclaiming my time journal Specifically, do you understand the violent impact racial profiling and do you support the in racial profiling? Religious profiling in the joy bill including the removal of the strict interpretation qualified immunity, which would leave individuals like Brianna, Taylor and George Floyd without any relief at all. No I'm opposed to women qualified immunity and I don't agree that it would leave the victims of police misconduct. Let me share with you some aspect without any remedy and I'm reclaiming my time. Let me share with you some aspects of profiling after the death of George. Floyd found that while black people make up nineteen percent of the Minneapolis population in nine percent of its please they were on the receiving in of fifty. Fifty eight percent of the city's police use of force incidents. The Justice Department has many tools that it's supposed to reduce police violence, the patent or practice investigations a practice to end bad policing and police violence. It addresses police violence at an institutional level rather just focuses on acute cases. If you understand that, then why has your department only pursued one parent practice investigation since President, trump took office that could stop systemic racism. The if if you read my statement or listen to my state than I, did you specifically acknowledge that there was a difficulty in this country. With the African American community attorney during labs short time high. Answered Don, a pattern and practice. What was the reason? and. You ask me what I thought the response was, and I thought the response to this is in fact. Training of police and I think the police believe that that's a response I was talking to a black. Then let's continue lease Attorney Journal, I wanNA respect you, but I have a short time. You, for example, eighteen. Section to forty two, which makes unlawful. The denial of rights under the color of law can defend the fact that in the first seven months of F., white twenty, twenty federal prosecutors filed only two hundred, forty, two charges to forty two charges. Twenty seven cases in the trump deal Jay, and were you aware that in? Two Thousand and nineteen federal prosecutors to section two, forty, two charges and just forty nine cases in the United States, and are you aware of how many cases we've had? One, hundred, eighty, four, thousand, two, hundred, seventy, four, which means that in Y. Two, thousand, nine, hundred and only about twenty seven out of every one, hundred, thousand prosecutions related to section two, hundred to. To forty two charges. Do you have a reason for that? Yes. I do I, will get you the numbers on it I don't know them off the top of my head, but actually our criminal prosecutions under two forty, one to forty two are extremely strong and are comparable to if not exceed prior administrations. But at the beginning of this year, most of the. Very, few jurisdictions had grand juries that were open. Does back. Mr. Gohmert. It is a dangerous town. Well, let me ask you. I know you know that a US attorneys are supposed to serve at the pleasure of the president. You Know Bill Clinton fired ninety three us. Attorneys on the same day A. do you know what made us attorney Berman think that he was the exception who did not serve at the pleasure of the President? What caused him to think he owned that position? I think part of it was he seems to have had the few that because he was court appointed and there is a provision in law for court appointment of a US attorney is essentially a placeholder until the administration. Get. Somebody. that. He felt he could not be removed by the president because he was court appointed and that's not correct right now. Is brutes or still working for the FBI. He works for the Department of Justice. Well. We have heard so much information about his basically being the go between between the DNC Clinton campaign fusion, GPS Christopher, steele, the Russian propaganda that were incorporated into his dossier and. Klein. Smith. Christopher wray indicated he'd been. Given. The chance to resign go get a better job I'm wondering how long Bruce or is going to be staying where he is. Incredible to me that he's still there. I can't talk about you know individual personnel matters. Chair recognizes gentleman from. Tennessee. For five minutes, Mr Bar. I'm the chairman of the Subcommittee on the constitution civil rights and civil liberties. So this is most pertinent hearing me. Firstly, I'd like to ask you if you will. Work with US and allow the head of the Civil Rights Division Assistant Attorney General Eric Dry Band to testify before this committee this ball. I'll talk to him about it. We encourage him. I'll talk to him about. All right I've closely watched actions taken by the Federal Government Lafayette Park in June. When did you first learn that the president planned to walk through the park and go to Saint John's church? I I'd like to respond to what you would you please my question. My Time is limited. I, learned. Some time in the afternoon that the president might come out of the. White House and then later in the I heard that he might go over the church. Mr Collins is recognized for five minutes. The other question I have is you've heard earlier today, the stormtrooper comments by the speaker of the House, and we know that that is a direct reference to the paramilitary wing of the Nazi party stormtroopers going at it. The you believe that that actually puts our law enforcement community at a whole. A son of a State Trooper, I? I. Want to know you're being. Is it don't you think it? It encourages the violence that we're seeing encourages the participation against the police I think that's possible and I think it's responsible to call these federal law enforcement officers, stormtroopers. Do you believe that there was actually a basis to go after General Flynn? I mean what we've seen so far? What's been releasing especially keeping an investigation open Peter Struck, kept it open? Do you believe there's actually a basis for the beginning of this investigation to star with? Continuing it well, I. Asked another US attorney in Saint. Louis who had ten years in the FBI ten years in the Department of Justice. As a career prosecutor to take a look at it, and he determined based on documents that had not been provided to flint side and not been provided to the court. That in fact, there was no basis to investigate. And what are their more? It was clearly established by the documents that the B. I. Agents interviewed, Him did not believe, right? He thought he was lying or there's another part of this as well that concerns what has been given to the courts and in the interviews in that is that the facts were not disclosed Flan prior to the interview. Seems. Like a brady violation to made. You believe that was brady violation there in this case. No there wasn't a violation there, but I, think what the? Council concluded was that the only purpose of the interview? The only purpose was to try to catch them in saying something that they could then say was allies and therefore, and therefore, there was not a legitimate, the interview was untethered to any legitimate. Investigation, but I have another problem and I've talked to you about this. And that's down with the District Attorney John in Fulton County Georgia actually charging. Majoring felony, murder charges, own officer, and the interesting part about this is, what we do is is is prosecutors do, but were you aware that the dish Carney failed to seek an indictment from a grand jury or even waited for GB investigation to finish before bringing those charge? Were you aware of that? As an attorney and again looking at this with the environment, we have right now with police officers constantly under attack from from this comedian from others and all of the country, and especially from the speaker of the House as an attorney in especially at prosecutor. Appropriate to charge a law enforcement officer with a crime severest felony murder without giving investigation more than a mere days and without obtaining an indictment from the grand jury, and while you announce the charges lay out a case, it is full of falsehoods. I've said that I would have preferred and that he had used the grand jury and had waited till the Georgia. Bureau had completed its investigation, appreciate your help and adding without a yoga. Mis- Mister Johnson from Georgia I'm should we can agree. On some things we disagree on a whole lot, but I'm sure we can agree on the fact that president trump is just a prolific tweeter. Isn't that correct? He seems to be. And he tweeted many times about the Roger Stone's sentencing, Disney. I don't know how many times he tweeted about many times and you're aware of them because you said, it would. Hurt you from doing your job and isn't it true that when prosecutors in the Roger Stone Case? Filed a memo with the court, recommending a sentence of seven to nine years in prison. A few hours later president trump tweeted that sentence recommendation was a disgrace. that. Yes. In general bar several hours that that. You filed the pleading with the court stating the sentence recommendation would be changed and that you would be asking for a life sentence for Roger Stone. Isn't that correct? Now, what what is correct is that? What is corrected on February tenth Monday. I gave instructions as to what the time. In, answering your question, you gotta let him answer maiming time reclaiming my time and I know you don't want to answer. But the facts are clear. Sentencing recommendation made in the morning tweet in the afternoon, you change the sentencing recommendation that tweet tweet was not in the afternoon. The tweet was made it. I think one thirty or two in the morning. Tweet was made before and after tweet tweeted about that relentlessly and you've agreed to that. Now when you file your sentencing recommendation asking for a lower sentence, I? Didn't ask for lower. That you were going to recommend a lower sentence and you know I. Wasn't the sentence that was recommended by the line prosecutors. Supporting. To The sentencing guideline calculations, it was within it was within the guidelines, but it was not within Justice Department policy view general boy, you're expecting the American people to believe that you did not do what trump wanted you to do when you change that sentencing recommendation and lowered for Roger Stone. You think the American people don't understand that you were carrying out trump's. I. Was not I had not discussed. Might sentencing recommendation with anyone at the white? House. Or anyone outside. To do. And that's what you did. No. Let me. Ask You. Do you think it's fair. Do you think is fair for sixty seven year? Old Man Reclaim? Maybe be sent to prison for seven to nine years was in accordance with the sentencing? No, it was not. As attorney does not the depart Herbert Walker Bush. You never change the sentencing recommendation for a friend of Herbert Walker Bush did you. Know as I recall. All right. No and over the course of your time is nothing was elevated to. Mr Buck is recognized for five minutes. General Bar. This has to stop. We can't let mtpa continue terrorizing our country. Can you please tell us about the appropriate use of civil and Criminal Rico statutes to address violent criminal groups like Antifa? In the in the wake of the beginning of these riots I asked our joint terrorism task forces the FBI's joint terrorism task forces around the country. to. Be Our principal means of developing evidence and prosecuting. Violent extremists, terrorists who are involved in these activities and one of the tools obviously we would uses Rico, can be used against an organisation, but that doesn't mean that we currently have a rico case. and. The chair recognizes Mr Deutsch for five minutes. You just told us that nothing was ever elevated to me. You had said. An. Interview recently that there's a process in place and esscalation system is the responsibility to resolve it. How is this elevated to you the case of Roger? Stone? On Monday February tenth us attorney was with me and he raised the issue with me. So it was aided by Timothy Shay. Yeah and. had. It been elevated. During, the two months between the time, the conviction came in under the former US attorney and. And the time that Timothy Shay started. I think shame may have had conversations with people and the did you ever have conversations with former US attorney about this case? About the sensitive I don't recall any discussion about stone, right? So Timothy Shay. You said in the interview that he was new, you just started. He's he was nobody worked for you for a long time to me. Yes. Most this job for you. Well, when I was Attorney General thirty years ago, he were known announced just now. He he was on my staff. He advised you on on criminal justice policy and law enforcement, right? Correct. And you act you named him acting US attorney. Had You discussed stone case with him before you named him acting attorney? No. Did you discuss sentencing with them not before the first time was when he came in and it wasn't Monday actually to. Refresh election in prior and every you said, he came in the week before he came in to see some senior staff. That's know. That's what I said. He may have. He may have had discussions with people deputies because I was not involved in those discussions. Basically I didn't. As far as I. No substantive involvement in stone until Monday. When he came in in the morning while the I'm so missed errol the week before when he came to see the the senior staff that he had worked with the week before when he was working on. I. Think he had raised it with people in the deputies off at senior staff to I. Understand. I was not involved. He started he started on July thirty first the first week he was there. He came to raise this issue I. think he started February first right the first week he was there he came into your office to raise the issue of sentencing. In the interview ABC's I. Don't think he came. That's that's what you told. ABC News. You said that he's talked senior staff, not you perhaps, but he talked to senior staff. That I think I speak English I said that before he came in to see me I believe he had some conversation conversations senior staff, right? That's right. Before you can see we're saying the same thing I. I it was raised with me was on Monday was, did you talk to the senior staff after they spoke with him? I think at nine o'clock. They said that. He was trying to work something out on sensing and he's actually optimistic that something could be worked down. So I didn't think of it as an issue until that Monday when he told me to then. Then He. So then they filed, he filed the sentencing memo in the sentencing call for seven nine years. It's the policy of the US Attorney's Office to suggest a specific guideline range which. which they did, and then you overrule the line prosecutors they ask for a lower sentence. And you gave some reasons you talked about health health is to be considered only for an extraordinary physical impairment. Did that apply to Roger Stone? Missile Attorney General. Guideline, said, well, actually I can't. I can't reveal all the info. I'm not asking what is health was but apply no A. And did it. Apply his health. was. Allenton. Health. Is it reason? Is that the reason for Roger Stone? Very, you're asking for a lower sentence. Let me go on. It says. Go on. Ice Taking an age can be consideration. It says only if it creates conditions that have an unusual degree and distinguished the case typical cases, he was sixty seven grade with a congressman. Asked. Ms Robey. Do. You believe that Congress is adequately funding programs that provide state and local agencies with the tools that they need. To be effective in preventing and pursuing crimes such as child exploitation, and human trafficking. Particularly, over the Internet. I think we could always use more resources for that congressman, but but if I could just have a moment of your time to respond to these questions here on. That were being asked about the Roger Stone sentencing. The. US Attorney came to me and said that the four line prosecutors were threatening to resign unless they could recommend seven to nine years. But there was no comparable case to support that it would have been very disparate sentence. All the cases were clustered around three year sentence for that, and the way they had gotten to the seven to nine was by applying an enhancement and there, and there are debates all the time within the Department of Justice about the proper calculations under the guidelines whether a particular enhancement applies or doesn't apply and those are usually worked at solve. But here they were saying that they were taking enhancement that has traditionally been applied to mafioso and things like that. Threatening a witness, applying it to him because he had a phone call at night where he told a witness that if you WanNa get it on, let's get it on and I'll take your dog and we felt that technically could apply. But in this case, it really didn't reflect the underlying conduct and the overarching requirement at the Department of Justice that we do not presume automatically apply the guidelines. We make individual assessments of the defendant and what is really just under the case and nothing that is excessive and. Individuals trying to force the US attorney. Who was new in the office to adopt seven to nine, and I made the decision now? We are going to leave it up to the judge and that later when that was not done that evening, I told people, we had to go back and correct that the next morning. so that's the sequence of events, but the end of the day. The proof of the pudding in the in the eating, the judge said, she would not have gone along. She didn't think with the first recommendation because the enhancement artificially inflated the exposure of the defendant and she came out exactly where I had come out. So at the end of the day, the question is fairness to the individual and even though I was going to. Get a lot of criticism at the end of the for for doing that. I think at the end of the day, my obligation is to be fair to the individual. Best Attorney General Bar when it comes to police engagement last. August, when speaking the national fraternal order of police, you shared your views on police engagement with the public you stated and I quote, underscore the need to comply I, and if warranted complain later, this will everyone safe. The police subject, the police sub suspects, and the community at large, and those who resist must be prosecuted are repeat zero tolerance for resisting police. This will save lives. Do you stand by that statement? Yes I think it's very important. Zero tolerance attitude is costing lives not saving them especially in communities I'm not not saying I reclaim my time. Do you know how frequently ketamine is used by law enforcement to subdue civilians? Especially, people of Color No. Did, you know if police departments have been documented as directing paramedics, EMT's to eject ketamine during arrests. Have you well, then I guess you haven't evaluated the use of force tactics by because since becoming a g an specially, this particular tactic of seduce subduing suspects with Ketamine, not with respect academy, will you commit to directing the department to evaluate the protocols around the use of ketamine choke holds and other methods used by federal law enforcement officials when making arrests are detaining subjects. Absolutely under the president's executive order are reviewing. Thank you and especially to force. With police departments, especially, the Ketamine. That's pretty outrageous. said that under the executive order? The administration is looking at chokehold. What have you determined so far? Well, we're we're Shutting up system of certification of police departments in part of our charter is, is the come up with a criteria that will be used for certification including limitations on use of force specifically including chokehold, and what is your view of a national registry of law enforcement officers of the second aspect of the president's executive order is to set up a database like that. So that all determinations excessive force around the country, go into that database, and if police department reporting that information, they wouldn't be certified. So we do believe in one national point where you can go in and get a determinations of excessive force on who enforcement candidates for jobs. You've recently said that you believe Antifa to be a terrorist organization. What's your basis for that belief? Are. A terrorist organization. I said, we're investigating it as domestic terrorism but. in Thika. There a number of a violent extreme groups in the united. States and they're across the spectrum ANTIFA is heavily represented in the recent riots. That's not to say they're the only group involve. and a they have been identified as involved in a number of the of the violent mob actions that have taken place around the country. and Mr Attorney. General. I saw the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Recently say that Antigua's a myth. That, their involvement in this violence isn't something that that is real. What's your reaction to the chairman, but I don't think it's a myth. ANTIFA is is Can Be. Best Thought of I. THINK AS A as a umbrella term for what is essentially a movement comprised of loosely organized groups around the country and some of these some areas of the country. There are a number of groups and there are sort of centers of activity. The groups. As I say are loosely organized, but they are definitely organized But as since they have an anarchic temperament, they don't get along very well with each other. So got suggesting it's a national organization that moves nationally. They tend to to get organized for an event and There's a lot of. Organization right before an event occurs, but we see a lot of the organization during the mob file. Have you given consideration to the risk that might befall other American communities if the Department of Justice were not to take action to protect and preserve federal property in places like, PORTLAND? Yes. Absolutely. We are concerned about this problem metastasized and the country. And so we feel that we have to do. In a place like Portland, where even where we don't have the support of the the state of the local government we have to take a stand and defend this federal property. We can't get to a level where we're. We're going to accept these kinds of violent attacks on. Federal. Courts Gentleman, goes back, Mitch Richmond. Let. Me also say you mentioned bogus Russia Gate in your opinion, as attorney, General of the United States of America. Russia, interfere our attempt to interfere in the two thousand, sixteen election. Yes. In your position is determined general, the United States is Russia attempting to interfere in the twenty twenty presidential election. I think I think we have to assume that they are. Thank you, sir. Now. Let's talk about the integrity of the election, which is also something Congressman Lewis. Fought for jared. Kushner. Implied that the president could move the election day. Can a sitting US president move in election? Day. Actually, I haven't looked into that question under the constitution. To US code section seven says, proud election day is the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. So if you take that is correct statute. Is there any? Action. By president never been asked the question before I've never looked into it. As Attorney General. United. States, do you believe that this twenty twenty presidential election will be rigged? have. No reason to think it will be. A president trump tweeted. That the election will be rick, but he also tweeted that when he was losing to Hillary Clinton and he tweeted that. Day. After it was box showed that he was losing to trump, but I don't want to be too political. Do you believe as the Torney General of the United States? That mail in voting will lead to massive voter fraud? I think there's a high risk that it will. Do you ever vote by mail in ballot. Apparently, I, did once at least. But. You believe that other people voting by mail could lead to massive for how what I've talked about made very clear is that I'm not talking about accommodations to people who have to be out of the state or have some particular need not to a inability to go invoke. What I'm talking about is the wholesale conversion of election to. You voting. You do understand that. African Americans disproportionately. Do not survive covert. Nineteen. Corona. Virus, you are aware that I didn't hear the question. You are aware that African Americans black people disproportionately die from covid nineteen corona virus. Correct. I. Yes. I think and not that it would be. The first time that African Americans were risk their lives to vote in this country to preserve its democracy but the suggestion is that. Them having the ability to vote by mail would somehow. Lead to massive voter fraud, but I won't stick to that. No. I didn't say that I just stayed I. Think what is a reality? which is that if you have wholesale mail voting substantially increases the risk of fraud that doesn't make it lightly said now also saw on TV that the president said, he's not sure that he'll accept the election results. Can a president just protest because he lost election? Protest chance. Woken a contest election just because he simply loses Gore versus. Bush Gore. was over a slim voter margin. I'm talking about it is very clear that the president has lost. The election does he have a remedy to contest the election not that I'm aware of? Let me go back to what? Representative Bass mentioned. You mentioned the number that there were eight. African. American. Killed by the police, an eleven white people killed by the police. She gives you. If you use those numbers, that's eighty. Five percent of that population is why fifteen percent of that population is black. But if you actually look at the deaths according to the numbers, you just gave forty, two percent of the deaths are African, American, and fifty, eight percent of white. That is A. Glaring disparity in terms of population, and I just give you those numbers. Early because I feel just it by WHO by. The race of the criminal. No I just did that for you. I'm using your numbers and according to your numbers. African Americans are four or five times more likely. than their percentage of the population to be killed by police than their. Actual I just wanted to give you that based on your numbers. Actually, the studies I've seen have suggested two things. One that in fact. Police. Are less likely. To shoot at a black suspect, a little bit more likely to shoot it white. However, that black that police are are more inclined to use NONLETHAL FORCE IN A. Contact, with an African. American suspect. So those are the those in terms of the statistics. That's what it looks like to me. Mr Jordan is recognized. Thirty Eight People Unmasked Michael Flynn's name forty nine times in a two month timeframe. Seven people at the Treasury Department. Unmasked Michael Flynn's name. Is this an issue that Mr Derm looking into? I've asked another US attorney to look into the issue of unmasking because of. The high number of unmasking and some that do not. Readily appear to have been. In the line of normal business, wait a minute I want to be clear. So there is there is another investigation on that issue specifically going on at the Justice Department right now. Yes. Mr Durham is looking at how the whole trump. Russia. Thing started. You have another US attorney. Can you give us that US Attorney's name or is that something you're doing John Bash of Texas John Texas is looking specifically at the fact unmasking. Is Funding, the police. A rational policy. No I think if anything more concerned that the police be adequately funded today and get more resources, a lot of the things we need to do to address, some of the concerns people have about what they saw in. Minneapolis, we're GONNA take some resources some of the training. That we have to do and one of the difficulties in our country difficulty, it's a fact we have eighteen thousand for US agency, some most very small, and so we have to find a way of training. Making sure the training is pushed out dangerous dangerous to defunding police, extremely dangerous gentleman years Mr Jeffrey. Let's the Attorney General. What will you do if Donald trump loses the election on November third but refuses to leave office on January? Twentieth. If. If the results are clear, I would leave office. Do. You believe that there is any basis, all legitimacy to donald trump's recent claim. That he can't provide an answer as to whether he would leave office. I really am not familiar with these comments or the context in which they occurred. So I'm going to give commentary on. Okay. Thank you. You just stated that publicly about a week ago to Fox News. Is recognized. was there violence and attempts to burn down, vandalize the building and attack? Civilian employees of the federal government prior to any other federal agents or the reinforcements being sent in a federal agents. My recollection is our our main effort to reinforce was around the fourth of July period and had been going on for quite a while before. Can you do you want to expand on right on the actions regarding Lafayette Lafayette Park? Right. So I two, thousand, nine, thirtieth and thirty. First, there was unprecedented rioting. Right around the white. House very violent. During that time, as you say, about fifty park police in comparable numbers, my recollection of Secret Service So we had about nine, I think around ninety officers injured. I'm talking about things like concussions. One was operated on and so forth. we had the president was so bad that as it's been reported, the Secret Service recommended the president down to the. We had a breach of the Treasury Department. the historical building on on Lafayette, Park was burned down the lodge saint. John's was was set on fire. Bricks were thrown at the police. Repeatedly, they took crowbars and pride up the pavers at on Lafayette, Park and through those at the police balloons of caustic liquid thrown on the police and It was clear when I arrived at the white. House on Monday. There was total consensus that the we couldn't allow that to happen So close to the white. House that kind of rioting, and therefore we had to move the perimeter out. One block, push it up toward street, and there was already a plan in being at that point that the police the secret service had worked out the night before. which was to put the perimeter further away and then give them time to put a non scalable fence across the northern part of the park. During the day during Monday, the factors that led to the timing of it were that that movement was going to be made as soon as they were enough units in place to actually perform it and units were very slow in getting into place throughout the day much my frustration because I wanted move. Before there was a big buildup of demonstrators. and also the fencing had to be delivered and when things were accomplished, the tactical a commander in charge of the park police proceeded with the with the movement of pushing he. The perimeter. So this was this was something conceived of long. Before didn't turn on the nature of the crowd although I would say the crowd is very unruly and and while the tactical considerations were made by the park police you know they tried to respond to the situation to say that this had to do. The photo is I don't mean to analogize this to a military operation, but it's Ken this saying that we invaded the Philippines in world. War. Two. So Douglas mccarthur could walk through the surf on the beach. One follows the other, but we did not invade. Philippine. So Douglas McArthur could walk to the beach. Generally back. Mr Swallow. At your confirmation hearing you were asked, do you believe a president could lawfully issue a pardon in exchange for the recipients promised not incriminating? New said. That would be a crime. You were asked, could a president issue a pardon in exchange for the recipients promised to not from him and you responded? No, that would be a crime. Is that right? Yes. Said, you said a crime. You didn't say the wrong. You didn't say be unlawful. You said you'd be. And when you said that that a president swapping pardoned silence, a witness would be a crime. You were promising the American people that if you saw that you would do something about. Is that right? That's right. Now Mr Bar, are you investigating Donald Trump for commuting the prison sentence of his longtime friend and Political Adviser Roger? Stink. No. Why Not Why should I? Are. You familiar with the December third two, thousand, eighteen tweet were Donald Trump said Roger. Stone had shown guts by testifying against him? No I'm not familiar with that. You. Don't read the president's tweets. Well. There's a lot of evidence in the president's treats Mr Attorney General I think you should start reading them because he said, Mr Stones. Choke guts, but on July ten of this year Roger Stone declared a reporter. I had twenty nine thirty conversations with trump during the campaign period. Trump knows I was under enormous pressure to turn on him. It would have eased my situation considerably, but I didn't the prosecutors wanted me to play Judas. I refused. Are you familiar with that stone statement? Actually. I'm not. So how can you sit here and tell us why should I investigate the president of the United States if you're not even aware of the facts concerning the president using the pardon or commutation power? To swap the silence of a witness. Because we require you know a reliable predicate before we open a criminal investigation and I just gave you side I. Don't consider I considered a very rube. Goldberg feary that you will. It sounds like you're hearing the and by the way by. Is surrounded NBA a lot to be a lot more people under investigation. Mr Attorney General. The very same day that, Roger. Stone's said that Donald. Trump. That's one of the no surprise standards of justice. We're really during the tail end of the Obama. General. Let's turn to the Michael Cohen, case. Are. You aware Sir that Michael Cohen after being released from prison was asked not engaged with the media including to write a book. Were you wear that that was going to be asked of him? Was I aware? Yes. No. Do you know if anyone else in your department was aware. Maybe, I should tell you what happened. Why don't you tell us what? He was furloughed from the Bureau of Prisons No. Why don't you tell us why he was asked I was telling you because something that people don't seem to understand is that his home confinement was not being supervised by the Bureau of prisons and it was it was being supervised by the Probation Office, which is part of the US court system, and it was the US court system that had the requirements about. That US court system called your actions retaliatory. that. So I know is what I what has been said in court before the judge and in the record, this is that the individual. was then called by the US court system saying that this Guy Cohen is uncooperative, he's not agreeing to the conditions and at that point bureau of Prisons, person made the decision that he was no longer eligible for home. Instead of federal judge said, no other inmate had ever been asked of in his experience gentleman's time expired Mr Liu. Thank you. MR, chair. Thank you Mr Bar for being here today like ask you some questions about the legal standard for seizing arresting protesters. Under the fourth amendment, it requires probable cause before you can season. A protest there. Correct. Yes. Okay and their probable cause has be particularized to a particular person. So, if a protester was merely standing around a crowd in vicinity of someone else suspected of criminal activity, you cannot arrest that fees for protesters. In other words, there's no such thing as probable caused by mere association. Correct. Not Strictly, but I'll say that you know you do need particularized probable cause. Okay and if there's no problem with 'cause, there's someone sent to a getaway car on their three or four people in there. That might be enough to give you probable cost. Just those circumstances. You needed an each claiming, my kindness, her attorney general, there is no problem. 'cause you can't arrest a protest. Correct. I said at the beginning arrest has be predicated on probable cause. Are, right now and arrest can also occur whether or not. The federal official says, it's an arrest. So for example, if federal officer cakes or protester into custody transport that protests that are, let's say a federal building detains a person for questioning that will constitute an arrest whether or not. That federal official says, the is under arrest correct. That would require very intensive. Review of all the specifics involved. Actually In the case of dunaway versus New York, which is black letter law for over forty years. The question is whether the police violated the fourth and fifteenth amendments when without probable cause to arrest, they took petitioners into custody transported, Hampshire, police, station Eddie, paint him for questioning. The answer is, yes. That would constitute an early answer is that you know fourth amendment is ultimately governed by reasonableness and there can be circumstances. The question sometimes is, when does something actually become claiming my time? Federal Forces and Portland did was unconstitutional. Federal Forces. In full combat year in a dark of night. Grab a protester was peacefully standing there forced them into an unmarked van drove entries separate location searched in detained and questioned him. That is a police states do. Joe US veterans. Let's go. Thank you Mr Chair since representative Lewd and allow you any time to answer his allegations. Would you care to answer any of his allegations? Yes. Obviously, I don't know all the particulars of any individual case out there but. Based on my general understanding of what had happened was that when they tried to affect wait arrests of the ringleaders, the people are engaged in violence that they saw with lasers and so forth and they went out, they're immediately swarmed by people in Black, and there was a lot of violence. So they couldn't affect the rest. So the modus operandi was changed and based on specific information as the individuals who were seeing doing things and identified, they later tried to pick them up. When there was less of a risk of this kind of mob response. The fact that if you have information that someone has a laser and his using it, and later pick him up and he doesn't have it. It doesn't mean that there wasn't probable cause. It means he doesn't have the laser. The question is you know, was it reasonable for you to rely on the information that you had? Had and the identification of that individual and some cases, it could be a missile identification and other cases. It could be the person you know ditch the laser. So there is a distinction between whether the person ultimately can be shown to have violated the law, and whether there was probable cause for the police to make the inquiry and take him and interrogate him or ask them questions at least. Why do you think these autonomous zones in democrat-led cities are dangerous to America. Starting with the. Dangerous because. They are purporting to keep on the outside duly constituted authority of the government. There also to me outrageous because these the people who were living now under this autonomous zone having selected the government, they've selected the duly authorized government of the city and the state. So it's quite an outrage that people would would take US force to take over an area. What what makes me concern for the country is the first time in my memory that the leaders of. One of our great to political parties. The Democratic Party. Not Coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts. Why can't we just say the violence against federal courts has to stop. Could we hear something like that? Committee will resume. Mississippi Cellini. Is it ever appropriate for the president or presidential candidate to accept or solicit foreign assistance of any kind in his election? No, it's not appropriate. You forcefully condemned processes this morning, but let me ask you Sir why have you not condemn the federal office? You're sending into cities without proper training or attempting to take away the concentration constitutional rights of Americans peacefully protesting are having condemned protestors. Protestors are good demonstrations are good part of the first. amendment. Condemning his people commit crime. We agreed you think it's ever appropriate Mr, BAR officers to use force against peaceful protesters. Yes or no? Not against peaceful protest. So you also don't mention in your statement today or your testimony that federal offices have even teargassed elected representatives. So let me ask you, sir, do you think it's ever appropriate to use tear gas on peaceful protesters? Yes or no? Well the problem in these things sometimes occur because it's hard to separate people, Mr Bar, my question is very specific. Do you think it is ever appropriate to use tear gas on peaceful protesters? Are. Now. It is. It is appropriate to use tear gas when it's indicated to disperse peaceful version, unlawful assembly and stir unfortunately peaceful protesters are affected. Mitsubishi's recognized. Isn't it true? The inspector general found the FBI under the Obama Biden administration made seventeen significant errors in the applications are avail candidate trumps can't pain, associate. Carter. Page. I. Think. That's right. How many years are acceptable when the FBI is targeting Americans. None are acceptable. Why is it so important for surveillance targeting Americans to be Arafat. Well. Especially, under under five which Is a counter intelligence tool and doesn't have the same built in protections that the criminal justice process would have. It's very important because you're going to be. Spying. On Americans that you have you know you've demonstrated an appropriate basis for doing that and Therefore. There's a special burden on the investigative agency. In this case, the FBI to have accurate information as to the basis of their surveillance. and. I think the bureau is has been working very hard to correct those problems into put in place much more. Effective system of. That the information is accurate. Yield the remainder time Mr. Jordan. What's What's more important government putting limits on? Protesting are putting limit on attending church. Are they're both first amendment. Exact. Exactly. We should treat an assumption we. Gentleman's time's expired mistrial Paul. He was Mr Brian Heroically. The president believes that you can be activated to implement the President's agenda and dominate American people exercising First Amendment rights if they're protesting against him, but let's look at how you respond when the protesters are supporters of the president. On two separate occasions after President Trump tweeted, liberate, Michigan to subvert, stay home orders to protect the public health of people in Michigan. Protesters swarmed the Michigan capital carrying guns, somewhat swastikas, confederate flags, and one even with a dark-haired doll with a noose around its neck. Are you aware that these protesters called for the governor to be lynched shot and beheaded? No. You're not aware of that or was not were major protests in Michigan. You're the attorney general and you didn't know that the protesters called for the governor to be lynched shot and beheaded. So obviously, you couldn't be concerned about that. Well, there are a lot of protests around the United States and on June. Worried about the district of Columbia which. Parts of the country. You're very aware of those when protesters with guns and I'm very. Aware of like pro. Time and I control it. Dollar Eddie. Let me just could. I just ask for one minute though do respond yet. As I made clear moving H street out to is street as the perimeter was a decision made The day before it was justified by the extreme rioting was going on around the White, house? I don't remember Captain Demarco. Who has the same captain DeMarco who ran as a Democratic candidate for Congress and Maryland even being close to the discussions as to what was going on? Now. The fact is that the movement was not geared to the behavior of that particular crowd. It was geared to the fact that we were moving the perimeter actually could put a fence up on h street by h straight. So, but it is a fact that the park police reported and I saw myself projectiles being thrown from that crowd. So I did not consider them peace all peaceful protesters and I'm sorry, thank you for giving me that. What about the autonomous zone in Seattle? Carswell John Paul has said and I quote that it's a peaceful protests zone. Is it a peaceful protest zone? No I as I already said, it's outrageous that people set themselves up and over a piece of territory where the people in there have not selected them as the government and try to exercise sovereign authority. That's an outrage and. We. People handing out guns to uh. People to quote, keep the peace and so forth. It was anarchy there. Gentleman, yields back demings. On June nineteenth, you annouce Mr Berman would be stepping down. Then let me just be clear when you told. America. That Mr Berman was stepping down did Mr Berman. Tell you. He was stepping down. No, but but stepping down is the language that I am told. Okay, you did not tell you that. No, but it's the language we usually use to leave the. Flexibility as to whether whether the person doing it on June twentieth. When asked about the basis for Mr. Berman's removal on the very day you announced, he was being fired stepping down the president's personal attorney Mr. Giuliani suggests that that and I quote the reason may lie in the fact that Berman's office got involved in what Giuliani described as baseless investigations. Sir, if that wasn't true. If YOU DIDN'T REMOVE MR? Berman, because he was overseeing investigations of the president and those close him, why would the president is personal attorney? Think that I'm sorry. What did he say and win I? Didn't hear the quote. Mr Giuliani suggests that win when June twentieth. June twenty that he may have been fired because he was investigating baseless investigation wealthy said that that's that's nonsense number one. Anyone. Familiar with the Department of Justice would say they're removing component head is not going to have any effect on any pending investigation arm ceremonies records recognized for five minutes. Acting Secretary. Wolf has said that the violent mobs publishing personal information of federal officers jeopardizing not only them, but their families, why is docking federal agents so dangerous and are you concerned about? Well, it's dangerous because. People can take retaliation against their homes, their families, or or then when they're when they're by themselves. See some of these Latin American countries in Central America where the police are very, very brave because the gangs are trying to deal with go to their houses and killed their families and you know you never think that can happen here. But you could never think some of the stuff we're seeing today could ever happen here. Back when the Supreme Court struck down the president's attempt to. Put His citizenship question on the census. At that time the president announcing executive order to collect citizenship information by other means and at that time. You made reference to a dispute over whether illegal aliens can be included in the importunate purposes. Is that what you're referring to answer I think that I could have been referring to the Alabama case. So I can't remember the DOJ studying this issue. Have you concluded? Can you provide this committee with discussions? Any Research? Any concluding memos on that issue are looking to partake. We have considered it, and as I sat our advice is Has Been that congress does have the power to define the term inhabitant to either include or exclude. About the president's executive. Orders Twelve Congress has delegated that power to the commerce secretary. So as the law stands now I think the commerce secretary that delegate of congressional power can defined that term. That's a reasonable ARGUMENT TO MAY MISDEMEANOR GOOSE RECOGNIZED Earlier this year on February tent, you stated that you had set up a quote intake process for submission of information. Excuse me intake process end quote for submission of information relating to the Ukraine to the Justice Department, and that included quote is your words anything Mr Giuliani might provide your recall making those comments something along those lines. You can see there isn't anything standard about the attorney general creating special process for information related to advancing I. Disagree. I also made it clear that that is a vetting process that's available to anybody. Is that right? which US Attorney have you assigned to receive information from Vice President, Biden's personal lawyers regarding president trump? Well, maybe if they had vetted the dossier, there's no they vetted. Dr. The attorney general, there's no US attorney, of course that you've appointed to do that because. This process is unprecedented. Now, it was cautionary so that we do not to lose the criminal investigative process with Ukrainian information you an opportunity to explain the intake process. My standing is that you have directed. You are going to give me an opportunity plan intend to right now the eastern district. Of New, York, the US attorney responsible for that district understanding is that you have asked that use attorney to be responsible for the intake process. Is that right? That's wrong. The US attorney, the US attorney in the Eastern District was given oversight of all Ukrainian related cases. Any new cases involving Ukraine faced a problem with Ukraine which unreliable information coming in I, appreciate a lot of corruption. They're all of mirrors Mr Transgender, and I wanted to make sure that before we got into criminal proceedings and this was to everyone's benefit. Particularly, vice president diagonal that the information was scrubbed. I. Appreciate Khun Jody. Intelligence demand, the memo that you issued, which said any and all new matters relating to Ukraine shelby directed exclusively to. To the Eastern District of New, York for investigation inappropriate handling. Just as you described right now. Now, of course, the US attorney responsible in the eastern, district of new. York was recently changed my understanding a few weeks ago. You announced that Seth Ducharme would be taking over to replace Rich Donohue Mr Ducharme. Prior, Pittsburgh is in charge of the vetting on Mr Attorney General Prior to taking this position Mr. Ducharme worked at main department, of Justice, is that correct? Yes. He was a counselor to me and then and then he was the the principal deputy. Assistant Deputy Attorney General. That's right and rather than having the acting us attorney the deputy US attorney rather in that district swap John Now have appointed your prior council to oversee that very same process with that I, yield back my time chairman. Mr Stanton, can you commit to the American people that you will not interfere with the decisions of state and local authorities to use vote by mail absentee ballots in the twenty twenty elections? That's a yes or no question. I think the federal government has very limited ability to get involved in this, but I'm not gonNA give up whatever ability we have to ensure the integrity of the election. I've never, you know my observation was simply that it wouldn't inject some uncertainty into the election process and it would opens up the. Fraud An iphone? Import the president has suggested that only votes counted on election day should be what matters meeting that if a voter casts a legal ballot on or before. Election? Day. Ballot is not counted on election day. It shouldn't count at all. So I wanna ask you again about your commitment to ensuring that every vote is counted. If in this upcoming November election, the president asks you to intervene and try to stop states from county legal ballots after election day. Will you do the right thing and refuse yesterday? I will follow the law. You're won't say, no sir. I was follow the law. It's very disappointed. Well, if a state has a law that says, if a state has a law that says, it has to be cast on election day. That's the law. Making. Sure. The Department of Justice does not get involved in a contested. No. I will follow the law is Dean is recognized. So yes or no, and this is a yes or no? Sir, have you begun an investigation of the use of excessive force in Lafayette Square I? Think the is looking at everything related to. The anti-european. Investigating the ideas investigating. That he does not get fired. Tragically. What happened in Lafayette, square longer an isolated incident? Use of chemical here. Has Been used in more than ninety cities. My colleague showed you the video of the navy vet. Being pepper sprayed and beaten stones broken. Whether or not. You thought this was appropriate at the time. Have you now called for law enforcement to stop using these chemical irritants on protesters? Yes or no pepper spray? Yes. No. Now I think it's a very important nonlethal option. For protesters, know for rioters. For protest for rioters. Carswell Powell, do you commit to not releasing any report by Mr Germ before the November election? No. You don't commit to that. No, so you will be. Justice policy. Justice you want your fear in any political investigations before the November election. We're not going to interfere. In fact, I've made it clear. I'm not going to tolerate under oath. You're saying that you do not commit to not releasing a report by Durham. Not Going to. Any report will will be in my judgment, not one, it is covered by the policy would disrupt the election time ten. I've already made it clear that the. Department of Justice Policy Mr, Barton, don't you tell me what that pilots? Well actually. Do you want me to repeat it for you know what the policy. Escobar's recognized. I'm alarmed by your department's refusal to comply with an implement key supreme court rulings on June eighteenth of this year. The Supreme Court in an opinion authored by Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the trump administration's attempt to resend Daca was arbitrary and capricious and required the administration to process new dock applications despite the Supreme Court's ruling zero, Daca applications have been process. That's not the only. Supreme. Court decision, your administration has ignored in twenty seventeen year department issued a memo stating that transgender workers were not protected by civil rights laws. The Supreme Court struck that down to. You. Know I'm sorry in both shed. What's sexy four act did not extend to reclaiming my time Sir in both Daca, the DACA and transgender decisions. Your department has yet to comply yes or no. Will the department implement the Supreme Court's DACA and transgender rulings. Yes, I think we are. The DACA ruling. You are you are now processing daca applications. I think what we're trying to do now is is restored the administrative process. has put out a rule. I think DHS put out a rule. Sir, you keep telling us that you're not aware of the president's tweets. Are you aware that your department has stated that the president's tweets are official White House statements? No I wasn't. Okay. Don't pay attention to. The my attention. The law fair podcast is produced in cooperation with the Brookings Institution. If you haven't yet please get on facebook and twitter and tell your friends and followers about the law fair podcast and give us a rating and review wherever you listen to us. You can also purchase law fair SWAG AT WWW dot the law fair store DOT COM. This episode was edited by me. Elena. Kagan until next time. Thanks for listening.
"Thing about you to make that possible least go to pod survey dot com slash reset and ticket quick anonymous survey. That'll help us get to know you better once you've complete to keep our show going we need the help of great advertisers and we WanNa make sure those advertisers are ones that you actually want to hear from to do that we need to this is reset right now. People in Hong Kong are still using H K map live except that instead of accessing it through an it's been largely leaderless so much of it is organized online later that was two weeks ago now apple got slammed for the decision notably by US lawmakers Democrat and Republican who wrote CEO. Tim Cook a letter passing their concern. Now we've been hearing a lot about how American businesses have been walking efimov in line with China the gaming it's P. O. D. S. U. R. V. E. Y. dot com slash reset Mary Hoy you've been reporting on the months-long protests in Hong Kong for the news each moment or series of long series of moments it's not just any activision blizzard got caught up in this and so did the NBA even Lebron James but in the case of apple the decision makes now could alter how every the way you might want to avoid an orange flag has been raised which means that rubber bullets might be five imminently take a political movement it's very much a movement made up of many many different individuals who each have their own stories to tell Mary you recently reported a story for courts about an APP that's being used by pro democracy protesters in Hong Kong can you explain from the very start apple wasn't sure what to do about hp map dot live it's designed to help protesters and residents in Hong Kong locate police website quarts how does it feel to be on the ground when all of this is going on it is a highly and jet powerful child from places to avoid if you don't want to get hit by blue died was a canon phone APP they're getting it through a browser or an android APP here's how it works Mary Hogan opened up from I type in Hong Kong at thought life hey there was a protest going on just down the road from me in the neighborhood of course obey and it's often been a flashpoint of protests so I'm just out of eyeshot pull up this map where you will then see all sorts of symbols showcasing where police might be where they might be moving in at this time and then maybe a block away is a squad of police I would see kind of symbols for the police is end demonstrations and when it was initially submitted to the APP store apple rejected but then apple changed its mind and proved it before finally banning it a few days interview's its role in dictating what companies can and should do I'm Arial Jim Ross Oh just this protest movement this on several different grounds first of all it is seen as an act of censorship I suppose on the pulse of apple too came out with a commentary and said that apple by approving this had made a unwise and reckless decision and that thing this app yes but everybody seems kind of upset with apple for having removed it from the APP store does this actually matter that apple did that I think it matters open the APP zoo men to the neighborhood of course obey and see okay at this intersection there are number of protesters gathered here this APP was quote poisonous and so apple felt the heat and I think than decided in response to criticism from Chinese state media in response to us to continue using the dog Emoji police okay so it is Hong Kong user approved dog Emoji it is so you are still currently used gene how the APP works and how protesters are using it as protests that you might pull up your phone to figure out okay where should I go next what's happening up front takeoff this APP and it seems directly in response also to pressure from China so what happened really was that the APP maker had has reached into the Chinese they apparatus enough that they would rather it not be seen by their own citizens but of course oh fits ahead of values of freedom and democracy and this isn't the only way that tech companies have sort of capitulated to the then I will then see the page load with a map of Hong Kong I would look very much like open street map oh google map so you see the whole of Hong Kong and let's say lied to put this APP on the apple APP store and it was often a bit of back and forth it was finally approved but soon off the Chinese state media focuses might be where do things stand with apple now think to a lot of phone congas apple's decision is just the latest in a string of Emoji for police it's an insult I suppose that protesters have have adopted for the police there was actually a vote taken earlier on asking tests likely factored into the decision so how do you feel about that I take it partly as a compliment that are what I suppose what many see as foreign and mostly American companies have capitulation on the Beijing China pressure to wchs do you think that's true there is no evidence to prove that that has been the case at all and in fact not only is there no evidence that's not at all how the that's after the break hiring the right symbolise the Mac users is a dog Emoji for the police and work emojis for protesters really yes is there a significance behind using the Chinese government An apple has actually done this in in a number of ways it took down the Taiwanese flag emoji from iphone keyboards and removed at your news organizations thanks so much for having me free speech Democracy Apple's actions undermine those values but could it have done things any differently Mary Hoy is a reporter for courts Mary thank you so much for talking to me I know it's late and I really appreciate it. Adaptability Lincoln looks beyond the work skills and connects you with the candidates who match your business perfectly and when you're hiring you can actually look through a person's profile ooh toe the Communist Party's ideological line and too many Hongkongers I guess this shows that many of these companies are putting users on telegraph the Telegraph Channel for Hong Kong live should we continue using the dog Emoji for the police or should we use the police chief of police and actually the overwhelming it's time consuming honestly not everybody has that kind of time but you shouldn't let a time crunch get in the way of finding the right candidates for your business that's why linked in walks if apple had taken the time to actually use the APP and look how it actually works they will realize that as actually impossible and and see how previous employers have endorsed them that's really useful these skills qualifications and other insights help Lincoln paint a better picture of potential candidates up from the Chinese APP store the the Courts News App Right now is no longer available in China are you the reason that that the courts news APP was removed from the Chinese is the best place to post your job Lincoln jobs screens candidates with the hard and soft skills you're looking for so you can hire the right person fast things like collaboration creativity today with Lincoln jobs you can pay what you want and the first fifty dollars is on them just visit Lincoln Dot com slash reset that's Lincoln Dot com slash we a lot of things are going on between apple in China China is one of Apple's biggest markets it's weird apple manufacturers get to get fifty dollars off your first job post terms and conditions apply aw within the nature of the APP to be able to provide information of where exactly what a single individual officer or even a t why would it have been more strategic for apple to say you know what we're removing this APP because China asked us I also see it as a pelvic regis affront to to press freedom and I much rather than what happened how Lincoln can make sure your job gets in front of people you want to hire it's no wonder great candidates are hired every eight seconds on linked in find the right person meant for your business its products and its where apple has I think the biggest conflict between its ideals and values and the reality of authoritarian we've been told that this APP is being used by protesters to target the police commit acts of violence none of this is supported there's no proof of this and they said well you know the the is that apple says it was its own decision it didn't blame the Chinese government for the pressure and said we've looked at the APP we've had reports we see like a a notable one is breaking encryption I message right if the United States government decides that inscriptions backdoor apple has no choice but to comply they have to Neil Patel you are the editor in chief of the verge and you've been covering apple for years what happened between apple and China comply with what the government says in this case they have to comply with what the Chinese government wants why would apple blame its own sort of values judgment here blaming up store it's hard to say because they didn't give an exact reason but given the timing I would think that at least my and my colleagues coverage upon conference truth which is the Chinese government pressuring Apple Germany this out they could have just passed in fact they didn't that is the center point of the conflict it's going to have to come to a reckoning with China and the fact that it has this massive exposure to China and the fact that in the Chinese market it has capitulated he demands it would never capitulate to the American market so I- cloud servers in China are run by a Chinese firm with Chinese state investment potentially control it's where the Chinese government does have the ability to sort of shape the Chinese economy where they can see their sales in China fall that is a critical market for apple their financial so apple has an out every company has you have to follow the law of the countries where you're doing business in the United States oftentimes the United States wants to pass policies that apple doesn't is there so that's just a lot of exposure to the Chinese government this is a small hit I think for apple if you look at their stock price unaffected by all of this in a way that so apple taking out this APP that protesters in Hong Kong using its record into protests is obviously a concession to the government the big problem the APP store because it was illegal Lebron's news app the Courts News App why was that APP illegal because they were covering the protests in Hong Kong that is a huge problem for apple decide to ban the APP right apple said that their reason for removing the APP from the APP store was because it was being used to target police officers and sort of facilitated violent attacks didn't offend China that is a huge decision for apple to make it is a decision that other Hollywood studios routinely make but it's a new set of decisions for apples it's mind over a random APP like Hong Kong map live and the courts news app these things seem kind of small what does it tell you about China's state of mind right now when the Internet was first sort of being established there is a lot of sense that you couldn't stop it Bill Clinton famously said Conference Ashley now as they're extending their reach just from selling hardware from selling operating system to news and entertainment apple runs apple news is apple in Congress have told us this is I think that is a mistake it's a mistake for apple to enter that sort of value judgment zone when everyone kind of knows the formats every quarter is actually affected in meaningful ways so the Chinese government has just a lot of control or apple's business not to mention they actually manufacture the product a now defected at all doesn't mean going up in on certain days what is your judgment of how apple is handling this I think will does Wanna be values driven company true reckoning about that trade especially with China speech issues but that is a choice apple could've making in his choice they chose not to make does it make sense that China which sort of lose against competitors like marks Hooker what would have been the alternative for apple what do you think the company should have done I do think one answer is look we have to follow the laws comply with the law and we see that in the United States it's a messaging issue I think it's a messaging issue it's also a risk issue that message carries a significant which is strong which does exist it's basically messaging we're going to continue to try to export American values that is the promise of globalization that it's the trade we've sort of made the APP and the way that it's used instead of blaming China why would he do that I think apple has a strong interest in irritating the Chinese government especially in the car news going to be censored if they decide to extend to China well that is a huge decision for them to make there were reports that Apple TV plus show runners were asked to make sure that their shows amount of globalized information economy globalised market the strictest speech standards for the largest market are Chinese extraordinary state control if it is used in the absence services that we're talking about here they might seem like small potatoes but they are fundamentally just simply unlike the Web in China's closedown apple closes the APP store they are in charge of what gets in and out of that store so they remove the courts APP true is that you can stop the Internet that you can in fact filter what people see that you can you can shut it down entirely if you want to shut it down entirely you can the Internet is a tool of way I've been thinking about it is a little out there but go with me I think about emission standards so California has the strongest car emissions standard countries where we do business people in China love apple we will continue to fight for China to open up we will continue to fight for the values we hold dear but we haven't had mountain frisk especially in the context of the trade war so for apple to say we disagree with the Chinese government at this moment we will comply because we were forced to but we are going to push for them to change is a message it could be retaliated against the message that could affect their market in China it's a message that strikes it sort of the nationalism inside of China next of this larger trade war which doesn't seem to be reaching a conclusion where the majority of its products the vast majority of products might might see increased harasses does apple need China why pay attention to the Chinese government at all it has it's making money all over the world right so if you look at the apple absolutely needs China there's there's no question there it if you look at their financial performance and the growth of iphone sales over the years literally unlocking willing to accept in in in that country it appears the answer is all of it so why should people in the US care about these APPs getting removed in China and Hong Kong does it make sense for companies to constrain your speech doesn't make sense for tech companies in particular which make tools for other people to constrain the range of activities the revenue who'd meaning we change their product cycles and they really do build the products there and moving those supply chains moving those factories movie make especially with a CEO who says privacy as a fundamental human right who has Martin Luther King quoted in his twitter bio right holds himself up as a paragon values bait and so yeah it's the courts out but do you want to be in a position where the next move for China is to say hey you Americans started the words on country so every carmaker comes in wants to play in the United States market builds to California standards strictest it is the most efficient choice to pick California's Matt engineering expertise anywhere else in the world right now appears to be impossible could do it over time maybe with that is a multi year phase out so what you're really saying is also right because otherwise you end up with cars with different car mission standards are all over the country that makes no sense you just WanNa make one car so you make it to California standards tech companies like apple there are others as well they need China and that means that they often end up making decisions that seem sort of anti democracy not small the protesters in Hong Kong but they carry huge consequences and other arenas as this whole conversation with those tools can help on the people that is a huge question it is a philosophical question it is a question that strikes right at the heart of globalization ought to a large extent is not really in the Chinese market apple is there they sell hardware they sell the products they services they can't just walk away from that it would it would meaningfully changes pattern so that is a huge market it's a lot of people for them to serve they are in that market I think very notably Google and facebook are not in the market Microsoft she can walk away from China but you will not make phones for several years okay so you need to phase that transition out okay so what I'm getting from you is that friends and apples level of exposure to Chinese market versus Google and facebook so with that in mind with apple being so vulnerable when it comes to the Chinese market where do you of that larger control right you either do it all the way or you don't do it at all China's chosen to do it all the way and that means courtship has to go in that is just how much control are you you think this is all going I think right now for this incident apple rides out we are seeing that the Chinese government affecting American and to be there apple strategy requires them to be there so there's a different level of exposure when he talked about tech companies bundle them all together there's a there's a massive debt right we're GONNA WE'RE GONNA open up the market to the world America's GonNa go out we're going to export our values our democracy our free speech I don't know if that trade has come to fruition I think this is a moment a new carrier in China with the spike in revenue was a spike in in iphone users year-over-year they they ran out of countries to go into they ran out of big Chinese mobile carriers in that growth give us a five star rating and review on Apple podcasts it really helps we'll be back on Thursday later nerds inside of Google their employees do not want to build a censored search hundreds of Chinese government facebook Mark Zuckerberg learn mandarin like he he was he wanted to be in China. If you haven't already subscribe to reset on Apple podcasts stitchers spotify podcasts overcast or in your favorite podcast APP and if you like what you hear and Google more recently has been trying to build a search engine for China very controversial secret and our own place had no stop this and there are still rumors that are trying to do it but some in China it feeds into the trade and you end up in a place where Attorney General William Barr says look you're making concessions to the Chinese government the Internet's going to come in China and they're going to try to stop it it's like nailing Gelato Awal never in left everyone everyone just assumed that you couldn't stop the Internet what is abundantly in companies story is not going away I think the big danger for apple is a story continues to grow if he's infant nationalism in the United States and the nationals it of course all the companies are going to pick the most restrictive standard it's going to work if you meet the Chinese standards of course you're GonNa meet the nights okay that makes sense for Kardashian's did the quick survey you can even choose to enter for a chance to win a one hundred dollars Amazon
April 9, 2019: Hour 1
"Support for here. And now comes from ember wave presenting this message ember wave, the revolutionary new personal thermostat ember. Wave is designed to make you comfortable in any environment. Learn more at ember wave dot com and use the code NPR to save fifty dollars at checkout from NPR and WBZ. You are I'm Jeremy Hobson. I'm Robin young. It's here and now attorney general William Barr told congress today that he'll soon be able to release special counsel Robert Muller's report on his Russia investigation. A redacted version not the full report from my standpoint within a week, I will be in a position to release the port to the public, and then I will engage with the chairman of oath judiciary committee's about that report about any further requests that they have Democrats on the house appropriations committee zeroed in on how bar summarize Muller's more than three hundred page report in a four-page letter in just forty eight hours. And why he reached a conclusion that Muller? Did not that. There was not enough evidence. The President Trump tried to obstruct the investigation NPR national security editor Phil Ewing is here. I fill Harbin, and I how did bars. Testimony strike you today. It wasn't supposed to be about any of these things this isn't appropriations committee. But how did what he say you? That's right. The attorney general and his colleague from the Justice department are in congress today talking about their budget. This is something a lot of other cabinet officials are doing right now in congress of the Treasury Secretary in congress today leaders of the military at cetera. The president's budget came out they need to tell members of congress why they should support it. But of course, you can't have the attorney general in your committee without talking about the biggest story myth nut in the world. Certainly in Washington the Muller report, and so Barr when as far as he was prepared to do with this testimony today and say, I'm still working on it. It's still going to come out you'll you'll find out what you want to find out, but no more. So as members of congress pressed him about what he would do or what things had taken place beyond the step that he was prepared to take. Today. He said I'm not going to answer that question. I won't address that now you'll have to wait until this thing comes out. He he did say though, that he offered Muller the chance to review that for page, summary and Muller declined. That's right. And the explanation that Mr. bar gave was that. He thinks that Muller felt that that was all to his bars responsibility. As the attorney general the special counsel regulations, call for the special counsel to give the attorney general a quote, unquote, confidential report, according to the phrasing of the regulation, and then the attorney general then has the privilege to do with it what he or she chooses bar had promised before his confirmation that he would make as much of it public as he could consistent with laws and regulations, and he stuck to that position. And according to bar Muller didn't want to get back into the process after he considered his role in this story. Had concluded a Hawaii democrat Ed case pressed bar on one category of redaction. This is striking out information to protect uncharged people's privacy and reputations. But I'm particularly focused on. Privacy and reputational interests. Because it seems to me that that's an exception that you can just drive a truck through. So I mean, you're the one that says you have discretion to do that. And I'm asking you where does your discretion lie? Where's regulation? So phil. What are we hearing here about what may be a fight on what gets redacted? That's right. There are four areas. The attorney general said that he's going to take out of this report grand jury material, which is secret foreign intelligence, which the spies don't like to have revealed things that bear upon current investigations or cases, including the criminal cases that have spun out of this special counsel investigation, and then fourth this area that involves what bar called peripheral players in the story. And he said it's the practice of the Justice department not to release derogatory information about people who aren't going to be charged. There were a lot of people in the campaign and kind of in the wider Trump world who we know became part of the rush investigation who are not going to face from what we understand today criminal charges. What bars? Saying is that the Justice department shouldn't release things that had found out about them that are derogatory if it isn't going to make a case against them in court, and what Democrats are concerned about is the Justice department under bar who was nominated by the president confirmed by Republicans in the Senate might try to protect the public from information that they should still know even though there aren't criminal charges, but it's a very kind of fuzzy situation because as you heard in that clip, the attorney general says he has the discretion to do that. The question will be what does he take out, and how much politically might help people who Democrats might wanna hurt or might view should have their stories be made public as part of this will be in the first clip we heard about a minute left here. Now in the first clip we heard he seemed to be saying I'm going to do this tactic or redacted report within the week. And then congress can have other requests does that sound like maybe congress can still as they have democratic leaders of committees have asked for an unredacted report is he does he sound? Open to that too. Just that small group with the attorney general today seem to do is open the door to negotiation specifically with the chairman of the House Judiciary committee, Jerry Nadler. He's been very clear saying, I don't wanna redacted document. I want everything the special counsel's office developed because it's my purview as the judiciary committee chairman to get access to that material bar has an agreed to that. But what bar said today was look if Jerry Nadler wants to have a conversation about us giving him more material than what we releasing the report will have that discussion Democrats on that committee have authorized Nadler to subpoena that material if he needs to what isn't clear is whether he and bark and come to some accommodation, or whether he'll have to force the issue with that subpoena and take this case to court NPR national security editor Phil Ewing. Thank you. Thank you. Well, it's been a violent week in Afghanistan with new attacks by the Taliban despite peace talks, they're engaged in twenty Afghan. Soldiers were killed in an assault on an army checkpoint near the border with Pakistan last night. And earlier yesterday four Americans three troops and a contractor died when their convoy hit a roadside bomb near the main US military base in Afghanistan. Joining us now from Kabul is the BBC's show. I Sharif -i sharp. What do these recent attacks say about Taliban strategy right now? Well, Jeremy it says two things it is sort of a mocking the routine typical spring offensive that each it's Mark on by both sides, the Afrin government and the Tana bomb. So at this time of the it is expected to that those size, particularly Taliban intensified if fighting mocking the spring offensive on at the same time because this the mole tangible efforts are underway to make the Taliban sets on negotiation tables anytime that there. The talks off talks the Taliban tried to show that the coming from position of power. They all strong on the Goshi nation table, and they are resilient in the frontline. So they all looking for some high performance targets to show that the coming from position of power will the US has around fourteen thousand troops left in Afghanistan. President Trump has talked about pulling them out. Do you think that part of the strategy here is for the Taliban to put more pressure on the US to pull those troops out more quickly? Yes, indeed. Because somehow they have been given a green light that us troops all leaving of Masan eventually, but the the disagreement is on the timetable, the Taliban are insisting that they want American troops to leave within six months in some say is maximum off year or something that American cited. It's impossible not favorable for the US government interests on the ground, and they insist on that on the negotiation table, but at the same time they intensify their attacks on Afrin on the use backed I've on as security forces positions across the country would the Afghan security forces be ready to take over completely. If the US were to pull all of its troops out or would the Taliban just crush them. Well, in fact, somehow four years from now we had over one hundred sixty thousand international forces American plus NATO forces in Afghanistan on ninety five plus percent has all the left. The the the important thing is not the number of fourteen thousand us troops. It's the sheer. Support intelligence, and as support of the US as support on the ground that the app on food is counting on when they are facing difficult decisions rights now each in fact, this year the US Anna on force drone attacks has tripled. So a lot of the current fighting is entirely or highly dependent to the air support in that if that drops that will really have a bad impact on the government security forces possessions. Otherwise, only fourteen or fifteen thousand troops is not enough. We cannot blanket the whole of the country with the foreign troops in order to support Avalon security forces. They are fiercely fighting, but they are still very very dependent on support intelligence and air support of us forces finally shy. This is the longest war America has ever fought. It will reach the eighteen. Earmark this coming fall. But of course, Afghantistan has been in conflict for decades longer than that. What's the feeling there in Kabul about the future? Somehow this year say peace or some. Yeah. I've. In the last three four weeks. I have been across the country talking to people talking to the Taliban. Some of the Taliban's chief negotiators on both song. It's there's a positive feeling that this conflict somehow Ghana come to an end, or at least will reduce this point. All that feeling some house, sadly is not what is currently happening in the front lines. But the hope is it has never been so positive, but this year that this conflict will eventually come to in a feeling and thought that is shared on those sides of the frontline that is the BBC's Chaib. Sheriff speaking to us from Kabul, Afghanistan, thank you so much. Thank you very much. If you've been paying close attention to the news recently, you've heard a fair amount of remorse. I'm deeply sorry. I cannot change the decision. I made nor can I undo the harm my behavior calls then. And today, you know, my apology was sincere when it was given. And I made it sincere when I gave it again, you know, social warms began to change their shifted and the bounded protected personal space have been reset. I get Joe Biden, Kevin Hart and Ralph Northam, they're all of those statements, followed a huge amount of public outrage. So are there lessons here in how to deal with past mistakes, and are these high profile shaming making us afraid of risk? Joining me now is Martha Crawford a psychotherapist who writes the blog what a shrink thinks, Martha welcome. Hi, thanks for having me. Well, it seems like almost every week. There is another story in the news about someone having to answer for something. They did in the past. Whether it's an. Old tweet. Whether it's an uncomfortable hug or just some mistake that was made many years ago. What do you think about that? I think it's complex. I think that you know, obviously mores are changing. But more importantly, you know, there's often a lot of dialogue about whether this kind of public shaming is okay or not, okay or destructive or not destructive. And they think there's a lot of different components in this that often get kind of lost in the conversation. And I think there's a lot more nuance in these transactions than as often assessed. Wh what do you think is lost in the conversation? We actually have in some ways at bigger problem processing guilt. I think it's very hard for most people in any kind of conversation. Whether it's about me to kinds of shoes or issues related to white privilege or other kinds of failures people become defensive and terrified as soon as any feeling that seems like it might be guilty emerges inside of them. And the. The other thing is were told at a young age that it's okay to make mistakes. And then here we are as adults saying, no, it's not okay. That that mistake is not. Okay. Well, I mean, I think that there's a, you know, a pretty complex transaction that happens, which is one is there's a lot of projection the people involved in the public censure are participating in even if it's behavior that really requires censure. Sometimes we use the opportunity to designate a escape goat who becomes Representative of all of the badness that were contending with all of this embolic failure all of the oppression all of the incidents of harassment or or prejudice. But I also think that there is a lot of challenge when you're in the cyber you actually have committed an infraction or discomfort or impinged upon someone or created some transaction that left someone press store. Disenfranchised in some way, I think the fear of guilt is so intense that we've kind of lost our way through negotiating guilt feeling. Well, let's talk about two examples in in the public eye to politicians who got caught up and stuff. Al Franken his one he was caught up in the metoo movement. Forced to resign from the Senate. He talked in his resignation speech on the Senate for about the irony of him resigning while President Trump who's been accused of worse than he was is still president. So he I don't think was very happy with what happened and the the accountability that he faced at the same time. You've got Ralph Northam the governor of Virginia who admitted to wearing black face years ago. He's still in office. Both of these men did things they're not proud of and one sort of got away with it. I guess you could say and the other one didn't what do you think about that the way that people themselves make a choice about? What the appropriate penalty is what I think is that mostly what happens is people don't wanna lose anything mostly what people want is to go back to put things back the way they were before as if they'd never broken anything, which is really different. I think than finding your way forward, and allowing failure to remake you and remodel you and reorganize. How you see yourself? Are you better off than admitting that you did something wrong, psychologically? I mean, politically, I don't know, but psychologically, if I was your therapist. Yeah. I think trying to get back to the way things were before is almost always a futile event it negates. The fact that you know, for somebody who feels harmed something was changed. And if you're trying to go back to the way things were before they may not be able to do that with you. Do you think that we not the perpetrators, but we the viewing public? I guess are holding people the two highest standard that we're not allowing people to make mistakes. I think there are. Are cases where we are too. You know too quick to rush to judgment. We don't have the full story. There is trial by the media. There are ways that the collective judgment annihilates people who maybe don't require that level of the Nile Asian. But I also think that there's a real need for people to slow down when they've made an error. I've watched on social media, for example, a lot of people make mistakes, and I've watched a lot of people confront that. And I've been confronted. I've had people say to me the thing that you're saying right now really really is only about white people, and you really speaking out of white culture, and what you're saying is really specific to a very specific group of people, and it's leaving people out. And usually say, oh, thank you. You're absolutely right. That's really useful. For me. Appreciate you pointing that out. And you know, the transaction is resolved and we move on. What really does us in is a kind of very binary thinking about all good and all bad that this. A person is all bad or I'm all good or I can't possibly done anything bad because I'm a very good prison. So I think these binary. When we bought into them. And usually it's because we're fearful of eases infraction itself, or what the guilt is going to do to us, or what will happen if if censure isn't set I think that when we respond in these fearful ways, we exacerbate it and make the world seem more black and white than it is in do. We also create a new fear of risk. I want to bring to our listeners. Attention another story that was in the news recently, Kevin Hart, the actor was called out for old tweets that were homophobic before he was supposed to host the Oscars. He apologized, but it wasn't enough. And then nobody else wanted to to be put up as hosted the Oscars because they didn't want the scrutiny that came along with the job. Are we just too afraid of the risk of mcoscar's worked fairly well without? Okay. That aside. Yes, I agree with you. But that being said, I actually think that if we could actually learn as individuals to process guilt differently. It would help to DS. Late public shaming. But as I motioned transaction diffusing, it's not just about apologizing. Apologizing again can often be experienced as away trying to trying to get back to the way things were before you've forgiven me. Okay. Good done off the hook. I think the bigger challenge is not to go back. But to try to find your way forward as a different person who's been changed in some way who can demonstrate that change who can make reparation who can who can initiate a restitute of gesture who can maybe lose something and withstand that and find a new path. I mean, I think when we've really heard somebody in profound ways that's part of what has to happen in order for something to move forward and be healed between people. So you have to be able to accept whatever it was that you did and say I'm going to move forward. I'm going to try to be a better person now. And I'm sorry for this thing that I did in the past. Now, the question is will other people be able to forgive you for whatever it was that you did. And. I may or may not I mean, depending on the depth of injury, depending on the intensity of the trauma or the trigger that it activates and somebody else, I don't think we move toward atonement right in ourselves for other people's sake. We do it because we're trying to heal our own sense of relationship tore own values. If somebody who has been harmed can receive that. And and they want to forgive that's a lovely thing. But it's a lot to require a people depending on how deeply intensely they've been harmed as a psychotherapist. How often do you have to talk to people about this sort of thing every day? This is daily work in one form or another right? You know, people hurt each other people have been hurt people are fearful that they aren't forgiving enough people are fearful that they're too forgiving people. Right. Like, you know, this transaction of like, how do I really take responsibility allow this to change me allow this to make me better person? What if they never forgive me? What do I do? Then I'm what if I can't repair. What I broke can I? Still be a good person. What value do I still have to offer the world? What if my perpetrator never understand what what they did to me ever? Now. What do I do? How do I move forward? If I can never get them to understand these are daily conversations in my work. I just want to finally ask you just because we've been talking about a lot of politicians. What do you think about the president of the United States who very rarely if ever admits to a failure and apologizes for it? And he's you know, he's been able to get by doing just that for quite some time. It's funny. I was thinking about that on the way. And I was I was thinking about how that's really very much an expression and a symbol of the struggle. I think we're having collectively right now, which is that culturally we used to have in the distant past some mechanisms about how do we how do we approach forgiveness? How do we approach atonement? How many hail Marys do? I need to say, right. How how much how many steps do? I need to crawl up on my knees. How what hair-shirt do I need to wear in order to purge myself of this? And we've instead put some we have somebody in office. Currently who actually does not do that. We literally have no model and haven't for awhile, which is part of the reason, I think, you know, this is manifest we. Don't know how to process guilt in the way we used to. And so all we're left with is public censure and shame which can just escalate you see people sometimes who really do seek forgiveness were simply accept responsibility, and you can feel it. You can hear it in their voice, right? They didn't implode and collapse and shame and beg the world rescue them from how terrible they feel about themselves. They didn't accuse anyone they didn't become defensive right? They said I'm a failed human being failed in this way. And I'm taking it seriously. And it matters to me, and I'm gonna learn something from it. That is Martha Crawford who is a psychotherapist in New York. Her blog is what a shrink thinks Martha. Thanks so much for joining us. Thank you. This message comes from here announced Bonsor ember way, ember wave the revolutionary personal thermostat. That is designed to help you feel cooler or warmer at the press of a button ember wave can put you in control in places like you're freezing office uncomfortable. Airplanes restaurants, trains, cafes and more named one of time magazine's best inventions of two thousand eighteen learn more at ember wave dot com and use code NPR to save fifty dollars at checkout ember wave control your comfort. US? Trade officials went to the mat for Boeing this week threatening the European Union with eleven billion dollars worth of tariffs. It says are retaliation for what the World Trade Organization calls illegal subsidies from the EU to Airbus for more. Let's bring in LLC MSNBC anchor in economics correspondent Halley, Jeremy. So the rivalry between the US and the EU over Boeing Airbus has been going on for a long time. Why did things escalate this week to the point that the US is now threatening new tariffs on everything from aircraft to olive oil? So this has been a big back and forth. Really since the invention of Airbus because Boeing's America's biggest exporter and the European sought opportunity to to to fight back on that and created Airbus the threatened US tariffs are in response to subsidies that Airbus and target of host, you know, European companies give Airbus and what they're doing is. They are imposing US's imposing threatening to impose tariffs on helicopters aircraft parts. Even things like cheese. There's a fragile truce between the EU and Donald Trump after we had those steel and aluminum tariffs on the EU. But this is a fourteen year old back and forth. Tit for tat discu- dispute about whether America subsidizes Boeing more than Europe subsidizes Airbus and America does subsidize Boeing and the WTO has also found the US guilty of illegal subsidies. Correct. Both sides have actually now been found guilty by the WTO of subsidies or ways in which they provide advantages to their home aircraft manufacturer. Now, the they're still more rulings to come. The E U is waiting to find out what their retaliation rights are because in w in two thousand twelve the WTO of felt that Boeing had received billions of dollars in illegal subsidies that had been to the detriment of Airbus. But on the other hand the WTO last may found that there were subsidies that Airbus gave that were to the detriment of Boeing sale. So far from being resolved. And it's like alphabet soup here. E- e-, you US WTO interacted are talking about it. But how does this figure into what's going on with Boeing seven thirty-seven? Max is this the Trump administration coming into try to help them at a time of need. I think that there's a concern that as America's biggest exporter of goods if Boeing starts to go into some sort of a free fall in terms of sales of at seven thirty seven max, it could affect a lot of American jobs. So I think that there might be some relationship to the fact that Boeing is currently in trouble. However, it is a continuing issue. I will say this Boeing has been feeling the heat from the global concern over safety. They said they're cutting their seven thirty seven max output to forty two planes a month by mid April. And it seems like they've got for the moment. At least no new orders for the seven thirty seven max. So there may be a place where the government is saying. All right Boeing's biggest exporter. And it is in some trouble. Let's see if we can step in to help. Now. This is just the latest time that we're talking about tariffs on one country or another. There are so many at this point it's hard to keep track of winter consumer's gonna start to really notice these tariffs. So remember every tariff and counter tariff increases the price of something. Right. So from the we're talking about dairy jams olive oil certain wines. It will start to result in higher prices. Because if you're imposing tariffs on someone else, and they're imposing tariffs on your goods. Everything gets a little more expensive. I will say the fight with Europe is dwarfed by the fight with China because that's where we get most of our immune goods from. And that is still not settled yet. So you're already starting to see in some industries if we don't settle with China soon. Everybody's gonna feel it. I will pay any price for Greek olive oil. Hell eventually MSNBC anchor economics. Correspondent thank you. Enlightenment is hard consider professor Chandra in author achieve Balasubramaniam delightful. New novel. Professor Chandra follows his bliss. He is a conservative Cambridge University. Economist who in the course of a few days does not win the Nobel prize has a heart attack. It's his by car gets no love from his estranged children or former wife, and is told by a California doctor who happens to be in England. You gotta follow your bliss, man. And thus a Homeric journey is launched maybe one. That follows the path the author took welcome Rajiv Balasubramaniam. Thank you what fun and your character ends up at Esselin the meditation center in northern California after he punches his ex wife's new husband in the nose. You ended up in the is it the Dhamma deep meditation center in England. That's where richly started meditating in England. Now, there's a stereotype of these centers is either. Complete elitist scam, coats or life, changing spiritual awakening centers. Why did you go? And what did you find? I went because my life was in crisis. And it seemed like it was the only thing I hadn't tried yet. And this was so extreme, and I felt that I was in an extreme position in life. And he didn't extreme solution drinking pretty heavily. In fact, I think drunk the night before you end up Adama Deepa you were skeptical. I was more terrified than skeptical. I I was very very very nervous. And then, but I went there, and I managed to survive the ten days and meditated as best I could. And I thought well, that's that that's the end. And then a few days later, I started to fall apart and a spectacular fashion at it was really like starting from the beginning. Again, I had to figure out who I was from from day one that felt Ziff mirror had just been held up to my face. And I was being forced to see everything all at once. And then. Slowly over time that became a process that I would through being reminded of growing up being racially abused in England year the child of immigrant parents just dip upper lip. You weren't supposed to talk about this stuff. Exactly. It was all achievement based and not emotion based which will bring us to the novel is mom the con- mistake on life as that. It's all about the extra and let's out the material and not the inside. Right. I neglect to the inside not focused on a chievements as has professor shandra 's this is your character. He and the achievements. We're going to be a Nobel prize, and that doesn't happen. And this starts this tailspin, but it's all about achieving and there's a couple other storylines here. I I'm sure there are listeners saying wait a second your family's from India. Of course, you meditated, you know, you've probably did yoga too. But but what professor Chandra also struggles with is it not all people from India. Did this kind of internal searching. Yeah. Of course. I mean, I grew up in. Very eightieth household as well other. It's possible to be very religious and very unselfish away. I think we all know. But I I grew up with physicist mother and communist father, so so that's very externally focused will view, and you know, of course, professor Chen. There goes to California to find his bliss. He doesn't go to India. I mean, in a way, you could say that the two continents have sort of switching places India's becoming full billion as GNP's rising, very fast. It's becoming much more materialistic, and and Americans are looking for spirituality, increasingly yes, you plop him in Esselin in California where you know, he suddenly sitting with this is closed in a room filled with strangers who are in a very American California way. Suddenly pouring their guts out to him. It's hilarious. It's also kind of poignant. Well, I think there's a lot of sadness in the novel as well as humor, and I think that most comedy is the flip side of sadness and the tragedy is the professor under such high achiever. And his gains so little joy from life. His achievements have been at the expense of joy and his relationships is so weak. And so finally, the age of seventy begins to realize that well, also this is post the global crash of two thousand nine he drops names of other economists Milton Friedman, Kenneth Galbraith, he considers book titles like Impreza of wealth, or why we need corporations you made me actually think of one of my neighbors are Matia Sen. who was a Nobel prize winner. His economics is about making sure that poor people have some kind of an economy. Well, a month you would be opposed the neoliberal consensus the professor under emerged from the he represents in opposed to Milton Friedman and the Chicago school, so he would be affectively professor unders nemesis to do notice the references to send in the book. There are a couple o- by name that the professor of abuses him a couple of times. Because send did within a bell and his politics of the opposite of the professors. So yeah, this is hilarious. So a macho sent who's again, a Nobel prize winner who has devoted his life to helping the poor people. So he's represented, and there is this anger. The professor feels about the change in thinking about economists after the crash back before the crash, economists and policymakers were respected technicians the ones who made things work the ones without whom the system would fall apart. And then came the crash and nowadays every communist in their dog claimed to have seen it coming, but he had would mitt he didn't even know what a quick fault. Swap was huge battles with a daughter who sees at the bailouts. She says it's a bunch of bankers and shiny suits who pulled knives on us and took a trillion dollars from us, and he responds and this is over breakfast without capital injection. We'd have global run on the banks, which means key industries would fail which would mean no food nationwide blackouts riding in the streets. I think the bailout is an acceptable price to pay. So. Oh, you take us into how perhaps your father? But how an economist felt during those times. Well, I think in two two thousand eight two thousand and nine though was a broad consensus, the neoliberal consensus what you should be called the the Washington consensus, and then after the crush, it simply broke down we had occupy we had Bernie Sanders, we had Jeremy Corbyn in the UK, and now we've got a Casio quotas and everything's changing you're getting young socialist, millennial socialists and generations, Ed, socialists, and economists is suddenly realizing that then no longer being treated like the knoll gods that they used to be and they're having to depart from the consensus to and I think that they spent such a long time being the the leaders of the tribe and suddenly that being dismissed and so they have to do with that. Well, you have your professor dealing with that we're not we don't wanna give any way because the twists and turns are just fantastic escellent is just the beginning. Ning and he goes again as we said on his home Eric honoring journey to find his bliss. But meantime, you were told by publisher that your book was part of a new genre. That you had a look up. We did too up lit in other words up lifting literature. Well, I hadn't heard of it either. I suppose if I had to characterize this novel, I would call it. He'll it as opposed to applets in the flippant is not the most important thing for me. But I think it is a novel which encourages the reader to go on a healing journey with the character. There was no prescribed response that I wanted, but I was very very happy. When readers read the book and said that they felt that it helped them to heal little bit or to think about healing or to think about their relationships. Well, but can you attribute that to someone who now does meditation as you say retreats, maybe every six months, maybe meditating every day, you said you were filled with rage before you began. And now here you come out with this, you know, up let book are you worried that you've killed off? You know, the part of you as an author that might wanna go to that rage place. No because the rage comes back. Negativities come back all the time. I think I've just captured a snapshot of something very positive in me. But if I felt that overcome all my negativities, I don't think I'd care about writing novels anymore to be honest, but I'm certainly very very far from from from that place. Well, it isn't it also true that anyone who says that because of meditation they've gotten rid of all of their negativities is probably not telling the truth or hasn't really gotten meditation. Absolutely mean, it's almost always the case. And that's why people who meditate can be so obnoxious also terrifying because the trying to tell you that they're better than you. And I think it's it's about the shadow, right? The character sunny, my German translator sit to me. It seems to me that he's your shadow. We should say sonny's, the professor son who becomes this historic communist of billionaire who founded the institute for mindful business and tells people they can make millions by having positive affirmations. I thought that's a really great ups avation because the creativity I think comes out of the shadow it comes out of doc places. And so if we if we alienate we strange us from our shadow, then we strange ourself from creativity. Again. It's a terrific read called professor Chandra follows his bliss Rajiv Balasubramaniam. Thank you so much for talking to us about it. Today representatives from Facebook and Google testifying before the House Judiciary committee about the role social media plays in extremism and terrorist attacks like the one in Christchurch New Zealand last month, which was live streamed by the shooter and quickly spread across the internet. Lawmakers want to know how social media platforms are going to regulate the spread of extremism on their platforms. Here's Neil Potts who oversees Facebook's content policy team. There was no place for terrorism or hate on Facebook. We move any content that it's like violence beliefs harasses or threatens others, that's why we've had long policies against terrorism and hate why we've invested so heavily in safety and security in the past few years for more. Let's go to our weekly guide to the world of tech Recode. Shreen Ghaffari is a reporter Recode and joins us from New York Charene either so have Google or Facebook made any changes since the massacre in New Zealand or what are they telling lawmakers today? Yeah. I mean, they have Facebook, for example has made some changes shortly after the shooting. They said they would expand their definition of harmful content to include white, nationalist content, not just white supremacist content. And generally mean, both these companies have set for a while now that they are increasingly trying to patrol hateful and harmful speech on their platforms. But as we can see with that definition, sometimes details can get tricky will there's a tricky balance to strike there between stopping the spread of extremist content while at the same time allowing users to express themselves freely. Right. And it's also hard to anti what kind of content is going to go up. And so once something is up there, even if the company does determine that violates their content moderation policies, it's very difficult for them to be able to control it in a short period of time. Will you have to think that in a situation like the shooter in New Zealand? You would actually that was live streamed. You would have to have somebody that saw that as it was happening to determine that that needs to come down immediately as it's happening. So that's a difficult thing to do that requires an actual human being probably. Yeah, exactly. I'm in both of those companies have you know, dedicated teams of human moderators toward policing this content. However, they have been criticized by many for for that not being enough. Meanwhile, this week marks one year since the CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, testified before congress where he said he believed regulation was inevitable after it was discovered that users personal data were exposed here. He is last year. Answering a question from democratic Senator Maggie Hassen of New Hampshire. Will you commit to working with congress to develop ways of protecting constituent privacy and wellbeing. Even if it means that that results in some laws that will require you to adjust your business model Senator yes, we will commit to that. I think that that's an important conversation to have our position is not that regulation as bad. I think the internet is so important people's lives. And it's getting more important the expectations on internet companies and technology companies overall are growing, and I think the real question is what is the right framework for this? Not should there be one. So Sharon has sucker. Berg make good on his commitment to create the right framework for improving privacy in the last year. Well, you certainly proposed frameworks. I mean, he published an op-ed in the Washington Post recently, giving some loose guidelines around what he calls for in terms of international standards, not just for his company, but for other media content companies. However, you know, he's been criticized for not as enact already enforcing those standards within his own company. I mean, just as recently as a couple of weeks ago, the company had a another privacy scandal where it was revealed that hundreds of millions of user accounts private information was left vulnerable on unprotected servers. So I think a lot of people are asking if the company can sort of walk the walk as well as talk the talk some countries are going much further than the US last week trillion passed a new law to put big tech exists behind bars if platforms failed to remove a horn content quickly and this week the UK proposed the establishment of an independent watchdog to flag terror related content and impose fines for executives who fail to remove it within an hour, basically. Go after the executives. Maybe maybe then they will listen, do you think the US is gonna follow suit? Or what impact you think these policies will have? Well, I think it's too early to say if the US would shoot and even the the UK proposal could be derailed by Brexit on proposal is very preliminary. However what I think it does represent is a big shift. If you look back from a few years ago in terms of how western governments are thinking about regulating these companies, and I think that you're seeing an escalation in the seriousness of the kinds of regulations that they're proposing. You know last week I put a poll up on Twitter and asked people if one out of four Silicon Valley giants had to remain in the rest would go out of business. Which would you want to stick around, apple Google, Facebook or Twitter, not a single person voted for Facebook? Which was interesting that is Sheree in Ghaffari at Recode. Thank you so much. Thank you. And here now is a production of NPR and WBZ or an association with the BBC World Service. I'm Jeremy Hobson. I'm Robin young. This is here now. Support for this podcast and the following message. Come from K bucks bound in support of the David Gilkey and Zaba ULA tomato memorial fund established to strengthen NPR's commitment to training and protecting journalists in high risk environments.
The Mueller Report is In; What Does it Mean?
"The takeaway is supported by ZipRecruiter. Hiring is challenging, but there's one place you can go where hiring is simple and smart that place ZipRecruiter where growing businesses connect to qualified candidates. Try it for free at ZipRecruiter dot com slash takeaway. Ziprecruiter, the smartest way to hire. Wait a minute. That's it. Then no one else really knows anything. Yes. What did we learn Palmer? I dunno sir are to say the department of Justice announced it will appoint of former FBI director Robert Mueller as an independent special counsel. General consensus. It was a good decision to pick a special counsel Robert Moore, as perhaps the single most qualified individuals to lead such an investigation in my view Muller loves prosecuting, bad, guys. He loves putting criminals in jail. It's his thing. I was going to fire Comey. My decision. Do you believe this arise to obstruction of Justice? I don't know that that's Bob mother's job to sort that out. I think that the the probe is a disaster for our country to me, this appears as the closest we've seen yet real light. Actual collusion. We've been saying from day one there's been no evidence of Trump Russia collusion or people going to suspect cover up absolute high did not collude with Russia. There was no collusion. Nothing. Have this witch-hunt it's total which onto which is rusher thing with Trump and Russia again, I think we really have to see what Melissa and a lot of falsification going on. We've got a lot of lying going on. And we've got cover up short popadopoulos. Rick gates, Holman Manafort Flynn, Alexander's wa Kalin Michael Cohen thirteen Russian nationals. They were hoping to make Americans feel more angry more divided and seeking to interfere in the United States, twenty sixteen presidential election. It startling. If you take a step back and think that a president of the United States is the subject or focus of Neff be counter intelligence investigation. That's remarkable leaks. And there were insinuations and the people were then making that what they wanted Russia Russia. Russia hate Russia. Russia Russia for so giddy. Eager to hear more about this Russia and Trump story and when their stories get completely debunked. It just kind of everybody agrees to ignore Russian rush in Russia the Russians Russia Russia Russian. Justin out. There was no collusion with Russia. The most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. There was no collusion with Russia. It was no obstruction. It was a complete and total exoneration. President Trump is wrong. This report is not amount who a so-called total exoneration special counsel. The Muller was clear that his report quote does not exonerate close. Quote, the president. This is the takeaway. I'm Tenzin Vega after twenty two months special counsel. Robert Muller has submitted his investigation into President Donald Trump and Russian interference in the two thousand sixteen election to the department of Justice and on Sunday attorney general William Barr delivered his own summary of the report to congress. Now. Most of what we know about Muller's report is filtered through the attorney general who is a Trump appointee. But bar quotes Muller directly several times on key issues. So let's break those down. I is collusion barred quotes Muller from the reports saying the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. But then there's the question of the president obstructing Justice bar quotes Muller again saying quote, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime it also does not exonerate him. When the news broke over the weekend. Republicans. Claim victory. Democrats vowed to pursue other lines of investigation and Americans were basically left to assess where we go from here this hour. Our goal is to try and make sense of this political turning point we begin with two fantastic expert guests MARCY, Wheeler is an independent journalist covering national security and civil liberties at empty wheel dot net. Marcy, thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. And we also have Ilya marritz WNYC reporter and co host of the trumping podcast Iliad. Thank you Zena. Marcy. Let's start with you attorney general bars letters to congress revealed what ultimately they revealed that he is trying to narrow the scope of what Muller investigated and in so doing give Trump a clean Bill of health even in what you just quoted. He describes Muller saying, the Trump people did not conspire with the Russian government on the hack and leak, but we never thought that they did conspire with the Russian government. We thought that they conspired with Natalia vessel at sky. Who well has while she has ties the Russian government is not employed by them. We thought that they conspired with Constantine clinic, again, not not employed by the Russian government right now, but has ties to Russian intelligence so very narrow and also does not address something that we know Muller investigated at length, which is whether or not there was a quid pro quo where Russians came and said, we'll give you help. If you give a sanctions relief that this letter is utterly silent about that. And that's important because in clearing Trump of obstruction Barr says he didn't obstruct Justice not because he didn't do a bunch of things that I have said under oath to congress amount to a crime. But because these crimes which I'm clearing him of again, working with Russian government on the hack and leak are not ones that that Trump committed. So it's a very squishy letter and people I mean, I don't know whether Muller thinks that Trump engaged in a quid pro quo. I know this letter doesn't address it. Well, one of the things. Of course, not to reduce this to a headline because that's what seems to be happening. A lot today. But the big question is the language of nod exonerating, the president is the president vindicated. Marcy. No, not at all. I mean, what happened over the weekend is the attorney general spent the weekend Indio Jay which says you can't indict a sitting president and considered indicting a sitting president for obstruction. And again, he has sworn under oath several times as part of his confirmation process that what Trump is known to have done in in particular floating pardons. So that people like Paul Manafort would cover up his crimes bar said as part of his confirmation process that amounts to a crime over the weekend forty-eight hours, he decided that all of a sudden, it's not a crime Ilia you guys on the trumping podcasts have been covering this extensively from your perspective. Looking at the bigger picture here. What is the closing of this chapter mean to what you guys are working on? Well, it's really really interesting and also very unsafe. Is fine. Because of course, we haven't seen Robert Muller's work, and we know that he took such a broad look at the Trump or not only the Trump campaign in two thousand sixteen but there's a lot of evidence that he started looking at the Trump organization and various Trump branded things. What's interesting now is attention starts to turn to some of the probes that are already happening here in New York from local law enforcement of these against southern district of New York. So then just to give New York and the new York Attorney General so in the southern district there appears to be a probe into the hush money payments. Karen, McDougal, and stormy Daniels. There also subpoena went out a month or so ago for the Trump inaugural committee, and then on the new York Attorney General side of things they're looking at the Trump foundation and also at a potential lies or fraudulent statements to lenders around the purchase of the Buffalo Bills. So those are all places where Robert Muller might also. Also have something to say or might also in his report have information that would contribute to those cases or talk to those cases in some way. Maybe tell us if those are are going to be worthwhile prosecutions, but we just don't know yet and Marcie I want to bring you back in here. Because the question here is what about what does bars letter, not absolve Trump of at this point. Well, it says he's not going to be charged by DOJ for obstruction. But it's clear that Miller believes he obstructed Justice. And as our notes that was in plain sight, but it also again doesn't clear Trump of engaging in a quid pro quo with I mean, he the letter clearly says that he it's it's unclear Iliad. Would you want to weigh in on that? We just had an episode on Trump Inc. About the Trump Tower Moscow. Right. And that deal is super interesting because as Trump was campaigning for president. He also was pursuing tower in Moscow, and because of the nature. The the size and scope and the kind of locations that he was seeking and the kind of people he was working with. He was almost certainly going to need permission from the highest levels of the Russian government to build that tower. And we know that his associates who were promoting the project Felix Seder and Michael Cohen were talking about giving the penthouse to bladder MIR Putin, so I think MARCY is right to raise. This question about a quick quid pro quo, and it's just very unsatisfying. What about William bars controversial memo that was written before he was appointed attorney general what does that tell us about this moment today? Well, that's why it's so important because before you get off the first page of that memo, it says, of course, the president can be can commit a crime of instruction. If he prevents an inquiry from finding the truth, which we know Trump has done, we know he has done, but the rest of the memo says, I think Miller is inventing some other application of obstruction by saying that because he. Fired Jim Komi, he obstructed Justice that didn't involve an underlying crime. And that's why I harp on this issue of the quid pro quo. If Trump either did or contemplated a quid pro quo with Russia, which is again, what the actual evidence points to then by for example, offering Manafort a pardon to lie, which he did then he obviously obstructed Justice. And again bar said that three times in his confirmation hearing that if you offer somebody pardons to shade their testimony that is a crime all of a sudden over the weekend bar changed his mind. I want to ask you both. What happens next Ilia your thoughts? Well, the area that I'm washing really really closely is the selling district and these hush money payments. So it's a really interesting question. Now where the southern district goes with their probe. How advanced that probe is illegal. Campaign contributions sounds like technicality. It's actually a very serious crime. And they will have to answer a question of where they want to take this since evidently, the Muller probe is not going to lead to any kind of charges for the president. Marcy, your thoughts. What happens next? Well, obviously Democrats in congress and get really busy. And and they should before this letter. I sorta said let's see what bar gives us. Let's see if he's an honest broker, and because he violated what he said under oath. I mean, he said again to get this job. He said if you dangle pardons for testimony, that's a crime. And then all of a sudden he's decided it's not a crime. I think it raises even more questions than we had yesterday, which is really unfortunate. Because I thought maybe we'd get some closure on this and and the way in which bars handled it instead actually turns it into even bigger can of worms Elliott final thoughts. If we get past the spin does this help the president. Who comes out on top? I mean, this is a great new cycle for him right now. If you saw the headline of the New York Times, they don't have it with me, but it basically repeats what bar said and the way that bar put it the president has been basically exonerated on the collusion charge. And there's no reason to bring obstruction that's gonna make things I think a lot harder for Democrats, especially in congress who have already set a lot of investigations in motion around these exact questions on the belief that they're gonna find a lot of stuff, and it's going to be very incriminating. And the other thing just to remind our listeners, we still don't have the actual report. This is a filter of the we may never see it. And there you go. Ilya marritz, WNYC reporter and co host of the trumping podcasts at MARCY Wheeler is an independent journalist covering national security and civil liberties at Mt. Wheel dot net. Thanks to you. Both. Thank you. Thanks. After nearly two years Robert Muller's investigation might be over but probes and congress are just starting to take shape Democrats in the house and Senate responded swiftly to the summary of Muller's findings presented by attorney general bar on Sunday afternoon. And you all know, my next guest, very well. Amy, Walter is the host of politics with Amy Walter on the takeaway, and she's also the national editor for the cook political report, Amy so great to have you on. I'm very glad to be here Tenzin ah. So let's talk about the Democrats here were they prepared for this version of events. I mean, this didn't seem to align with what I think they might have been hoping for. In some ways, I think they had been prepared for this in this way. If you remember think it was about a couple of weeks ago. House speaker Nancy Pelosi came out per actively and said, look there's not going to be any impeachment unless something comes out in the mullahs report. Right. And so I think she was sort of setting the groundwork there for a whole bunch of Democrats to say there has to be something really big and really ground shattering for the house to take up impeachment. Otherwise, we're gonna just keep going down the same path we've been on premolar, which is holding the Trump administration to account doing our oversight role. Now, what we're going to see, of course, is a more aggressive attempt to interview the attorney general Bob Muller and get the actual underlying documents that made up this report into the public's hands. Of course, we saw over the weekend that Representative Jerry Nadler. Who's a democrat from New York, and the chair of the House Judiciary committee put bars letter out there to the public, and he tweeted that the committee is you said would be calling in attorney general bar to testify. Are they going to be successful in that? And what strategy does that signal on the part of the house, Amy? Yeah. I think they are trying to do the following. They aren't going to be able to make a case that the president or those around him were involved in colluding with Russia. It's very clear from at least what we've heard of the report that's far. That's what Muller is say. There's that are has been no evidence of that what they're trying to do is to get out as much embarrassing material as possible on the president and those around him through these supporting documents, interviews, etc. I mean one one line in there. Of course, the Democrats have been p- pointing to is where Torney general Barr says. This does not exonerate the president. That's not what this report does. And what Democrats would like to see, of course, is as much of the material out there that raises questions about the president's conduct or those around the president and how they acted either during the campaign or during the time that they were in the White House. Okay. So the question of collusion aside. There's also the question Muller decided not to make a judgment on whether there was obstructed of Justice and attorney general bar and his deputy attorney general rod Rosenstein, determined that the charge could not be made it the question now is will Democrats pursue that charge? Well, you can hear them already trying to do this. And again, this is where getting pieces of the report dripped and drabbed out are gonna make that much more difficult, right? This has been the the problem to end Zena all along in trying to report on the Muller reports, which is. Leaks and there were insinuations. And there were grand jury experiences that were told and people were then making of it what they wanted. Right. They sort of filled in the gaps. Now, we have a full report. Here's the opportunity where you no longer have to make sort of assumptions or guess, what's in the actual report. It's going to be there. And I think the most reasonable, and quite frankly, responsible thing would be to get it as a whole as opposed to only getting bits and pieces of this at certain times of the attorney general says look here the rules. We cannot release this this, and this this has to be redacted but other than that. Here you go that to me would seem to be the most responsible way to do this. Everyone gets a chance to look at it at the same time and in the same way. Of course, the big question of is how this will affect. That little election. We have coming up in twenty twenty totally inconsequential totally I mean who really thinking about that. But for those who are paying attention. Will this have an impact? I mean, even if the report the full report with its reductions is released if the president is looking at this as a victory will this help him for reelection. You know, what's fascinating about this investigation. It in many ways has been this dark cloud over the president. And yet at the same time for so many voters at it hasn't really made much of an impact. I think the way that they've used the president or their opinions of the president have been settled along ago. And this report was going to do very little to change their opinions of him. And I don't think that they will interestingly enough to in the two thousand eighteen campaign. Democrats weren't running on the issue of the Muller report. They weren't running on Russia. They. Aren't running on impeachment. They're running on healthcare. They're running on being over, right? That we need to check on the president. They're running on the tax Bill. This issue has always sort of been one of those that was kind of deepen the background where those of us in Washington, obviously spent a great deal of time thinking about and covering it. But for the average voter this still didn't make a whole bunch of sense to them in part because they were just getting in dribs and drabs and what they wanted was. I don't know just tell me what happened. Did he do it? Or did he not do it? Now that the top line answer is did not do it. I think a lot of folks are going to go back to their regular old lives and be normal like most normal people are and say, okay, you didn't you didn't collude with Russia. But I don't know that that's going to change their underlying opinion of the president at all. So I think it's been amazing Tanzania. The the Gallup organization has found that this president's job approval. Rating has been incredibly stable the most stable of any president at this point in his presidency. At least since they've been measuring opinions of the president the gap between his highest approval rating and has lowest approval rating has only been ten points, which means that no matter what happens opinions of this president are pretty well settled, and there's very little good or bad to change that Amy Walters. The host of politics with Amy Walter from the takeaway and national editor of the cook political report, Amy thank you so much. Thank you. One of the biggest questions surrounding that report. Now is whether the public will get to see it all former independent counsel, Ken Starr argued this weekend that Muller should not produce. A public report star. You may remember road a four hundred forty five page report in one thousand nine hundred eighty eight that led to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in a piece for the Atlantic this weekend, star defended the regulations that require that Muller. Stay silent the rules surrounding the special counsel's findings are specific. And they're they're says star for a reason. So now, we turn to an insider about this history. Robert Ray is a former federal prosecutor an independent counsel for the whitewater investigation. Welcome to the show. Robert. Thanks nice to be with you. So I your initial reaction to how this investigation wrapped up were there any surprises for you. Let me just say initially. I actually don't agree with Ken Starr about that men. More importantly, I don't think that the attorney general Bill bar does either. And as the attorney general's already said in his letter yesterday, the public interest councils in favor of full disclosure consistent with the law regulation since so and so forth. So there are some exceptions. But I think you're going to see disclosure of Bob mowers report in one fashion or another. We are we keep talking about how or whether the public is entitled to know how much the public is entitled to know how much congress is entitled to know. There have been dozens of indictments spread out over months wondering if the real impact of the investigation his somewhat been diluted because of these indictments coming out over time versus coming out, you know, over the weekend. As far to speak to the you're in Britain initial point to the question of what is the the public entitled to know that, you know, obviously, that's a difficult question, isn't it? And I think that with regard to uncharged individuals the public's not really entitled to know about that, including members of the president's family, by the way, with the exception of the president because the president is subject to consideration by congress in its function under the constitution to determine whether or not in its oversight capacity and impeachable offense may have been committed. I do think that the congress is entitled to the benefit of that information relative to that point, but fairness dictates consistent with long standing department of Justice policy that if you're not going to charge somebody, and this was the point that star was trying to make and I think it is applicability to everybody except the president. The public is not entitled to know all the the back and forth in the ins and outs. With regard to a process. To'real decision declining to prosecute someone. So were there any other surprises for you? Were there any surprises at all at how this wrapped up? No. I mean, my question going into this was would the findings and conclusions that Bill Barr indicated in his first letter would be forthcoming over the weekend would address the question of the constitutionality of indicting or charging a sitting president aside. Would there be resolution with regard to the principal? Focus of the investigation in connection with collusion. Was there a provable case there against the Trump campaign or any members of the Trump campaign, which would include the president and then second with regard to obstruction of Justice? And frankly, the more interesting question would would there be resolution of that as well? And there was so I wasn't I guess maybe like many Americans surprised that the path chosen by Bob Muller. With regard to the obstruction piece as it concerned the president. Was to lay out in the report apparently his evaluation of the evidence and leave the decision in this instance, to the attorney general to make which by the way, I think it was a politically savvy decision to make I think it was important out of all of this for the department of Justice, speak with one voice, and that is something that I think, you know, from an historical perspective is important to remember. This is a very different environment than the independent counsel environment. Where you had congress passing a statute, providing the independent counsel with complete independence. That is not the world that we live in any longer after the demise of the independent counsel statute when it expired in one thousand nine hundred nine the department of Justice instituted regulations under return, then Attorney General Janet Reno and that's the environment we've operated under from that point forward. So let let let me let me take take step back here because this history is critical to where we are today. It is I wanted to talk a little bit about how the roles and the rules of. Of the special counsel have changed. You mentioned nine thousand nine hundred nine what changed what degenerate Renault do that changed the regulations envision that in a case in which the department is conflicted. And this I applied to this circumstance. Remember, the attorney general had recused himself from the matter that was then Jeff Sessions, right? And rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general filling in as the acting attorney general for this purpose decided in the wake of the firing of Jim Komi that it wasn't appropriate and in the public interest for the department itself to continue the investigation the regulations, then provide for the appointment of a special counsel outside of the department of Justice. And that's precisely what he did. But understand that in that environment. It's a much more carefully controlled environment from the department meeting the department still overseas that investigation and when the special counsel was done. That's where we are. Now, the special counsel in a confidential report provides findings and conclusions. The attorney general, and then it's up to the attorney general to provide notification to congress about the results of that investigation. Ken Starr, over the weekend did write about these quote, unquote regulatory handcuffs. What are those? I'm not sure it's fair to characterize them as handcuffs, but there was much criticism of the final report requirement during the days when the independent counsel statute was operative. Now there were constraints on what an independent counsel could do regarding a final report, but it allowed for a pretty fulsome disclosure. It was directed that. That report be filed with the US court of appeals for the DC circuit, the special division of that court after people named in the report had an opportunity to confidentially view that report and include their comments the report. Plus the comments were then released for publication by the government, printing office and filed with the public. So that's the distinction there. Now star is also talking about a separate reporting. Requirement under the independent counsel statute. And that was this. And this is where there's a little mischief because the language of the statute was if the independent counsel finds substantial and credible information to believe that an impeachment offense may have been committed may have been these key words right that required under the statute, the independent counsel to notify congress. And that was the star report. It was fairly open ended star took that statutory mandates. Seriously. It was a very low bar. He has now since said it was too low of a bar. But there is and remains in my view. This is where I part from Ken Starr, and this obviously a substantial public interest, including by the people's elected representatives in the house of representatives to be informed about whether impeachable offenses may have been committed. Ultimately, it's their determination that controls. Now, we're we're in a different. Environment is Congress's entitled either believe in the public to a disclosure as much as possible of what Bob mowers report says where I think that I part with Democrats, though, is that I do not think Congress's entitled to all of the investigatory detail. The background information investigative reports the benefits of all the search warrants all the things that the executive branch does through the the Justice department in order to conduct a criminal investigation. If they wanna have an investigation in the house as part of an impeachment inquiry. They're going to have to do that on their own. And I think the the department will appropriately resist efforts whether through opposition to subpoenas or otherwise to turn over the results of the criminal investigation to the House Judiciary committee. Robert Ray is a former federal prosecutor and independent counsel for the whitewater investigation. He's currently a partner at Thompson and night. Robert, thanks so much. Thank you for having me. Critique from Orlando, Florida. I'm just a little confused about the Tomar thing because we've been watching it for two years now. And if Mr. Trump is totally innocent, then why have so many the people around him that or for him, then indicted, so very confused. I'd like for patients complain, oh, Texas. I'm saying that the country was put through two years of stripe over four seconds ations of collusion by the president. It's hurt the country. And it turns your the administration from apple lake in New York. I think that the Miller report is not fully out. So I don't believe that we can make a true decision on it. I also believe that no matter which camp you are in whether you're in the Trump camp were on the opposite side, I believe people have already made up their minds and the show from Massachusetts. I have to say that the Embiid. Nature of what he concluded for the destruction affect was something I did not for C, and I actually find it. Confusing. I'm not happy that left it in the hands of the trae general barring rod Rosenstein, and what I would like to see happen next is that the full report is released. This is Susan calling from San Francisco and the southern district of New York had better have a number of indictments up their sleeve in order to stop the majority of Americans taking to the streets. Keep telling us what you think on Twitter. We're at the takeaway, and that's our show for today. Thanks so much for listening. I'm Tanzania Vega. And this is the takeaway.
AG William Barr Testifies, Hidden FBI Funds in COVID Bill, & Bidens potential VP Picks Wednesday, July 29th
"It's Wednesday July twenty. Ninth. Attorney. General. William Barr testified to Congress plus information on the hidden FBI funds in the coronavirus relief bill, and who is Biden considering for VP. Welcome to rob talk podcast where I bring you the latest Progressive News and politics in ten minutes or less I'm Robert Cunningham. Thank you for tuning in. Let's get informed. Attorney General William Barr appeared before the Democratic led House Judiciary Committee yesterday. Bars considered by some to be corrupt ag who will blindly defend the president or worse. The House Judiciary Committee press to the G on a number of incidents which call into question is agency's independence and USA for CNN says, Jerry Nadler the chair of the committee has said the House is looking into impeaching bar for politicizing investigations bar defend himself from the accusation that he was not independent from trump saying that he feels he has complete freedom to do what is right Bar also pushed back on his politicizing of the DOJ saying it was not true and then Michael Flynn and Roger Stone didn't deserve to be worse because they were the president's friends. The attorney general then went on to claim that federal forces have a duty to defend the Portland Oregon courthouse, which has been under national scrutiny recently since the arrests of peaceful protesters there by unmarked federal agents. Chair Jerry. Nadler. Reprimanded AG bar for causing the use of pepper spray and batons on these protesters and the pursuit of a political objective further as representative Sheila jackson-lee was pressing bar on systemic racism and policing outright denied it existed responding to her saying quote. I don't agree there systemic racism in the police department generally in this country. So it turns out the Coronavirus Relief Bill I've been talking with you all about for the past few episodes does have some sneaky unrelated stuff in it? mainly. In as funds for a new FBI headquarters, NPR reports, Multiple Democrats and Republicans have raised objections to this provision snuck in by trump Republican Senate majority leader. Mitch McConnell told reporters, he does not support the funding on the grounds that isn't related to the immediate coronavirus needs. Quote. When we get to the end of the process, I would hope all the non-co vid related measures are out no matter what bills they were in at the start. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer included the new FBI headquarters in a list of unacceptable things included in the bill. Bernie. Sanders actually pointing out some crazy things in the coronavirus relief bill. Get this. He says over two separate tweets, the Senate Republican plan. And then he lists twenty nine point four, billion dollars for the Pentagon, zero dollars for hazard pay zero dollars for nutrition assistance zero dollars for the uninsured slash underinsured zero dollars for the postal service zero dollars for state and local governments. One hundred percent deduction for three Martini CEO lunches what a disaster. The GOP Kovic Nineteen Bill includes two billion dollars for thirty five's one point seven five billion dollars for an FBI building one billion dollar for surveillance planes three hundred seventy five million dollars for armed vehicles three hundred sixty million dollars for missile defense two, hundred eighty three million dollars for a patchy helicopters zero dollars for millions facing eviction it's dead on arrival. Back in a debate between Bernie, sanders and Joe Biden Joe Biden promise to choose a woman as his VP. So here, the final contenders with a decision likely coming in the next few weeks at some point. Senator Connell a Harris of California former national security adviser. Susan Rice Representative Val demings a Florida representative. Karen Bass of California Senator, Tammy Duckworth of Illinois. Atlanta Georgia Mayor Kisha Lance Bottoms Senator Elizabeth Warren New Mexico Governor Michelle Luhan Grisham and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. That's a lot. That's a nine people on Biden's VP list but I'm going to list some quick facts here. On the top of the list is commonly Harris Commonly Harris is aged fifty five and she ran for president. This cycle is well, she endorsed Biden after dropping out but a concern is her attacks on Biden during the debates where she attacked by on his early opposition to bussing. Concern as her history with law enforcement specifically when she was ag of California and vigorously prosecuted Marijuana Crime Susan Rice aged fifty five served as Obama's national security adviser, and before that served as US ambassador to the United Nations under Obama. The concerns around rice come from her involvement in the controversy surrounding the two thousand twelve Benghazi attack val demings aged sixty three. Is a congresswoman from the battleground state of Florida. She's a former police chief of Orlando, which could be problematic for progressives considering the tension nationally right now amongst the American people and law enforcement. Karen Bass aged sixty six is a congresswoman from California who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus seen by many as a progressive. She has an extensive background in police reform and was one of the first to start the houses response to the police killing of George Floyd earlier this year. Her weaknesses include her age, which is something. Biden wants to contrast himself with. Tammy Duckworth aged fifty two is a senator from Illinois who lost her legs in combat while fighting in Iraq in two thousand four she was the first woman with a disability anti American to be elected to Congress. Her main weakness is lack of name recognition. Kisha Lance bottoms aged fifty is the first term mayor of Atlanta Georgia, which has seen massive protests since the killings of George Floyd and Ray Shahr Brooks by police earlier this year a concern around bottoms is that she has no experience at the federal level. Elizabeth Warren aged seventy one also ran for president this cycle. She's the Progressive Senator from Massachusetts which can help bridge the divide between moderates and Progressives a weakness of Warren is her age, and also the fact that she did not endorse anyone for a while after dropping out of the primary. Michelle Luhan Grisham, aged sixty became the first Latina Democratic governor of a state in two thousand eighteen when she assumed the governorship of New Mexico, she's held federal office before serving in Congress for six years. Her main weakness is probably name recognition. Finally Gretchen Whitmer aged forty eight the governor of a battleground state that trump won in two thousand, Sixteen Michigan. Reuters reports that she came under fire earlier this year from some Michigan residents for a stay at home order that they viewed too onerous. So that's a breakdown of all of Biden's potential. V. P picks it's probably not going to matter. It would have to be someone truly vile for Biden to screw this one up. Biden. As a head commandingly and the polls right now and of his lead does change it's not likely related to his VP pick I'm personally rooting for Warren as she is the most progressive on this list, but I'm not too hopeful on that. We'll know soon and I'll do a bigger deep dive on whoever Biden ends up choosing. Okay. So as I was wrapping up today's show, I saw a strange tweet from twitter user, mark? Bedminster. He writes political labeled senator calmly. Harris's Biden's running mate that he chose on August first four days from now. The. Twitter user then included picture of Kamla. Harris has image which reads. Joe Biden chose Commonly Harris to become his running mate for the two thousand twenty election on August I two weeks before the Democratic National Convention after keeping his choice close to his chest for months in his announcement Biden called Harris a worthy opponent and a worthy running-mate alluding to the pair's rivalry during the earlier stages of the Democratic primary. She will bring her experience as a prosecutor household name recognition and skills as a debater to the ticket. A user responded to this tweet saying they amended the article where the picture reading editor's note due to a technical error and Of this story mistakenly identified one of the women as Biden's BP pick, we regret the air. Wow. So this is wild if politico accidentally leaks this. I'm going to leave my previous segment in the show just in case it's not true I guess we'll find out on August I. I'll be keeping. You posted here. Make sure your subscribe to the podcast wherever you're listening to this you don't miss it. That's offered today. Thank you for tuning in. If this show brings you value, be sure to share it with a friend and let them know they should be listening as well. Have a great rest of your day. I'll see you next time.
"Hey guys a Tulio and we have a new episode for you all about the latest with trump Ukraine and the impeachment proceedings but as you all know this. This new cycle is literally changing by the minute. We recorded this Monday morning and since then so much has happened so I'm going to try to summarize this W T.F. Moment were in here goes Ukrainian. President Alinsky is denying he was pressured to investigate the gate Biden's son and denying he ever met with Rudy Giuliani and speaking of good old rudy. The House has subpoenaed him for documents related late into the Ukraine probe after he said on television that he asked the government of Ukraine to look into one hundred Biden okay and it's also been reported that Secretary Stereo State Mike Pompeo is basically obstructing the House Democrats impeachment inquiry and late Monday news also broke that trump pressured the the Australian prime minister to Provide Attorney General William Barr with information that would help discredit the molestation okay so yeah you could say okay. This is historic and the story is still developing. I mean could even possibly change by the time I finished recording this but anyway we promise we're going to keep everyone updated as we continue to report on this all right so enjoyed this Tuesday in the thick episode the reason why the Republicans are so supportive important trump is because he is reinforcing and buffering `institution maintained their power which is white supremacy. Ooh You'll what's up. Welcome to the podcast about politics race and culture from a PSE perspective while we still live in a democracy. I might the whole and what a way to intro own my God joining us in Harlem Studio is. It all-star also so Russia and Ukraine expert Terrell Germain Star senior reported the route one up to round of so we've dropped some shows last week. We didn't get an opportunity to talk about all of this regarding the impeachment inquiry so there's a lot of news that did what happened that now we get to talk about so. This is our first big week since the news broke that there's going to be an official impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump so just to recap. Everybody knows it started last week on Tuesday with a whistle blower alleging that in July phone call trump asked the president of Ukraine Vladimir Ademir Alinsky to investigate former vice president current twenty twenty candidate Joe Biden's son and his so-called. You know very bad ties yes to the country. I love this in particular. Children doing bad things right okay. If everything goes as it said on that log Ugh from Paul it appears very much that trump used. US Aid to Ukraine basically as leverage if the president didn't oblige though that word though so before we get to the consequences of the impeachment investigations Terrell. You've been reporting on Ukraine for years. Yo you just got back from there helped me to understand because you know Putin Russia Ukraine. It's a very complicated situation nations so this notion that the president of Ukraine would basically be like sure trump. I will and basically like like say like is that possible. How do you think that Colwin Woods's alinsky actually do this. No because there's no long term incentive for him to do so so let's go directly to that. 'cause nobody's really address that so thing is there's a rule of law of Ukraine like he just can't single handily do on these parliament. There is senior the pharmacy right so now the reality is that Americans are very key geopolitical strategic partner for Ukraine America ensures that the EU maintains its own version of sanctions against the Kremlin and the reason why Joe Biden's name is so pivot though is that Obama dispatch joe bind to Kiev precisely nicely for the reason to one assure that Ukrainians at the Americans are doing everything on their side for pressure on a European partners in order to maintain the sanctions because it was really the Americans are pushing for it not the European Union the European Union. They have a very strong gas relationship with a large percentage of their gas comes from Moscow and the fear is that if we piss off the Kremlin then they could restrict our guys you know there are also business people in European capitals concern about the business interests between their nations as well as Moscow so there are a lot of financial business related issues there tied into that but it was Joe Biden who was cracking the whip and many respects one of the things that Joe Biden to crack the the whip was ensured that Ukraine was maintained their obligations to America saying hey if we're going to give you the support against Russia that means that you have to root out corruption because foreign aid leaks Ukraine like okay. That's just the reality now. Here's the thing now that you have a switch and the White House with President trump up. That wouldn't be a good thing for for several reasons. One trump is a short term game. He's GonNa be gone eventually. Whether it's through impeachment whether it's through losing the election the twenty twenty or in two thousand twenty four he's going to be gone at the end of the day. The Ukrainians want to be part of the European Community NATO for example in order to buffer themselves against Russia's military aggression financially. They're closer and culturally linked to Europe. Do you really think that the e U and NATO is GonNa look on Ukraine. Fong Lee ten years from now twenty years from now by doing trump's dirty work it doesn't make sense for them and another thing Ukrainians through through hundreds of years where the air with the Russian empire where the beat through the Soviet Union or present day Russia with Putin. They're used to being bullied from Moscow how they're used to it so my point is a phone. Call for trump is not gonNA make them quiver in their boots. So none of this makes can't hold on so basically basically you're saying Alinsky is like on the phone would have stood basically like pretty much. That's some crazy stuff right there. This is more on the United States and it is on Ukraine right. I mean my understanding. Is that everyone in the Ukraine's like yeah. This is a problem and we don't want anything of this. So what's the mood what people have been saying in the Ukraine. They are being kind of being ridiculed by trump being really by trump. No is not as big store and Ukraine frame because the phone call implicates trump not Zilenski. That's the main thing and so right. Now is definitely a part of the news cycle not as much as it is here. You're so the Linski is his career is evidence retainer that of a comedian and so that phone call was very much theater on his side okay so I'll tell you when I go to crane you know I tend to speak with elected officials in people who are involved in politics they look at you and say Terrell what's going going on what's happening there and so they just can't believe that if the White House is now functioning properly congress would not intervene and so everything that they understood about the functions of American government is unraveling not only before our eyes but for them it was about to say for everybody right yeah so first of all anyone who's listening to this who really wants to know about the Ukraine. Can they just book Terrell Star. There's no one that I've seen in the last week. Throw that has broken it down like you have so we we really appreciate you. You being here all star but let's talk about the actual declassified whistle blower complained. It was nine pages it. It was released last week. It's just fascinating fascinating document in August the intelligence community inspector general. His name is Michael. Atkinson was given a whistleblower complaint. The House Intelligence Committee was notified of it in early. September there several White House officials senior White House officials implicated and while reporting needs to cooperate a lot of these details. The report is pretty bad especially especially for Rudy Giuliani trump's personal journey and also Attorney General William Bar like they're all over this complaint so it's obviously the focus is on the call. What's Alinsky. Do you think it's smart for the House to focus on this one instance of trump abusing his executive power to pursue impeachment and also so let's talk about the whistle blower here in this case what's the importance of keeping the whistle blower anonymous. I don't think it was a good the idea to reveal the CIA because there is not a whole lot of CIA agents that work at the White House so you can easily narrow down the number of people who may be implicated Araya Raya because it was very specific that this person worked at the White House. It'd be one thing if this person was solely based at the CIA and Langley but that's not the case. This person was dispatched dispatch to the White House and I would believe that would be putting that source in danger because you can narrow down the number of agents. It's at the White House so definitely have a problem with that. I think that was a very terrible call by the executive editor at The Times now. Let's go back into the he was a blower complaint and whether or not that should be a primary focus. My answer is yes because you have donald trump directly asking a foreign in leader the president of Ukraine to look for dirt on the son of his political political opponents somebody who he may have to face and a general election so yes there alone should be something that that should be investigated. Get it now. I think all of us would agree that it shouldn't have just come to this because there are plenty of other examples of his corruption in him turning the White House into a talk rec- but directly ask your question absolutely assured the thing is is that some of us have been around and we remember the the swirl of controversy around Richard Nixon the fact that he was potentially going to be impeached but then he resigned I mean we we have seen this. We this is not the first time Jojo Ho Ho at the Rodeo basically the way Nixon played it. You're right. I'm a victim who expletive deleted is the way they would say when he would start swearing until he wasn't right he was a victim yeah and then he wasn't and then he had to resign. I guess because we not particularly on this show have been never let up on forty five and on his corruption. I do worry okay. At what point is something going to. You know there's is going to be twinkle in the sky and the forty five is going to say. Oh my God. This guy is green and now the New York Times. USA President Trump declare sky is green. We have to stop talking about impeachment because because we have to ask the question. Is it really green yeah. No I think you're right. I think learning from Watergate actually going back and seeing how that was covered covered to now a lot of the tactics that trump is using and his people are using and continue to us and we'll use are going to be utilized I so I think we're going to have to learn from history and the perfect example of a I don't know what to call them anymore. I know he's as personal lawyer but a distracter jour- although he he calls himself a whistle blower is Rudy Giuliani like well in May he canceled the trip to Ukraine after Democrats craft accused him of trying to recruit a foreign country to interfere in our elections aloe private citizen and then during the thirty minute call that trump had with Dolinsky he named a G William Bar is someone to work with investigations trump and trump also told Zilenski several times to speak with Giuliani and then Giuliani's on this bizarre media tour making all these appearances and let's just say he doesn't sound completely the innocent if I didn't investigate it. I'd be guilty of malpractice you know they. They seem to forget that. I'm a lawyer. If I were defending ending a terrorist they'd be going crazy. I was called before Senate committee all those civil liberties groups. It'd be saying right to counsel. How can they intimidate a lawyer. It's fearless pursuit of trying to find justice. I was not involved in any election anything rallying anything about Hunter Biden. You never ask anything about job. I only thing I ask Joe. Biden is to get to the bottom of how it was that Root Sankoh who was appointed dismissed the case against against anti you did ask Ukraine to look into Joe by of course I did. You just said you didn't know I didn't ask him look in Joe Biden asking the allegations that related to my client which tangentially involved Joe Biden in a massive bribery not unwilling to utilize will because he irresponsible yeah well you you actually usually say incredibly stupid things public figure and by the way do you have any idea that the State Department they shut the State Department's already said no Guiliani he's not in our paper who come on what about all the simplification of Julian Bar and all this. He's literally line and journalists are just like sitting there going yeah whatever dude okay so the implication is really simple. We and I keep saying this. The White House is a kleptocracy and so we you can't look at this current the White House as you are normally look at the previous ones so he is basically trump's flunky. He has no true official role. He's been given multiple titles. I don't know if he's a non voi-. I don't know if he's a personal attorney. I don't know exactly what he is a what he does does. Who Does he work for. He works for trump. That's the whole thing is so. He doesn't have any you know supposedly he doesn't have any official capacity but the reality is that he is trump's. Propagandistic deceased trump's henchman. That's pretty much function and so that's his title okay. Let's just be clear about that. He's part strong person. He's part of a loan Shark III Ukraine for example. That's all it is. It's like an invective version of a of a loan shark. That's all he's doing okay again. That's what he is. I'll tell you you too real is Andrea about this as somebody who's been studying this region since I was twenty one years old when you hear about civil society and when you join these government organizations like Peace Corps and fullbright the idea is that the Americans are helping to spread democracy around the world own we are helping to inform the Georgians Armenians the air by Giannis Di Bella Russians sends the Ukraine. We New Democracy in Iraq of it. Is that a country. Would you have really sincere I anti corruption activists who are really doing the best that they can last revolution the Don Revolution is starting two thousand and thirteen was inspired on fighting against a corrupt government in Viktor Yanukovych. They literally get rid of a Kleptocratic authoritarian ruler right and ironically so you have somebody in Petro Poor Shinko who despite him being a no the guard can being a part of the oligarchy there and Ukraine actually maintain stability of the country. You have now in Dolinsky. Somebody who's new ingrain. His whole pledge is to root out corruption. The irony of a country is known four corruption you have the president of the United States encouraging corruption Julio Julio and if you're a fan of in the thick and you love listening to Itt star Jimmy La King as a guest host with me then you are in luck. Jamila is the host of the mother Jones podcasts from our friends over at Mother Jones so if you're still trying to make sense of this political moment check out this podcast posted posted weekly by Itt Start Jamila King the mother Jones podcast on tangles the chaos of the moment by serving up reporting and analysis from America's frontline not think Castro's his favorite Ducati in San Antonio or Alexandria Cortez outside of a detention facility in Florida or North Carolina's Reverend Reverend William Barber on voting rights muckracking investigations candidates commentary Mo- Joe's trademark smart fearless journalism cutting through the clutter every Wednesday just for you learn more mother Jones. Dot Com slash podcast and subscribe wherever you get your podcast. Hey we're back. You're listening to in the thick by my horse I with my co host Julio Ricardo. We're joined this week by Terrell Germain Star. Let's get back to the conversation. Basically forty five is looking a little bit more corrupt than than the president of Ukraine. How Ironic Research Certain Roenick is that yeah. But what about par tell me about bar okay. Here's another instance right so you have. Let's think about the prosecutor general's of Ukraine Ukraine right where you have you know the last we're talking about the prosecutor general's of Ukraine People Book Terrell Starr Dr. This guy knows it. Continue Okay so let's check this out. Okay this man the one who was recently fired. He was just replaced a month ago. He served served time in prison. Okay over corruption charges now. He says that there were trumped up as Ukraine right. You know who knows you can make an argument for either or but the issue is that you have this man who serve prison time telling Guiliani via bar essentially because he was their emissary you might as well say that that you know what we cannot conduct an investigation into Hunter Biden unless you have sufficient evidence however if you conduct your own investigation and provide the requisite evidence then we will be more than happy to cooperate so when you ask me about how far you have a Ukrainian who served prison time who sorry more integrity than the attorney general of the the United States okay so what does that tell you so what continues to be not not for those of you who listen to this because we understand yeah yeah we have attempted to break this down in terms of structural understanding of white male supremacy and Patriarchy and the depths to which they will go due to defend in this particular case forty five and everything that swirling around him so you know and the fact that Republicans as as the party that represents that is still basically trying to justify all of this so Stephen Miller was interviewed on Fox by Chris Wallace list. Let's take a listen inspector general showed they also found his comments to be credible and a matter version concern and they turned it over to the Justice Department justice despite all that they thought that this was a credible complaint and they're wrong Chris Basis Chris. I've worked in the government and the federal government now for nearly the three years. I know what the state looks like. I know the difference between a whistle blower and a deep state operative. This is a deep state operative pure and simple people who haven't been in the federal government. We haven't worked in the white. House may not appreciate this but the situation is you have a group of unelected bureaucrats who think that they they need to take down this president all ten interagency meetings Chris Rhino for a certain fact right the right people. The meeting will leak. If I don't say the right thing the Go-to the hill if we propose policy idea that they don't approve of they'll work with Democrat appropriators to try to block it they leak this president's phone calls. They publish hit the pieces they publish fake stories. They've been doing this continuously for nearly three years and their motives and their agenda is clear this is about. Do you want a democracy in in this country or do you want a deep state. It's a binary choice for the American again. This person that you're accused of all this the director of National Intelligence Joe McGuire a life long long serving of this country said was acting in good faith and going by the book but enough with rhetoric. Let's talk about some specific facts you know they they understand if you just keep saying ally over and over and over again that eventually certain people will believe it. Yup. I also love that quote from Stephen Miller where he's like. You have a basically he's saying that there's like a coup todd. That's going on by unelected. People and I'm like dude. What was Giuliani doing. He's unelected. You're describing what the White House is doing. Exactly you know what I'm saying so it's like the way that they take everything that is happening and then pretend like they're not doing it but anyway Terrell. It's not as if you understand from the Democrats kind of exactly what is going on so so help us to understand and one of the things that Donald Trump has been able to do effectively is that he has changed shape of the Republican Party and so the shape of the Republican Party is not going to be rehabilitated if he loses or if he is impeached in his office the Donald Trump that the Republicans have have embraced is the reflection of their party and it's going to remain that way from years to come because all the thing the Democrats have to do is show video of Donald Trump in loop over and over again just like they did Hillary Clinton because it's all about the Clintons now she's long gone. She's not going to run again L. User but the Democrats can do the same thing so the main takeaway away from this is that that the reason why the Republicans are so supportive of trump is because he is reinforcing and buffering the institution has maintained on their power which is white supremacy yeah the only difference that they're letting him being the bullhorn four and they could just stand behind and say all we're doing this supporting our president and so there's a way in which which the old guard is invested in institution and they have a pseudo understanding of political process when they believe ultimately or not not with the Democrats. You have what I call a is simply a lack of courage okay because ultimately you know there were calls for Nancy Pelosi to resign. You can have a conversation about some of the Aronie is logic that was brought forth to justify her taking a step aside hi but what we're seeing right now is what the AOC's near Yana Presley's and people were ill kept long said is that there's a way in which she believes in traditional process of elbow rubbing and being able to talk in in convinced the other. Si- to the point where it makes them comfortable to move as opposed to going on was was morally correct and she has not displayed their requisite courage could not ignore what the president did. He gave us no choice so it wasn't any change. NJIT mind. I always said we will follow the facts where they take us and when we see them we will be ready and we are ready and so requires a more radical types of leadership that she has never truly possessed she despite competence she displayed a steely resolve but this particular moment moment requires a fire of. Ao See that type of courage and she's not demonstrating it so right now I would have to say that the Democrats they have have the Republicans Navarro position in there just unwilling to pull the trigger. We've been there before. This is a pretty historic moment though so we say although I don't like guns so you know make that balloon pop do what you gotTa do look. Here's the thing you guys. I know every single one of you. Who's listening felt this as well because because yes we were overwhelmed by this impeachment talk. It was only last week that started guys. It feels like a month but you know what there has gene so much happening in terms of immigration policy that has been so concerning just over the last last week a barrage of things who are what's the update yeah. I mean just on Friday. This was this was just on Friday. Trump administration three defeats in the courts in terms of immigration. I won a federal judge blocked the administration from fast-tracking deportations number two another federal judge blocked ice from using flawed databases to target immigrants an issue detainers and then another federal judge blocked the trump administration from dismantling the floor is agreement protections for young immigrants and also essentially from indefinitely holding families in detention and that's just on Friday mightier because there was more right right on Thursday there was a hearing with the House subcommittee on immigration citizenship focused on ice detention centers in it with the persistence of sexual abuse and assault that seems to just continue to happen year after after year after year in fact this recurring of sexual assault of women immigrants in detention is something that we reported about for Latino. USA we focused on a detention facility in Texas outside of Austin called the Don t Hutto residential facility where sexual she'll abuse has been going on for years. A recent report found that the Inspector General at the Department of Homeland Security received over a thousand reports of sexual abuse result in detention from two thousand fourteen to two thousand sixteen That's an average of more than one complaint per day. Hutto has been at the center of the conversation around sexual abuse of immigrant detainees and one particularly high profile case which we're gonNA follow closely on. Today's episode has led activists and residents in Taylor Texas to ask ask. Why is this happening. And what is ice doing to prevent it. There was a moment of essentially white entitlement entitlement that happened when former iced tom home and disrespected representative. jay-paul issues exist. You need to look into Marian failed the American people for not securing the border in loopholes. Mr Homan look lease respect the chair and the authority of the chair then you have the gentlemen has expired expired. I bet you play with my time. You let other pedal will be good not to come home. He don't go beyond this time. Mr Homan we have this. This is it for the Republicans and the Democrats with the ranking member. Please respect the chairs authority the Jewish Book Futures Authority Sir Home at which you work for me. I'm a taxpayer but he's done the same sort of talking over in terms of doing this like he did it with a AOC right and then this is another piece of news and I'm sure it got missed last week. Fifty four immigrants were arrested in a five day raid in New Jersey which actually was part of this nationwide sweep that arrested over a thousand people and then starting this week the trump administration will be sending most asylum. I'm seekers detained at the border to Mexico to await trial in the last thing that happened was there was a new agreement with Honduras that will require wire migrants passing through this country to stay there in Honduras while going through the asylum process and that's the third agreement the US already did one would L. Sarah Lord another one would allow complete capitulation by those three Central American countries of where migrants are fleeing from we'll because if they were to agree to let their people apply for asylum and leave the country than they would be admitting that their countries are basically that they are unable to provide security to their own citizens sends so all of this sounds crazy because if you are fleeing and trying to get to a place that you believe historically as represented a safe haven in to basically be stopped in your tracks and say no no no actually you need to wait in one of the cities in the country that has you know the murder capitals in the world. You need to just sit here and wait. It is horrible and disgusting. This is not what immigration policy should be in the United States right now. We're GONNA move onto our final segment twenty twenty shit show all right so this is a segment where we get updated all things twenty twenty election which by the way I'm kind of like. Can we have paper ballots twenty twenty election or it's we WANNA talk about how white media's continuing to fail at covering the candidates who are not white specifically the only let the Democratic candidate for president right during the Texas Tribune Festival will this past weekend there was MSNBC Anchor Katy Tur. Why Love I love. This is a tough one for me. I Love Katy to her but she asked who Dan Castro this question. How how would you feel about the Democratic Party. If the next nominee was Caucasian to support the next nominee enthusiastically. I've always said that I believe that we should have greater the diversity in our party certainly leadership but I also don't believe you can say just because somebody is white that they should be in that position so I'm going to support for the nominee in any one of the people that the eighteen people that are left would be tremendously better than Donald Trump. Oh okay okay. I'm like they've been all white except for one yeah but there was another moment than star night live. I don't know if you guys saw this. Even when it comes mm style parodies who Castro's not getting any love they did an impeachment townhall skit with people playing these nine candidates and cash. There wasn't even a part of it. WHAT IF JOE BIDEN GETS implicated in this Ukraine scandal in some way Ma that would be terrible Nacho so by president bag. Do you have a response. Do I have time for very long story. You have thirty thirty seconds. I'm GonNa blow right by that. The year is nineteen sixty two. I'm lifeguarding no-shirt Kirk. Ten Chess Medium Knicks should point out that it was a segregated pool Joe's to put everyone on the edge for the rest of the story so I'm life garden in who walks in but corn pop corn pot so oh I see corn pop corn. POPs was a serial that we used back then by the way you guys there was a cereal named Corn Bob's before we throw it to you. Terrell you know shout out to you Julia for how we can cover. POC Twenty twenty candidates because on Friday Latino rebels radio that is part of our sister podcasts here dropped a great interview with Leon Castro. So if you haven't heard it yet itt listeners make sure you go oh to let me know rebels radio so country but in the six weeks we have left until the likely cut off so that threshold that we can make it to the November the base but there is a sense and I told my supporters what is out there people who want to make sure that we keep going to have a certain team on the debate and so contain is working working very hard. I'm working very hard on talk of the people we have a busy travel schedule and Sundays and schedule and I believe it was a make but yeah there is a sense versus. The absolutely thank you all right eight. Terrell you've been entering all these twenty twenty candidates. What's your thoughts on white media members and just the mainstream media political media in general during this election when it comes to POC candidates so is interesting because I've been I've interviewed allow these people. I've spent much of my contact with former. Hud Secretary Leon Castro in his campaign manager. My Aruba who is an African American woman by the way right first of all my immediate response is that yes they of all the candidates that the media he has done a very poor job one. I think Kuan is the absolute worst and I say that even above somebody like cory booker or someone like Komba Harris and here's a reason why yeah I think that even for the route we we really take a lot of pride and even with our small shop to give as many kinds as as much space as possible so oh. I think that we are the UN you know the rude and Latino rebels like we gave miscast raw full hour talk about his policies what he believes in etc that thing about about him is that there is a way in which they this perfectly acceptable to talk about who Leon's background being the Latino man and and we talked about it all the time and as he definitely understands he worked with African American woman who talks about like outreach so there's another problem with at the issue is that there is a way in which who the on has become this this Latino caricature of sorts like like their brains can only focus on right now. This man has come up with a very robust police reform policy. That's strong anybody's on the campaign by a country mile. How Long Spears are playing. This man was a mayor. I don't even hear people talking about his experience. As a mayor. The mayor was a mayor of a top ten city in the United States. Yeah Cory Booker you have Buddha Jr and the thing is Buddha. James runs the city of one hundred thousand. It's not a million and so I think that people depot their brains cannot get beyond this this immigrant story or him being a Latino man because they've never had to deal with one before it's kind kinda similar to how the white press for a long time dealt with Obama until they learn how to adjust to a story so there are some similarities and failures of how media have covered people uh-huh presidential candidates but was really worse about who it was different for Obama. Is that the lack of coverage and poor management of the stories about him. I'm in the questions asked hurt his candidacy. That's the main issue and so as the fourth estate right the fourth state has a duty to do his best to diligently legitimately suss out and flush out everything they need to know about a person and I think that from a national standpoint we know virtually nothing about him and that's the media's fault Tam boom mic drop all star Terrell Germain Star Just let us know what is like. It's that we're not even doing this to ourselves. Dell's we're trying the best that we can and we still get boxed in. Thank you for all of your work as a senior reporter at the root and thank you so much for joining me on this episode of the Fiqh. You're you're welcome Bolshoi Lorella. Hey Listener before you go for those of you who live near Cambridge. We are headed there for a live show next. Tuesday October eighth eighth go to our social media or it live from Cambridge dot event bright dot com to RSVP for your yes free free free free free seat that these Cambridge Massachusetts we'll be talking twenty twenty in the boat with guests dopey resident fellow fellow latasha Brown award winning organizer and Co founder of Black Voters Matter Fund and the Fabulous Renee Graham Associate Editor and columnist the Boston Globe and it's going to be so remember dear listener go to apple podcasts to rate and review us his yeah it does help also so remember that you can listen to the big on Pandora spotify. You know where you're going to your for. You just like boom. I WANNA listen. We're going to beat their who follow us on twitter and on Instagram at in the big show like us on facebook and remember to tell everyone you see today to listen in the biggest produced by Nicole Rockwell and our New York Foundation ignite fellow nor Saudi audio engineers are Stephanie the Bow Julia Caruso. Our digital editor is Louise's new not our interns artemio vainly and lead a Hallo the music you heard it is courtesy of Nasional kept. NC K. records. We'll see you on our next episode. Dear Listener Astana Proxima Child This is not the first time Jojo at the Rodeo that was on purpose. This is not the first uh-huh ho Ho what the Rodeo the opinions expressed by the guests and contributors contributors in this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fujairah media or its employees.
NPR News: 10-04-2019 6PM ET
"This message comes from NPR sponsor xfinity. Some things are slow like a snail races. Other things are fast like Xfinity X. by get get fast speeds even when everyone is online working to make WIFI simple easy awesome more at xfinity dot com restrictions apply live from NPR news in Washington. I'm Jack Speer President. Donald Trump today continued to downplay his conversations conversations with Ukraine's president about opening an investigation into potential political rival and former vice president Joe Biden and his family speaking at the White House while all heading to Walter Reed to visit wounded veterans trumping motivation was about Biden's sons ties to a cranium gas company is about corruption. We want find out what happened with twenty sixteen and there's you know there's a lot of work going on that. I don't care about five campaign but I do care about corruption. It's campaign. That's up to him politics. That's up to them. I don't care about politics over trump today. Also said the White House formally object by letter to the impeachment inquiry even easy admitted House Democrats have the votes to move forward. The letters expected to be sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Speaker Pelosi says she's unsure whether or not the whistle blower over at the heart of the probably protected from trump's attempts to find out their identity from Georgia Public Broadcasting Robert Dimension has that story following demands from the president to speak to the anonymous automous whistleblower whose complaints about trump sparked and impeachment inquiry speaker. Pelosi isn't sure that the Intelligence Community Whistle Blower Protection Act will be enough to shield the whistle so blower anything. That's enough to protection him because he says he wants to interview the person completely counter to what a whistle blower is is about Pelosi says trump either doesn't understand the laws protecting whistleblowers or that he simply doesn't care for NPR news. I'm Robert JEMISON IN ATLANTA. The Justice Department is asking facebook to to delay plans to fully encrypt its messaging services citing public safety concerns. NPR Shannon bond reports the requests clashes with the social networks works plans to strengthen privacy for its two billion users earlier this year facebook promised to roll out end to end encryption for all messages on its messenger APP instagram Graham and what's up that means only the sender and recipient can see the contents of their messages but Attorney General William Barr says he wants the company to create a back door in it systems to let the government read some of those messages he says that will help fight terrorism child exploitation and other crimes in a letter to CEO Mark Zuckerberg Barr says quote security enhancements to the virtual world should not make us more vulnerable in the physical world facebook says any backdoor would undermine its users search privacy and security the letter is also signed by top government officials in the United Kingdom and Australia Shannon bond NPR news Yoshikawa me. We're still adding jobs last month. While the unemployment rate fell to new five decade low of three and a half percent over the Labor Department says the numbers also show some signs of economic slowing the economy added one hundred thirty six thousand non-farm payroll jobs last month on Wall Street the Dow was up three hundred seventy two points this is NPR while it's been a great deal of discussion about child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church it appears at least some of those alleged abusers continue to live under the radar radar with little or no oversight that's based on an Associated Press investigation which finds at least some of those involved work as nurses or volunteers at nonprofits fits teach and conduct other activities involve contact with children. AP analysis also found dozens of those who were allegedly involved have been convicted of crimes including sexual abuse use and possession of child pornography the French any terror prosecutor is taking up the investigation of a police employee who stabbed and killed four of his colleagues yesterday in Paris Paris and Bureau's owner Beardsley reports. The case may point to a possible terror attack the normally quiet. It specialist stabbed his colleagues before he was neutralized by another another employee with a gun. The drama unfolded in Paris's main police station not far from Notre Dame interviewed on French media. The man's neighbors he was kind signed and lived quietly with his wife and children he was also slightly deaf and mute. Police have been searching the man's house and examining his telephone records. Initially the case case was being investigated by a regular criminal prosecutor. Some thought it was possibly the case of a disgruntled worker French media are reporting that the man converted to Islam. Ah Year and a half ago Eleanor Beardsley. NPR News Paris move apparently aimed at placating farmers the trump administration says will implement new rules aimed at increasing demand for ethanol sunol that would reverse a decline caused by exemptions given to refineries forty percent of U._S. Corn is used to produce ethanol. I'm Jack Speer N._P._R. News in Washington.
NPR News: 06-09-2020 4AM ET
"Live from NPR news. I'm Shay Stevens. US. Attorney General William Barr says he opposes calls by some protesters across the nation to de-fund police departments details from NPR's Ryan Lucas in an interview with Fox News. Barr says he understands why African Americans look at George Voids death in Minneapolis NC, institutional racism and police departments, but he says there have been reforms made to law enforcement across the country in recent decades, and he argues police chiefs and rank and file officers understand the need for more change, but he adds defunding. The police isn't the answer. defunding the police holding the entire police structure responsible for the actions of certain officers, wrong and I think it's dangerous. Demonize police bar argues that defunding the police will lead to an increase in what he called vigilanteism and chaos Ryan Lucas NPR news Washington Democrats in Congress say they're proposing to overhaul. Police procedures does not call for defunding police, but does propose accountability measures for abuse. The lawmakers held a moment of silence yesterday and read the names of blacks killed during interactions with police before unveiling the package at the capital's emancipation hall. The American, Civil Liberties Union says six hundred rights, groups and relatives of four black people who died in police custody are seeking an emergency. U. N. probe phillies violence in the United, states a special session of the UN Human Rights Council requires the backing of at least one third of its forty seven member states. The council's last session was held in March that was cut short because of Covid nineteen. A judge in Richmond Virginia has issued a ten day injunction, preventing Governor Ralph Northam from removing a statue of confederate general, Robert E. BPM's Cray carper has that story. The sixty foot statue of Lee has stood in a place of honor on Richmond's Monument Avenue since eighteen ninety. The Order Says Virginia is a party to a deed recorded that year in which the state accepted the statue, pedestal and ground they sit on, and agreed to quote faithfully guard and affectionately protect them. The lawsuit was. Was Filed by William Gregory a descendant of two signatories on the deed. The order claims its in the public interest to resolve the case before the statue is removed, a spokesperson for the Governor says he is committed to taking down the divisive symbol, and that the administration is confident in his authority to do so for NPR news I'm Craig Carper in Richmond. A federal appeals court is ordering a lower court to toss out legal challenges to a two thousand seventeen travel ban. That president trump ordered weeks after taking office. The fourth US circuit court says a federal judge in Maryland made a mistake by refusing to dismiss three lawsuits after the US Supreme, court upheld the ban in a separate case a year later. This is NPR news. The mayor of Moscow plans to lift corona virus lockdown restrictions by the end of the month details from NPR's Lucian Kim Russia is still number three in the world for the number of Corona virus infections behind Brazil and the United States, but Moscow's mayor. Sergei Sabean said on state TV city at succeeded in beating back the pandemic. The. Union from Tuesday hair salons, veterinarians and employment agencies can reopen. Dentists offices in museums following next week and most other restrictions being lifted on June twenty third. Government critics say the Mayor East the lock down to make way for a military parade and a constitutional referendum whose key provisions is removing term limits for President Vladimir Putin. Both events were scheduled for the spring, but had to be postponed because of the pandemic. Lucian Kim NPR News Moscow Hong. Kong's leader Carrie Lam says she hopes that all sides have learned their lessons from the difficulties of the past year. Lamm's comments come amid calls protests day to commemorate the first anniversary of anti-government unrest, sparked by legislation to allow suspects in Hong Kong to be extradited to mainland China for prosecution. US prosecutors and attorneys for Britain's Prince Andrew or cues ing each other a blocking the duke's participation in the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking pro in a statement Andrew's lawyer say their client may three offers to speak with the US investigators but US attorney. Jeffrey Berman has issued his own statement saying Queen Elizabeth. Son repeatedly declined to schedule an interview about his relationship with Epstein. This is NPR news.
"One Saturday in March of two thousand five the servers for the Lion Brand Yarn Company crashed more than forty thousand people had tried to download new crochet pattern. The instructions showed you step by step how to create a lacy gray garment called the coming home. Poncho why I was so popular the Poncho looked exactly like the one that millions had seen Martha Stewart wearing on TV that month as she boarded a private jet home if you don't know her Martha Stewart was the head of a media empire in the nineteen eighties and nineties she showed people in her TV shows and magazines scenes how to lay out the perfect table setting serve the right appetizer for your party or to make sweet potatoes spoon bread. Wouldn't you like to have a center like this on your Thanksgiving table. A grouping of rich autumn colored gourds. I love a good guard but in March two thousand and five Martha was boarding in her private jet from a minimum security women's prison in Alderson West Virginia she had finished serving five months sentence. Martha Stewart getting on the plane they begin hear the cheers waving through the handful of fanfare there with her daughter and the Poncho had been made for her by fellow inmate. Martha's troubles started in two thousand and one when she told her stockbroker to sell her shares in a biotech tech company and that sale have been just before the company publicly announced some bad news. Martha later told investigators that the timing wasn't suspicious. Does she just told her broker to sell shares that they fell to a certain price the government then believer here's what their investigation uncovered the day before the announcement of the company's bad news. Martha got a call from her broker. He said the stock's price was about to fall. Martha told him Cell Oh he had some inside information. Remember that wasn't the story. Martha told the FBI the SEC or the department women of justice she was trying to cover behavior that suggested a crime insider trading that involves profiting illegally from some non public information information in two thousand and four federal jury convicted Martha Stewart on the four criminal counts she was facing she was never charged charged with insider trading instead she was found guilty of conspiracy making false statements to investigators and obstructing justice or conviction that the prison a weird TV show with Snoop Dogg that Poncho and crushing the yarn companies servers one of the tasks given to special counsel Robert Muller was to investigate whether president trump had engaged in any obstruction. What exactly is the crime of obstruction and end. Why did it appear to be such a complicated issue. In the Muller report. uh-huh this is what trump can teach us about common law and ongoing series of indefinite length and now monthly monthly released third Friday of every month mark your calendars where we take the tweets of the forty fifth president of the United States and his critics and use them to examine our constitution constitution like we never had before our music is from doom tree records are professor and neighbor is Elizabeth Joe and I'm your fellow students and host Roman Mars. The basic idea behind obstruction of justice is that it's a crime time to interfere with a criminal investigation. If that sounds a bit vague let's because there are many kinds of conduct that can count as obstruction and obstruction obstruction of justice itself is best understood as part of a family of criminal offenses that punishes not harms to people or property eh but to the justice system itself crimes like perjury witness intimidation and making false statements to investigators are like like obstruction because they all involve actions that make the machinery of justice work less effectively than it should. There are a lot of different federal laws. Does that make it a crime to obstruct justice but we can take one statute as an example the federal law says whoever corruptly alters destroys mutilates plates or conceals a record document or other object or attempts to do so with the intent to to impair the objects integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding or otherwise obstructs influence or impedes any official proceedings or attempts to do so is guilty of obstruction scored a mouthful even if there are many different federal criminal laws that target the obstruction of justice they generally share three common parts or elements as we'd call them. I'm in the Criminal Law. They are one some obstructive conduct to a connection between the obstructive conduct an official proceeding eating and three with the law calls corrupt intent one way to think about why these three elements are important is because these so the things that would have to be proven by a prosecutor in a criminal proceeding the thing you did that the government said was obstructing the connection to an official show investigation and the improper or corrupt state of mind you had when you engage in the conduct if you have three and you presumably engaged in obstruction national justice the funny thing about this crime is that the actions that count as obstruction can be things that aren't necessarily criminal by themselves. What turns finds it into a crime is that you do these things with the intent of interfering with an investigation and here's another thing you can even be guilty of attempting attempting to obstruct justice. That's right you can be an unsuccessful instructor instill be guilty that part's consistent with the rest of Criminal Law. You can be punished for a criminal attempts even if you fail so let's get to trump on March twenty second of two thousand and Nineteen Special Counsel Robert Muller submitted his Report Court to Attorney General William Barr this concluded the two year investigation conducted by Muller and his team as we later learned when the Attorney General that that was jeff sessions told trump in two thousand seventeen about the special counsels appointment trump slump back in his chair and said Oh my God God this is terrible. This is the end of my presidency but the public didn't immediately find out what the report said instead two two days after the report was submitted Attorney General Bar sent a four page letter to Congress that claimed to summarize the report as a letter notes. What's the special counsel report looked to issues Russian interference in the two thousand sixteen presidential election and any interactions with the trump campaign pain and any actions by the president that may have raised obstruction of justice concerns we learned from the Attorney General's letter that yeah well Russian interference in the election was serious bar quoted from the special counsel report and said the investigation did not establish establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities but but the part of bars letter that received the most attention was about obstruction after carefully reviewing the facts and legal theories outlined in the report and in consultation with the Office of Legal Counsel and other department lawyers the Deputy Attorney General and I concluded that the evidence developed by the special shall council is not sufficient to establish that the president committed and obstruction of justice offense the same day trump tweeted no collusion then no obstruction complete and total exoneration keep America Great and on April sixth he tweeted I have I have not read the Muller report yet. Even though I have every right to do so only know the conclusions and on the big one no collusion but it turns out that the Muller report laid out a much more complicated story than bars letter suggested if you read it on April Eighteenth two thousand and nineteen the Department of Justice released a redacted version of the four hundred forty eight page report it's divided into two parts volume one focuses on Russian interference with the two thousand sixteen election the report states that the Russian government interfered in the two thousand sixteen presidential presidential election in a sweeping and systematic fashion but volume one continues by stating that the investigation did naught establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. That's the part that the attorney general quotes his own letter volume two though focuses on any potential obstruction on the part of president trump and it does so by focusing on several instances which Muller's office investigated these include many examples that the media had reported on on including the firing of FBI Director James Comey and trump's criticism of Michael Cohen his former personal attorney when Cohen began to cooperate with with investigators. Remember that tweet December sixteenth two thousand eighteen trump said remember Michael Cohen only became a Herat after the FBI did something which was absolutely unthinkable and unheard of until the witch hunt was illegally started they broke into an attorney's attorney's office why didn't they break into the DNC to get the server or crooked office but let's take a longer look at an example on the special counsel's report art. It's about trump and former. White House counsel Don mcgann. The report says that on June seventeenth two thousand seventeen the president called Paul mcgann twice and told him to have the special counsel fired mcgann refused to follow trump's instructions instead began started to pack pack up his office and decided he would resign that same day mcgann told White House Chief of staff reince Priebus that trump had asked him to do crazy. White House officials persuaded him not to resign and he remained in the job for another year on on January twenty fifth two thousand eighteen the New York Times published a story about trump's attempt to have muller fired by again the next stay trump demanded them again put out a statement that refuted the time story began refused on February six two thousand thousand eighteen mcgann met with president trump in person trump denied ever having ordered muller's firing and then he asked mcgann for a correction Gan said no and that was the end of that in each of these instances both trump's attempt to have muller fired and then to have began denied that it he'd ever tried to have him fired are discussed in the report do they count as obstruction of justice. The Muller report used the term substantial evidence to describe the facts supporting whether trump's interaction with mcgann fulfil the elements of the crime. What's important here. Is the the context the report examines many possible cases of obstruction by trump. Sometimes report says there's some evidence or sometimes it says the evidence doesn't establish something but with them again events we get a pretty clear hint that these acts by trump could qualify as obstruction of of justice so why did nothing happen. That's another story altogether because even though people are convicted on obstruction charges all the time the person person in question in the Miller report of course is the president of the United States in the usual case a prosecutor doesn't investigation and decides whether or not ought to bring charges but muller says he quote did not make a traditional prosecutorial judgement instead the special counsel's office felt bound by the Department of Justice's rules and the report relies on a legal opinion from the office of Legal Counsel from the year two thousand ah which says that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted and that memo it's based on nineteen seventy-three legal memo that was written written during the Watergate crisis and said the same thing the Supreme Court has never decided whether a sitting president can be prosecuted but it's a rule that the department of Justice has followed. What does this all mean. The mole report should be understood as a document that lays out a lot of evidence and makes several observations about that evidence but nowhere does it say and therefore the President committed a crime why because a sitting president can't be prosecuted according to the Department of Justice and if you think about it it would be pretty unfair even for a normal person to not be prosecuted but also to be accused of a crime without any way of defending himself in a legal proceeding and that's why to observations nations in the Muller report are revealing. Here's the first one you wrote quote. If we had confidence after thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice we would so state based on the facts and the applicable legal standards however we are unable to to reach that judgment close quote now does that say there was no obstruction no because he feels bound by these rules muller could did not conclude that trump committed a crime even if he wanted to but they were free to say that there was no case for obstruction and they refused to say that second the mall report basically says well. We can't make a traditional prosecutors judgment but there are other constitutional processes. Sassi's this means impeachment. That's not guesswork. The report drops a footnote referring to the constitution's clauses impeachment. The report reminds ends us that even if a sitting president can't be criminally prosecuted and that's a big if the president can be impeached by the House and removed by the Senate remember obstruction of justice was among the charges levied against both presidents Nixon and Clinton when they faced impeachment Nixon for trying to interfere with the investigation instigation into Watergate and Clinton for trying to interfere with the Paula Jones case for Nixon the full House never voted on the proposed articles of impeachment against him he resigned Clinton actually did face to articles of impeachment including the one charging him with obstruction and the Senate eventually acquitted him after a five we trial on February Twelfth Nineteen Ninety nine of course the current House has not impeach trump not yet after the Miller report was issued the House Judiciary Ashamed Committee had called several witnesses in the report to testify including Don mcgann who didn't show up as ordered on May twenty first president trump told the former White House counsel not to comply and the house intern authorized the Judiciary Committee to sue to force mcgann to comply which which it did in August the lawsuit argues that mcgann is the judiciary committee's most important fact witness in its consideration of whether to recommend and articles of impeachment it may be that president trump will not face either impeachment or criminal charges as a sitting president but the special counsel report pointed out that any immunity would not last beyond his presidency in fact when Muller publicly testified before the House Judiciary Committee on July this very issue came up chairman Jerry Nadler s molar under the Department of Justice Policy. The president could be prosecuted suited for obstruction of justice crimes after he leaves office is correct through this doesn't mean that trump will likely face criminal charges but only that it's theoretically possible and then there are the tweets on April twenty fifth of this year after reports that House Democrats were seeking testimony from Don mcgann trump mm tweeted as has been incorrectly reported by the fake news media. I never told then White House counsel Don mcgann to fire Robert Muller even though I had the legal right to do so if I wanted to fire muller I didn't need mcgann to do it. I could have done it myself. Nevertheless Muller it was not fired and was respectfully allowed to finish his work on what I and many others say wasn't illegal investigation. There was no crime headed headed by a trumpeter who was highly conflicted and a group of eighteen very angry. Democrats drain the swamp and just a few weeks slater trump tweeted on. May I know collusion no obstruction besides how can you have obstruction when not only was there no collusion allusion by trump but the bad actions were done by the other side the greatest con job in the history of American politics. Trump is suggesting suggestion. You can't be guilty of obstruction when there's no underlying crime charged. That's not quite right. Remember you can be charged with obstruction of justice. Even the government doesn't prosecute you for the underlying crime remember Martha Stewart she was convicted of obstruction and lying to investigators even though she never faced any charges about insider trading itself here's a fun fact about the Martha Stewart case in two thousand and three the US attorney for the Southern District of New York Mark. That's the Chief Federal Prosecutor in the case held a press conference. Here's what he said about Martha. Stewart this is a criminal case about lying lying to the FBI lying to the SEC lying to investors. Martha Stewart is being prosecuted not for who she is but because of what she did she was convicted of course and the US attorney his name was James Komi so what gives a memo written in nineteen seventy three and then updated in two thousand any type of legal weight to make any decisions on like I don't quite understand what these memos about and if there's any process to critically reappraise the conclusions that they came with in order to suggest other outcomes about how president should be charged something well. That's a good question but I think maybe the short. The answer is two things number one. We don't have a definitive case that has decided the question. Somebody has to give an opinion and the office of Legal Counsel is kind of of the office that provides legal advice to the Department of Justice right when there's some sort of issue that needs to be resolved and molar operating within that framework framework right. He can't be the one employee. Who says you know what I don't like these roles. He's of organization man has been so's entire career and so he's bound by that. I I think one of the things that we see play out in the media. Coverage of both bars letter in the mullahs report was it's a very carefully laid out report that explains this is what trump did this is. What the elements of obstruction of justice justice are you know. There's a lot of evidence for a lot of events supporting an obstruction of justice charge in theory and there are things we can do about it but the problem is that no one including president trump apparently read the for one hundred and forty eight page report so so all you can get her little snippets which suggest we'll look. He didn't charge him with anything and therefore he didn't do anything but that's really not at all muller was saying we kind of puts you in a weird catch twenty two of the memo from the Office of Legal Counsel says you can't charge a president and therefore you never charge a president so therefore it never gets tested in court and then never gets overturned then you're just kind of stuck yeah we are. Kinda stuck. I mean unless you have an oil C. which decides to change its mind or decide but you know it does kind of make a lot of sense? I mean it is the executive branch. We're not thinking well. They're going to say you can prosecute the president the very idea I and we've talked about this before of prosecuting a sitting president. It sits uncomfortably on people of all political stripes. He would just haul off present present jail in the abstract sounds crazy is we would be doing nothing as a nation other than watching the criminal trial of president if that were to happen whether or not it's legally possible. I think many people feel that this is the appropriate mechanism is impeachment so oh a Lotta people sort of turned to Congress thinking is they're going to be impeachment but of course impeachment itself is not just a legal consideration. It's a political consideration. She you know do you go through the process for the sake of going through the process or do you make a political calculation that you know there's no way he can be removed so let's not even and begin and how you view what impeachment is supposed to do as a mechanism kind of colors how you interpret the events that are going on around us so the investigation resulted in this thing called the mold report which by most accounts most people didn't actually read it not even the president himself so what was its point in. Y was disappointing to some people in vindicating to other people so there was what the public expected they. They expected the Muller report to just have a bottom line conclusion. The president is guilty of a crime or the president is not guilty of crime and then we can all move on depending on what happened next ex but instead as we've explained here you know Muller knew that he couldn't really come out and say even if the evidence suggested to his office that president trump is committed minute a crime he was gagged from saying so essentially could not come to that conclusion so instead he draws out the most careful like the ultimate law school exam here. All of these facts do these amount to obstruction. I will lay out every single piece of evidence that we found in our hundreds of hours of interviews and looking at documents if you're a law student that is one of the things you do if you're a busy member of the public it is boring does not sound like like something that you really ought to be paying attention to it so it was never meant to be sort of an ultimate bottom line. I don't think it was really meant to lay out the case as you could say a referral to Congress the instant and I think erroneous conclusion is oh. He's not guilty that let's move on by by his own interpretation of the office of Legal Counsel. He really couldn't say a bottom line thing of he's guilty with. That's just wasn't the job at all right. I mean there's so much which more to say about the report to I mean the presence lawyers went into a huge legal defense of what trump did and said you know all the things that trump allegedly really did he's allowed to do he's allowed to do things like fire the FBI director but as we explained the problem with the crime of obstruction is that even ordinary things you're allowed to do if you do them with us of corrupt state of mind the bad state of mind. You're trying to interfere and that's why you're engaging in this conduct. That's what makes it a crime so if trump has a corrupt mind than I mean like that's such a it's a it's a legal term of art doesn't mean yeah it's so it's so funny honey. It's so funny because like even the most noxious things he does so corrupt in so many ways but even when it's something as simple as wanting wanting to greenland that he's allowed to do up sitting mind all right thank you thanks and this show is produced by Elizabeth Joe Chris Brubeck and me Roman Mars. You can find US online at trump CON LAW DOT com. The music and trump on law is provided by doom tree records the Midwest hip hop collective. There's a new shredders album. It is excellent. They're the ones who do the opening theme the music I'm talking about right now. The new is called great hits. Get on it. People it is so good you can find out all about doom tree records get merch and learn about current tors and doom tree dot net we are proud member of Radio Topa from PR REX supported by listeners just like you aradio acts.
The attorney generals defense
"Post reports is brought to you by Purina. You care about where your food comes from whether it's for you or your pets. That's why Purina makes every ingredient count and is committed to responsible sourcing of ingredients learn more at Purina dot com slash cares. From the newsroom of the Washington. Blue over over. The Washington Post. pining parents. This is Peter James Washington, post reports I'm Martine powers. It's Wednesday July twenty nine. Today. What we learned from bars testimony to Congress what Tasmanian PAPI's have to do with the US opioid crisis and a new kind of concert. This Week Attorney General William Barr testified for the first time in his tenure in front of the Democratic controlled House, the House Judiciary Committee Good Morning. Chairman ranking member Jordan. Pleased to be here this morning and it came at a time when he's facing a ton of questions about how he has led the Justice Department under trump critics allege he's helping trump politically in ways ranging from policing in cities that match up with President Trump's campaign message to intervening criminal investigations of trump friends and questioning mail and voting in a way that trump has an election experts have not. I'm Phillip I analyze politics for the fix blog at the Washington Post. And how would you describe the tone and tenor of the way that Attorney General Bar was interacting with these members of Congress. Bar, came in ready to rumble. He was pretty contemptuous almost of members of Congress. Bar, supporters will say he kept getting cut off by Democrats in the House wouldn't let him answer. That's that's a fair criticism I think of how the hearing went whose story but this is a hearing I thought I was one of those supposed to be heard. Well, let me and I'M GONNA get there but bar submitted opening statement the night before that made clear that he Going to play the role of a truly independent attorney general see no party see no politics kind of person the way he was saying his confirmation hearing the president has not attempted to interfere in these decisions on the contrary. He has told me from the start that he expects me to exercise my independent judgement to make whatever call I think is right and that is precisely what I've done. He was very defensive from the very beginning and he went out right in front to say, okay president trump is like he painted him as this consummate professional president giving bar complete freedom to do it he needs. But that certainly is not what we see based on trump's public comments online for Smith where he regularly injects his personal opinion in ways that other presidents haven't and bar has received a lot of criticism for the fact that you have federal law enforcement officers who are in Portland right now, who are taking really aggressive tactics against protesters what had bar have to say about the use of those tactics but also about his role in deciding that that was going to happen like, did he basically say that this was his decision because these are federal law enforcement officers or did he punt that more toward the president? Bar was defy it about the criticism facing would he owned his his decision to send federal agents into these US cities? The evidence on the ground is that protests in most of these cities Portland being a minor exception had been fizzling out since May and then sending in these federal troops gave. Something to rally against and a reason to go out every night. Bar chose to focus on some of the black clad protestors coming out every night and attacking specifically this federal courthouse in Portland every night for the past two months. Of Hundreds of rioters have laid siege to the Federal Court House and other nearby federal property. The rioters have come equipped for fight. Armed powerful slingshots, tasers, sledge hammers, saws, knives, rifles, and explosive devices, and he was unrelenting about that even as Democrats tried to argue, well, like for the most part, these are peaceful protesters and again, reports on the ground do bolstered Democrats argument that for the most part in these cities in Portland these are peaceful protests. The Inspector General at the Justice Department and internal watchdog said last week that they will look at police force in Portland as well as police force clearing out that Lafayette Square Park at the White. House earlier this year. It also seems like Attorney General Bar has been noticeably absent in this national conversation that we've been having about the future of policing and about systemic racism and injustice that is part of the policing system in America what did bar say about that and what is his plan for police reform? You're right Martine. He hasn't been a major voice in this despite leading the top law enforcement agencies in the US as Americans debate, police brutality and racial inequality, and so this was his chance to talk about it and he did acknowledge racial inequalities and how police treat black Americans but you referred to it as history saying okay. Well, until just last fifty years ago. Or so our laws work institute and institutions explicitly racist explicitly discriminatory. Widely. Brushed aside today's concerns among Americans of color. In their supporters bars straight up said there's not systemic racism police in the United States police forces today are far more diverse than they've ever been. And there are both more black police chief more black officers in the ranks well, though the death of George Floyd at the hands of the police was a shocking event. The fact is that these events are fortunately quite rare. He tried to cite statistics that that show that. Perhaps the white men are shot at or even killed at a higher rate than black men the statistics don't show that when you look at the US population black men absolutely are shot at by beliefs and at a higher rate than than white men or any other recent America and he just he just didn't seem like he wanted to be a major advocate for the black lives matter movement but I I would take it even a step further he didn't want to. Almost give it any credence I would say because perhaps he felt like to do so would undermine his reasoning for sending federal agents to Portland where he was adamant and maintaining these protesters had a negative intent rather than a positive one You know one point in the hearing he refused to say that he would institute a Department policy to limit tear gas being used against peaceful protesters saying well. Know. Sometimes it's a valuable tool even among peaceful protesters. Did Bar talk about the election about voting about concerns about foreign interference he got asked by Democrats about all of that. He has said Multiple Times. He's worried about foreign actors manipulating voting by mail to large-scale November. He repeated that Tuesday. He acknowledged he has no evidence to back up that concern and I should add that election officials say what he's warning about is totally unlikely beanery said I have common sense representative David Sicily in a Democrat from Rhode Island asked him is it ever appropriate serve for the president to solicit or accept for an assistance in an election and bar said? It depends on what kind of assistance, which is just a draw dropping statement Martine because it's not appropriate and it's not legal. It's very illegal to accept foreign help to try to win your election trump was impeached for just that kind of accusation by the House a couple months ago where election officials and where you know intelligence analysts want bar in the present to be tough on. They've been weak and bar especially on Tuesday was. It also seemed like there were a lot of questions coming into this about Roger. Stone and about situations in which the president has successfully protected his friends or allies either from criminal prosecution or from from punishment in jail time, and it seems like that those are the situations where bar is in his day she s position rate like he is supposed to be the kind of criminal enforcement officer in chief, and these are situations where the president has basically like done the runaround of the criminal justice system. What did he have to say about about that and his relationship with the president on that? He maintained that the president wasn't telling him what to do. He wouldn't speak specifically to in any private conversations of of any kind he's had with the president so you couldn't get him specifically to say, no, the president never told me to reduce the sentence for Roger Stone, for instance, or to Drop Charges Against Michael Flynn, even though he pleaded guilty to those or any number of actions said, bars received criticism from. But what he did was try to cast himself as the attorney general doing unpopular things that he knows will political but he truly thinks they're right in the case of Roger Stone Trump's longtime friend who was found guilty of lying to Congress and intimidating witnesses among other things. Bars said he felt like it was fair to intervene into that case and to recommend to the federal judge that he does not get. Seventy. Nine years, which is what the federal prosecutors on the case calling for. But Bar said listen this is direct quote. Do you think it's fair for sixty seven year old man to be sentenced to prison for seven to nine years and then he cast himself as somebody who was doing something that he knew it'd be controversial but he felt it was right almost as if he's being an impartial attorney general because he's helped the president's friends. and. So what was the big takeaway from Attorney General barreds stance on that bar is totally uncowed by criticism that he's doing the president's bidding. He does not seem to care at all that he's being cast by his critics and by Democrats specifically, as this henchmen is literally what Nancy Pelosi called him, she also called him a Blob. For President trump he does not care. He's going to continue down this path that is on which he's argued is. Seeing justice in partially. But when you look at the totality of everything, he's done. That's raise. Criticism is unquestionably matched up with what president trump has wanted. There's does not seem to be any end in sight and like a multi our lashing out by Democrats in public at this hearing probably won't change that. Amber Phillips reports on Politics for the. Win Now enough in a pedicab puppies field of poppies probably always say Teen Hick via pedic beautiful paddock just coming on into flour. Where have you been traveling? We were in Tasmania. That's Peter Warshafsky. Again, they're a my on on thraw on the chief executive. All puffy growls Tasmania that something out that I've been doing for the last thirty three years. Poppies, and Tasmania are huge part of the global market. That's where a lot of the chemicals for poxy Khotan and hydrocortisone that have the opioid crisis come from off across all of the alkaloids that can contained in mess in the crop morphine codeine by. Our poverty with provide approximately. Fifty percent of the world demand. Northern Tasmanians where they're mostly grown and it's a beautiful area, it's meadows and rugged mountains. The fields are beautiful. Does these incredibly beautiful flowers for acres and acres? Are the poppies they're the poppies there because Tasmania very good place to grow poppies. It's the right climate. We have long son Lord hours not too hot not to call the plane appears to like that it's difficult to move poppies anywhere else because on an island, it would be has been and continues to be a highly would be the most highly regulated cropping strike up and so describe to me how the supply chain works from these fields in Tasmania to. The opioid market in the US farmers grow the poppies they're independent farmers. There's hundreds of them in. Tasmania is probably four hundred paddock's like this. In the state they grow the poppies. This will be justed in February they sell the poppies to one of three processors. It'll wolf to the factories. One of them was once a subsidiary of Johnson Johnson until two, thousand sixteen. That company shipped to another Johnson and Johnson subsidiary in the United States where what they call concentrated poppy Straw from Tasmania is refined into hydrocortisone oxycodone, codeine morphine so on. And hadn't Johnson Johnson get into this business because I associate Johnson Johnson with something like baby powder or bandaids or just like random household items and not with the opioid market Johnson Johnson also pharmaceutical company they got involved decades ago they purchased a company called Tasmanian, alkaloids. And Tasmanian alkaloids made a kind of brilliant discovery. They created a poppy that was laden with something called fee Bain, which is what you make hydrocortisone in code out of. So, once they discovered that the poppies mania were. Very potent or very powerful as very useful day decided to get more into that market while they created that poppy they they did it on purpose they took a bunch of regular poppy seeds subjected them to some chemicals that just randomly change their genetics and then they grew thousands of these plants and then they found that by messing up their genetics, they came up with one special strain. That had lots of the bane and that's the one that they picked out and then they read that one how did it change the opioid market but made it much easier to make hydrogen oxycodone? Normally, fee bane is just like a tiny part of the opiates in a poppy. So by getting a poppy that was full of it, just made it much easier to produce oxycodone and hydrocortisone. So, what has been the experience of the farmers who have been developing these poppies for Johnson Johnson. Well, the first thing Johnson Johnson had to do through their subsidiary Tasmanian Alkaloids, people to grow these new poppies police for just another crop fouls grew we try doing carriage production. Farmers aren't going to take on crop and devote lots of land to them without knowing that they're going to get some money out of it, and that is we didn't have an we weren't getting enough material through the factory. To curb, it fully occupied for twelve months. We're usually running out of handle the shakespeare capacity for ship table through. January. So in order to entice farmers to grow these poppies into, grow them a way that sort of maximize their potency, they started offering the farmers luxury cars for the person who grew the best crop. The. Actors. WAS A. Brilliant Recruit Claudia are suggests that we should. Give car attraction lottery or gushing APPs so insane if they gave him a Jaguar one year, Mercedes. BMW The next year and obviously this made poppy growing. Some popular and competitive did have a dramatic effect, the five or Straw. All sorts of techniques dig rather biskra puppies and they would advertise this. They just be like, Hey, farmers whoever can grow the best poppy you get a Jaguar. Was Competitive. People were very proud if they had the top crop, that's something that they would boast about. But even when the car was about on the farmers would be Sirichan off the car she a beautiful crop look at that crop out, it's a beautiful crop or Oregon. Oregon put report. Crop is the harake and put down for. The. Most pitching models of age. It was the chiefs Jiang bar but I think the. Sixty thousand dollars. which was nothing compared to the advantages a guy in increase productivity and more raw mathilde process. And so then how did that change the total amount of poppies came from Tasmania? Well, it boomed how does that translate to the US market? The fact that all these farmers were growing more poppies. Helped the people who wanted to make oxycodone Hydra Koto much of which went to. Film makers in the United States including purdue, which made oxycontin. And so were there any limitations on the amount of poppy byproduct that could come to the US and fuel the opiate market I mean I would imagine that wouldn't it be something that would be somewhat restricted It is and this was a critical issue for them because for years international in US drug policy said. We want to get most of our. Opiates from Turkey and India those are the traditional suppliers. We don't want poppies to be grown all over the world because then would end up with lots of diversion, lots of illicit use. So Australia Johnson and Johnson and other people lobbied for years and said, we want a bigger part of the United States market they eventually got. So how did the regulations change? So they decided that the drug substance that was in there poppies the bane that is turned into oxycodone hydrogen that would not be limited by the previous rules even though it was a narcotic raw material, which is what was limited under the law they said, we won't count the under that law. That basically meant that there was no limitation on the amount of poppies that could be imported to the US. The still regulated the total amount that could come into the United States. They have annual quotas for imports, annual quotas for production, but sort of lifted much of the limit that was on. Tasmania and Johnson and Johnson. Do Johnson and Johnson or the poppy industry in Tasmania do they see themselves as having any role in the opioid crisis in the US? No, they see themselves as a company that was just trying to make. Painkillers for people who are in pain for patients the fact that there was diversion. Abuse and so on. was something that lay outside of their responsibility test minded fabulous. The very strict law Shinkansen conditions by grew out of contracts. And any. Any problem. has nothing to do with the US with the Tasmanian. Poppy us. But. Does anyone else see them as part of the cause of what is now a truly terrible crisis? Yeah. Lots of people think that the drug companies. and. The DA were producing irresponsibly large amounts of. opioids much of it. You know stemming from Tasmania and they should have known long ago that. Lots and lots of their drugs. Were being abused and that there was just too much of it. They should not have produced so much. and. So have they faced any legal action for all of the puppies that they produced nothing specifically regarding the poppies although Johnson and Johnson lost a big lawsuit in Oklahoma there been asked to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to Oklahoma for creating a public nuisance there, and so what is the state of Johnson and Johnson's role in the poppy industry or in the industry? Now they got out of the business in two, thousand sixteen they sold both of those subsidiaries that I mentioned Tasmanian Alkaloids and Ramco which was making a Hydro Cohen oxycodone and it was very fortuitous timing because the Started crackdown and lower the amount of codeine and oxycodone that could be produced. So the fact that Johnson and Johnson sold these poppy companies in Tasmania. How has that affected the farmers there? Well, the whole markets turned on them and they're not producing nearly as much prices have come way down the stopped offering the cars stopped offering luxury vacations for the top crop lot of them are moving on. They also say that the very resentful about how sometimes they're portrayed in Australian media, which is look these guys are making so much money. Get rich from. Poppy. No. No no one could kind of richer grind popish the average fire audette with a get ten dollars an air and they found. For the tall pudding. It's more. And everybody's making money in a bigger shops and ship the farmers. So while the factual. And makers of opioids in United States we're making lots of money. That's why it became such a big business. The farmers didn't really make a lot of money against a handful. Every year would win a BMW for, but for the most part they weren't. It rich based on poppies and so what are they gonNA do now Poppies are no longer like the lucrative crop for them sheep. Sheep. Big Now. She'd somehow has come back. Feature? She. Were ski is a business reporter for the Washington. Post. And now, one more thing. Might sound like a bunch of random voices singing a bunch of random things. But what you're listening to is broadcast from home. It's a fascinating collaborative work by composer Lisa Bela. Composed entirely from words, invoices crowd sourced from strangers in isolation. On her website below asks for written testimonies from whoever might care to share them answering questions about their time in quarantine like when you first wake up what do you remember? What are you most afraid of? What hope? These written testimonies are than set to melodies and arranged for every vocal range by Beulah. Who then post the scores for the next wave of participants? They sing a selection of lines and submit them. The collected phrases. Like I. Want to sit across from me. I don't want to meet you for happy hour online. Are. Then layered informed by below into a spellbinding sparsely accompanied socially distanced virtual chorus. It's hard to imagine any composer thriving creatively in our current circumstances. But especially, Beulah. For one thing she's big on group collaboration. In two thousand, thirteen, her Chrissy broadcast assembled over eight hundred professional student, an amateur musicians to cluster and wander around a former airfield in San Francisco. Performing what she calls a massive specialized. Symphony. She's also inspired by public spaces and the intimacy that comes with Public Assembly. Her two thousand seven work chance encounters was site specific work in which the performers arrive individually to a park in. Lower. Manhattan. They converge into a single musical unit and then dispersed back into the bustle of the city. And lastly, she's a composer who loves life in the big city. She once told an interviewer that walking around the city was her sure fire way to fall in love with humanity again. Even the words sung by the Soprano in chance encounters come from straight utterances overheard and collected around New York. City. which is all to save it for a composer like Lawa losing access to people is like losing her instrument. Barabbas burke summons much of its emotional forced from the very things that covid nineteen is taken away. All of this makes broadcast from home not just a mesmerizing portrait of life in quarantine. But a fascinating document of below versatility as an artist. As each new weekly chapter of the project arrives, it's arc broadens its story grows and the distance overcomes is transformed into an uncanny intimacy. Broadcast from home is a piece, the plays with absence and presence isolation and community fear and solace. And, it might sound a lot like the voices in your head. Michael and or broder is a classical music critic for the Post. That's IT for post reports. Thanks for listening and thank you to all the listeners who filled out our audience survey. We were literally overwhelmed with responses and it is super helpful in shaping the podcast going. Forward. If you WANNA support post reports even more. One thing that you can always do is subscribe to the Post. You can even try one month for a dollar go to Washington Post Dot. com slash subscribe. Ign Martine powers we'll be back tomorrow with more stories from the Washington Post.
Amanpour: Kristalina Georgieva, Reverend William J. Barber II, Anne Milgram, Matthew Desmond and Afua Hirsch
"I'm Don Lemon and I'm taking on the hard conversations about being black in America real talk and meaningful solutions on my new CNN podcast. Silence is not an option. Listen on Apple, podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. Hello everyone and welcome to Alan Poor. Here's what's coming up. Corona virus cases rising millions out of work and a reckoning with racial injustice. Could this be the fork in the road to building back a better world I ask the IMF chief and taking up Dr King's Mantle Reverend William Baba joins me about fighting structural poverty that platforms structural racism, then when the rule of law is under, threaten America. What does that mean for democracy around the? The World I speak to former federal prosecutor Anne milgram about trump firing, a top attorney, investigating his allies, plus all of us know that we need stable affordable housing to live. This is essential to us, but our country has not invested in this fundamental human need another brick in the wall of racism on Fair Housing in America Matthew. Desmond tells Michelle Martin about the coming pandemic evictions. Welcome to the program. Everyone I'm Christiane poor working from home in London the WHO is now warning the coronavirus pandemic is far from over in fact, its accelerating in some countries including the United States where nearly half of states are reporting an increase in infections along with the mounting bodycount, the brazen killing in broad daylight of George Floyd, which is reignited the black lives matter movement on the streets around world. There is a sense of seizing the moment, and now some unlikely institutions including the US federal. Reserve a speaking out warning that income inequality for minorities could get even worse. Thanks to the pandemic, even the notoriously. Notoriously hard bargaining international monetary fund is talking about building a better world from the current crises while also preparing to release it updated assessment of the global economy this week and the IMF managing director. Kristalina Yoga joins me now from Washington. For an exclusive interview. Welcome to the program and I was very interested in reading how you have analyzed the situation that you have to try to figure out how to come out of this into a better structure, a better a better world, but first. Let me ask you because the world is waiting to hear about the next assessment of where the global economy is headed. What can you tell us about what's on your mind? Given the increase in some places of Corona, virus infections. The headline of our assessment is that the recession is deeper in twenty twenty. Then we projected in April. The recovery is going to be slower in twenty twenty one. Then we projected in April. But the action's governments had taken have put a floor under the world economy and are preventing a massive wave of bankruptcies or unemployment. What we are seeing is that both advance economies and emerging market economies are faring worse in this assessment. If you take out especially China that was first on the curve of the pandemic. And therefore what we are saying is, we are not yet out of the woods. We have to concentrate on supportive measures for longer, and we need to think of a recovery that is going to bring forward our world, not not. Backward So I'M GONNA. Put this off because it does show. How in the E U? In European countries, the curve is coming down while in the United States. It's sort of flattening in some places on flattening in other words, it's carrying on along. That are all along that horizontal road with some countries with a lot of countries, lifting lockdowns and restarting their economies with fits and starts and fairly slowly. How is that going to affect the issues? Eve just talked about and particularly. In America, there's still talking about you. Hear the president's Economic Advisers, talking about a v-shaped recovery is that. Does that look like being on the table? Well. Recovery we forsee now is one that will coexist with the pandemic becky April. We were still hoping that somehow the epidemic puts would REC-. And we can see a v-shaped recovery, but this is clearly not happening. Not only the pandemic is still with us, but its course continues. The epicenter now moved to art in America. We are quite worried about. Parts of south. Asia and we don't yet know whether Africa will also followed this speed up of infections. So what we can say on the positive side is that. Countries, have learned. Enough about actions. They need to take heavy enough medical capacity to treat people when they're sick. Be sure to wear masks and. A sufficiently apply micromeasures that allow restart economic activities and be very agile in your policies. As! We are still waiting for the decisive component vaccines and treatment to be in place. So look generally institutions like yours and the Fed and others are allergic today, and yet right now there is mountains of debt. We have a graph that can show that and you have also said I don't know it sounds different to what the IMF would generally say you. The messages exceptional times call for exceptional measures, so spend what you can, but keep the receipts. What are you saying? The debt is just going to be without some. We shouldn't worry about it for now. What we need to do now. Is to protect the economy of such a massive collapse that it can push us in depression, and that is why we highly value actions taken by central banks to put in liquidity actions taken by. Its with fiscal measures on an unprecedented scale Christiaan. We are now edging up to almost eleven trillion dollars fiscal measures alone, and what we know is that as long as this degree of uncertainty is with us as long as we need to protect firms and people. That necessity of additional. Support for the economy is there, but we do need to think of the world on the other side, higher debt higher deficit. Likely higher unemployment and very important a risk of. Inequality more poverty. Now, we have to put some smart policies in place meaning that this very fiscal stimulus that we are going to inject. We have to be thinking of how best to put it in place to do the right thing and the right thing is well. Make sure that we invest in. The economy of the future that is greener. low-carbon resilient to climate shocks that we invest in digital access for everybody. One of my worries is the big winner of this crisis, the digital economy. Maybe good for some, but not for all and by doing that lack of faxes for everybody we expand inequality in our society and we know from. Experiences with pandemics like with SARS and h one. N One that pandemics push inequality up especially for the people with lower education. Fewer. Assets in their hands. Do we really want that? We don't and not only for the people that may be impacted for does that. My may find themselves poor and excluded. We don't want it for anybody. Because inequality of opportunity means that a big chunk of our society does not contribute as much as they can, so everybody's were. And that is what we need to focus on. And as you know, of course, because on the streets. Of making that cried right now. Black lives matter racial inequality. You've seen all the disparities that you've mentioned along racial minority lines and the US Federal Reserve is beginning to engage on this and we've heard Rafael Bostick who's the president of the reserve in Atlanta basically say systemic racism is a yoke that drags on the American economy and said basically the feds complained important role in helping to reduce racial inequities and bring about a more inclusive economy. So, what do you think about that and does that? Affect your thinking. It is very much aligned with the research. We had done a damn F- about inequality. Including structural inequality beat on race? Or on geography. Or on whether you're a man or a woman. And so we clearly demonstrate that they are ways in which. By, making sure that there is equal access to education that the quality of education health services. Is across the board everything that they are no areas geographic areas that are left to decline with no attention with with crumbling infrastructure. Investment in digital are done with priority focus on these areas that are falling behind this all is a pathway to reduce inequality and a very important element that. The. Finance Institutions Skin Porsche is access to finance equal opportunity in access to find us. Look every single bay four hundred children for country. Thousand Children are born on this planet, every single day. Winter born. It's lottery. Race gender geography. Your family swelled. It doesn't have to be lottery all the way through we can make. It sold that every child can reach its full potential. Entities? A Matter of determined policy choice that we ought to make. KRISTALINA Georgieva head of the IMF managing director. Thank you so much for joining us. and. Our next guest joins the ranks of Martin Luther King and Congressman John Lewis in devoting his life to fighting poverty and racial injustice. Reverend William Baba is coach of the poor people's campaign. which this weekend had its own march on Washington calling for economic. Justice only this one. The twenty twenty version was virtual with more than two million people taking part according to the organizers Reverend Barbara is joining me now from Raleigh North. Carolina welcome back to the program. Reverend I said. In, the introduction that this seems to be a moment on the street and in the pandemics. That is a moment to seize this day. Do you believe and you just heard the IMF achieve? Do you believe that institutions that can are serious about making this matter right now in your issue? This is a moment, but it's been a moment this coming because of the confluence of movements that have been building for instances we can't. We Now said we had two point five million people on facebook, and we can track that metrically, and over three hundred thousand people that sent our platform to governors, and all of the members of Congress This was the centering into our national consciousness of movement made. Made up of all races and faiths and creeds and sexuality, bowing to say listen we have to address five interlocking injustice, systemic racism, and all of its components how it impacts first nation people how it impacts. Brown people, and black people, systemic poverty, one hundred and forty million people, forty percent of this nation, ecological devastation as undermining the clean air, clean water, clean, clean land, and then the war economist. Fifty four cents of every description dollar into war, and that is more money than we put into education infrastructure healthcare combine, and then we have to address this false mar narrative religious national and went to walk five million people and said we're we. We can't go to DC. We were planning to be up, but we're going to be online. WE'RE GONNA sign up and we're GONNA join. That is critically sansom that we in a reconstruction moment we're not in a moment, but just taking around the edges with not in a moment for people just trying to say like people, but they don't change policies. This is a transformational moment. Well to that point you've you've written earlier this month. There's one onset to why the wealthiest nation in the world cannot provide for its most vulnerable. We have decided not to, and so you are you know again for the structural enter to the structural poverty. Do you think this? Despite the streets and the two point five million who joined your virtual March? That does the political will where it's needed to actually make this shift, because it is a shift in distribution of resources. It will have to be where we not only in the streets, but we're GONNA have to the voting booth and that's why we're also building power. We've had a moment where the people are going to have to change the political. Atmosphere just like people that went cross. Edmund Pettus Bridge. None of the politicians wanted to deal with voting rights. The president wanted didn't want to deal with, but the people forced a change in the political context, and that wasn't even in an election year. We have a greater possibility because we are in the middle of an election. That doesn't mean. Go devoting November and then leave and go home. It means that we have to build power, and we have to show people what we did on Saturday. It wasn't people talking about the poor. Poor, we've got thousands of text back. That said we saw ourselves. We said Look America. You must see yourself these five interlocking injustices, affecting a white farmer couple in Kansas just like its affecting coalminers in Kentucky, affecting fast workers in north, Carolina and people down in the Delta Mississippi and more, we show that to the people at the possibly of chained. Not Politicians are going to have to understand what this moment is still playing with it. They don't understand yet. This is the moment and they better, because if we can't fix these. These issues in the midst of a pandemic and the mist of the poverty is coming. There's going to be added another fifteen thousand people and unemployment if we can't face, these issues of raising living wage isn't getting healthcare and deal with poverty God. Help us as a country. This is the moment this is the moment that we must be of his movement and we're what we're saying. We're not going anywhere. We're going to be at the voting booth. Whoever wins? We're going to be still in their face. We're GONNA. Keep pushing because. Because what other choice that we have is one guy said on Saturday. Our backs are against the wall. We have no other choice but to fight in. Lastly, we've got to decide in this country. Do we believe in our first declaration? And that is life because every regressive policy denial of healthcare living wages, even denial of voting rights has what I call it mission. People die when we don't have healthcare. People die when they don't have been waiting. People die when we have voter suppression that people used voter suppression to get in. And then once they get in office, they protect corporate polluters, and they deny healthcare and they blocked wages. We're going to deal with the death of George Florida as we should. We have to deal with the desk that we don't see on camera, but happen everyday to the tone of seven hundred four people dying every day from poverty. We have to deal with the death measurement. Otherwise, we don't mean what we say when we say, we are life, liberty and the pursuit of happened. So what happens then when you have a situation of voter suppression and all the other issues that you're are working against Stacey. Abrams is working against. Obviously, we saw what happened in the primary in Georgia and now we hear you obviously you know these figures better than I do. The you says one in every thirteen black Americans cannot vote. Ju to disenfranchise. Disenfranchisement, laws. Are you convinced that everybody wants to vote in your community? You said that's the first step will be able to in November and throughout the primary season. When I talk about my community, I'm talking about poor and low well regardless of what their colors. Because we've done a study, we'll release in just a moment that shows if you just register fifteen percent of poor and low wealth people and they vote, they can fundamentally change the political calculus in every state, and they can overwhelm the system so what we said we fight against. Against Voter suppression in the court, we will fight and have poll-watchers, but we must overwhelm the system. A hundred million people stayed home last time in the three states that trump Juan. Wisconsin, Pennsylvania Michigan by one hundred and one thousand votes to million-plus poor and low wealth people that could vote didn't vote, and so what you're saying is it's time to put that all of. Of that power on the table now to do that, we need politicians to stop just talking about the Neo liberalism and the middle class, and start talking about the pool and say how their plan their policies on banking their policies on wages, their policies on on healthcare will help. Everybody will lift up at Brown they need to say this is. How will help the black community? Community. This is the white community. This is how it will help Kentucky this will help those in this is how we help those in the Delta, so that people hear that name and he had that condition. A lot of folks have stayed home these past election, because the politicians only talk about the middle class and the wealthy, poor and low wealth people expanding the voting. Numbers are the key to fundamental transformation in this country, and it's time pastime that we talked to them with saying that to the candidates I certainly hope those wondering against trump will do that if they do it, they will see a mass turnout of voters like never before, but then again. We are also saying even if they don't do it. We're going to be a power. Go to the poll and make it so that the poor and low wealth in this country can no longer be ignored. This is a movement time. We have to have a third reconstruction and we have to have it now. Because, too. Many people in power are too comfortable with other people's deaths. And desperation. Just. And and you do represent the poor disproportionate amount according to all the statistics on black-americans, minorities, and we understand that there's obviously going to be this primary in. Kentucky Tomorrow and in Jefferson, county home to nearly eight hundred thousand people. Apparently, we'll just have one polling station open and one in five residents is African American. You know everything starts voting I guess and fitting out the the senses. How are you going to be able to convince people to get over those hurdles? Well a couple of things first of all disproportions, sixty one percent of African Americans I well, but sixty six million people, poor low well, which is forty million more than the twenty six million black people now having said that we worked in Kentucky for two years before this last governor was elected, and we worked in five counties and three of them trains from trump counties to voting for this new governor and the governor. Wa. When when black folk from a rule Easter knocking out outta hooked up with Black Pete from Louisville and bounded together. They needed to take on extremism and their state. We say to the people who are fighting court. Tomorrow you gotta stay in that line. You GotTa do what you have to do. If you don't have a one because people died for and Dan, we've got a fight between now and the fall to open up the open up those more districts we've got assuming court emergency decisions to make sure that there are more precincts in people have access to the ballot through mailing, but what we have to do is be determined. We cannot let these people who want to steal this. This election and undermines democracy, win and I say the folk in my community, particularly that if our people face down dogs, and they face down out outmatch moths, then surely we can face down those who simply want to keep us from the poll. This really is a moment that if that that you have to decide, these matters are of life and death in our communities there are matter of life and death of this democracy, so we have to fighting the courts. Move in the streets, and we have to move at the ballot box and we have to stay there. The other do whatever we need to do. Non Byland register our, both because they wouldn't be fighting so hard to keep us from voting if they could win a fair election and poor and low, well black, white, Brown, first nation people have the power to change this election and we have to do it. And it was actually very inspiring. Watch. All those people stand in line for hours amid the chaos of went on in Georgia primary to actually 'cause their ballots, so that was pretty amazing civic duty Reverend Baba. Thank you very much indeed for joining us. Urgency, frequency leakage, they may not be water cooler topics, but about one in three Americans over the age of forty experience, these symptoms of overactive bladder, or a at least sometimes, it's embarrassing having to worry about having an accident. Looking back I should have talked to my doctor about it sooner. A lot of people just try to deal with a symptoms, but we spoke to some who sought out a treatment plan. Listen in it Oh a B. Mid dot com, and hear how they got over the embarrassment and ask their doctor about Mir Patrick. Mirror Baghran. Is a prescription medicine for adults used to treat O. symptoms of urgency frequency in leakage. Do not take if you have an allergic reaction to your patrick or its ingredients near Metro may increase blood pressure. Tell your doctor right away. If you have trouble emptying your bladder, have a a week here in stream Mir, metric may cause serious allergic reactions like swelling of the face lips throw tongue, trouble breathing, if experienced. Stop taking until your doctor right away, mere rhetoric may interact with other medicines. Tell your doctor if you're taking fire redesign. Melrose s flick. Flick an I tend core pro PANIN rhythm all the Jackson Nachson or Sola. Phoenix sucks and till your doctor liver kidney problems, common side effects include increased blood, pressure, common, cold or flu, symptoms, sci-fi rotation, dry, mouth, urinary tract, infection, bladder, inflammation, backer, joint, pain, constipation, dizziness, and headache Sierra in Reader's Digest magazine, or call one, eight, five, five, six, nine, seven, two, three, eight seven. If you're dealing with O. A., B., symptoms, speak up and talk to your doctor and ask about Mir. Veteran learn more that Oh A. Med dot com. That's. M. E. D. dot com. Now talking more about the power of democracy. Why did the Attorney General William Barr fired Jeffrey Berman? He's the top prosecutor at the Manhattan US Attorney's Office. Berlin was appointed after president trump fired his predecessor in two thousand seventeen, but now his office is investigated some of the president's allies, including his lawyer Rudolph Giuliani so. What does this latest in a string of judicial and oversight firing say about the rule of law in today's America with me to discuss and milgram formerly a federal prosecutor and Attorney General of New Jersey and she's now professor at Neocon University's law school joining me now from Monmouth County in New Jersey welcome back to the program. You've had all weekend to sort of. Think about the meaning wise in the workforce of this latest firing. Why do you think it happened? What would you immediately sort of leap to? Yeah. I mean we're still we're still finding out more. There was just an article released by The Wall Street Journal that painted a picture of Attorney General Bar, being very angry with the US attorney in the Southern District Jeffrey Berman over Berman's refusal to sign a letter criticizing New York City Mayor Bill De blasios related to religious freedom and the existing protest movement, but it's really not clear to us. US, whether there was one specific thing and you pointed out now that there have been investigations, but there are a lot of investigations that touch the president or the president's associates, including the president's Bank deutchebanks, including an indictment against the Turkish state. Bank including as you mentioned Michael, Cohen Rudy Giuliani, and so on, and so it really does look with the timing being just five months before the next election. And with somebody who's Berman the US attorney who's been involved in all these very high profile, investigations and charges against the president's associates. It felt very political in the way that it was done and I think raises a huge number of questions that have to be answered by attorney, General, bar. Were also the questions of who did what when because? It seems like Bob said that he was going to step down Burma Burma's said no I'm not resigning. Then bar panic goes to the president and says fire him that happened, and then the president says what is not me. It's the attorney general. How do you read what you read into all of that? So. That's a great question and. The first thing I tell you is that it's bizarre how this went down? I mean it's very clear. That bar did not tell Jeff Berman that. The Attorney General did not tell the US attorney southern district, and he was going to essentially fire him by a press release on Friday night, so that press release comes out and in response the US Attorney Greg Jeff Firm and basically says look you actually don't have the legal authority to fire may which I believe is true under Section five forty, six twenty eight United States coat. Basically the attorney general can put in a US attorney for one hundred twenty days then the court could end that this is what happened in New York, the court. Court then put Jeff Berman and as the US attorney, it's very clear in my view that the president has the authority to fire US attorneys, but that the attorney general does not and so this is something that was interesting, because bars essentially was trying I think to do it without invoking the president's authority and what Berman did is he basically pushed back and said No. I was appointed by the court. You can't fire me now. What's really interesting? Is that then on Saturday bar in my view really steps back in some ways from this he writes. He writes a somewhat very sharp letter to Jerry Berman to the to the US attorney. Saying you know the president has now fired you. And what we will do is instead of putting in what bar had proposed on Friday night was to put in the acting New Jersey basically the US. The US attorney in Jersey Craig Carpenter. Bar had suggested moving him to the southern district, so he would oversee both, which is again very very unusual and strange and then. Berman, had pushed back on that as well and so on Saturday. The G. comes back bill bark back and says. You're the president is firing. You and we're going to put in your deputy. Audrey Strauss as the new United States, attorney and so it feels to me like Berman was really pushing back against not just the way he was being fired, but also the fact that they were really going out of the chain of command, basically taking the leadership of the southern district, completely out of the southern district, which again is really not heard of and so as of Saturday afternoon we ended up in a situation where Jeff Burma agreed to step out, but now his deputy Audrey Strauss is the as the acting United States attorney in the southern district. So can you connect to dog? And how do you assess? The gathering dogs so to speak because the Attorney General Bob did something similar in Washington, didn't he pushed aside the head of the Washington DC District Jessie. Liu and he had intervened in cases previously. Involving President Trump associates people like Roger Stone Michael Flynn. Is that. What is? Do you think he's trying to do in New York I? Mean sort of take control of a lot of these areas that maybe investigating president, trump's associates or dealings. I think to Jesse. Louis example is really one of the most important parts of this conversation, because what what bill barge there is. He essentially pushed her out as the united. States attorney in Washington. He then put in his own person. WHO's since left, but that person totally changed the way that they are prosecuting Roger Stone. If you recall the sentencing recommendations in response, a number of career prosecutors at the Department of Justice left they. They either resigned from the case, or they resigned from the department, but it did look like bar effectively was able to do it because Jesse, Liu agreed to essentially resign and here the difference is that Berman really stood his ground and said they can't fire me. Only the president can fire me I was I was put in by the courts and really push back and so I. Think of course all the attention. It got really. Pushed back Attorney General Bar, but yes, I think I. Think what concerns me is where five months out from election we we know that there are a lot of high profile cases in the southern district related to the president's associates. It is also very possible that there are new matters that we don't know about but we do know is that Berman has appeared to. Conduct himself well as as the Federal Chief Federal Prosecutor there, and this also reminds me of other thing that's worth just mentioning if you remember back to two thousand and seven when Alburto Gonzales the attorney general for George W Bush, he fired nine US attorneys and the president of the United States can fire US attorneys, but they can't do it for political reasons. They can't do it to try you know there's there's all. All kinds of ways in which they cannot exert their influence over this process and politicize criminal prosecutions, and so, what's really interesting here is, and this is why I think bill bar needs to answer questions like yes. The President has absolute authority to fire US attorney, but you can't do it to for political gain or for political purpose, and we saw Alberto Gonzales ultimately resigned. What was found out that there was political motivation? So expanding it now to basically undermining justice, the rule of law, the America's unique position in the world on these on these issues of moral values and Constitutional values. There's a conservative scholar who was a film, a government official and wrote this about bill. baas actions in the Atlantic. This is how `authoritarian works to subvert justice. He proposed to uphold the forms of justice. In this case, the formal rule that the attorney general in the President Exercise High Rock who control over the US attorney's while undermining the substance of justice. You think that's what's happening. Book I read that piece as well and I think that there this is one of many things that have happened since bill bar has been attorney general that really do call into question the Department of Justice and the rule of law. I mean we've seen countless times where bar now has appointed investigators to look at prior investigations. He's gone out of his way to summarize the. The report in a way that that to me at least did not seem accurate, so he's changed the sentencing on. Roger Stone He's dismissed the Michael Flynn. Case I mean there's just example after example we can give and I think the end result. Is that and I'm and I'm an alum of the Department of Justice and believed that the men and women who work there. There are there to do the right thing, but it is really called into question I think for many Americans whether the Department of Justice has been politicized, and it is such such a problem when it comes to criminal prosecutions and the rule of law, being enforced against people, which is critical and rule of society and democracy like we are, if people don't have faith that. That the government is doing it and is doing it fairly, and so you need people in positions of power, because these are extraordinarily powerful positions people who are making decisions based on the law and the facts, and not on political motivations, and so I think that this is you know one in a very very long list of ways in which the department has been politicized. And as an alum, it really pains me personally, because again I think the men and women who work there are extraordinary lawyers WanNa do the right thing, and so I believe that bar should be called to testify. Think he should have to answer to this and what's happening? And you know again. We're five months out from an election so strange timing but I do think it's also worth noting that he will not get to put his pick in right now I believe for the Southern District, and so we've come to a point where there is at least some pushback I think that's really important. It's really fascinating. Especially, you mentioned the Turkish State. Bank, and of course John Bolton. If you believe what he's written in his book, suggests that authoritarian leaders like the president of Turkey felt that they could intercede with president trump for him to intercede on their behalf very very very worrying in the courts and mill room. Thank you very much indeed for joining us. Now with little access to affordable housing, the majority of poor Americans spend more than half of their incomes on keeping a roof over their heads, which for many means ending up on the street if they can't. The eviction lab at Princeton University Proposes Remedies that are in turn the key to Economic Mobility, Professor Matthew Desmond's book evicted poverty and Prophet in the American City was awarded a Pulitzer prize in two thousand seventeen and here he is talking to Michelle Martin about how the system got so broken. Thanks Christiane professor doesn't thank you so much for joining us. For having me. I have to say that if you live in a city, maybe even suburb. This is a story. That's like right in front of your face I. Mean we've all seen? This Ross People's belongings piled up on the sidewalk ball seeing a rental band so frantically. You don't throwing people's stuff in it and yet. The scope of this is something that I. Just don't think a lot of people think about. When did it get to be this way? Yeah, on the one hand. Poor. Americans have always struggled with housing. There's a story of tenements story of living underground without heat and running water, so on the one hand it's an old story on the other hand when you read newspaper accounts of addictions from the thirties or forties, you're struck by how strange and scandalous they were. You know there are reports the new. York Times in the thirties at say you know three people getting addicted in the Bronx and hundreds of people showed up the protest. That's not where we are right now misnomer. We've got quite used to the sound of the knock on the door. In the early trump rumbling through your neighbor eviction had become incredibly commonplace in the lives of many Americans. And why? This problem has three main ingredients incomes for many Americans have been very stagnant over the last ten years, even over the last forty years in many parts of the country, real incomes have fallen. But what is not been stagnant housing costs to rinse and utility costs have risen incredibly fast over the last fifteen years. So there's this shrinking gap between what many Americans are earning at work and what they have to pay for basic shelter needs, and then we might say well. Wait a minute. Where where's the government here? Worst public housing or I've heard of housing doctors, don't they? Help and the answer is that they absolutely do help, but they're only for a small minority of families that need their only one in four families who qualify for any kind of housing assistance receive it. Which means most poor renting families today in America's over half of their income on housing costs. And one in four, those families are spending over seventy percent of their income just on rent and utilities. There's no entitlement, just safe a decent shelter in this country. It's like a lottery system I mean if only for the people who are eligible get, and it's really lock right. Y- lottery is the exact way. Many policymakers describe our current housing situation I have two young children. If I applied for public housing today in Washington DC, for example, chances are I would be a grandfather. By the time my application came up for review the waiting list for public housing in some of our largest cities, not candidate years anymore cannon decades. All of us now that we need stable affordable housing to lift, this is essential to us, but our country has not invested in this fundamental human need. One of the things that struck me is that you've been assembling a database that did not exist, and this is incredible, because this is a country loves cow everything. We Love to count everything I mean. Tell you at any given point. You know how many trees planted on any given street and when they were planted. So how's it didn't know this? So how did you notice? This is what I'm asking you. So I wrote a book in milk in Milwaukee and I looked at the addiction numbers in Milwaukee and I thought Gosh these really high one in fourteen homes in the inner city of Milwaukee is addicted. Every that's that's standing number. In, so, when I started talking to communities around the country about my book I'd be in Houston or la or Baton Rouge Louisiana people say will what's eviction like in my community are higher or lower What cities are doing it right? which policies work and we had no answers to these questions. Federal Government doesn't collect data on addiction. It doesn't even collect data. From its own housing from public housing, so we were really designing policy art. Imagine if we didn't know how many car accidents happen to be every year in America. How many graduated from High School? That's kind of the State of our knowledge about addiction, so we took it on ourselves to build the first ever national database of addiction, but I think this is really a job to the federal government should be doing another point that you make in the book you say. Incarceration had comes define the lives of men from impoverished black neighbors. Eviction was shaking. The lives of women who are black network locked up who are black women were locked out. Why is that? Go into any housing court all around the country, and you'll see rows and rows of MOMS with their kids there. We can't understand the addiction crisis without understanding the history of racism, in America, and the systematic dispossession of people of Color in particular African Americans from the land from the soil of America that started in slavery and went through share cropping. You can fall that trend through the great. Migration ghettoisation, black folks It took Martin Luther King, getting murdered on a Memphis balcony. In a racial segregation of housing market, but when that happened, there are other things african-americans confronted. Racial Discrimination still exists in large part to, and you can follow it all the way up to the some prime lending crisis where we know. Communities of color were targeted by predatory lending institutions. And so most white Americans are homeowners, most black and Latino Americans are arrangers of because of that history, so they're exposed in new ways and women are particularly vulnerable in these communities. If they're single moms for example, housing needs to be bigger than is there not because the kids can take up more space than that increases their housing costs, and just a poverty and financial security that many single moms face exposes them onto a bitch, really high rates. In your book convicted, you tell. The story is a number of different families and how they came to go through this and I. Do want to mention all are not. You know single black mothers there are there are other people there are men there. There's white. Male nurse who lost his license when he stole opiates MS patients. There are a number of other people I do WanNa. Ask you to tell me a story of one of the the people who you say sort of to advise action crisis. I was thinking. Maybe maybe range the. Tell me restoring like. How did this? How did this happen to her? And how does restore exemplify all young sitting want? Sure, so he right? Addiction affects communities. All across the country affects Kennedy's Pino Communities African American communities about one in five of all American renters is now spending over half of their income on housing costs, so it is a widespread problem. But. Someone like lean really does typify the face of the election crises that America's when I first met Arlene, she was a single mom, African American woman, she was raising two kids, and when I met her, she was bending over eighty eight percent of our income on rent. Just on Rindt forget about utilities. So how is that even possible? Won't what Arlene would be wish she would pay the landlord in the winter when there was a moratorium on on. On utility, shots shops, but when the moratorium lifted in, April she had a pay the utility companies, so she can be back in the black come next winter, and so these are the kind of situations so many Americans are facing. Should I pay my landlord of the company? Should I buy food or pay the rent? orlenas facing that that situation every month when she got a victim wasn't necessarily because she made a mistake or had a bird. Lives. Her fiction is much more the result of inevitability than irresponsibility. When you're paying so much of your income, just for Basic Alson I'm glad you mentioned that. Because one of the points that you make I think a lot of people have this idea that people get just because they don't know how to handle their money. You know that they're just a responsible or making their plant. They're buying their kids or playstation where they really should be paying rent or they're just. They just handle their money. They don't know how they don't have the skills. They should take a class or something like that and you. Tell me what you have to say about that. You. Know I think that that kind of idea that harm is being visited? Two families 'cause they messed up gives us some comfort. It makes us think we can control our lives. You know if we play by the rules It'll be okay for us, but there are a lot of Americans that are playing by the rules that are working hard, but articulate kids that are sacrificing, and they're still facing this problem. Not by the thousands of the tens of thousands, but by the millions every year in this country, this is not just a situation of. Spending your money on a playstation or being responsible. This is a situation where rents have gone out of control and millions of Americans can no longer afford basic shelter. And it's a snowball effect. We one of the point that you may very clearly. Is that this snowballs because you're constantly? Getting knocked down so the. Client your way back when you lose everything or at least you lose some things. Then what do you do you get back into sheltered and have no Satan's. You have no question and then you got this record that follows you. What's the consequence of having the of infection as part of your your financial record? What happens? To so when addictions goes to the court process, there's there's a record that's created that record is public, and it's published often published on line for anyone to see. Lord see that they often say no, because from a landlord point of view that's that's a big deal. That's A. It's a marker of risks that maybe this person. Isn't going to be a good tenant for me, so that means families who? are pushed into worst neighborhoods and into worst housing after they move, because allow. Landlords are seeing that mark. They're saying now. The market division can keep your public housing because many public housing authorities actually view in fiction record as a mark against your application that means were systematically denied housing help to the families that need it. The most addiction records reported to credit bureaus as well and I think this is a really important point to stress. Now in Kobe, there's GonNa be a lot of families. They're going to get that addiction. Record wells currently though. I understand that number CS have imposed. Eviction Moratoriums is that pretty much a nationwide standard I mean the fact that most gates at some point it in post these shutdown whereas has that intervened in this crisis. I think the media coverage of the moratoriums has been too rosy. Honestly you know there have been some states. Are, Connecticut Delaware Minnesota that Harold out pretty strong moratoriums, stopping a bitch and all parts of the. But there are a lot of states. have it. You know by our estimate there about thirty one million renters living in states where the moratoriums are very weak, and even in states where the reforms were okay, and they stopped convictions, those are starting to expire so now hearing stories of addiction core, being held over zoom, or over over the phone, which means we care about the safety of court officers, but not safety of families that are gonNA lose their home in their shelter and I think the big question is what's going to happen to the millions of renters who? have been protected over the last two months, but as those more terms lifted a summer. What's going to happen next? We about landlord's though for a minute. What's their role in his you medal? Landlords like West near deal. How do they see this? Because the overwhelming majority of landlords are still individuals. Aren't they I? Mean they're not these big corporations are. That's a hard question. Actually answer. It's a hard question now who owns our cities many even individual proprietors will use L. season other companies. To do their business, and so you know if you asked to the top of victim landlords, Washington. DC. Who are the landlords that aren't doing a lot of convictions. The are really hard questions, and it really shows the gaps, and in our data to now from landlords, point of view, they have received rent, which means they received income, and for many they're stretched. You know and they have bills to pay as well. So a lot of times when he talked about these issues, we say okay. Are we on the tenant? Side? We on the landlord's side. We don't need to do that. The system isn't working. It's not working for both parties now in a fiction is not going to solve the landlords problem. You know what's going to solve the landlords. Problem is serious injection of relief for both attendance and property owners to get us through the spell. But she the. System isn't working. Why is that okay? Let's break this down. When we first started public housing in the country, we started very late. In the modern public housing system, these ideas these towering. Buildings in Chicago or. Saint Louis Atlanta. When families I moved into those buildings. They thought it was amazing. Often, they said this is incredible gives member. There are moving from slumps. They were moving from incredibly dangerous degrading housing. Now that policy was also infused by American racism know public housing concentrated racism race in a concentrated Auburn way that reflected our national center, and so that was absolutely unconsciously wrong, but it was also true that public housing failed because we made it fail, you know we defended public housing. President Reagan cut the budget for public housing by over sixty percent six zero percent any program we have in America. America is GonNa fail with that kind of cut. And so when those towers went down, they didn't go down because the idea necessarily was corrupt at the route, they went down because we choke them to death now when arose from their ashes with Society of housing dodgers. If I qualify for a voucher I can take that ticket. I can live anywhere. I want in the private rental market songs. My housing is too expensive or too shoddy as it passed basic tests in instead of paying fifty sixty percent of my income to rent I pay thirty in the voucher covers arrests. Does, that work absolutely that works I mean studies that show and families receive a voucher. They moved to better neighborhoods. They don't move as much studies consistently find that. When families receive back ticket, they do one. Thing with their income, which is they buy more food? Their! Kids become stronger now they work the thing that's not working about them. Is Our lottery that most families that need him? Don't get them so they perfect now, but what is the big problem? Is that waiting rest? That's the big problem with doctors and I also hear you say that you think were unaccustomed. Another fiction crisis because of the severe job loss of experienced over the last couple of months the response to the Cobra nineteen a health crisis. So what's keeping you up at night right now? And what's giving you hope right now. So, unless we have a serious intervention. In the crisis it's hard for us not to anticipate a wave of Vixen and homelessness is going to wash over the country throughout the summer and into the fall as the moratoriums lift. I think for many of us had become something. We've reached it when. So fast when a tenant can't make the rent, and this is an all property owners. This is a good amount of them and I think we need rent relief at the scale the problem they don't get it. We're going to have more disease spread. We're going to have more poverty spread and more social suffering in the country. That's. Is keeping me up at night. But I'm hopeful about. Is what's happening on our streets today. I'm hopeful that the countries having a moral reckoning with its legacies. Of Racism. You know anyone who studies a social problem like addiction or incarceration or job loss. We quickly realized that racism is at the very heart of that problem. You know this is at the heart of the election crisis in the heart of many social ills around the country and so. I'm I'm hopeful that we as a nation are at a at a place where we can fully face the sense of our past sins of our present. Where we can enter into a new chapter where we we actually believe in act on values, we profess that there should be equality under the law. There should be equal opportunity and where you're born shouldn't dictate your future. Professor, Desmond Matthew Decimate you so much for speaking with us today. Thank you Michelle for having me. And finally we address a moral reckoning about the sins of great. Britain's passed on what's known as Wind Rush Day here a recent honor to the first Caribbean migrants who brought over to rebuild this country some seventy two years ago after World War Two only for many of their descendants to be wrongfully detained and even deported in a toughened up immigration system two years ago, the scandal that ensued highlights the UK's long struggle. Struggle with colonialism and racism, a new poll commissioned by CNN finds the Black Britons twice as likely as whites to think that this country has not done enough to address historical racial injustice, black and white Britons are also far apart on the visual symbols such as public statues of men with ties to slavery, so in this personal primer, a frequent contributor hirsch author of British has more about this time of moral reckoning. There's a real tendency in Britain to believe that racism and especially anti black racism. The originates from a history of slavery and colonialism. Is American program? We often sit complacency and talk about how terrible things are in America. The irony is this was a form of racism and ideology that was invented here in Britain and black people. We have been living at ground. Zero this ideology, any recognition of the ways in which shaped I lived experience. Really fascinating how scratchy spontaneously became centers for protest during this movement, because no one was really asking for them to be taken down a specific response to the motor of George Roy. But for so many of us they represent all the says and raised parts of history. The reality is that we glorify people who personally and institutionally complicit, even enthusiastic about the mud, the genocide, the patient of land, and the enslavement of black people, many of the figures that we have on statues were involved in military expeditions. People like Admiral Nelson remembered for two seats in the French incredibly important war for the British, but was not remember to say he personally supported the slave trade. He used his political privilege to advocate against the abolition of the slave trade. Winston Churchill rightly remembered for his role in enabling the allies when the second world, war but it's not mutually exclusive to acknowledge that and remember that he also was obsessed with racist ideas about Africans about Indians so much so that even his conservative Eton educated cabinet colleagues were concerned that his racism was clouding his judgment. Until we can look at these statues in an honest way and have a conversation which has not been happening I. Don't think it's acceptable to leave them in these positions where they glorified in public spaces, an all the messages that sends to British people about what we signed for the nation. Right, people in the UK are living the everyday legacy of the system of racism. That was crates, many black people in Britain. All the descendants immigrants who specifically brought to this country to do low wage labor live in substandard housing. The children's receive inferior education, and we still see the results of that. Black children are so much more at light speed from school. Black people are more likely to live in inadequate housing. Impoverished areas. Black people are more likely to work on unfair labor terms. This is a moment where it's time to really hone in on the black experience and to stop tiptoeing around it, as society has always done For Hirsch on the struggle that needs to continue and that is it for now you can always catch us online on podcast and across social media. Thank you for watching and goodbye from London.
Full Episode: Friday, March 22, 2019
"Are you hiring with indeed you can post a job in minutes set up screener questions than zero in on your shortlist of qualified candidates using an online dashboard get started today at indeed dot com slash world week. That's indeed dot com slash world week brought to you by the new Capital One saver card earned four percent cashback on dining and entertainment two percent at grocery stores and one percent an all other purchases. Now when you go out you cash in what's in your wallet? From ABC news world news this week. I'm Chuck Sivertsen in New York coming up the Muller reports, the confidence a report detailing the special counsel work is now in the hands of attorney general William bar flooding evacuations in the mid west had to move out fire causes a shelter in place in Texas is or so red and burning race against time in Mozambique. We don't have anything to eat nothing. Just seclude them backs and a day of mourning in New Zealand heads when be an love would redeem. People in events that made headlines when world news this week continues. Honest, unflappable oneness real what could Luke Bryan? Tim. Tebow Kellyanne Conway and Raza ostlund all be talking about find out on journeys of faith, a podcast where we learn what faith means to some of the most influential people out there. Join me all a ferris every Wednesday as we dig deep into how faith has guided them, listen and subscribe to journeys of faith on apple podcasts or your favorite podcast app. Special counsel. Robert Muller has sent his report to attorney general William bar. The Muller report is the result of nearly two year investigation that began when President Trump fired James Komi is director of the FBI the FBI is a fantastic institution. But some of the people at the top were rotten apples. James, call me was one of them. It prompted deputy attorney general rod Rosenstein to appoint Muller as special council to oversee the investigation into Russia's interference with the two thousand sixteen election. And whether the Trump campaign was complicit Muller secured more than three dozen indictments during nearly two years of investigative work. Close associates of President Trump were charged with lying twenty-six Russians were charged and publicly named and the investigation launched spinoff cases in several prosecutor's offices. And before congress, assuring what the president has repeatedly called a witch hunt will persist through the remainder of his term. It's now up to attorney general bar to decide how and how much information to release Aaron Katersky. ABC news, New York. ABC news chief Justice correspondent Pierre Thomas on what happens next we've been informed. That confidential report detailing the special counsels work is now in the hands of attorney general we embarked who has some huge decisions to me, namely, how much Robert Muller's report can be turned over to congress. How much can be made public has sent that letter to congress notifying leaders that Muller has completed the work and the bar will begin reviewing report and deciding what can be released there's a new allegations surrounding the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner and his possible use of a private messaging app to conduct official White House business. President Trump says he wasn't aware that his aide and son-in-law Jared Kushner had been accused of using what's apt to conduct official White House business. I think about it. I've never heard that. I've never heard about congressman Elijah Cummings says that he was told by Kushner's own lawyer that the president's aid was using the private messaging app, which raises concerns about violations of the federal records. Act Cummings has requested additional information. But claims that the White House is stonewalling him lawn. Zak ABC news, Washington speaking to workers at a military tank facility in Ohio this week. President Trump stepped up his week long attacks against the late. Senator John McCain, President Trump in Lima Ohio praising tank builders and talking jobs and then suddenly returning to an attack on Senator. John McCain McCain didn't get the job done for our great vets and the VA Trump also claiming John McCain was in part responsible for the molar investigation. Andy Field ABC news, Washington. President also held up a map during that speech and declared as if today, this is ISIS is none the caliphate is gone as if tonight by the end of the week White House press secretary Sarah Sanders announced that the territorial ISIS caliphate has been eliminated in Syria calling it a major military victory, but ABC's James Longman who was recently on the front lines in the fight against ISIS and bug bugaboo. Syria says defeating ISIS may take more than a military victory. Isis is more than a piece of land. It. It is an idea. And if you look at what's happened in Iraq victory of rice in row because she declared some time ago, and yet they all resurgent. There are constant attacks Mozell one of the biggest cities that they had control has been quote unquote, liberated, but says the tax continue Mosul has had multiple Cobb homes in recent weeks. So if you want an idea of what victory over ISIS looks like in Syria, just look at Iraq to US service. Members were killed in action in Afghanistan this week, they were part of fourteen thousand remaining US forces there, do you servicemembers work killed in action specifics on the operation they were involved in not been released by the US or NATO, but a Taliban statement claims u s and Afghan forces were killed in a raid on Taliban stronghold in Kunduz province. The fatalities. Bring to four the number of American soldiers killed so far this year in Afghanistan ABC's, Tom rivers reporting from the foreign desk in a reversal of decades-old US policy. President Trump made a major chain. In regards to Israel ABC's? Lana Zak explains Isreaeli, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is in the middle of a tough reelection campaign. But he was just handed a major victory by President Trump rookie Moses rules. Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Bill undisputed region was claimed by Israel after the six day war with Syria in nineteen sixty seven previously the US State Department referred to the disputed territory as Isreaeli occupied. But now, it has been instructed to call the Golan Israel controlled and in another policy reversal President Trump tweeted, he's reversing North Korean sanctions that his national security team announced the day before a surprising and major policy reversal announced by President Trump in tweet the president writing he has ordered the withdrawal of the most recent sanctions aimed at punishing North Korea. The treasury department announced just yesterday was placing penalties onto Chinese shipping companies that have helped North Korea evade sanctions White House press secretary, Sarah Sanders said in a statement, quote, President Trump legs chairman Kim, and he doesn't think these sanctions will be necessary. Karen Travers, ABC news, the White House. Put an additional safety feature have saved the lion Air, Boeing, seven thirty-seven max, eight jet from crashing could have saved the. Doomed Ethiopian flight as questioned swirl around the safety of the seven thirty seven max, eight planes new reporting fines, Boeing offered additional safety features for the max eight four a price. ABC's? Alec stone explains. The issue in at least the lion aircrash involved sensors on the front of the plane called angle of attack sensors detect the angle of the wing and the rate of airflow past the plane if the plane is pitching up too high it's in danger of stalling in the lion. Aircrash it's believed as sensor malfunctioned and put the nose down airlines have an option of paying more to get data from two sensors and of the two don't agree pilots will be warned lion. Aaron Ethiopian Airlines reportedly did not pay for that option. Well, American and Southwest Airlines confirm. They did pay for those safety. Add on United says it did not pay for the upgrade. Ian, statement ABC news United saying, it's aircraft or already equipped with anti stall indicators the airline goes onto say none of United's planes have angle of attack on their cockpit. Primary flight displays because quote pilot. Are trained to use airspeed pitch and power for those safe operation of aircraft. Alex stone ABC news as Boeing tries to stay ahead of questions about its planes. Concern is growing about what's on the black boxes. Recovered from the wreckage of the the opium plane, and why Ethiopian authorities have yet to share the data. The for five days have had the data from the black box of the crash. The second crash of a seven three seven max, if there is data that says something is wrong, we need to know us in the flying public, or why would you want to get onto this aircraft? And they have not released one shred of evidence one way or the other as to whether or not that plane went down in Ethiopia week ago Sunday because of pilot error because there's something wrong with his aircraft. Boeing has a software fix for the first crash. Well, what about the second crash, the eighth Yopie and still have told us nothing? ABC news, senior transportation correspondent David curly. I'm absolutely sure you the public has had enough Utah of the. Fighting you'll Todd of the political games and the all Cain procedural rows. Todd of MP's talking about nothing else. But Brexit, British Prime Minister Theresa may acknowledging the fatigue in her country over the Deel to leave the European Union. And yet the wait continues as the UK has voted to delay Brexit ABC's. Tom rivers with the latest from London by a healthy majority is four hundred and twelve of the left two hundred eighty two. So the eyes the eyes of it here agreed to back a delayed Brexit by at least three months, meaning Britain's March twenty ninth departure now looks unlikely EU council president Donald tusk for one says he'd be open to along extension. If the UK needs to rethink its year being exit strategy also UK lawmakers voted against holding a second referendum on Britain's E U membership at least for now. Tom rivers ABC news, London, six days after a mass shooting killed fifty worshippers in Christ's church. New. Zealand the prime minister announced a ban on military style semi automatic weapons and high capacity magazines like the ones used in the attack ABC's the pilgrim on the decision. New Zealand's Prime minister descend to Arden immediately moving for a sweeping ban on assault weapons in our country. The time for the mass and easy availability of these weapons must end. And today, they will the prime minister who has vowed to not even say the shooter's name says the drafted legislature targets the type of weapons used in the massacre one of the most extensive gun control reforms in the country's history. New Zealand, we'll ban all military style. Seamy automatic weapons. We will ban all pats with the ability to convert seeming automatic will any other type of firearm into a military style seamy automatic weapon in the days following the attack Arden acting swiftly on a promise vowing to quickly change the laws in a country where there are an average. Of thirty firearms for everyone hundred people in the United States where the rate is approximately four times higher the second amendment and political opposition have stalled calls for similar reforms in the wake of mass shootings. Just as the first funerals get underway. The prime minister outlining those new changes expected to be enacted by April eleventh thirty people remain in the hospital seven in critical condition. It's about all of us. It's in the national interest. And it's about safety to prevent an exit of Thira happening and out-country Eva, again, an apocalyptic scene is how those ground or describing the situation in Mozambique Africa after a category. Four cyclone hammered the region now is the flood waters received. There are new fears that the death toll will rise ABC news senior foreign correspondent in panel. Is there and reports on the desperate rescue efforts? Such survivors is now critical rescue drops from ahead onto a puddle of Mudd housing. Family inside a destroyed. Makeshift huts. This around it by contaminated water with nowhere to go similar scenes of people too. Weak to walk being strapped in lifted on choppers. Others swimming that way to safety woman recalls being told the floods were coming up Boorda. I was inside my house and seventy my brother ran in saying wake up the wolf is coming many areas now only accessible by helicopter aid for the World Food Programme coming in with over one thousand seven hundred metric tons of food, we visited one of the distribution centers in the capital Puto. The big aid agencies are starting to kick in people here on waiting helicopters income complains, deployed to Berra city and areas. Wet people cut off surrounded by floodwaters survivors coming in rescue boats to Mozambique's polls with food shelter medicine and now key priorities and in the face of devastation Muslim beacons coming together. And in the US. Thousands of people in the mid west were forced to evacuate as floodwaters threatened several towns along the Missouri. River ABC's Ryan burrow, spoke with some of those affected. We had to back up and move out. Lifelong resident of Craig Missouri. Laura much ler sheltered with her family at First Christian Church in mount city, Red Cross shelter. She had to evacuate during the floods in nineteen Ninety-three and twenty eleven but her home remained dry. She fears this time, we'll be different. It's going to be very emotionally. When I go back about seventy miles south in being lake, Missouri. Residents like Deb Hooper have been packing up sandbagging. And securing swing sets as water reaches the top of the Levy, I have packed so many times. And then a lottery didn't get my house. She's been putting clothes food and furniture in Iraq. It would just stuff, but the thing now hand up she plans to stick it out. But admits the roads around her home are starting to flood. It's getting down in the nitty gritty now the water is expected to crest late Thursday or early Friday. Ryan burrow, ABC news new statistics from the centers for disease control show. Just how devastating. The opioid epidemic continues to be a new report from the CDC says that deaths from Fenton all powerful synthetic opioid. That can shut down a person's breathing in less than a minute dramatically increase between twenty eleven and twenty sixteen. The report finding a one thousand percent increase in deaths over those five years. The report says between twenty eleven and twenty twelve there were about sixteen hundred deaths from Fenton all by twenty sixteen though it had skyrocketed to more than eighteen thousand Mark Remillard, ABC news. Doctors are calling it. A major medical breakthrough the FDA approved the first ever drug to treat postpartum depression ABC, Sherry Preston. With the details for one in nine new mothers postpartum, depression is much much more than just the baby blue. She might be tearful crying all the time. Unable to take care of herself or the baby unable to make basic decisions. This is not a matter of just being oh, you know, you'll adjust to it. Maybe you need some help, maybe are overwhelmed. This is a medical emergency. Which is why says ABC news chief medical correspondent, Dr Jennifer Ashton, the first FDA approved treatment for postpartum depression is such a big deal. It's called Zoll risotto, and it's not just a pill. You can take this is an IV intravenous infusion that has to be given over two and a half days. A woman would have to be in basically a hospitalized medically observed setting because there's a rare potential risk for low blood pressure or fainting. There's also the cost up to thirty thousand dollars a treatment thirty thousand it works almost instantaneously though in for women suffering from the potentially deadly life-threatening, mental illness of postpartum depression. This is a huge breakthrough Sherry Preston. ABC news or no environmental concerns for people near Houston, Texas, following a chemical fire that burned for several days ABC's Marci Gonzales in deer park, Texas towering. Flames burning out of control for a third day, debris falling into neighborhoods officials closely monitoring air quality insisting it is still at safe levels. Wind carrying that huge plume white towards Houston. But officials say that smoke is four thousand feet in the air high enough ground they say to not cause any health problems. But Jennifer Rosa's says she and her seventy four year old mother are already feeling the effects so much. So they've had to block off the windows of their home with plastic because my eyes are so red and burning I have to sleep with the wash cloth on my thinks mum's throat started getting worse started developing nosebleeds. And so I thought this can't be normal. The company that owns this plant has set up a hotline for anyone impacted now offering an emotional apology to the community. This is an event we wanted or plant a federal jury in San Francisco says roundup weed killer was a major factor in a man's cancer. ABC's Alec stone in California. The verdict was unanimous says second jury finding that roundup cost non-hodgkin's lymphoma and attorney say it could impact hundreds of sin. Lawsuits against roundups manufacturer Monsanto now owned by bear, the latest verdict involves a case of a seventy year old man from sonoma's, California, the trial will head to the damage his face. As result of recent cases. Los Angeles County is now ordering all of its departments to stop using the popular weed killer. Alex stone, ABC news, Los Angeles. A Florida man accused of sending more than a dozen mail bombs to critics of President Trump has pleaded guilty ABC's. Aaron Katersky has more sees pleaded guilty to sixty five federal counts related to the spate of homemade bombs mailed last year to Hillary Clinton, Robert deniro, and others the number of charges he faced than double just prior to the plea hearing say 'Ok faces up to life in prison when he's sentenced in September say had been living in a white van plastered with stickers indicating his support for President Trump and disdain for liberals when he was arrested in Florida that are prosecutors here said he sent sixteen devices to two former presidents sitting members of congress, and the billionaire activist George Soros among others Aaron Katersky. ABC news. New york. A battle of the brewers is headed to the courtroom. You could call it a brouhaha between beer companies, but some brewers and farmers are not laughing. It started when Bud Light Super Bowl ad that pointed out rivals Miller lite and cores light beers. Use corn syrup in their recipes. Is this corn syrup yours? It's in the mix for some brewers to help with the fermentation process. Miller. Coors tweeted it is quote, proud of our beers. Are ingredients corn Growers Association. Also responding saying, quote, America's corn farmers are disappointed in you and advised Bud Light to the table to talk. Michelle Franzen ABC news, you will likely be hearing a lot of this around the office. Jackson looking for. Sounds of college basketball as people go crazy for March madness supervisors either shutdown March madness or they participate in the March madness. So they can get something out of that says Bobby Albert who advises companies on workplace culture of their fee for having fun. That'd be more productive. And therefore, they'll make me more money encouraging employees to wear their college colors or allowing them to watch some of the men's basketball tournament can help to build esprit de corps, but Albert says bosses also need to set some boundaries. We gotta be very careful about the level of noise and disruption and to discuss these games at reasonable times. A survey of thousands of business owners middle managers and decision makers finds that nearly a quarter of professionals plan to watch some portion of the tournament during work hours. Seventy six percent of the men in those offices will participate in pools sixty five percent of women. Even as a team building event study suggests March madness will cost American productivity six billion dollars this year. Jim Ryan ABC news on racing up. The right not since Tonya Harding, and Nancy Kerrigan has a scandal. Like this rock the figure skating world. Mariah bell is at twenty two year old American figure skater being accused of deliberately kicking sixteen year old South Korean skater Lim sue during a warm up at the world figure skating championships. Limb was cut in a calf with a blade Abell skate. The agency representing the Korean skater has asked that a formal complaint. Defiled both women train under those same. Coach in LA limbs agency claims bell has been bullying limb for months, but the International Skating Union says there is no evidence at bell intended any harm to limb. Alex stone ABC and as a new distinction for this former president with ninety four years and one hundred seventy two days under his belt. Jimmy Carter officially becomes the longest living person to ever serve as president of the. United States in his memoir. The virtues of aging Carter wrote about a purpose driven life after leaving the Oval Office. And since then he has written numerous books built homes through habitat for humanity and conquered global health issues through the Carter Center, the previous record holder was president George H W Bush on Zak ABC news, Washington, along rank model maw. Friday, New Zealanders marked one week since the mosque shootings with a symbol of unity road news. This week continues when it comes to hiring. You don't have time to waste in need help getting to your shortlist of qualified candidates fast. That's why you need indeed dot com. Get started today at indeed dot com slash world week. That's indeed dot com slash world. Week capital? One is building a better Bank one that feels and acts nothing like a typical Bank. That's why they're reimagining banking and building something completely different. They offer accounts with no fees or minimums Capital One. This is banking reimagined. What's in your wallet capital? One. In a we are broken hearted. But we are not broken the words of the imam of the Al Noor mosque one of the targets of last week's mass shooting in Christchurch New Zealand where on the one weekend -versity of the shootings, the nation came together in mourning and prayer ABC's Brad milkey with more. Long wack model? It's been one week since the attack on two mosques in New Zealand one week since a nation learned what it was like to witness a mass shooting driven by eight. Muslims went to their weekly prayers when they emerged from their mosques, many of them were greeted by their countrymen. E. Seventy seven's. Holy. Right after the attacks prime minister. Yes. Into ardor with the families of the victims. And she wore a headscarf. She told the rest of the country. Let's have a nationwide call to prayer head when be unbutton. On love would redeem us to there in public squares, also in schools and offices, thousands of women across the country war jobs. Some of them were makeshift some of them had to petition to get uniform exemptions. Now, the real test for the country are still to come it. Instituting new gun laws, and it's investigating troubling white supremacist subculture in some areas, but the country's small Muslim population is witnessing a quiet message from their leader from their neighbors. We see you we support you we grieve with you. And those are the people in events that made world news this week world news this week was written produced by tarragon. I'm Chuck rich. ABC news, New York, are you hiring with indeed you can post a job in minutes set up screener questions than zero in on your shortlist of qualified candidates using an online dashboard get started today at indeed dot com slash world week. That's indeed dot com slash world week brought to you by the new Capital One saver card. Earn four percent cashback on dining and entertainment two percent at grocery stores and one percent an all other purchases. Now when you go out you cash in what's in your wallet?
Jayapal goes after Attorney General Barr over federal force against protesters
"Seattle congresswoman promoter Paul and US Attorney General. William. Bar had a heated exchange today at a house, Judiciary Committee hearing giant Paul accused bar of hypocrisy in the federal response to black lives matter protests. K. U. W. Politics reporter David Hyde has more congresswoman, Julia? Paul said Bar has treated protests against police violence more harshly than protests, against Corona, virus lockdowns when protesters carry guns and confederate flags and swastikas call for the. The Governor of Michigan to be beheaded and shot and Lynch. Somehow, you're not aware of that. Somehow you didn't know about it. So you didn't send federal agents in. You didn't put pepper balls on those protesters. Bar Claims. He didn't know about threats against the Michigan Governor, and during today's hearing defended the trump administration including decision to send federal agents to quell protests in Portland. Oregon David Hyde, K. U., O. W. News.
First Read: The Redacted Mueller Report In Focus
"This message comes from on point sponsor, indeed if you're hiring with indeed you can post a job in minutes set up screener questions than zero in on your shortlist of qualified candidates using an online dashboard get started at indeed dot com slash NPR podcast support for on point and the following message. Come from legalzoom legalzoom used by more than four million people for a variety of services from wills and trusts to LLC's and trademarks more information is available at legalzoom dot com slash point. From WBU are Boston and NPR. I'm Kimberly Atkins. And this is on point the mullahs report is on its way to Capitol Hill. And it's out to the American people the roughly four hundred plus page Turner is expected to lay out evidence about President Trump's efforts to control the investigation into obstruction of Justice, which Robert Muller has left open for others to decide it also shed light on Russian interference in the twenty sixteen election. Here's attorney general William bar a little over an hour ago. After nearly two years of investigation thousands of subpoenas hundreds of Lawrence and witness interviews, the special counsel confirm that the Russian government sponsored efforts to a legally interfere with the two thousand sixteen presidential election. But did not find that the Trump campaign or other Americans colluded in those efforts this hour on point? High stakes and the mullahs report join us as we parse this together and at come call in and let us know we'll the report change your mind about this president the special counsel congress. Join us anytime on point radio dot org or on Twitter and Facebook at on point radio. We're going to start off with McKay Coppins a staff writer at the Atlantic. He joins us from Alexandria Virginia via Skype McKay. Thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for having me and fan to any point. You wanna point out something that you find compelling in this report, you can chime in to me, and we will get to that. And we will be looking at this. As we go along this hour, we appreciate that. And so I I went to a point out something that attorney general bar said last hour when he gave that a press conference. He said, given the limited nature of the reductions in the special counsel, Robert Muller's report he believes the publicly released version will allow every American on. Understand the results of Muller's investigation nevertheless in an effort to accommodate congressional requests. We will make available subject to appropriate safeguards to a bipartisan group of leaders from several congressional committees. Aversion of the report with all reductions removed except those relating to grand jury information now bar set those reductions by law cannot be shared off from that one category. So now members of congress are getting depending who they are either the fully redacted report or a little bit less redacted report as folks like us are parsing this report McKay, wh what do you expect to happen next? Well, you know, obviously all of us including myself as you were just talking. There are pouring over this report. And I think that in the coming hours, we'll see media outlets Paul out kind of. The the big revelations or the key points. And then we'll start to see the political and partisan process kind of churn into gear certainly members of congress are going to pick out the bits that conform to their their narratives and kind of amplify those the partisan media will do the same. But, but hopefully, I think we're going to be having a debate that goes beyond the questions of legality rights and more into questions of the president's character, the president's behavior and the behavior of those around the president both during the campaign and in the White House. I think that, you know, one of the central questions that's Hubbard over this president throughout his time in office has been it has been to what extent we're okay as Americans with him kind of shredding the conventional norms of the presidency. And I think that a lot of those norms are going to be. Oh up throughout this report. And and I think we'll be having a broader conversation that goes beyond the galaxy and into kind of ethical behavior immoral behavior and his fitness for office will one thing that has become a norm for this presidency is the president's use of Twitter since attorney general bars press conference, the president has tweeted and pinned to the top of his feet a of a visual a game of thrones themed visual that says, no collusion. No, obstruction of for the haters in the radical left Democrats game over that's clearly his way to frame this. But McKay one thing leading up to this morning that I've seen a lot of discussion about is the press how the press is going to cover this report. Will there be a rush or will reporters take the time to stop and read four hundred plus pages digested in only then put forward what? The impact of this is going to be how do you respond to that? Yeah. I mean look in a perfect world. We wouldn't all be on the air talking about this right now. Right. I I'm actually I have MSNBC up on TV right now. And they were literally had the document up on the screen, and they're scrolling through the document for viewers to Stevie clearly kind of dried too in the in the industry, we call this vamping. Yes, they're trying to buy time as the journalists and experts that they have on staff just as as this show has has plenty of experts. I actually take time to read through in quickly digest what's in here? You know, I hope that we are all trying to be careful about not drying big definitive conclusions until we're able to get through the report. But this is why I said that the kind of the way that our system works. Now, the way the media complex works. I think already on Twitter you're seeing screen shots of Lynn little grabs of snatches of quotes from the from the report. Flying around Twitter. And I think that this is going to be a pretty chaotic twenty-four hours. Well, I'm going to grab a little bit from the Washington Post that they've put up it says Muller considered Trump's written answers, quote, inadequate, but new that a subpoena would impose substantial delay. According to the report, it also says the special counsel team wrote in the newly released report that Trump's stated more than thirty times that he does not recall or remember or have an independent recollection of information investigators asked about, but they wrote that they chose not to pursue a subpoena because of the substantial delay, and the the that's such a step would cause and decided that they have sufficient evidence to understand the relevant events and to make certain assessments without the president's testimony. Clearly, they anticipated that that question why the president was only allowed to submit written answers and did not testify. Himself. They knew they had to explain that McKay. Right. And and I know from my own reporting and others reporting that the people around the president the thing they were most worried about in all of this investigation was a situation where the president is under oath and falls into a basically get into a situation where he's saying untrue things under oath, right? And this is a president who is not known for the discipline of his words. He is known to get distracted to a hyperbole is an exaggerate and lie, and there was a lot of fear from the president's lawyers and the people in his political team that that more than anything else posed a existential threat to his presidency. And so they did all they could to keep him out about situations. He's attorney Rudy Giuliani and others refreshingly cult at perjury tramp to have him come in. Well, joining us from NPR west. In Culver city. California. Is Jessica Levinson. She's a professor of law at Loyola Marymount university. Jessica welcome, thanks for having me. So so far from the press conference with the attorney general, and what little cleaned in the few minutes that this report has come out. What is your initial reaction? Yes. I have to say I was thrilled by the length of your discussion previously because it gave me some time to at least go through the report. So what I've gleaned frankly, from the press conferences that I think if you look at the president and who have been his best appointees, I think that Bill bar has been enormously useful to the president. He got out in front of the report by putting out that four page summary that dominated the narrative for weeks now. And then before any of us had a chance to even look at the report, he has put out essentially a press release almost that you would see more from crisis. Management firm than from the attorney general trying to phrase the report now what I've seen from the report, and what we've discussed is answering one of the questions. I think is most interesting, which is why didn't Robert Muller come to a conclusion when it came to obstruction of Justice. And I think that we're able to zero in now, and I want to caveat everything with I think because I am not at page four hundred and forty eight. Yeah, sure, I think that what we're zeroing in on its this issue. That's the hardest approved for obstruction of Justice which is corrupt intent, and it's very difficult to prove that when you have not had a sit down with the potential with the person who might be indicted on obstruction of Justice. And so I do think it's important for us to remember that asking someone to testify in real time is not a perjury trap. It's asking them to provide information in a verbal form. It's only a purge. Trap. If you think that that person might contradict their statements. I don't think that any member of the molar team was trying to play a Gotcha game. And I think that's important for us to remember, particularly when we're gonna see a response from the president today, and Jessica on the point of that interview, not taking place. What do you think about the the explanation that we've seen from the excerpts of the reporting here to be sure that that special counsel was worried about the delay that attempting to subpoena the president and force him to testify would do to the investigation. Do you think that there's a trade off there? There might be a delay about the other hand as you said, you really need in person testimony to get to that that men's res- the us legal folks say of behind that charge. Well, I think for me, you know, what I thought is. I I understand because there was this feeling by the. American public. And I think that's largely because the president and then ministration was very effective at conveying. The idea that this investigation was dragging on. There was a feeling that we need to wrap this up. If you look at the scope of the investigation, the number of interviews, indictments, etc. This was actually an incredibly quick and efficient investigation under two years for something of this size and scope is very efficient. But to me indicates if the reporting is accurate that Robert Mueller is a human being, and he understood and felt the pressure to try and wrap this up and maybe didn't wanna go through a subpoena fight with the president of the United States. All right McKay. And Jessica hold a stick with us. We're going to talk about this big day in Washington and the country as the mullahs report hits the public. You can join the conversation. What questions do you want answered in the report? I'm Kimberly Atkins. This is on point. Support for on point. And the following message. Come from legalzoom with their network of independent attorneys. Licensed in all fifty states legalzoom offers a variety of services from wills and trusts to LLC's trademarks and contract reviews. Legalzoom has helped more than four million people take care of their legal responsibilities. And the best part is legalzoom is not a law firm. You won't get charged by the hour. More information available at legalzoom dot com slash point. Hey, it's a fear Eisenberg host of MPR's asked me another. And we're making the month of April all about women in comedy. We've got grittily and Leslie Hedlund from the Netflix series. Russian doll, the beloved Reta from NBC's parks and recreation and many more spread the word. Listen and subscribe now, this is on point. I'm Kimberly Atkins. The ma. Report is out. You can join the conversation. Attorney general William bar said this morning that the White House fully cooperated with the special counsel's investigation. Do you agree? Follow us on Twitter and find us on Facebook at on point radio. We're talking with Jessica Levinson law. Professor at Loyola, Loyola Marymount university law school and with McKay Coppins staff writer at the Atlantic just a little bit more that we are learning from the report as reporters and others part. This is from MSNBC. They report that President Trump immediately wanted to get rid of Jeff Sessions saying that he was a expletive as soon as he heard about the special counsel probe will keep this family safe. So I won't use the war. But you kind of get an idea of what is coming out from this report, the president himself spoke about it for the first time just moments ago. He was speaking in the White House each. Room to participants of the wounded warrior project soldier ride. No collusion. No obstruction. The never was by the way, never will be. President Trump was addressing again addressing this two year investigation that wrapped up with the release of this report today, a here's more from those remarks in the East Room the should never happen to another president again this hoax. It should never happen to another president again. Thank you so McKay this reaction from the president. Is it what you expected? Yes. Because it's fairly consistent with his reactions to this investigation throughout and certainly in the last month since we got that summary memo from attorney general, I do think that as the actual stacks in this this four hundred forty eight page report began to trickle out as their contextualized an amplified that kind of triumphalist response from the president is going to be tested. It was a lot easier for him to kind of take victory lap. When all we knew was what the attorney general had had told us about the report now that we're actually seeing kind of the derby laundry, aired to the extent that it's not redacted. I think that that it's going to be a much more muddled picture. And I think that the the White House seems to know that I think that sending the attorney general out the way he did to act in a way that at least a lot of. People in this country. And certainly a lot of people in the press could reasonably interpret as pretty partisan means that they're not there. The White House is fine to fight to a draw. Stay they don't expect to win over the country to their conclusion that there was nothing bad found no bad behavior found in this report. But they're fine with their base believing it and their opponents not believing it and muddying up the waters enough that we can all just kind of move on. I think that's the strategy. We're saying here, let's go to the phones Logan is calling from Omaha. Nebraska, high Logan. Go ahead. I just I just wanted to make my comment on this. I I love NPR. I really do. But this this narrative going on discrediting bar. I just I just this tasteful in my opinion. I guess I guess I've heard him speak publicly both times he's come out. And you know, it doesn't sound to me like he's defending the president. It sounds like maybe he's trying to get you know, ahead of this thing and tamp down some of the some of the political just. War going on over this thing. To me sounds like he understands he respects the law. And and you know, I just hope that that once every we get done reading this report and talking about it that we can finally just put this to rest and and move on. And and, you know, move onto new subject, and and then that's that's all I have. All right, Logan. Thank you for that. Cole. John is calling from Amherst New York. Hi there. John. Hi, I'd like to kind of reference. I know I've listened to all guests, and everyone, and everyone seems to have a plant where they do believe that, you know, Trump did something felonious or something like that. I am curious. And I want a direct everyone the law professor that reporter from the post. I don't care who it is the piss hole, Faisal request was completely this whole Steele dossier was completely defunct. Now, I hear people on the left saying that it really wasn't. Oh, no. It's been it's been. I'll true nothing in. It is true is paid for by the Clinton campaign through shell of law firm. So when they filed for the visor report, they actually lied about where it came from or defies, a judge just let it slide, but it was a button paid for dossier. And that's what the whole thing. I don't wanna hear to popadopoulos or whatever his name is because that was a show to because he was set up in a bar about some Clinton emails. The everyone knew about two weeks prior to them even talking. All right. I wanted to know if these guys are curious about the Pfizer requests. And and it was fun paid for by Democrats. I wanna give the the our guest a chance to respond to that McKay. I'm going to start with you. And then I'll go to Jessica. Well, there's a lot to unpack there. I think that I'm not going to speculate about the steel memo just because I haven't gotten to the it's mentioned in the report dimensions of it into reported. There are mentioned what I will say is that I think that the steel memo has been used in probably a less than good faith manner by both conservatives and liberals throughout this investigation. I think that some some of the president's allies in defenders have used it as a bit of a straw, man. Argue it trying to cast the entire Russia investigation as something that was based on a steel the steel memo when in fact, we've learned that that's not necessarily the case. And then I think liberals have have at least some liberals have run gotten too far ahead of themselves by amplifying claims in the memo that were simply have never been established or confirmed. But I mean, this is why we have the special counsel, right? We had Robert Muller. And this team of highly credentialed nonpartisan figures look into this dig into this and come up with their own report. And now it's just been released to the public, and I hope that we can focus on what was actually in that report as opposed to what was in this memo in the steel memo, which was I think, you know, has been discredited to some extent. But also, you know, doesn't need to be the main thing that we're still fighting about just the colour talk about these Faisal requests in this is clearly an issue that I think will hear more of from the White House. They've already seized upon attorney-general bar using the word spying in describing what happened although the attorney general did not say he knew anything illegal took place. How do you see that part of this playing out? Well, I think one it's it. It's interesting that attorney general bar has adopted the language of spying as opposed to surveillance because that is really a distinction with a difference. But I would say also with respect to the issues of the Steele dossier. I absolutely agree with the point that like everything else in American twenty nineteen. This has been frankly missed used by both sides of the aisle. But I would say the fact that a report is paid for by opposition does not undercut everything in the report. It just means that you have to look at it in a says credibility. In fact, what we know is that the FIS of judges were aware of the fact that this was essentially opposition research that doesn't undercut whether or not it's the veracity of that report, you also if you look at the FIS accord and you disagree with what they're doing you essentially have to say, I'm not comfortable with the judgment of a number of different federal judges. So I think that there's a lot. Lot of things that were looking at today with respect to the dossier in the report, I would also want to remind people, obviously, this is the news of the day. It's the news of the week. It's likely going to be the news in the month. But what Robert Muller was looking at was actually quite narrow. It was just these two questions of whether or not there was conspiracy. Finally, the memo explains to all of us that collusion is in fact, not a crime that collusion is not the word we should use and whether or not there was obstruction of Justice unfairly narrow grounds, but the entire Ambit of possible legal exposure that President Trump has is actually much broader. And I think that we have not done ourselves any favors by both sides, kind of hinging everything on the mullahs report while ignoring all the other potential avenues of investigation and prosecution. Okay. I want to go to the Coles Joel is calling from Richmond Virginia. Hi there. Joel. I can how are you? I'm good. Good. So I guess just prefaces by saying that I'm a lifetime progressive leftist. But I'd like to switch focus for a second to the other side of things, right? We've talked a lot about Trump and bar on this program. But I'd like to switch focus to the democratic the Democrats. Right. So I I just as I watched this unfold I can't help but wonder if the Democrats are using this to save face after the loss of Hillary Clinton to de-legitimize criticisms of her and the we candidates they've kind of put on the ballot in the past few years and to distract from the grievous rigging of the primaries in two thousand sixteen. So I guess my question is do you think that their motives are purely altruistic or do you think that there may be some political motives behind this investigation? I'm gonna put that Tim. Mckay. Go ahead. You know, I. About the political motives, I think that the investigation was undertaken for with legitimate reasons. I think that certainly there has been par partisan politics of played, but I'm not gonna go so far out on a limb to impugn the motives of everyone involved. And and I understand this this schism in the frustration. But that's a little bit further than I'm willing to go unless I'm you know, out there kind of reporting it out a little excerpt as it comes out this from the Washington Post. It says repeatedly it appears Trump may have been saved from more serious legal jeopardy by his own staffers who refuse to carry out orders. They thought were problematic or legally dangerous. Jessica I want to ask you broadly about how some actions of others might have saved the president. Or we were wondering before this report came out whether some actions of his staff may be problematic to him in. Cluding that meeting in Trump Tower of that took place with members of his campaign team in Russian nationals talk about sort of how one could have a hell he may have been saved by what his what those around him did. Well, I think on a number of different situations. I mean, potentially the Trump Tower meeting and other frankly other activities throughout the campaign, and the presidency we've seen the president's staff, essentially, try and guard against a certain behavior. I'm thinking most recently, the news that came out was the president perhaps jokingly dangling part in before a official of the customs and border patrol saying if you close the border, and you get into any sort of legal problems, which of course, you would if you close the border, I'll give you a part in. And then the staff kind of pulling back on that saying that was a joke. I think. That we've seen a number of different situations, for instance, in terms of the I travel ban where the staff has played two different roles, perhaps bringing President Trump to the brink of legal jeopardy like we saw on the first travel ban, and then bringing him back where either we have the staff saying we're not going to carry out that order, I'm thinking of the anonymous op Ed from the in the New York Times or the staff explaining to him, for instance, most recently where President Trump said that he wanted to put illegal immigrants and undocumented workers in sanctuary cities and sanctuary states that that actually would fly in the face of federal law in a sensual explain that can't happen. And so then you would see the president kind of go up and back, but ultimately pull back, and I think that when it comes to these really delicate questions, for instance, the conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government to come back to today, and obviously. These issues of obstruction. I believe the story, you know, if we look a week from now, we'll probably be that the staff really did help a lot more than it hurt. Because of this idea of pulling back of potentially not carrying out orders of explain to the president why certain conduct is problematic. You have to assume that when the press saw that interview with Lester Holt where the president said, you know, I got James Comey. So this Russia thing went away that there was a lot of cringing in the room when that was aired. Yeah. Yeah. I I want to get to a couple of more excerpts through the press that we are seeing from this. And then as McKay about them CNN is reporting that Muller was unable to conclude that no criminal conduct occurred when it came to obstruction. We have this excerpt of the report itself as reported by the Wall Street Journal, it says we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against sitting president would place Burton's. On the president's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitution constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct. The report says other reports that investigators didn't believe the evidence exonerated, Mr. Trump. It says, quote, we if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of Justice. We would so state McKay. How'd you think how do you think that is going to be treated by by congress, and the public will that that is key right there? And it's something that the attorney general kind of gestured toward in his first letter to congress a month ago, but that's really important because what you've seen in the past month is the president and his allies going around the country going on TV going to rallies saying that this report has fully exonerated, President Trump. And evacuate. This report says the exact opposite. It says that we we were unable as you just read we were unable to exonerate him. And if we could have exonerated him. We would have said that right? And so I think that is worth bearing in mind as you see some of the partisan spend it's gonna come out from the right in the coming days and weeks that just because they did this special council wasn't able or willing to fully assert that there were crimes committed. They also said very clearly that they weren't ready to say definitively that crimes weren't committed. And frankly that that is actually one of the big frustrations. I think on the left end for a lot of people who were putting a lot of faith in this report in this process that there was no traditional prosecutorial judgment. That was rendered right? Mckay. Coppins staff writer at the Atlantic in author of the wilderness, deep inside the Republicans Republican party's combative contentious case. Attic quest to take back the White House. That's quite a tongue twister McKay. Thank you so much for joining us. We're going to ask Jessica Levinson of Loyola Marymount university law school to stick with us. We are pouring over the Muller report. You can join the conversation in ten twenty fifty years. How history look back on this report this moment in our nation's history. How are you looking at it right now? I'm Kimberly Atkins. This is on point. This message comes from on points sponsor WB. You are presenting kind world a podcast about transformative acts of kindness intimate true, stories and interviews new episodes of kind world every Tuesday available on apple podcasts. America has a long history of white nationalism and its influence reaches farther than you might think you can go back, and you can read the New York Times coverage you can read Hitler saying it was America who taught us we should not open arms. Equally other nations this week on. It's been a minute from NPR. This is on point. I'm Kimberly Atkins. You can join the conversation. What's your question for the panel? The country follow us on Twitter and find us on Facebook it on point radio as we continue to talk about the mullahs report as we get a first look at it. Just this hour we're talking with Jessica Levinson, professor at loyal, Loyola Marymount university law school in Atlanta will get that. Right one these days Jessica and joining us now from Washington is ginger Gibson national political correspondent from four. Reuters welcomed ginger thanks for joining us for me so far from what you've been able to parse with your speed reading skills from this report. Have you come across anything yet that you think what we're what do you think is the biggest takeaway, so far it is four hundred forty eight pages, and I can tell you there too. Team of reporters in our newsroom, currently scouring over this report. So we I little premature maybe to say what the most interesting thing is I can tell you some highlights that I have seen so far one of which was that Donald Trump junior was in communication had correspondences with WikiLeaks during the campaign. He alerted other campaign staff, but he had received a direct message on Twitter from WikiLeaks that they had sent him a password to access a website that was critical of of the president then candidate Donald Trump that he hit used that password that it had worked in allowed him to access that website in another communication WikiLeaks asked on junior to tweet a link to the hacked emails of John Podesta, and that forties later he had in fact sent that link separate from these confrontational WikiLeaks. We're also finding out a lot about. Conversations in internal discussions that were happening inside the White House as the special counsel was being named. We've learned that President Trump instructed his counsel, Don, Mcgann to fire Muller that Mcgann intern ignored that request concerned quote that he would have another Saturday night massacre. He opted instead to norm. And then Trump never came back and asked about it again. Yes. And in addition to that point about McGinn bulking at in order to dismiss Muller. The New York Times is reporting that President Trump also likely fired James Komi for refusing to clear the president's name of the times reports that substantial evidence indicates that the catalyst for the president's decision to fire. Comey was komo's unwillingness to publicly state that the president was not personally under investigation, despite the president's repeated requests that Komi make such. An announcement. Jessica I want to turn to you. We have this issue of obstruction which was left of open by the special counsel when you see evidence like that or reported evidence at this point right of that. What do you think about that in terms of obstruction? Well, I think it's it's hugely problematic. I mean, I keep thinking as we're having this discussion that there's going to be this huge disparity between the headlines and actual report. And that that disparity will actually be I think an uphill battle for critics of the president and Democrats because if you look at the headlines, it is no, you know, no prosecutorial finding that there's enough evidence for conspiracy certainly a lot of evidence, but maybe not enough to charge and then for obstruction of Justice that they didn't come to a conclusion for variety of reasons and one of which this idea that it should be left to the political branches. Obviously. Really is a more than a wink and a nod towards the possibility of impeachment. But if you look at so if you look at just the headline, it's the president's not going to be indicted, and it that decision doesn't turn on the fact that he's president. And we think the president can't be indicted. If you look at the actual report, there's so much problematic behavior. I mean, I'm just pouring through it. Now, any one of these paragraphs, I think in another administration would be what dominates months if not years and plagues the president. But I think that for Democrats politically they're going to have to really thread and needle of trying to explain the problematic behavior to the American public without sounding like sore losers without sounding like people who can't just get over it with and frankly with an eye toward still understanding that they need to explain to their voters. Why their platform isn't just look there was a lot of wrongdoing in the Muller report. But. Also, here's how I'm gonna make your daily life better. If you elect me or elect me. Ginger just sort of looking as more information comes out. I see on CNN is reporting that according to Muller, congress has the ability to find that the president obstructed Justice attorney general bar said in his press conference. Does it today essentially that that was his call that it was not Congress's do? You see a fight playing out there. Well, bar can say what he wants Congress's in independent separate branch of government that can do whatever they want doesn't really get to determine. I mean, we only have to remember. And it's -portant to remember that when bar makes decisions he's acting as a prosecutor, and he's making legal determinations about how things hold up in a court of law that congress doesn't make those kind of decisions they're largely making political decisions. And I mean political decisions with a little P and the academic sense impeachment as a political process having hearings and going. Through a review in congress is a political process. They can act independently and separately of the president. And let's be I mean of the of the administration of the Justice department, and let's be clear the kind of standards that prosecutor in a court is going to use to determine something like obstruction of Justice aren't necessarily the same things that congress is going to use because they're not really enforcing the law. They're not a court of law. We have seen Nancy Pelosi say pretty clearly that she doesn't intend the congress would would execute some type of impeachment. And I think the report the point dismayed was really important, which is the Democrats are going to be trying to find a way to explain what they think is wrong to their readers their voters. Explain what they think is problematic in the president's behavior. They will be able to potentially reconstruct some of these conversations in a hearing. Format and that would allow them to maybe illustrate what they think was problematic in this behavior without having to get into sort of legal processes that that we saw bar trying to explain today. Let's get back to the phones. Anthony is calling from Cleveland, Ohio. Thanks for the call. Anthony. Question. Is there anything in United States law that could block congress if they were to call? Muller to testify that could block them from compelling baller to answer all of their quit their questions, and specifically regarding things that are redacted that that otherwise never come out of take very long anything in the law that would block congress from being able to do that to get Muller to testify and answer all their questions. Jessica Yu, our legal expert this hour. What do you think? Well, so I'm gonna give you everybody's least favorite answer from a lawyer. Which is yes in now. And and or it depends. And this is what it depends on so obstinately, congress has subpoena authority as your caller knows congress can subpoena, Robert Muller and say, please come and testify, and we want to hear from you. And if you don't comply with the subpoena, we can hold you in contempt of congress and potentially we can go to court now in terms of what Robert Muller. Actually can be forced to say he is still subject to all of the privilege concerns and privacy concerns that we've seen attorney general bar talk about in terms of the redaction. So Robert Muller, for instance, without an exception would have to respect the fact that grand jury proceedings are secret Robert Muller would wanna say that's a national security concern. And I don't want to speak to that. So he would absolutely have to answer certain questions. But then there are other questions that might fall within these buckets of either privilege or overriding privacy, like national security concerns harms to ongoing investigations where I think Robert Muller could under the law absolutely say, I'm not at liberty to answer that a ginger. We have heard the president say in seen him tweet the term new collusion of over and over again over the last two years. I want to read you this excerpt from. The Washington Post that's important to that point. It says Muller's team looked for tacit or express agreement with Russians not collusion in an executive summary Muller's team clearly stated that they did not believe collusion, which President Trump has incessantly insisted he did not commit to be a legal term for that reason. Prosecutors did not assess whether Trump's campaign colluded with Russia does that undercut the president's argument. He didn't what we're going to see here is but of a vocabulary fight, I think President Trump says, no collusion. Democrats are gonna say well, of course, not because no one was looking to see if you committed collusion, I think what is going to be really telling the president going forward is that when these narratives when we can see as this reporting clued communications that Don jR, was having the things he was sending back and forth with. Wikileaks does a voter read those conversations and say that's on favorite. I don't like that conversation or do they say, you know, what I believe the president is I wasn't collusion. And and I don't think that's a problem. Really? You're getting not just folk terms now. But a real look at what those conversations were right? Mel is calling from Syracuse, New York. Hi, mo. You guys covered one of my questions. And I was this morning attorney, William Bard was speaking on the Wiki leaks dumps, and it seemed like he was providing cover and so now my question is with the revelation is that not. Of obstructive. There were these ties the weekly stuff. Yeah. I'm gonna put this question to Jessica what we we. We have been hearing reporting about potential connections with WikiLeaks with Donald Trump junior with Roger stone. What do you think it would have taken for that to amount to some sort of criminal conspiracy, which is the legal term, not collusion? And why did it not reach that point in the eyes of a special counsel Muller? Yes. So I let me say I'm so overjoyed that we are finally using the word conspiracy. This has been one of the things that you know, I fear that this is gonna be on my tombstone said forever. We shouldn't use the word collusion because that's not a crime. And so when it comes to in frankly, I mean, the president was just brilliant about doing this saying, no collusion. Well, that's exactly right collusion is only a legal issue when it comes to antitrust law. But to your caller's question if if I was able to hear it correctly this issue of. Conspiracy. It has to be conspiracy to do X we need to find a statutory bucket to put that conspiracy end. So it has to be for instance, conspiracy to violate federal laws concerning computer, hacking, federal election laws, and in terms of how you define the agreement which in this case, I think was defined in if fairly difficult way to satisfy that you need either an express or tacit agreement essentially kind of UNITA smoking gun agreement, and then you need to find a statute to hinge that problematic agreement on I think it creates a high bar, and I also think that in a number of the circumstances. And again, I've been reading as quickly as I can what potentially we've seen with respect to Don, jR, is one of the things, and this is what I think progressives and Democrats worried about one of the things. That might save President Trump, and or members of his campaign and family is this idea that you have to really know a little something about the law in order to violate it. And I think that's potentially what we've seen with respect to obstruction of Justice and the president and maybe with respect to what we're seeing in terms of lack of conspiracy when it comes to the Trump Tower meeting that in a way, the less you understand it again big caveat of we still need a pour over the report. But in a way, the less you understand the better for your defense. I want to try to get another Colin Glen is calling from old, Lyme, Connecticut. Hi, glen. Hi, kim. Thanks for taking my call. So what I've noticed from mainstream and other media outlets is sort of dualistic discussion, you know, collusion no collusion conspiracy. No conspiracy. And the conversation tends to stop there. It seems to me that there's a lot more kind of shades of gray zero. And you know, there's certainly the potential for intentional criminal activity unintentional criminal activity, and then below all that sort of took them. You know, is this just simply unethical, which I'm sure in some places that it was or questionable, or is it truly impeachable? And, you know, just my request to the broader media is to really, you know, get into some of that nuanced discussion and really wasn't the time to kind of begin turning over a lot of these different stones Glenn. I'm going to give ginger a chance and under a minute to try to give some of that new on. It's moving forward. How might these scenarios play out ginger? I think a new opera going to be involved people reading a lot 'cause we're gonna fill a lot of ink on these on this new onto the next few days. And it's also going to involve people paying attention to more than two headline and really looking at how this what we're still talking about two days. Now, what we're talking about three days from now, and how that affects the fabric of the conversation and overall as you are pouring through this, no ginger, what do you think of how do you think this is going to impact the election? I mean, that's just next year. A lot of people are looking at it through this Lynn, some of our some of our listeners online have asked that question. I think it's going to be important to see how the president responds how his opponents respond, and whether or not this starts turning people off. I think a lot of Trump's independent voters people who are not Piggly partisan. Want him to? Be able to do things they believe he's done. Great things for the economy. If they think he can keep doing that Phil vote for him. Again, if they think this report in these details will hanstring him indefinitely, then he might start losing some of their support ginger Gibson, national political correspondent for Reuters. Thank you so much for joining us Grammy. Professor Jessica Levinson of Loyola Marymount university law school, we really appreciate your time and expertise. Thank you. It was a pleasure. Thanks for having me. You can continue the conversation and get the on point pud cast at our website on point radio dot org. You can also follow us on Twitter and on Facebook at on point radio. I'm Kimberly Atkins. This is on point.
Ep. 773 - The Great Censorship Debate
"Facebook bars, Louis Farrakhan, Alex Jones, and Milo Yannopoulos Democrats continue to smear attorney general William bar end. We check the mail bag. I'm Ben Shapiro. This is the Ben Shapiro show. A lot to get to today. We'll jump into all of it momentarily. But I hiring is challenging there's one place. You can go were hiring simple fast. And smart. It's a place where growing businesses connect to qualified candidates. That place is ZipRecruiter dot com slash daily. Wire. Ziprecruiter sends your job to over one hundred of the web's leading job boards, but they don't stop there with their powerful matching technology. Procr- scans thousands of resumes to find people with the right experience. And then vice them to apply to your job was that -plication come in ZipRecruiter analyzes each one and spotlights the top candidates. So you never miss a great match ZipRecruiter. So affective that four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate through the site within the very first day. And right now, my listeners can try ZipRecruiter for free at this exclusive web address, ZipRecruiter dot com slash daily wire. That's D. I L Y W IRA that ZipRecruiter dot com slash daily wire ZipRecruiter dot com slash daily where we use ZipRecruiter right here at the daily wire offices, whenever we are looking to upgrade our hires, and it is a fantastic way to save time and money in the hiring process. Go. Go to ZipRecruiter dot com slash daily wire and tried out for free. Ziprecruiter, the smartest way to hire. Go check it out right now already. So the big story of the day to begin is the situation with regard to the United States Konomi. We'll get to the censorship on Facebook in just one second. But the Senate the US economy created two hundred sixty three thousand jobs in April unemployment has now fallen to its lowest rate since nineteen sixty nine since nineteen sixty nine to the economy continues to boom all the talk about President Trump and his volatility and President Trump and President Trump and president. The fact is President Trump's policies have made businesses feel comfortable. His regulatory policies have made them feel as though they are not going to be targeted. The fact that Republicans still control the Senate provides check on democratic excesses. So businesses are looking at all of this. And they're saying okay well for the foreseeable future. Let's keep pumping money into the system receivable. Higher up is a good time for the economy. Let's make this thing happen. The economy generated a stronger than expected to hundred sixty three thousand new. Jobs in April helping to drive down the unemployment rate to a forty nine year. Low of three point six percent. The increase in new jobs easily topped the two thousand two hundred seventeen thousand market watch forecast. The jobless rate slid from three point eight percents in March to hit the lowest level since December of nineteen sixty-nine. Economists consider anything below four percent unemployment rate in the United States to effectively be full employment. The average wage paid to American workers rose six cents or point two percent to twenty seven dollars seventy seven cents an hour. Now, I want to again emphasize that wage twenty seven dollars seventy seven cents an hour. We keep hearing from left at a fifteen dollar minimum wage is necessary the average wage in the United States is more than twelve dollars more than that. Number of people are surviving on minimum wage is extraordinarily low overall the twelve month out rate of hourly wage gains was unchanged at three point two percent hours worth each. We each week fell point one hour in April two thirty four point four. So for all the talk about how Americans are being deeply overworked. If people are working less than thirty five hours a week. On average. It is hard to make the case that they're being desperately overworked less than thirty five hours a week on average and wages are increasing means that people aren't being worked harder for less pay. It means they are making more pay for working fewer hours, thirty five hours a week seven hours a day. Hey, some simple math will tell you this. That says not mean that people are are slipping away in a in a wage slave economy. The way the Democrats seem to be suggesting the government revised the increase in new jobs in March two hundred eighty nine thousand from preliminary one hundred ninety six thousand February's gain was raised from fifty six was raised to fifty six thousand from thirty three thousand which means that the past months have also seen higher increases in jobs than normal. The economy is still going great guns. President Trump's economy doesn't get full credit for the economy 'cause no president does Obama didn't. But he does get credit for not quashing the economy. President Obama got blame for these lowest recovery in American history and the economy continues to boom. So this is very good news for President Trump as I've said if the economy. Continues to be good. If President Trump keeps his mouth shot, then he will have a significant shot of being able to win a general election reelection bid, if you the polls right now, it's fascinating. If you look at the polls right now, what you are seeing is that the various Democrats running against President Trump are not running in the mid fifties. You would expect given president from approval rating that all of these polls would have Trump at forty two percent the same as his approval rating, but his approval rating does not match up with the number of people who say they will vote for him his approval rating hangs around in the low forties. The number of people who say that they will vote for him is always hanging about forty five to forty seven percent. In fact, the only candidate in this new CNN poll is amazing this new CNN pull the only candidate who drives who drives Trump down to his approval rating in terms of his public support for voting is Bego. Really this new poll from CNN has Baidoa fifty two and Trump at forty two. The is it's pretty hilarious. Actually. So it has by has Bernie at v. Eighty and Trump at forty four which I think would not be the final result of that election cycle. It has Biden at fifty one and from forty five which is the reason that Biden right now is doing so on the primaries because Democrats are affectively suggesting that he is the most electable candidate Peabody judge only at forty seven percents to Trump's forty four percents comma Harris at forty nine percent from forty five percents. They're not winning a majority against the guys unpopular as President Trump. Elizabeth Warren loses to Trump in this poll. So Trump forty eight Elizabeth Warren forty-seven natural. This means probably the Democrats will probably nominate Elizabeth Warren. I think the way this works is. So that's the latest on the political race and the real big news. This morning is not even the economy. All that's huge news. The real big news. This morning is that Facebook has now banned a bevy of what the media termed far right extremists. There's only one problem some of the people who are from far, right? Extremists are not in fact of the right? Hey, so they labeled Louis Farrakhan, a far right leader. The New York Times talked about the talks about what happened here, then we'll get the media coverage of the actual issue. So the New York Times regionally said that far right extremists were being banned. And they use that description for Louis Farrakhan leader of the nation of Islam and virulent anti Semite who's been pictured with virtually everybody in prominent circles on the left in article for the Atlantic was originally, titled Instagram Facebook ban, far right extremists, the New York Times Washington Post political in the Atlantic all described booze Farrakhan's far right extremist. Now, the reason that this matters I will get to in just one second. So here is the actual story. According to the New York Times after years of wavering about how to handle the extreme voices populating its platform Facebook on Thursday victims seven of its most controversial users many of whom are conservatives. Immediately inflaming the debate about the power and accountability of large technology companies. Now, I think it is worthwhile noting here that the New York Times description is funny as soon as they start describing people who are. Fringe like Alex Jones. They start calling them conservatives. That's because for the press. There is no difference from between conservatives and quote far. Right extremists. Right. According to the economist, I was all right. And then when they corrected it. I was a radical conservative. There's no difference for the media between a normal mainstream conservative and Alex Jones. They just don't see any distinction there. And not only that they also see if somebody is extreme that person must be far. Right. The I've never seen any of these newspapers describe anybody as far as I can recall as far left extremists Ray, Bernie Sanders is an open socialist who used to defend the Soviet Union and talk about the glories of bread lines. And he is the secondary contender in the democratic primaries right now, the press conflict conservatism with all right, and they can play not being a wild leftist with with being a conservative lump all of that together. And then they say, okay, conservatives are bad. This is how the game is played. The social network said it had barred Alex Jones conspiracy theorist and founder of Infowars from its platform along with a handful of other extremists Louis Farrakhan, the outspoken black nationalist minister, who has frequently been criticized for his anti semitic remarks was also banned the Silicon Valley company said these users were disallowed from using Facebook and Instagram under its policies against dangerous. Individuals and organizations now their statements here is is so impermissible vague. It's so insanely vague if you're gonna ban somebody from your platform, you should have a pretty good reason you're talking about Facebook, which is the biggest social media platform on planet earth with billions of users. If you are a platform, you really should have to release a specific statement explaining what this person did wrong. Not only the person has a right to defend themselves against the charge, which could very well be a smear. But also so that everybody else knows what the rules are. But Facebook is acting like an arbitrary centralized government here banning? Without even we don't need to give you an excuse why you're bandaged band. Why will because you we call? You a hateful extremists. We'll make somebody hateful extremist. Facebook has no hard definition because it's an innately malleable term a Facebook spokeswoman said in a statement, quote, we've always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology, the process for evaluating potential violators is extensive, and it is what led us to our decision for move those accounts today. We'll thanks I now know nothing about your standard. This statement itself has a bunch of problems in bedded in it. So they say they've always been individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate. Okay. Well, Alex Jones has been promoting exactly the same sorts of material for years only. Now, do decide that he has to be banned. Melian apples has been promoting the exact same sort of stuff for years only. Now, do you side? He has to go lose. Farrakhan has been calling Jews termites for years only. Now, do you decide that he has to go? So what changed what was the new thing that happened that changed Facebook's opinion on all of this? That's question. Number one question number two. They say that they've banned individuals or organisms that promote or engage in violence and hate his so how about organizations that promote violence against like ISIS. So as my friend, Eric Weinstein pointed out, he suggested correctly that he is a supporter of the peshmerga in Kurdistan, fighting ISIS. They're engaged in violence. Does that mean that he is engaged in supporting violence in? You're going to have to make some distinctions here. I would assume and then they conflict violence and hate organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate because Alex Jones so far as I'm aware has not engaged in violence. Now, if you can show me evidence that he had like, I I do not I I've seen no evidence. That Paul Joseph Watson another person who was banned. Mainly because he's the top report info worse has no evidence at all the pulse. Watson has engaged in violence. Now, we have to make a distinction between violence and speech. I'll explain in just a second first. Let's talk about your sleep quality. So the. I am not a good sleeper, which means that when I go to sleep better have the best mattress on the market. Good news. I do helixsleep has a quiz. They take two minutes to complete and matches your body. Type Ansley preference to the perfect mattress for you. Whether you're aside sleeper or hot sleep or the plush or firm bed with helix. There's no more confusion. No, more compromising helixsleep is rated number one mattress by G Q, N wired magazine CNN called it the most comfortable mattress they've ever slept on just go to helixsleep dot com slash Ben take their two minutes leave because they will match you to a customized Nattrass that will give you the best sleep of your life for couples helix can even split that mattress down the middle providing individuals support needs and feel preferences for each side, they've got a ten year warranty. You get to try out for one hundred nights risk-free, they'll even pick it up for you. If you don't love it. But you definitely will helix is offering up to one hundred twenty five bucks off all mattress orders for our listeners. Get up to one hundred twenty five bucks off at helixsleep dot com slash Ben. That's helixsleep dot com slash Ben. For up to one hundred twenty five dollars off your mattress order. Helixsleep dot com slash Ben, my wife, and I have a helixsleep mattress because we took that quiz. The mattress came in the mail. Personalized for us. It is great. It is so good that I got one for my sister for her wedding, though, check it out at helixsleep dot com slash bending at one hundred twenty five bucks off your mattress order. That's helixsleep dot com slash men for the most comfortable mattress on planet earth. You dot com slash also cost you an arm and leg. Okay. So back to the statement from Facebook, they say again that they've always been individuals were organsations that promote or engage in violence and hate so as I say, the violence standard is big, and then they're complaining violence and hate so people saying bad things is not the same thing as people issuing calls for say murder. I should know this because as news have reported. There's a person who was arrested this week for for making violent death threats against jerk Kushner, and Donald Trump junior and who has made violent threats against me and against my employees. This this person was engaged in a level of criticism. That is not the norm. That's why this person has. Been arrested right now. Thank you law enforcement for doing their job. There's even vast difference between that and people who just say bad things about me who say hateful things about me. And they're plenty of people who say hateful things about me on a regular basis. There is a vast difference between people utilizing their free speech in ways that I don't like I get hit by more than I was the number one target of antisemitic bile in twenty sixteen according to the anti defamation league. The number one target. I never filed a police report with any of this. If I know the difference between people who are spewing hateful garbage at me and people who are actively threatening my life. There's a difference between violence and hate there's a difference between speech and violence. No matter how much I dislike the speech. So that's a distinction that Facebook seems to be obliterating. And then finally, they have no hard definition as to what is eight full. So this is completely arbitrary now. It's okay. Well, basically, what it feels like is that Facebook came up with a list of people that they wanted to ban who were anti leftist. I don't wanna say they're on the right because I again, I think that the right is a somewhat confusing terms. Sometimes when I say the right, generally. I'm talking about conservatives when the press uses the right? They mean, people are anti left. I don't think that those are the same category of people. There are a lot of people who are anti-left who also happen to be not conservative anti-conservative on group of people who seem to be anti-left. But also not conservative in any way are white supremacist, for example, there anti-left because they don't like multi-culturalism, and because they they're racial supremacists. And all of that. But they're not conservative because they don't believe in limited government. They don't believe in the values of western civilization. They scorn Judeo Christian values. They scorn the idea of freedoms in the constitution. Those are people are anti-left, but they're not conservative. The media will consider them. Right. So for purposes of the media's terminology, the people who they are banning many of them are on the quote, unquote. Right. They really mean anti-left K, but they've kinda throughs Farrakhan in there. So they could say, listen, we're not biased. We're throwing in Louis Farrakhan too. But the fact is that again. None of these people said anything new got the man Facebook is simply deciding that they want to ask people that they consider hateful now. I may even agree with some of the people who they consider hateful again, I've been personally targeted by several of the people on this list. But that does not mean that my definition of hate is the definition of hate that is legally applicable. It doesn't mean that my definition of hatred from everybody else's definition of hate. There really is too much play in the joint here. Nine thing that Facebook wanted to issue rules say you're not allowed to call people certain names, for example, he can't call somebody the N word like have a clear definition of rules. How about that? That's that's pretty much all that people are asking for and Facebook refuses to grant that instead they wished to go after people along vague standards, and those standards do not apply. Equally to everybody show you in just one second. Okay. So Facebook suggests that they have this constant standard. They say that the process revalued and potential violators. Extensive it's what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today. Facebook's moves. Says the New York Times is one of the tech industries broadest actions to punish high profile extremists at a time when social media companies are under fire for allowing hateful content and misinformation to spread on their services. It's a politically delicate moment they say, and then they they're the only suggestion that we have seen thus far with regard to why many of these people were banned is because many of these people featured shows hosting for example, Gavin mcginnis so Facebook found instances of extremist my Alex Jones, and others that pushed the company to take action against them. According to the New York Times, for example, Jones last year hosted Infowars show, featuring Gavin mcginnis a far right political commentator whom Facebook had designated as a hate figure. Okay. You know, who used to host Gav McGuinness was crtv. Crtv to have a show with Gavin mcginnis now, the blaze TV are they gonna be on the blaze TV Gavin McGuinness his appeared wide variety of shows, including Fox News. This mean, Fox News will now be banned. You're not Bolus had signalled praised for Gavin McGuinness earlier this year, by the way on the on the on the spectrum of people who suck Gavin mcginnis is actually not as crappy as my apples, in my personal opinion. But if the idea is anybody who's ever talked to Gavin mcginnis gets thrown out while then this is going to create quite a problem for Facebook as well. Now, the reason it's going to create quite a problem for Facebook. And for Instagram, for example, is because one of the people they Dan was Louis Farrakhan, Louis Farrakhan is as evil in his views as anybody on the list, I would say more evil in his views than pretty much. Everyone was probably the most evil of the people who are on this list Louis Farrakhan for years, he's been an open brutal blatant, anti Semite whose genocidal language about Jews and Louis Farrakhan is being pushed today by snoop Dogg. So is Instagram and Facebook, they are they going to ban snoop dog because the fact is that according to the New York Times people like Alex Jones are being banned not for stuff that they did. But for featuring Gavin McGuinness. And my leeann apples is being banned, by the way. I think of sucks right Milos, the kind of person as a human being who during the twenty sixteen election. He said that I was insufficiently committed to the cause of preserving whiteness in the United States affectively, and he called me a cook for this. And on the day that my son was born he sent me a picture of a black baby on Twitter because obviously I wanted my wife to have sex with the black man to produce a black child because I was in favor of what the racial mixing of the United States or something in. It's just it was an insane thing to Gavin. So you Napa Lous is bad on his on his own merits. But you Napalese being banned because he signalled praised for Gavin mcginnis. Okay, fine. If that's the standard why snoop Dogg so on Facebook Instagram yesterday. He put an Instagram video in which he actively encouraged people to post videos of Louis Farrakhan on Facebook and on Instagram. This is okay, snoop Dogg's at the White House, by the way with Barack Obama snoop Dogg is a deeply influential public figure so the snoop Dogg away because if it's go by associate. This a pretty strong association is not what. If you down what it like, I'm down with it post, your favorite minutes, Farrakhan video Instagram Facebook page show, some love to a real brother postie right now. He got is everywhere. If you ain't got no snatch it off YouTube is everywhere. Put up some minister, Louis Farrakhan footage show, some show what he really be talking about educating truth. Came ban all of his campaign all of us. He's a real brother. Okay. So there is nuke dog. Not just making the case for free speech for Bush Farrakhan. But defending Farrakhan, he's a real brother show it he really be talking about. Okay that. Okay. So you're telling me that Milo is banned or Paul Joseph Watson is banned for so me. Just get the straight. Paul Joseph Watson has banned because he is associated with Alex Jones. Who is associated with Gavin mcginnis is this the Santer Facebook is using now. Okay. You're gonna have to dog dog is actively associated with Louis Farrakhan, this I don't think any of these people should be banned. And I think that if they are banned, I'm a clear standard as to why these people should be banned. Facebook won't even articulate that. I love this Jones on of the director of Harvard's technology and social change research project. Studies online extremism says I'm sure they're gonna make a slippery slope argument here. No, I'm not making a slippery slope argument. I am making an argument that you do not have clear standards by any stretch of the imagination. I'm not saying you're going after Alex Jones, therefore, you'll go after Paul Joseph Watson, therefore, you will go after me that is not the case that I am making the case I'm making that you have not are ticketed any standard at all. And so you've having not articulated a standard. It's not that I suspect there will be a slippery slope. I am suggesting there is no absolute principle that is being applied here, and I have proof. I have proof that there is no absolute principle being applied here. This proof comes courtesy of Jewish insider today quote in a letter Facebook vice president Joel Kaplan makes clear the site will not remove lies or content that is inaccurate. And that includes denying the holocaust. So if you're an open holocaust denier, you will not be removed from Facebook. But if you once had a conversation with Gavin McGuinness or. Or said something nice about Kevin McGuinness, not on Facebook. You'll be removed from Facebook. Kaplan, who's vice president for global public policy at Facebook. He said that Facebook intends to allow cost on the platform so long as it doesn't advocate violence against Jewish people in any way, by the way. This is the actual correct perspective. What Kaplan is articulating here should be perspective. You should be allowed to say, whatever you want on places like Facebook, so long as we're not advocating for violence because there's a stark difference between violence and speech that is unparalleled -able and gross. And terrible Kaplan's has I wonder score that Facebook reject hate. We take down any content that celebrates defense or attempts to justify the holocaust. So let me let me get this straight. If you deny the holocaust didn't happen. You're cool. But if you take down, but if you put up content that says, the holocaust was justified. Then you're what what does he think holocaust deniers do does? He think that holocaust deniers are just like, no, I have questions about the history. Is that really what he thinks that how costs Nile is holocaust denial is a way of downplaying the evil of the Nazis. That's what holocaust denial is four. He's the same goes for any content. That mocks holocaust victims accuses victims of lying about atrocities spews hate or advocates violence against Jewish people in any way. Now, he broadening the standard again, but the standard is so inconsistent that my sister has been targeted on Facebook by anti-semites, she's reported them for years. Okay. Nothing's ever happened to any of these people. This is the wildly inconsistent standard. And the media who are celebrating Facebook for doing this on their finally standing up to hate. I have some questions about this media as some questions about these free speech. Firefighting advocates because I don't think that that's actually what they are doing here. I don't think that's actually what they are doing here. And if and again, if we are going to now start banning people for having guests on their program, you know, who had Alex Jones on his program. Joe Rogan, so is YouTube and Facebook these people going to banjo Rogan now and then because I had Joe Rogan honor the beyond me. And then because they had me on the everyone has been on pretty much. I've been with FOX. This is all nonsense. It's anti-free-speech nonsense. They'll talk about the legality of it in a second. 'cause there are people calling for regulation. Facebook talk about what that would look like whether that should be done in a second. But I wanna talk about what the media are doing here. And I don't trust the media to set a standard for hate in in a standard for what should be been. I you guys have heard me talk about fragrance before, you know, they make it super easy and affordable to custom frame favorite things from print and posters to the photos on your phone mother's day day's round the corner that perfect for Mahmut already on your phone right now, it only takes a few minutes to order. Just upload your photo. And order by Sunday may forget he'd free delivery in time for mother's day. Just go to frame bridge dot com and upload your photo, or they'll send you packaging to safely mail in your physical pieces preview that item online in any frame style. Choose your favorite or get free recommendations from their talents designers, the expertise frame bridge will custom framing item deliver your Finnish piece directly to you. Or they can deliver them in time for mother's day when you place your order by some. They may fifth instead of the hundred you'd pay traditional framing store, the prices start at thirty nine bucks. All shipping is free. I've spent hundreds of dollars in the past on framing, no reason for you to do the same and get better frames from frames for cheaper. Plus, my listeners will get fifteen percents off their first order at frame bridge dot com when they use my code Shapiro order. Accustomed for any mom in your life in minutes. Go to frame, bridge dot com. Use promo code Shapiro. You'll save an additional fifteen percents off your first order just gonna frame bridge dot com. Promo code Shapiro frame bridge dot com. Promo code Shapiro. Go check it out right now. So members of the media who suggested that they they and they alone have a window into the meaning of hate. I mean, I I saw members of the media celebrating this yesterday because they don't like any of the figures on the list does what I'm not fond of any of the figures. Listen, I've been targeted personally by many of them. I keep repeating that. Because I do not have a stake in these people staying online other than that. I like free speech, which seems like a pretty heavy steak. The reason I don't trust the media on the stuff the media lie. Then they can flight to the media as mentioned earlier as they labeled Louis Farrakhan far-right extremist. There is no such thing as far left extremists. And everyone on the right is an extremist who to be banned as evidence, I point to the pointer institute journalism nonprofit organization, they put up a list of five hundred fifteen news websites identified as unreliable, the raised eyebrows. This we're gonna posted that index of what it identified as unreliable news sites. The index came from verge merging various list identifying websites purportedly spreading misinformation the list was compiled by the group's international fact, checking network it initially included the Washington Examiner. The language on the website called for full boycotts, by advertisers of all of these blacklisted sites. Enlist included. Everyone included daily wire it included. Drudge report it included Breitbart included, daily signal from Heritage Foundation included, the Washington Examiner included just an enormous enormous list of pretty much every site that was to the right of center like all of them were considered unreliable by pointer. And finally after blowback and they're calling for boycotts. These folks this is this is what the left will do. This is why media matters does this. They try to label the southern poverty Law Center. It's all the same. They tried to generate the idea that if you are anywhere to the right of center or anti-left in any way that you ought to be banned, you're unreliable, and you ought to be shut down your d platform is the way that they put it and pointer actually had pulled list. But I promise you have point had not pulled the list. It would be cited by the New York Times and the Washington Post every time the mentioned the daily wire in any of their stories. They would say an organization that points are has declared unreliable they do that. With media matters all the time for years, they were using the southern poverty Law Center, a hack left organization to smear all right wing. Sources every time. They mentioned Prager you or daily wire or anybody else they would say an organization deemed hateful by these other poverty Law Center. So the media create this echo chamber where everybody who disagrees with them is evil and everybody who agrees with them is good. And you can tell who's evil, and whose goodbye who disagrees with you very convenient on Thursday night point actually had to pull the list. They're managing editor Barbara Allen posted a letter to the editor explaining the decision. Allen wrote. At the initial aim of the project was to provide a useful tool for readers to gauge the legitimacy of the information, they were consuming. However, she wrote soon after republished we received complaints from those on the list and readers who objected to the inclusion of certain sites and the exclusion of others. We began an audit to test the accuracy and veracity of the west, and while we feel that many of the sites did have a track record of publishing unreliable information. I review weaknesses in the methodology we detected inconsistencies between the findings of the original databases were the sources for the list and our own rendering of the final report as a result at that point was removing this unreliable sites list until we are able to provide our audience more consistent consistent and rigorous set of criteria while there is no consistent in rigorous set of criteria here. One of the things that always find musings that they put together these lists. Left's members left to in which they say that sites are unreliable how do they determine on reliable? They find a couple of stories that have been wrong over the course of a four year history. And then they say the site is unreliable you see this a lot of these studies. Okay. Well, the New York Times blows stories on a pretty routine basis so to CNN these are not considered unreliable sources because the vast majority of stories that they are not factually inaccurate. We hear daily wire fifty stories day we've been doing so for four years that means that at this point. We have posted tens of thousands of stories it should not be hard to find four or five stories that are unreliable. But that is also true for all these other outlets with this really comes down to this objective method of measuring the sites you don't like, and then finding some sort of covering excuse to ban them. It's almost impossible. Not to read this stuff in this way. So what should be done about this? So there's been a lot of talk about the idea of regulating Facebook as public utility. I I don't think the Facebook is public utilities a private company. Facebook is actually begging the United States government to regulate them Facebook Twitter, they've been asking members of the governments regulate them why? Because they're on the verge of being bankrupted by the European standards on hate speech. So they're caught between sort of a rock and a hard place in Europe. They don't have the same standards on speech because you're does not respect free speech in the same way that the United States does one of the reasons the us has better than Europe has better standards on free speech that is very very good thing. And you're the beneficiary of it it, but what's happening in Europe. Right now is that the Europeans have set the standards for hate speech. And then they are looking at suing or taking down Facebook over, quote, unquote, hate speech appearing on the platform. So Facebook is now looking for similar regulation from the United States. So that they don't have to be eaten alive by the market in the United States. They can blame it on the government of the United States. That's actually happening here. Now, there's been a lot of talk about whether they should be regulated because they're affectively monopoly. I don't think that effectively monopoly because I think that there can be competitors to Facebook. I'm not a fan of antitrust law as general area of law. The only monopoly that I really see our government guaranteed monopolies. If you are just a company that is very successful in your space, and you're not gal Jing the customer. I don't think that you have technical monopoly tend to be consumer side advocate when it comes to deciding whether a company's monopoly, there's sort of two theories of monopoly one is that if you are the only company in your space supply side, then your monopoly, the consumer size has well who cares? If you're the only company in your space, so long as they're not gouging, the consumer if the consumer is getting better products that is the purpose of the market. It is the possibility of competition that allows for cheap products to continue being in the marketplace to different theories of monopoly, I tend to side with the second theory, which is why I was not in favor of for example, brick not Microsoft in the late nineties the other way. Of looking at Facebook is to try and try and ration out ready to reason out whether they are in fact, a platform or publisher you've heard me talk about this before in the second. Explain legally speaking what that means. I I for decades credit cards have been telling us to buy now and pay for it later with interest. That's how they make their money. Despite your best intentions that interests can get out of control really really quickly with lending club. You can consolidate your debt or pay off credit cards one fixed monthly payment since two thousand seven lending club has helped millions of people regained control of their finances with Ford -able fixed rate, personal loans, no trips to Bank, no, high interest credit cards, just go to lending club dot com. Tell them about yourself, and how much you wanna borrow pick the terms that are right for you. If you're approved your loan is automatically deposited into your Bank accounts in his little as a few days Linden club is the number one peer to peer lending platform with over thirty five billion dollars in loans issued go to winning club dot com slash Ben. Check your rated minutes borrow up to forty grand. That's lending club dot com slash Ben lending club dot com slash all wounds. Made by webbank member FDIC, equal housing lender. You're responsible adult. You should be looking to consolidate your debt and make your life easier. You shouldn't be paying twenty percents on those credit cards each and every day. Instead look to borrow up to forty thousand dollars from London club dot com slash Ben. That's lending club dot com slash Ben go, check them out right now, make your finances simpler and easier and cheaper. Frankly. All right in a second. We're gonna get to the legal status of Facebook. I you're gonna have to subscribe nine ninety nine a month subscription daily dot com. One of the reasons we want you to subscribe folks is because it does protect us and protect you from being deployed formed meaning that if in the future YouTube or Facebook decide that they wanna crackdown on everyone right of center. Well, then you still get the show. It's one of the things that allows us to keep bringing you the show is the fact that we have subscriber. So please help us out. If you get the if you get the ninety nine dollars a year version, which is cheaper than the monthly. Then you also get the leftist. Cheers, tumbler leftists tumblers magnificent piece of vessel where it is just terrific. It is so great that people have been taking pictures. Of themselves with it and posting it online. In fact, it is time it's Friday to give shout outs. One of our daily wire. Subscribers today at Carey Davis on Twitter and your daughter just thank you for supporting what we do. I take it seeing that Jessica is wearing a Harvard law shirt that she is either student or an alumnus. I'm sure leftist. Here's tumbler was working overtime on campus. As it always does. Thank you carry just support. I definitely appreciate it. We appreciate it here at daily wire. Also, when you subscribe, you get all sorts of awesome stuff. Like, for example this week. We have a Sunday special for you. Boy, we have a Sunday special for you. Joining us on the Sunday special which you will get early on Saturday is former US ambassador to the United Nations my spirit animal, Nikki Haley, and then Ryan called that Friday. And he said, okay, don't Fania thing. Just listen US ambassador to the United Nations. I said Ryan, I don't even know what the United Nations does. I just know. Everybody hates it. It's fantastic episode with fantastic insight, so click subscribe tumbler, get all of our shows get early access to the Sunday special. You will. Indeed, thank me later. Go check that out also continue to follow us YouTube or I tunes if you're not subscribing, please do if you haven't left review, please do until all your friends about it. We're the second most downloaded podcast in America. Make us number one min come on. Let's make this thing happen guys. We are the largest fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in America Already. So let's talk for a second about whether Facebook is a platform or a publisher. So to illustrate the difference between a platform and a publisher think about the difference between your phone line and daily wire dot com website that I run see your phone line. If you are talking on your phone line, and you say something terrible AT and T variety. They're not responsible for what happens on foam one. None of them responsible for what mint mobile, they're not responsible for what happens on your phone line because it's an open platform, my publisher, if I print something that is liable as we can be sued if we violate copyright. We can be sued in now there's a section forty seven thirty which is a provision of the Communications Decency Act, which creates an enormous amount of freedom on the internet. It's very good provision as a general rule section to thirty was designed to protect providers or to protect publishers effective platforms effectively sections thirty says, quote, no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher. Or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. So in other words, YouTube is not really responsible for you. Posting a copyright violent of video you are responsible for that. Now, you take down because they don't wanna be legally liable, but they will. But it is you who are responsible for that. The same thing is true on Facebook. If you decide to post something that is violent threat Facebook is not responsible for your violent threat. You are responsible for your violent threat, which is appropriate. He's are open platforms anyone can post virtually anything. And in fact, it is even true the daily wire the site that I run we are not responsible for your comments. If we have opened threads, and you post something that is terrible or libelous. We are not responsible for all that. Now that changes all of that should change logically speaking, if there's no clearly articulated standard by which comments are being removed or my which videos are being removed. In other words, let's say that YouTube decides that they are only going to release videos provided by users that are that are. On one topic. And then they just decide that they're going to remove all other topics. That's a clear standard. But now, let's say that YouTube is doing what people suspect they are doing which is democratizing specific sides of the aisle that they are taking down videos that violate certain things and not taking down other videos. Let's hit Facebook. Decides to do that the question now is do they look more like how I run my website daily wire where all of my independent contractors right for me were responsible for them. Does it look more like that we have free contributes, by the way, we're responsible for the writing if people right for us does matter if we pay them if we print something, and it goes through the Oriel process, and then it goes up we are responsible for that does Facebook look more like that or Facebook look more like an open forum where they're like back policing things on a on a consistent basis. If there are no standards are ticketed. There's a good case to be made that section thirty of the communications act should actually the Communications Decency Act should be changed to require that. If you are a platform, you should have to have at least a clearly articulated standard for what is REM. Moved. And what is not because otherwise, you really not acting like a platform, really? You're acting more like a publisher like I decide on an editorial level what we wish to publish well Facebook if they have decided that politically motivated concerns are the issue will the more like us. So that is what is going on with these sort of vague hate standards. If you have a vague hate standard that is only being applied to one side of the aisle that would suggest that you're acting more like a more like a publisher than like a platform. And that means that there should be some serious considerations. Revising section to thirty of the Communications Decency. Act. Now, the case against that just to give the other side is that you don't want government getting involved with regulating websites, generally, you don't want the government in. Now. I don't think that's what would be happening here. I think instead what would be happening here is that you are opening up to I build websites that acts like publishers. They're not quashing, my free speech. I'm the publisher of daily wire, they're not quashing, my free speech. The fact that we can be sued for liable for copyright violation. Will the same case could be made with regard to Facebook. If you're responsible for your material, you're responsible for your material. There's a better thing that could happen here. Hey, Facebook is asking for wider regulation that by the way, they want the government to actually regulate speech that can be put on Facebook. But there's a better stance than this which is held at a clearly articulated standard that says what you can put up and what you cannot put up on Facebook. How about that? How about like terms of service that aren't impermissible vague? How about you have to offer an excuse when you band somebody from your service, and so we can see it and learn from the case study, but the social media companies don't want to do that. And that's why people are so suspicious of what exactly is going on here, and they should be suspicious of what is going on here. Again, if you are if you're a person who has one setting nice thing about Paul Joseph Watson, and you're going to be banned. Or if you're watching yourself, right? Paul Joseph Watson, by the way is not nearly as extreme just as a human from what I have seen. He's not nearly as extreme as Alex Jones guy for whom he works. But if pulse have Watson, if the idea is that pulse. Watson was nice to have him again. Milo Yannopoulos was nice to get mcginnis, and they can be banned. Again, you're going to have to ask why snoop Dogg? So there why are half the people in congress pictures, Louis Farrakhan, still their standards are not being evenly applied because they can't even be articulated. They're not even trying to articulate them, frankly, because they know that they're gonna get help from the mainstream media that agrees with them. That's the bottom line in the end, the New York Times, very happy. They free speech newspaper, supposedly is very happy that the social media outlets are throwing people off that they don't like I don't like a lot of these people either that doesn't mean that they should be thrown off the platforms. It doesn't if you don't like what they have to say have an easy solution. You don't have to watch them. I've another easy solution. You can yell at them all of these are appropriate. I don't mean like physically yell at them and disturb events. I mean like you can go online, and you can yell at them. I know I get a lot of it. So there's that. Okay. Meanwhile, the Democrats continue to proclaim that the attorney general of the United States. William bar is a liar, a brutal, terrible evil liar. So Nancy pool. Says the William bar light. What what did he lie about? She still cannot name single lie that William bar has told the attorney general of the United States fallen under fire for no apparent reason. He wrote a four page synopsis of the findings of the mullahs report. Then within six weeks, he released the entirety of the Muller report that's called transparency folks that ain't a cover up. Nonetheless, Democrats are going after William bar because they wish they wish that Robert Mueller had recommended prosecution. He did not and thus democrat William bar. Wuling bar was was what stood between President Trump and prosecution as I say if Muller wanted to recommend prosecution good of instead, he advocated he handed it over William bar, William bar said no appropriately I've read the report, but according to Nancy Pelosi, this makes William bar political hack an emissary of evil and Aligarh. Now, she believes that he's a perjurer. She can impeach him. Anytime. I don't see you're making any serious moves in that direction to you yesterday was quite a day. I've really lost sleep last night after watching over and over again, the testimony of the attorney general of the United. States. How sad it is. How sad it is. For us to see the top law enforcement officer in our country misrepresenting withholding the truth from the congress of the United States. The attorney general of the United States of America was not telling the truth to the congress of the United States. That's a crime. Okay. Well, she's going to have to explain where the crime is. I think the democratic definition of crime, basically crap. I don't like well that in crime lady in a second. We'll get more on the Democrats attacking will William bar. Okay. So it's not just speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi who is openly suggested without any evidence at all that William bar committed perjury, which he did not it is also Ted lieu who is just a terrible congressperson suggesting that William bar, the attorney general is one of the most dangerous men in the country. Really? You mean that dorky lawyer is one of the most dangerous men in the country for giving you a report that sitting in front of you dolt? My goodness here is here's Ted lieu making case or turns your Bill bars. One of the most dangerous men in Washington DC for three reasons I intentionally mischaracterized the mullahs report, he was then towed by Robert Muller A, he mischaracterized Mullah report. And instead of college is he doubles down and continues mislead the American people second today. He acknowledged the will congress oversight responsibilities of congress and lawfully issued subpoenas and third right now he is suing to eliminate your healthcare coverage. Let's not forget right now he is suing on court to eliminate pre existing conditions healthier. He's just such nonsense. Here's the reality. Democrats are not going to do anything about William Barr. This is all sound signifying nothing. This is them whining and whining, and bitching and moaning because they didn't get what they wanted from Robert Muller, and they can't blame Robert Muller because they spent several years building up as the day hits MAC and who's going to save us all from President Trump Representative Akeem Jeffries of New York, let the cat out of the bag. He said, yeah, we're not jailing bar. So like all this talk about how we're gonna hold them in contempt and then throw. Jail. Yeah. That's not happening. How do you get this thing? Moving to your post fines, you suggest maybe even some of said jail time for the attorney general of the United States will jail time is not something that I believe is being seriously contemplated. And look we're gonna continue along track of trying to find common ground on behalf of the issues that would improve the lives of every day Americans while at the same time understanding that there's another lane which is going to require for congress to hold the administration accountable win it steps over the line. And we're not going to shirk that responsibility either. Okay. Well, they're not gonna shirt that response, except that there is no responsibility here because they're not gonna do anything. They're not interested in doing anything. So all of this is manufactured. Meanwhile, the House Judiciary committee is trying to get Robert Muller. They're in the wild hope that Robert Mueller will come in. And then say listen, I decided that I couldn't indict because the president the president. But secretly guy should impeach him. That's what they want from Robert Muller. I don't think Robert. Going to give that to them. Apparently NBC news NABC news are reporting that the committee is now speaking with Muller's team when it was previously dealing with the Justice department NBC reports that hearing has not been finalized to date was not set, but they're apparently negotiated with Muller to come testify. Well, I mean the networks I'm sure we happy with the ratings because that's exciting stuff. But we have we have Miller's thoughts in four hundred and fifty pages things longer than Tolstoy novel. We have all of his thoughts in hide them. They haven't been they haven't been hidden from you. They are publicly available. You can buy a print copy online right now at Amazon, this is all this is all silly talk. Now, the reason I think the Democrats are truly upset about a lot of this stuff is because their their new stories that are coming out pretty much every day now about the lengths to which the Hillary Clinton campaign was interfering with other countries in the election of two thousand sixteen the extents which the intelligence community was intervening with regard to election twenty sixteen. There's a story that have mentioned. Over the last couple of days from the New York Times in which the New York Times reports that the F B I sense yet. Another quote, unquote, spy another investigator posing as assistant to meet with George popadopoulos. According to the New York Times, there is a woman who posed as a as in a government invested as a research assistant shoes actually government investigator. She went to spy on George popadopoulos. She said her name was ROY Turk, and this this would be a spy being deployed to go talk with a member of the Trump campaign. Trump was never told about any of this. There will be investigations into the extent to which the intelligence community targeted members of the Trump campaign, whether Trump himself should have been told, and whether there was enough of a supportive evidentiary basis to suggest the use of informants and surveillance against people like Carter page and George popadopoulos. That inspector general report is set to come out. I believe in June. I think Democrats are fearful of that. I think Democrats are also fearful of new reports like this one that is coming out. According to Fox News Ukraine's embassy wrote that a Democratic National Committee insider reached out in two thousand sixteen seeking dirt on President Trump's team. According to a bombshell new report on Thursday that fueled Republic that further fueled Republican alligators. That Democrats were the ones improperly colluding with four agents during the campaign ambassador. Valery Chailly said DNC contractor Alexandra Lupu pushed for Ukraine's, then president petro Puerto shaneco to mention poem affords ties Ukraine publicly during a visit to the United States and so detailed financial information on his dealings in the country. According to the hill at the time Manafort was from embassy, it was Trump's campaign, chairman Chailly said in a statement, the embassy got to know, Mr. Lupu because of her engagement with Ukrainian and other diasporas in Washington DC and not in her DNC, capacity. We learned about her DNC involvement later, we were surprised to see zander's interest in Powell poem for its case. It was her own 'cause the embassy representatives unambiguously refused to get involved in any way as we were convinced that disease strictly US domestic matter. In other words, it looks like a DNC contractor slash operative was trying to get information for the twenty sixteen campaign on Paul Manafort now again, that's not collusion. It wasn't collusion. When from junior was talking with a Russian lawyer about getting on Hillary Clinton collusion. A quid pro quo or the organization of the release of material. But with that said is that just as bad as the Trump Tower meeting? I mean. Yeah. Kind of right. A minute is trying to get information from a foreign source about domestic political adversary. So Democrats are in for a rough ride here. I think and I think that they know it so that is probably why they're tempting to misdirect William bar. I don't think the next couple of months real well on the intelligence community. I don't think that they do a lot of wonders for the credibility of the Democratic Party and the intelligence community on any of this stuff. So that may be why they are trying to misdirect William bar, Robert Muller and all the rest of this stuff. Okay. Time for a little bit of mailbag because it is indeed a Friday. So we begin with laya says haven, a few friends, and I are planning a month long trip for Tober and at the end of our trip planning to visit Turkey, Lebanon, traveled all over the world with the exception to the Middle East. So when they said they wanted to visit I said I'd be on board. However, I heard you can't enter Lebanon, if you've been traveling to Israel, March under passport. I've never been there. I was curious the reason for this. And what your thoughts are on traveling there and Turkey when I'm a strong supporter of Israel. Thanks and love the show. So I am not sure what the actual rules are in Lebanon. I know that those rules do apply in places like Saudi Arabia. There are certain countries that refuse to acknowledge the existence of the state of Israel. Don't worry it's not anti-semitism to fail to acknowledge Jewish state. That exists. It is merely a form of anti Zionists not anti-semitism at all those rules, obviously are targeted toward Jews. That is the goal of them. Israel does not have similar rules with any country on planet earth. It's pretty amazing that that all of that is tolerated but soft bigotry of low expectations when it comes to radical Muslim leadership in that part of the world. Kyle says what is your arguments? People say the economy will crash after Trump because of his Reaganomics policies tax cuts trade relations etcetera is this possibility in your mind. Well, number one, they're very few communists who have been consistent in being able to predict ecconomic crashes. This is just a reality of the situation. I think people suspect there. Will be one in the sometime you're future simply because every eight to ten years in the United States. There is some sort of economic downturn. The last one was in two thousand eight it's now two thousand nineteen. So that means that we're probably do. But that's more of like an earthquake. Komen feeling that you get sitting on the porch. Right. That is not based on any economic criteria. I have no idea why you would say that Reaganomics type policies create recessions when Reagan type policies created the greatest peacetime expansion in the history of the United States economic expansion in the history of the United States even short-term downturns like like black Monday back in October of was in nineteen eighty-seven. Even that was quickly rectified the economy kept on growing, even the short-term downturn. In nineteen Ninety-one was reversed by the end of nineteen Ninety-one by the time nineteen ninety two election came about the economy was already moving forward again. So the idea that Reaganomics type policies what quashes economic growth know quashes economic growth. Downturns are unpredictable. Economic growth, however is predictably tied to. A business climate that is friendly toward business as opposed to heavy regulatory and tax base climate tends to quash growth. So we found out from Barack Obama keeps US German to be a better influence in defending spreading conservative ideas. How can an average conservative such as myself help change hearts and minds in my daily life. Well, a couple of things number one. You have to read and read and read you really do need to know the issues about what you speak second of all seek commonality and common definition before you start a conversation. The way to have a bad political conversation is for somebody to say something like, you're mean, you're cruel. And then you say, no, I'm not meaning that's not a conversation. That's an argument. We have to do is say, I need you to define meanness and cruelty. So that we can have a definition of what exactly we talking about? Because I don't believe your definition. If your definition as he just don't like me. Well, you know, then we can have a conversation going to have a conversation. We have to get to common out commonality of terms. It's funny. I have conversations with folks all the time on a variety of issues, particularly on the other side of the aisle and to use an example, I didn't I didn't interview. With I believe it was salon. I think and the and the reporter over at salon was extremely was extremely antagonist. The the entire interview is basically this person trying to make an argument over it was not interviews. It was an argument, and you can read the transcript of it. They wouldn't release the audio may the reporter look pretty bad. That is my opinion we asked for the release of the audio. They would not do it. And then I had a similar conversation about my book with Sean Elliott vox who happens to be an honest reporter who's read my book and who disagrees with my book. But because we were having a conversation that was productive. He would ask my opinion on something out. Ask him for a clarification of definition. I respond would ask for clarification my definitions. He would respond. This is what is called the nice conversation. You can do that specifics. Help conversations move forward. This is true in marriage. It's touring child-rearing. It's true in parenting. It's true. An all areas of life specificity and clarity is what should be seeking in conversation. If you wish to have a conversation broad-based terminology about which. There is no common. Understanding. That's have an argument. Sarah says Ben what books do you recommend to learn more about these really Palestinian conflict? Well, there's a great book that I've recommended on the show by David Brock reclaiming Israel's history, it's very short two hundred pages. And that gives you a pretty good background on what you need to know. There's also a book by ally barred commits and facts that I always recommend mainly because it's bite sized. It has a myth, and then it will have the facts, and that's like a page long answers. Most of your questions about it. I'd start with those two books, and then if you want sort of longer form histories, there's a book by Howard soccer about called the history of China's them that that is worth reading Benjamin Netanyahu actually wrote a great book called durable. Peace back in the nineteen nineties that talks about kind of long term history of Israel and the Palestinians and more than Israel and Palestinians, Israel and the world around it because the Palestinians as a cohesive entity really did not exist as a cohesive entity until the creation of the state of Israel, all the Palestinians Palestinian actually referred to read the Palestine post was referring to the Jerusalem Post is referring to Jews. House tinians as a specific political entity. We're not created really until nineteen forty eight and everybody was considered Siri not say that they weren't indigenous to the area the Palestinians indigenous to the area, but they consider themselves Syrian origin or Jordanian or Saudi. So it is worth reading all of those books and give you more. If you're interested. Anthony says haven is there ever an argument from a conservative side for implementation of Kenyan style economic policy. Also, do you believe we are in the late stage capitalist system, currently the the phrase late-stage capitalist is very irritating because there's either capitalist or is there. There's non capitalist. The idea that capitalism is moving toward an end game where it falls apart that is a Marxist construct that I just don't believe Martinez suggests that eventually history will end with the with the seizure of the means of production by the workers, and that has not happened, historically. Instead, what has happened historically is a forcible seizure of the means of production by governments and then the collapse of that system repeatedly. Because that's. Sucks in his terrible for human beings. So I don't really believe in the phrase Leitch stage capitalist. I believe in in economic that. There is such thing as top down economic fascism or corporatism and that exists, but I don't think that's capitalism. I think people tend to conflate a lot of terminology as far as the the argument for implementation Keynesian style economic policy, which I assume would mean seizure of money from people who are more wealthy giving it to people who are poor said they can start the inva-. So they can start spending that money that spending is better than saving. No, I disagree with Keynesianism. There's a great book. By the author of economic one Henry has a four hundred fifty page book that that really breaks down Keynes's work at length. It's very detailed. So if you're still in that that's available. Richard says Hello, Mr. Shapiro. I've heard several times you see the congress has subpoena power. Where's it say that in the constitution is a part of the necessary and proper powers will congress can pass legislation that allows them to subpoena than the other branches have the power to resist a subpoena, and then the judiciary gets to decide whether the subpoena in fact, hold so they have to pass a piece of legislation. You're correct. There's nothing in the constitution of the United States that specifically refers to subpoena power. But there's no doubt that congress does have investigative powers under the constitution. That's how they keep the other branches in check, Michael Ben, do you think there's any Republican who if they were run could beat Donald Trump in the primary maybe Gimenez Mitt Romney or Ben Shapiro. No. The answer is no I think Donald Trump would win every primary. He's the incumbent president of the United States. There has yet to be an incumbent president of the United States who loses in the primaries. Even LBJ not lose in the primaries. He just came close to losing in the prime in a couple of early primaries and decided not to run. So that is that is not the same thing. The strongest primary contenders have never taken out an incumbent. President is never happened Hilty Jackson's has been totally agree with your assessment of endgame. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate being a huge marvel fan. I still enjoyed it. Totally fair. I said if you're marvel fan, and you really into it, and he likes it was twenty one movies leading up to a vendor's endgame, and you're looking for Easter eggs, and it's on the stellar for you and fan service, totally fine with that. I personally thought it was bloated. I thought that what they did. With the main characters didn't make any sense. I had a lot of critiques men game. I listen I wanted to enjoy it the same as everybody else things gonna make jillion dollars. I mean, it's already racked up. I think it's I by the end of first weekend. It had racked up almost one point five billion dollars worldwide. I wish I could enjoy it like everybody else. I just have critiques Jackson's has. It was wondering how you have constructed the final battle personally, I would have just had airmen Thor and captain America fight Thanos and his generals. Yes. This is correct. The battle that very end of the vendors endgame should not have taken place. Meaning that it is obvious that Daniels is facing off against them. And so as I mentioned in my review of ventures endgame yesterday on my show on the podcast. The biggest problem with vendors. Endgame is one of the problems my business partner. Jeremy boring points this out is that the relative powers of the various characters make no sense. So in the first of interest Infinity war fan Ohs is barely able to hold off just Thor and he's not the Infinity gauntlet while he's doing that. And the Infinity gauntlet is super duper powerful. Well, at the end of ventures endgame spoilers here. Okay. Guys. You're all warned at the ends of ventures at the end of vendors endgame Thanos does not have the gauntlet. He's just a big guy. And he's a big guy and he's holding off simultaneously Thor and captain America and airman. He's holding all of them off. And captain America has has the hammer. He's got all these things. And still is holding them off without the Infinity gauntlet. How how so you'd have to construct the final the final battle scene better. Also, there's something inherently a little bit unfair about a three on one. So the only way to make that fair if he does have the Infinity, for example, also having captain marvel come in, and she's and she's able to basically take on alone. Like, none of these relative power arrangements. Make any sense why she so much more powerful than Thor. The God of the God of thunder. Why none of this again, the internal logic doesn't make a lot of sense. I think there was way to construct it where it makes sense. For example. Tony stark is wounded that would make sense or captain America is finally feeling his age. This would make sense or you or you have or you have Thor who is so broken that he can't fight properly that would make something like their ways to construct this. But I just don't think it was done. It turned into kind of the same big beat him up. Smashing battle. You have at the end of. Every one of these marvel movies Williams's Hayden said many times on your show your huge sports fan. I'm curious what your favorite teams are from the major sports NBA NFL MLB. So number one, and h l should be included the major sports number two. I don't know. I just didn't grow up with hockey. I wish I had because every time I go to a hockey game. It's awesome. So I am a I am a Blackhawks fan, you know, sort of peripherally, but NBA NFL in MLB NBA Celtics fan. I know I live in Los Angeles makes no sense. I'm Celtics fan because they picked up all of my fathers sports allegiances because like religion fans for sports teams is picked up from your parents. This is why my kids will be White Sox fans, even though they're two generations removed from Chicago. So the NBA I'm Celtics fan because my parents went to school in Boston. I and the Chicago Bulls really were not a thing when my when my dad was growing up, so he was a Celtics fan partially Celtics red arbox was the owner of was the owners lash general manager of the Boston Celtics and was an early integrator of the NBA, for example, was Jewish. It's. The NFL Chicago Bears fan picked up all the Chicago allegiances. I know it's a terrible fate to be Chicago Bears fan and Mitch Trubisky. Yeah. Okay. And and MLB I am a huge Kaga White Sox. If you wish to hear my thoughts about the Chicago White Sox, all you have to do is go to Amazon dot com. My father, and I wrote a full book about the two thousand five Chicago White Sox championship season, we traced every single game of the season. And it's a series of letters from me to my dad and back and forth. It's really a lot of fun. It's called say it, so you can go check that out at Amazon dot com. Yeah. I'll deal haven question. How would you respond to the argument regarding abortion than life and death situation? The life of the mother takes precedence over the unborn. Baby. Admitting to a certain extent of the two lives are not the equal at that point unborn versus born while I myself have a bunch of issues with what is extrapolated from this point. I'm having a hard time, just crediting the logic. Well, the logic mix makes cents that you prefer the life of the mother so long as the baby is not born yet because there is a difference between unborn and born with regard to choice of life. But that does not mean that Nevada you can just kill. All the born. This is what people seem to get wrong. You don't actually have to make the argument that an embryo is of the exact same value. You don't actually you can make the argument. You don't have to make the argument that the embryo is of the exact same value as a thirty year old person in order to make the argument that embryo must be preserved. You don't have to make that argument because it is not a choice. The choice is between your inconvenience and the embryo or your your wishes and the embryos existence that that is not the same choice. You I what people do is they create the false choice between the existence of an adult life and an unborn life. And then the next thing that they do is they say that all cases are that choice, which they are not. So it's just bad logic. I don't think you have to accept even the you're not even have to accept the premise that all life is innate -ly of equal value to ex-, especially you know, in early stages of you don't have to you can accept it. Again, you can say embryos exactly the same as a as a fully grown human being. But you don't. Have to order to make the argument for the preservation of the embryo, that's historically been the Jewish argument, for example. Okay. Time for a quick thing. I like, and then we'll do a quick thing. I hate and then we'll get outta here. So things I like so yesterday was Yoma Showa talked at length about holocaust remembrance day. And there's a great video yesterday from L all the is Rayleigh national airline there the plane, which is full of Jews going to Israel onion Showa. They were flying over Germany and the in guy got on the one of the flight attendants got on the intercom. And he starts telling everybody about how his all of his grandparents were slaughtered in the camps. He gets on the intercom. And he says, and if they could see now that there is an airplane with a Jewish star flying over Germany, imagine. I mean, imagine the miracle that it really is a miraculous miraculous thing how bad was the holocaust. The holocaust was so horrible in terms of human populations that there are still you Jews on earth eighty years. After the holocaust and the world before the holocaust and somebody who's word. It's an amazing amazing. And then all the people on the plane start singing together and dancing in the aisles. It's pretty it's pretty amazing. Well, I was asked yesterday by somebody for movies that concern the holocaust. I mentioned some yesterday. One of the ones that I mentioned that has been wildly underrated. There was a movie TV movie that was done about the Warsaw ghetto uprising, which is one of the great inspiring stories of Jewish history. A small band of barely armed Jews had been cut off by the outside world holding up for a month against the mechanization of German military forces. It is it is a strong argument, by the way that people should be armed because armed Jews held off the Nazis for a month in the middle of complete privation without proper ammunition without proper firearms. There's very good movie called uprising as I say, here's a little bit of the trailer with Donald Sutherland and Hankas area. Largest armies in the world. Have not been able to defeat the nuts. What's pictu- think that end Fulham unprinted Jewish citizens? The bums to prevail. Three hundred thousand soldiers have been sent to Treblinka at this Kemp or simply been. These were innocent people doing the face of his medley. We live the hands to go and pray for them aside. The we must something other than our face. Don't let them know that you are in the movies uprising, you can go check that out believe it's only available on DVD can order from Amazon. It's it's certainly worth the watch. It's quite good. In fact, I find the Warsaw ghetto uprising story. So important that I'm actually working on musical about with with my father, my father rights musicals. I wrote the libretto my dad writes music, so we're hoping to bring that I think probably sometime next year in any case that okay time for a quick thing that I hate. So Burger King all these corporations. Now feel the need to social Justice message. I am a huge advocate of people who have mental illness need to seek help people who have mental illness need to seek healthy. I mental illness runs in my family people who have a problem need to seek help. They need to find somebody who can help them Burger King runs commercial about mental illness, and it makes no sense at all. It just doesn't make any sense. Here is Burger King's weird commercial, which I mean, I guess capitalism for the win. But here's Burger King trying to push depression. Eating is that the idea here. Not everybody wakes up happy. Sometimes he feels had scared crappy. Alliances that she let me feel my way. Kinda dakhil. Can't wait till this close says he's a bunch of little little poetic statements about feelings. And then the chorus is I just want you to let me feel my way, you can feel your way. Okay. But what you really should do if you're depressed in your down. You're having a problem is you go see somebody and do something about it Burger King's eventual solution to all of this is that if we just let you feel however you wanna feel without trying to intervene, and we then we give you a bunch of meals that you're gonna eat. So we're gonna like heart your arteries, that's the proper solution is free to feed like very weird. Very weird take very very odd. Take by the way for folks are depressed. One of the greatest methods of of trying to fight depression. Something called cognitive behavioral therapy in which the goal is not to let you feel your way the goal is to try to explain to you how you can intervene in the chain of your own feelings and stop yourself from feeling away. You don't want to feel. Burger can make money off depression eating and then virtuous signaling about it welcomed if there is a such thing as late stage capitalism. This this'll be look like, man. All right. So we'll be back here later today with two additional hours. Plus, remember, you should subscribe and get the Sunday special day earlier, Nikki Haley this weekend. That's pretty awesome stuff. Go check. We have big a bunch of big name guests who are coming up. Also, we have a very special episode that I can't wait to tell you about the Sunday special coming up next month. It's going to be just fantastic. I've been doing interviews for a week. It's so good. We'll get to that. But go subscribes to get all that stuff. I'm Ben Shapiro. This is the Ben Shapiro show. This is the Ben Shapiro show executive producer, Jeremy boring, senior producer Jonathan. Hey. Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens. Edited by Adam sigh of its audio is mixed by micrometer Herron makeup by just over production. Assistant Nik Sheehan. The Ben Shapiro show is daily wire production copyright, daily wire. Twenty nineteen. He goes over on the Matt wall show today Facebook has stepped up its censorship efforts. So we'll discuss the great purge of supposedly dangerous people of people who all reside coincidentally. I'm sure on one side of the political spectrum. And we'll also talk about the ethical and legal implications of what they're doing. Also, we're now being told that it is white supremacist to try to be objective. Objectivity is white supremacy. So I want to talk about how the left has made white supremacy into a completely meaningless concept. We'll talk about that and other topics that over on the wall show.
Monday, May 6, 2019
"From Washington DC. This is Westwood One. Daily news for may sixth twenty nineteen. I'm John trout. There were no harsh words or strong warnings from President Trump or the administration over the weekend in the face of some small missile testing by North Korea. Bob Costantini points out many people in Washington figure that's a good thing. The White House is acting as if North Korea's short-range missile test launches over the weekend did not violate Kim Jong UN's promise to President Trump at the end of their short summit in Vietnam there. Mr. Trump said Kim pledged to not engage in any provocative missile or nuclear testing on Saturday. The president tweeted, I believe that Kim Jong Hoon fully realizes the great economic potential of North Korea. And we'll do nothing to interfere or end it. He also knows that I am with him. And does not want to break his promise to me support for the president's position. Coming surprisingly from democrat party presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. This is one area actually where I do not fall from. I think the idea of sitting down with Kim Jong UN is the right thing to do it. Is very very difficult. But clearly they are a threat to the planet. Louisiana Republican Senator John Kennedy on NBC's meet the press saying talking is better than war. Now at some point. We're going to get down to it. It's going to be what are you going to give up? What are we going to give up? I soon the president's working on that secretary of state Mike Pompeo who's done some of the legwork away from the to Trump Kim summits on ABC's this week still optimistic. We still believe that there's an opportunity to get into Goshi it outcome where we get fully verified. Denuclearization term Kim has repeated that he's repeated that quite recently, in fact, so we hope that this act that he took over the weekend won't get in the way. It's believed the north fired several short range missiles that landed in the Japan, but flute nowhere near that country. Bob Costantini, Washington. President Trump has turned up the pressure on China ahead of trade talks this week by threatening to hike tariffs on Chinese goods. A showdown is brewing between the White House. And how Democrats over the release of? President Trump's personal tax returns today. The deadline. Correspondent Linda Kenyon has details of other timelines facing the administration and attorney general William bar lawmakers to priorities when it comes to the attorney general I want him to turn over the unredacted version of the mullahs report second they want him to testify before congress. They wanted the same thing last week. But at least when it came to the house bar did not come through Representative David cellini on Fox News Sunday says, the chairman of the House Judiciary committee Jerrold Nadler has given William bar another chance, but his offer expires at nine AM eastern time. The chairman of the committee conveyed to the attorney general some additional compromises and said produce all of the documents. But prioritize those that are referenced in the report give us an opportunity to see the unredacted version, and if the attorney general fails to comply this time, the chairman will ask the committee to move forward with a contempt citation. This is something goes on between the administration and the congress branch at all. Representative Collins the top Republican on the House Judiciary committee, telling CBS face the nation that pushback between the legislative and executive branches of government is not unique to the Trump administration. There is a give and take between the two, but what if our fails to comply again, he should withdraw himself from any of the results that are leading could possibly prosecutions because the MO investigation Senator Richard Durbin on CBS face the nation. Made that comment not only in connection with bars refusal so far to turn over unredacted portions of the mullahs report, but with bars decision not to show up for Thursday's hearing before the House Judiciary committee also on CBS Representative Collins defended bar, he just didn't want to be part of a show. Senator Durbin says Bill bar didn't appear before the house because he was caught an ally. When he testified before the Senate Judiciary committee journal, bore not only received that letter from Bob mower saying in writing that he disagreed with the attorney general's characterization the ball report, he then had a telephone conversation with him to follow and. To say he wasn't aware of molars misgivings about his characterization that is at the minimum misleading. If not worse, we'll special counsel. Robert Muller himself, testified before the House Judiciary committee Representative Sicily on Fox News Sunday has been set of may fifteenth, but the White House disagrees in a series of tweets, President Trump declared Bob Muller should not testify. No, reduce or the Dem's. Linda Kenyon, Washington. Just when you thought the democratic field of presidential candidates. Couldn't get any more crowded and her build Blasios as we hear from Steve Kastenbaum. New York's mayor is reportedly going to announce this week that he's in built the Blasio has been flirting with the idea of running for president for a long time. Now during a recent appearance on MSNBC's morning, Joe he gave glimpse into how he would differentiate himself from other far left candidates were not speaking enough to people's lives, and the frustrations that are feeling and there's open petunia here for Democrats to do that. Part of why we've announced, you know, the whole idea of big bold ideas that actually reach people like New York City green new deal. It's important for people understand if you're not talking to people's everyday lives, if you're not talking about things, they're actually feeling global warming. Don't be surprised if Donald Trump's back in the White House a few weeks ago, he joins democratic presidential candidates who appeared at an annual event held by Al Sharpton organization the national action network. Don't let anyone tell you. What you can't do don't let anyone talk you out of your own power. But New Yorkers seem to wanna talk them. They're out of running for the White House. A Quinnipiac university poll of New York City voters found that seventy six percent believe he should not run for president the same poll showed he had only a forty three percent approval rating. Here the mayor has faced a ton of criticism number of areas from his handling snowstorms to the increasing homeless population. And for continuing to use his city hall. SUV caravan to drive several miles to his preferred YMCA Jim in Brooklyn while at the same time pushing sweeping climate change policies that seek to decrease travel by car in New York. Former members of his administration have been critical of his management style claiming that he spends too much time on the thought process, but as low to implement policies, then there was the time. He took aim at the press for all the negative coverage. He received things have gotten really negative, really divided and tablet culture. Unfortunately, adds to that might you. So I hope they'll be changed. It sparked comparisons to President Trump's treatment of the press. Steve Kastenbaum, New York. Alex trebek's received a standing ovation as he accepted a daytime EMMY award for jeopardy for outstanding game show host correspondent Barbara Kusak. Fills within it was back in March that Alex trebek's disclosed he has advanced pancreatic cancer. So we said he was worried about winning as best game show host concern. That sympathy might play a role in voting. He said contenders should be judged on the merits of their work, but travek recalled that he lost last year after he had major surgery for life threatening blood clots. So since that didn't give them a sympathy vote the seventy eight year old trebek's said he can live with the honor. It's a seventh. Daytime EMMY including two thousand eleven lifetime achievement award. I'm Barbara Kusak. Westwood One daily news may six twenty nineteen. I'm John trout.
Mueller finds no conspiracy with Russia but does not draw a conclusion on obstruction of justice
"From the newsroom of the Washington Post. This is a special episode of post reports, I'm Martine powers. Sunday, March twenty four. Today, the attorney general outlines the findings of the molar investigation into Russian interference in the two thousand sixteen election. Obstruction? And none whatsoever. And it was a complete and total exoneration. On Friday evening. We found out that special counsel. Robert Muller had delivered his long anticipated report about the Trump campaign to attorney general William bar and then on Sunday bar sent a four page letter to congress breaking down the principal findings of them. Learn best Gatien who are you? What do you do when aims Devlin Barrett? I cover one force in national security for the Washington Post, which is a very exciting job on a day. Like today keeps us busy. And since the moment that the attorney general's letter to congress was released Devlin's, been unpacking. What it means? So what is the key takeaway on the question of Russian interference in the two thousand sixteen election. The key takeaway on that question is that Muller did not find conspiracy between anyone in the Trump campaign and the Russians who were trying to influence the outcome election. There's basically they found no conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, and we know that there have been indictments related to Russian interference in the election. But basically what the report concluded was that there's no evidence that that happened on the Trump side of things on the cameras that they have indicted more than two dozen Russians for various types of election interference, including hacking. And in some cases, social media troll farms, essentially, but the big question the central question of Muller's work was did the Trump campaign or anyone in it help aid or assist the Russians in any way in doing. That and what we found. Now is that Muller did not find that happened? So that was the big question explored by the Miller team. But then there is a secondary question of obstruction of Justice, and what did the special counsel conclude on that will there you can tell from the Joe even from the summary that officials really struggled with that question. So the obstruction is sort of a simple idea that can get very complicated very quickly under the law, for example. There's nothing illegal about shredding documents. Everyone does that in the office. Most offices. Let's say, however, if you know, the FBI is coming over to look at your document soon, and you start shredding them, especially the ones that might be particularly bad for you that usually does count as obstruction. So a lot of it's about intent and circumstances in the president's case what they started out with when it came to obstruction was all the events that led up to the firing of FBI director Jim Komi in may of twenty seventeen there were series of conversation. With Komi that led up to that they involved the investigation of the presence, former national security adviser, Michael Flynn. And there was a question in the minds of investigators. As to is the present saying these things and doing these things in order to try to stop the investigation. So the question that was put to Mahler, and frankly, the reason Muller exists as a special counsel is because it was a concern that what the president was doing was interfering or attempting to interfere with the investigation on that question Muller, did not reach a conclusion, he laid out according to the attorney general's letter a bunch of essentially pro and con facts and pro and con legal arguments on the obstruction question, but did not reach a conclusion on it. I think that suggests that Muller struggled with coming up with the prosecutors answer to that question, and ultimately left it up to his bosses to make the call there in this case his bosses are. Our deputy attorney general rod Rosenstein, and the attorney general Bill bar, and it did really seem up in the air. Because the quote that was included in the letter that we've seen is while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime it also does not exonerate him. Right. Which is a pretty remarkable thing to have said it really is. And it's also again, it's this weird. It's a little amazing to think that when this process started nearly two years ago in large part because of the question of obstruction thing that really turned the Justice department on its head to focus on the president personally was the obstruction piece of this. And to think that we have gotten now to the end of that investigation, and essentially the people in charge of that investigation said, you know, what we actually don't have an answer on this. And I think it's understandable. I do think the law, and the facts are an interesting and complicated batch of things to try to sift through. But it is amazing that on such an important question. Multiple did not reach a conclusion, and he punted it. To Torney general William bar, what did bar have to say about this question bar said that when he and his deputy looked at the facts what they came up with was that the faxes presented did not meet the legal standards and also the Justice department practices for prosecuting obstruction case, they made it very clear that they weren't making that decision on the notion that the president can't be indicted. They looked at it as a factual and legal matter does the conduct constitute the crime of obstruction whether or not the person doing it as the president. So the issue here with basically that there wasn't an proof. Right. And that the law itself may have not supported an accusation of obstruction. You know, obstruction is about a couple of different things. It's about what you do in. It's about what your intent is. When you do those things I think it's been pretty clear for some time that Muller and his team spent a lot of time trying to understand the president's intent of certain things, and it's. Seems as if based on what we have in front of us that they didn't get conclusive answers to the question of intent. So how has President Trump responded to the so far? Well, he spoke to reporters out in an airport in Florida, and he declared it a complete and total exoneration which knowing the president is not as huge surprise. And I think certainly some lawyers will argue that the, you know language about not exonerating him. The nine complete completely exonerate him. Correct. So that's true. But I do think in fairness, I do think we should look at. This report is saying in some ways that the main thrust of concern about the president's conduct the question of collusion with Russia, which is obviously a radioactive subject. If that were true, they had found evidence of that, you know, that would throw the whole the legitimacy of his presidency into doubt. So that's not true. And that's an important meaningful thing. And I think frankly anyone who's come under investigation. Who does not get charged is in some ways entitled to a little bit of a victory lap there. But this obstruction question, I think is going to linger and that debate I think will go on for quite some time as to the DOJ pursued as aggressively as they could they think about it aggressively. They could you're already seeing some Democrats suggest that to make a decision on this complicated legal matter in two days, which is basically the amount of time between when bar receive. The report and when he issues the letter summarising its findings. That's too short a time for such a complex problem. So we'll see how that debate plays out. And a lot of the ways that people are going to be thinking about this questions. Depend on what we learn or do not learn from the actual report itself did the letter that bar sent include any details about whether he's going to release some of those details of what the actual investigation found out. He doesn't say explicitly. But it's it's fairly I'm fairly optimistic from reading the letter that he is going to release a lot of the report what he says in the letter is that the report itself is being reviewed now for essentially protected material, which means grand jury information, it's against the law to release grand jury information and other types of measure that would be improper to put in a public space and the way he frames that in discusses that in the letter makes me think that they are going to release in fairly short order. The report albeit in redacted form and the obvious question the flows from that is okay. So how redacted? And because we don't know how much for example, how much grand jury material Muller put into the report or how much for example, classified material was put into the report. We don't know exactly. How substantive those reductions might be. But I do think it is interesting that he's seems to be signaling the letter very strongly that the report is coming. You just won't get every word of it. Howard Democrats in congress responding to the so far. So Democrats have said that they won all of the underlying material that Muller basis report on they wanna see the evidence for themselves and make their own determinations on the question of, you know, the Trump and Russia conspiracy that Muller says did not exist. It'll be interesting to see how much they take Muller's determination face value, and how much they decide to pursue that on their own despite his determination. I do think that the obstruction questioned the way the obstruction question was decided inside the department of Justice really leaves it ripe for lawmakers and Democrats to spend a lot of time exploring. That question in their committees. But still for those Democrats who have said that they really want to pursue investigations into the president for the next two years doesn't this take some of the air out of their efforts? Oh, I think definitely I mean, if you look at how the Muller appointment was heralded the start, especially and then since Democrats, welcome Bob Muller's appointment, not just because it meant stabilizing the Justice department stabilizing, what seemed to be tearing toward a constitutional crisis. On sundays. They welcomed it because they felt that it was the best chance if there was evidence of such a thing to be there. They felt like Bob Muller was their best chance for finding it. Now by Muller has come back and said, it ain't there. I don't know how willing Democrats are going to be to accept that answer necessarily. That's one of the interesting questions going forward. The president has not been exonerated by the special counsel yet. The attorney general has decided not to go further or parents to share those findings with the public. We cannot simply rely on. What may be a hasty? Partisan interpretation of the facts on Sunday evening Representative Jerry Nadler, chair of the House Judiciary committee. So that he believes that bars conclusions on the Muller report are premature we will ask the attorney general to testify before the House Judiciary committee. We will demand. The release of the full report the American people are entitled to full accounting of the presence misconduct referenced by the special counsel. That's it. For today's extra episode of post reports. I'm Martin powers. They'll be more on the Miller report on Monday in a special episode of the post podcast. Can he do that? And we'll be back in the afternoon. With a regular episode of post reports.