20 Episode results for "George W Bush Administration"

Why the Taliban Cant Use Facebook

The Lawfare Podcast

58:33 min | Last month

Why the Taliban Cant Use Facebook

"The following podcast contains advertisements. If you prefer podcast without advertisements you can sign up for our ad free version at patriotair dot com slash law fair. That's patriotic dot com slash l'affaire. You'll get rid of the ads and will be very grateful. The financial histories approach is just to say look. The risk is too great. We're gonna categorically shut it down. And if i'm being completely honest i'm not one hundred percent. Sure what the legal argument is the platforms. That don't just shut it down. And we were talking about just straight up designated entity and it's using their platform risk legal risk-averse. This of it is that they should shut it down. I'm jurassic and this is the l'affaire podcast august. Twenty six two thousand twenty one today. Renew another episode of our arbiters of truth series on our online information ecosystem. We'll be talking about the taliban takeover of afghanistan and how like everything it raises content moderation issues when the taliban seized power following the us withdrawal from afghanistan this month major platforms like facebook and twitter. Face a quandary. What should they do with accounting content belonging to the fundamentalist insurgency. That was suddenly running a country. Should they treat taleban the afghan government and let them post or should they remove taleban content under us sanctions. Look if you're coming at this from tax space you may have been watching the conversation in recent weeks about how this has raised new and difficult issues for platforms dressed in the center of geopolitics questions of what to do about taliban accounts. But how new are these problems really this week. Evelyn and i spoke with scott anderson a senior editor law fair and a fellow at the brookings institution who you might have heard on some other l'affaire podcasts about afghanistan in recent weeks. He walked us. Through the problems of recognition and sanctions law the platforms are now running into and we debated whether or not the platforms are navigating. Uncharted territory or whether they're dealing with the same problems that other institutions like banks have long dealt with. It's the law fair podcast. August twenty six were. The taliban can't use facebook scott. Thank you so much for coming on. We're gonna be talking about the different sanctions on the afghan taliban how this relates to clinton moderation. Because an and. I don't mean to be flippant about this because i want to say everything is a content moderation issue these days and pretty much. Every geopolitical crisis is going to raise issues for tech companies. Both in how they responded but also how they facilitate the events in their role in events is a plays out and while i think sometimes the online disclose tends to over emphasize the online aspects of any conflated peripheral issue here as real very real issues for platforms in how this plays out and whether the taliban has access to social media does fundamentally affect their legitimacy their ability to communicate with the afghan population in the world and spread the propaganda or the next steps. But i think we should stop by situating. Our rita's a bit more. Broadly beyond the online environment. Can you give out rate as a quick overview of with stand right now in afghanistan from a governance perspective so is the taliban fully running the country at this point. Is it right to call them. The government of afghanistan so though is a very difficult question and one that the united states and many other members of their national community are wrestling with right. Now the idea of what to call the taliban isn't a new question. That's something that. A lot of countries wrestle with throughout the nineteen nineties during the last period that alabama was kind of in control of a good part of the territory of of afghanistan. And it's kind of resurrected itself now and it gets down to something that international lawyers refer to as recognition which is the kind of formal acknowledgement that a given regime overseas is the government of a state and that often means at a formal level. That can speak for that state and international affairs. Music can enter into treaties for that state. It means that it can send diplomats to man the embassies of that state overseas it means that that government can manage claim ownership over the foreign assets of that state. Something that's very relevant in the debate. Regard afghanstan given that with foreign currency reserves currently frozen in us reserve banks and other financial institutions. So it's a really foundational and fundamental legal question that the united states and nor any other member of the announcement as yet address me regards to afghanistan for all intents and purposes it seems like the islamic republic of afghanistan. That's the government that has been in place and internet was internationally recognized last twenty years since the u. s. led invasion into has one seems like it's gone away. The taliban certainly seems to have a military control of a good part of the country of the capital city of kabul. They have declared their intent to reestablish the islamic emirate of afghanistan that was the name of the pseudo state pseudo government that they ran back in the nineteen nineties before the us invasion they have taken steps among their various factions and including a couple other prominent afghans like former president hamid karzai to. Sit down and kabul. Really as we as we record this. They're they're discussing. What is this new government going to look like but generally states meaning other states the broader community wanna see certain hallmarks before they sign on to recognize a new regime like this particular one. That's come to power through force of arms as the new government the main requirements. They wanted them to see that. They have effective control. And that basically means that they are likely to be permanent that they have a degree of acquiescence from the public that they are actually able to govern and do the things you expect of a government of a state. It's it's a fact specific and fairly flexible. Standard at st supply and top of that state's often put conditions on recognition. They say well. You need to abide by human. You need to respect your treaty commitments. You need to embrace some sort of representative democratic for governance and we see in the united states ever governments hint at that in the context of the taliban which are requirements taliban. Stocking meet anytime soon. Although maybe they'll the pay lip-service to them as we kind of seen the last few days to that that's very long winded way of explaining it. It's not clear that the state of afghanistan actually has a government. Right now i would. I would say that the probably this consensus concluded that they do not so. The taliban takeover has raised questions for social media and internet companies in a number of different ways on the one hand it seems like some companies that were previously blocking content from the taliban. Now are the washington post reported. Recently that a number of websites run by the group suddenly went dark as a few days ago on the other hand. Some websites like facebook did limit. The taliban's access to the web are now facing this issue. Of what do you do. When an insurgent group you blocked on your platform is now defacto running a country and so a lot of these companies blocked taleban access as a matter of policy pointing to. Us law will go more into the details in a moment just on a high level. Can you explain what the legal architecture is. That might encourage you. If you're in the general counsel's office at one of these companies to kind of institute that blocking cutoff taleban access to your platform. Sure i mean this actually relates to kind of a separate set of questions than recognition authority issues regarding you know. Who is the governor afghanistan. That's one set of questions that can inform a company that may be determining okay. Well who should we hand the keys over for this official afghanistan misery of foreign affairs twitter account or something like that It can affect decisions like that that are part of the equation but in terms of actually cutting the taliban off from platforms that actually comes to another area of law and that's that's the issue of sanctions because the taliban has been the subject of both international sanctions by the un security council and bilateral sanctions by the united states in a number of other countries weren't mentioned since the late nineteen ninety cents after the nineteen ninety eight embassy bombings and those sanctions are are pretty draconian. They they install pretty strict limits. That say you're not really supposed to be having any economic or in-kind interactions with the taliban. The whole design of these sanctions is to kind of cut off economic support for the taliban and so on account of that when you are providing a service to the taliban as a company you are facing argument that in fact well yeah. You are giving an in-kind service or giving something of value of the taliban that can constitute material support for terrorism in some cases although we can get into some of the legal nuances there. That doesn't clearly apply here as a technical matter but similar. Similar legal prohibitions. That say hey. You are providing assistance in violation of federally established sanctions or otherwise doing things that carry with them criminal penalties or civil penalties as a corporation and for that reason companies are facing legal risk. They're facing those potential sanctions. That are involved in. They say okay. Well we need to cut these off. Because otherwise the federal government could come to us or potentially foreign governments in penalize us for doing something that they think is within the scope of the statute to say were essentially providing this terrorist group with support. There's another angle this that's also been of increasing concern. I think for social media platforms. Last few years is that there's actually a civil liability component to this. Us law has a very broadly construed civilly ability provisions related to the acts of international terrorism which can include things that look like support for terrorism terrorist groups in various regards and so if a us national were injured in a terrorist attack and a credible case could be made that the given social media platform was somehow involved by the terrorist groups and planning for that attack whether as recruitment method or as a means of communication means of coordination. Something like that. They might face claims of civilly. Ability potentially very large multi million dollar tens of million dollars claims from civil for the damages arising from this acts of terrorism. Not many of those law suits have succeeded thus far to my knowledge. I'm not sure if any of them have actually gotten to the point where there's been damages against the company but they're credible enough that they've been litigated out up to to the appellate court level and in many cases actually settled and on the financial services side. Which has been field dealing with this problem. Little bit longer and number of cases happened settled in and have gotten closer to those sorts of negative judgments that it's a real risk and so that's another set of incentives. You're saying that even if the federal government says we're not gonna penalize you privateplus might and so regional council's office have to think about that. When they're deciding what level exposure they're willing to tolerate by letting their platform by be used by groups that every knowledged has ties to terrorism. Yeah that's great. Quincy asked you to answer that. Like general counsel and you you did with the very risk averse option of even though none of these lawsuits have been successful yet when you're sitting in a platform obviously your incentives of very much one way opposed to the other and and we'll talk about that later in terms of the ramifications that has full freedom of speech and and sort of the incentives more. Broadly here but i think before we go any further. It's worth sort of car find a little bit more the legal framework and which groups in which lists sweat talking about because i think this was a source of confusion in talking about this when this first started so there are actually two groups lists as far as i understand it that a relevant to these conversation as the pakistani taliban which is a us designated foreign terrorist organization and then as the afghan taliban which is what. We're talking about today obviously and not on that f. t. earliest but they're on another list. Which is the specially designated global terrorist. List answer would you mind sort of unpacking for us. The difference between the two earliest one y one group might listed on one and the other in what the different ramifications or consequences of being listed on thursdays shirt. It is a really really complicated question. And i'm not surprised that there's confusion around this guy think. There's there's kind of constant confusion around those two legal regimes and a number of related regimes. That also exists in the space. But you have to go into history to understand how they relate to each other because it's actually really kind of a a matter of path dependence historical development the f. t. o. foreign terrorist organization the acronym tio regime was that was in the nineteen nineties. As part of the terrorism ineffective death penalty act a statute. That any law student is is familiar with because it did all sorts of things it through all sorts of corners of the law. But this one kind of very specific corner where it set up this regime that congress legislated out saying essentially. The state department can designate certain foreign organizations that are engaged in terrorist activity that threatened the united states those three requirements there and put them on this f. t. o. List and once they put on the olas. It triggers a bunch of legal consequences for them. It says that they are essentially sanctioned You know their assets are frozen. It becomes illegal for anybody to deal with them economically within the united states. You can fish penalties for doing that. eh assets. There's a comes under. The jurisdiction nights are supposed to be frozen and then also importantly is that you can be prosecuted for providing them with material support. That's one of the three for four. Mitchell support prosecution laws. I think that's two eighteen to three nine capital letter be fed. We're calling my my sequence incorrectly and it's kind of a presumptive where they say once you're on this list. It's illegal to write this group support. You don't have to know that there are terrorist group. You don't have to know that. They're involved in terrorism. It becomes a much stricter form of liability for doing that. So after the nine eleven attacks. The george w bush administration was in a position where they said well. We really want to be able to apply the sanctions part of this. At least meaning the part that freezes assets. Way more broadly because we know terrorists are funded by networks and networks are flexible. They are adaptive. They moved quickly and they're not always easily died. Identify will this person is a member of this group and therefore falls under this f. t. o. designation we're has to be a foreign organization so they use another statue. The international merge the economic powers act which is essentially very broad delegation of authority from congress to the president allowing the president to regulate all sorts of foreign economic activity in these economic activity with some sort of foreign access to say worst apple shing the separate regime the sd gt or specially designated global terrorist. Regime that basically says if you are for an entity meaning person or an organization. They're individuals doesn't enter this who is engaged in terrorist activity that might threaten the united states or economy us a slightly broader definition there This is where it gets more important or if you happen to be an entity that is acting on behalf of entity like that or that provides any material support for any entity like that you can be subject to this designation so creases daisy chain effect. We're not just a terrorist. Group is subject to designation but any entity that supports that terrorist group is subject assassination. And then andy. Any entity supports those entities that subject to designation echoes out from. They're very effective method of shutting. Down broad networks of support and because it was established under aida. Nash words economic powers act. It's administered almost entirely by the executive branch. executive branch doesn't have to go back to congress to amend or update the statutory regime. And so it comes as much more flexible tool for extending the sanctions component of this to a much broader range of entities involved with terrorists. So what happens The game is still used. It's mostly distinctive because of the criminal prosecution effort of material support. It also carries a lot more for reasons that frankly are entirely clear to me either. Lot more moral sanction i think because it is a much more delivered processes used much more rarely. It really is. You're on there with a real list of bodies of organizations that are engaged international terrorism. But it's it's still seems limited. Use the state department's designated about seventy two seventy four efthimios. I believe at this point. The is somewhere around there as dgt regime. Meanwhile has been used thousands of times I did a quick search before side on here. Look like there were at least eight thousand s. dgt's designated on the sdn list the state department itself which has kind of a sub sub sort of primary authority under the sat regime Itself has designated three hundred fifty one as s. dgt's compared to just the seventy four efthimios and then perhaps the most tellingly is that every single f. t. o. doesn't it by that regime is also co designated as an sdg t. As kind of a belt and suspenders method of showing. Yeah in fact the full range of economic sanctions that we can apply against you both those defined by congress in the regime which are pretty broad and those defined by the executive branch in the gt regime which are much were broad and flexible and subject to a member of the executive branch these all apply to these entities. Too long. it's one of those. Are the two different regimes. Dgt regime is used much more often much more flexibly much more. Broadly but the epa regime still carry some sort of moral wait. It gets a lot more attention and then it has. That added hook of criminal prosecution for material support. You can still be criminal. Prosecution prosper violating sanctions under the sd gt regime. But the material support criminal prohibition is a little stricter little more severe penalty as extra territorial element to it about how it can be used and so it provides a little bit more of a of an added sanction there so i think this distinction is is actually one that seemed to cause a lot of confusion for platforms and even for some journalists to write about technology in the wake of the taliban takeover an at times honestly it seemed that even the platforms weren't clear on what their treatment of the taliban was or what the basis of that treatment was a there. Ambiguous statements that sometimes to conflate the afghan taliban with pakistani taliban which is a different organizations sanction differently and. i think this is important to note here because well the platforms don't exclusively rely on. Us government lists. They do try to reference them often to kind of clothing choices in the legitimacy of being the result of of government decision making so facebook for example seems to generally treat both the te'o an gt list as the basis for its rules and has long been. the afghan taliban. Twitter is not bending the taliban as a group but will set it will ban any individual tweets that breach its rules so graphic content or inciting violence. A youtube seems to have settled on the position that it had always bound taliban which seems right except that the company initially didn't seem to clear on why they ban them untold writers that it relies on governments to define after ios to the sites enforcement of its rules against violent criminal groups. So i think it's fair to say there's a lot of confusion. I do think one of the reasons we wanted to ask you on was to try to draw out the similarities and differences between what social media platforms are trying to do here and what other industries are doing you know when we talk about content moderation internet i think we often try to talk about how platforms are handling things as kind of exceptional industry. That's divorced from what other institutions are doing. But as you and i discussed on twitter many institutions are faced with the question of how to treat the taliban both before they took power and now so what have other institutions like banks for example or anything else that comes to mind been doing in connection with the taliban in light of this month of ads. That's a great question. The something that the financial industry has wrestled with more than anything else because the sanctions component of economic sanctions of both the fda. Oh and the sat regime is really the meat and potatoes of the regime. I would say it's the part that comes up. The most as those impact materials perpetrators of prosecution gets a lot of attention but the sanctions is actually the part that i think a lot. The work of these sorts of designations. And it's set. The regime is set up legal regime in a very specific way to allocate legal risk at a very specific way and that is to put it on the company. All the treasury department does that that maintains these less And it's worth noting efthimios. Sdg dgt's and dozens of other sanctions regimes established under different statutory authorities. Are all just kind of glommed together on one less called the specially designated nationals less. Sdn list Would you yourself go look at if you want it. Treasury dot gov slash sdn. All the treasury department does is published this list and they just put on the internet and that's at they provide a couple different file. Types of version excel version. Couple of the things for databases. That's it and they update it pretty regularly because again yesterday. Gt regime other sanctuary. Gm used all the time. New ended are popping up there most days it then falls on the financial industry particularly but also frankly just about any other type of business to say. Okay well we actually have an obligation to implement this list were also we are going to face potentially legal penalties as a result of us if we are found to have knowingly or negligently recklessly given money to one of these entities. Then we're really in trouble. We're gonna face criminal or civil penalties potentially and so most major financial institutions over the last. You know at least twenty years probably a little bit longer where these regimes have become more and more common. They have essentially set up very carefully structured in consultation with a number of law firms and variety of special consulting groups that does sanctions compliance. Were essentially every major financial transaction. Certainly major ones often relatively smaller financial transactions as well gets automatically put through a series of screens that are then evaluated for tripping any of these sanctions regimes along with a bunch of other legal requirements. That are in. Baltic like foreign corrupt practices act things like that and these sorts of sanctions and other compliance. Issues are a huge. Part of the financial industry's business now. Lots and lots and lots of law firms make a lot a lot of money for major financial institutions by helping them navigate these obligations these burdens. But it's part of what makes the sanctions regime so effective because by putting the burden on the financial institutions. It is decentralized the federal government now doesn't have to go down and track all these people it burden gets shifted onto the individual financial institutions. That do that in theory. This obligation is not limited Financial institutions right like everybody's subject to these sanctions. I can't go buy something from a member of the taliban more than northern bank of america can legally but that just doesn't come up for a lot of other industries with the regularity and frequency that the financial industry regime faces at in regards to these types of terrorism sanctions or other international sanctions other industries. May face some of these issues at some quite a systemic level and have their own compliance issues so like airlines. I know have a a a pretty rigorous compliance regime in part. Because they also have no-fly other things to reconcile with but financial industries really really been the tip of the spear because they are one of the very few industries of truly transnational corporations that likely to encounter the subjects these sorts of sanctions. So as quinta said there's this element of tech is course. The tends to talk about what platforms do or the questions of efficacy about in any situation is unprecedented and exceptional and reinventing the wheel having to build governance institutions from the ground up. But then you in quinto having this argument about whether it really is that unprecedented whether it's just you know platforms having to fully behind these kinds of questions at other institutions have been dealing with for ages and not really raising any special really unique issues. But i think there is something that feels a bit different about speech. And i think there's this general conception that speech is somehow special and different and i think you know depriving groups or governments of funds is a pretty common tool and so maybe doesn't raise such existential lord difficult moment questions as censorship dozzell. Censorship is a cultural hotpoint and their feels like the difference between cutting off funds. That might be used to purchase weapons that could be used to kill civilians or allowing groups to speak and there's a good argument to be made and in some circumstances i myself have made it that you're taking down. The speech of state actors should only be done in the rarest of circumstances. Because there's a public interest in knowing what these influential actors saying and thinking and understanding how the taliban is positioning itself had some sort of value. Obviously that doesn't apply when it steps over into like incite. Violence will graphic content or propaganda but there is some sort of virtue or benefit in knowing somewhat what they thinking or the message that they want to send out. So i'm wondering if you can. Maybe what your reaction to that is. And whether you see a distinction between you know the decisions that financial institutions that having to make the decisions of platforms that having to make right now. So there are obviously kind of fact based distinctions. We can make an slightly different legal regimes. But but i think there's actually more less difference than than even that description you just you just gave may suggests because essentially what. i think. You're getting out with the idea of speech. Here is that there is a public interest in the service that platforms provide in being able to facilitate whatever the given sanctioned entity may be trying to do so too the taliban government if they're trying to advertise and let people know about public services. They're providing even of they'll mail so in the next breath support terrorism or do something else nefarious. There's still some value of saying well. They are a multi functional multi-use entity and we need to support or at least facilitate some of the legitimate. Things are going to do a public interest in that. That's very true. Though of almost the entire universe of kind of sanctioned entities a lot of them at least who in the financial context are the funds that they used to pay for social programs if they happen to be a entity that has social programs in addition to acts of terrorism so hamas life in this category or government services if they effectively administer a particular territories so the islamic state during its heyday was like this where it basically ran a good part of syria and iraq. Or you know just the to take an example from afghanistan right now. The united states is frozen of vast. Majority i think all of the afghan funds that were in. Us banks including central bank reserves and for reserves. A lot of these are money. That's used to do things. Like pay for afghan civil servants or pay for afghan civil services to their citizens which some of which are pretty essential and life preserving but the sanctions regime draws kind of a bright line and says you know in fact you are the to cut this off because all this resources all these funds are fungible in that by allowing them axes funds to one good purpose. Perhaps you're also facilitate them to do lots of things for other purposes and you're making it cheaper to for them to that good purpose and therefore they're able to shift other resources to the more nefarious purposes. This is the topic of a supreme court case in two thousand ten humanitarian law project beholder. The supreme court basically came down and said look in that case the organization challenging was then. They're an fdr designation or restriction. Under enough toyota's nation was going to a certain at doesn't efthimios specifically. I think it was a tamil tigers in sri lanka and the uk. Kurdish group in turkey. And saying we we want to educate these groups on the law of armed conflict and humanitarian law. We wanna tell them how not to hurt. Civilians in their armed conflict there pursuing. It encourage them to do so not to do so. How could this possibly be something that the. Us government wants to prohibit and says that this is against sanctions. It doesn't this race first amendment rights and other rights for the public and the way it's been court came down. They said look congress and the executive branch together have made this judgment to say that there are no such exceptions for this group because every dollar you give facilitating a legitimate activity. They may do is another dollar. You free up for them to pursue their illegitimate and that's the judgment of the political branches. In this case. So i see your point like certainly there are some novel questions posed by the speech role that platform plays but i. I'm not sure that there anymore integral or really that different from the role of financial industry and lots of other industries. Already play for regimes organizations. That have these sorts of legitimate and illegitimate purposes wrapped together and and that's been true threat the almost the whole history of these sanctions regimes for a lot of these groups So so that's not really is a novel question. Having football dance with science starts with having sweep down with science because the better you sleep better you show up on game day that's why. Nfl players rely on the sleep number. Three sixty smart bet it senses their movement and automatically just to keep them effortlessly comfortable and it tracks vital sweep metric like average heart rate and average breath rate so they know exactly how well they slept. It tackles the science. All they have to do is sleep. It's the biggest sale of the year. All smart beds are on sale. Say tipper percents on the news sleep number three sixty limited edition smart bet only for a limited time sleepnumber the official sleep and wellness partner of the nfl. So learn push on some other ways. I think that might make the power that these platforms exercise different from a bank. And then you can. You can tell me why you think i'm wrong. So part of it is that on the one hand it does seem to me like financial transactions might be a lot more black and white like either money is being transferred. Or it's not you know it's in a bank account or it's not whereas if a platform is evaluating speech there are inevitably a lot of grey lines in qualitative judgments which is actually more or less widely the holder versus humanitarian project. Decision was so controversial when it comes to the sort of the overlap of speech and what constitutes support for these organizations in a way that is concerning. So that's one thing and another thing that i'm sort of curious for your thoughts on is whether this has to do or that the tensions that evelyn are picking up on have to do with the fact that major technology platforms are sort of in an earlier stage in their role here than banks are. Were as you said banks. There's kind of a whole support architecture. For compliance with the assistance their armies and armies of lawyers and platforms on. The other hand are kind of in the stage that they've always been in which is building the plane as they're flying it and so there's a lot more ambiguity. There's a lot more sort of making snap. Decisions is a lot more weight. What our policy on the taliban again and curious what you think about that. And whether i'm exaggerating. The extent to which there is an architecture for banks or whether part of what we're seeing is that the platforms are sort of rushing to get up to where the banks are now and that earlier on in these legal regimes banks face similar problems. Yeah i think. I think you you kind of preempted my answer with with your last last question there but i'll i'll just to go back to your point about the ambiguity. I would actually argue. I think platforms. Have it easier in regards. That speech is a lot less ambiguous as to whether something is legitimate or illegitimate to. If that's the line were drawing you know. Something of that sanctions are intended and we accept as valid to prohibit or not prohibit because financial industries. They're just dealing with dollar amounts. They don't know with these. Transfers are going towards. That's part of the reason why you end up with just complete freezes on accounts because you don't really know for what purpose any given transfer is being used. That's part of the logic of demand law project cases to say like you don't know what any of this funds is being used and even if one dollar spent give them one dollar discount on a legitimate purpose that just means is one dollar. They're going to be able to shove towards an illegitimate purpose. Potentially and at risk congress in exhibit branches set up these leeward jeans have determined. It's substantial enough in and the courts knock converse that logic so i'm not sure that's true whereas in a platform case at least you get to see the speech in a lot of cases little more complicated we're talking about users And like you know account access. I suppose that actual substantive content but subs of content side. At least you you kinda get the see. The speech or at least have the capacity to see the speech react to pass judgment or at least after the relatively short term after the fact probably because If it's already online. But i think you really in your question got to the real difference here. And that's just a matter of the evolution of these industries. these support systems these law firms. That do this for an advantage industry. Just be clear. They are not publicly subsidized. These are not nor did they. Arise from the earth as a gift from god to support the financial industries and addressing these legal obligations. They're there because the financial district paid a lot of money to develop them over many many years. And i think that is what you are starting to see when you see these social media platforms and a variety of other. Technical companies are facing similar challenges. Here where they are transnational awesome. These sanctions issues are very real for them. They're developing slowly this legal support and they're tapping into the pre existing network that the financial industry is already subsidize the creation of in that you now have lots of law firms with expertise in the space. I mean you talked to lawyers. Who work issues based like they get a lot of clients are kind of emerging tech clients that raises sorts of issues whether it's social media often. You have crypto currency raises a lot of these questions You can have a variety. financial services. App is these questions another classic example from a few years ago. The big deal is when you saw lots of companies developing new ways to trade and provide access to cellular minute. Minutes and cellular. Phone services and also wireless internet services because people were using the transfer of minutes and access to the internet as a kind of currency. And using it to launder money in part for terrace organizations alongside credible organization. At least that was the suspicion and they also suddenly had to deal with sanctions compliance. So it's really painful adaptation. I think for these companies and again our public policy really does deliberately put the burden on them as i all the in the world for that And it's a tricky set of questions to wrestle with that that is not without legal risk. But i don't think it's fundamentally different from a lot of industries have had to do At least at its kind of broad broad character so i think this is fantastic. Because i really disagree with a number of things that you just said i great illustration of this idea of when you'll feel familiar with a particular area you tend to see the complexities That don't necessarily from the outside. And i think i disagree with two points in particular that you just made the first about the less ambiguous nature of the decisions the platforms have to make whether they're more black and white and second whether they're more transparent so on the first poignant to me for as a as a simple outside into the financial world it's like shorting financial transactions much more black and white like his money. Being transferred is in a bank account. Which you've talked about the fungibility which is obviously a much more complicated issue. And i think a really great point but for platforms when they're evaluating speech. I feel like there's a lot. More grey lines in qualitative judgments than there are around funds. So does this constitute praise and support or is it just raising awareness is it condemning documenting condoning. The behavior is it human rights evidence or is it propaganda when a bystander documents something and he's showing the actions of a sanction group. Should that come down. And i i suppose you you probably get my my drift here. I think that there's sort of all of these Really difficult grey areas where platforms are having to make judgments about the public value of certain speech. I'm the costume in a more sort of the sliding role than perhaps banks are when they have to evaluate certain decisions. And maybe you're going to push back on that. But i i also wanna sort of pushback on the idea that what platforms do Is more transparent because while you're right that we suddenly see posted a left up when platforms. Make that decision. We definitely don't necessarily see plumes taking down on fact. This is a massive problem. In particular in conflict situations where platforms might be deleting voss amount of human rights evidence and in fact they have done is in a number of situations. Syria is the big example. Where youtube just sort of nuked tens of thousands of videos of the evidence of human rights abuses. And we don't see any of that. A lot of it happens as a prior restraint on before it gets uploaded and we don't even really have knowledge of what lists platforms rely on that outlining before. How we sort of vaguely can unpack what platforms do and they sort of somewhat map onto government lists but certainly not perfectly and they have internal lists that we don't know about and this is actually something that the facebook oversight borders highlighted with respect to facebook on that they're pushing facebook to be a lot more transparent on that whereas it seems to me again is a symbol outside of that the least banks operate on the basis of a pretty clear villers published lists. And we know what the the decisions are they making with respect to those lists even if is question of fungibility so curious for your reactions to that barrage of contradictory statements. Well i'm still not quite persuaded You know your point about the shades of gray and evaluating the particular speech being engaged. That's certainly true or like you know. It is challenging. Like i think if i were at a social platform you would say. Oh it's gonna be really hard to say like. Is this a legitimate message. Something we could support so that we can't etc but in a way that a choice the social media industry has taken on itself by even considering the fact that they should tolerate any of the speech as valid right for some of these entities. The financial industry's approach is just to say look. The risk is too great. This regime wants us to do. We're just gonna categorically shut it down and if being completely honest like i'm not a hundred percent of what the legal argument is for the platforms. Don't you shut it down. We're talking about like just a straight up designated entity that they're confident this is designated entity and it's using their platform. I think the risk legal risk averse. This of it is that they should shut it down. Maybe now that that the taliban may be a government or seen as doing governmental things although again that's true hezbollah drove the islamic state's true of other groups that are a summer position at a point in the past. We say well we gotta let him do these things because this is a public service. But you don't hear the financial industry saying but we've got to let them give their money to You know their ministries so that they can pay their civil servants that people can still you know get their healthcare and get their other public services in the states. Financial industries just made a different choice in his an pushed back on this. Maybe it's i think maybe it's a little different in the social context. 'cause you there may be an stronger empathy element you see more clearly. The consequence of what's happening ellis removed from it. And a certainly. I think there's a different cultural lamented how people think about their role and think about the relationship smoothies activities. But i'm not sure that makes it fundamentally different from legal perspective in terms of the challenge legal challenge being put to these platforms They're just choosing to do in a different way. There may be good values reasons for doing that. And but i. I think that ultimately comes down to the degree to which social media values the speech that facilitate whereas the how that compared to how the financial district values the variety things that facilitate and the financial industry just isn't as invested in that. That's the social media. Industry is for my my my sense. I should say by the way like the way that the financial industry tends to get around. These things is that they put the burden back on the person wanting to the transaction. Saying okay like if you think. This is valid and that we should be able to do this. Let's get a legal opinion about it or more often. Let's go to federal agency and get a license because the federal government particularly for iep based regimes. Also i s james substantially can basically give licenses that say oh you can do this thing that would otherwise be prohibited. We agree with it. Go ahead with it There is again a whole cottage industry of people trying to get licenses for this purpose to engage with all sorts of groups so if you are a nonprofit organization that wants to provide assistance in islamic state territory or in hezballah territory at. You are worried about these sorts licenses. These sorts of restrictions. You can try and get a license to get that approved. Federal government's record of giving licenses isn't always great particular circumstances like i just described. It's actually a real problem for humanitarian assistance. A gargantuan problem that has real human costs involves but again there. Is that sort of avenue there that you could. Frankly see you know the social media industry pursuing to and saying. Hey we're not going to pass these judgments we're gonna go to a license get a license for from federal agencies and try and get them to give us clear aligns about how to do this and if they don't grant to us just not gonna play along but instead they're willing to push the league limbaugh little bit more and again. I think it's more of a cultural difference as for the transparency point as to whether banks are doing is more transparent. I i'm. I'm just not sure that really bears out entirely. I think your point about you. Know deleting evidence of humanitarian atrocities is a very real one and is actually one. Where you're right. I think that's something very different than a social media. Industry is doing here. But it's not compelled by the legal framework here. There is no reason to think that keeping information that you know. You've pulled down off the internet such as video of people massacring ethnic or religious minorities in some corner of the world yet. There's a good argument to say that if that group was put on the internet and they're sanctioned you should pull it down else maybe you're giving them a service that might post action problems. There's absolutely nothing the law that says you have to lead this stuff. I've actually said this to social media companies and point out. This is like a real legal problem for you because there's no reason you actually need to dispose of this evidence under these regimes are not doing a service that these organizations wanted if anything. You are preserving evidence that may ultimately be useful to governments in prosecuting them later and i wholeheartedly support them doing so but that particular challenge. Is it something that they've arrived at in response to these sanctions laws. They've arrived at it. Because frankly i think for administrative convenience because they want to wash their hands of these difficult policy oriented situations as opposed to taking on the responsibility of preserving these eggs and making them available under appropriate conditions to authorities. So i'm gonna i i i this pushing back just a little bit more again. I think is somewhat administrative convenience. But i think that is also practically perhaps more difficult than your framing might have suggested where you're saying. There's there's no legal gatien old hurst any of these sanction groups speech but there's also no legal obligation to take down content like human rights material. And why don't they just sort of do not do the other and i think Especially in like rapidly evolving situations where they're having to rely on automated tools. Perhaps the distinctions on quite so easy and serve the question that we actually have to ask of platforms these. Which side of the line do we want them to On in those rapidly developing situations do we want them to or on the side of leaving more speech up if even if that results in sort of more propaganda or violating content. Being left up or do we want them to or on the side of taking most speech down even if that means they're taking down some of these really valuable content because you know perfect content. Moderation is an actually possible. And so we're in that world. Where when calculating. Eric costs. And i think i think actually probably the the way that platforms have operated is to generally take very very broad view of the legal obligations. Here like you're sort of saying l. When you're in the position of general counsel like why expose yourself to risk but this is perhaps with someone like me comes at it from a different perspective. Where you know. It's not clear here who is going to be standing up for free speech like who has the right incentives to protect valuables stage because the platforms apart from maybe a minor bad news cycle or or shoddy article in the new york times about taking down a little bit of extra speech. It doesn't actually matter to them all too much. If opposed or two comes down by lodging they talk about how these content really makes up a very small proportion of what they heard which is mostly puppy pictures and salad recipes. And so i you know doesn't worry you at all that there's no incentives here for some vote for platforms or anyone in particular to push back against that risk of us position in a way that maybe maybe doesn't operate quite so much. There's no not that valuable role or there isn't that sort of civil liberties question as much in other contexts again. I think maybe this is the distinction. I i i should get out there. You know no point. Would i ever argue that. There are not huge massive negative extra of though sanctions system in the way it's applied in other context. They're they're absolutely are it comes at a huge humanitarian costs to a lot of people Whether you know civil liberties or whatever values we may have right. It's less of liberties front but it's other equally important social values. The humanitarian assistance delivery vehicles is like the number one best example in my mind. You know we slap these sanctions. On countries are on terrorist groups that controlled territory were innocent civilians live and when you put sanctions on them. Humanitarian workers can't go deliver assistance to those people because they're worried that if they get taxed by local authorities or if they get Have to bribe to a local authority or even by simply you know spending money the local economy. They are going to run a foul of the sanctions regimes. And a lot of them will do it. So that's a really serious human costs. And i think that's a very real extra analogy there that you know you could see in a hypothetical universe. The financial industry caring more about and pushing back on to say. Well we really need facilitate allow for these particular types of transfers in fact that is actually what the humanitarian assistance industries. An industry hanbury assistance organizations. Really do they really lobby hard. I think for very good reason to say hey. Governments you really need to structure your sanctions. More narrowly and to give us more exceptions and to give us more nuance more. Subtlety so that we can do our jobs that we all agree are really important and help people the only difference. I really see again. Is that the social media. Organization seem to be playing a little bit of that role as well unlike the financial industry which says nope washer hints of this is in our role they have a different vision of their social responsibility. Different cultural view about the role that they play as that leads them to sort of different outcomes. I totally agree with that. I mean as i noted i obviously there's really different way the the social media industry and platforms really view their role the services to deliver as having a much more of a double bottom line public interest perspective than perhaps a financial industry does. But i just don't think it fundamentally means that it's actually facing different problems. They are just choosing to act on a different set of priorities of values that the financial industry does a lot of other industries affected by the sanctions. Regimes are so you know. That's where i think the fundamental differences. I think you could see platforms. Adopt a much more financial industry perspective which would be just a lot more cutting the stuff off consequences damned and the same way you could see. The financial industry take a much more nuanced perspective pushing back and saying no in fact we need to facilitate more of these transfers that if we weren't to do them have real humanitarian costs but they're just taking different perspectives about their social responsibilities industries. Those perspectives aren't compelled by the law. And the problems. They're facing their compelled by the broader cultural context in which those industries are operating. Does that make sense. Yeah absolutely i mean and speaking of Social and cultural context did note that the taliban has complained about how you know. They're having difficulty posting on facebook. And that seems to have garnered it some strange allies. I would say. I saw donald trump junior tweeted approvingly about the talibans complaint. The facebook was censoring it. curious what you make of that. Overlap between the american right and the taliban obviously not to groups. You usually think of as having a lot in common. Do you think this comes up more. Just because it sort of as we've been discussing social media has become so much more of a presence in the culture worse. Yeah i mean. I think that's really the only way you can kind of ascribe it in assuming for itself a more substantive judgment in serving in more regulatory role i suppose in making these subject matter judgments about who has access and who doesn't along substantive criteria that are informed by an kind of inspired by maybe public law standards but are still mostly like kind of internally generators substantially internally generated like you know they are assuming a vacant value judgments that people are going to criticize and at some type on the wrong side of the value judgments will make weird alliances. I think there's something admirable about that. That sort of approach and and thinking about the broader social responsibility industry that these companies are doing even though it really does complicate things for them and certain ways particularly legally. But it's you know it does lead to the saints bedfellows and it does make you much more. Prone to be the subject of this sort of controversy. I will note. I think that that's actually something that a lot of companies and private sector organizations really desperately trying to avoid which is why they don't put themselves into the position to make those sorts of judgments when they're provided an out which the sanctions regime kinda does a lot of cases. And so you know it. Is i think indicative of the very different. What i'm calling. A cultural approach see sorts of things with indie industry. That that they found found his way into this role Because they're willing to take on that risk a little bit more at least so far knows that'll continue the future than a lot of other private industries that seemed to be. I do like the idea of the financial industry it's looking at the platforms engaging in essence themselves. Like what the hell are you doing. Don't you know this is exactly what you don't want to be involved in. But i do think it's interesting to end on the nuance a little bit. And what i mean by that is that we've been talking about sort of platforms writ large. But of course there are huge differences between how zoom ver- works versus how that works versus facebook. Twitter van mo the taliban's Own websites and as we go forward here. I think we may see cultural changes but we may also see legal changes in how these companies are regulated and think about their role in their interactions with groups like the taliban so as we start thinking about this and going back to your point about the sort of human cost these kinds of regulations. Are there other factors that you think. Lawmakers should be considering Making these kinds of sanctions more of a scalpel and less of a sledge hammer or is it inherent in the nature of this legal architecture that it's just always going to be a blunt instrument that that actually is a great question and it really gets to what i think is one of the more valid criticisms of us sanctions policy as the way. It's generally administered particularly in the counterterrorism context little also true of other context but somewhat somewhat less. So which is that. There is just a very strong bureaucratic resistance to the tool that allows for much more fine grain and nuanced judgments. and that is the licensing tool. This is something that congress has for a reason built into both the fda regime and the scott regime and almost every other. I think every other sanctions you that. The epa authority and other authorities are used establish. There's almost always some vehicle that says we understand they're going to be outlier cases where we need some sort of transaction to happen or favor some transaction happening that would otherwise be prohibited. And we're going to give the federal government a tool by which they can give credible assurances to the private sector actors involved that you will not faced penalties for doing and that's the way to do it. A license license can be really hard to get a lot of these contacts. It varies regime to regime at various types of issue. You're doing but you know you could have a much more nuanced carefully. Structured regimes that would allow for a lot more of legitimate activities. Who wanna take place. Take place in illegitimate activities. We don't wanna take place get blocked with the use of these licenses. But they are administratively burdensome to craft and pursue. there's not necessarily a bureaucratic actor who is inherently involved in advocating for them or pushing for them or trying to say let's actually get a little more shades of gray in our policy here to accommodate other other interests other than just cracking down terror. Mortaring whatever it may be. And they are There's just a strong resistance taking on the risk of issuing the licence because often there's this idea that well licensing we'll get stretched fudged and will end up causing problematic activity to happen anyway so there is something there. There's something to be said that the executive branch will be doing a better job administering these licenses and making them more realistic policy tool that different industries can use and that if the executive branch won't it feels like a camp and congress step in and make that more of a reality because that really is the existing vehicle through which you could resolve a lot of these problems whether for their social media industry where the financial industry or elsewhere but in the current status quo. It's it's something that in a lot of context particularly counterterrorism context isn't used very broadly and that that instead is is causing these these much larger problems that don't necessarily have to exist that you could avoid with a little bit more nuance. Is there anything else that you think we should have asked you about. There is one angle of this that we did not cut on that. I maybe should elaborate one aspect of the sanctions regime that that needs to be born in mine as well. Particulars relates to social media is that there are often carve outs for certain types of speech activity and medium media related to speech activity. And it's possible that some of the social media companies particularly those that are willing to push back a little bit more on sanctions restrictions or more willing to entertain messages that seem legitimate by entities with ties to sanction entities. Maybes ewing themselves as fitting within at so from that perspective. You could see the social media. Industry may be having a little bit more leeway for a lot of what it does compare to the financial industry that the vast of transactions reason to think they have anything to do with those sorts of first amendment media related activities whereas that is the entirety early substantial portion of what social media companies to. I think that's a really good place to leave it. And i just wanted to say thank scott for the good humid sparring about all this. Even if we didn't convince each other. I think it was a really desert generative an interesting conversation about the nuances of these conversations at don't generally get sort of indexed position with each other and i think it's a really interesting comparison serve We may have to have you on again to continue. The debate is keeps coming up in basically every geopolitical prices as we go forward so thanks very much my pleasure. You've been listening to arbiters of truth. The love affair podcasts miniseries online information ecosystem you can find past episodes in the love. Her podcast feed. And we'll be back with another episode next thursday. The leifer podcast is produced in cooperation with the brookings institution. Our music is performed recipe again. Our audio engineer. This episode was homes as to our producer. Is jen paci halal. Please rayton view the l'affaire podcast and whatever app you use and thanks for listening. Having football with science starts with having sweep down to a science because the better you sleep better you show up on game day that's why. Nfl players rely on the sleep number three sixty smart bet and automatically just to keep them effortlessly comfortable and it transpired sleep metric like average heart rate and average breath rate so they know exactly how well they slept. It tackles the science. All they have to do is sleep. It's the biggest sale of the year. All smart beds are on sale. Say tippy sat on the new sleep number three sixty limited edition smart bet only for a limited time sleepnumber the official sleep and wellness partner of the nfl.

taliban afghanistan us efthimios confusion dgt facebook congress afghan government twitter federal government kabul george w bush administration scott anderson treasury department state department Sdg dgt brookings institution
The religious threat to global human rights must be taken seriously  Opinion Out Loud Ep 010

National Secular Society Podcast

08:09 min | 3 months ago

The religious threat to global human rights must be taken seriously Opinion Out Loud Ep 010

"Welcome to opinion cloud bringing you the best opinion pieces from the national secular society in audio fork. The religious threat global human rights must be taken seriously written and read few by keith would first published by the national executive santi on the twenty second of june two thousand and twenty one. The united nations recently asked ngos with whom it works about the legacies of colonialism that still have adverse implications for human rights unco to challenge violations of human rights should consider both oppressive laws which their crowns polled informa- colonies and their efforts to impose similar agendas further afield some of the worst. Systemic human rights abuses. Are those criminalizing consensual sex between adults. The same sex. Their code defied in the laws of about seventy states about forty percent of these are in africa which was almost entirely colonized by european countries. Such axelsson became potentially subject to life imprisonment in india through laws introduced under british rule. Even after british rule there is a possible death penalty in pakistan and ten years imprisonment in bangladesh. However india criminalization was repealed in two thousand and eighteen these remnants of colonialism implied in an article in the independent on lgbt plus strides across the commonwealth hid referred to britain's colonial legacy of homophobia the article notes that half of the seventy countries that criminalize homosexuality worldwide uk commonwealth members. There is no denying strong correlation between former colonies unmodern laws in contravention of human rinds. There is also a different powerful underlying causes for these one sprint. Violations continuing notably there remain eleven countries all muslim majority countries where the death penalty is effective or possible. This remains despite the un passing a resolution in two thousand seventeen condemning. The use of the death penalty as punishment for consensual. Gay relations unbelievably this. Resolution was opposed by the united states in two thousand and nineteen. Iran defended such laws in the following terms Society has moral principles and we live according to these principles these moral principles concerning the behavior of people in general and that means the lowest respect it on the law is obeyed. Further clue about a major underlying causes comes in another passage from the independent article. Which ones off. A new wave of fundamentalist evangelical funded from abroad. It adds that well funded. Evangelical crews from america been spending vast amounts of money to build new movements and judges against lgbt plus equality in developing countries. Christianity is the most widely practiced religion. Emma's komo's nations in an investigation published in twenty twenty open. Democracy noted that the us christian right had poured more than fifty million dollars into africa since two thousand seven one research based in south africa accused us conservative networks of exposing hey to africa and other parts of the world along with us style culture war in polarize asian over issues relating to gender and sexuality. The aussie the little are noted. That in two thousand and five plan for aids relief in africa promoted by the george w bush administration reserve two-thirds of his hiv prevention funds for abstinence and fidelity campaigns which was strongly supported by religious conservatives bush funds spent about one point four billion dollars programs. An africa is any part of this anti-gay crusade the articles and eighteen since two thousand eight. Us christian groups of spent more than two hundred nine hundred million dollars outside the us across several continents. There is also a great deal similar happening in europe. Some of the most concerning of which set out in a leaked document called restoring the natural order an agenda europe. The european parliamentary for among population and development has described the plans in restoring the natural order as the planned destin workings and deliberate strategy of europe's anti choice movement which is driven by religious dogma and often has the fingerprints of the vatican it paints a picture of a movement which would force women to carry unwanted pregnancies restrict access to contraception designed. Who can marry decide. You can call themselves family. Those behind this agenda her attempting to push their personal beliefs onto others enshrine into law religious beliefs that violate human rights. Another concern is poland's foundation on. Do your knees institute for legal culture which the epf describes as an extremist religious organization and in the most dacian potentially far-reaching development. Italy is now pushing for the vatican to have a permanent road in you and health tokes other this is being resisted. This would bring the threat of church doctrine. Influencing the decision making body of the world health organization that would be detrimental to sexual and reproductive rights worldwide caroline hickson regional director of the international planned. Parenthood federation has warned that strengthening the catholic church is conservative influence in this unique and vital arena for international collaboration on public. Health could spell disaster for women's reproductive health and rights anyone who cares about upholding. Human rights should be concerned. Many decades after former colonies declared independence laws which persecu- gay people and severely restrict freedom expression and women's rights continued to cause widespread misery. Meanwhile rather than being in retreat religious conservatives to seeking opportunities to push draconian restrictions across new pulse of the globe i named both casey's groups who wished to impose religious dogma on others are introducing around coding series violations of human rights and humanitarian law in response to the un's kufr evidence. The national secular society is edged to focus on these religiously. Motivated attacks on human rights in this episode was produced by the national secular society all rights the views expressed by contributors do not necessarily representatives at the ns. You can access the sure nights and subscribe intimation for this. And all episodes at secularism dot org dot uk slash podcast. The feedback comments suggestions. Please email podcast at secularism dot org dot uk if you enjoyed this episode. Please subscribed and lisa positive review wherever you can. Thanks for listening. And i hope you can join us next time.

audio fork africa axelsson national secular society us santi informa george w bush administration india european parliamentary for amo united nations keith komo europe bangladesh pakistan un
NPR News: 08-20-2021 7PM ET

NPR News Now

04:40 min | Last month

NPR News: 08-20-2021 7PM ET

"Live from npr news. I'm janine herbs. The pentagon says about twelve thousand people have been flown out of afghanistan since august fourteenth when the taliban overthrew the afghan government at his npr's wade goodwin reports. That pace is expected to accelerate in the coming week. There were some dramatic scenes at the kabul airport. One hundred sixty nine evacuees most if not all americans found themselves just outside the airport wall. Unable to breach the hundreds of desperate afghans between them and the gates american military personnel were dispatched to create a path and escort them into the airport in another case in american marine passed a sick infant over the wall into the airport so the child could be taken to a norwegian medical facility treated and eventually return to its father after the twenty year. War the number of afghan allies who may qualify for resettlement is expected to run into the tens of thousands wade goodwin. Npr news the white house says president biden will nominate nicholas burns to be the new. Us ambassador to china burns has deep experience in diplomacy. He worked in the foreign service for nearly thirty years before retiring in two thousand eight. But as npr's john rich reports his exposure to china has been limited nicholas burns has been middle east and europe focused for most of his career. He had early postings in cairo and jerusalem then he worked on the national security council during the collapse of the soviet union and its aftermath. He was a state department spokesman in the late. Nineteen nineties and then game some experience as an ambassador to greece and the nato during the final years of the george w bush administration burns was under secretary of state for political affairs. A bio released by the white house says in that role he worked with china. On issues including afghanistan north korea and iran his nomination will be subject to senate confirmation so far biden has only had one of his picks approved far fewer than his immediate predecessors. John rich npr news as the more contagious delta variants spreads around the country. San francisco has become the first major. Us city to require approve of full. Cova nineteen vaccination for many outdoor setting indoor settings rather from member station k. q. e. d. in san francisco keith. Ms gucci has more. The rule applies to restaurants bars. Entertainment venues in gyms but it does not apply to people grabbing takeout from eating establishments customers will have to show either their paper vaccine card. From the cdc a clear photo of that paper card a digital vaccination record from the state department of public health or verification from an approved app while the requirement is now in effect businesses have until mid october to verify employees vaccination status for npr news. I'm keith mizuguchi in san francisco and you're listening to npr news. Us naval academy has expelled eighteen midshipmen and sanctioned another eighty two after an investigation into cheating on an online physics final exam. The online tests forbid the use of outside sources including other websites but officials say some students used those outside sources eighty two midshipmen who were sanctioned. Were found to a violated. The academy's honor concept and are now undergoing a five-month honored remediation program. Crude oil prices have been dropping for seven straight days right now. The global benchmark crude is at just over sixty five dollars a barrel. That's down ten dollars from just a few weeks ago as npr's community domino ski reports concerns over the delta variant of the corona virus. Play a big role for most of this year. Oil prices went up and up as economies reopened cars needed. Gas planes needed jet fuel. The world's oil supply just wasn't keeping pace but now things look different. The delta variant is raising concerns that we aren't as close as we'd hoped to the end of the pandemic and the dollar is very strong which always pushes oil prices down. Average gasoline prices dropped by a penny this week. Demand will keep slowing. As summer driving season ends so analysts expect prices to drop further especially is crude stays cheaper camilo domino ascii. Npr news in on wall street by the closing bell. The dow was up two hundred twenty five points. That's up six tenths of a percent. The nasdaq gained one point. One percent gaining one hundred and seventy two points the s&p five hundred thirty five. This is npr.

wade goodwin npr news nicholas burns janine herbs afghan government kabul airport Npr news npr John rich president biden george w bush administration china afghanistan white house Us city Ms gucci pentagon taliban department of public health national security council
#101 The Evidence Keeps Piling up: Lockdowns Dont Work

Verum Tota: The Whole Truth

10:01 min | 1 year ago

#101 The Evidence Keeps Piling up: Lockdowns Dont Work

"You can't handle the truth. The toll lockdowns have taken on human life and human rights has been incalculable increases in child abuse suicide, and even heart attacks. All appear to be a feature of mandatory stay at home orders issued by politicians who now ruled by decree without any legislative or democratic due process, and then of course, there is the economic toll on. Employment which will feed negative impacts into the longer term. The economic burden has fallen the most on the young and on working class families whose earners are least able to work from home. These measures also have made a mockery of basic human rights while essentially expropriating private property mom and pop business owners were told to shut their doors indefinitely or face arrest the. Unemployed were told it was now illegal to work for a living if their careers were deemed non-essential police officers have beaten citizens for not social distancing while mothers have been manhandled by cops for attempting to use playground equipment. This was all done because some politicians and bureaucrats who were in no danger of losing their large paychecks. decided it was a great idea to. Carry out a bizarre and risky experiment forcing large swaths of the population to stay at home in the name of preventing the spread of disease an experiment concocted by governments indeed, politicians have long dreamed of forcing people into isolation in mass, but this was most recently revived during the George W Bush administration has the New York Times reported in April fourteen years ago. To federal government doctors, Richard Hatchet, and Carter Maker met with a colleague Burger joint in suburban Washington for a final review of a proposal, they knew would be treated like a Pinata telling, Americans to stay home from work and school the next time the country was hit by a deadly pandemic doctors hatchet and Mecca were proposing that Americans in some places might. Have to turn back to an approach self-isolation first widely employed in the Middle Ages how that idea born out of a request by President George W. Bush to ensure the nation was better prepared for the next contagious disease outbreak became the heart of the national playbook for responding to a pandemic is one of the untold stories of the coronavirus crisis, the concept of. Social distancing is now intimately familiar to almost everyone, but is it I made its way through the federal bureaucracy in two thousand, six, two, thousand, seven it was viewed as impractical unnecessary and politically infeasible lockdowns don't work and why was it considered impractical and unnecessary? There is more than one reason but one major reason is that lockdowns have never been shown to be. Particularly effective and this lack of success in containment must also be weighed with the very real costs of forced isolation. This was explained in a two thousand, six paper in Biosecurity and bioterrorism called Disease Mitigation Measures in the control of pandemic influenza. By Thomas, v INGLES BE JENNIFER BE nozoe Tarot tool and d a Henderson the authors conclude there are no historical observations. Or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza a World Health Organization who writing group after reviewing the literature and considering contemporary international experience concluded that forced isolation and quarantine are ineffective and impractical despite this recommendation by experts mandatory large scale quarantine continues to be considered. As an option by some authorities and government officials, the interest in quarantine reflect the views and conditions prevalent more than fifty years ago when much less was known about the epidemiology of infectious diseases and when there was far less international and domestic travel in a less densely populated world, it is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half century when large scale quarantine. Has Been effectively used in the control of any disease. The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme forced confinement of sick people with the well complete restriction of movement of large populations difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone that this mitigation measures should be eliminated from serious consideration not surprisingly then it's now becoming apparent that. lockdowns don't work when actually tried earlier this month for example, Donald Tusk noted in the Wall Street Journal measuring from the start of the year to each state's point of maximum lockdown which range from April five to April eighteen. It turns out that lockdown correlated with a greater spread of the virus states with longer stricter lockdowns also had larger cova outbreaks the five. Places with the harshest lockdowns the District of Columbia new. York. Michigan New Jersey and Massachusetts had the heaviest caseloads basically lufkin searched for a clear correlation between lockdowns and better health outcomes in relation to covid nineteen, he found none he continues it could be that strict lockdowns were imposed as a response to already severe outbreaks but the surprising negative correlation while statistically. Weak persists even when excluding states with the heaviest caseloads and it makes no difference. If the analysis includes other potential explanatory factors such as population density, age ethnicity prevalence of nursing homes, general health, or temperature. The only factor that seems to make a demonstrable difference the intensity of mass transit us we're in the experiment a second time to observe the effects on case. Loads of the reopening that began in mid April we use the same methodology, but started from each state's peak of lockdown and extended to July thirty one confirming the first experiment. There was a tendency though fairly weak for states that opened up the most to have the lightest caseloads the states that had the big summer flare ups in the so-called sunbelt second wave. Arizona California Florida, and Texas, are by no means the most opened up politicized headlines notwithstanding there's no escaping the evidence that at minimum heavy lockdowns were no more effective than light ones and that opening up a lot was no more harmful than opening up a little. So where's the science that would justify the heavy lockdowns? Many public health officials are still demanding the. Most, recent of many studies of the sort, a July study published by The Lancet concluded the authors identified a negative association between the number of days to any lockdown and the total reported cases per million where a longer time prior to implementation of any lockdown was associated with a lower number of detected cases per million in April. T. J. Rogers looked at a simple one variable correlation of deaths per million in days to shut down and found that the correlation coefficient was five point five percent. So low that the engineers I used to employ would have summarized. It has no correlation and moved on to find the real cause of the problem the trendline slope downward states that delayed more tended to have lower death rates but that's also a meaningless result due to the low correlation coefficient inmate the lane he had Bloomberg showed there's little correlation between the severity of nations restrictions, and whether it managed to curb excess fatalities and in August one study also published by The Lancet the authors concluded. Rapid border closures full lockdowns and widespread testing were not associated with covid nineteen mortality per million people. A June study published in advance by Stephan, Hamburg and Kristof covernor found that the data strongly suggests that the UK lockdown was both superfluous. It did not prevent an otherwise explosive behavior of the spread of the coronavirus and ineffective. It did not slow down the death growth rate visibly in fact, the overall trend of infection and death appears to be remarkably similar across many jurisdictions regardless of what non. Pharmaceutical interventions NPR's are taken by policymakers in a paper published with the National Bureau of Economic Research and be our authors Andrew Adkison et al found that covid nineteen deaths followed a similar pattern virtually everywhere in the world and that failing to account for this familiar pattern risks overstating the importance of policy mandated NPR's for shaping the progression of the steadily pandemic along these lines. Simon would examine the progression of the disease in the United Kingdom and in Sweden and found that the data strongly suggests that. The decline infections in England and Wales began before full lockdown and that community infections unlike deaths were probably the low level. Well, before lockdown was eased furthermore such a scenario would be consistent with the infection profile in Sweden, which began its decline in fatal infections shortly after the UK but did so on the basis of measures, well, short of full lockdown is the pro lockdown data good enough to justify massive human rights violations extraordinary measures require extraordinary evidence and the burden of proof is on those. who seek to use the coercive power of the state to force people into their homes, cripple the economy and abolished countless basic freedoms for the duration have the advocates for lockdowns made their case. It's hard to see how they have for one advocates for lockdowns need to present obvious and overwhelming evidence that lockdowns bring big benefits far in excess of the no lockdown approach they have not done. So Moreover, they have not shown the lack of lockdowns is anywhere near as dangerous as they have claimed. In the name of pushing lockdowns to begin with, we can already see what the no lockdown scenario looks like. It looks like Sweden and that's a better outcome than many pro lockdown regimes can claim governments are none the less likely to continue claiming there lockdowns worked in ancient days a witch doctor might perform a rain dance on Tuesday and claim credit. When it rained on Wednesday. lockdowns are increasingly looking like the modern equivalent of a rain dance our thoughts I live in Idaho, and there hasn't. been a crazy lockdown scenario here we have been lucky in many ways, but the area in which I live as a stone's throw away from Washington state and the insanity fear and outright lies coming from there is palpable having this two sighted view has shown me a lot about how and why this all is actually happening as more and more prominent doctors come forward and tell the whole truth. This whole scam Democ will hopefully be put away as fast as it was pulled out there m Toda.

Sweden United Kingdom pandemic influenza President George W. Bush World Health Organization The Lancet NPR Donald Tusk District of Columbia George W Bush administration York New York Times Idaho Richard Hatchet Wall Street Journal INGLES Washington m Toda
Jon Jarvis: Theyre calling it the sh*tdown

Go West, Young Podcast

31:56 min | 2 years ago

Jon Jarvis: Theyre calling it the sh*tdown

"On a warm January day in the Rockies. This is go west young podcast your show about park's policy and this week. Sadly poop, I'm Aaron Weiss at the center for western priorities in Denver, welcome to twenty nineteen the federal government may or may not join you at a later date. We are talking about the government shutdown this week, and what it means for our public lands. The former head of the National Park Service. Jonathan Jarvis will be here in just a minute to walk us through what happened during the last big shutdown back in twenty thirteen. Plus, we will give you something to to on in our trip back in western history. How Colorado's most famous cannibal was arrested escaped avoided hanging and eventually walked free one hundred eighteen years ago this week, but first let's catch up on the news on his way out the door. Now, former interior secretary Ryan Zinke ordered that national parks keep their gates open. Even though visitor centers would be. Closed and most park Steph furloughed during this government shutdown. There has been sadly, predictable piles of trash even human excrement across the national park system. Tourists have been seen harassing elephants seals point race nest. National seashore, there are empty champagne bottles left on the ground at Joshua tree. After new years. Washington Post says at least seven people have died at national parks since the shutdown began, including a man at Yosemite who illegally brought his dog on a trail, and then fell now enter David Bernhardt, the acting interior secretary as of last week Bernhardt could've admitted that Zinke plan was a mistake and closed the gates for the safety of both parks and visitors. Instead, he doubled down ordering parks to dip into a pot of money from entrance fees to pick up the trash use that money to bring some park staff back to work. The only problem here is that probably illegal entrance. Fees by law are supposed to pay for enhanced visitor services, not basic park operations, but burn hearts memo. According to the hill orders park superintendents to drain those accounts entirely in order to keep the gates open. Now, Betty McCollum, the incoming chairwoman of the appropriations subcommittee that oversees interior is promising oversight of burn hearts plan as rogue Rehovot, the new chairman of the house, natural resources committee, and the crazy thing through all of this is that it didn't have to be this way. The last time government shutdown for an extended period was in twenty thirteen back then Jonathan Jarvis was the head of the National Park Service. He before that he had spent more than thirty years in the park service as a civil servant. He is. Now, the head of the institute for parks people and biodiversity at UC Berkeley, John Jarvis, welcome to the podcast. Thanks great to be here. First of all, what's your take on the shutdown, and what's? Opening the park service right now. Well without attribution. I've heard from good sources inside the park service that they're calling this the ship down rather than the shutdown. Because it's it's such a mass in the parks of with the parks being still open, and but no staff on. So it's a significant departure from what we did in two thousand thirteen with the closure of the parks when congress did not pass appropriation that I can go into detail on them. Please. Do I wonder what those deliberations were like was there talkback than of keeping the park's open in what could that have looked like? So we looked back as the shutdown was looming. And they are late summer of two thousand thirteen as we were coming upon the end of the fiscal year end of September. And it sort of began to look like we may be going into a shutdown. We look back historically. And of course, there was a shutdown in nineteen ninety five when President Clinton and. Newt Gingrich were fighting out and the government shutdown at the same time showdown over December ninety five and the parks at that time also closed across the system. So there was already a significant precedent at in two thousand thirteen you know, I had a team at the department of interior. We are working with the secretary Sally jewel. Recently, come on as the new secretary for the second term of Obama administration. And we did sit around the table. We had lots of deliberations about sort of what to do. And we made the decision that the right thing to do the legal thing to do the thing that would ensure we were meeting our mandate of protecting the national parks unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations, and providing for public safety in that the vast majority of our employees are going to be furloughed was to close the parks. Now, we recognize that would be a significant impact to gateway communities to our business partnerships and to the visitors that were coming to a, you know, experience the parks was October. Remember fall is the fall colors in New England. And it's Columbus Day weekend. Very very high visitation. Period little different than now on credibly important. And we knew they were going to be consequences. But we felt that the absolute right thing to do for resource. And for the visitor was to just close down entirely for the shutdown and and deal with that until the congress would find the passing appropes was that at the time in any way, a political decision. Was there pressure from the White House or anywhere else to make the shutdown more painful in order to to make the Republicans owners or something like that? Absolutely not the politics of didn't enter into the discussion whatsoever. And frankly, the White House wasn't involved in the decision. I mean, they were informed. But this was a decision that we made at the department of interior in consultation with our solicitors. But there was no political overtones to this. There were political consequences, of course. But it was not designed in any way, shape or form to to sort of a serve political agenda. It was done for the protection of the parks in the protection of public. So when you look at that decision versus where the parks are now, and that calculus that decision making process were the worst case scenario the bad scenarios that you'd laid out then are those coming to fruition now. Yes. Absolutely. I mean, we we certainly worried about that. If we had left the park's open that there would be these kinds of consequences in the thing that a lot of people don't really understand about national parks is that. The national park service's first of all as a somewhat unique park services in operational agency the money that congress appropriates goes directly out to the field in it's fairly small overhead organization small regional offices small office in Washington. The vast majority of the appropriation goes to the field, and that Hayes the salaries of Rangers, maintenance employees interpreters pays the utility bills halls the trash and cleaned the toilets and in pace rescues, and you know, the equipment necessary. So that the public but three hundred plus million people that come each year can have a safe and enjoyable and memorable experience in do. So in such a manner that the resort were not harmed. And that is you know that is a mission. That's the mission of the National Park Service. And these are not just sort. This. We were accused of open Air Resources. These are highly sensitive best places in the nation, and they require professional staff in order to ensure that they're protected in the public is also protected in when you go to a national park. The first person you see is the person at the gate and person greets you hands. You a packet of information that tells you in a wear the the trails that are open, and where they're hazardous conditions in there might be bear activity with the weather is going to be that day, and what you should be prepared for in hap- can have good exhibit. And it always has its, you know, set of warnings about, you know, not walk on these areas than what sensitive and all of that acts not happening right now, if you want you got that information in you should get to go to the visitor center in you, get more. Information you'd think up guidebook talked to ranger, and you sort of the latest so that you can have a fantastic experience in people from all over the world. Come to do that you take away all of that. The all of that stamp. And you get exactly what we're seeing today is trash piling up people. Biking off trail off road vehicle use metal detecting in the civil war battlefields people taking their dogs using drones owner, you know, this is not everybody, you know, the I would suggest that the vast majority of public are are respectful in well behaved. But there's always going to be a percentage that are gonna take advantage of the situation. And or do it without a cheer lack of experience lack of knowledge. And and that can have what I worry about is some long term consequences too. We'll get back to the consequences and the clean up in a second. But since we're talking about funding, and this notion of using entrance fees in I only one hundred seventeen of the more than four hundred national park units even collect entrance fees, but how big are these entrance fee funds? What difference could they potentially make in number two? Do you agree with Betty mccullum's assessment that this is probably illegal move by acting secretary Bernhardt? So explain a little bit just from a basic on the program. So as you said about hundred seventeen parks collect entrance fees, also camping fees, and there are special use fees that are collected. Roughly two hundred twenty million dollars a year are collected in across the system under the current law that allows the park service to collect fees. Eighty percent of the collected fees are retained at the collecting park. In twenty percent of the collected fees are pooled and brought back to Washington and used in the non collecting parks. The parks do not collect fees for variety of reasons. Sometimes they're great smoky mountains it's prohibited. By state law of some parts have too many entrances or visitation is so low that it's not worth it to to staff people to collect the fees. And the the funds are what we call no year funds. So they're non appropriated funds. They reside in a treasury account that are available till extended and under the law that was passed it merely used for certain things, and our legal opinion that we had always operated under was that they are for enhancement of the visitor experience or the resource or the facilities not for operations for basic operations. The regular annual creation is for basic operations in the fee program is to improve the facility inexperienced for the public in. We demonstrate part of it is to ensure that the public feels good about paying a fee on top of paying their taxes or the national parks and ANSA we demonstrate through cynegetic information to say your feet hours at work in it is approved this trail. Or fix this wayside exhibits, or, you know, helped some area get rededicated or or a particularly address the maintenance backlog. So we put a priority. Sixty percent of the revenue was meeting use on on our maintenance backlog. Let me put also in perspective. So the the operating budget of the National Park Service annually is right around three billion. That's what a typical annual appropriation to the national park service's. And so you're talking about roughly two hundred million. I don't know what's in the current account. Because some of it is obligated in what bay directed the parks to do is to spend your nominated balances. Now that money is supposed to be being used in his unsure is scheduled in planned for projects. Not like, it's a a slush fund account. It is land out years in advance or projects like creating acceptability to a trail for folks that have disabilities or new putting in braille under exhibits, or you know, fixing a roof on an older building. And now will they told the park to do is to spend that money down to zero. So here's the portent point is it's a double hit because we're also during this period, not collecting fees in so. On a normal. It's a parks or open. We would be collecting service wide somewhere around four hundred thousand dollars a day. So you're not only not collecting into the FIA count. You're you're you're eating your seat or burning through a fiscal capacity that should be utilized to fix the parks. You know, after they reopened know they'll be they'll be needing these funds than yet. You're gonna wind up using them up in the end, they will also be used disproportionately because eighty percent named the feet collecting park in only twenty percent is available for the non p parks. So it's going to be even more chaos out there about which parks have reopened with the money, and which ones have not robbing Peter to pay Paul, basically. Yeah. And in terms of legality. I'm not a lawyer. So I I'm not gonna not gonna pine on whether it's legal or not I would say that when we were doing it. We we looked at fees. We said that's not appropriate in. It's not really legal either. It's a it's essentially in our view violation of both the intent of the feed legislation and probational all from your understanding talking to folks, obviously, not expecting to name names here, but what will the cleanup process, look like in some of these parks, and do we even have a sense of how bad the damage is going to be it's going to be weeks of cleanup or months of years worth of damage will independence on you know, what we're talking about. I think in terms of trash and toilets. You know, you're talking probably a couple of weeks to gather it all up. Now, you know what happens? This is not a municipal, but cleanup. This is a this is a park. So while life will have gotten into it and spread it around. You know, there's there is a concern about a creating habituated while knife gigli. Bears that have Nelson they have access to to trash and human food that can have all kinds of cascading effects that could take a significant amount of time. If there are people driving off the road or trampling resources. Letting their dogs run a leash in exposing wildlife to to potential diseases those have long term effects that take a long time to to all. This is our first show since David Bernhardt became acting secretary. I wanna go back since you were a park superintendent and a regional director prior to becoming park service director. So you are a civil servant last time. David Bernhardt was at interior at that time as solicitor did you ever cross paths with him during your time there? Yes. What was your take? I missed Bernard is is a very smart accomplished. And intentional individual that whose agenda is about energy development, and essentially a transfer of the of the public state to private hands in. He I believe he believes that very very deeply. That's the mission that he carries the into department of interior. See you served under Republican Democratic administrations. One of the things that I keep trying to figure out under the Trump administration and previously with Ryan Zinke as secretary worth things or are things really that different this time around compared to the George W Bush administration or even the Reagan administration going as far back as James watt are things actually different this time around. I think they are different of there's definitely been a trend. It's really interesting to me. Like, you said I've served. For forty years in the National Park Service served lawn presidents allow secretaries while directors. There has definitely been a change in the Republican party in terms of their view of of conservation parks and public lands. There were many many really wonderful members of congress on the Republican party committee chairman in the Senate and the house and then in the local points in the department of interior that have been great supporters of conservation. Always take a little bit different tack about it. We used to say that the Republicans came in. It was more about bricks and mortar Marceca's facilities and the like. And then when the the dams would come in. It was more about bation amount more about public access, but there was never related sort of. Huge pendulum swings that we're seeing now and what this began to see. I think frankly, I mean, you saw briefly with Jim watt who played out fairly quickly. But in the in the George W Bush administration, there was there was sort of a new group that that came in who really saw the public lands as something that should be privatized. Should be converted into development. Why aren't they saw the park service as a bit of a thorn in their side? Here was a popular agency with a conservation mission bat could rally constituency around initially you and they learned fairly quickly that that you couldn't really sort of dismantle the National Park Service. You could sort of ignore them into push them side, not invite them to the meetings, but they didn't really go after the service, and I think in this growl that has come in some of them came from that past administration including day Bernhardt. I think they're the decided they're gonna take the park service apart. And and clearly they're already doing that with the Beland official Wallich, and they already done that with the four service, and which is extraordinarily. Sad and and disconcerting in those are sister agencies. Do not have the core constituency. The park service has the high visibility. So there little bit easier to manipulate than the park service. But I see in this particular group, a a real concerted effort, you know, as you know, they moved all the senior executive round forcing people out like Dan, wearing Chris Leonard, and in others out of these senior jobs the revised policy rescinded, you know, our our deal. One hundred will now you see them working the parks to use fees to operate. I think it's all part about a larger strategy in its, but steeply concerning that directors order one hundred was the climate change order, correct? That's correct. So Elizabeth Shogren with reveal center for investigative reporting is done some stellar reporting on attempts by this administration to interfere with studies on climate change affecting national parks. Do you think government scientists need more protection from political interferences that something you'd like to see the incoming congress take on? Absolutely. Yes. I mean, our scientists our government scientists and not just our service, but USGS no have all of these. I mean, they provide really really vital work that often not very flashy. But they're they're they're out there every day, helping us understand the environment. Our water year the drought index, you know, what's going on with wildlife diseases. You know, how the parks are faring in terms of its overall environment in in, you know, we were future of these places has got to be based on good science and not science that is driven by some sort of political agenda. And clearly this particular administration has is an anti science organization. They are they're suppressing science. They are demanding that reports be the ended rewritten to take out things like the word anthropogenic. Elizabeth's abroad a lot of that out in her really great reporting. But it's in there, the forcing good scientists to not publish or not participate in conferences where they would be sharing this information. And I I think it's gonna have long-term consequences than it has a it it it causes young. Scientists did not want to work for the government. And I think that that's tragic as well. You mentioned that park service employees are referring to this as the shit down. You're obviously still in touch with with folks in the service. What's morale like these days, and for folks inside the park service who are listening to this looking to you perhaps for for guidance or message, do you have a message to to them right now? Will I think that they need to remember that the American people to deeply appreciate their their their public service? I think that's why you're seeing this kind of coverage that you're providing and Washington Post and the guardian I got a call from that for the London Times this morning and. There are millions and millions of people out there and people that come up to me that know me at the university. I just had lunch with a whole group of folks that we spent a lunch talking about the situation that deeply deeply love the national parks. And I even got a note from arranger in Scotland a yesterday that I know in was deeply concerned about what's going on over here. So I think that our ploys need to know that they're still a lot of people out here that that are rooting for them and are concerned about them. And worried about them and hope that this, you know, somehow will shake it self out in soon in the parks can get back to back to doing their good work. We'll leave it there. Jonathan Jarvis was the director of the National Park Service for the entire length of the Obama administration capping more than three decades of public service. He now leads the institute for parks people and bio-diversity at UC, Berkeley, John Jarvis. Thank you so much for taking the time today. Thank your care. Let's look back this week in western history. New Mexico became a state this week in nineteen twelve and in Colorado. The notorious cannibal Alford Packer was released from prison in nineteen a one c back in eighteen seventy four Packer and five other men were trying to get from what's now Montrose, Colorado to gold prospects in Breckenridge. They left in February middle winter. And in April only Packer emerged at a government cattle camp Packer. I said that his group got caught in the blizzard. He claimed he set up camp. The others went in search of food, but never returned. But after that, he became a big spender in the saloon in the general store, he was taken in for questioning in his first confession Packer claimed that one of the men had died and the other five having run out of food aid him over the following days. He said two others died and were eaten and then he claimed that one of the survivors. Shannon bell killed the only other room. Remaining survivor Packer admitted that point that he killed Shannon, bell and took a large piece of his remains along as food. He agreed to take a party along to the campsite where physical evidence would either confirm or contradict his account that did not go. So well Packer claimed he got lost. He rushed a constable with a knife and got thrown in jail. And then he escaped from that jail. Nine years later Packer was found living under an alias and Cheyenne Wyoming this time he made a second confession saying that instead of the men gradually killing an eating each other. It was fan in bell who killed everyone else. While Packer was out. Scouting then Packer shot bell. When he came back after a one week trial Packer was found guilty and sentenced to hang. But that verdict was reversed by the Colorado supreme court and in the second trial Packer was convicted of five counts of manslaughter and sentenced to forty years. It was at the time the longest prison sentence ever handed down in US history. After serving seventeen years of that sentence. The Denver post published a series of articles editorials questioning that guilty verdict. The governor granted Packer parole on January seventh nineteen zero one Packers life after that was quiet. He went to work as a security guard at the post. He lived quiet life in Littleton. Well, liked by his neighbors. Alfred Packer was reportedly vegetarian when he died in nineteen oh seven and his story went on to become a Colorado legend. Mom out in Hungary to the call. God was back. They trusted him too long. Forest. Character was weak and his appetite was strong. They called him. The. Just doesn't pay anything. But government inspected be. That's folks with the ballot of Alfred Packer. There was a movie in nineteen eighty that got his name wrong. Calling him. Alfred not Alford and in nineteen Ninety-three. Trey Parker and Matt stone the creators of south park made a spoof called cannibal the musical. Survival the strongest backer. Maybe it's for the best. I mean now we have enough meat to last us for weeks. Hell we make it till summer assert mysterious. Parker and stone were students at the university of Colorado. They might have taken their inspiration from the cafeteria there. The Elford g Packer restaurant and grill where you can still order from the Elkana ball Mexican food menu. So what really happened in that winter of eighteen seventy four we will probably never know for sure, but for index studies and an account from civil war veteran who visited the crime scene suggests that Parker's second confession was the accurate. One, shannon. Bell was in fact, shot twice the others all killed by a hatchet. In other words, it may truly have been self defense. Followed by cannibalism, all of it. Leading to Colorado's most notorious parolee one hundred eighteen years ago this week in western history. That's it for this episode of go west young podcast. Thanks again to Jonathan Jarvis for his insights on the National Park Service and the government shutdown. We will of course, keep tabs on what's happening on your public lands during the sutdown and also some more stunts administration just tried to pull here at the end of twenty eight teen please drop us a line. With your thoughts on the podcast. What topics you'd like us to cover or guests, dude like to here on the show this year podcast, it western priorities dot org is where to send your Email or I am a Weiss on Twitter on behalf of all of us at the center for western priorities. I'm Aaron Weiss. Thanks realistic. Make Lamey doesn't kill that. He only their high. That hat six Kratz until he did arrive. Only one lives on today. He ate the other.

National Park Service Alford Packer secretary David Bernhardt Colorado Jonathan Jarvis Alfred Packer congress director Ryan Zinke Shannon bell Aaron Weiss Washington Post White House Washington National Park Service John Jarvis Shannon George W Bush administration
Can We Rein in the Power of the Presidency After Trump?

TIME's Top Stories

09:55 min | 3 months ago

Can We Rein in the Power of the Presidency After Trump?

"Brought to you by american express business. American express offers a line of cards to help take your business further because with needs like yours. You need a card designed for business. Can we rain in the power of the presidency. After trump by iraq lichtblau there are at least eighty one million or so americans who would like to forget all about donald trump and his presidency late night. television host. Stephen colbert has stopped saying his name. Altogether referring to him simply as the former president but the ongoing stream of criminal charges arising from the january sixth riot that the capital have made it all but impossible to forget trump and the violence. He inspired that day with his lies about winning the election trump himself even wild kept off. Facebook and twitter has refused to go away quietly teasing supporters at a rally last weekend with the prospect of another white house bid and twenty twenty four and exerting his influence over gop leaders even if we could forget him though it's important for the country to remember trump if only to deter the kind of blatant power-grabs that he attempted an office and to rein in the powers of the presidency and his wake no matter who sits in the white house when the watergate scandal forced president richard nixon to resign in nineteen seventy four. Many americans didn't want to think much about nixon anymore. Either but his departure ushered in a slew of critical new federal laws from congress to restrict the bloated power of the presidency through limits in campaign finance ethics wiretapping and surveillance operations or powers and more trump's imperial hubris which rivaled only nixon's in the view of many historians now demands its own wave of corrective measures. Only then can congress hope to deter another president from wielding the levers of power with such abandon whether it involves a commander in chief lining his own family's pockets hiding his taxes firing government watchdogs investigating his administration or trying to reverse the results of an election. A capitol hill source tells me that democratic leaders in the house have been working on a new plan to limit presidential powers and response to trump's abuses. That plan could be rolled out in the coming weeks. The proposal would build on a series of reforms first proposed by democratic leaders. Last september to restrict the president's authority to accept personal payments from foreign governments issue unlimited pardons. Get rid of inspector general's without calls or take other controversial steps that trump employed as president. That initial plan came out six weeks before the election. A lot has changed since then. Trump was voted out of office. The democrats took control of the senate along with the house and the january sixth the rioting at the capitol made painfully clear. The dangers posed by an unchecked president determined to undermine election with senate republicans having blocked the creation of january sixth commission. It doesn't bode well. For any further attempts at holding trump to account for his abuses the new proposal. The democrats are working on the likely feature steps aimed at limiting president's power to interfere with some election results. Congress is given the power under the constitution to regulate federal elections and it could for instance expressly prohibit a future president from using the power of the office to pressure election officials to turn the validated results of a federal election. Federal law already authorizes criminal prosecution of any official who knowingly and willfully deprives defrauds or attempts to deprive state voters of a fair and impartial election. And even more explicit ban on a president waging pressure campaigns to undermine the work of election officials would help showed the integrity of the electoral system from internal attack. Few would have thought that was necessary before trump took the extraordinary steps of calling election officials directly in georgia to urge them to find the votes to change the state election results and summoning michigan officials to the white house after the state had already certified. It's results but the common thread running through trump's presidency was always his lust for power as trump himself famously declared multiple times. In fact i have the right to do. Whatever i want is president. It wasn't true of course but trump acted as if it was which is why he became the only president in history impeached twice first for pressuring ukraine to dig up dirt on then candidate joe biden and then for inside in the capital riot in an effort to reclaim the power of the electorate had taken from him and those were just the worst of the abuses most presidents in modern history of salt to stretch the limits of executive power at one time or another. But none did so. As frequently as trump or in ways so nakedly intended to benefit his own self interest and skirting the laws and norms of presidential power. Trump acted in ways that make all of the problems that were on the radar screen before much. Much much worse said jack l. goldsmith. A senior justice department lawyer in the george w bush administration who co authored book with bob. Bauer the white house. Counsel under president obama called after trump reconstructing the presidency trump built his presidency on shattering washington norms and his behavior exposed holes in the rule of law that we didn't know existed trump rightly denounced as an authoritarian in many quarters. Even before his attempts to inspire a violent insurrection. Succeeded if nothing else in muddying the waters as to what a president was truly allowed to do in a nation of laws. The courts were willing to intervene. Only sporadically as federal judges did in the initial versions of trump's so-called muslim ban rejecting them as overreaching and unconstitutional. That leaves the challenge up to congress as we saw after nixon's fall. Congress has the clear legal power under our system of checks and balances to rein in the powers of the presidency run amok and seek to curb future abuses it could for instance make explicit. What at least before. Trump was commonly understood to be a ban on a federal candidate seeking anything of value in a campaign from a foreign power as trump did and welcoming dirt on his political opponents from russia china and ukraine. It could require presidential candidates to make their tax returns public as part of long standing financial disclosure requirements for federal officials and it could enact a clear ban on presidents profiting off payments from foreign payments to their properties under the emoluments clause an issue. The supreme court unfortunately left unanswered at its most ambitious. Congress could even try to legislate an answer to one of the biggest legal obstacles that special counsel robert s muller faced in his russia investigation. The belief that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime. Muller's team found significant evidence that trump repeatedly obstructed the probe but they reached no conclusion about whether trump broke the law because of a prior legal opinion at the justice department. Finding that criminal charges against a sitting president would unconstitutionally undermine his ability to do his job. That opinion has never been tested in court and the constitution itself is silent. A willing congress could remedy that through a narrow statute declaring that a sitting president can in fact be charged with a crime for relevant offenses during his time in office restrictions. On the presidential authority would likely face legal challenges whether democrats have the political will end muscle to impose new limits on the presidency now in the bitterly polarized climate. That trump left behind is still unknown. But the idea of raining and presidential excesses should in theory be a bipartisan. 'cause with the balance of power now flipped in washington some republicans have already accused president biden of overstepping his presidential authority through a flurry of orders and through the air strike that he ordered in syria in february a military step that he took like trump and other presidents before them without congressional office supporters of the let. Sleeping dogs lie. Mantra might well disagree with the idea of revisiting. trump's abuses after all with trump. Gone at least for now. Does the country really need new checks on presidential authority and another political battle over his legacy. Perhaps as some commentators have predicted america will never see another president like trump so willing to flout long standing legal limits norms after the last four years however. That doesn't seem like a risk. The country can afford to take meet. Lucy bella owner of fancy flowers. Business was slow until lucy received an email wedding date february fourteenth flowers only red roses. Valentine's day the most expensive day for red roses so she used her american express business card which gives her the ability to pay overtime with interest. So she can buy those red roses. Now talk about loving bloom built for business by american express. Don't do business with this story. Features a fictional character from a fictional business terms of law or more american express dot com slash business cards.

trump Congress lichtblau American express nixon white house Trump Stephen colbert donald trump senate richard nixon jack l george w bush administration capitol hill gop ukraine white house iraq justice department twitter
How We Got Here: Key Missteps in Afghanistan

WSJ What's News

12:02 min | Last month

How We Got Here: Key Missteps in Afghanistan

"You let him try violin because you love him and if you love him that much love him enough to make sure he's buckled up an in the back seat find out more at nhtsa dot gov slash the right seat brought to you by the national highway traffic safety administration and the ad council as the taliban takes over afghanistan. President biden defends the us withdrawal. I stand squarely behind my decision. After twenty years. I've learned the hardware that there was never a good time to withdraw. Us forces so how did it come to this. We go over key missteps over the past two decades when the obama administration decided that they wanted to get out. It was already too late to get the concessions from the group that would have been available back in two thousand and five and this is something that the us negotiators today really regret. It's monday august sixteenth. I'm angry for totally for the wall. Street journal this is the pm. Addition of what's news the top headlines and business stories that moved the world today in his first public remarks after the collapse of the afghanistan government president biden acknowledged that the country fell to taliban rule faster than the us had anticipated but amid the ensuing chaos and mounting criticism. He defended his decision to withdraw from the country defending thing the development of the past week reinforced at any new us military involvement afghanistan. Now was the right decision. American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dine in a war that afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves. Critics have accused the biden administration of not taking enough steps to protect the afghan people. Especially those who may now be targeted by the taliban president biden said today that. Us troops are working to evacuate americans and afghans. Who worked for the us will have more on afghanistan. Coming up later in the show in haiti. Emergency teams are rushing to find and treat survivors of saturday's earthquake ahead of a major storm. That's expected to pass through the area overnight. The storm is threatening to bring heavy rainfall and potentially cause flash flooding. The death toll from saturday's earthquake stands at at least one thousand two hundred ninety seven people haiti civil defense agency says thousands more injured and estimates. That thirteen thousand buildings were destroyed. Hundreds of people are missing and in business news. Pfizer and biotech are seeking. Us approval for covert nineteen booster shot for the general public. The companies say they've submitted data to the food and drug administration from a small early stage. Study showing a third dose of their vaccine generated higher levels of antibodies against the original virus. End the beta and delta variant than the original to dose regimen studies show. The vaccine is still highly effective six months after a second dose last week. The fda authorized booster shots for certain people with weakened immune systems and tesla's driver. Assistance program known as autopilot is under investigation by the national highway. Traffic safety administration in a document made public. Today the agency said it had identified eleven crashes since early twenty eighteen in which tesla vehicle that had the system activated struck one or more vehicles involved in an emergency response situation for the crashes under investigation occurred this year. Tesla didn't respond to a request for comment. Shares ended the day down more than four percent coming up on afghanistan. How we got here key missteps across administrations. I'm alex you a host of the reback from there. It's been an extraordinary year for stock markets particularly for companies going public. Ipo stored and they showed no sign of slowing down. But the boom didn't come out of the blue and there was plenty of pain on the roads ipo success. So how do you put a price on innovation. This season on the reebok. We'll find out. We're winding back. The clock on a decade of ipo's from his on facebook to uber and airbnb. The redback is available. Wherever you get podcasts. The fall of afghanistan to taliban rule comes nearly twenty years after the us. I invaded the country in the wake of the nine eleven attacks. The war in afghanistan has spanned four. Us presidents spoke democratic and republican and while the speed at which the taliban has retaken the country has been shopping. It caps two decades of missteps across administrations joining me. Now to explain is reporter jessica. Nadi she covers foreign affairs and national security for the wall street journal. She's also the author of the book. Eagle down the last special forces fighting the forever war about the war in afghanistan. Hi jessica thanks so much for joining me. Thanks for having me so jessica to understand what's happening now. We have to talk about how we got here and there is a lot to cover. But let's start with the initial invasion under the george w bush administration and how the. Us missed early windows to negotiate with the taliban back then absolutely these early windows where what was really critical when the us came in in two thousand and one the taliban were pretty much defeated and they tried to reach a settlement with the afghans. They asked to surrender but this was never accepted because the us was really keen on punishment. They were traumatized by then. September eleven attacks and they weren't willing to negotiate a settlement over the years. There were these missed opportunities right up until the point when the us decided that they wanted to get out and that they wanted to negotiate at this point it was really too late. The taliban had become really strong and their demands where such and it was very difficult for the two sides to come together if you went back to about two thousand and five that's when the insurgency really began to start regrouping and the us had this approach of allying with leaders in afghanistan. Who are already influential. These were former warlords and others. Who had very sketchy human rights records and ended up really causing a lot of anger which drove support for the insurgency. This was the way that the obama administration responded was to send more troops to afghanistan to turn the tide so to speak against the taliban which just created more and more anger amongst the population. And so you had a system in which the insurgency was building up support making them much more difficult to defeat when the obama administration decided that they wanted to get out it was already too late to get the concessions from the group that would have been available back in two thousand and five and this is something that the us negotiators today really regret. Let's talk about the trump administration. President biden has blamed his predecessor for the situation. We are now in pointing to a deal. That trump made with the taliban and for announcing troop withdrawal deadline. How beholden was the baden administration to those actions from his predecessor. How much did trump's actions influence. How the biden administration responded. I mean i think that you have to look at if you're looking for blame and there's a lot of that going around washington at the moment you have to really look back across the administration's certainly during the trump administration the deal that was negotiated. We can the afghan government because they weren't part of the negotiations and the taliban felt very empowered by this. The other factor was that the trump and negotiators. We're not really able to extract any serious concessions from the taliban taliban never agreed to reduce violence against the afghan forces they never agreed to reach finish a settlement with the afghan government so on paper. All the deal really did was give. Us troops safe passage out of the country. However the by the administration certainly did have options they could have used clauses in the deal to prolong the troop deployment. They could have tried to work in a bit. More conditions. Because it was so hazy. But their view was that they didn't want to prolong the war and get caught up in sending more troops and more violence and so they decided to rip the band aid off. This is something that the trump administration was constantly threatening to do but even if we go back even further the obama administration had a plan to fully pull out by twenty sixteen. And i think that too has contributed to how we the african government is because they've been constantly preparing for the us to leave and it doesn't give those behind a lot of confidence in the system and one of the many questions. Circling now is how the us on the world at large was not prepared for the speed with which the taliban has retaken the country. What did we miss in just the past few weeks. I think that everybody who follow people who follow afghanistan closely have been surprised by the speed. I think even the taliban surprised by the speed with which they have retaken the country. What we've seen in the last few weeks is the taliban test. The waters and see what was the us prepared to do to defend the afghans and when they ended up sweeping across multiple provinces in the north and then captured kunduz which is the sixth largest city in a fairly significant prize and the taliban found no resistance no response then tested other cities and quickly the entire country cave to the point that we store over the weekend they surrounded kabul and the capital city basically fell without a shot fired. You saw afghan leaders give statements on the saturday saying they would fight. They had a plan to defend the city. And then the next morning they had all flown out to different parts of the region and jessica. What about us training of afghan forces. Why did that not hold her. Why was that not sufficient here. When one of the main problems was that the us built the army in its own image and so they built a huge force that first of all the afghan government couldn't sustain with the finances that it had and the force was very spread out totally dependent on the us for air support for logistics for intelligence gathering. And so once the us removed these really critical pieces that held it together. The army fell apart without the us to ferry soldiers to different places without them to carry out critical maintenance on aircraft vehicles without them to deliver air support. They just weren't able to and this is just the early days of this playing out right now but already we've seen a lot of criticism of the baden administration here facing significant backlash for how this is currently unfolding. What ultimately do you think this will mean for the biden administration. I think that it's still very much under in play. At the moment for the the priority now is to try and get all americans that need to be evacuated to get them out. They've completed the evacuation of diplomats. But there's still a lot of contractors and other american civilians who desperately want to leave next. They are under a lot of pressure to get out. Afghan siv applicants afghans. Who helped the americans during the war. These interpreters and other people who could be punished by the taliban for their efforts with the us. And so i think once that is complete. Then i think they may have at least done some damage control but given the chaos at the airport. We had multiple people killed in clashes between the us and the taliban when they're not even supposed to be or even trying to fight each other. I think it's really really precarious situation at the moment. How how bad it gets. I think will determine what the fallout is from this. But it's definitely not good. That's wall street journal. Reporter jessica naughty jessica. Thank you so much for joining me today. Thanks for having me and that's news for this monday afternoon. We'll be back tomorrow morning if you like what you hear please. Rate and review us. I'm anne marie for totally for the wall street journal.

taliban afghanistan us obama administration President biden biden administration tesla nhtsa afghan government Street journal biden jessica Traffic safety administration reback haiti earthquake fda ad council george w bush administration
The Relevance of the Nuclear Posture Review

Arms Control Wonk

39:39 min | 3 months ago

The Relevance of the Nuclear Posture Review

"Deterrence failed so let's do the same thing we just didn't work for. You are listening to the arms control. Podcast a podcast on arms control disarmament and non-proliferation jeffrey lewis professor at middlebury institute of international studies at my and the founding publisher of the arms control bunk blog stein. The director of research at the foreign policy research institute. We have a guest. we have junior junior fellow lorestan. Who was at my feet happily watching sesame street but if you hear there she is if you hear a little baby noises in the background. It's because we're still home despite having shots in our arms because our children's still can't get vaccinated. My kids are in school. So my heartbreaks for you. My older is at school although it tomorrow is his final day until we start the summer. It's gonna get even more lively control walk throws you don't have any camps plan july fifth july fifth so we have about a three week window there. I one of my kids is going to sleep away. Camp been tahoe. That sounds like fun. Oh yeah yeah. Yeah i mean we have to get him a covid test the day we take him up and if he fails it he doesn't go and we lose all the money but you know other than that. It's fine any as which is obviously something that you want to avoid more than this lipoic. Acid oh the. I'm actually worried that the test has a very high false positive rate. We've we have a friend. Who's like like ed like a an infectious disease specialist. She's the one who swabbed cuomo on national. Tv and she told us the false positive rate for the test and it was like. Oh that's not great. Yeah no that's just not great but better than nothing right. yeah. I guess that than nothing. Hey you know what else is better than nothing. You tell me actually not nuclear posture review nuclear posture review is not better than nothing. It's worse than nothing. You're staying for the nuclear posture review. Is i think. Well documented on this podcast. And i think the biden administration may be trolling you. Because we're getting one no one. No one ever listens to me but let me just say for the record. Nuclear posture reviews doing a nuclear posture. Review is the equivalent of kicking yourself in the nuts. Why would you do that to yourself. Why well it's something to do right. It's not just a nuclear bus review. I w- on twitter. We're getting a missile defense reviews. Well yes yes. That's right well. So i actually. I'm fine with missile defense reviews because the more time but my basic objection to nuclear posture of us. And we we can talk about this kind of the first third of the podcast. But it's ultimately that they're a waste of time and that they the president has a very limited window in which he or god willing someday she can make changes to use nuclear posture and the posture of you. Essentially sucks up all that time and and basically leaves. Us nuclear weapons policy posture forces on autopilot. That is probably also true in terms of missile defense. But that's it's already on autopilot and that it's already a giant waste of money and that it's already kind of pointless and so like wasting time before you waste some money just doesn't offend me in quite the same way. Yeah no and there's a lot of stuff coming down the pike nuclear modernisation going going on and i think ultimately tied to this is the preparation of dollars for that modernisation. Should we do it. Should we not system. Should we invest in But also how. This is all wrapped up in the future of our patrol. Something that we talked about on this podcast a lot like it's all these. Things are coalescing that the by demonstrations going to have to be taking on as dear points. Do you really want to waste time. How long the stakes a year. Six months. I can't remember how long they usually take a on. Your mileage may vary the bush administration and the george w bush administration did. There's quick and dirty because they knew it was a waste of time and they just like kicked it over to a contractor and he shot that out and it was terrible and forgettable and people noticed it when some of the kissy bits leaked and then it was forgotten which is what should happen to nuclear posture reviews. But you know the obama administration did one and it was so dumb because they had to do a mini pasta review before the summer because they were trying to negotiate the what would become the new start treaty with the russians and then they did the full posture review which then dragged into may two thousand ten. I think they got it out before the empty review conference so they might have gotten it out a little. I guess they got it out a little bit before that but it was really bumping up against that deadline so we really kind of went into the spring of two thousand and ten and then. What's what's crazy is because it's a review right. It's just a review. It's a study then. You have to do the whole thing over again to implement the things that you decided to do in the study. So the obama people signed a new presidential. What were they back. Then they were presidential policy directives ninety day implementation study. You know which stretched on for like a couple more years. I remember it. It kept going on and on and on and lyndon brooks started calling it the increasingly poorly named ninety day implementation a so. This is something that the clinton administration found out to. It's like you do the study but then the study is basically a waste of time because then you have to redo all of that work to actually produce decisions to implement the review so like why not just cut to the freaking chase and start making the changes that you think you wanna make rather than like go through this entire process. Ast that that you know. I think ultimately in the end doesn't get you any closer to answering the questions. All the things you mentioned are super important questions. And they are all bearing down on the by administration and we don't know how long joe biden is going to have to make these decisions right in two years. We can have a republican congress in in four years. We'd have the second trump term. And so you just don't have that much time and so to piss a bunch of it away on nuclear posture review. Doesn't make me very happy. No i mean. We've talked about this before i mean i think this is that you it's got written about you know because you have this these ideas about what she is about that. You got how he also thinks. Nuclear posture are freaking stupid. Yeah she does and she's very unhappy with fish. Sorry is that you and scott sagan. You have written about the The way what you think nuclear weapons at least the us nuclear policy. A nuclear posture should go. Yeah absolutely i mean you know. I think one of the things that has hasn't nervous about the posture review. Is that what tends to happen. Is you tend to basically have the same old fights you've had over and over and over again and we're gonna have that fight again about sole purpose right and all the people who don't like sole purpose or are not like it for the same reasons they didn't like it last time and all the people who liked sole purpose are going to continue to like for all the same reasons that they liked it last time. She believes purposes so listeners. Yes you're right. I should have done that. There are two versions of sole purpose. There's the real version and jeffries hybrid version though real version. Is you say that the sole purpose of nuclear weapons is to respond to nuclear attacks against the us and its allies The jeffrey variant is. You would say you wouldn't make it a statement about employment which i think is kind of always dangerous territory to get in although i'll happily jump in about two minutes Jerry version is to subtly change that instead of making it about when you would employ or use nuclear weapons to say the sole purpose for possessing the weapons is to deter a nuclear attack on the us or its allies really. This is a question of is the united states going to reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in response to non nuclear attacks. It's the same debate we've been having since You know like late. Nineteen forty-five and it's gone through various iterations Used to be. No i use. Would you initiate the use of nuclear. Weapons are only respond. Today it's sole purpose. It's not like in doing the study. There's going to be some change you know it's like it's not like gregg. Weaver is going to forget that. He loves nuclear weapons. You know you're there. There's no point all you're doing is putting these people down in a room and then they shouted each other. It's ultimately down to the president and the people appointed by the president to say we're gonna take path a or path b and you know with all due respect if you're the president of the secretary of defense or the under secretary of defense for policy you already know what your opinion on this matter. You know yeah totally like. This will not be the first time. Colin call has ever heard this discussion. No probably not. I mean he's not going to be like. Oh canada me more about this idea. I'm very unfamiliar with it. After a thirty year career. That come on so i just to me. It's about what the president wants. And so scott ni- bright have have this very distinct what i'd like to see is to get out of the sole purpose debate which is instead of trying to go down that path because we're so purpose ultimately flounders on this idea of What the obama people said. Well we liked it. It's a very. It's a very obama solution in all the ways. Drive me crazy. Well we'd like to do sole purpose but we can't because we don't have the conventional weapons we need to get to sole purpose so it's our goal and some day god willing. We'll get there which i just you know. Whatever drives me crazy instead of revisiting. That debate scott. And i and we've actually added a third musketeer guy named alan Weiner who is a professor at stanford law school We think that the president should say as a matter of policy that the us would not use a nuclear weapon against a target that could pick your felicitous phrase be destroyed with reasonable confidence by conventional weapons. Could we repress nuclear weapons with hyper sonics. I'm sorry. I was just a joke. That was just a jump. You know i always think about these things. You're talking about scenarios in which the fundamental premise of deterrence has actually broken down. You know one of miami's favor phrases reestablishing deterrence you know like or we have after like rockets or missiles. Start flying at one another. It just means that you aren't deterring but i. I know that you failed the same thing. We just didn't work but more but more right. Don't do just just just do more of the thing that it was clearly a moral failing on our part and if we just fix it yeah it's very very nineteenth century right but i think we were talking about off pod. Maybe i'll prompt. You hear a little bit is rather than looking at it as a posture review deterrent review. Something along those lines putting them all together. Yeah i have heard this idea kicking around instead of doing a missile defense review and a nuclear posture of they might do an integrated deterrence review. And that that that's like not necessarily as bad of an idea. Because i do think when you get down to it what's really happening. Is we have competing ideas about how. How nuclear deterrence functions How nuclear weapons create deterrents and. What are the legal limits and the point of our pledge by the way kind of goes right to that idea of trying to clarify that very clearly Do you know this story about the principles and deputies and the obama. Nfc where they played a played a tabletop exercise responding to a a russian low-yield escalate to de-escalate strike. It was it wasn't written recently. I swear. I just recommend fred kaplan. Got the scoop So it to me. It perfectly illustrates. How many terrible ideas are floating around about deterrence including terrible ideas. That are probably war-crimes. But they like pop they kind of just percolate people have them and they don't really explore them And that game. I think brought that out so they played it twice. They played it at the deputies level and the principal's level so in both games the russian to use a low yield nuclear weapon in an escalate deescalate way against neo nato airbase in europe. So they don't kill that many people. It's you know it's the you know i'm not. I'm not prepared to accept that our immediate view when it really happens is it's low yield but whatever it's the game and you have to stipulate some hidden so that's been stipulated so the deputies the the policy people basically look at the military people in. They're like well because the military people are like what we have to respond with nuclear weapons and the people are like okay well. Nuclear weapons are weapons with big political costs. So explain to me how much faster we will win the war if we use nuclear weapons and the military people are like well. I mean it might actually be a little slower gotta like work around like it's it's not about that and then the policy people were like well. Your job is to tell me how to win the war as fast as possible. Your job is not to you know. Tell me about this other stuff. Because that's like my bailiwick. And i'm telling you us using nuclear weapons without having a clear theory of how that's going to reestablish deterrence help us prosecute the war without understanding what the actual military benefit of doing this. Is we think politically. This is a nightmare and like how about we just go ahead and win the war which they do. They play the game again at the principals level. And they're just for whatever reason right because you know. I guess you know principles different group of people and the principles by into this argument. That like We really do have to use a nuclear weapon. They used one. We have to use one. What do we do but they are too cowardly near the russians. The russians of new dust. And we have to do come back but gosh if you can back i mean could could be terrible and so they decide that they're going to nuke bellarusse belarus is not even a party to the conflict by the way right. And so you know what i think is happening here is that just just lay it all on the table and and this is why i support this idea this sleight of hand that goes on if you ask targets like how to nuclear weapons work. They say well. The nuclear weapon destroys the target. That has value. It's permissible military target. The destruction of the target is what creates deterrence. Because they lose their ability to prosecute the war and so like the famous example is when they put like sixteen nuclear weapons on that radar in the moscow suburbs and the official argument is it's a legitimate military target because it's a missile defense radar and destroying the target reduces their capacity to defend their military assets and therefore that produces deterrence. And everybody knows it's actually like sixty nuclear weapons hitting the moscow suburbs that is deterrence. But that's illegal right. You can know that in your mind but if you actually came out and said yeah well. We're just going to kill you. Know a couple of million suburbanite suburbanite muscovites. So you're not survivor. That muscat middle you. You can't you can't say that right. So what the point of scott. And i is to try to bring that tension to the surface. You know my view. Is i take literally the idea that nuclear weapons are weapons and if they do things like real things like destructive things that conventional weapons can't than they are to be preferred on upon the said. There's one in north korea according to intelligence community. That is too hard to be destroyed by conventional weapons. So that's a role but like all this metaphysical mumbo jumbo about like the unique psychological effect of nuclear weapons. I think one. It's not real because it's just made up and it's certainly not like a falsifiable belief and to it's a it's a war crime right so i agree with you on the metaphysical stuff serve the mumbo jumbo but that also leads me to question the taboo but i totally agree but i. I have to always raise that. Which means that. The taboo doesn't actually exist doesn't exist. It's actually very dangerous. That's my point. Have you have you. I mean we know that taboo doesn't exist because there were a bunch of principals around obama who work in a new belarus for no reason. Well so yeah so for a well. I'm just saying maybe belarus deserves it so in our view. It's all these people out there. They're protesting lukashenko holding the signs and the russians invaded lithuania. And we the people holding signs fair's fair right for this is like when the nixon administration by the way i know we're off the rails but i teach this in my national security decision making class when the north koreans shutdown us reconnaissance aircraft nixon ultimately and kissinger decided that we couldn't we couldn't do nothing. Because you know the commies would think we're week and that was the justification for the secret bombing of cambodia. it's i just imagined this poor cambodian farmers like looking at these bombers way up there and it's like why are they bombing us and you know his friends. Oh well kim. Il sung shutout in american aircraft. And its like does he know that's a different country so anyway to put a bow on it because i don't want to belabor eighty four but our from our perspective and this is where alan really comes in when we look at how strat com interprets the law of armed conflict particularly something the principle of full of precaution which the us military does believe in you know like the military as a whole has one view of the principle of precaution about minimizing civilian casualties and strat com is a little bit at odds with the way the rest of the military does it Because it would be very hard to justify using nuclear weapons except for in very limited circumstances in their arguments device struck home right so our argument. Is that if you made this policy. Pledge it would bring the legal arguments into alignment right so that we'd have a kind of consistent and correct interpretation of the law of armed conflict and then for me the of second benefit is preventing insanity like nuking belarus. Because what it really does is it says like look. The value of nuclear weapons is what they do for you militarily. And it's you know you're not going to be able to justify the use of a nuclear weapon based on this. Shall we call it. Highly speculative idea that there is this metaphysical effective using them. And you know. I think i think that's probably where by news. He said stuff like that. Yeah so yeah but thing is. You need a nuclear posture review to do that. The other part is almost eighty years old. He's been doing this for fifty years. He knows what he thinks. He does what he thinks. I mean you think biden's gonna wake up like you know. I just had a small stroke. I think do clear weapons or gray like come on. Yeah yeah exactly. I mean the the f. On i do see value in combining the two though. I don't know what you think if we have to do this document and wurley and we have to do votes for an integrated defense integrated deterrence review. Because you know as you wrote for four fares dot com a was the centerpiece of arms control being the treaty acceptance of vulnerability and the the movement of of missile defense towards. You'll ultimately one of the main prongs now of how we conceptualize nuclear deterrents. And i think we both agree. Other people disagree but i think they're wrong. Which is ultimately that advances in missile defense are the more instability not more stability More investments in crazy weapons systems Than less investments in crazy weapons systems is that you have to put the two together. But i'm not sure how that alternately manifest itself because of the document is on autopilot would actually end up in a bad place. You know what i'm saying i do. I mean you know full disclosure. I know leonor tomorrow. The deputy assistant secretary of defense pretty well And further full disclosure I've had a plenty of disrespectful arguments with gregg weaver on twitter. I think i helped bully him off of twitter actual and he's the joint staff guy. Who would who would. Who would work on this so you know just knowing what the two of those people think. That's a pretty big. It's a pretty big range of views. And so yeah. I think you could get a document came out in a good place. You think the document the came out in a bad place but it would be good too. I don't wanna be too fatalistic about it. But i would say in that argument in foreign affairs article. I accept that the united states is not in a place at the moment where limitations on missile defense are going to command anything like widespread support even among democrats. And so this is going to be one of those cases where you know like tom. Shelling said when they started making this argument the early sixties democrats looked at them like they were crazy and it took them years. And in retrospect it was pretty fast but for him. It was nearly miraculous that academics were able to come. And say hey you think. These things are defenses but actually worked better as part of offenses and they're deeply destabilizing. And you're not going to like what happens and i just you know. Even if the document comes out in the wrong place. I think those of us on the outside you know. We have a generational task in front of us. In terms of reestablishing the you know the correct view of why missile defenses are not really even defenses and are ultimately destabilising. So maybe it's good to start that fight now even even if we're going lose well the fights i think is going to be presented in front of us. You know because this will be a key. Russian demand this link between offensive defensive conventional versus non-conventional. Andy follow onto the new star trading. If we are to have any future arms control between the two countries you know setting aside. The trump era idea to make a trilateral with the chinese. But if you keep it in the bilateral you mean the trump idea to use the chinese to justify them not negotiating the agreement. They didn't want to negotiate. I just want to make sure we're clear about what it was silly billingsley his on your foot. Straining marshall billingsley man tried to steal his government twitter account and impersonating a police officer or impersonating a servicemember but who impersonates a state department official after they leave did not want to give up that twitter account and selena. Stolen valor case i've ever seen. I thought it was hilarious. But my boy my friends at state. You're wonderful people. This is gonna this. Is this issue is going to be shoved in front of our faces. You know. i think it will be the defining issue moving forward in arms control negotiations more so than limits on launchers and morehead numbers. Don't you think yeah. Because it's become the fundamental justification for the modernisations that the chinese and the russians are carrying out. And so the idea that we're going to be able to go to the russians and say. Hey you're developing and insert system doomsday torpedo. We'd like it if you didn't do that. They're literally going to say. Then you know like the take down the defense that we're designing it to beat. I mean i just. It's crazy to me that we can't grasp this idea that like you know like the that the the panoply of capabilities that they are developing which they say are for defeating missile defenses which were as a matter of historical fact developed in the eighties but the concepts were pioneered defeat sti the programs that basically went dormant and the one thousand nine hundred and then of came roaring back after the. Us left the abm treaty. I don't i don't know what more evidence you would need to understand that the russians and the chinese are sincerely committed to having a survivable second strike capability and that includes defeating defenses. Like i just i. Don't you know we confront people in there like oh this is all ally like what they just. They just like cuddling with like like why like why. They're building boom. I think panda is a couple of times in the show is talked about as part of this looking at how missile the missile defense prompts other. Basically prompts you know pure adversaries how they tried to feed them as a matter of a public study and i know that you have some other ideas about like like the missile defeat the calling the missile defeat agency. Now the defense agency. i forgot. Well this is my idea. It's still the missile defense agency. But i have a. I have a modest proposal for the missile defense agency laid out. This is the time. I'm chuck full of good. Good ideas here. What was madison's nickname was k- ask colonel has another outstanding idea. Yeah yeah uh well. Jeffery has another outstanding idea J. house jay haas german. Yeah we have to work on that So listen it used to be the strategic defense initiative then it became the ballistic missile defense organization bimbo which i miss bimbo became the missile defense agency. Because it wasn't just ballistic missiles it was cruise missiles like whatever it is time to end this entity as we know it About a decade ago the national academies was asked to you this study on boost phase missile defenses and they like rap that workup at a couple of weeks ago whose face missile defenses really work. Not a great idea. Jack so they. They took it upon themselves to a comprehensive review of the missile defense architecture. It's phenomenal report. It is a phenomenal. it's phenomenal. I mean mission creep and it was bad and they shouldn't have done it but it was wonderful. It was a great pop. Know at these are people who like missile defense right so not a neri a hippie among them and they ultimately they had a big internal debate which was ever really reported interest. I don't know why but about half the panel wanted to take missile defense away from the missile defense agency and give it back to the services because it's really important to understand that missile defense programs are unlike any other real defense program. Because they're not really real the services don't say we need this capability and then pay the money and develop them like any other weapon systems. Subjecting them to all the same. You know All the same procurement of baseball the same defense funding roles. Mda them like giant science projects with the plan that someday they will transition them to the services who will say. Thank you for this very valuable program. We'll take it from here and while that has happened in a couple of cases like the grandba- system and alaska is still run by the alaska national guard. It's still an mda entity. The army does not want to pay for this crap and so my idea is to basically do that is to give all the missile defense programs back to the services right where they compete like any other weapon system and to take the missile defense agency and change its name and mission and so i would call it. The missile defeat agency and their job would be to think about the mission of defeating missile attacks and that would not just include like the you know the sti interceptor parts but special forces attacks threw interception up to civil defense if it's appropriate and they should have only money and that money i think should be competitively provided to the services right so basically we say we have a national missile mission of missile defeat. Mda has you know however many billions of dollars or tens of billions of dollars. I lose track of how big their budget has gotten now and the services all compete for that money so like if special forces are like you know we think we can do a better job but we need the following equipment. Then that's a thing that nda could fund drive is the development of of equipment technologies supporting infrastructure in order to allow special forces to go. Do this mission or to allow cyber command to go do this mission or you know but really to treat it as a mission and to make. Those interceptor programs compete against other service priorities and also other methods of achieving the same mission. And you know if it turns out that the disaster in alaska is still the best of funding. Then i'll accept that there's really no way to justify the system in alaska. I think we all. I don't have an answer to that. Because this is someone alaska. Don't get the system. I think we all i i'm a. I think we would call the controlling podcast. A supporter of theater. Missile defenses. And i would say of works just fine and a naval missile defense. It's the big one. It's the big one the The disaster in alaska the london in the tundra thou- one. I just can't ever get behind. That makes sense and you can. There's all sorts of fun things you could do with that but your ideas essentially is to make it compete with the priorities of the other services to make at least you know insulated from the serve was the monopoly which it now operates in. Here is the common thread between these two ideas. The us nuclear weapons only against targets. That can't be reasonably destroyed by or reliably destroyed by conventional weapons and shift to a missile defeat mission and compete though the interceptor systems against the alternatives and more broadly other service priorities. These things have become magic. Wands and people love them and they're not magic wand just in weapons and they either worker. They don't work and they are cost effective of the dot cost effective if they don't work or not cost effective than build them. It's really not that complicated. But they're not right there like their symbols. Their ideas their fantasies their penises their imbued. With all this other just that has nothing to do with a mission and you know you would think that. Can you get to position responsibility. You would leave all that behind but as we see with all the hyper. sonic nonsense. You know you get senior defense officials who still think gliders are faster because it's it it it's no longer about the actual military capability. It is about all the emotional baggage that they're bringing this discussion. So did we just draft the comprehensive deterrence review posture document to good ideas to make the situation slightly less insane to be honest with your ideas. I just trying to stay on mute as much as possible. My daughter is marching with the balloon in front of sesame street. Every time she screams a full throated endorsement. it's well. She's now spinning in circles. And dancing to elma sir. She's she's spinning in circles. so she's reenacting. The last thirty years of missile defense development says she's jumping for joy and doing the happy dance. Oh i have a happy note. Was that be known for years. I remembered a bloom county cartoon. That was the perfect mockery of sti and the cartoon was the characters had decided to apply for funding as a like a small business under the sti program and their proposal was to ring the earth in dollar bills and so they basically just request your crates of dollar bills from and of course in the cartoon they ship them just crates of money. And i think that to me was the like that is how i look at missile defense. We have no idea how this is going to work to. Ship was crates of money. And i could never find it and like i looked hard like i would go to bookstores and go through. Bloom county books google. I could never find it and matthew goal after. I complained about this on twitter. Sent it to me. And it was every bit as funny as i remember. You should blow it up in frame and put it in your office. Yeah i think that is a great idea. i'll I'll reposted on on twitter. Yeah and then you could be jeffers fathers take. Oh my god it was just. It's just it's just incredible so like years. I've been looking for this damn thing so to have it finally be able to see it again and have it be just as as wonderful as i remember it. Just incredible well. That is a happy note. Anything else we need to hit for doing the sign off here. Now i got. I got lots of other good ideas for the nuclear posture review missile defense review slash integrated deterrence review. But but i'm gonna. I i keep i keep lobbing hand grenades. We'll see what blows you should write about it. They should just figures off. I have green anything in so long ago. It's your next your next foreign policy piece or put on the old blog the old but all all right. well that Thank you jeffrey. Thank you laura for joining me now with blocks if you enjoyed the show Want to continue to support us Head on over the patron dot com slash. Ac w podcast you can find our patriot page there and you can become a patron yourself. three dollars a student. Five dollars if you are not joined the slack channel on your phones if you don't wanna give any money but still like the show libra review on itunes five stars only typing some good stuff because we enjoy reading and we actually do with. That was a pleasure.

us obama middlebury institute of intern foreign policy research instit belarus biden administration george w bush administration obama administration lyndon brooks scott sagan Jerry version twitter alan Weiner jeffrey lewis scott cuomo nixon administration infectious disease Il sung stein
The Larry Elder Show 06-30-21 Hr 1 WEDa

The Larry Elder Show

38:36 min | 3 months ago

The Larry Elder Show 06-30-21 Hr 1 WEDa

"Is podcast is a production of the salem podcast network for more podcast like this from courageous voices of conservative reason visit salem podcast network dot com. Triple eight nine seven one eight. Ge triple eight nine seven one. Seven two four three. I am larry elder. We are relieffactor. Dot com studio new york city board of elections made a major error and counting votes is removing the election. Results results widespread voter fraud anybody. Oh new. poll shows school choice support at an all time. High cuts across party lines cut across racial lines. Remember the democrat. Party is a party that is anti vouchers because they need that money from the teacher's union charter schools. Most of them where the teachers pay dues is optional. They don't like that. At least seventy seven people shot last weekend chicago including seventeen in to mass shootings. But the mayor of laurie. Life would insist that crime is not out of control intercity after all components did she can say that added that part. A woke restaurant is enraging diners by adding a new anti white charge to all receipts remember. Lavar burton played contained in roots. He wants to be the host of jeopardy and says it would be a words just right here. Quote jeopardy is a cultural touchstone for a black man to occupy that podium is significant close quote you mean for you talk you pie that podium. Oh my god if a black person for the host of jeopardy can we just lose reparations thing because after all it's a cultural. Cultural coach touchstones as lavar burton. And if a black man were to occupy that by the way knows he didn't say black woman black man so if lavar burton is not offered the position to host jeopardy. Does that make jeopardy ru now. A couple of things. I want to get to before we get into the show. The former two-time secretary of defense donald rumsfeld has died at the age of eighty eight. He was secretary of defense during nine. Eleven he also with a strong opponent of the invasion of iraq. Later on he lost favor. With george w bush ended up leaving. I had the honor of interviewing donald rumsfeld. After he left the george w bush administration and i think i might have mentioned this you before i ask him the following question biggest granted you were when you were serving during the george w bush administration. You know what he said. He said. My biggest regret was that we did not fight back. When people began saying bush lied. People died i just knew. He said that the american people are not going to swallow that nonsense. He said i was shocked to find that. The majority of democrats believe that. George w bush lied us into the iraq war. He said we did not respond when people were saying things like that when ted kennedy was saying things like week after week after week we were told law after law off the light. We didn't respond. Because we knew that people are gonna think he was full of it. Little did we know he said by the way. I had the honor of interviewing former vice president. Dick cheney is from the same question he said the same thing. They weren't being interviewed together. They said we just did not believe. The american people would believe that. George w. bush would strap on a camouflage outfit in go to war just because great man donald rumsfeld great public servant. This is why a lot of people don't want to be public servants by the way now. I told you that. Chris cuomo of cnn. Whom i watched it. You don't have to said that. Donald trump called the corona virus hoax. You're a great writer but even you couldn't have imagined what trump would do in calling a pandemic a hoax. We always say the fact a stranger than fiction if people had written up what he was about and how he acted and try to get someone. Like you to sell it okay. So he's doing the screenwriter of the movie. Contagion and chris. Cuomo is just heard. Reiterated that trump referred to the corona virus hoax. Now i do something every morning for fifty nine seconds or less. It's called robe rate where in my role by rant and yesterday. I did one about chris. Cuomo making this assertion. And i pointed out that. Cnn's own fact checker. In september of last year looked at whether or not trump referred to the corona virus pandemic as a hoax and cnn. Said he did not. He specifically with talking about how democrats are characterizing. His handling of the pandemic. That's what he called a hoax said. Cnn not me cnn so. I did aerobics age. Where i ripped chris cuomo for ignoring his own channel. And i ended it by saying chris. Don't call me freight cuomo. Apparently doesn't watch cnn either now. I used to have a relationship with him on twitter where he was sometimes semi something by direct message and i was sent him things by direct message but that stop several years ago when he said something that was bonehead and i checked him he said something else. I was born here. I checked him and then after that. You're just you're just an a-hole airy metro. He said that way. And that was that by the way the same thing happened with jake tapper cnn. With whom i have Twitter direct message kind of relationship. He said something. I checked him. He said something. I checked him. I think it was him referring to illegal aliens as undocumented. And i said there's no such thing in the legal code is undocumented that is propaganda you're trying to influence how people see this issue and all of a sudden that was all right donna. Brazile believe it or not had a relationship with donna brazile on twitter where we direct message each other. She said something stupid. I checked her. She said something stupid. I checked her. She ended the relationship so cuomo follows me on twitter and after i posted that instagram message. This is what he wrote. And i'm quoting. Does it bar. The u2 unfairly attacked me. When i never do that to you just for a little buzz when you and i treat each other respectfully and then you pretend to disrespect me i'm not pretending dude i due disrespect you. I interjected that. Just now he continued. You better take more of that. Fog as e pain medications deal with the injury to your soul. I assume he's referring to factor so rolling back. I said yeah. But was i wrong. You said trump called the corona virus hoax. He didn't that assertion with refuted by your own channel yet. You said it again. I'm happy to come on your show and discuss it. I'm happy to have you come on mine. I extended that offer to you before. But you've never taken me up on it. I don't blame you. Why does the baloney avoid the grinder. And of course that got to him. Because he's a little slow snowflake. Here's how he responded. Oh yes he did. Meaning trump did call the corona virus. A hoax he said there would be a dozen cases. It would magically disappear that it was just a bad flu. Notice how he changed the subject. The subject is whether or not trump called the corona virus a hoax at cnn. Said he did not and this guy says oh yes he did which means he's not believing. Cnn well that makes two of us dude. Oh yes he did. He said it would be a dozen cases it would magically disappeared appear that it was just the bad flu and of course that's not the issue and regarding my invitation to come on his program. Here's to come on line. Here's what he said. And i'm quoting. You don't deserve the platform you defend a liar and a man who is willingly motivated. Hate of people like you. Whatever that means no no not mere political posers which you have become but black people go sell more snake oil. He said siro back. Of course you'd say that. never mind the platform. You gave hillary for four years. Who referred to the two thousand sixteen election as stolen and president trump as 'illegitimate' sixty seven percent of democrats according to a yougov. Pope falsely believed that the russians chain vote tallies despite zero evidence. They did so. A greater percentage of democrats seventy eight percent. According to gallup believe the two thousand sixteen election was changed by the russians in the seventy six percent of republicans who believe in widespread voter fraud. Get cnn continue to get hillary platform and ever accused her promoting the big live. Killary joining the jill stein lawsuit. He'll support his the streets. When trump won and on inauguration day why the baloney. avoid the grinder. Larry larry elder here again with a message for anyone struggling with pain like i struggled with for years and of course i want you to know. About relief factor the one hundred percent. Drug-free supplement that tens of thousands are now taking every day. Obviously i'm taking it every day. Because i like being out of pain but i know you may be skeptical just like i was but then i kept hearing about all the people who are no longer in pain so i decided to give it a try in fact. Listen to genesis story. Now skeptical at first. But because of the pain. That i was having when i would substitute teach have to climb stairs. 'cause i have lower back hit and even knee pain and after about three weeks i found that i could climb stairs pain-free but it wasn't only pain-free i could do it. Step over step without holding on the railing. I'm really happy it makes me feel like i'm young again. That's relieffactor dot com or call. Eight hundred five hundred eighty three eighty four eight hundred five hundred eighty three eighty four call. The larry elder show now at eight nine seven one sage. That's eight eight nine. Seven one seven to four three el dorados. Let larry know what's on your mind. Hey larry this is ryan from southern california. I i want say god bless love your show. Keep up the great work I just wanted to comment about The clip you played about heo see where she's basically dismissing. This uptick in violent crimes. And stating that. It's just basically hysteria that it's not real even though the numbers are real. It's not real for some reason. I'm just wondering. How does she feel about funding to schools. Because her in the squad love to promote that. They're systemic racism everywhere and that it's in the police it's in the schools it's everywhere and that defunding. The police will fix this problem there. Well finally she will become the school to then because there's always problem schools. Our school shootings. There's bullying bad to be a right place for systemic racism but for some reason. Turn the squad touch that. Just a thought their next larry godless keep up we have seen these headlines about percentage increases. Now i want to say that any amount of harm is unacceptable too much but i also wanna make sure that this hysteria you know that this doesn't drive a hysteria and that we look at these numbers in context so that we can make responsible decisions about what to allocate in that context. Triple eight nine. Seven one s. eight g. e. triple eight nine. Seven one seven two four. Three hysteria says a woman who says the world's going to end in twelve years if we don't tackle climate change now whether you're buying a home or refinancing to a better rate the lender you want on your side american financing america's home for home loans. Because this is a company that is in it for you. I mean it there process start with a free mortgage review. Though there's no pressure no obligation no upfront or hidden fees. They just don't do that instead. Their mortgage consultant take the time to understand your goals so they can present custom loan options. That may save you up to a thousand dollars a month. You choose what makes sense and they make it happen. You know mortgages. Don't get a whole lot better than that. Call eight six six eight six twenty twenty six. That's eight six six eight eight six twenty twenty six or visit american financing dot net. that's american financing dot net. Nmls one eight two three three four in mls consumer access dot org now. Want to stick with cnn again. Chris cuomo referred to president trump as having referred to the corona virus as a hoax. You're a great writer but even you couldn't have imagined what trump would doing calling a pandemic a hoax. We okay and again. Cnn own fact checker said that he did not call it a hoax yet. Cuomo apparently does not believe. Cnn fact checkers which makes cuomo on the same side of the line as we are for for a change. We don't believe cnn either. Now again cnn allowed hillary to go on their network time and time again and refer to the two thousand sixteen election as quote unquote stolen. Call president trump illegitimate in eight years to president trump referred to barack obama as an illegitimate president. I never heard that. Hillary said it for four years to the point where one more time. She'd convinced two thirds of her party that the russians change vote tallies despite the senate report that found zero evidence. They change a single vote. Tally seventy eight percent of democrats. According to gallup believe that the russian interference quote change the outcome of the election. Close quote even though the senate report made no such conclusion. They said we can't tell one way or the other. That is a higher percentage of democrats who believe the two thousand sixteen election was altered. Then the seventy six percent of republicans who believe the twenty twenty election. The outcome was a with one of widespread voter fraud. So more democrats believe that. The two thousand sixteen election was stolen then. Republicans who believe the twenty twenty election was stolen right yet. Hillary's not been shut down and nobody to my knowledge ever ever said a word about hillary going on cnn and making charges like this. You can have the election stolen from you. Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to essentially prove that he beat you because he knows he didn't he knows he's an illegitimate president. As i mentioned whenever. I bring this up. And i look at some of the comments on social media as i do from time to time. There are three responses. Well hillary conceded trump. Didn't actually trump did concede google. Donald trump concede the election. Stand back point two if you look at hillary. So call concessions leach. She never used the seaward she'd ever said i can see so. Technically she didn't concede either. Well hillary didn't follow lawsuit to overturn the election. Yes she did. Join the lawsuit that was found by fouled by jill stein. The green party candidate. To overturn the election in wisconsin and the hillary legal team filed a separate motion to have the hand recount done by hand. But have the recount done by hand well. Hillary supporters didn't storm the capitol building on january six. That's because hillary was not in the white house. She did not win the election in two thousand sixteen therefore she wasn't president but don't tell me. Hillary supporters are not violent shortly after. Donald trump won the election in two thousand sixteen in november. Hillary supporters took to the streets all over the country including and especially portland where there with violence where there was arrests. And don't get me started on inauguration. When have you seen violence. In washington dc. On an inauguration well happened when donald trump got inaugurated. Those are your answers. So hillary for four years can say. The election was stolen. Not a problem. Donald trump can say stolen for a few weeks. Oh my god. He's undermining the integrity of our election. It is such fraud. And that is why this project veritas. Reporter confronted cnn. Anchor wolf blitzer as blister with walking down the street looks like a nice nice neighborhood. It wasn't hood wasn't what kinda but here's what happened. Listen to this exchange and what was it just kept walking kept walking kept walking wolf. How's it feel actually what you're actually being reported right now. Yes why hasn't been suspended from twitter promoted when you're just because it's just funny how you're promoting walking down the street. I'm on an important conference. Call as opposed to unimportant one and you're not being from twitter and you're also sharing people's private information are pushing anti-trump gender. The wolf is was to get out of office straight without saying that's what it was very and that part he chose to work is silence accepted. We engage journalist is propaganda sir and we just take five minutes and talk instead of run if you truly do care about being the most trusted name in news. Thank you accuse me. I'm going to conference calls a very important conference call. It's not just an ordinary conference call. It's way more important than me to talk to you and it goes on a little longer. We're going to have the rest of it for you on the other side. Triple eight seven one as a triple eight nine seven one seven two four or you cannot make this up wolf. What about the guy that says jessica tells them what to do. Well if what about all that. What about him saying the next agenda is gonna be climate change. What about all that wolf. The tunnel to towers foundation helps us keep our commitment to never forget larry elder here this year the foundation is honoring gold star and fallen first responder families with young children and catastrophically injured veterans and first responders with two hundred mortgage free homes chairman and ceo. Frank ciller is paying tribute to the fallen by walking from the pentagon to shanksville and on the ground zero more than five hundred miles through six states in forty two days the month of august through nine eleven towers of light to shine at the pentagon and shanksville memorials in remembrance. The names of those we lost to nine eleven related illness or being read aloud at a ceremony on the twelfth and on veterans day the names of all we lost in the war on terror will also be said out loud. Do good and help. America to never forget. Donate eleven dollars a month to tunnels two towers at t to t dot org. That's t the number two t. Dot org t the number two t. Dot org portions of today's larry elder show brought to you in part by american financing. I larry my name is pete. I was just wondering when we get to the point to where conservatives just do not want to have anything to do with liberals and we just separate ourselves seems to me that that liberals need of course our money and then they want to be in our face all the time and conservative. republicans doesn't need democrats anyway. Thank you very much. Triple eight nine. Seven one s. Eight triple eight nine. Seven one. Seven two four three i am larry elder. We are relieffactor dot com so that was the premise of the book by i n ran called atlas shrugged where the people that are the ones that are workers the creators producers to hell with it. Let the other ones that wanna take and take and take try to create things on their own. That was the whole premise behind that. That wonderful book called atlas shrugged. Thank you very much for that. We're talking about cnn. Cnn is a network that ultimately both Jake tapper their daily host and mike merconish. One of their weekend hosts both admitted that no donald trump did not say about charlottesville. They were good that nazis in bad nazis on both sides that he was specifically referring to the debate about whether or not there ought to be confederate monument in the public square. They didn't say it right away but ultimately they agreed that they were both wrong when they said donald trump had been referring to neo nazis on fascist or whatever when he said both sides yet other guests including Then candidate joe biden. Went on cnn. Repeated it after those two had determined that Donald trump said no such thing and said it again and nobody said a word. Isn't that fake news. Isn't that what you're talking about. No one's saying all checking donald trump when. He says he was stolen. Well joe biden goes out there and says well donald trump said there were good and badly remember is bulging veins tech carrying tiki torches. I knew and you'll never remember. You're never forget what he said he said could be all one of joe biden's big campaign talking points both jake tapper and we're said it wasn't you he said it again. Nobody said a damn thing. Cnn fact checks the allegation that donald trump referred the krona virus. That's a hoax. Said he didn't quit cuomo. Few days ago goes on and says it again and then of course the complete and total pass hillary's gotten who supported hit the streets violent protests when donald trump november two thousand sixteen determined to have won the election. Hillary supporters hit the streets violent protests on president trump's inauguration. Don't give me this well. He'll supportive didn't born the capital in january six. That's because he'll he wasn't president well. Hillary didn't file a so. Yes she did. Google it jill stein. Hillary joined lawsuit to overturn wisconsin. Google it well. Hillary conceded trump didn't yes he did. Google trump concede and then read hillary so call concession speech and see if you find the word conceived because you won't i play that game know. Hillary didn't concede eater. You wanna play that now. This project veritas reporter. She had some kind of cashews. Then she sees wolf blitzer walking down the street and stayed with him and stayed with them and stayed with them and points out some of the things that we found out. From project veritas including. They've got employees at cnn. Literary saying the ceo of jack jeff zucker of cnn. Jeff zucker hates. Donald trump's got has a personal vendetta against him tells us what to say and she confronted wolf blitzer with many of those things and he just kept walking. Very good by the american people are getting propagandize about cova. Death ratings by cnn. That's what charlie. Chester said gangbusters gravy. Right which is why the death toll aside fears. Fear really sucks. Don't you think you should be held accountable for promoting theory lies. If you're in fact doing that as cnn. Technical director. charlie chester said. Did you see the project veritas video. Why was it. Cnn banned from twitter promoting football's information and for dachshund people basically releasing their private information without consent. Saw video from project veritas. Though is taken down because they confronted a facebook executive on his front lawn. Here's the thing. I can show you a video. Cnn doing the exact same thing to an old woman who was a trump supporter in her front yard looked at both videos. It's an apples comparison. Cnn remains up. Project veritas. was taken. Down project veritas was banned from twitter. Even though we didn't actually do that the end of an increase. Radi silences excessive. Is it not going to be for climate change or where is gonna be the next pointing report. Thank you so much for taking time out. Tough day he got back. In the game. Share excerpts of today's show from larry elder's youtube channel. Just go to youtube dot com forward slash. the larry elder show radio and click on the subscribe. Hello mr elder. I love you. I love your show just thinking about The republicans defunding police argument sound a lot like Some of the historical slavery arguments. Where now all of a sudden it wasn't the democrat who helps to end slavery it was. The republicans are wasn't the republican was the democrat. It just keeps flip-flopping and it's happening right before our is all over again. I am for defunding police. yes i support. The fund movement in writings were divided. It's like this is the word that's coming from the street. Many affluent suburb suburbs have essentially already begun pursuing defunding police in that they fund schools. Not only do we invest foreign pleased. But we need to completely dismantle the minneapolis police department. Minneapolis department is to fund. The police does not mean. Abolish the police. It means that dramatic reduction advisors as we get set. Richmond said republicans de funded the police by not supporting the american rescue planet. But how's it that. That is an argument to be made when the president never mentioned meeting money. Police stop crimewave when he was selling the american. Triple eight nine. Seven one. Eight triple eight seven one. Seven two four three. I am larry elder. We are relief. Factor dot com studio. I learned this word. Gas lighting from watching. Cnn crystal. call me. Fredo uses it all the time The republicans are gas lighting gas lighting gas. Letting her emmerson. Cooper say i think what it means is telling you something. That just isn't true hoping that you're going to believe it gas lighting. You know like when people go on cnn. And say donald trump to were good nazis and bad nazis on both sides. You know like that Let's play some of the sound of president trump back in two thousand seventeen saying he'd said today that he answered the question perfectly of let's take a listen protests people but you also had people that were very fine people on both sides now elsewhere. In this remarks the president did condemn neo. Nazis white supremacists. So he's not saying that. The nazis in white supremacists a very fine people. But he's saying people protesting alongside those neo. Nazis and white supremacists a very fine people within the last ten days. I know that. I reference to those words from the president and i had a phone caller who called and said that is not what the president said now having invested the time to go back and pruder the tape. I think the callers right. And i think you're right now as you know my friend. Mike lindell's a passion to help anybody at the best sleep of his or her life didn't stop by simply creating the best pillow ono. Mike created the new geezer dream. Bedsheets they look and feel great which means an even better night's sleep for me which is crucial for my schedule. Mike found the world's best cotton. It's called giza ultra soft breathable and extremely durable. Mike's giza sheets. Come with a sixty day. Money back guarantee and a ten year warranty first night to sleep. When one of these puppies you'd never gonna wanna sleep with anything else. Giza dream sheets. Come in a variety of colors and sizes and mike is making a special offer for my listeners. So wait for it. you'll receive two for one. Low price plus free shipping just go to mypillow dot com click on the radio listener square and use promo code. Larry you're not even gonna find this amazing offer but also deep discounts on otherwise my pillow products including but not limited to the my pillow mattress. Topper the my pillow towel sets and so much more so call one eight hundred eight nine eighteen forty three and and use promo code larry or go to mypillow dot com again. Make sure you use promo code larry. This was just today at the last briefing that you think. Republicans wanted to deep on the police because they did not support the american rescue plan which republican ever said that they did not let the american rescue plan because they wanted to defend the police. Well first let me just note that the president ran and won the most votes of any candidate in history on a platform of boosting funding for law enforcement after republicans spent decades trying to cut the cops program. There's record of that. That doesn't require anyone. Having new comments and then also stood in the way of crucial funding needed to prevent the laying off of police officers as crimes increase. That's a simple statement of fact. I understand what you're saying there however there are lots of examples of democrats explicitly. Say they want to de-fund the police. We've got bush congresswoman paiva presley alexandria cossio quartet. It's on omar. Are there any examples of republican members of congress saying they want to de-fund the police. I think most people would argue. That actions are more important than words. Wouldn't you say well point to your point. There at the time of the vote on the american rescue plan the republican leader in the senate mitch mcconnell and he said he just didn't like it because he thought it was a classic example of big government democratic overreach in the name of relief and then kevin mccarthy said he thought democrats were using corona virus as an excuse to justify funding pet projects. Well where is the here. They're gonna vote again. You want to deepen the police again. I think actions speak louder than words. Peter so if you oppose funding for the cops for something that was dramatically cut by the prior administration and many republicans supported and then you vote against a bill that has funding for the cops program. We can let other people evaluate what that means doesn't require them to speak to it or to shout it out. Their actions speak for themselves. I didn't detect a single republican in this montage. I am for defunding the police. Yes i support the movement. Why use the word defined why is the word defined. It's like this is the word that's coming from the street. Many offs affluent suburb suburbs have essentially already begun pursuing defunding up the police in that they fund schools. Not only doing this invest. were in police. but we need to completely dismantle minneapolis. Police department minneapolis. Police department is rotten to the root defunding. Police does not mean. Abolish the police. It means a dramatic reduction and recall comma harassing. She can re imagine the police. Are you for funding. The police how are you defining to fund the police while i'm not for anything remotely for meghan mccain at so i would ask. The protesters said thing. But i assume i assume and again this is something that is new to me. I assume it's removing police and as congresswoman ilhan omar said bringing in a whole new way of governing and law and order into into a community and my understanding again. This is something that is just come into my understanding recently that you would not have police officers like this. Minneapolis city council woman said that i would be a place of privilege if someone broke into my home and i wanted to call the police so again. We need to re imagine how we are achieving public safety in america so we need to re imagine how we are achieving public safety in america. I'm not saying fund them. I'm just saying we need to re imagine because the whole idea of increasing the chances of a criminal being caught being convicted and being incarcerated doesn't work we need to re imagine a new way larry's father staff sergeant randolph. Elder says hard work wins. You get out of life what you put into it and now. Here's larry elder. Larry love the show. Love uncle tom. Dot com. here's the thing. The american i message is amazing. Need to everybody knows we need this but we need to add something good when need to add families first american merge those two things together families first america first that message right there it will hit home. We'll suburban housewives hit home with inner city families. I america first not get with that it. It says it all right there it. It's everything it's law enforcement tool choice. Seconds fam- families for amendment. I triple eight nine seven one. Eight triple eight nine seven one seven two four three i am larry elder. We are relieffactor dot com studio. The secret is out. People are abandoning their overpriced wireless carriers and flocking pure talk for the same coverage but at a fraction of the price. If you're with horizon. At and t. t. mobile switching pure. Talk could save your family over eight hundred dollars a year and switching it so easy you can keep your phone. Keep your number or get huge discounts on the latest iphones and androids. I've got a new iphone. Se and i can tell you the service. Great plus right now get unlimited. Talk text and six gigs of data for just thirty dollars a month. And if you go over data they don't charge you for it. There's a reason. Pure talk is the highest rated wireless company by consumer affairs. Why they are the preferred wireless partner of amac friends. It's time to start saving money so from your cellphone. Dial pound two five zero. And say larry elder and save an additional fifty dollars off your first month. That dial pound two five zero. And say larry elder pound two five zero and say larry elder. We're gonna be talking about illegal immigration new poll showing that a growing number of americans are getting teed off about what's going on on our borders and it's beginning to cross party lines similarly the school choice movement. How all time high number for people that want the money to follow the child rather than the other way round again cut across party lines because the cut cuts across racial lines. All of that and more triple eight nine. Seven one s. a. g. now says the headlines regarding a spike in crime are hysterical. They're just hysteria. Tell that to this. Houston police officer and i mean it's it's just completely terrible and you know what the worst part about all this is its members of our black and brown community that are impacted most statistically they are the victims of these violent crimes so while she goes out there and talks about how all these lives matter but apparently they don't matter to her too much because she's not supporting policies that will ultimately be able to impact the crime. That's occurring and. I think they realized that this is a huge complete loser. The defunding police movement for the democrat party represented kleiber and said that after they nearly lost the majority in the midterms. Not only that. If you look at a recent gallup poll eighty one percent of black. Americans said they don't want leslie officers in their neighborhoods. They want more and recent poll and new york city. Less than fifteen percent of the black and latino community wanted to fund the police. It's a complete joke when we come back. Who wants to fund the police growing polls numbers show. That people are getting cheesed off of. What's going on in the borders school choice all time high. I'm larry elder.

cnn donald trump lavar burton hillary Chris cuomo larry elder Hillary george w bush administration jill stein president trump twitter george w bush donald rumsfeld cuomo Cuomo larry jake tapper shanksville
Ahead of Impeachment Trial, GOP Falls In Line with Trump 2021-02-01

The Takeaway

44:40 min | 8 months ago

Ahead of Impeachment Trial, GOP Falls In Line with Trump 2021-02-01

"Kirit and this week in the united states have anxiety the origin story of black history month. It's the first in our three part series on the future of black history. Join me for the united states of anxiety. Subscribe where ever you get your podcasts This is the takeaway tanzania vega and. It's great to be with you on this monday. The second impeachment trial of former president. Donald trump now. A private citizen is scheduled to begin next week in the senate but just weeks ago. There were signs. That impeachment could be a bipartisan issue. After a number of prominent republicans criticize the former president for his role in inciting the capital and direction the mob was fed lodged. They were provoked by the president and other powerful people in the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob riot. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw unfold. I hate it then this way. Oh my god. I hate it all. I can say as count me out. Enough is enough. I've tried to be helpful when it's over it is over it is over but now most. Gop members are delivering a very different message. Here's what i'd like. I'd like to get this trial over sooner than later to my democratic colleagues. If you try to one witness us on blow up the united states senate do that. High partisan democrats are about to drag our great country down into the gutter of rancor and vitriol. the likes of which has never been seen in our nation's history. But i want. Everybody could be threatened and understand the all responsibility here. That was house minority leader kevin mccarthy who met with trump last week last week all but five senate republicans attempted to block the impeachment trial for moving forward voting against it as unconstitutional. Now that trump is a private citizen so with most congressional republicans shifting into their roles as members of the opposition party and looking ahead instead to the two thousand twenty two midterms a reckoning within the gop over the capital. riots doesn't appear to be coming understanding. Why the republican party is sticking with donald trump in his post-presidential days is where we start. Today let's get going with doug. Hi who's lead communication positions in the house senate. Rc and served in the george w bush administration. Doug thanks for coming back on the show. It's going to be with you. Thank you also as sahil kapur national political reporter for Nbc news sahel. Welcome great to be back doug. I'm having whiplash listening to those statements from top. gop officials here. What i mean. Why is accountability for what happened at. The capitol considered something. That's tearing the country apart right now. How did we go from wanting to hold the president accountable to this. Well i think it comes down to a word called politics and you know when you talk about accountability the one thing that house republicans senate republicans to have been very mindful of over the past. Four years is that they face an accountability for their voters and their voters are overwhelmingly supportive of donald trump. That's especially true in the house than in senate where you have congressional lines that are drawn in a more partisan way. And that's what they're reacting to because that's who they're hearing from most vocally. I can tell you my conversations with members of congress on the feedback that they get from their voters is overwhelmingly pro-trump and one thing that we know about trump supporters. They're not quiet. It's not a silent majority or silent minority for that matter. They are loud and vocal. That's what they're hearing from. And that's what they're reacting to. So doug i mean these voters or support. Trump supporters are sort of intimidating their their representatives into Into what into believing that. This didn't happen into believing that the president has no the former president. I should say has no accountability for this. Well they're pushing them to not convict him or not impeachment if the votes in the house and that again is is what they're reacting to and part of this as you mentioned in the setup for the two thousand twenty two elections. I can tell you a big part of why House leadership did not vote to impeach the president a house republican leadership despite the words of kevin mccarthy Despite the private misgivings of steve lease is because they want donald trump support in two thousand twenty two taking back. The house is their biggest priority and if donald trump is not on board they see him as a real impediment to that because he would potentially go in and and cause trouble in a house republican primaries and then even in general elections where he wouldn't be supportive. That's a big concern for them. Sal i want to bring you in here because i'm wondering. We heard different clips from from gop leadership immediately following the capital insurrection. We heard from mccarthy Mitch mcconnell lindsey graham and were they just shell shocked by what had just happened and hadn't had a chance to process the political the political calculations that they were going to have to make. I mean trying to explain this sort of shift here i think. Many republicans including party leaders were legitimately rattled by what happened on january six. It was extremely extremely unusual for them to be in a situation where in the building they work in the united states capitol their safety and their lives were put at risk so this was an extraordinary event and i think that did play into some of the early republican reactions chris. Criticizing president trump israel as a result of that certainly played into the fact that ten house republicans voted to impeach former president trump. making him the Making about the most bipartisan impeachment and history but overtime politics has a way of progressing to the mean and the sentiment as doug was pointing out that these lawmakers heard from republican voters was overwhelmingly pro-trump. And that's why you saw a little bit of vacillating early on from the orbit of senate republican leader mitch. Mcconnell who was reportedly pleased to see impeachment go forward. He seems to have walked a lot of that back. And now he is signaling. Along with ninety percent of senate republicans that they intend to intend to oppose the impeachment trial on procedural technical ground and by all indications appear likely to quit the president. So he'll if there is no. I guess we should. We shouldn't get ahead of ourselves here. But if if the chances of trump being convicted here are very low. Why are democrats moving forward with the trial. Well they have to have the trial now. it's a little too late not to Given the house has impeach the president and the house managers of walked the papers over to the senate. There's not much else that can happen except a senate trial. The reason democrats did this was not necessarily out of politics. I think politics had little to do with this. I think this is out of conviction. there were democratic members. Who who believed that doing impeachment at this time would distract and detract on the senate floor from president. Biden's agenda from his cabinet nominees from getting his legislative proposals off the ground and that was legitimate concern but that argument lost out to the overwhelming sentiment of house. Democrats that if the house won't impeach a president for this for inciting an insurrection on the us capitol putting the safety and lives of lawmakers and everyone in the building at risk then. what is the point of impeachment. What is the point of having a constitution of a president can aim a dagger at the heart of a legitimate self-government and a legitimate election and the congress does nothing about it so this was more about conviction than politics. I think we definitely need to ask that question. Doug i mean if the republican party. I want to get into some of the folks who voted a four Impeaching the former president. Just a minute but if the party as sahel is pointing out doesn't hold donald trump accountable or any of the gop accountable for this. What does that mean well. It means again that this is this is this is process. that's about politics and Republicans are very mindful again of what they're hearing from. Their constituents are also mindful what they're hearing from their other members and so if you look at The backlash that liz cheney has gotten for sticking her neck out and doing what she thought was the right thing doing so as a member of house leadership the only member of house leadership to to support impeachment. She's being campaigned against already. In her. In her district. In in wyoming. I can tell you. I had a wyoming politician called me saying i'm being recruited to run and this was two days after the vote. That wouldn't have happened. If liz cheney voted the other way members are very bein of the politics of this you know. I would equate them sometimes too. You know animals that. Start to scurry before anybody else's the earthquake coming but that's the reality of where they are right now and ten house. Republicans did vote to impeach former president donald trump. What's their calculus there. you know. it's it's hard to say politically. I think they know that that it's not a popular move You know we just talked about liz. Cheney tom rice in south carolina has been censured by his own state party And we're seeing other state parties your republicans who voted to impeach. Just well not that. Every member of congress necessarily worried about what the oregon republican party is doing but it demonstrates the sense of what is out there in in the party right now and that the politics of this are especially treacherous for those republicans. I would say there's a flip side to that politically as well. I'm looking at my home. State of north carolina where fifty eight hundred republicans in this in this month of january since january six have changed their registration from republican to unaffiliated so the state parties losing voters. And if you're motivated to leave your state party to do something political in january of an off year that means you're really motivated and you're really angry. It's unfortunately a lesson. The republicans only learn come november next november not in their primaries intensify. Kind of that trump problem that they face so he'll in the days. After the capital insurrection the rnc re elected chairwoman. Chairwoman are ronna mcdaniel. Who's a trump ally. What does that say about how much i mean. I guess it underscores this point that the gop is leaning in to trump and trumpism. Yes it's still very much. Donald trump's party we saw that when house minority leader kevin mccarthy a few days ago went to visit him In florida released a photo of him with the former president talked about how trump has committed to helping republicans win the house. Majority which again as doug pointed out is the overriding priority of much of what happens here. There's a separate controversy involving congresswoman Who has lot of inflammatory and conspiratorial things named marjorie taylor green who is also invoking Former president trump as a supporter of hers and saying essentially signaling to leadership that. Don't don't you dare cross me. Because i have the support up. Donald trump. he is still the king maker in the party. He is no longer. Has the bully pulpit in the white house. He no longer has his twitter feed. Which is preferred mode of communication. But he still looms large over. The party of the voters still have a passionate kind of connection to him. And i wanna make one little point on your earlier your earlier question. Why did those ten vote to impeach the president. The reason one of the reasons is all ten of them ran ahead president trump in their district. So they feel insulated To to an extent and they also believe that they have independent brands. That can kind of help them at home. Doug we're talking about How frightened say the a lot of the gop are for their holding onto their political positions Free to turn away from constituents who are bathed in The glory of their former president here refused to let go of that. My question to you doug is. Why don't these folks leave government and go make money in the private sector. Like why are they holding on so tightly to this ideology which is in fact appearing to tear the country apart. You know it's a very good question. I actually asked a pretty similar question of that to a member. I've known for a long long time. Who voted against impeachment and said basically you know. Why is this worth being ranking member of a subcommittee or if you get back. The majority chair of a subcommittee members of congress aren't very happy. Capitol hill is not a really great workplace. I tell you my experiences there. I had a great boss but it was miserable because we were going through things like shutdowns constant fighting with your own team to where you didn't have time to worry about fighting when nancy. Pelosi 'cause you had to show up your own side constantly. That member of congress was eric. Cantor and you know. He's a cautionary tale for a lot of these. A lot of these republicans who are scared of if they do what they see is the right thing that they're going to lose and i would tell you the fact that eric cantor wanted to do something on immigration was a contributing factor to his loss and immigration. Reform never happened in congress since then in two thousand fourteen. That's been six plus years now. Sil- how do we explain that. I mean the idea that there are members of congress In the gop who are choosing to stay in these roles choosing to stay in this position when they could easily you know go into the private sector or into consulting and make a number of different career moves. that wouldn't Have them you know. Essentially in fear of a political party or if certain constituents look at who is retiring and who has retired in recent years People in the house republican conference who are known to be workhorses. Who are known to be interested in getting things done. Many of them have left. Greg walden is one example. The former chairman of the energy and commerce committee other figures like pat tiberi. have retired Previously a close ally to the pre the former speaker. John bainer understood us. You know someone who's respected in the conference. There are a lot of people who wanted. Who were there to to get things done. Who were policy minded who have decided to leave all of them but many of them and this moment and politics is a very good time for for show horses. You know who want to spend a lotta time on right wing. Media maybe booster their personal profile and collect social media followers. This is a very good time for them. Because that's kind of the political moment that that They're in right now but for those who are more policy minded who were more interested in getting things done through the hard work of compromise. This is a pretty dark political moment. Silent wondering also there are rumblings I don't know how real they are right now that There could be and we've heard this many times in in our political pass that there could be the emergence of a third party here Are you hearing anything like that is. It's still too early to even think about that. I think rumblings is fair mainly because they're dating from former president trump but my my view on this. I'm highly skeptical. Because there's always some talk of a third party or the potential for third party given that the two major parties are so unpopular but there are many reasons that doesn't happen. The single biggest one is negative partisanship. Voters dislike one party strongly enough to vote for their opposition and having two major parties only entrenches that trend. But the one caveat to this is donald trump and if he were to decide that he wants to fully throw his support behind a third party there they seem to be testing out potential names for that if he decides he wants to do that then i think the republicans are in a world of trouble because he will take a big chunk of that party's base with him and it's unclear how much of a future republicans would have then. And frankly i think that's one of the major reasons you see party leaders and lawmakers and operatives eager not to eliminate him and one of the reasons that he is on track at this point to being acquitted if he were to be significantly and sharply disowned by the republican party. Data only raise his odds of wanting to start a third party. Doug we're not just talking about the political calculus That a lot of lawmakers are making but there is a this really happened. The key capital insurrection happened live on national television on january six in the afternoon americans and people across the country and a world were watching what was happening. If there is a failure to convict the president for any role in this does that doug further emboldened some of the radical groups that we saw involved in that capital insurrection. Who the fbi and the cia are already saying are a serious problem to our national security to be honest. I don't know the answer to that. And that's because one one thing that a lot of republicans have said is that going through second impeachment processes divisive. I agree it's divisive. Now i push back on that. How is it to finish. I think it's a necessary division. We have to show that they are real punishment's when you do something wrong. I'm not a parent but every parent that i know doesn't not punish their child for doing something wrong because the kids not going to like the punishment but we need to be mindful that w- it's very clear that there could be further adverse reaction to this. It's part of why. The capital is still under lockdown. And you still have national guards Members patrolling that perimeter. So i think it's i think it's unclear which is going to cause bigger a bigger problem with that trump base of and people are going to break the law. They need to be put in jail. There's no there's no question about that. The impeachment process is entirely political. It's not illegal process. It wasn't designed to be. I worry that you know. Without a conviction we also send a message to any future president. That as long as you do something in your closing days to pick an idea. That's not hypothetical anymore. Shooting somebody on fifth avenue that you can do that as long as you do. It late enough. That's a terrible signal to send. We got to be watching very closely. Doug highs communications expert who's had positions in the house senate rnc. And the george. W bush administration and sahil kapur is a national political reporter for nbc news. Thanks to you. Both for being with us to join. Your january has been the deadliest month of the covid nineteen pandemic in the united states. So far nearly eight hundred thousand people died over the past. Few weeks bringing the country's total death toll to more than four hundred and twenty five thousand that incalculable loss has left so many families grieving and on top of that grief. It's left families struggling to cover the cost associated with those deaths. Too namely burials and cremations but relief could be on the way for some families with federal funding for covid nineteen funeral costs being allocated in the december stimulus package. That was passed by congress for more on that. I'm joined by tanya marsha professor at wake forest school of law and host of death at sec. Podcast a podcast about death care and the laws around at tonya. Thanks for joining me. Thank you so much for having me. One of the things that i don't think is top of mind for a lot of people when they lose a family member or loved. One is how much it's going to cost. What's the average cost of dying in the united states today. Well that's a really good question. We know that what it was pre covid was about eighty five hundred dollars but of course that varies significantly from place to place A market like new york city. It's going to be understandably More expensive than it would be a smaller community elsewhere in the united states Then on top of that eighty five hundred dollars. You have the cost of any burial. So that would include the the cost of the grave itself opening and closing the grave with her service charges That are incurred at the time of need so you can easily be over ten thousand dollars. I've heard that figure the ten thousand dollar figure a lot and that seems to be regardless of the type of funeral home you know that's even at the lower levels. I'm hearing from friends and family. Tanya why our funeral costs expensive well. There's a lot of goods and services that go into those funeral costs so you're getting the services of a funeral director and they do an awful lot of things behind the scenes. That grieving people don't want to deal with or can't deal with or its legally logistically difficult for them to deal with so muendane things like getting the death certificate submitted and dealing with the paperwork with the state getting something called a burial transit permit With necessary for final disposition they also deal with coming and taking the body from the place where death occurred and cleaning it up and making it presentable in a way that is socially acceptable for us. I suppose to let are deceased. Loved ones go. The federal government has been involved in this In some ways representative alexandria ocasio. Cortez co introduced a bill back in spring. Two thousand twenty to provide financial assistance for funeral expenses. That bill itself is stalled but she and other members of congress were able to get some financial relief into the stimulus. Package that we mentioned at the top was approved at the end of two thousand twenty tanya. What is in that package. That will help grieving families right. So in december twenty twenty stimulus package there was two billion dollars allocated for fema to distribute as funeral assistance as part of their sort of typical way that they disperse money up for disaster assistance and so fema is actually in the process of the rulemaking for that. So there's a lot that we don't know about how that money will be allocated. We do know that the famous spokes a person has said that it will only be available for funeral expenses that were incurred prior to december thirty first of last year. I don't know if With respect to funerals that take place in twenty twenty one whether or not that would require additional funding. Or if that's something that fema has the authority to do under that pryor bill does it look like there's a lot of red tape for families right now who are looking to get some of those resources well if you look at historically the the disaster funeral assistance rules that fema has adopted. There's not a ton of red tape. This is a different kind of disaster right so the documentation i suppose that would be required is going to be less difficult for people to obtain for deaths due to covid than say a hurricane or other natural disaster which may have wiped away people's homes and may documentation really difficult to get. I will say that one of the potential hangups is that in general the fema disaster funeral. Assistance program will only pay families for unmet. Funeral needs so that is that they're not being covered by veterans assistance benefits social security or even personal income and savings. So i know that the folks who proposed this to congress keep referring to it as a reimbursement but that's not typically how the fema disaster funeral assistance program works so whether or not they're going to change it For covid related deaths remains to be seen tanya. You mentioned fema assistance in the past. What about something called the stafford act. What is that well. The stafford act is basically enabling legislation that defines sort of the limits of assistance and about some of the programs that they can engage in so the stafford act doesn't really say anything particular about funeral assistance and what character that might take. It gives scheme the flexibility to set up programs that are responsive to a particular disaster. We've been talking about the financial hardship that some families will face when trying to really bury their loved ones and have end of life celebrations for them because that can be very costly. But there's another side to this. Which are the funeral directors. The people who work in funeral homes who themselves have been overwhelmed with demand Some going so far as to do things that may not be appropriate. You know say storing bodies that they don't have the capacity to store because they just feel overwhelmed and want to do what they can. Is there any relief for them. Well i suppose that this two billion dollars. If it's is all spent on funeral expenses will be going to the funeral directors right but i think part of the unevenness of this as a response to their need is that i know anecdotally. A lot of funeral director simply knocked down the cost right when faced with families who had financial need even though funeral directors have experienced increased costs themselves. Some have had to go as far as get refrigerated trucks etc to sit outside and then of course the ppe and other sorts of protection for themselves from virus that is continues to be communicable after death. If female is going to follow the same playbook that they have in the past. That's not going to really be able to compensate funeral directors fully for their cost to the extent that they wrote off some of those costs because families were struggling in two thousand twenty china. Is this moment to rethink the funeral. Industry moving forward. Oh i think that we need to fundamentally rethink a great deal about the relationship between the government and what is essentially a privatized system for handling and disposing of the dead. We have a private funeral industry. We have a private cemetery industry then of course. More than half of americans are cremated Now that is also entirely privatized. So one thing that. I think we've really seen in new york city and we've seen in los angeles in recent weeks is how did the system is so the private market when it is subject to a great deal of regulation whether that regulation is reasonable or not cannot nimbly respond to great increases in demand and we have a very static rigid system so if the government isn't going to be able to step in and help out in these sorts of situations and so far it hasn't then i think we do need to look at ways to make the private industry able to respond better. Tanya marsh is a professor at wake forest school of law and host of death at sec. A podcast about death care in the united states. Tonya thanks for joining us. Thank you it's the takeaway. I'm tanzania vega this past summer. Americans watched as an uprising for racial justice. Made its way across the united states as that remarkable historical moment unfolded the takeaway spoke to history teachers to ask them how they explain that moment. Their students the place that we started in my classroom was just for what i needed to do. We need to start with just dispelling myths. But now history. Teachers are grappling with how to teach another historic moment the capital insurrection and one of the most tumultuous transfers of power. We've ever seen. Here's what one teacher had to say. My name is niles. mattera me. Mr m And i teach fifth grade. Us history at boston collegiate charter school in boston massachusetts. As a history teacher. I do want my students to feel hopeful for the future of the country however i also want students to know that while they may love this country in order for it to improve must never stop critiquing. Also got one of the teachers. We spoke to back in july with us. Matt and failed is a social studies. Teacher fishers high school in fishers. Indiana matt welcome back. Thanks so much fabric back. Also we have some new perspective from brenton cobb. A sixth grade history teacher a math teacher in fort worth texas brenton. Thanks for joining us to ren let's start with. You has teaching online and in person sort of Prevented you from having in depth conversations about what's going on or student sort of approaching you with. Hey what's happening. That's a good question I think with design teaching in person and online at the same time it does have a barrier with students online at times and I mean i feel like in the classroom. It's a lot easier to have those conversations but engaging with students online there is still a barrier and I think that it does cause some problems to have those deep conversations. Sometimes i think. Also there's a disconnect too when you're online from your students you're more when you're in person you know those people and i think there's a lot of anxiety for these Students during this time. And i think that that also takes away from you know just learning in general when ask you a little bit brenton in a moment just about what kinds of questions. You're your sixth graders are coming to you with but matt. what about you. You teach high school. What are your high-schoolers coming to you with. Does it matter if you're remote or in person or did they have lots of questions for you right off the bat. Yeah well i mean listen. I mean if there's never been a better time to be a teacher or a harder time to be a teacher because I think the pandemic has kind of magnified every imaginable social issue and so Kids i mean. The questions have been absolutely nonstop. And i kind of share them. It's incredibly difficult. What brinson was describing kind of creating that safe space. Have the environment have sort of honesty in the vulnerability to talk about politics. Talk about race to talk about honestly talk about death as the kind of the pandemic drums on in the background in so it's been incredibly challenging and very rewarding working at kind of building a a classroom space that is both online and in person at the same moment where you're still having those conversations. 'cause the kids have never had more questions than they do right now. I'm going to come back to you. About what kinds of questions. They have brenton. What are the sixth graders that you teach. What are they want to know about. what's happening. Are they scared or they confused or they excited what what are they. What are they coming to you with. A lot of them are nervous or scared or don't actually know what's going on because there's so much disinformation out there and so i've had a lot of students like when it happened. A lot of the students were like. Are we going to go to war. And even when trump loss remember a lot of the students came up to me. And they're just like you know if he loses. Are we going to war tomorrow. Like to happen and a lot of them were just really concerned. I think that a lot of them didn't understand certain things to which also promoted a lot more money from me and Yeah i just. I felt like or sixth graders like all the information that they're getting from their parents to and they don't really know much besides that Like the students a lot of them. Don't like search the web or anything like that or they don't really at this moment in time they're just learning about credible sources. So it's me more light trying to find those credible sources for them and talking about that too so it's been quite interesting and and teaching right now man. That's a really important point. Because i often say we are in the Misinformation wars as we speak and so for high school students. That you're teaching. Are they coming to you with similar questions or have they done their own research or are you also grappling with the effects of misinformation in the classroom. Undoubtedly i teach in interesting context. Were a suburban school. Just a city very rapidly diversifying. But you know within my building we have you know we have students who are sympathetic to the proud boys or even have said that they plan to join the proud boys and we also have undocumented folks just kind of trying to make it in america. We have this broad swath of society that we have to. We have to serve all of those students and so we have students that walk in and they ask. Is this fascist takeover. We have students asking. Are the police going to be abolished a soon as asking what is white supremacy and so we're kind of hosting all those conversations within the context of a very very divided city Politically and everywhere you can imagine. It's just hyper polarized. Is that polarization match showing up among students. So i think it's showing up in the classroom because we are contract with students. Who are they hear what they hear from home. And they i guess what we say in the classroom is that Pulse truth is pre fascism. Some what we have to do is tell the truth all the time in hold to human dignity regardless of people's perspectives and so when we sort of set that context our conversations are i think much more productive and they would be otherwise brenton when we think about things like fascism white supremacy. These are not new ideas but they also aren't pillars of a lot of american history classes to begin with especially in the sixth grade. How do you introduce these topics. Well i try to relate it like the other day we talked about We talked about germany and they have a little context behind that. So i try to bring that into bike taking their background. Knowledge to what's going on and this fascism or are we seeing something that could result and like something as a fascist takeover and. I think a lot of the students were really nervous about that. But also sprung up more conversation amongst them trying to an of ideas going and that was really great like trying to relate found their background knowledge. Because i mean they are young. They're only in sixth grade. So that's like how. I kind of related fascism to them when you when they don't have that big backgrounds matt what about you. I mean introducing topics again. Our history textbooks in this country are are often lacking In the full story of the united states and that can include our history of white supremacy. So i'm wondering how you incorporate those conversations. Maybe it's an introduction of these terms for the first time to high school students. Or maybe it's a deepening of their understanding of these concepts. Yes i mean what we say is that we know that classrooms are the frontline democracy and that the future of democracy will be won or lost in the classroom and so what that means is that we had some hard conversations as teachers. You know over the summer you know. We kind of agreed that you know. We know that. George floyd died within the unas neck but it got there under the weight of our apathy in so what we need to do is completely right the curriculum. We can't just add a lesson about george floyd or add a lesson about the capital. What we need to do is go from the foundation right. How can we understand. What happened to george floyd without understanding the redlining of our cities Without understanding the continued racial segregation in our public school system. A school system that remains about as segregated as was in nineteen eighty and in many parts of the country is actually continuing to further segregate and so we want to build the foundation upon which we can have the conversations that we need to have. I don't believe that we can talk about a class matter until we talk about for example the origin of whiteness itself. Where does this come from. And what does it do to us. And so i think those are. The foundation is what we're building in order to be able to have conversations about what's happening today. Brenton went about parents. You mentioned having a students that come from very diverse backgrounds very diverse political backgrounds at least for for their parents perspective our parents saying. Hey we don't want our kids to talk about that or we're not interested in them learning about that or or the opposite. Teach them more about this so far. I haven't had a lot of parents reach out. Actually that's like in my school. I feel like we have to tow line but also like i'm trying to bring as much information to them as possible and have them critically think about what's going on and A time like this. Most parents have not reached out to me or told me. Don't use them this or teach them that So i try to teach them as much as possible. And unless i hear otherwise amman but i think that i just keep going i. I want them to as much information as they can especially in a time like this. It's so important that they're getting the right information. And being able to find this nation the right places. I mean being in a classroom. I think that as teachers it is our job to make sure that these students that they're able to find the right information. That are not being pushed into disinformation and if parents like i haven't had very many parents like i said Say anything about this but I'm just trying to give them all the facts that i can. At this omen matt we talked a lot about the mental health effects of this pandemic. Now that we're a year into it and it looks like it's gonna be a while before we reach the capacity of of having enough people vaccinated to really make a difference to go back to something quote unquote normal Are your students feeling the weight of history and also the weight of this pandemic right now. does that That has to add to the stress and of course the educators themselves. Yeah i mean to be blunt. I think a lot of my kids are really struggling both with the anxiety from the pandemic and also just the changes. that's kinda underway We have a theme in my class. in in the book the fire next time by james baldwin. There's a quote where he says accepts one to accept one's past is not the same thing as drowning in it and so we we find ways to look clearly at a who america has been and what we've been without drowning in that and so we don't let despair sort of takeover. We understand that. Our generation is sort of the next generation whose job it is to help realized that democracy in so in that sense i try to sort of restore a sense of purpose to the students so that they don't just sort of like drown in the The weight of what's happening man. That's a really interesting point that you're raising their and brenton. I'm wondering how you see that a lot of my students they're they're thinking about vaccines and They have hopeful for the future off. Lot of students might classroom. Who also with doubts in the family because of corona virus I have several students. That i've talked to over just went to a break who grandparents died died at one girl who she got part of iras and then it spread throughout her family and because of out or grandparent or grandfather died. And so it's there is sadness around here and they're also dealing with so much more outside of school and My job i feel like right now is to create a safe space for them when they come into the classroom and provide them a voice in here. it's just wearing a time that we've never in such a. I never seen before and so just creating that safe space being able to talk about the difficult things and it's also comes to you have to know your students knowing each individual student is probably the key thing is not every single student. Learns the same or you can talk to them. The same way and One thing that i've found especially in such a difficult time right now. Not every conversation is that same and you just have to be understanding and listen and allow these are just going through a really rough time right. Now brenton cobb is a sixth grade. History teacher in fort worth texas and matt bach and felt a social studies. Teacher at fishers high school in fishers indiana brenton matt. Thanks to you both for joining me. Thanks so much thank you. My name is keith harrison. I teach european and united states. History grades nine through twelve at a private high school in los angeles when i speak to my students about the events of the capital in january sixth. I remind them that our democracy depends on the peaceful. Transfer of power is part of our national identity that was put in place by none other than george washington students have asked and how we come back together as a nation after something like this my answer through justice. Those who were responsible must be held accountable. Then we can unify. The nation witnessed the results of the hasty reconciliation in the wake of the civil war which gave us nearly one hundred years of jim crow segregation curtailing the citizenship rights of millions of americans and ideological animosity. The many ways is still with us. Perhaps we can learn our lessons from the past and then carve out a just future. Hi my name's. Brian sheehy on the history department coordinator at north andover high out about thirty minutes. North of boston i teach. Ap european history ap us history sports in american culture and sports of the past. I think that especially with the storming of the capital. It was important for me as a teacher to go in the following day. And just kind of understand where my students heads brat and helped them process. I mean there's so many things that our students have to process through this pandemic that i thought it was important just to listen and see what they had questions about and see how they felt. Young people really are much more tuned. In than i think we give them credit for and much more in tune with current events than the. Maybe i was when i was their age. It's really a great thing to see as an educator to see young people taking an interest in wanting to initiate change. And i hope that continues. That's all we have for you today. Folks and thank you as always for spending part of your day with us and of course you have any thoughts or ideas for the show. Send us a tweet at the takeaway. I'm at tenzin bega. But we also take your voice. Memos you can record them on your phone an e mail them to take away callers at g mail dot com or you can call us at eight seven seven eight mike tate. That's eight seven. Seven eight six nine eight to five three and leave us. You're takes their. Thanks so much for listening. I'm tansy vega this is the takeaway and we'll see you tomorrow.

donald trump senate congress doug us kevin mccarthy liz cheney fema sahil kapur Doug trump republican party Kirit george w bush administration wake forest school of law steve lease mccarthy Mitch mcconnell Cheney tom rice
Going Over the Timeline

In the News with Mike Dakkak

24:20 min | 6 months ago

Going Over the Timeline

"Common sense commentary on politics culture and current events. If it's on your mind it's in the news. Now in the news with your host mike dakkak. Today's episode is going to be a bit of a bit of a story our here so i'm gonna put on my by mr rogers cardigan sweater and slip into my slippers. And and talk to you guys for a little while he. I've been working on three different stories over the last couple of months. As readers of stories on the site will know in evidence keeps coming out that the three were connected. No one piece of evidence is a is a smoking gun but when you lay the facts out of each of them next to each other what you see is that the the timeline is the smoking gun the narrative here is the Smoking gun and i just put a big piece on this up on the site and it has all the the sources and all the extra links. So if you're looking for that hop onto the site and you'll see all of that. It's got a couple of bells and whistles some tweets and video and that kind of thing but i wanted to talk about some of those things today and i'm not gonna mention every entry that i have on the site because it's Is just too long. But i want to just give you guys a taste and a glimpse of what the story is about. It's about the milan rendition. Which i'm going to talk about here shortly in. It's about spy gate. Of course this effort to get donald trump that was coming at him from all sides. And it's about it or gate and when you combine the timelines and the data points from all these three different scandals picture emerges of an element. Maybe an element is even to less like a handful of people within the us intelligence community. That have acted at times. It seems independently of and sometimes even direct contradiction to this country and its elected leadership and so i put together a time line using public documents. Congressional testimony press reports will submit accounts. And of course interviews with the principals. And it's meant to offer a glimpse even the time. Line that i have on the site. I mean it's it's very long and i apologize in advance for the length that some like five thousand words the irony there is. I actually had to cut a lot of things out. I mean it could have easily been fifty percent longer if not twice as long and i still wouldn't have been able to get all the data points in there and so the time line is not exhaustive. But it's just it's meant to offer a glimpse of this picture that we're talking about here. So i wanted to talk to you a little bit about some of the entries that i have and some of the Facts kind of connections that. I've uncovered in doing this research. And it takes us all the way back to nineteen ninety nine november nineteen ninety nine link university. A university is founded in rome italy. A lot of the stuff that we're talking about comes out of rome and so link. Universities founded in rome by a maltese professor by the name of joseph myth sued along with a former italian interior minister. By the name of vincenzo. Scotti navinchandra scotty was a former interior minister. But he was also he also had connections to the italian telling its services some reports. Although i haven't been able to corroborate a but some reports actually had him as the head of italian intelligence services which i guess as a time interior minister you would have caused to oversee some intelligence service activities so link university is founded in rome nineteen ninety nine. The university would be the first foreign university allowed to operate in italy. Which is kind of like the first thing that makes her eyebrows. Rise over the next two decades. The campus serves as a quote unquote mingling place. For western intelligence officials. Their conferences held their seminars by the cia the fbi. italian intelligence services obviously other intelligence services and so for the next couple of decades it becomes kind of like a unofficial meeting place for a lot of intelligence Western intelligence officials in two thousand and three a muslim cleric known as abba omar is abducted from milan italy. He's flown to egypt. Where he's allegedly tortured by the egyptian government by gypsy government officials. The case would become known as the milan rendition. Now it's characterized as a joint. Us italy counter-terror approved by both the george w bush administration at the time and the silvio berlusconi government at the time now despite that characterization that it was approved at the highest levels of those the respective governments rank and file. Cia officers would be convicted for the operation. That's the milan rendition. Two thousand and four so apple omar is abducted in two thousand and three and two thousand and four. He's released an egyptian judge. Cites a lack of prosecutable evidence. And so he's let go turns out. The whole thing was kind of a sham in january. Two thousand seven. A trial begins against cia officers for the abba omar. Abduction begins in italy. Abba omar kind of complained and perhaps rightfully so made a big stink outta this unlawful. And unwarranted Abduction and so shortly after the trial begins plans to charge leadership or scuttled when in an unprecedented move. An italian judge ordered a swap of evidence. There was evidence that was about to be submitted into the case and was going to be a part of the public record and it consisted of non redacted documents and it contained details about the rendition case including presumably the names of high ranking. Us an italian italian officials who facilitated an approved the operation so those documents were swapped out and they were replaced with redacted documents which were transmitted by italian intelligence. Day didn't show much of anything. As a result of that swap of evidence the prosecutor could not proceed with charges against cia leadership instead twenty-six rank in files cia officers. Including one. by. The name of sabrina to susan would be charged instead. That's in two thousand and seven and two thousand eight. A whistle blower identified as ryan. Dark white he starts working with officials at the fbi in maryland on counterterrorism operations the whistle blower by the ways active on social media as well under the handle. John here to help. that's on twitter. And i believe he's on gab. As well under the same handle check him out because he talks about things that are going to happen. A full year in advance. Well this group. That john here to help. We'll call him. John for short is a part of he starts working with them. In two thousand and eight this group becomes known as quote the dirty tricks squad. This is what he says they're the they go by. And under the guise of information systems security operations. John says the group would spy on people they would illegally compromise. People they would wiretap they would break into computers. They were plant evidence on people's computers They would change information exchange emails on individuals computers. The team was headed by the us. Attorney for the district maryland. At the time a person who would go on to become a the future. Deputy attorney general of the united states. And that's rod rosenstein. Also part of the group was a fellow. By the name of sean henry shawn henry was an fbi agent at the time and he would go on to head a cyber security firm by the name of crowd strike. Now that's in two thousand and eight. That all starts in two thousand nine. Sabrina the so. The former cia officer is convicted for her role in the milan. Rendition now what you need to know about that is that the susa actually played no role whatsoever in either the planning or the execution of abu. Omar's abduction of the milan rendition. In fact at the time. Abu omar was snatched up the street and milan by cia snatch team and an italian intelligence officers. The susa was one hundred miles away. Chaperoning her son's school ski trip and this is not her version of events. I mean this is come out in raynham italian freedom of information act request court documents testimony all of which by the way has been submitted to the european court of human rights so the suzanne has nothing to do with the operation and yet she's charged two thousand fourteen cia director. John brennan asks barack obama. And i'm kind of walking you through here the the the events as they happen. Cia director john. Brennan asks barack obama to broach the subject of pardons of the cia officers involved in the milan rendition with the italian president at the time a fellow by the name of sergio mozzarella now brennan curiously. Never mentioned to obama that one officer. Sabrina the susa is excluded from the list. So brennan leaves desouza off the list. Instead of twentieth percent of of twenty six officers he hands them a list of twenty five officers and he says hey you know. Do you think you can bring this up with president mozzarella of italy and see if you can get them pardoned now. The questionable exclusion of sousa seems to confirm that brennan kind of acting unilaterally here without the knowledge of the obama white house and even subsequently trump officials in getting to susa imprisoned at the time leading up to that time desouza was speaking out against an unjustified rendition and as a matter of fact an email from the italian minister of justice in two thousand seventeen would confirm that the main difficulty with sabrina 's case was related to the. And i'm quoting here little support that the former us administration meaning the obama administration and the cia itself gave her in the past and that didn't allowed her to be included in the clemency request. The president montereau and so desouza comes to believe that there was a quid pro quo involved here. She had to serve her sentence in italy in exchange for charges. Being dropped against jeffrey castelli. Jeffrey castelli is was the cia station chief in rome at the time abba omar was abducted and castelli. Of course being the station chief was privy so all the details of the operation including who in italy ordered it and facilitated it right. that's in two thousand fourteen. The following year april two thousand fifteen desouza travels from the us where she had been since two thousand and ten so two thousand attention comes back to the us. She's here from two thousand and ten and two until two thousand fifteen without incident. No one says she has to be extradited one just to be arrested. The cases kind of add a standstill. Italy's doing their thing. But the souza's here stateside. She travels from the us where she had been since twenty ten to portugal to visit her family. She has roots in portugal out prior to travelling to portugal desouza and our legal team do the smart thing and they reach out to the portuguese government. And they say hey you know is coming. They are going to cause any problems. So you're going to be forced to take action against me. Or am i free to travel to visit with my family who i haven't seen in years and so. Her legal team obtains approval from the portuguese attorney. General joanna marquez vidal but doll issues desouza. What's called a nullah which has permission from vidal that she would be able to travel to portugal safely without being arrested now. Assurances like that were necessary because at the time the susa and several other The other people involved in the milan had a european arrest warrant out on her meaning if she traveled anywhere on the european continent she could be taken into custody. So the susa gets this kind of a permission slip from vidal to transfer the portuguese attorney. General to travel to portugal. She travels to portugal and she's in portugal for months without incident without any threats of extradition. That's april two thousand fifteen june twenty fifteen of course. Donald trump announces his candidacy and he kind of quickly rockets up to the top of the pulse and all summer long. You're hearing about how donald trump no one's ever gonna vote for donald trump. He's gonna fade. This is just you know it's during the summer where nobody's paying attention. Wait until the fall comes around and he's going to quickly drop off by september two fifteen things start to get a little interesting by this time. Despite the incessant media tax donald trump emerges as the prohibitive favourite for the presidential nomination and remember at the time. He's in the middle of field of more than a dozen republican presidential candidates. Right you remember this field jeb. Bush was in their governor. Scott walker. Senator rand paul. I mean they were people who had extensive political experience considered at the time to be heavyweights. I mean they were sitting governors senators and congressmen and women well a majority of republicans despite all of that despite all the best efforts of the mainstream media and the pundit class telling them who to vote for and who not to vote for a majority of republican voters at the time fifty one percent believe donald trump and. That's a huge number to get in a field of sixteen seventeen people but a majority of republican voters at the time fifty one percent believe at that point donald trump is going to emerge as the eventual nominee. And of course if you follow polling you know that the number behind who do you think is gonna win is actually the most. The best predictor of who's actually going to win and so at that time it was donald trump also at that time. A fellow by the name of stephen helper. Who's a person known to be an operative for both the cia and the fbi. He's awarded contracts by the department of defense's office of net assessment and it's believed that intelligence officials including helper are charged at that time with befriending individuals close to donald trump and setting them up with quote unquote russian connections so they could be used against for example in that contract in september two thousand fifteen helper lists a former russian deputy foreign minister as a consultant and adviser. That foreign minister is a known russian intelligence officers and he officer and he would be listed as a source by retired british intelligence officer christopher steele in the opinion mus steele dossier the still dossier of courses that report submitted by steel to the fbi in two thousand sixteen that claims donald trump had all kinds of salacious activities with prostitutes in moscow years earlier and that the russian government had evidence of such activities and it was used compromise donald trump and now donald trump is a russian asset. Still dossier would of course turn out to be fake completely bogus. So in september two thousand fifteen helper is contracted to befriend individuals close to donald trump. The same month. An fbi officer calls a fellow by the name of yard to me to mean is the it director at the democratic national committee and so this f. b. i. Officer calls him out of the blue. This is all still in september. Two thousand fifteen and asked him he says. Hey you know. We're noticing some strange activity from the dnc's network. We're noticing that people are trying to intrude into the dnc is not worked. You guys are being hacked. Basically i'm paraphrasing and so he calls to mean this. Fbi officer and says hey. Are you noticing the same thing we're noticing. It was a very kind of strange call and so to me. Being in the it director at the dnc has an analysis performed on the dnc's sim systems and he finds and he says he tells the officer. This and the officer says okay. I'm going to check in with you every couple of weeks the see if you began noticing. Anything will this. The fbi officer calls on a monthly basis. The first call was september. He calls back in october. November and december two mean says and asks basically the same questions. Are you noticing and this hacking activity. Each time for those period of months to mean would say no. We haven't noticed anything right around this time. Also the washington free beacon which is a conservative news outlet contracts with a washington. Dc political research firm called fusion gps to begin gathering research on donald trump. This is all happening here in the states. September twenty fifteen in portugal. Sabrina the susa would be told that there was a high level meeting that took place in the country between. Us and portuguese officials likely brought under pressure from the us. now remember. Desouza has been in portugal for months at this point and october october. Fifth two thousand fifteen after being in portugal for months without incident. The susa is surprisingly detained at the lisbon airport. She's attempting to travel to india to visit her mother. Her mother was born in gola india. And so the susa shows up at the airport as far as she knows she's doing nothing wrong. She has permission to be there. She has permission to travel and so she shows up at the airport and she says an entire team of portuguese officials are waiting for her and they arrest her two days later after being arrested in portugal. Italy out of the clear blue sky issues in extra addition request for desouza. She was freed shortly thereafter. But she was ordered to stay in portugal pending a decision on her extradition. This is all happening on october. Two thousand fifteen the same month. Nellie or a woman by the nellie or back here in the states contacts fusion. Gps the partner and co founder of the firm glenn simpson a partner and co founder of the firm simpson. And she asks him for a job at the firm. She's hired as an independent contractor shortly thereafter. Now it seems kind of like an easy way to get a job. I just call up and say i'd like to come work for you. Will who exactly is nelly or nellie or is married to a man named bruce or reuss or at the time is the head of the organized crime drug enforcement task force at the department of justice he says though he had nothing to do with his wife nellie getting a job at fusion. Gps the company that at the time is investigating donald trump. I fast forward to february two thousand sixteen. Donald trump wins the nevada republican primary contest. Late february february twenty third. It's his third win in the first four primary contests and although the primary season would go on for several more months at that point. He's the odds on favourite to win the nomination. In france the same day the european court of human rights rules in favor of abajo more in his case against italy for his unlawful abduction from milan. So now that's a big black eye on italy. You fast forward a couple of weeks later. March fourteenth twenty. Sixteen george popadopoulos. Who at that. Point is a foreign policy adviser to the trump campaign is introduced. Joseph myth sued the fellow who founded link university years and years before he's introduced. Joseph smith sued for the first time during a trip. Popadopoulos took to rome while he was associated with a now defunct london kind of political. Think tank the london center of international law practice. They're not around anymore. But the purpose of that trip to link was to meet officials affiliated with link. University popadopoulos would tell robert muller's investigators later on that myth sued at first seemed uninterested in him but took a greater interest after learning about his role with the trump campaign. The two would begin corresponding. They'd begin emailing calling and even meeting when they were in the same cities overseas a month later. In april twenty sixteen in a meeting. In london england myth sue tells popadopoulos during a recent trip to moscow. He had learned that. The russian government had obtained dirt on hillary clinton at that point clinton is the front runner for the democratic presidential nomination. Of course and so popadopoulos would later tell the fbi that myth suits had the dirt was in the form of emails of clinton and that they had thousands of them. That statement would be the beginning of spy gate and of course spy gate would go on and morph into italy gate. The stealing of our election. That i've been talking about for a long time as well. I'm going to stop here because this could go on for another couple of hours easily. But i just wanted to give a little idea of what has been happening here right under our noses again. Any one of these data points is not a. It's not a prosecutable offense in and of themselves but when you lay the whole thing out and if you read the entire piece on the site you'll see what i mean. You begin to see the forest for the trees. The main overarching goal. That we have to figure out we have to recognize here is that this government is no longer of the people by the people and for the people it is now of the cabal by the cabal and four the ball and so the first step to fighting it has coming to that realization. Our government now no longer works for us. It works for a small group of elites that they have kind of co opted and are all involved in this little circuit. It just keeps going around and around and it's only when we name that we can begin to challenge it and resist it and now we can begin to change it because we can look back and see just how far we've come and importantly we can begin to see who played the biggest roles and who's playing the biggest roles in getting us here and keeping us on that path. That's our show for today. I hope you enjoyed it. If you have any comments on any of the issues we discussed dropped me like you can reach me at comments at itn. Show dot com. That's comments at it. Show dot com. Thanks for listening everyone until next time. Take care of yourselves. If it's on your mind it's in. The news subscribed to end the news. On both i tunes and on stitcher radio. This has been in the news.

desouza cia Donald trump milan abba omar italy portugal fbi rome Us mike dakkak ninety nine link university joseph myth Scotti navinchandra scotty brennan foreign university egyptian government gypsy government george w bush administration
Merrick Garland's Impossible Job

Politics and More Podcast

19:57 min | 3 months ago

Merrick Garland's Impossible Job

"Wnyc studios is supported by forward waiting months for a ten minute. Doctor's appointment healthcare is backwards. Luckily forward is here to clear things up with on demand access to great care backed by the latest tech and top-rated doctors learn more at go forward dot com. That's go forward dot com. This is the political scene a weekly conversation with new yorker writers and guests about politics. It's thursday june seventeenth. I'm dorothy wickham then executive editor of the new yorker during attorney general. Eric garland's confirmation hearings earlier. This year. He spoke passionately about his commitment. To keeping the justice department nonpartisan. I do not regard myself as anything other than the lawyer for the people of the united states. i'm not the president's lawyer I am The united states lawyer. And i will do everything in my power Which i believe is considerable To fend off any effort by anyone to make prosecutions or investigations partisan or political in any way. My job is to protect the department of justice on its employees in going about their job and doing the right thing. According to the facts and the law garland is a centrist. He believes in pursuing justice without becoming entangled in politics yet in the past few years. He's found himself in the center of two of the most fiercely. Partisan episodes in recent history i his nomination to the supreme court was blocked by obstructionist republicans and now as attorney general he has to craft a legal response to the excesses of the trump administration. He has already become a target for conservatives who are portraying him as joe biden's lackey and progressives who him as insufficiently tough on the former president david road and executive editor of new yorker dot com joins me to discuss the minefield that garland is navigating and how his decisions will affect the country in the coming months and years. Hi david welcome back. It's been too long. Hey thanks so much reading me on. Let's start by. Establishing what garland is dealing with us attorney general. Maybe you could give us just a few examples of decisions. He's made in recent weeks. That were not terribly easy. Sure and it. It is yes. A minefield One of the initial was sort of the gene carroll lawsuit. This was a defamation lawsuit that she filed against president trump after he dismissed her rape claim by saying she's not my type To the surprise of many democrats. And even i think the surprise of president biden garland stood by institutions. You know in the past. The government has defended public officials when they are sued for defamation so he is continuing Garland to have the justice department. Defend trump in that case but that caused that biden white house sort of instantly distance themselves from that decision. They issued a statement that they didn't have any warning. That garland was going to do this and biden sort of his spokesperson condemned trump. In the way he he reacted to this. So this is the central issue for garland. He's following legal principle. He's this incredibly fair. And i've been told incredibly kind person but is that what an attorney general should do. When should an attorney general be completely neutral. And when should he sort of pursue a policy agenda of the elected president the attorney general serves. Yeah let's talk about. Maybe a couple of the other controversial decisions. He's opposed the full release of classified department. Memo that william bar had used to distort the findings of the mueller investigation in this case of the investigation memo again the institutional prerogatives to keep those institutional inside memo secret that helps institution in the long term but democrats and the public. You could argue. Should know what that memo says that to what extent that bar distort the truth and hide the truth Of the molar investigation and again garland has come down on being an institutionalists and progressive. Say that's that's that's a mistake when you focus on the institution you're protecting and enabling trump. You wrote about all of this This week and you interview jack goldsmith. Who served in the doj during the george w bush administration and he pointed out that garland faces even more challenges than his predecessors did after. nixon resigned. What are the bigger challenge is here so the country is is much more deeply. Divided is what i'm goldsmith said. And it's interesting. He's a conservative. As you said he served on the bush administration he's a fan of garland. A liberal and conservative kind of legal scholars. Like what garland is doing. But it's a completely different political environment today than it was After watergate Anything garland does is going to be criticized by half the country No matter what either. Republicans or democrats are going to be angry atom. so it's it's much harder for him to get clinical cover for some of the difficult decisions he's gonna have to make And we can talk about the separately because he's overseeing multiple criminal investigations of trump and his associates and he's also overseeing a criminal investigation of hunter biden. President biden's total nightmare for someone who who is known for his temper and says you say his moderation and his you know utter commitment to the sanctity of the law all of which made him perfectly suited for the supreme court even even many conservatives agreed that that would have been a good job for him. But as you're saying it's so different being attorney general and you can't extricate the politics from the law and that job. It's a strange job. And i i kind of learned in writing about this that so. What's okay for the attorney. General to do in terms of politics is for a president to come into office. And say i have a mandate from the people. I campaigned on say. I'm gonna crack down on pharmaceutical companies. That's fine and any attorney. General should carry out the law enforcement priorities of an elected president. What's not acceptable. Is if the attorney general at the president's request decides to go after certain pharmaceutical company. Ceos because they didn't give you know that president large campaign donations and so this modern attorney general approach that emerge sort of after watergate was when it comes to investigations and prosecutions attorney. General should be completely independent of how those proceed. There should be no pressure influence in any way from the white house but when it comes to broad policy approaches. One thing garland's doing is he's using consent decrees with law enforcement agencies around the country to prevent police abuses. That's a priority that joe biden campaigned. On and and he has a democratic mandate. Carry that out. So that's fine but it. It's very confusing. I think to the public like is this a political position or not right and donald trump as we now essentially chase his first attorney general jeff sessions out of office and then he viewed his second attorney. General bill barr. Less is the country's lawyer and morris his own attack dog so he left the justice department and a total mess once heart does go out to garland and maybe just talk a little bit more about just what he has inherited. It's a complete mess. It's it's These new revelations just in the last few days about the justice department Saying they were pursuing a leak but they seized the meta data the phone meta data of at least two democratic members of congress. This is as far as i can. Tell unprecedented It's outrageous and then if you weeks ago there was revelations about reporters for the washington post the new york times cnn Having their phone records that would include adamant. Who's who's are calling out the new yorker. He had his phone records seized by the justice department again. The legal pretense that the trump administration was. They were trying to find out who had leaked classified information to journalists but it's really about intimidation an echoes of the approaches of many authoritarians. Now today and its vaccine because in the digital age. They're all these records now of everything people where they're doing you know who they're emailing who they're calling and all this data that can be subpoenaed and there aren't really clear rules of the road from congress about how to handle it so it's a it's a nightmare for garland and i you know i feel for that. But there's a broader debate to you. Know he should use his powers. Some democrats are arguing again. Democrats have won a mandate here. They won the presidency and trump abuse the powers of the justice department by constantly pushing for political gain from every everything attorney generals did and that was a real problem with bar- So this is concerned that that again garland might be too cautious. He shouldn't be a judge. Act like a judge overseeing trial which he did successfully and very fairly for decades that the attorney general's job is different. Yeah so trump was trying to use the country's most powerful law enforcement agency and the tech sectors data-collecting to smear people. He considered his enemies. And as you say to members of the house intelligence committee adam schiff and eric swallow and again unprecedented. So this is one of the reasons. Democrats are so anxious and angry about the direction. Garland is heading they are. They want to hold trump accountable. And then frankly verma political perspective. They wanna talk about these issues publicly they want to expose the wrongdoings of trump. There's a very you know. The former president is very involved in. Politics is widely expected to run again. So they want more of this to come out. They want to remind voters of these activities and yet garland is trying to restore view of the justice department as neutral apolitical and there was a consensus. After watergate nixon was wrong and he had resigned in shame. That consensus doesn't exist. This is a deeply you know almost evenly divided country. And that's the key difference here. Yes the political landscape is is completely different and then again you live in this digital age where there's all kinds of information you can obtain and subpoena from the government. And and so. It's it's it's a. It's a tremendous challenge for for america on wnyc studios is supported by forward. Know what's crazy waiting months for ten minute doctor's appointment healthcare is backwards before word is clearing things up by offering primary care that's both surprisingly personal and refreshingly straightforward using the latest tech like in-depth genetic analysis and real time bloodwork. Their doctors create highly personalized. Easy to understand. Plans aimed at improving your long term health. Move your health forward today at go. Forward dot com. That's go forward dot com. This is david ramnik every week. Look forward to bringing you the new yorker radio. But i'm also hoping that you will subscribe to the new york and get everything it has to offer. Becoming a subscriber is the best way the only way really to make sure you don't miss the pulitzer prize winning reporting and some of the best writing in the world from jane mayer and ronan farrow and politics. Two go tolentino. In zadie smith on contemporary culture to subscribe please visit our website new yorker dot com or new yorker dot com slash radio hour to get home delivery of the magazine and unlimited digital access to everything including daily cartoons. Crossword puzzles are vast archive of ninety five years of issues. And thank you. Thank you for listening and thank you for reading. Your support helps make possible everything we do one of the most explosive issues. He faces and the country. Faces is the january. Sixth insurrection by trump assists at the house hearing on the issue of republican representative paul gosar of arizona complained. The doj is harassing peaceful patriots across the country. Could you explain exactly what. The department's role is in that investigation. Sure again it's massive More than four hundred people have been arrested for their role in january six riot. This is believed to be one of the largest if not the largest criminal case ever investigated by the federal government and again. The buck stops with merrick garland The biggest question adds that cases investigated is what role if any did donald trump or his allies Roger stone michael flynn to focus of suspicion play in encouraging and even coordinating the assault on the capital And because of congress's inability to agree on january six commission. Again this this hot potato lands and merit garland's hands so that's and then there's all kinds of individual people who you know who you know when inside the capitol and you know their defense attorneys are saying they didn't do anything violent inside the capitol and and they're being caught up in this whole thing and and there's an overzealous prosecution by the justice department. So it's it's an incredibly complex case and jack goldsmith told me this. That merrick garland is going to half to make very hard decisions. Who do you prosecute on january six know. Do you prosecute donald trump and again do you prosecute. Hunter biden. Joe biden son. It remind us only hunter biden case what. What's involved there. Yes there's an active investigation that's overseen by the federal prosecutors in delaware in terms of Biden's it's not clear but hundred sort of lobbying activities and whether he carried them out properly and s- closed everything he was doing. There's a similar investigation to rudy. Giuliani his lobbying both of them lobbying on behalf of foreign governments to disclose and register all their activities as they were supposed to so it's an enormous amount of work You've got a million other issues. Civil rights Things that civil rights issues. That garland wants to prioritize voting rights. He wants to defend voting rights in. Ross he's under pressure to respond to republican state legislatures restricting access in some states Many states most many many states. Most states defending abortion rights across the country. That so there's an again the policing issue I mentioned earlier. It's it's an incredibly busy and fraught to do list for america on and just getting back to january six or second. What do we know about his broader domestic terrorism strategy. Yes and so this week. The day before president biden met with president putin. The white house unveiled a new strategy for countering domestic terrorism. That's fraud as well. I've i've talked to you. Know law enforcement officials at the fbi in particular is is very leery of a policy that some democrats push for where you would designate. Certain organizations in the united states to be terrorist organizations. That has that happens with foreign groups but american citizens domestic organizations have more protections under the constitution where they can say hateful things but that's protected first amendment rights The problem is that hateful speech turns into violence which is illegal So how do you. Crackdown on domestic extremism. That can become violent without playing into the hands of sort of conspiracy theorist you mentioned representative gosar. Saying that you know these the the doj was harassing you know law abiding citizens so if there's too aggressive crackdown on domestic terrorism or domestic extremism. You can see trump and republicans saying we are the victims You know an oppressive federal government is infringing on our abilities to to say what we think in an organized politically. So janet reno served as attorney general for all eight years of bill clinton's presidency the the only attorney general more than a century to stick with the job that long do you think garland can somehow survived these unbelievable political storms. I think garland wants to survive these political storms He's determined to serve. But you have progressives already calling for him to be you know ouston. There was a piece that ran the new republic where the authors were calling for garland to be removed. They said it wasn't intentional. But his you know again. Focus on fairness his focus on defending the law and the institutional rulings by the justice department is leading him to unwittingly protect donald trump and therefore according to progressives he should. He shouldn't be the attorney general so we'll see But it's amazing and looking at all these issues you realize how much of an impact the justice department has on so many issues. It's not just about law enforcement. It's about you know again voting environmental protections anti-trust measures against big tech companies Integration immigration you. Know you name the issue you know. There's gotta be decisions by the justice department. And merrick garland. Thanks so much david. Thanks david road. An executive editor of new yorker dot com is the author of in deep the fbi the cia. And the truth about america's deep state. This has been the political scene. You can subscribe to this at other new yorker podcast by searching for the new yorker and your podcast app and find more political analysis and commentary on new yorker dot com. Feel free to rate and review us on apple podcasts. Our theme music by russell. Sp this program was produced by alex. Barron and colleague warner for new yorker dot com. I'm dorothy window. History can leave scars even one hundred years later. If you come to north tulsa it looks as if bernie had just happened because there's nothing left you mean today which is why come there today. Yes yes if you come there today. It will look as empty as it did that day. They burned it blindspot. Tulsa burning is a podcast series from the history channel and wnyc listen to blindspot tulsa. Burning on apple podcast.

garland justice department Hunter biden jack goldsmith Wnyc studios dorothy wickham Eric garland david road Joe biden united states gene carroll president trump president biden garland william bar biden george w bush administration President biden trump donald trump merrick garland
The Flow of Information

In the News with Mike Dakkak

20:40 min | 6 months ago

The Flow of Information

"Common sense commentary on politics culture and current events. If it's on your mind it's in the news and now in the news with your host mike dakkak. I read something interesting the other day. I thought it was interesting. It said that That joe biden has been spending and by the way. I still don't call him president biden. It's just an editorial kind of philosophy that i've taken on my side in on this show but it said that joe biden has been because i don't believe he won the to put it bluntly but it said that joe biden has been spending the last month trying to contact kim jong hoon of north korea. But that kim jong hoon won't take his call. He says he says that whole only speak to donald. Trump president trump. I thought that was the the funniest thing. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing when i when i saw that cross wires and it's actually i mean it's not a laughing matter definitely isn't satire. I couldn't. I couldn't help. But i thought it was hilarious. And you're probably sitting there and you're thinking to yourself or i mean it's kind of amusing but it's not really all that funny dakkak but i think i think it hits the nail right on the head. I mean the entire world knows this guy is not really the president and a and by the way there are a lot of people who are happy that donald trump is no longer in the white house. There are a lot of people in the power structure all over the world that were not comfortable with the questions and the points that donald trump was raising. And so they're happy he's not there but even those people know what really happened in this election and now the dust is settled a little bit here. And there are some distance between the certification of the election. January sakes and the objection to the electoral d- The electors in the electoral votes in the us. A weekend all look back on it now. We all know it was stone. That's why they're troops in washington. Dc still the capitol. Police came out a couple of weeks ago and said well there are militia groups that want to blow up the capital and they wanna kill every single member of congress and they wanna roughshod want want to run roughshod over the capital and they wanna do all this data and they came out on monday and said well there's actually no credible threat and so we're taking down the fencing or at least moving it back a little bit closer to the capitol building. Minutes all ridiculous. The real reason they they're they're the troops are in washington. Dc's because they know like. Maria zack said several weeks ago. Who's who's working hard to bring all of these allegations of italy gates alight. She said several weeks ago. The real reason they're there is because they know we know they know. We know that the person was stolen. Nothing they can do about it now. I mean there really is no such thing as the perfect crime right. No matter how hard you plan and plot you may plan and plot but god is ultimately the best plan the best plotter. I mean there's always that that one strand the fiber that falls off your clothing is you're robbing the bank or something that happens to come from a sweatshirt discontinued making in two thousand and five and so the only person that sells it as the thrift store. You have to buy it from the day before the robbery or something like that. Isn't that how these murder shows go. Just because nobody is seeing. You doesn't mean god is not seeing you. The same thing is happening here now. Catherine austin fitts. I was watching An interview with catherine austin fitts recently and she was talking about the microchipping that they're doing with us through these vaccines and the gentleman who was interviewing her asked her a very interesting question. I thought he said they're doing this. And we know they're doing all of these things but they're moving so quickly now with what they're doing. Why do you think that is. Why do you think they're moving. They've always been moving at a pretty rapid pace but they're moving so quickly now that they risk exposing themselves and they are in many ways exposing themselves and fits said well. That's that's the million dollar question. That's the most important question that not enough people are asking. She said if the genie popped out of the bottle right now and gave you my three wishes or allowed me to ask the questions that i really wanted to ask and he would reveal the answers. The first one would be who is mr global. Who's really running the show and number two would be. What are they so afraid of. She was talking about. How what they wanna do as microchip everybody and by the way. I'm not sure. Catherine austin fitts is right when she says the most important question. The reason everything is moving so quickly right now is because so many people are waking up and so the quicker people are waking up to quicker. They have to move around and around. We're going this. Is you know a quicken. Now that's happening but fitz's talking about how they wanna. They wanna do microchip. Everybody and she said that by microchipping. What they are planning to do is control as she's worked on wall street for many years. Catherine austin fitts. Her background is in finance but she was also hud director housing and urban development in washington several years back i believe it was the george w bush administration could have been the clinton administration goes that far back but it was around that time so she's worked with a lot of elites both in the finance world and in politics real one world government globalist crowds and she said you know the one thing i want people to know this was in a separate earlier interview but she said the one thing i want people to know and she was speaking hear more about the wall. Street crowd though. I suspect actually. I know they have sympathizers if not downright allies in washington. Dc but she said the one thing i want people to know is that these people actually do believe in slavery they want to enslave folks. A lot of people are perplexed by bill gates and his activities former microsoft ceo speaking of elites vaccines. They say why is he so heavily involved in all of this vaccine stuff. I mean he wants to be treated as the as the as a sovereign nation when he goes to the world health organization. Doesn't he have enough money. He's got a one hundred and fifty billion dollars or whatever it is he has now. What does he want with more money. But it's not about the money he wants. What every person wants once they get all the money they're ever going to need or spin. He wants control. That's what the game is. That's what it's really about. That's what people really want. Why do you think when people get a lot of money the first thing they do invariably or the next thing they do is they go into politics they make millions they make a name for themselves then they go into they become governor congressman or congresswoman and then ultimately they want to become president because power is the real game control and so it says you know these people are really into slavery but of course. What's the twenty first century version of slavery. It's not leg irons and building tombs or monuments or performing manual labor in fields and harvesting crops. No for them. It's mind control so fit. Says these chips are about that. They can program what you do. They can program how you feel. Of course they don't tell us that. Read up on these madonna vaccines for example. What you find is even they call it an operating system. That's not us calling it that that's them calling it an operating system you read the literature the press releases the promotional material the copy on the website. And you all this kind of bizarre language operating system software. It's like they're talking about windows. Xp or something technology platform plug and play interchangeability programs. Apps interface with other programs plug and play interchangeability. The hell what does that have to do with killing a virus or cheering me of an illness. I don't want any kind of. I don't know about you folks but i don't want any kind of plug and play interchangeability going on without my knowledge and my body. I don't want my body interfacing with a machine but of course it's not about what you are i want. It's about what they want. And she says it's about having us be able to interface with machine so they can learn to do our jobs and we can train machines to do our jobs. It's kind of like the reverse matrix if you remember that. Movie the matrix where our hero neo played by keanu reeves sits in that chair and he plugs in a plug it into a whole nother bag of his head and he downloads all of the software and suddenly he knows how to fly a plane and do kung fu and jump across rooftops. That are a quarter of a mile wide. Well this would be the opposite of that. This would be a machine plugging into us. But they would download the information on how to build a car on assembly line or or so a handbag or harvest a crop or whatever and then of course comes the depopulation which no one wants to talk about. Either if you've taken this vaccine we all may have to take it eventually but if you have taken this vaccine you're part of an experiment that's what it is. It's not about cove in nineteen. This thing has covid. Nineteen as as dr lee merritt Said recently who spent decades studying vaccines she says. This doesn't make any sense as a vaccine in the first place you don't make vaccines for viruses and for diseases for which there are treatments. That's why vaccines exist because Diseases come about where there aren't where there is no treatment and that's why vaccines have to be developed for them. This thing has a ninety nine point nine percent survival rate. There's plenty of treatments for it so we shouldn't even be making a vaccine ford in the first place but of course the problem is when you try and amplify information like that or even opinions like that even if you say hey listen. This is my opinion and i just want to give people a different point of view. They wage war against you. And it's not that they stand up and say that this guy a quack. Don't listen to him. No they ban you from twitter and from facebook. They take down your youtube videos. But they don't stop there anymore then they take your books off of amazon then they ban you from using people they ban you from collecting any kind of money. It's about punishing you but it's also really about sending a message. A chilling effect. Hey this guy just got banned from pay pal deck. Just got banned from people. Now he has to ask people to send in physical checks to buy his books or subscribed to as podcasts or by his merchandise the mugs and the t shirts that he sells on his. or whatever. You know i've got kids. I've got rented pay and i have to eat. I can't afford that happening to me. And there's always a percentage of your followers who follow off if you're not where they are right there's a small percentage of hardcore supporters. That will follow you wherever you may go for you to the ends of the earth but there is a percentage of of drop off your if they happen to like twitter and they're on twitter and you're no longer there well it's kind of like out of sight out of mind they don't follow you the telegram or wherever else gab. Wherever else you may be and so some people think to themselves well. I can't afford that to happen to me. It's a maybe. I'm not gonna published a story about the fraud that was discovered in georgia. And by the way that's changing. I'll let you know. They can't bank on it as much as they used to. It's decreasing but it's still there in a small percentage and some people. They pull their punches. They don't talk about the fraud that was discovered in georgia are how joseph smith sued. This character happened to be at that infamous. Two thousand and fifteen dinner according to sydney powell or michael. Flynn is photograph sitting next to vladimir putin they say i w i don't need any trouble i can't afford it. I'll publish that when i can't afford it. That's when all published those things but the thing is you wind up never publishing them because it's never a good time. It's never a good time to lose money or to be waged war upon and that's what they bank on. That's what they bank on you feeling or believing are at least being afraid of the possibility of. That's why they do what they do. And that's why they put the screws to you in a manner that they do syntagma mystic not about justice. If a worry about justice they would let the free market. Decide the free market of ideas. They'd let you stand in the middle of the town square on your soapbox and say beware and then a year later when the virus is eradicated in everybody's back to school and back to work and no one is ill from the vaccine as they would have you believe and no adverse effects have been reported. Well then you look like a fool right you go away and no one ever hears from you again. You've been shamed like that fellow way. Back when i believe was in two thousand twelve with said the world is going to end. No-one banned him from twitter. No-one banned him from facebook. No-one banned him from pal day. Just let them talk and say the world is going to add but the world didn't end. Have you ever heard of that person again. I can't even remember his name. That's what they that's what they do to you when you're wrong if it were about the free exchange of ideas that's how it would go but it's thought about that it's about control and by the way they say well you know it's it's it's the this is dangerous information and your causing harm to other and you. It's the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded movie theater. It's not. That's not the right analogy. Yes it's illegal to yell fire in a crowded movie theater because in that scenario you're contriving a situation where you can be. You reasonably assured that reasonable people are going to panic and needlessly caused harm. That wouldn't otherwise come the equivalent in this scenario though is if you you go out to the movies and before you get there you read a scientific study. That was conducted in india or indonesia about how the butter on the popcorn at the movie theater uses harmful to people's health causes cancer or causes some other illness. And so you stand off to the side on the side of that huge line of people who are waiting to buy the popcorn without butter on it and you say hey. I know you're gonna think this is crazy folks and i know it sounds crazy but this butter. They're using isn't the greatest thing in the world and here are some natural alternatives that could just as easily sell that you can just as easily buying e that have a much more proven record and maybe you decide. It's for you and maybe you don't but i feel like you should at least be aware of this other butter. You can decide for yourself which is best for you and your family but as soon as you open your mouth movie. Theater management comes out a couple of goons hired by the theater. They come out and they grab you by the scruffy your neck and not only tell you that you can't talk about the other kinds of butter but they take your movie ticket. Tear it up throw you out and then they tell you can never watch another movie in any movie theater ever again. That's the correct analogy. Would they be right in doing that. They obviously have an interest to protect them. And you're standing there telling them that a product they sell is harmful to the people who are buying it so they have an interest so maybe they would be right in doing the but their interests are not your interests. I guess that's the point that needs to be made the guy. Yelling fire in the crowded theater does not have your interests at heart. The guy trying to warn you about the butter on your popcorn. That's going to slowly turn you into a walking mac book because there's a microchip hidden in it. That person may or may not be right. They may be wrong but at least they're trying to inform you of something. You may not have been informed of before they're trying to give you all the information and possible and are allowing you to make a determination that person that's kicking you out is is saying in essence. These people don't have the authority to think for themselves. We are going to do the thinking for them and we are going to decide for. That's what the problem here is. That's what the problem is always been getting rid of trump wasn't about trump. It wasn't about oh. He put kids in there. Their kids in cages right. It wasn't about calling the president of ukraine and asking for a political favor that happens daily if not hourly in washington. Dc it wasn't about tweeting means things it was about the nine you the ability to pick your own leadership to vote for the person you wanna vote for to think for yourself. That's what the war against trump is and that's why they're trying to shut everybody up and that's why dangerous. The person that is trying to control the information that reaches you whatever that information is. That's the person you need to ask questions of and be wary of the person trying to give you an abundance of information. There are exceptions of course but the person trying to give you an abundance of information. That's usually the person that can be trusted or at least heard out and you can decide for yourself whether or not they can be trusted. You see the thing is they. Don't want representative government and they don't want representatives society. Representative government is their enemy. Why because they're the few and worthy many and when you're the few the globalist and you wanna control the many the population you have to centralize everything you have to do. The opposite of democratize at democratization instead of cash that you have in your pocket and you can spend the wherever you want. Outside of their circle of control and influence you have digital currency that can be turned on and off by one person with the click of a mouse now instead of controlling three hundred and thirty million people and their cash flows. You just have to control the one person who controls that button that can turn on and off and ban you from pay pal or amazon. Or what have you. Laws have to be crafted by bureaucrats in washington. Dc not locally by your state or town leaders now instead of controlling three hundred thirty million people you just have to control three or four hundred in washington dc. That's why the media calls the presidential race and they decide what information is is correct and what is disinformation instead of controlling three hundred thirty million people the population of the us. You just have to control about a dozen people at cnn. this why they tried to get donald trump. This is why they hate him because he was trying to give the control back to the people he was trying to give the people back their voice where my sister's house yesterday having dinner. We were talking about how we miss. Donald trump and biden wasn't doing much of anything and these are not hardcore trump supporters. But the difference when trump was there in now is palpable. And that's why kim jong hoon is right to only take trump's call because What's leader is the person who has the mandate of the people they purport the govern. No more no less elections and fraud and florida has thirty. Electoral votes in california has fifty five. Bet that all well and good but ultimately it's about who has the people behind them and in march twenty twenty one in the us. That person is not joe biden. Well that's a chauffeur. hope you guys enjoyed. You have any comments on any of the issues we discussed. Drop me a line. You can reach me comments. Itn show dot com. That's comments and itn show dot com. Thanks for listening everyone until next time to yourselves and each other. If it's on your mind it's in. The news subscribed to end the news. On both i tunes and on stitcher radio. This has been in the news.

catherine austin fitts kim jong hoon joe biden washington Donald trump mike dakkak president biden dakkak Maria zack mr global george w bush administration dr lee merritt twitter capitol building north korea Trump sydney powell fitz
Biden's Taliban problem

POLITICO Dispatch

12:38 min | 2 months ago

Biden's Taliban problem

"Do you think the past twenty years have been a waste. It depends who you talk to do. I trust the on. No but i trust the capacity of the afghan military with better trained better equipped and more confident in terms of conducting wars. I mean it is undoubtedly true that there have been gains robens rights for human rights in afghanistan for quote unquote democracy in the country. There have been elections hughes frame. Be souls from afghanistan's presidential election show incumbent dash johnny has security slim majority. There is at least a central government in place but what the. Us mission was was basically to transform afghanistan into a stable nation in central asia. It has not done that. The taliban are on the march and gaining territory at an astonishing rate has not even succeeded in defeating the taliban on the battlefield. I'm jeremy siegel this is. Politico dispatch and today. I'm alex ward. I'm a new national security reporter politico. And i'm the anchor of our newsletter national security daily as this september deadline for troop withdrawal nears alex ward on recent taliban advances biden's big bet on diplomacy and afghanistan. The taliban is a hard line. Insurgent group that controlled. Afghanistan took over afghanistan in the nineteen nineties that fed into the ninety s and it was severely brutal right. I mean just subverting human rights for women for children now but they will so heavy into they use heavy guns and cannons for the few just extremely like old style really horrific form of leadership and the us was not a fan to begin with a really not a fan after september eleventh when It became clear that the taliban had harbored al qaeda in afghanistan and so the george w bush administration launched an invasion. Good afternoon on my orders. The united states military has begun strikes against al-qaeda terrorist training camps and military installations of the taliban regime in afghanistan and it led to the long standing twenty year war. That is still ongoing. Technically these carefully targeted actions designed to disrupt the use of afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations and to attack the military capability of the taliban regime. The us never really gained a military win. Did push the taliban out and The taliban kept fighting back and making their own certain gains and so there was never really a big military win. You know. there's there's elections and there's a democratic government in theory although it's very corrupt and there's tons of issues. Have there been improvements. Yes but is the overall situation solved right. The thing that the us really went into fight After a while i it was remove al qaeda and the taliban then it was sort of transforming afghanistan. Looks like that first mission somewhat succeeded. The second mission is not despite that lack of success. President biden in april made this announcement to withdraw all troops from the country by september eleven of this year period. We cannot continue the cycle of extending or expanding our military presence in afghanistan hoping to create ideal conditions for the drawl and expecting a different result. This was an announcement that drew a lot of blowback from critics from some experts. Saying it's hasty and would lead to violence and embolden the taliban as the. Us has been withdrawing troops over the past couple months. Have we seen that fear come true yes no i mean i think it was always clear that as you know. American and foreign troops left afghanistan. The taliban would take over certain regions and they have as by some estimates. They've taken two hundred districts. Many of them in the north of afghanistan which is traditionally the power center base really for the government So it's not that in the sensitive surprise what a surprise surprises how swiftly. They've done it and they've done it in some areas where you know. They're afghan troops put down their arms or that weren't really you know well guarded over the weekend. Afghan government troops in the north of the country abandoned their posts and fled to neighboring tajikistan. The reason a taliban advanced they felt they were ill equipped to oppose. The taliban has struggled to take over many cities. They've tried but they've been rebuffed so far and so what we're seeing right now as maybe heading towards a stalemate in afghanistan where the taliban has made these initial gains the afghan government and others are sort of pushing back. And then we'll be you know at a at an equilibrium. Let's say which could make the negotiations Even harder because the taliban away seems to be looking for a military advantage so they can make a political deal a diplomatic deal on their terms if that is no longer the case. Let's say where you know. The afghan government and the taliban are kind of fifty fifty. That's not going to be the case. But roughly there then does the taliban really think about a diplomatic strategy or do they push on and then we haven't a longer ongoing civil war but this time of course without the us and foreign troops in the middle of it. You mentioned negotiations. Obviously the biden administration has pushed for a diplomatic approach. Here Over the weekend there was this. Big meeting with delegations from both the afghan government and the taliban to discuss a path toward peace. You and your new newsletter have exclusive interviews with the us's special envoy for afghanistan and afghanistan's national security adviser about at all and people can find a link to that in our show notes. But alex what happened during those talks this weekend. And what sort of progress has there been in negotiations. Yeah it's yet. Another set of talks between kabul and its allies and the taliban and this was a very senior level delegation writes. There were some high hopes for this meeting in the end. You know not too much has come out of it. We there was a joint declaration. Saying look you know. They want to accelerate the pace of discussions. In other words. You know maybe trying to reach a solution sooner rather than later especially as foreign troops including american troops are leaving and the taliban. I'm told by a source familiar. Offered a three thousand prisoner swap right. So three thousand prisoners released each and a ceasefire during aid Which is currently not agreed to win. Kabul is thinking about this right now but this is sort of where we're at you know we're still at the. Hey can we exchanged prisoners. Can we not. We're not really at the. What does the future afghan government look. Like and i know speaking to u s and afghan officials at. They're pretty upset at the slow pace of these negotiations. So what is the next step. Look like in your eyes as you said. The taliban appears to be advancing in hopes of getting some leverage. They're still this back and forth. Violence like wear will things ultimately end up because a stalemate isn't sustainable in the long term right. I mean in a way. We've had a true stalemate over twenty years right. There was a time where the. Us did push out the taliban but they came back and there are countries around including pakistan that have interest in allegedly and keeping the taliban around. So i don't really expect you know the taliban to win outright militarily i think the the us and others are right that Sort of fall of kabul is not inevitable. It could happen. Don't get me wrong But at the moment it does seem like there is a bit of a stacey. So there could be a stasis that could change of course and if that's the case then what i think will happen is it will be a big disagreement between washington and kabul over the diplomacy. Because right now this is the main part of the american strategy right help. Broker this diplomatic deal between the taliban afghanistan but the afghan government is saying look. The taliban is pursuing a military first strategy. You know they're not really playing ball they don't really want to engage with us They're doing nothing to make peace now. We'll a stalemate lead to the taliban to reconsider possibly many people would say no What it could mean. Then as that as negotiations drag out as the war drags out kabul in washington sort of start to differ on you know we try diplomacy thing and it didn't work out so I expect turbulence ahead. What does that mean for. The people living in afghanistan more horror. Unfortunately you're expecting more war. You're expecting a lot more time in between maybe having a functioning government versus not having one right now You're expecting little help from outside forces that have more you know air support and firepower right now. It seems like when the us will get involved in afghanistan it will be for counterterrorism missions. Not for anti-taliban missions. We'll see if that changes over time but you know for the moment feinman afghanistan. I'm worried about the future of my country. Because i will maybe expecting more war maybe expecting more political strife and frankly no resolutions of the problems that the us went into solve twenty years ago. So what does that mean for. The biden administration because they decided to pull out there putting diplomacy first but a diplomatic solution. If it's even possible seems so far away. Will this be a loss for the white house. You know it really depends like if kabul falls on biden's watch. There's no question that people are going to blame him right. Because he's the one who made the decision to withdraw. Us troops leading nato to poets troops and others. You know he. His whole thing is look. We tried the military solution. It didn't work. We're going to try to broker some sort of deal and in fact the. Us has more flexibility to broker a deal. Because we're not in the war and so we can sort of be on both sides or at least not have our troops in harm's way and so we can be frank with both sides That is all well and good as long as taliban does not take over by force so if that happens i think everyone's going to quickly jump on biden and say this was a failure However if you sort of muddle through or if there is even a small Even incremental progress on the diplomatic front that leads to some sort of mean even future power sharing agreement between kabul and taliban then i think people will say look by made the right call. He got troops out of harm's way and there isn't political progress. I don't think anyone truly believes that the us can make this fundamental massive change in afghanistan. There are some critics who say that. But i think the majority of people realize that america's ability to influence the future politics future life in afghanistan is quite limited at this point. The question is what was the best way to make. Progress and biden has put all his eggs in the diplomatic basket. Alex ward victims for talking with me. Of course things are adamant. Alex ward is the author of politicos new national security daily newsletter. You can sign up for that at politico dot com slash newsletters. Also today. candida is planning to ease border restrictions for fully vaccinated travelers from the us on august ninth before loosening restrictions for people from other countries. A month later. The trudeau government's announcement on monday followed months of pressure on ottawa and washington to ease the rules on non essential travel. A major unanswered question at this point is how and when the biden administration will go back its own measures at the shared border and a federal judge has handed down the first felony sentence in january insurrection on monday. Us district judge randolph. Moss sent thirty eight year old. Paul hodgkin's of tampa to prison for eight months for obstructing congress's effort to tabulate and certify. The electoral vote as imposed the sentence. Moss said hodgkin's sent a profound and dangerous message by raising the trump flag on the senate floor saying quote the symbolism of that act is unmistakable and that people have to know that assaulting the united states capitol and impeding the democratic process. Even if you don't come bearing arms will have consequences. Episode of politico dispatch included music composed by brake master cylinder. If you like what you're hearing and want to help us out. Tell a friend to check out the show. I'm jeremy siegel. Thanks for listening.

taliban afghanistan afghan government alex ward united states kabul dash johnny jeremy siegel biden administration george w bush administration President biden al qaeda biden Afghan government Politico democratic government hughes qaeda tajikistan asia
Irans Presidential Election, With Suzanne Maloney

The President's Inbox

31:27 min | 3 months ago

Irans Presidential Election, With Suzanne Maloney

"Welcome to the president's. Inbox is here for podcast about the foreign policy challenges facing united states. I'm jim lindsey director studies at the council on foreign relations. This week's topic is iran's presidential election with being discussed what's at stake when ronnie and spoke to the polls on friday suzanne maloney susannah vice president and director of the foreign policy program at the brookings institution were research focuses on iran in persian gulf energy. She is advised. Both democratic republican administrations on iran policy including as a member of secretary of state condoleeza rice is policy planning staff during the george w bush administration and as an external adviser to senior state department officials. During the obama administration is written two books on iran in last year. She added the volume iranian revolution at forty which brookies institution press published suzanne. Thanks for being here. Thanks so much for having me. Suzanne finish presidential election in quotes when we talk about iranian elections not free and fair election in a western sense. For instance. candidates have to be approved to run but before we get the mechanics. Could you just give us a sense of how significant this particular election is. Thanks jim and i think it's a really good question. Iranian elections aren't free and fair. But they do. Have i think some signaling value in terms of understanding what the state of the internal political dynamics are within the islamic republic. And they also have a shaping impact on iran's engagement with the world and in terms of the regime's treatment of its own population. So we have seen at least some shifts in the way that iran engages at different points in time after the election in nineteen ninety-seven of a reformist cleric iran appeared to engage more openly with the world. There were in fact. Some significant reforms to iran's internal political system into its economy and we've seen shifts backward as well in two thousand five with the election of what's known as a principal list a hard line candidate by the name of mahmoud off nina jhad who engaged in provocations that alienated iran and contributed to iran's further isolation. So in that sense While this election won't represent a an accurate barometer of the opinions of the iranian people. I think that it will have some impact on iran's relationship with the world and it will also tell us something about the political establishment and where the islamic republic may go from here who cases dan. I want to get into that question. But let's hold off on it for minute. Likewise let's dolphins specific candidates and issues. I really like if you could just give us. A basic primer on iranian elections. Let's begin with the question who actually gets to run. Well that's one of the most significant elements of the iranian electoral system. Which is that. There is something called the guardians council and unelected body of twelve clerics and jurists who are empowered to essentially all candidates for all elections and they have played in increasingly heavy-handed role particularly around iranian presidential elections over the course of the past twenty years at this point. They have approved only seven candidates out of approximately six hundred who registered to run and while many of those were simply protest candidates or people who were registering purely for theatrics. Also this guardians council also in this case Disqualified both the sitting vice president of the islamic republic and a number of other senior officials who have held significant positions across the iran establishment including those that required vetting through the same process in the past. So it is clearly a very arbitrary mechanism and one which the islamic republic uses to essentially ensure that it's a very closed system of elections who picks the guardian council. They elected by the irani. People know they are not elected by the iranian people. Six of the members of the guardians council are handpicked by the supreme leader and six of them are essentially vetted through the parliament and they're approved by the supreme leader so there is at least some degree of mild competition but ultimately it's really They are a hand-picked elites chosen by iran's unelected supreme leader. Do we know suzanne. What criteria the guarding council uses as it. We knows the field so to speak mentioned. Six hundred down seven are there established principles or is this through their discretion. We're left to wonder how they get to the decisions. They make well as with most things in iran. It's a little bit of both. There are some established criteria including in post revolutionary constitution which include criteria such as a requirement to have been born in iran and that in the past has infect proven somewhat difficult to meet for some candidates but there are also a number of aspects of the vetting process which appear to be entirely at the discretion of the guardians council. And this is ben. Subject of a great deal of controversy as prominent members of the iranian establishment. Have at different points in time then disqualified probably the most famous case of that was in the two thousand thirteen presidential election which produced an outcome for hassan. Rohani who has now spent eight years in that position. One of the candidates who was disqualified for that race was in fact the former president of iran. The late elliott hashemi. Rafsanjani had served two terms as president. He had run again for president and had been vetted and qualified to compete but in two thousand thirteen. He was disqualified and it was. You know there's a. There's a robust Kind of conspiracy. Theory and discussion in iran about why that might be but i think the ultimate conclusion that we can draws that the guardians council sees its role as essentially protecting the insular political establishment of the islamic republic essentially setting very narrow boundaries on the choices that are available to iranians. You mentioned the incumbent. President ruhani suzanne. He's not up for re election. But that's because he's term limited by the iranian constitution correct. That is correct. Okay so now as we look at some of the decisions that were made to exclude candidates you mentioned not allowing the incumbent vice president to run. i also notice. According to news reports that former parliamentary speaker ali larijani was innocent as conservative was not allowed to be a candidate. But his brother happens to be a member of the guardian council and he issued a public protest against the council's decision and then subsequently i tell how many endorsed the council's decision. But then a senator tweet apparently is by tweet. These days that in the vetting process some candidates were wrong calling on the council to reevaluate. And as i understand it. The council decided not to reevaluate. Should we make anything of this. There's always drama in iranian elections and this round appears to be drama centered on the personality of ali larijani and potentially around. I think the larger larijani family who have been key elements of iranian political establishment throughout the past forty plus years as you mentioned sonic large on the brother of the man who was disqualified serves on the guardians council on has been in other very significant positions. He wants been talked about as a potential heir to the supreme leader In terms of that position there are rumors that ali larijani's disqualification may have come because of reports about potential dual nationality of one of his children. Of course many of the siahaan's of the iranian elite have some managed to produce far-flung opportunities for their own children and so we find daughters and sons of the most senior members of the islamic republic. Who spent much of their lives in europe or in the united states and it would appear that. This is one of the issues with respect to ali larijani. In my view. This was a little bit more of a tempest in a teapot. Larijani has run in several prior iranian presidential elections. He's never managed to secure much of the vote. There was some sense that he might try to position himself. As the moderate who could succeed where hassan rohani stumbled rohani also coming from kind of moderate conservative background but larijani has very limited charisma. It's not clear he couldn't fact avoid the pitfalls that have dragged down the ronnie presidency. Nor is it very clear he would have been able to command the same kind of excitement at the polls that did appear to emerge at least with some degree of orchestration. No doubt back in two thousand thirteen when ronnie was first elected so. I think this was the controversy which may or may not have stirred up a little bit of additional interest in this year's iranian elections. But i'm not sure. It had a manifest impact on either the outcome of the election or on iranian policies. And so we shouldn't read. It assigned the idaho power somehow. How waning ring question. I think it's a sign that iranian politics are always contentious and that the political establishment feuds among itself and that there are secrets that they are prepared to deploy to their own advantage in order to gain some kind of currency but beyond that what it tells us about the resilience of the iranian system. I think is is what we already know which is that. This is a system that has survived every catastrophe. I would've said short of the plague that the islamic republic has indeed survived a pandemic. it has taken a devastating toll on the country's population and its economy. And yet you know despite the internet in fractiousness within the iranian political establishment the elite remains relatively resilient as the regime. So as you look at the disqualifications my understanding is is that the main moderate candidates and again let me put that in quotation marks have been excluded. Maybe you can help us understand. Suzanne what determine moderate means in context since many of the policies favored by so-called moderates would not be seen as moderate here. Let's say in the united states or in europe. Yeah i will try to probably over. Simplify the divisions within the iranian elite. And i'll do that by stretching back to nineteen seventy-nine very briefly. It's important to recognize that you know. Iranians came to the streets to overturn the monarchy and then they embraced in a slavic republic without a lot of specifications about what that would entail but there was no one political constituency that actually affected the islamic revolution and while the political establishment has narrowed considerably over the years. I threw a effective civil war that took place during the first years of the islamic republic and more recently through attrition and through the intensive intensifying polarization among the elite. There has never been one single perspective on politics or policy there have always been deep. Philosophical divides over key issues within the islamic republic. And so what we've seen over the course of these many years as an attempt to sort of explain this or understand it by putting it in terms that we recognize which is to say laughter right reformist versus conservative in those terms. Don't always translate perfectly but it is quite clear that in the late. Nineteen ninety s a political tendency within the establishment of the islamic republic came to the fore that really did believe in trying to liberalize political institutions of the revolution to try to incorporate more opportunity for democratic institutions and For the views of the iranian people to help to shape those policies and they in fact for a brief time appeared to be ascendant but at every point for the past twenty years. Those forces have been on the defensive because they don't control the key levers of power whether it's the security forces or whether it's ultimate decision making within the institutions of government. Iran government is bifurcated between these elective institutions like the presidency and the parliament and the institutions. That are unelected like the guardians council that we discussed in the office of the supreme leader himself. Which has grown quite large and so elections are still held. There is still quite a bit of diversity. Within the political establishment but ultimately the impact of those elections has become increasingly less significant on key iranian policies because ultimately the elective offices can only accomplish what the unelected office is. Permit them to accomplish. Okay we spent some time talking about candidates. I want to talk about voter. Suzanne who gets to vote in iran. This assistant like the united states. You can vote if you want to not vote if you want to. This system like australia where you're required on penalty to vote. Who is the iranian electric. Urinate electorate are all adults over the age of eighteen. And while there are some pressures incentives around voting. There is not a such a penalty that individuals can't simply stay away from the ballot box. And so what we've seen over. The course of the past. Twenty years is a is a continuing reduction in the levels of turnout punctuated occasionally by exceptions to that trend. But i would expect in based on the polling that has been done within iran as well as by outside organizations. This is likely to be the lowest turnout in any election. Since iranian revolution in nineteen seventy nine and turn out. Times has been well over seventy percent. There have been you know sort of attempts to utilize the turn out as a sort of vindication or legitimation of the islamic republic. And that is why there was some speculation that the larijani disqualification might have been a kind of ploy to generate additional interest to try to persuade people to come out and vote but the fact that there has been no real shift in the slate of candidates who are available to iranians that there has been no permission for anyone who represents a significantly different point of view From that of the political establishment suggested at this stage the leaders of the islamic republic are quite content to have a relatively modest turnout. They will use in the thirty s or forty percentile of the electorate as enough of a of a legitimation of their own power to do iranian campaigns. Work suzanne. I mean they made a decision at the end of may as to who the actual candidates can be the elections about twenty four days later how to any of the remaining seven candidates get their case with forty ronnie and public. Well first of all. It's important to note that the official campaign is preceded by a long period of unofficial campaigning. By most of the aspirants to power within iran and so the debate about who the president might be did not begin with the qualifications by the guardians council. That's been going on for months. But it is one of the interesting features of the iranian system that there is short and intense burst of official campaigning. Activity may typically does include of public appearances. That's become more difficult because iran is going through. What would describes v wave of cove it at the moment and the pandemic restrictions have made it complicated. At least one of the candidates leading candidate ibrahim racy has come under intense criticism for holding a large public rally and has canceled at least one subsequent public rally but there's also an enormous amount of television coverage which is the way that most uranium received their news even today and there are typically debates. This time around there have been three public debates which have been broadcast and while viewership is not as high as it has been in more apparently competitive elections that took place in the past. They tend to be wheeling conversations where each candidate is looking for an opportunity to jab at the other and they can be bitter nasty and quite intensely fought. These have not been quite as interesting but they've had some important moments in drama. An interest in it does appear at least. Some of the polling suggests that there is a modest uptick in terms of expected participation perhaps as a result of the interest that may have been generated by those conversations suzanne. You've mentioned the gentleman who is favored to win. Is abraham racy. He tells a little bit about him. Who is he. What's his background. What does he propose. Ebrahim racy is the head of the judiciary and he is someone who has been on the ascendant for the past decade or so seen as a potential successor to the supreme leader when he dies. Iran's supreme leader is over the age of eighty at this point and while he's in good health. There's a lot of speculation about who might come next rice. E has a background in the judiciary Having served in in various subordinate roles and about a decade ago he began to take on increasing interest as someone who was being given important positions. He was made the administrator of iran's largest shrine and its endowment which numbers in the billions in mashhad was added in twenty nineteen to the assembly of experts which is another important of body within iran and he was one of the candidates For years ago when hassan ronnie ran for reelection and he was the kind of foremost adversary to rohani in that campaign so he has been given increasing prominence but his most important so to speak is is evident. Willingness to indulge in fierce and completely arbitrary repression against iran's he was one of several individuals who approved what has become known as one of the worst massacres since the iranian revolution. The killing of upwards of five thousand political prisoners after the end of the iran iraq war five the islamic republic and and role in that it which is a crime against humanity is something that candidates have alluded to in this election within iran but has made him detested. Many is five iranian public suzanne. Is there a chance that he in fact won't win. The opposition tomb will coalesce around another candidate. And if so who might that candidate. Unfortunately i think there is a very limited chance that he won't win. Because in fact of the seven candidates five are from the conservative or principal side of the iranian political spectrum and only two or from the more moderate or reformist camp. The best known of those were the most prominent of those nassir bazzi who just resigned his position as head of iran's central bank and who has been the most effective and articulate of the critics in this campaign of rac- but the real question that everybody's watching now is to see which among the conservative candidates will withdraw their own candidacies in order to pave the way for icees victory. That's a well-known tactic in iranian elections. In fact it was a reformist candidate who withdrew from the race just a few days before the actual ballot in two thousand thirteen that enabled asandra honey to win at that time. And that was a heavily broker decision by mohammed autograph to essentially hand the field to ronnie at this point several days before the the actual vote none of the other conservative candidates have in fact withdrawn. But they are being heavily lobbied both in the public press as well as presumably in private to do so and most of the public opinion polling which has been conducted in iran. Seems to suggest that even if they continue in the race. Racy is the hands on favorite among conservative candidates. Who are most likely to turn out. There is a. I think a real question about what the turnout will be from those who would favor some kind of Reformist candidate or those who are alienated from the islamic republic. And so it seems likely that racy could win by default because the electorate that comes to the polls will be mostly those who find him. Attractive will so as his jockey is going on suzanne. The issue's been what are they at least publicly disagreeing about i will note you mentioned earlier. Iran has been racked by the pandemic maybe five surges in all its economy has been in a shambles for quite some time. There's the question. I would imagine of political balance of the country though. Obviously that may get Caused the guardian council gets to say who runs the issue. The iran nuclear deal divisions in these conversations that these candidates are having most iranian elections as in most elections anywhere in the world. The bread and butter issues loom largest. But of course in iran the bread and butter issues that is the economy and the day to day lives of ordinary people are intimately connected with relationships with the rest of the world and by default by extension with the nuclear deal as and so there has been a lot of conversation about how to fix the economy what that entails and of course the fact that the more prominent opponent of the front runner is the former head was in fact when he registered still the head of iran's central bank has put that candidate hennessy on the hotseat as essentially bearing some responsibility for the fact that the economy has been somewhat disastrous. Despite the fact that this is ben a period of time in which is a lot of focus on those issues but of course stat also opens up the conversation about the nuclear issue and about iran's relationship with the rest of the world and so this is despite the fact that these debates weren't terribly fascinating. These were the really juicy moments where you heard the back and forth between these candidates about. How do we address the fundamental dilemma. That iran cannot really fix its economy without addressing the nuclear issue without finding a way back into the nuclear deal which inevitably mean some compromise with the international community and with washington in particular some of the more conservative candidates focus on the criticism of the current administration and focus on the need to really strengthen domestic production. The iranian supreme leader has preached a mantra of resistance economy. But probably the best moment for the more moderate candidate hem. Ati came when he said we cannot have a fixed economy without an engagement with the world. It's simply not possible and so if you propose to fix the economy without getting back into the nuclear deal and facilitating at least some abatement of the economic sanctions. That we've been suffering under. Please tell us how you're going to do that. They've also been you know. Sort of side debates about various individuals credentials have been illusions to races very dark past and to his role in suppressing dissent. But really you know very little sort of frontal assault on easy for this gruesome role that he has played in iranian history. Suzanne is there any chance that the iran nuclear deal could prove to be a wild card in the ultimate election. Vote in. I asked that because iran is announced that is reached a broad agreement with the united states over lifting sanctions on its industrial sectors. Obviously that plays into the point. You're just making about how to rejuvenate. The economy gets going again. Is there potential at news. Coming out of these negotiations could have a political impact. Your essentially results already baked into the cake. My sense is that the general disillusionment with the system with the state of the iranian economy and with the expectation that there can be some kind of a breakthrough that would have a dramatic and fast impact on. People's lives is already well priced into the campaign that we're seeing play out. But of course. This is your ron and its elections. Have proven to be surprising. In the past anything is possible. There has been a lot of discussion about the timing of what is intimidated to be some kind of agreement between the united states. Iran about a return to compliance with the joint comprehensive plan of action many anticipated that from the iranian point of view. It would be better to delay until after the election is done. Simply because that would prevent me from getting credit for any breakthrough others have worried about the impact about that kind of a delay because we may see some change in the iranian negotiating team. In the foreign minister himself javad zarif who is closely associated with ronnie. And of course was the architect from the iranian side of the nuclear deal. And i think there's a broader problem of optics. If you have an iranian president who is credibly accused of crimes against humanity who espouses the most repressive interpretation of iran's own political system you know how easy will it be for the united states and its partners to celebrate a return to the deal that involves significant economic relief to iran at a time where it's government appears to be moving in a more retrograde direction. So let's play this out. Let's assume that reecey wins as he is favored to do what you see the consequences being. I asked that question keeping in mind. A point you made earlier that elected officials in iran can do what unelected institutions bodies allow them to. Do i think right. Uc's election will not have a significant shift on the tone and opportunities for a resumption of compliance with the jcp way. I think that the momentum is moving in that direction from both sides. There's obviously an incentive that is fairly strong from the iranian side to give a new government some breathing space for economic recovery. That would come in the wake of the suspension or waiver of some of the us sanctions. That are in place. Obviously the nuclear deal did not involve an end to all us sanctions. And so that is why. The negotiations have been so complicated. But it would. I think create more opportunities. For iran's supreme leader to really reinforce the essential conservatism of this regime to try to undo where possible at least the hope for any kind of liberalization and democratic breakthrough within iran. And it would. Certainly i think cast a pall on the opportunities for engagement beyond the nuclear deal between iran and the united states as well as frankly cast a pall on the opportunities for other countries particularly from europe and asia to really jump into economic opportunities in a very big way because iran under a racy presidency would be subject to far more concern and recrimination from the international community. Do you see any change in a recent government toward other countries in the region whether we're talking about the arab governments in persian gulf war toward israel. I think if anything government will only reinforce the fundamental inclinations of the islamic republic to engage in hostile rhetoric and toward subversive action against the wider neighbourhood the patterns of iran's support for militia groups across the arab world are too well entrenched and frankly there has never been a serious or full-fledged debate even within the political establishment about those issues so i see absolutely no inclination from a more consolidated hardline iranian regime to contemplate any shifts in a positive direction toward the rest of the region. So let me ask you to put your forecasters had on suzanne looking out her two year. Where do you expect us. Iran relations to be well. It's never wise to make predictions where iran is concerned. But i think in one respect. I can say with some degree of confidence that i expect. There will be continued conflict and tension in the us iran relationship and that is not simply You know sort of a generic statement. I expect that in fact we will see a resumption of the nuclear deal but it will not be a resumption that in any way. Improves the overall tenor of the relationship. Between the two capitals and it will be a nuclear deal which is under much greater strain because the timeframe has become much more contracted and the timeline for some of the expiration of the restrictions. Under the deal has become more urgent and there will be increasing frictions over the interpretation and implementation of the deal. Even after it's done. So i you know whereas in two thousand fifteen in two thousand sixteen. The nuclear deal was seen as a pathway to a better iranian relationship. And a reduction in tensions between the two capitals. I think in this case it will have very little impact. We will still see a very tense and likely conflictual relationship. Am i correct to infer from that. Assessment suzanne that you think the by administration is not going to succeed in its design. Arte created deal. That is longer stronger. And broader that is to extend the provisions further out into the future inhabit covered. Not just a nuclear program. But ballistic missiles in iran's behavior in the region i am very pessimistic about the prospects for any additional agreement if in as we are able to reinstate the joint comprehensive plan of action and frankly i'm concerned that the lifespan of the jcp away will be shorter than it is expected to be simply because of the conflicts that are going to arise as we begin to approach some of the expiration dates on that note. Close up the presence inbox for this week. My guess has been suzanne maloney vice president director of the ford policy program at the brookings institution suzanne. Thank you for an exceptional conversation. Thank you jim. Please subscribe to the presence in boston. Apple podcasts spotify or wherever you listen in liberals review they help us get notice it shout as always opinions expressed in the presence of august solely those the host or guests on a c. Far which takes no his short positions on matters of policy. Today's episode crucify by. Zoe calls from senior producer. Jeremy shirley so did double duty as retorting engineer. Thank you so special. Thanks to margaret gach for her assistance. This jim thanks for listening.

iran guardians council ali larijani larijani suzanne ronnie rohani Suzanne jim lindsey suzanne maloney susannah foreign policy program brookings institution were res george w bush administration obama administration nina jhad us Rohani elliott hashemi President ruhani suzanne siahaan
June 30, 2021 - Full Show

Chicago Tonight

56:48 min | 3 months ago

June 30, 2021 - Full Show

"Good evening and welcome to chicago tonight. I'm peres shuts. And i'm brandis friedman on the show tonight definitely discussions have started. Chicago's due for a new map of sitting wards would check in on the drafting process. We've been in. People of color are always held to different standards. I understand that. I've known that my whole life. Tensions are running high at city council and the state gets a credit upgrade. Plus much more spotlight politics. It's official college. Athletes can get paid for their name. Likeness and image under a new illinois law to what the united states and other countries are doing to promote vaccine equity across the world. The whole thing seemed like a giant puzzle exploring the complicated history of chicago's lakefront. And how it could have turned out very differently and broadway hits are coming back to chicago. Theater critic chris. Jones has the latest plus an update on his new role at the tribune. The first some of today's top stories city council's planning to convene a special meeting on friday to address citywide violent crime. Nineteen council members have now invoked a rarely used provisions of state law to hold this meeting and to call police superintendent david brown to testify about the summer violence prevention strategy. If brown doesn't show up the group says they will vote on a no-confidence resolution. This is the second time older people have called a special meeting in the lightfoot tenure and it will be held virtually. And we'll have much more on this coming up in spotlight politics public officials and dignitaries were on hand in brownsville today to dedicate a new sculpture to legendary black journalist and chicago in b wells sculpture. Called light of truth was designed by englewood born. richard hunt is located on the site of the former. Ib wills homes in brownsville and is said to be the city's first monument dedicated to an african american woman but she found a home here in our city in chicago and we claim as our own. She came here making sure that she would have the necessary work to continue demanding change and advocacy on behalf of black people. And yes she did. And you can visit our website to watch our conversation with sculptor. Richard hunt former. Us defense secretary and chicago native. Donald rumsfeld has died rumsfeld's family says he was surrounded by family in new mexico. And here he is on chicago tonight. With john calloway. Back in nineteen eighty seven rumsfeld served as secretary of defense under the george w bush administration from two thousand. One to two thousand. Six was one of the key. Architects of the wars in iraq and afghanistan served in the same position from nineteen seventy five seventy seven under president. Gerald ford rumsfeld was born in chicago and grew up in winnetka and is an alumnus of nutri or high school. He was eighty eight years old. And now brandis. We go back to you paris. Thank you the lines of power are set to shift at city hall in. What is a complicated and often shrouded process. That happens every ten years after the. Us census new ward maps must be drawn and it could change the shape of the chicago. City council amanda finicky joins us now with more on where this process stands. Amanda lots of remapping going on after the census brandis. It is a year for new maps everywhere. There's already a new map for illinois house and senate districts then the state legislature is in charge of drying new congressional boundaries. But they're putting that duty off until fall. Chicago is under. Its own time. Line in the case of the city is still relatively early. Still alderman roberto maldonado says things are happening. Definitely discussions have started at this point We still do not have the map room. Basiji city is in the process of acquisition of the software. So that we can start throwing the potential maps on that we all would want to have now. Beer aficionado. Made no map room as a longtime bar in town but that is not what maldonado means rather this is a room space that is equipped with a computer. Maybe a few. I don't know i've never been in one. And that's really a big point in all of this because they are peron official rule closed to the public but these are computers equipped with specialized map making software. Now the law does leave it to current members of chicago city council to draw future maps of words words it of course they may well be running in maldonado says older people are in early. Talks about what they want the outcome. But they want that map to look like he's a member of the latino caucus and says that there is a chance of picking up one. Maybe two more awards that have a majority of latino residents he says the latino caucus is determined to present a united front. I'm going to be looking out. First and foremost for the interest opulent in our community at large in the city of chicago. So that we can really and truly get a fair a fair map nat nat not like. We did ten years ago. We were shirt change. Ten years ago by the previous mayor at the time mayor emanuel. We will not allow that to happen again. He says that he is going to engage with constituents with local stakeholders as negotiations for grass. And then when a map is drafted the public will have a chance to give input but there is a commission totally separate from the city council. That is taking a more preemptive and more transparent approach last week beginning holding a series of meetings some virtual. There's going to be hybrid. All of these have a sign language in spanish interpreter option that is seeking public input on the new map. The chicago advisory redistricting commission plans to use all of this public back coupled with census data once it arrives in mid august to come up with a proposal love its own the group change illinois helped to organize this commission and dry van dyke. Is the chicago project manager. We believe it should be an independent process where residents have Some power in writes some voice residents should be a part of this process in this should be done in a back room that typically that room doesn't involve every alder either which means there is a lack of representation. There is a voice missing at the table when those decisions are being made for the the greater public. But just who is on this commission. She says that in the spring some four hundred thirty people submitted applications to be part of it and then leaders. You can learn who on the website. Chicago's words dot org had thirteen and says they were chosen with a mindset toward reflecting chicago's geographic age and racial diversity and then the goal is to get a map drawn by fog it more public input on it make revisions and then hope that at least ten members of the city council will give it wings. A portage park resident was one of the few who gave public testimony at a virtual needing help. Last night dan butterworth says he lives in the thirty eighth ward but with so many other words nearby he says the various ultra people who represent the area often passed the buck. If i walked two blocks from my house or east i'm actually in the forty fifth ward award. I might add is full of energy. Vibrancy if i walk six blocks south from there. I'm in the thirty six. Or if i go to more blocks i'm in the thirtieth ward unless of course i'm on the west side of the street then i'm actually in the thirty first ward and That this is the sort of input from the public. That should be taken into consideration. It is people live in these faces every day who knows boundaries and understands the territory's in their communities in how their communities function and that's why it's important to have their voices so that we don't put people in a situation where we're putting lines in the middle of their communities which splintered things in a way that they can't come together organize. They can't come together and get resources. They can't advocate for better things in their community because they have to go to four three four two representatives who since them in circles but alderman mock maldonado says that he has been in politics long enough to know that everyone has an agenda. He has map-making should stay in. Under the city councils control in expects the alder people will reach a compromise on a new map afford december. I don't believe in independent commissions because independent commissions by definition should be independent. they won't be independent. dose members will be appointed by somebody They will respond to somebody. And i'm i'm not naive enough. But they would really be people coming and being dropped by a from heaven into into this so called independent condition that nobody knows who they are. And they're gonna come with the perfect ideal configuration of fifty wards now as i mentioned going back to the state level. Democrats dead pass a law. That establishes new boundaries for state legislative districts. But it may not actually be the final map it is basting to lawsuits one is from republicans the other from the mexican american legal defense and education. So we'll be watching that brandis back to you. Amanda thank you and now paris back to you all right thanks brandis and it is official as of tomorrow under illinois law college athletes in this state can cash in on their name likeness and image yesterday governor. Jay pritzker signed the student athlete. Endorsement rights act which passed the illinois. House and senate with some bipartisan support. And just today the nc double a. Handed down its own ruling that does allow college athletes to make money off of endorsements in states like illinois that have passed legislation and joining us to offer. His perspective is one of the. Bill's sponsors state representative cam buckner. Whose district covers several near northside and southside neighborhoods in chicago representative buckner. Welcome back to chicago tonight. So first of all. How will this law impact college athletes in illinois so this low changes the entire college athletics landscape in st louis. Lemoyne but it does. Is it allows our young student athletes across the board both public and private institutions to be able to profit off of their own name their own image and their only likeness which up until this point was prohibited by ncwa raw and by law and how lucrative could it be for college athletes. What kind of endorsements might we see from. Let's say a football player at north western or a basketball player at the university of illinois. This has the ability on the opportunity of being extremely lucrative for players across the board many sports looking at this as as a windfall. For as you said the star quarterback when the star point guard would also to be sort of people realize this also means that the young lady who's a tennis player at bradley university in peoria illinois or east university in charleston has the ability to make money for her name likeness as well and that includes being able to give tennis lessons and it includes being able to obtain Let's say the local piece of real or the locals cooking shot on campus on this is really about equity fairness increasement. Unlevel playing field women women and men you opportunity to compensate fair market value of their own image understand in the illinois law. There are limits to how an athlete to in college can use like use their likeness. Explain that we wanted to be very intentional. About threatening nato not just giving people the opportunity to compensate but also protecting them from what may be unscrupulous actors or industries that Maybe detrimental to their own image right. And so in the bill We prohibit endorsements of certain things like alcohol Like cannabis like a gambling things that we think. Could you know. Call the problem or a student athletes deadline at some point. And does this give universities and colleges in illinois maybe a competitive advantage to attract and keep more top tier athletes. You know if they decide to come to this state where this law is in place versus other states where it's not in place we truly believe. So we believe that this to student athletes at the prep level and at the collegiate level that we as a state are leaning forward and and ready to put them in the best position possible. You know as a seventeen year old High high school football looking at what kaj. I was going to go to if i had to choose. And this was one of the reasons that I got to choose what school i was going to go to a west i was going to go to. This would actually be a huge factor in my decision now twenty years ago and the nc double as we mentioned came down with this ruling today. Basically agreeing saying yes. It is okay for student. Athletes to make money off their likenesses in states like illinois that have passed laws. How does the ncwa's decision impact illinois basically just tells us that we'd get the right thing and while i'm excited that the players finally woken up and smell the coffee. I think it's it's not enough The incident delays arriving at midnight to party started seven very late late. They've come in at the end. You know this is something that they should address a long time ago but they defected state legislatures have had to do. This really speaks volumes to their work that they refused to do as you know. Nc double a. as an organization makes billions of dollars very lucrative. Television and radio deals had coaches at make millions and millions of dollars while student athletes. Don't get paid. is that something. The illinois legislature wants to take up the further discussion on whether there should be some compensation for student athletes beyond just endorsements and making money off their likeness paris. I think we have to have deeper more intentional. Conversations about overall compensation for these young women and men who are a huge revenue generators for schools across the state and across the country. I think what we saw last week. The supreme court's decision. That just as cabinet i was very clear about the fact that is really rating murky water and it appears that much of their business model may be predicated on antitrust antitrust issues right and so i think so. We'll see compensation come to the table. I think we'll have real conversations about that before but this was a step in the right direction. Certainly an interesting debate. And i want to go back to something you said so a tennis player that wanted to give tennis lessons to to their local district. They couldn't do that under under previous law. The previous law another previous roles that have been set for by the ncwa. Anyone who was a scholarship athlete is not able to market their skills to use their name. Likeness or image to make money and so. This is not about advertising for nike advertising for the local car dealer with local pizzeria. This is from the gulf of the tennis athletes who is unable on celebrate to to use their name like this local country club to bring in a pretty small amount where we are talking about huge dollars but pretty small. A small amount of money In order to support themselves and sometimes their families all right. It's a very interesting debate. And obviously it goes on around the country and our thanks to state representative ken. Buckner thanks for joining us. Going spirits and now brandis for look at vaccine distribution around the world brandis paris about forty six percent of the united states population is fully vaccinated but many countries have shown lagging vaccination rates rates as the demand for vaccines wayne's in the united states president. Joe biden recently announced a plan to distribute vaccines worldwide. We're taking a major step that will supercharge the global fight against this pandemic my direction united states will purchase an additional half billion doses from pfizer pfizer vaccine and we'll donate nearly one hundred low and lower middle income countries. They will be the beneficiaries. Joining us as tom hope professor of cell and developmental biology at northwestern university. Welcome professor hope. So we know that president biden's plan calls for distributing two hundred million cova nineteen vaccines by the end of twenty twenty one five hundred million vaccines to be distributed by june twenty twenty two and as he just said that is two ninety two countries with low to lower to middle income levels. Professor hope what more can the administration do. I think that they have to try to call with some creative ways to to get this done on. The problem is we were talking about billions of people and and the numbers we were just talking about. were Up around one hundred million or even a half billion but but we have to get this done quickly. It's we got to see amazing display of how the vaccine stops the virus right here in the us. We've gotta finish that job. But now we've got the vaccinate the world as soon as possible this this islip The delta isolate Variant is probably transmitting ten times more efficiently than the original virus. And so if we let this virus have chances to mutate. It could Start to invade the vaccine. What areas of the world are lacking most in vaccination. it's my understanding is that For instance in africa i think they have only vaccinated about one or two percent and and they're they're really struggling to even find places to try to get the vaccines if they can You'll find the resources to collect the thing. That africa is a is a place that it's been a bit of a blessing that the virus really hasn't taken off their But we're unfortunately seeing the virus taking off in places where it didn't really get get a hold over the past year and and so Again we just have to come up with ways to get the resources to get this done. We have to do it as a population. What are your concerns or what is causing the barriers in getting access to these vaccines for those countries. I think part of it is just being able to produce enough. I think they are producing a lot. And i think that You know unfortunately a lot of times it comes down to resources comes down to money and really That should not be The question at this point Those investments we have to make for The world for ourselves. And we've got to get the other vaccines that are being developed and optimized i line and out the people. There's a lot of work to be done. What are your concerns about countries as they fall behind in vaccinating against the virus that the virus mutates even further as we already know that the delta variant is spreading so my primary concern is the variance that we're seeing that they pop up and they take over because they are they can run faster than the next virus and they can sort of spread faster they can overtake it. And and so And that sort of a pressure the viruses have with each other as we roll out the vaccine and the virus has a chance to Bump into somebody that's vaccinated but then also somebody else that that isn't and can start. Try to go back and forth between a vaccinated individual non-vaccinated individual. That's the circumstances that can lead to a variant coming up that then sees it has an advantage and can infect vaccinated people what does this vaccination gap say about you know the global public health inequities that exist. You know. I think it puts it on the table for all of us to see without any fancy dressings. This unfortunately has been something. That's part of the world Maybe getting a little better but but during the pandemic it was very. It was sort of very obvious. And i know myself. Many people were were hoping that some of the lessons we learned. We have a chance. Had a chance to stop and think a chance to Organize things better make things more efficient and And we still have a chance to do that And this could be a good reason to do it but we but it's just will be sad if we go back to some of the bad habits and unfortunate things that we were common in our lives before the pan to that end. Is this an opportunity to learn. And therefore prevent this this vaccination gap from happening happening with future global vaccination efforts. I answer to that is yes. This has been the most remarkable eye opening a learning experience for someone who's been studying viruses for for thirty years because this is to watch it all unfolding in real time is is something else and and it's kind of amazing that we didn't know this virus existed you know your and a half ago and the and the countries now vaccinated pretty much. We have to finish that job. But but that is something. That's quite remarkable and what we learned from. That is next time. We'll be able to do better so but you know we have to stop these things early. There's a bunch of things you can do to keep it from becoming the big problem it became and that's the things we have to learn cry a lot of work. Our thanks to northwestern professor. Tom hope for joining us. Thank you very much up next. A new book on the complicated history of chicago's lakefront. But first a look at the weather. Chicago's lakefront is often referred to as one of the city's crown jewels and as with many valuable things. It's been the subject of frequent high profile political and legal fights as chicago. Tonight's nick bloomberg reports a new history of chicago's lakefront traces. More than one hundred fifty years of nearly nonstop litigation chicago's waterfront is renowned the parkland and beaches lakefront trail the relative lack of a major industrial presence. But those were never a sure thing. Chicago's just aren't lucky. Attorneys and legal scholars. Joseph kearney and thomas merrill are authors of the new book lakefront which traces the development of its namesake back to eighteen fifty two when the city council went over a may oral veto to let the illinois central railroad lay track in the city alongside lake michigan. What we now know. As grant- part was being washed away by the currents of the lake so from the very beginning the railroad played a key role in the very preservation and development of the wake front but the railroad also sparked immediate controversy among wealthy property owners on tony prairie and michigan avenues in the eighteen. Ninety s a legal battle over the railroads push to build an outer harbor gave us what's known as the public trust doctrine. They commonly known if not altogether understood doctrine. Essentially it holds that the submerged land under lake. Michigan is too valuable a resource to sell off to a private owner and must be held in the public trust. The public trust doctrine entered with the big bang but then it it pretty quickly entered into a period of what we call dormancy. It got new attention from preservationists in park advocates. Around the time of the environmental movement of the nineteen seventies. It's become a kind of the vehicle in recent decades a challenge various projects like the lucas museum or the obama presidential center. The the outcomes are very mixed. it's it's impossible to predict how the of the lawsuits are going to be resolved. The book goes deep. Well-known historical figures like the legendary squatter. Captain streeter who fought over the land that now bears his name not just with rich landowners but with the pot. Awada me and opportunistic scammers. There's more of a wild west story. I guess a much more interesting than just street versus the the rich investors but the wealthy and powerful were the ones who could file lawsuits and lobby. Lawmakers the causes they took up determined much of the lakefront destiny in cases both large and small like the fight over a makeshift lakefront ballpark once home to the chicago. White stockings a forerunner to the cubs. The property owners didn't like the baseball being played in front of their property and so they got the local. Us turney attorney to shut down the baseball club while both now live elsewhere merrill spent more than twenty years in chicago and kern grew up here. He says he came at the project as the legally trained to be sure but native chicagoan. Who really wanted to understand why various things are as they are. Why lakeshore drive ends at hollywood on the north side or why. The 1893 columbian exposition was in jackson park. As opposed to what we now know is grandpa in trying to answer some of those questions. Merrill says it became clear to them. There's never been a single master plan. Guiding the lakefront development it was a series of events that could have gone one way or the other way but in chicago sort of ended up with a very very splendid in happy outcome and a resource the authors say that demands continued vigilance so it might be preserved for future generations for chicago tonight. I'm nick bloomberg and you can read an excerpt from lakefront on our website and paris. We go back to you. Yeah brands you really cannot take the lakefront for granted and however it happened. I know chicagoans are appreciative of that forever. Free and clear stipulation and still to come on chicago tonight. Theater returns to the chicago loop chris. Jones has the latest and talks about his new role at the chicago tribune. We need to overcome the structural deficit of the state. We haven't fully overcome that the state's finances get vote of confidence tension rains at city hall and the delta variant spreads all that and more in spotlight politics but i more of today's top stories. An alleged police torture survivor of former chicago police. Commander jon burge is suing the city and others including former mayor. Richard m daley. Jackie wilson was wrongfully convicted of the murder of to chicago police officers and spent decades in prison. He's also suing a host of current and former police states attorneys and city officials alleging they conspired to convict him for crimes. They knew he did not commit and to cover up the acts of torture that led to his confession. This should be mad but by stuff to be mad. I was self destructing. He could castle cabinet and today marks four years that the chicago police department has been without a labor contract. The last agreement between the city and police expired june thirtieth 2017. Police officers have been working without a contract for that entire period as talks have stalled out over. Police reform provisions police officers still work under the rules of the expired agreement which was first signed in two thousand twelve broadway in chicago announced his big plans for the fall and for next year. And of course the actual broadway reopened this week with a reboot of springsteen on broadway. Our next guest was there and can tell us about that in a minute. Plus what's in store for chicago. Theater and joining us is the chicago. Tribune's chief theater critic and newly named editorial page editor. Chris jones chris. Welcome and congratulations to you. So chris has a longtime arts critic in this city. Your new role as editorial page editor replacing kristen mcqueen. Who now she's leaving. Is this a job that you wanted. Well i'd expressed interest in being writing editorials over the years. I think you know. I like writing indian collins. Is you know and i think that the voice of the paper is of crucial part of chicago and i certainly had said. I think an over a number of years that i would be interested in one day. Maybe doing that and didn't expect to come down quite like this but as is everybody knows the tribune. It's been through a lot of changes in the last three or four weeks. A lot of people have left. There's been a lot of reshuffling and allow thinking about what we want to do next. And i think also smuggled tune it is to try something in a bit of a different way. I think i'm an unusual choice for that job. But i'm going to give him my best shop. That's poletti was can do and traditionally. The voice of the tribune editorial board has been a little bit right of center on most issues. Is that the point of view. You plan to continue at least four the editorial page the other opinion columnists notwithstanding i would describe myself as a moderate centrist. I do subscribe to some of the core values of that page that have existed for as long as i've been working as such as pro business bringing The economic development to chicago. I think that's very important. I think freedom of speech is very important. Individual personal liberty is very important so all of those criteria i'm on board with. I'd like to hope unto me that the page will be also a place of diverse viewpoints including people that we don't typically hear from maybe had not heard from in the past and i think that's very important and as we come out of the pandemic i think was also frankly a healing role for the page you know bringing people together. I really believe that everybody in chicago. we all have to be brought along together and we're all in this together and it's been a divisive time in a very difficult time for a lot of people and i'd like to be the place where we sort of worked through that as as a city and certainly has been an important voice in the city for for many many decades. And you will you continue reviewing theatre reviewing arts performances with this new role as editorial page editor. I hope to do that. You know that's very important to the paper. There's a great tradition of that. It's also frankly one of my great joys in life to explore and explain to my rita's the the fantastic community that we have in chicago. And i would hate to lose that opportunity and so my intention hopefully is to be able to do all of this. You know the reality. We were small paper now. And i'm not unusual. There's a lot of people doing a lot of different jobs. Who are really sort of stretch themselves into things to have enough his law and those that are paying close attention to the tribu and especially since the total takeover from alden. They've seen the avalanche of buyouts. Forty plus people leaving in this recent round. What is your message to longtime readers and subscribers that worry how long attributed can even continue as a going concern. Well i think we're still is number one message number two that. I'm hoping that we can be place. That still elevates civic discourse. I think we've been in a place of late where The civic discourse has not been all that elevated and. I'd really like to see us you know. Get people thinking about big issues. I think some of the reasons for the buyouts had to do with what a lot of people are feeling the end of this pandemic which is am. I doing what i've always wanted to do. And maybe there's something else that i tried and i think that that and that's partly about me too and i think that's a very common feeling of the moment and And so. I think that i'm hoping that people will stick with us. There are some sensational reporters in the newsroom. Is incredible you bench of talent even now and the people who were that frankly. Paris really dedicated to being a. They chose not to do this. And they're taking all the risks that you take in today's environment. We'll look forward to continuing to continue. The book on shows like the weekend review. Let's me lower to the arts. Windy expect the loop theater scene to get back to what it was and what are the shows that chicago and should be looking for well. I think we're seeing a little bit of a reopening this summer with a show light chatrooms on this coming in achiness. Week is the where i think. That's that's a good thing. I don't think it's really going to be until october. That the loop is a little bit back to normal. There shows like frozen on the way which a lot of families role wanna go to. I think a lot of parents scared that their kids aged out of frozen during the pandemic. So i actually did not to worry well because people have got to see it now able to get to old and as moulin rouge is coming a comfortable way which is a beautiful show about nine. Eleven is coming. There are two pre broadway tryouts wanting to fall paradise square. Which is already got a broadway date as you know chicago. Has this great tradition of off. Broadway tryouts isn't sort of international leader in that and that's going to be happening also in the middle of the fall. I don't think the fall will be completely normal row. I don't think people are going to see a normal fall. I think we're into twenty two before we can really say that. Look forward to that. And and tatra zanjani which is truly a spectacle. I've seen that. What about the off loop theaters the theaters. That really make chicago. A great arch town like the house theater the annoyance theater. What kind of shape are they. Are they ready to bounce back. Well i think if you'd asked me that question two or three weeks ago i would have said inaugurate. Good shape but what's happened. Is some of the federal money. Through this shuttered. Venue operators grounds has been coming through so some of those theaters. You're mentioning actually got a good infusion of federal cash this designed to assuage losses over the last twelve months student the pandemic and we are seeing some they lose and feeders amusing clubs as well getting grants in the order of five six million dollars which is a lot of money and i think that actually is a game changer. Because that's going to allow them to reopen and to sort of restarted the production costs and so the does definitely been a shift it financially and at the end of the day. This was so devastating to a lot of arts organizations because they lost all their income in some cases especially the commercial operators so we got to see now the chance to review. But i think as i said earlier a lot of people at wondering. Is this what i really want to do. In my life and all we doing it the right way you know. You don't wanna go back. In many cases they want to go forward. They want change. And i think we're going to see a very interesting transition. You might say back into recovery. At speaking of a transition. Bruce springsteen at a rebooting he went to reboot his show on broadway that you saw recently. What what was that experience like i. It was indicative of how nothing is the same as it was before. The pandemic bruce. That show in two thousand seventeen i think. And he's now seventy one years. Old is mom has alzheimer's towards that on stage. Data's passed away of course and is very much about the loss of his parents yet. Which is you might think a strange thing. For a bruce springsteen show but he's also four years older and he's clearly in the pandemic is thinking about these things so the show is show has become deeper more infinitely more moving and he's more vulnerable than i've seen him before and i think there are two things that are going to be different in the odds after the pandemic one is the people are going to want to feel more deeply because we still have to process all of the loss that so many of has been been through. Then the other thing i was going to be different is. We're not gonna take things for granted. So just sitting in a theater here. In bruce springsteen i might have taken that for granted babs not anymore. Now it feels. I you know that the most glorious thing in the world and as i understand there were some anti vacs hecklers out there. Don't a lot of them. I mean i turned the corner of the block and there must noah several enough and they have this issue. That's going on in the arts where some people are required. Vaccinations so broadway generally has said that you have to be vaccinated to go to a show. So springsteen had no masks but theoretically a guarantee that everybody was vaccinated but that doesn't sit well with some people of course because it collides with a sense of individual liberty and then in chicago with not seeing that as much yet anyway. But i think that's of course a big decision of people have to make. Am i going to require vaccination and then our people going to prove it so new york they have digital a lot of people anyway have a digital record of their vaccinations. We don't really have that in illinois so it's famo- canary wharf to say how theater companies in chicago deal with that. All right chris jones. Thank you for joining us. And best of luck to you in your new role and next a special meeting of the city council has called for friday. Find out why with our spotlight politics teams so stay with us. An emergency city council meeting called for friday as older people push mayor lori lightfoot and police superintendent david brown to take additional steps to reduce violent crime meanwhile the state of illinois credit outlook just got rosier a landmark criminal justice bill goes into effect and the spread of the delta variant prompts questions about whether mask mandates and covert restrictions should return a lot to get to welcome back our spotlight politics team of amanda finicky. Heather sharon and peres shut so heather. Let's start with you please. How exactly did this special council meeting come together. Well nineteen alderman. Signed a letter calling a city council meeting that is significantly more than the three alderman state law requires for this kind of emergency meeting. And they want answers from superintendent. David brown about how he plans to tamp down violent crime during the fourth of july weekend is just around the corner and is typically one of the most violent weekends in chicago now. Mayor lightfoot did not want special city council meeting. She says the aldermen have been fully briefed on the plan. And if they don't know what's going on that's really up to them. And she put out a pretty blistering statement accusing. The alderman enforced the meeting of using public safety as quote political wed wedge issue and quote. And what's interesting about that. Is that many of those alderman who signed onto the call for the meeting are among her closest allies on the city council so tensions are certainly running hot now this also comes as the mayor and many older people continue to spar publicly including that high profile showdown between lightfoot and older person ginette taylor last week in city council chambers. Here's mayor lightfoot. Yesterday on chicago tonight. I think that we have very strong relationships with a good working majority of the but procedurally to people can shut down the entire process and unfortunately historically that has been used very sparingly. But we're seeing it being used more by people who frankly want to turn the legislative process into some kind of stage performance rather than doing the work of the people. We should also mention that. We also had older person's that taylor here on the show. Monday night as well paris all this tension in recent weeks. It's been framed as council wars two point. Oh what's the impact on the important city business that has to get done but also the public image of chicago's elected officials. Let's probably a misnomer to call it. Council wars two point l. Because it's not like the dynamic between a block of white alderman in the eighties and the city's first african american mayor harold washington. This is this is just a much different dynamic in city council and i think with alderman calling this special meeting. Everybody wants to look like they're doing something about violence. And what can alderman do. I guess they can call hearings and have the police superintendent testify. It's also as the mayor. Said i mean it's a political cudgel that they can use against the mayor. There's alderman like ray lopez who you just saw person. Ah genetic taylor there's older person. At burke who clearly is is not a fan of the current mayor and they can call a meeting like this over her opposition saying. Hey we're not afraid of you you know. We're not applying city council. And some might look at that and say it's not counselors but it's democracy in action and democracy can be pretty messy so i mean when there's a big legislative initiative like a budget that the mayor has and she doesn't have twenty six votes. That's that's when we'll know but we're not at that point yet. Amanda there's also this ongoing battle over what is known as alder manic prerogative which was put to the test last week. Remind us what that is and why it's back in the headlines i'll dramatic. It is is really just that it gives alderman a whole lot of sway over what goes on in their wards. They have the ability to sign on or to sign off on things like what came about last week signs in their words. This was part of the plan. That may are lori. Lightfoot wanted to make it more. These are the rules you have to follow. Put it under the city's business administrative arm and instead alderman said no we want to keep that ability to determine when these signs can go in our words and then when they shouldn't and this is a big deal for two reasons number one. The mayor ran on eliminating a whole lot of that dramatic. Prerogative because it's been abused with signs. Kind of a big linking sign right here. Referencing peres just mentioned council number at burke who of course is facing indictment for allegedly not approving some fine edge it because he wanted instead money to be kicked back to his law firm and heather. There have to talk about the pandemic of course growing concerns over the kobe. Nineteen delta variant. Now the who the world health organization now recommending that even fully vaccinated people wear masks indoors but the city's top doctor says that's not necessarily necessary in chicago. how should we make sense of this latest messaging. Well the city's health department has been in lockstep with recommendations from the centers for disease control and the centers for disease control. Say look the delta varian is certainly very concerning. It was the variant. I discovered in india. That helped fuel the huge rise in cases there but all of the vaccines that are on. Offer the pfizer. By attack the journa- the johnson and johnson appeared to be significantly effective in stopping it. So people who are fully vaccinated two weeks post. A final dose are protected from the delta variance. So that's why those people don't need to wear masks if you're not fully vaccinated all of the recommendations is that you should be wearing masks and of course. Everybody should be wearing masks. In some settings like hospitals and public transportation so the city is following the federal guidance the worldwide guidance has changed a little bit but because america is so much more vaccinated than basically any other country at this point. The the the it's a little bit different here on the ground. So moving over to state business this week moody's upgraded illinois's credit rating for the first time in more than twenty years. Here's governor jay pritzker. Talking about the state's finances aid from congress was not used to balance the budget in two thousand twenty two that's a fallacy whoever's saying that has got it wrong the truth is that we had both increased revenue from economic activity in the state that we didn't expect. I think nobody expected the kind of upsurge of economic activity that we had. That's part of it. And the other is we held the line on spending. That's hugely important. So basically mostly flat spending across state government other than education vital social services. Amanda how big of a deal is this credit upgrade from moody's into big deal considering that illinois had been on the brink had gone in the other direction on reaching below investment-grade status illinois bent the lowest credit rated state of anywhere in the nation so getting a notch. This is a big deal first time in some twenty three years the last time that instead illinois his seen a series dozens of downgrades last time there was an upgrade like this which by the way should save taxpayers money when illinois goes to the bond market was back. When george ryan was governor. The bulls were really good. They wanted championship for the last time. They're six feet. Was that year so this is truly very significant that sad illinois not out of the woods illinois still has a relatively low credit rating compared to other states and while the state was recognized for being prudent. Moody's pointed out that if legislators give into temptation to say skip a pension payment which by the way is something that governor jay pritzker had proposed during his tenure that one hundred forty billion with a b. unfunded pension liability that illinois could see things. Go back down again. That's how that's how you know. It was a long time ago. George ryan was governor and the bulls. Were really really good paris. We've heard for so many years. As amanda just mentioned about illinois's beleaguered finances is the state finally turning a corner here. I think the bulls are going to be good again too. I think all all this goes around comes around. Well yeah as a man to said. It's certainly something to be semi pro but not to be the debbie downer here the pension liability depending on what measurement you believe is either one hundred forty billion dollars or over two hundred billion dollars in the state puts seven billion dollars eight billion dollars a year about thirty percent of its budget. And it's still barely makes a dent in that liability and the credit rating agencies pointed out. Don't expect those ratings. Go up a whole lot more until something is done about. Pensions the perennial question whether it be more tax revenue dig dedicated specifically to pay down those liabilities or doing some kind of reform that's within constitutional bounds. Which doesn't look like there really is any or stretching out how long it's gonna take to pay off those liabilities right now thirty years forty years maybe it has to be fifty years but beyond that the state still has if not the worst one of the worst pension liability situations in the country and so it can balance the budget from year to year but that long-term clouds still looms now the twenty twenty two illinois primary. That's exactly one year away after. Legislators moved it to june starting next year. Heather why this move. And what's the political. Fallout going to be here. Well the simple answer is that the census is laid and that the new congressional districts won't be ready for people to pull nomination papers and give their campaigns garrick so everybody decided to just push it back and let that census data flow in. We now expected in about a month. Mid august a little bit less than that a little bit more and that will allow people to get going so it's just really to give everybody breathing room to as the census was delayed by i a pandemic and then court challenges brought by former president donald trump. And you know. Amanda while we're on it. What do we know about the governor's race. Yeah it's going to be time for him to make a declaration soon when he was last on chicago tonight we asked him. Are you planning to run again. He said. I haven't decided. I've got to have some serious talks with my family. That said he had put thirty five million bucks. Which made maybe not all that much. But still it's a pretty hefty chunk of change when it comes to spending on and then what have you for. Campaigns would certainly seems as if he's gearing up and wall. What a tizzy it would be for the democratic party. If at this point he were to back out. So i'm expecting that. He will be needing to make some sort of public decision sometime soon but really all the bets are that that is just he. He didn't want to say that he was running publicly. That we will get that this delay the primary gave him a little bit of breathing room so in. Dc house of representatives today formed a committee to investigate the january six to insurrection the capital but getting only two votes from republicans. Wyoming's liz cheney and illinois. Adam kin zinger. Here's what do you think in zingers calculus is here. He has been a frequent trump critic but also been floated as a potential candidate for statewide office. Well the house speaker gets to a point eight members to the select committee to investigate. What happened january six if the house minority leader kevin mccarthy wants to go along with this he gets to a point five but you know the fact that only to house republicans voted this committee to get to the bottom of what happened that day when democracy was under threat when their own lives were under threat it's pretty staggering and that tells me that house minority leader probably won't want to be part of this but it would make sense for the house speaker. Nancy pelosi she is a democrat. But it would make sense to put a republican like kuenz anger on a commission like that to give it the credibility of bipartisanship. So whatever they come up with can't just be dismissed as as a partisan witch hunter anything like that and a congressman kin inger has expressed interest in doing something like that. And then there's liz cheney in wyoming but the calculus is i think they've just gone for broke here. They're the holdouts in their party. Saying we need to read the party of the lies. We need to rid the party of the extremism and move on from donald trump and clearly. The vast majority of their party is not with them. So how does that impact their political. I don't know but it would be very interesting to see if one of them if not both of them gets put on that commission and had our circling back to city news. Before i let you all go you know. It's been four years now since chicago's police. Union's contract has expired with the city. How has that impacted policing in the city. And is there any sign. The two sides will be able to come to an agreement anytime soon. No there's no deal in sight. It expired exactly for years ago. Today is the longest contract negotiation. Now in the city's history and the issue is twofold one. the city wants reforms and the fraternal order of police. Lodge seven does not want reforms. Both sides are dug in. And even though the city is prepared to give officers a significant amount of retroactive. Pay to make up for pay raises that they've missed over the past four years. There seems to be no way to break this logjam because the mayor won't endorse deal. That doesn't include significant reforms in the police. Union won't accept one that does which leaves us pretty much. Nowhere right where. We are amanda. Thirty seconds that procedural hold was lifted today on the chicago public schools elected school board. One of the latest developments. What's next so this was the whole that was put on by the measure sponsor. So while sometimes you can play tricks in eighty. Somebody who's against bill will use this whole do prevent it from ever becoming law. That's not what this was. It does come after state representative deal ramirez that sponsor net with mayor lori lightfoot last week not a whole lot of news out of it i don't think either side is really budging but leans going to the governor who said that he will sign it so. Cps on the way to an elected school board mortar talk about bear on the next spotlight politics. Thanks to amanda finicky. Heather sharon parachutes shots and you can find out more about the stories discuss tonight with our spotlight politics team by visiting our website. That's w. w. dot com slash news and a note before we go a long time member of the chicago tonight and wtt. W family is transitioning away from fulltime work. Today after forty five years. Michelle mackenzie void. Came to wtt. W in nineteen seventy five as an administrative assistant and move through a wide variety of positions. You may have seen her honor auction or pledge breaks. She was an associate director for this very program. From the day it went on air in nineteen eighty-four until twenty ten when she became manager of production scheduling. She's been dubbed be swiss army knife of wtt w true story for her versatility which includes being the stations grammar guru. Thank you michelle. Now she will be spending more time with her husband a forty two years don voight. They met here on the job as well as her son daughter-in-law and new grandson. Michelle of course. He'd have been an integral part of the chicago tonight. Programming from the very beginning. Thank you for all you've done over these many years and enjoy your retirement. Lots of baby. Snuggles i wish for you. Absolutely are little grandbaby. She's gonna get to see for the first time and let's not forget to michelle. Kinsey void is a wonderful actor. Theatre actor that has performed in venues around town and she certainly is a legend in an icon here at chicago tonight and i know full. Well that if anything. I say right now is grammatically incorrect. I will hear about it from her. And as you are brennan thankful for that thankful for her as well. Yeah and i think she was a bit of a vocalist. I heard of a holiday party where the two of you sing a duet. And that's cold outside. That's it that's our show for this wednesday night don't forget to stay connected with us by signing up for our daily briefing and you can get chicago. Tonight streamed on facebook youtube and our website. You can also get a show via podcast and the pbs video app and please join us tomorrow night. Live at seven now for all of us here at chicago tonight. i'm brandon friedman and i'm parachutes. Thank you so much for watching. Stay healthy and safe and have a great night. Who's captioning is made possible by robert. Eight to plead closed. Captioning is made possible by robert a clifford and clifford law. Offices pleased to give back to the community through numerous charitable.

chicago illinois brandis city council paris tennis Chicago america amanda finicky nick bloomberg jay pritzker maldonado brownsville brandis friedman Nineteen council b wells sculpture Ib wills john calloway george w bush administration rumsfeld
John & Ken Show Hour 1 (08/16)

John and Ken on Demand

36:36 min | Last month

John & Ken Show Hour 1 (08/16)

"Johnny kill kim chiampou. Kfi am six forty live everywhere on the iheartradio app. Hey welcome on in everybody. I voted. I dropped off my mail in ballot this morning. And he's one of those lock boxes. What was weird. Remember the addams family with a hand comes out of the little hand came out of the box and took the envelope from me. That's news is what i'm worried. Densify hand see if it had any particular marks vindicated. Newsom of what is operatives. I am not trusting those boxes. I was afraid it was bonded. Or garcetti or somebody day in the box. They've been But they didn't have to stick their hand out. They're gonna just wait. Until i dropped it and just take it away but they want to make sure they got a hold on my ballot. They've been there for so long. I don't know what people have thrown in that box Well it's a very narrow slot. Yeah lot in there But you barely fits the envelope. Homeless guy could flings some poo in there. I'm not well. Somebody did something. I thought last year. There was bizarre. I forget what it was. Well i think one guy was able to somehow use a hangar or something got in there and grab some balance. I think that did happen. There was one instance of that. In last year's november. I am so opposed to the entire election system in california. The bailing ballots. These these these stupid yellow boxes a ballot harvesting the extended voting time burbank. This weekend did you go by and see them. No i did not. He went to a call center. I guess where they have people on the phone lines urging people to vote no on the recall and stood in there and he gave them a pep speech. We do have somebody like actor from foley day megan. Their plan is to call or text every single democratic voter in the state. They need to because right now. Looks like the turnout is going to be pathetic. I agree with you. Some people are gonna get this ballot in the mail. If you haven't gotten it already it'll come this week. Some are gonna toss it thinking it's just campaign junk. Yes it's not that distinctive. We got our ballots at home. Or they'll be like other people are gonna go now. I voted enough. I just voted a couple of months ago. Get out here. What are they want now or. When is this due. September mid-september new throat in the fruit bowl. Then it's in the garbage for another day months go by this. Well did he lose. Oh well from normal people. This is the dead of summer for a lotta people in. It's it's vacation time. It's hot last thing you're doing thinking about political nonsense everybody's exhausted by politics after the last five and a half years and we think that's probably good. Yeah oh yeah. I know just because just the hardcore people vote and if that's true then Newsome's going to go down. I think it fits under the category which we like to bring up on the show a lot. How did these people get elected. Who voted for them. Well maybe those people will sit this one out. No i mean. There's there's there's an incredible amounts of uninformed silly and stupid people. I mean that's most of the human race. Ooh so you we. Unfortunately voting is one of those equality. Things were all supposed to have the same influence. You really really shouldn't have that start with an iq test right sign points to people's votes based on their. Oh absolutely i would wait the votes. I like a political voting. And i am not one hundred. You get like ten point your vote counts but if you score a zero get the vote. I am not a democracy. I spent democracy in california. I mean if the purpose of democracy is that we we gradually make life better and better look at the last twenty years out here. Why would you support democracy. Most of this most of this nonsense is self inflicted. It's either ballot measures. That people voted for or any arctic moron candidates that they voted for repeatedly not that they made a mistake once in a while but the same people keep coming up and they keep getting promoted to the top of the system. Like newsom or they they they. They stay in their office for three or four terms. Whatever they're allowed to do as a democracies terribleness state you would've been a good taliban commander moolah cobalt. Oh i'm into san definitely into some of that i'm ed i'm i'm feeling my overflow juices right now my overthrow juices excuse me we pay overflow or my over my overflow juices or something else well. Yeah you're right ousted the afghan government that we can oust newsom so there you go by the way that would be a huge shockwave by the way you see all the afghan guys in the afghanistan president's palace in his office. Yes is a tough crowd. But somebody i was thinking of the january six. Take when i saw that i know. So many are the riffraff or hear somebody online. Juxtaposed the two photographs of the wacky guys at the january. Sixth insurrection right. And then this group with the taliban taliban this was a real insurrection. Okay when you look at the january. Sixth guys they look like like a cartoon characters. You know john. Koh belt uses this expression. I'm gonna use it today. Everybody i talked to today about this. This afghanistan kinda shrug their shoulders. Nobody cares nobody cares now. I just want to say if. I say that i have the numbers because this part is sad. Two thousand four hundred and forty eight. American service members have been killed in afghanistan through april. You know what's a little bit shocking. The next number the number of us contractors killed three thousand eight hundred forty six. We lost more contractors than service. That's mostly this was about. Do you really think we have to spend a trillion dollars in twenty years. Where did that money go. That went to to the The military industrial complex. That's where it it went to all the military companies that supply the the equipment and arms and now the taliban has billions of dollars are weapons and the running around with them posing for the camera because because the afghan army they all surrendered immediately and ran and they left all our stuff behind that we bought them so now. The taliban is fully armed with the stuff we paid for yet. That's happened before and this is the reason. I am so vehemently anti tax. Because that's a trillion dollars a trillion dollars. They spent almost one hundred million just training. And what you eighty three billion you said one hundred million no no no. I'm sorry training the afghan army for twenty years and they folded. And what a day or two. I misspoke billions. Yes billions not millions yet right and look what happened. Could have been one hundred billion yes. It's twenty twenty. I'm assuming it is eighty threes. What the new york. Times citing sources eighty three billion dollar at like high speed. Rail's gonna be one hundred billion right. You take any number of paris. Take any number of government gives an ad twenty percent or fifty percent one hundred percent. You'll be a lot closer. I don't trust anything that any number of the government is you know. What a lot of this This war budget was off the books. They didn't even put it into the budget. It was like in a separate black budget box. That didn't count and borrowed all the money for that. And that's what infuriates me. As they they want to raise more taxes they see. But i guess you can't say that giant leader so that'd be a twelve letter word. That's i know it's just give people money. Look what you did if he must've blown over a trillion on rocky blue a trillion on afghanistan and they got nothing well. Let's go back and talk about where this started. Many years ago when this group in the george w bush administration thought. Let's make over the middle east. What was they called the neo cons thought that they could bring democracy to this part of the world and it would be an incredible change we could actually have allies in a critical part of the world. And that's really gone. Down to white egotistical arrogance commemorating the purple fingers the vo is on its all turns out the afghan army just decided not to fight and they were bribed. I read. oh i've read alabama came in and just sit. Here is one hundred whenever there. I read a great story today from a guy who's been in afghanistan periodically since nineteen eighty ninety s a writer and he wrote on how the real world works and in the real world. These guys constantly make deals going all the way back to when russia owned afghanistan and it was communist or not owned but controlled it and it was communist long as you had. The musha was the taliban that was fighting them again. Free taliban right yeah the mujahedeen you had you had the taliban you had the civilized more or less afghan government and the thing is these guys cut deals all the time and the reason is they have a common interest. Common interest are the opium fields. They sell a ton of heroin and everybody gets a cut. The taliban gets a cut. The afghan government gets cut whoever's in power trying to get in power they all get a cut so when it comes to it they don't really want to kill each other. They would rather manufacture the heroine spoke the heroine sell the heroin and make big bucks and often families in afghanistan will send one son to fight for the afghan government. The other son fights for the taliban and this way at least they got one back depending on who wins seriously. This and everybody knows each other. It's it's very tribal. And they constantly make agreements. It's like okay if you barge in here we'll just lay down our weapons. You let us go home okay. Just don't kill us okay. All right we'll just take your town. So that's what that's what happened here. All all the weaponry all the training that we paid nearly one hundred billion dollars for an trillion over all went down the toilet because the afghan soldiers didn't really want to fight for the afghan government which is hardly corrupt. Anyway is usually the story about the afghan president. He left afghanistan with four cars filled with cash and a helicopter stuffed with cash. Isn't that information coming from the russians. Can you trust it. yes. I believe that the russians. Yeah well i. I believe that all these guys are really corrupt. And there's a lot of money floating around from all their heroin sales and all the american money that we remember the previous afghan president was harmed member. Hamad karzai dead. He was involved in all sorts of when we come back. We'll turn our attention. Dole joe who showed up late for his speech. Was he taking a late afternoon. Nap is that was going on. Because he was like fifteen twenty minutes late before he's supposed to address the country more coming up john and ken. Kfi john and ken show. John kobylt ken chiampou. Kfi am six forty live everywhere on the iheartradio app less than a month ago before recall day september. Fourteen we'll take a look at a brand. New poll came out over the weekend. Sampling in california voters opinions on whether or not to take dip eighty two out of office. Come at the recall desk. Have two to thirty talk about afghanistan now. We mentioned this on friday. You know about an hour and a half ago biden finding addressed the nation. I was kinda stand by for it. I mean what the hell but at twelve forty five at he didn't appear and i thought oh twelve fifty five. I thought we overslept. They can't rows he's flat lining just after one o'clock showed up job. I don't really disagree with them. Because what he said is after twenty years the afghan people that work. We can't stay there forever. Lose lives no. It's like the vietnam argument. Kind of you know. There was no no good time to leave because we shot our wok. We gave them the trillion dollars. We they supposedly on paper had a military of three hundred thousand which would should have dwarfed the seventy five thousand that the taliban had except most of those guys really On active duty they they quick and the the logistics terrible A lot of these guys didn't have food their weapons railways breaking and they were all fresh. They didn't have the will to die for the current afghan government. They didn't they didn't care that anything. Sadder than seeing people clean onto the us air force plane. Guess a couple. People fell to their deaths. Don't do that. They don't cling to the bottom of a plane after it's taken off naively looked at that and said what happened airport security. You're not supposed to be on the runway. You don't have a ticket to get. It doesn't work like that. You see the crowds on the airport tarmac. I did yes. That's why they shut it down right now. Because i have to try to get your so so by biden's right. This is something that that should have been done a long time ago. If trump got reelected he would have done it too but where he screwed up is is that they had they should have. I removed everybody who needed to be removed. All the americans and the diplomats and the embassy workers and the afghans who worked with us. We go again the pentagon said. This is going to happen quickly. But you know what the us intelligence people said. And i think this is the same crowd that told us that. Saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Maybe not the senate exact people. They said old eighteen months for them to us. They're always wrong. It's amazing they're just on the big stop. They always swing a miss right. They didn't see nine. Eleven company coming. They thought saddam hussein had the weapons they thought. Oh yeah we could The the the afghan forces could hold off the taliban for at least eighteen months baba. They're always wrong experts. That's why the word expert makes my blood. Boil experts experts from july eighth. You mentioned it on friday but we dug it up. This is just ally eight okay. Today is august sixteenth. It's not that many weeks ago bide was asked for reporter and we have the question included for context about whether or not this is going to look like vietnam and it's going to be ugly. Let's listen to some of these veterans see echoes of their experience in this withdrawn afghanistan. Do you see any parallels between this withdraw and what happened in vietnam with some people feeling went on mortaring river euro which you had yet entire brigades break through the gates of our embassy. Six not mistaken. The taliban is not the sow the north vietnamese army. They're not they're not remotely comparable capability. There's gonna be no circumstance where you see. People being lifted off the roof of a embassy in the united states from afghanistan. It is not at all comfortable completely wrong from beginning to end. Because i guess he relied on. Us intelligence which told him off it happens. It'll take eighteen months early to get out of there. These are like all the covert experts and political experts and the pollsters and every all experts for like the last Twenty years at sucked and have been wrong about every major news. Event that tap into this country. All of them The thing is but he was trying to sell them. That speech and i know people picked up on it. He tried to sell a huge contradiction. I he says we planned for every scenario. Second was this did happen much more quickly than anticipated which means you didn't plan for every scenario you forgot the scenario that said well. What if it happens really fast like within a matter of days. What are we gonna do now. That scenario they didn't plan for they didn't believe in it because their experts plus the afghan government told him. Don't worry we can handle this armies ready the ib day. Give me my back academy getting out. As you're the president runs off with his bags of cash and the military literally dropped their weapons on the ground and turn tail. What are we doing defending people who don't wanna fight for themselves. I heard an expert say today. The afghan army was only confident when we were there to support them with air. Support our weapons and right. Once we left they lost all their confidence it. The president didn't wanna stay and fight for his country. He's probably gonna end up in switzerland somewhere and the soldiers didn't care either and probably the soldiers wives and kids didn't care they said look. Just come home. Just come home. Elizabeth alabama nobody wanted to die for old afghanistan. And i generally agree with you. I think biden's statements today were pretty much correct. That after twenty years of this is no use losing more american lives. It's sad that we had this kind of toll and spent two trillion dollars. But the way he dealt with the fall of the taliban the calf government was completely bought bobbled and then he was so confident. Because everyone's making a big deal of this. You know he went to camp. David enjoyed some time off and things fall apart. All of you sitting there going. You told me they could hang on for eighteen months and this is what happened. This is hit an app for for a guy who's half in the bag. That's what he's going to end up in a combination of jimmy carter and gerald ford. It's looking like it. You know a bumbling well-meaning fool who's completely incompetent at the big stuff ness and maybe in the later years reagan right. Yeah because of the problems with his mental state. What did we come back. We'll be at the recall desk. We'll take a look at a new poll about have you heard of this. The newsom recall but it didn't put up a voter guide. Because i don't know it's kind of simple right. Yes of course. Is anyone asked for voter guide. People are asking who were endorsing and question to. That's all they're asking not asking for voter guy they just wanted to. We pick out of the forty six people. I we can talk about that for a few minutes to more coming up john and ken. Kfi in order to meet this moment we have to recognize. I have made mistakes period. Full stop the way. This ryan arrogantly handled the pandemic and everything down when he hits on kids in private school. Except don't winery. Appoint himself as the homeless for going to me. All this pretty boy period full. Stop these trash. I believe we have a statewide emergency homelessness and crime and the cost of living. It's exactly what i'm doing every single day. Twenty four seven. They don't realize the connection between what's going on in sacramento of houses so high people that have behind. This are members of the three percenters boys spokes. That support cunanan conspiracies. That's the origin. Here were exhausted. By the ron johnson's and the tucker carlson's were exhausted. By the margie taylor. Greens were exhausted by the right wing echo chamber that has been perpetuating misinformation connection with. What's going on at detrimental way. The schools are so bad period. Full stop for not going to change coats because of a few naysayers and doomsayers it all the choice to go out and drink and drive and put everybody else's lives at risk. We're going to defeat the recall. He's fun what date on the recall against governor newsom from john and ken john mountain ken chiampou. Kfi am six forty live everywhere on the iheartradio app. All right so this week. If you haven't gotten your ballot in the mail yet you will probably this week. They started going out late last week. I actually got mine on friday. John doesn't know where his is. What you're gonna vote in person any my A ball on the kitchen table. Oh just like you said earlier in the Yeah and then you'll remember september fifteenth. I'm probably going to do it in person. Yeah it's what you said. I like doing it in person. Don't trust is system even in person who knows you press a button. Where does it go my fill out a whatever i don't know i don't believe in anything anymore and you shouldn't. I don't even believe i'm here. I don't even believe you're here. Are you here is there. I see him. I'm staring right at him. That's not him. That's a hologram really. That's a really good hologram. Well technology has gotten better and better much better can make you believe too. He's even that he's even alive. Cbs news and yougov have come out with the latest poll. They took it from august six august twelfth. So it's fairly recent and far different from the ones. We've been seeing over the past two weeks. Among likely voters the vote to recall newsom as forty eight percent the vote to keep them fifty two percent among all registered voters. The spread is bigger forty six to fifty four percent to keep him. The one thing. I thought was a little weird in this poll voting and motivation differences by party. Among republican voters. Seventy eight percent said they definitely will vote but seventy three percent of democratic voters. Say they definitely will vote so it's pretty close although if you look at the next question very motivated to vote seventy two percent of republicans but only sixty one percent of democrats and at these polls it'd be believed that's the difference he has to make to has to get these people to bother with this This one thing about this. Paul bothers me. There's nobody on the fence everybody. Everybody selected yes or no did they. Oh the fence over. There's only there's only four weeks to go on the fence. I don't know what's going to convince somebody to keep them or booed him now. Paul's had Some percentage of people who are undecided. What cbs yougov did was they just said. Well pick an answer right. Where do you stand right now if you had to vote today. That's probably what the gun to your head question. How likely are they to change their mind anyway. Why are you voting. Yes on the recall. Ninety six percent to oppose newsom in the top. He's doing well at sixty five percent to oppose democrat party. That's the reason to have a rico. My favorite is half the people just to shake things up. Yeah that's a good one to among the people that are voting no on the recall ninety. One percent selected. There shouldn't be a recall in the first place. I don't like it. I'm opposed to some people on undemocratic and why some people are offended by the concept of firing politician which i find fascinating. We should wait for the regular election. He was voted in for four niche. How this for years. I would never. I would never say that. Even if there was a date. I liked i thought was doing a good job which has never happened. But let's fantasize. There was somebody there that i liked. He's doing a pretty good job now. He shouldn't be recalled. I wouldn't object to other people wanting to recall because he's only a politician. He's a government worker. So what if he gets fired are so what if we have a vote on getting him fired. What is this. Why is everybody so prissy about it. There's another crowd that believes. He should only be removed from crimes for corruption. That that's not what the law says. I keep seeing that he needs from these silly tweedy editorial writers to yes and these. These scillies irv the recall only the most severe circumstances. No no no no. You could could recall him if you don't like the color of his jackets guy. I think it's like fire in a manager or right company out. People don't always get fired for fair reasons. You don't get a guaranteed for years only steal money. Get and load bags into a helicopter and fly away. He's a government worker. Stop it. he's not a religious deity. It your head out of your rear end. There's poured still. Has larry elder the leader for question. Number two came out twenty three percent picking him by the way half the websites i go to his head pops up. He's spending some money now. Yeah yeah. I've heard some commercials on the radio is tv. Commercials are extreme close up of him. Oh is that right ladder. Pretty good because He's got the best Concise pitch and it's from you know doing a radio show for Thirty years he knows how to time everything. Just so with the right rhythm in cates and It's it's it's not most of these guys are very scripted. And he's not he can do this off the top of his head and he doesn't talk in vague platitudes either but this was a weenie poll. They continue to ask people. Do you feel at risk from the wildfires. Twenty nine percent said yes. Very high risk twenty one percent said very low risk. Most people rim between. Do you feel at risk from the drought thirty seven percent. Very high risk. If you've only eleven percent very feel it restless guess it. We're going to be on our hands and knees water. And then of course the old left-wing question what is the impact of climate change on your california forty six percents at a lot. Thirty three percent said some old twenty one percent. Not much where this was. This poll was weighted towards hysterical. People were at risk from the drought. I let's listen to do so. When he came to came to southern california over the weekend it was in l. a. saturday burbank sunday. Here's what he said in la and of course it's the usual over the top crap. I know we say this series this is the most serious this is the most consequential election. You're going to have an opportunity to vote on. I know it felt like that last year. But we didn't defeat trumpism. It's still alive and well in the state of california. It's on the ballot september. Fourteen this is only has has defending his record now. Defending himself relating to people. It's like this. Just don't this is this. Is the trump people say my job. Trump. everything's trump with this guy. Everything comes back to trump nothing about About what he is barely weighed in on this. I think he's sent out a couple of tweets but we see on twitter but he sent out a couple of emails now. He said much about this recall. I think he was asked not to. Oh you think so. Yeah yeah because he he's so inflames these progressives that i don't think nuisance opponents but he doesn't want anybody who do you think asked them that. I don't think california republican party or the people buying rescue california. Maybe caitlyn jenner called. But when when he doesn't talk there's gotta be a reason because his impulses always talk and always to jump in and draw attention to himself had make himself the center of the controversy so You know when he when he conspicuously is hardly said a word. And i'm thinking all right. He made a deal with someone. Someone called them up and he agreed to it now. He may not stick to it but i just think something's going on right now. Well newsome's definitely in trouble so get your ballot. Vote at a brief mention. You have voted yet. I did vote already. You know when it comes to question to a better choice. Newsom seriously forty six people running. I don't know that much about most of the democrats won't be had on the air with kevin path wrath who meet kevin dot com. He's the real estate guy. But i don't think we could go wrong with some other. Pick because what we have with. Deputy do is not a person. He cannot connect with anybody real in california. He's a political construct. thanks to wealthy families. Like the getty's thanks to his connections to people like Nancy pelosi and a lot of wealthy families. He is the absolute wrong choice for the regular people of the state so it doesn't really matter. Yeah pick and questions. I think the top five republicans are all good choices. Yeah pixel i'm down to since you can only pick one. I haven't decided yet. I can't decide to compare choice guys in my head. Because i picked all right. We got more coming up. John and ken. Kfi john and ken show continues. John kobylt ken. Chiampou up. It's kfi am six forty live everywhere on the iheartradio app. All right we'll give you the full rundown three o'clock. The taliban is retaken of afghanistan. The only surprise is how quickly so gives going to happen. You think people know where afghanistan is. I'd but do you think they could. Actually where like. Where do you think they could name. Two countries that border on it some other stands some other stands very good some other stats from other stands not far from russia. You know what i know. That there's a lot of media hysteria going on here but believe me people will be there already done with it. Oh i totally agree. The whole arc of the story is over. The taliban has the country. we're not taking it back Maybe they'll let us clear. Some people out of the airport biden has already said what i did was right but we Screwed up at the end and What are you going to do. we'll talk about. This is a very instructive story about this shifting allegiances in that whole region. One of the guys who pictured returning with the taliban takeover is a guy had released from prison three years ago. Kid you not. He's a co founder of the taliban. Right that's what. I need shifting allegiances. We thought three years ago we might be able to use this guy to work out a deal of some kind and the answer is no there. You go trusting. People explained who he is fascinating story. But it tells you all you need to know about Y we need to stay out of there. There's just no good but now you see the worried that this will spawn. Terrorism here comes al qaeda and isis and and who knows what the taliban will do well when we get When we get wind of these hoodlums gathering in caves you know. Then we send in a little nuclear drone and Turned them into Free radical molecules but short of that. What we were doing last. We got bin laden. Was it eleven years ago that should have ended and it was in pakistan. It wasn't even in afghanistan pakistan. That's another country that needs a good slap upside the head. They harboured him for years. They knew they had. It's another friend that we've given a lot of money all tentative there. I ended balanced between the american ally and be under. You know there's off our tax body and they all stamp at some back we'll get how much of our tax money that afghan president fly off with or drive like nine. Us currency. How much cash can you stick into four cars and a helicopter and they had some of the cash actually floated out and was blown over the tarmac. Oh that's good for the people ranting might help and get. What are we doing as my tax money there. Let's talk for a few minutes about an old topic on the john and ken show. It's actually pretty good story. There's a bill in sacramento to address a problem with recycling to bring. It's story matters at least eighty five percent of single use plastic items. Don't actually get recycled. And even if you see the bucket that has that simple it with the arrows. It looks like you know a bottle or something is going to get recycled around around. Apparently that's not true. And there's a state. Senator from santa monica in ben alad. Who's obsessed with this. So he's introduced a bill where you can't use that recycle simple if it doesn't actually apply and the story says the actual plastics that are commonly recycled are soda bottles. Beer bottles salad dressing bottles. Peanut butter jars microwaveable food trays along with milk. Drugs milk jugs juice bottle. Shampoo bottles laundry detergent grocery bags. Cereal box liners. But then there's a whole list of plastics that ended up just in the landfill they don't get recycled and that's eighty five percent of the plastics. Yeah like frozen food bags newspaper bags bread bags when i say that every day my stinking also going to times comes in that little plastic bag. You guys are. This is bad opportu. This and bright ends up in a landfill newspaper bag yogurt containers butter tubs syrup. Bottles ketchup bottles medicine bottles. All commonly not recycle all the crap. I tell people this because you run into a lot of recycling fanatics. Because i've seen articles like this for twenty five years. There were those one in the new york times back in the mid nineties that i read i even saved it for awhile. And if if you tell people this and they look at you like you're satan but just won't believe it. Because recycling become religious you have specially colored and we have a whole ritual on how we separate the plastic from the rest of the garbage and everything is in public. You have recycling bins and you had that cute little Designation with the rotating arrows. What are you should tell that person next time you're recycled guy comes down the alleyway and takes your blue ben with the recycling things on it. Why don't you follow them. And see what happens to that crash you put in there. It's say probably just separate out the ones that are commonly recycle the rest is go to the landfill like the rest of the trash. The what actually happens. The state senator whose pushing this is ben allen from santa monica and he says this is wish cycling. Yeah like that. Term wish cycling carefully sorting signaling with with the recycling symbol only to discover. They weren't getting recycled. he says it is technically recyclable. Under the best of conditions at one thousand degrees and some lab in san marino. But they're not recycled in the real world. Even sure what that means but what they melted down in other words you can recycle it but the process is so complicated and expensive. Nobody does it. And that's another thick. China used to accept a lot of our recycled goods but they said no because expensive. It's back right. They gave up on. It did for recycle there. There's no money in recycling because of the cost of the process. And then you sell once once you recycled down. You've created some new product. What are you going to get for it. It's one of the biggest money losing operations around. And i think people thought very simplistic way that when they put a plastic bottle in the recycling can all it does go somewhere and they just wash it out and put it back on the assembly line. They filled it again. Yeah doesn't really work like that one right here. I got a coke bottle right here. Plastic coke bottle plastic coke bottles got the little arrow symbol on there now. You could personally recycle it by using that for your water in other things in your house. And well i don't have in the garbage. I coming up more of a rundown very busy. The afghanistan fiasco john and ken. Show and debra mark has news. kfi am six forty.

afghan government taliban afghanistan afghan army newsom california kim chiampou garcetti biden Kfi john george w bush administration mujahedeen Hamad karzai Dole joe vietnam ken show John kobylt ken chiampou
The Roadmap: Fuel Economy StandardsThe Other Transportation Policy

Off The Charts Energy Podcast

45:23 min | 4 months ago

The Roadmap: Fuel Economy StandardsThe Other Transportation Policy

"Hi and welcome to a special series of the charts. The podcast of the energy policy institute at the university of chicago. I'm your host. Robinson meyer a reporter at the atlantic and a journalism fellow at epic. Today in the second installment of the series were talking about transportation emissions. Our guests are sam. Ori- the executive director of epic and Ego an associate professor at the harris school of public policy now transportation emissions are the biggest climate problem in the united states today and cars and light duty trucks. Like the kind you'd buy dealership. And that most americans own are the biggest contributor to this big problem. Cars and light duty trucks in fact are responsible for about twenty percent of total u. s. national greenhouse gas emissions. Not the main way we have of regulating carbon light. Duty trucks are the fuel economy standards. These are rules that are issued by the department of transportation and also the epa that solely require overtime new cars to get more fuel efficient and to emit fewer greenhouse gases. Their the reasons that many new cars for instance turn their engine off when you stop at a red light so far from the by administration. We've heard mostly proposals out of boots. Electric vehicle takes but these fuel economy rules are extremely important and they're due for an update. That's what we're here to talk about. Today will come salmon creature. Tell us about the fuel economy rules. How do they work. Why are they important. Well i mean. I guess i would start by saying. It's the cornerstone of of you know fuel policy for the us. The transportation sector is really whether you're whether you're talking about as the rules were originally intended to cover oil use and energy security or you're talking about. Ghg reductions they are really the star of the show for the for us policy when it comes to vehicles and i think the target has changed a little bit over time as i said like back in the nineteen seventies when the rules when the first you know corporate average fuel economy rules where i put in place. They were put in place specifically in response to the oil embargo to the nineteen. Seventy three seventy four oil margo. And you know policymakers looked at the vehicle fleet. And they said okay. This is a very inefficient fleet It was a big part of why the us economy was still vulnerable to oil price shock at that time transportation being such a key part of the economy and the fleet at the time actually was less efficient than it was in the nineteen fifties so cars and trucks in the us nineteen seventies. Were badly inefficient. And so policy makers. Were looking at ways to respond to the while shock. And they said okay. Well here's a washable place to start what's make let's make our cars and trucks more efficient and so you know the energy policy and conservation act of nineteen seventy five created. The first fuel economy standards define them as a miles per gallon standard. And you actually created all kinds of little things that persist all the way to this day. Including for example treating cars and light trucks separately creating separate classes for cars and light trucks. Which is a thing. I think we'll probably talk about that. I feel like sort of undermines and believers the whole the whole system to this day. And so you know that was really how you know Fuel economy policy in the us began. And i i think probably speak to this better than me. But i think also began in many countries around the world industrialized countries that were affected by the oil shocks You know i had had their first kind of vehicle policies and efficiency standards that we're putting in place at that time to war two points i would just make is by way of introduction. Is they the standards in the. Us made some really important improvements or you know there was. There was measurable improvement in efficiency in the seventies and into the eighties. But at that time in one thousand nine hundred eighty s in the mid nineteen eighties as oil prices kind of pulled back and the us was competing more and more globally for for in in the auto market. There was a sort of a real hiatus in a real pause on improving efficiency and the standards sat idle all the way really until the mid to thousands until two thousand and four. And the george. W bush administration when oil prices started going up again in the mid. Thousands was under pressure to act and started making little tweaks particularly to the to the truck components in the mid two thousand but the rules as we could as we sort of know them today. The the the national program that has epa is part of it and is designed to really now deal with a new problem Or at least a different problem than the original rules were were designed to deal with You know the greenhouse gas emissions from transportation and climate change that really took hold in following the endangerment finding and all the things that happened in two thousand nine and then the obama administration coming in in two thousand twelve created the national program which has really is really kind of this system. We have today but it really does still thing you know is still built on many of those things. Many of those elements that were first created in the mid nineteen seventies are still part of the program today and now it's just been sort of pointed in a different direction which is to deal with greenhouse gas emissions right. There's like i just want to make sure i understand. This may be end or I guess make sure we're on the same page about this right like starts as a fuel saving program run by department of transportation or or the national highway. Traffic safety administration is part of the department of transportation and then like in the two thousands it also like epa also takes over some of it but focused on like a totally different on a related but ultimately different problem right like on on climate change in on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Yes so right. So the clean air act gives epa this authority right to regulate pollutants and so a group of petitioners. In i think two thousand eight around two thousand eight go. Cpa and says you should be treating carbon dioxide as a pollutant and you should use the clean air. Act to to deal with it and you know this is like it happening. In the bush administration. The george w bush administration. So it i you know. The response is not overwhelmingly warm. Know makes it. It makes its way through the courts and eventually the courts ruled against epa. say that. Yeah you should be treating carbon dioxide as a pollutant and then epa over the next year eventually takes the next step of saying not only is it a pollutant but yes it does endanger public health. And so therefore we're gonna. Up is going to play a role in vehicles now but it was controversial. At first the bush administration basically says the epa or says to the petitioners no epa can't regulate this because nitsa already does or department transportation already does as part of its responsibilities under under pga under the nineteen seventies bill or law and then and then also isa. and so. no. We're not going to do it. But they lost in court and then you know the endangerment finding comes along so that did bring in epa and give ya a role in regulating in regulating the efficiency of light duty vehicles but right for a different a totally different purpose for for greenhouse gas emissions yet How successful so basically like there's this moment in two thousand late two thousands and then it becomes That the obama administration takes that over right And pass the kind of initial fuel economy plus greenhouse gas standards for cars and light trucks. How successful have those been in your opinion on road fuel economy for the entire. Us light duty vehicle fleet two thousand nineteen twenty four point nine miles per gallon in two thousand fifteen. It was twenty four point six miles per gallon so almost no improvement from two thousand fifteen to twenty nineteen and if i look back to nineteen eighty seven and it was twenty two miles per gallon. So i say that. I as a way of framing to say i think there's questions about how effective they have been. And i think there's lots of reasons why they why effectiveness hasn't been as much as we hoped. We hoped you know when the when the national program was put into place that it was going to achieve these massive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and massive reductions in fuel us over the life of the program from two thousand twelve to two and twenty five but the rules were had all these little elements tucked into them that over the that over time served ultimately undermine their effectiveness and so you know the treatment of light cars and passenger cars and light. Trucks is separate categories and giving light trucks a much more lenient standard to meet a much more lenient target to meet the the inclusion of footprint based standards where even within cars and trucks. And you have all these subcategories and the bigger of the car the bigger the truck the more lenient. The standard The inclusion of things like bonus credits for flex fuel vehicles regardless of whether they actually run on ethanol just by selling vehicle. You get the credit so all throughout the rule. There's all these little things that are kind of tucked in there. And in the beginning some people are kind of warning and saying hey this is going to potentially undermine it creates an incentive for the automakers to sell more trucks to sell bigger cars so bigger trucks. And it's going to undermine the effectiveness of the rules but there were all kinds of political compromises that were needed to get the support of the automakers and to get the support of michigan democrats in many pro industry republicans and so they made all these little compromises around to different parts of the rule but unfortunately what we did see as i think the a lot of those predictions came to pass the. If you look at the footprint you look at the size of the vehicles over the last from twenty twelve through through twenty nineteen cars are getting bigger. Trucks are getting bigger. The whole fleet is getting bigger. Automakers made a huge shift in from selling a fleet of mostly cars to selling fleet of mostly trucks. And so why does that matter. We'll all of the savings that were predicted that were projected when these rules were pass. Were predicated on predicted fleet. That's the thing i think. A lot of people don't understand when when epa or when the obama administration said that the the the fleet is going to be fifty four point five miles per gallon by twenty twenty five no that was a projection based on a certain mix of vehicles they were. They were projecting that there was going to be this fleet of mostly cars and smaller cars that were sold in twenty twenty five and so that was going to be the performance of that particular fleet. But we're not seeing that the fleas totally different than what was projected. It's way bigger way more trucks and it's changing. It's totally changed the performance and it's changed while we're actually getting out of it in terms of emissions reductions in fuel savings. And it's not it's not what was projected it's substantially less than what was projected until like. This is the biggest change in how the car market works over the past. Ten years like people have shifted to larger vehicles if you had a sedan. You've shifted to crossover review it across. The relief shifted to suv There's just more suv's and three row suv's and crossovers sold now. I think two crossovers for everyone sedan or two crossovers and suv's everyone sedan that's being sold in That's a very broad shift in consumer sentiment. That we've seen do you think that's are. Are you saying that you think that's an outgrowth of the emissions rules in basically like Because all these all these little carve outs and it's easier for automakers to not have to meet the rules like that's they've slowly expanded sizes because that way they are operating under more lax rules. Like maybe i can. I can talk about the about this. So there are two big aspects of the current fuel economy degration the us redid this point In in my academic table. I called it attribute based so policy is based on some attribute of a car and there are two attributes one as passenger car versus light truck truck It's its name. The name is light truck but that basically include suv's so for now Cars those two separate categories have different target of mpg. And that's one the other one is some mission seen each segment. We also have additional attribute which is footprint so the size of the footprint of each car if the car is bigger than the car can get less stringent regulation target so those two things basically motivate automakers to make cars bigger or maybe make more. Sev's also consumers to choose those cars because those cars tend to get cheaper than others because of the regulation so those two things globally motivate consumers and producers to shift lahser cars. But i do also think there is something unrelated to the policy. Possibly there has been a change in preference of consumers in the us. Preferring morgan beagle cars. That's also possible but these could probably down a combination of policy impact and the fundamental change in preference. Yes and you have to go back. I mean i you know. Don't just look at the current. The current standards. I mean sure. The footprint based standards footprint base attribute standards came into place in in in law in two thousand seven and we're not implemented in an actual standard until two thousand eleven really a little bit in the trucks before that but really not until twenty seven But the differentiation between cars and trucks. That goes back to the nineteen seventy five rule. And i mean you know if you just look at a chart of light truck. Sales light trucks share of the us market starting in the nineteen starting from basically the beginning. You see this all of a sudden this very large rise in in the sales of light trucks and you can also look at the behavior of the automaker's the automakers did a lot of things that that told you. They were trying to avoid regulation by making bigger vehicles. The hummer is perfect example. They built vehicles that were bigger than the weight class that was regulated to get so they could sell things that weren't regulated they did things like the pt cruiser. That okay the back. So this is an offroad vehicle. Lawmakers did things that that were clearly in response to the regulation. They're pre the two thousand twelve but they're but they're part of the they're still part of the original fuel economy regulation that was passed in the seventies that said in the beginning of was a six thousand pounds any vehicle bigger than six thousand pounds. You know is kind of up to the secretary of transportation in the original law is exempted regulation. The bush administration raised it eventually to capture the hummer for for example. But you know just the automakers. We're doing things around the edges around the margins of the rule that showed you they were. There was an incentive to build bigger. The other thing is to remember too. Is i mean. Market forces obviously play a role. And i think if you look at the what happened in the us during the national program during the period from two thousand twelve till now and you know just take a look at the program as a whole and their and their projections their fleet projections. I think if you re the original rule what you what you discover is that when they were projecting what the fleet of vehicles sold in the us look like like for example one thing that really drives the the makeup of that fleet is your input on oil prices and they were making those projections in two thousand twelve when oil prices. Were you know one hundred dollars. A barrel and Were still in the in the period time when we're talking about you know Scarcity i guess in a way of a markets and that future supplies are heavier more more expensive to to get out of the ground and sarah and so you know that high oil price really had an impact on people's thinking about what the future fleet would look like. In what consumer preferences would look like. Well you know the obviously that's not really came to pass. We had a big oil price crash in two thousand fourteen. And if you look at the makeup of us vehicle sales over the last ten years or so you see a big change when when that happened when the oil prices crashed in two thousand fourteen. The shift. To suv's accelerates so you know those kinds of there's lots of different factors that drive people's preferences about vehicles in what they're what they're interested in. Whether shouldn't buying oil prices. I think are very important. One than in it cuts both ways. There's times when oil prices are high and you see consumers you know really demanding much more efficient lighter smaller vehicles were now in this era of potentially lower prices for longer or given. What's happened on in us. All markets in the global market. And so it it really makes you wonder if it's if we should. We shouldn't be. Have you know assuming that the things will be different. You know or that the future it probably is more of consumers being willing to sacrifice on efficiency for comfort and for and for space and those kinds of things. it's so interesting so how do we fix it. How do we fix these issues. If we're gonna talk about how to fix it you also have you have to be super clear about how we got what we got. And i don't wanna you know both probably come across as like very You know hostile to the to the setup of attribute bay standards and the truck rule and all that or do dual categorization. But you know. I in two thousand seven. I was working in washington. Dc is part of a group. That was really. I think largely responsible for bringing a lot of pro industry. Republicans to the table to support fuel economy standards and we spent a lot of time talking to the companies and talking to makers and figuring out what the compromise was going to be. That was going to get republican support. Fuel economy standards and the ad should be based standard was pretty important to get that support the politics around the us the big three in particular And chrysler especially were complicated and chrysler was there saying we cannot support this and chrysler's you know lobbyists are up there on the hill talking to lawmakers and saying you shouldn't support this if it is gonna mean that we have to make a mini van. That is as efficient as a toyota. Camry we can't support that and so we want you to craft the system that doesn't make us Make vehicles that are as efficient as whatever the averages but that just tells us all we have to do is make our minivans slightly more efficient every year. We keep making minivans but as long as you just make them a little bit more efficient. We're fine and you know we'll political standpoint. You're sitting there listening to that. It has a certain appeal to it. In a certain logic to it and it's it was persuasive. And that's it. I mean that's why that that will ultimately ended up in the law because the the us big three especially chrysler and many Auto state democrats in prominent republicans wanted those kinds of nuances inflexibilities. And that there's something else here to eight you just alluded to but is like what we know which is not only do you have when you're regulating. Autos not only. Do you have pro oil industry or or you know anti-regulation republicans for any number of reasons. Either because it's a local industry because of ideological reasons as you said you have democrats from michigan who are in Who have been in congress for a while and are very protective of their seats but also are on seats that in a huge republican wave. Could maybe flip in and represent a lot of labor interests and labor to is also often skeptical of of really aggressive regulation. Because it needs. Its you know. The companies were has shops to do well. Yeah it's challenging. It's challenging question but it goes to the question of. How do you fix it. Because you know i think that if we look at it now especially in the context of climate change. I think it's it should be noncontroversial to look at the current system and say food. You know the compromise was too costly. The amount of The amount of emissions reductions that were lost as as all of the. Us fleet is shifting over to these heavier vehicles. It's not compatible with with the pathway that you know. Scientists say is needed to avoid the worst effects of climate change. We are with the. The rubber is kind of meeting the road here in the sense of we have not wanted to pay for the costs of of dealing with missions in the transportation sector. And so we've created these kind of political frankenstein. Policies that hide the costs and you know. Make things easier on on domestic industries. But they're very ineffective and the so looking forward to how to fix it i to me it. It requires a fundamental rethink of the way to approach the policy in the transportation sector. I guess from economists point of view You know what some mission is also important basically okay. Maybe in the political situation in two dozen seven was a constraint right so maybe domestic all the makers or some automakers needs something to pass this bill and then for some reason you know in reality. We passed this strange incentive below which involves attribute best regulation. So the the really thing about this is it. Incentivizes automakers behavior toward in inefficient ways. So everyone now has incentive to make cosby As we discussed to by creating this in sunday in a sense the government accomplished the redistribution. The cost barreda from one america to some somewhat. So there was another way to do this. We could have. We could have no ought to be based regulation and The government really needs needed to do it. It could actually do the redistribution for example We could we could talk about this in a credit trading market For the credit trading or just pure lump sum the money transfer. The government could transfer some money to those automakers to let them alone and then not create any strange incentive to upsize. The cars doesn't make sense so from the economic economists perspective. That's actually much better if you have to be Redistribution that's fine. That's a political decision right targeted towards did a Redistribution this a lump sum. Money to some old america's in. Oh i don't know if it's politically possible but this would be much bigger than creating a Incentive to impede effectively distribute the cost. In that's what has been going on in the fuel. Economy regulation in in the entity whether when i emphasized as indian that just makes the all regulations costs unnecessity. Big than what you know. It can be indian. Those old baden's basically could come back to the consumers. So why are we doing this. So if they is political constrain. 'cause another way to deal with it so we have to be kind of smarter than maybe it was that. That's what i would always think about. How much of this can be done with. I think there's two different things or three things we're talking about here the the footprint based rules and then there's the cars and light trucks rules and then there's like these credit markets that we were just talking about what can be done here by the administration and what can be done here only by congress because that's very important difference and is only likely to become more important as you know. Democrats get You know likely lose control of congress. In the next few years there are some things that can be done by the administration. I mean point about the credit markets. I think is a really good one that the credit markets are. Actually they have the potential to be a really efficient way to handle the kinds of problems. With you know the let's call it. The heterogeneous cost of compliance across automakers for the standards different automakers will be better or worse at producing vehicles that. Meet the standards in you know. There's a good amount of economics research that shows that the demonstrates in documents that the automakers have very diverse costs of compliance and so a functioning credit market could be one really good way for car companies. That are for them. It's very cheap to generate credits. Then they're very efficient at generating lots of credits every year. They're complying use. I guess i should say the way that you generate credits in this market is you over. Comply are handful of auto market a lot of companies that are consistently over complying with the standards. Which you know tells you. It's probably pretty cheap for them to do so And what you'd like to see is those companies than you know being able to sell credits to the to the companies for whom it's it's harder to comply. I don't think that the credit markets the exist today were contemplated In twenty in two thousand seven when attribute bay standards were put into place. And you know all those things ended up happening. They didn't really contemplate. I don't think that the credit markets could work that way. A lot of that ruling came about when When the epa when he came in and and you know after the endangerment finding in an e pa started being a major party in regulating you know vehicle efficiency but it doesn't mean the bottom line is like today looking forward where this moment now. Where a lot of this is going to be reevaluated. On by the biden administration looking forward. I think this is a really good opportunity to think about how to fix these things up so you could do something like Fine we're going to have separate light truck standards from cars. But they're going to be very close or maybe identical and you know the way that we're gonna handle the the the facts on the ground of different auto companies having different costs of compliance based on how many trucks they sell or how many cars they sell. Or whatever else is you know. We're going to have really well-functioning credit markets. I mean that would be a really. I think a really huge improvement and inefficient a major gain in efficiency in the system. There are some things that we need to happen to make the credit markets. Work better from my perspective. Like some of it's just basic housekeeping. Today you know the all of the credit transactions have to happen on a bilateral basis and automaker that wants credits has to go and find another automaker that has credits. The negotiations happened in secret. No one knows what the prices it's it's it's it's not a very transparent market and i think that is inhibiting the efficiency of the market. But i should say it's a growing market. I mean the number of credit sales are the number of credits traded or sold. Every year has gone up under the car. Program has gone up from you know. Barely a million metric tons in the first year to last year. Power for the last year. We have data twenty nineteen till like more than fifty million metric tonnes And so it's growing very quickly. It's becoming not you know maybe not the most important but it's coming very important. Source of compliance automakers and so getting that market to work. well is really important. I think it would only be even more important if if the administration were to take some steps like you know setting the car and truck standards pretty close to each other narrowing the gap on in the attribute based standards. Because i because they can't they cannot. I don't think just not. They can't just scrap attribute bay standards it's written into the law. They do some things. I think that would minimize the impact of attribu- base standards like making them culture. How much does like tesla. For instance just released to quarterly report where i think it's entire margin came from selling pedal especially california credits and And a few other things but How much increasing automaker voluntary electrification for lack of better term like we've heard from gm like tesla. Obviously he's already doing at this point. I think automakers with thirty percent of us market share today have committed to voluntary electrification by two thousand thirty twenty forty. Obviously that's voluntary. How much does kind of an uneven across the industry electrification process like affect these credit markets. How should regulators be thinking about the fact that you know some. Some automakers may in in ten years which is at the very end of this period but is still kind of within what they're thinking about With ten years. Automakers may have a surplus of credits. I saw you know. I think that the the standard should be designed to particular policy goal and the policy goal is it should be you know sort of driven by the science of of emissions in transportation and if automakers if a technology catches on that automakers sell watson that reduce the cost of compliance and and make the system know make it so that they meet or exceed standards. That's a good thing it might overtime lead to the to the policy makers are thinking about what the standard should be whether they should be more stringent. But you know so. I don't see that as a problem. In fact like you know. I think it kind of goes to the mice about curious. What you think My sense of it is that is that actually shows the system working so like you know like like last year kid in two thousand lots of the last two years so two thousand eighteen. You tesla generated something. Like i wanna say. Seventeen million metric tons of net credits. In the in the epa credit market and the deficit for the big three combined was like fifteen million. So i don't really look at that as a as a as any kind of failing that's like. That's an opportunity right so what should be happening. Is tesla is long as your policy is calibrated to your sort of like to your science based outcome for lack of better way to say it as long as your policies calibrated to achieve what what our ultimate goal is. Here is a certain amount of ghg reductions in transportation. That's a really good outcome. Then you know the policies calibrated right tusla's generating enough credits to be able to sell to the automakers and you know they're now everyone's in compliance that you know if if those were the only four companies in the in the whole thing you know that's that's an efficient that's an efficient outcome and i think it's exactly like kucherov talking about like if you know over the next five years you have some companies are selling lots of electric vehicles and they're generating credits now i should say they're not going to generate as many credits as tesla has been because the bonus credits are going away. You're still going to zero grams per mile. But you're not going to get that multiply by two and three but setting that aside. If you have some companies that are doing lots of electrification they're generating credits and then they're selling them to follow the companies. Who are selling lots of mini vans. That are still running on gasoline. And and they're through that mechanism. Everyone is in compliance. That's exactly the outcome. That you want as a policymaker. Maybe i can have something to do to it so i overall i agree with some so implantable. This is a good thing right. So tesla companies are making efficient cars so that they can get credit because their cars are more efficient. Don requires and then you know they can sell it to the market so that makes them to improve their mpg. Even more it goes. This is an incentive and then other automakers take advantage of it and buying the credit. And if they don't want to buy it they having sent him to improve their their own cars mpg. So in this market is working in principle. Maybe number two point is we want to have a bit of the coastal Argument about this because reasons in some mansion is a little bit of strange small policies behind it a creek cars guide bonus credit which was controversial. Like should we give them on. The other thing is many electric cars get other type of tax credits and other subsidies on it is can we justify they can get this fear economy credit so there is a discussion about those things right so we should. We should think about but if we can ignore those issues in principle in this a trading market. This has being looks like it has been walking. Well i would add number three point which is related to some mentions I guess the market transparency is still very low as some mentioned it's mostly by bilateral trading sold makers have to find the By yasser knows. And also from policymakers or this such as perspective it's very untransparent was a price and how much they traded Those exempting permission is not available to the public in. This is very different. From other trading market we have for example many crucitti market wholesale electricity market has more transparent open market infrastructure and. There's actually research about this. Eight crucitti market. Some markets shifted from poudel a partial bilateral trade to more like whole open market. And then there was of a benefit of doing it. It was a quantified benefit this on academic research so there must be more games from this mechanism if we can actually make the transparent marketplace possible for credit-rating market so we could proably much better But this is probably a good sign to seek trading actually happening among nichols. Because i just want to sort of add these couple of points on the credit markets which i which i really think are important. If they're done right. But i think can actually be. There are some problematic aspects of if they're done incorrectly. And i think one thing i've become more convinced of over. The last couple of years is that there was a big kind of original sin in the way these credit markets were set up. Which was that you know the amount of credits in the system. It's not like a regular cap and trade market Where the regulator allocates a set number of permits each year that are tied to a policy. Goal the in some ways. It could be like that. But it's a little bit of a bank shot because the way that you're allocating credits quote unquote is by signing a fuel economy. You know standard and then letting people who over comply generate excess credits but in the beginning you know in the very first part of the overall program in advance of the program that epa in in its other regulators said that there was gonna be an early credit program. That would run the first couple of years before the before. The new standards came into place. So from like two thousand nine to two thousand eleven. They they had this early credit program. Running and i think there's more and more a sense that a lot of automakers under basically business as usual conditions were able to generate these enormous surpluses of credits hundreds of millions of credits. They've been sitting on this whole time and that were allowed. They were allowed to carry the the ones from twenty ten in twenty eleven all the way through to twenty twenty one and so part of the reason that that the standards that performance against the standards has has not been what the regulators initially projected is because automakers have had all these credits that they can use to satisfy deficits. And i think those credits expire you know. A huge amount of credits expire in twenty twenty one as the biden administration. Now is kind of sitting there looking at. How are we going to reform this program going. Forward what changes are we gonna make as we as we look even over the next few years but also post twenty twenty six twenty five. You know that's the kind of mistake. I think we have to avoid making again is making the cost of compliance so detached from the policy goal number one to as were as thinking about those credit markets and how to make them more effective one problem that i think that the industry or one problem that i think is just built into the auto industry with these credit markets is. There's just not that many companies. It's not like the epa so two program where you have like hundreds or maybe even thousands of of of covered entities. Right it's a market with like twelve has been there's a small number of companies and the only way that you're generating credits is by over performance. And so you know. There's little things that we've talked about where you could say. Well maybe we should let in financial market entities to come into these markets increase liquidity and. That's fine as far as it goes. But at the end of the day you still only have a handful of companies and it's going to be a little bit of a thin market. And if you so if you really want these things to function you wanna do these little housekeeping things that transparency. You want to see the prices maybe even a centralized kind of auction. You know where. It's overly clear and transparent but i think it would also be desirable to increase the flow of the size of the market. And so one thing. I think that would be very interesting. To explore is as the biden administration is Pushing a clean electricity standard. And as that that is gaining momentum in congress is potentially finding a way to link those two markets that would be really interesting like having a so utilities and automakers could play on the same. Co two market basically. It's really interesting that you both for taking time. and any else. We should touch on before we go. I probably get some heat from number of people at least mention that. We've only talked about fuel economy standards as we look at the scale of climate of the climate challenge and of the Tation it's not enough to just regulate sufficiency at the lot and hand the vehicle off and there's no policy that is governing that has any way incentivizing people to use less fuel and some people would say that the way to deal with as a car is a carbon tax gas tax. I'm sure there's other ways we could think of but the fact that we're just doing this at the lot and then the vehicle waves and there is no incentive to change your behavior to use less fuel to take public transportation. Whatever it might be we are not. This policy alone is not going to put us on a pathway to achieving the kinds of reductions in transportation that we need to deal with climate change. What is i'm willing to go along with. Complementary from the perspective of political economy a complementary set of policies that includes efficiency regulation but is also heavily reliant on a fuel tax that is calibrated to the social cost of carbon. I love it very artfully done. Thank you for listening. Make sure to subscribe to off the charts wherever you get your podcast.

epa Us obama administration bush administration department of transportation energy policy institute Robinson meyer harris school of public policy chrysler Traffic safety administration george w bush administration tesla morgan beagle Ori
Ep. 829 -Get In Line And Get Left Behind

The Michael Knowles Show

47:48 min | Last month

Ep. 829 -Get In Line And Get Left Behind

"On this the five hundred twenty seventh day of fifteen days to slow the spread the leader of the formerly free world. Dr chee is finally offering guidance on when we will finally have slowed the spread and flatten the curve. And we'll be able to get back to normal life. I've got the answer for you just one more year. Do want to ask you something about the that you said to npr. Today you said if the majority of americans get vaccinated quote we could start to really get some good control over this as we get back into the fall of twenty twenty two year from now. Is that the best case scenario. And what does control look like you know. I know anderson. I have to apologize when i listened to the tape. I meant to say the spring of twenty twenty two. So i did miss speak and in the conversation with mary louise kelley. She was saying one. Do i think we're gonna start to get some control. I said if we can get through this winter and get really the majority overwhelming majority of the ninety million people who have not been vaccinated vaccinated. I hope we could start to get some good control in the spring of twenty twenty two. I didn't mean the fall. I misspoke his bad his bed. It's not going to be a full year. It's just going to be a little more than half a year and boy. Is that a relief. Because i thought it would be a year before we could get back to normal instead. It's just going to be two hundred and seven more days for a total of seven hundred and thirty four days to slow the spread which is just shy of fifty times as long as they initially told us that it would be before they changed that prediction a bunch of times. But i bet they're telling the truth this time right. I'm michael. This is the michael knowles show. Welcome back to the show. My favorite comedy yesterday from luis fishman. Who's says we haven't lost any equipment there it is. It's right there where we abandoned it in afghanistan. that's true that's true you can't. This was actually the point. I made in my column on afghanistan. You can't lose war that you never set goals to win you. Can't you can't lose if you if you set out to lose in the first place then you sort of win when you lose. We all lose when big tech companies spy on our data. Which is why. I would strongly recommend expressed vpn. I do not go online without a vpn. Okay what is it. Vpn vpn is a simple app for your computer or smartphone than encrypt all your network data and tunnels it through this secure server so that your isp entrance service provider cannot see any of your activity. When i go online. I go online with express. Vpn the best out there. That's just what i do if the nsa spying on tucker. Carlson didn't convince you of this. Then i don't know what will okay so much of our lives now are on the internet. People are looking at what you're doing. They're trying to get your data okay. I recommend express. Vpn as the best way to hide your online activity from your isp. You just download the app tap one button on your device in your protected. I know a lot of people. Don't think about this. Wake up every. We're living in the age of surveillance. Capitalism everyone is trying to get your data stop over your personal data to the. Isp's protect yourself with the people that i trust e. x. p. r. e. s. s. vpn dot com slash. Michael to get three extra months for free go on over. Xpress sweeping dot com slash. Michael right now tiller more. How much longer is dr. Fao she going to be able to keep up this charade. The answer is for as long as people believe him. And obviously if you're listening to this show you probably do not believe dr fao very much. Because he has lied because he has been wrong because he has misled on many occasions for over a year. Now but just that number had do people get over that number fifteen days to slow the spread ono another month on ninety two months. Oh and other one more season. Oh one more just one more just one more just one more. It's going to be over two years by the time. This is all done and probably more than that. I don't know why we would believe that it'll only be two years now. They have radically extended the time line again. And again you c factsheet. He doesn't want to he doesn't he. Respects people's freedom. Bought the other thing that you just mentioned now is they're gonna give a lot of incentive and backing for a lot of institutions and organizations and places of employment to mandate and that could be colleges university the military organizations that employ a lot of people. Some of the big corporations are going to say. If you want to work for us in person you've got to be there and get vaccinated. And i think that's a good thing i know i respect people's freedom but when you're talking about a public health crisis that we've been going through now for well over a year and a half. The time has come enough is enough. We just gotta get people vaccinated. Enough is enough you peasants. I respect you freedom but when politicians use the word but almost always they do so to negate whatever they have just said. I was look. Listen hear you. I respect you a freedom but i don't Get you detective chief. This jerk this jerk. I why he is permitted to pontificate after being wrong on so many things and admitting to lying about other like the masks right he said well the reason. I said that the that the mask don't work is because i wanted to save masks for the people in the hospitals. So you say it's not. I thought they would be a shortage. Raised these not saying he said the masks wouldn't work because he thought the masks wouldn't work. He's saying i said the masks wouldn't work. Because i wanted to save them for people who i would prefer to have have the a lot of people are pointing this. I mean i've mentioned this before how he has credibility but as a political matter this is actually probably a strength for fau g if faucher just stuck by his story for the entirety of the lockdowns then it would be very easy to prove that he got things wrong but that's not what she does. That's not how he operates that's not how he's operated. Since the beginning of his career going all the way back to aids thao she holds virtually every side of every issue at some point so that he always will have gotten something right. He'll have gotten everything else wrong but hill of always gotten something right if he's constantly changing then. You can't just look to the science you can't just look to the data you can't just look to some principle. You just look to his wins his caprice. That's that's the i mean. This is what demagogues do they take away your attention from some objective truth or some principal and they just put it in their own will and vouchers will is going to extend this for now. At least another what. Seven eight months probably more than that. So of course people are making comparisons to tyrants and yes people are comparing ouchi to hitler and to nazi is now i don't generally make nazi comparisons because i find that people only make those comparisons because they don't really know anything else about history so they'll say trump is hitler. It's because they don't. They don't know anything about any historic event other than world war two and even that they probably don't know very much about but they have at least heard the name. Hitler's says you're like hitler. But there are other historical. So i generally don't make the nazi comparisons but dr. She is very upset because people are comparing him to twentieth century. Tyrants how do you feel when you hear republican state lawmakers in maine and elsewhere and we played a clip a moment ago comparing public health officials scientists such as yourself doctors trying to get americans vaccinated to nazis to joseph mangla took about nuremberg nuremberg trials. And more. I think it's completely crazy. Anybody who has any common sense and looks at that and sees what they are doing the same people that are saying. It's being like a nazi to try to get somebody to do an intervention that would save their life at the same time that they're jumping around grabbing ivermectin and getting toxicity from it. It's just bizarre. Maybe totally bizarre totally besides so responsible to compare anyone to a nazi especially after we just had prison. Hitler trump right. Especially after george w hitler that we had before him. I just don't want to hear it. I don't want hear any complaint. About pfau being called hitler or nazi or mangla or whatever the left almost exclusively comparing republicans to nazis. They they did it. Obviously for the entirety of trump people. Forget now they did it. For the entirety of the george w bush administration. They did it to rake. So i just don't want to hear it. Sorry i don't care. I don't care about vouchers feelings. I don't care about his expertise. Don't care about his political power that he's maintained for five decades now or something four decades. He is a jerk. He's a jerk. No-one should believe him. No inch follow his advice. He should be fired but he probably won't be. He probably won't be because these guys have power and they're gonna wheel bill blasios in new york as summed this up. He summed up the left's approach to you your society your rights and your way of life. He was asked about the mandates so You know you'll remember. When the vaccine. I came out to blasios was just offering all these goodies to people to get it. He's he offered them cheeseburgers. He said if you go and he was. Eating cheeseburger live in person was disgusting. Oh rob or drew's borough no stick yourself with the experimental drug. You cheeseburger french fries. It was so gross So that was the that was the carrot. Then he's offering the stick. Which is you're going to be punished if you don't get it because there's a mandate and this is this is not just as theory on cova. This is his theory on human nature. What human beings do well when they have carrot and stick so mandate helps people to realize it's time. Fda final approval visor said. It's time now. The vitamin straight could do something else. That would really help us. All move forward speed the approval of the vaccine for the five to eleven year olds. It's time for that. It's time it's time it's just time for that. We pretended that you had freedom for a while but now it's time the jig is up okay and we need to follow the science which is why i a- politician in pressuring scientists to speed up the approval of the experimental drug for children even though children face very very low risk from corona virus because of the science and because anyway forget the science. The jig is up. Just do it. Carrot and stick. This is what these think of you. They don't think that you are a person to be persuaded. They think you are an animal to be bribed and goaded and product. That's it's not. Just a blasio who thinks that it's faucher it's biden it's the entire liberal establishment and unfortunately they've got the power so very often it works whether we like it or not. If you want to protect yourself from these sorts of things. I would strongly recommend you check out ring. We got some holidays coming up. We got labor day coming up looking past that columbus day thanksgiving even not too far into the future. People might become in your house. And you're probably gonna wanna know who's at the door when they come knock and that's why would strongly recommend ring alarm go to ring dot com slash knowles. Right now. ring will allow you to see and speak to whoever is on your doorstep. Whether that person is the delivery guy or the milkman or the burglar or maybe. It's your in-laws coming in for the holidays. And maybe you're going to react differently depending on. Who is it that door. I'm not saying how you're gonna react. I'm just saying maybe it's good to know that sort of stuff whether you're in your house whether you're at the office whether you are on a beach on the other side of the world protect your home with ring alarm easy to install. You can keep an eye on every inch of your house with their terrific equipment. Protect your home anytime anywhere. Rang alarm ring dot com slash knowles special offer on ring alarm security today build a system. That's right for your home. Have it up and running minutes. That's ring dot com slash knowles ring dot com slash knowles. We are seeing a national disintegration. Year it's well beyond afghanistan. Okay i think this is one of the arguments for the people who said why are we still afghanistan. One of the arguments really had nothing to do with afghanistan. It had everything to do with the home front. We no longer have faith in our elections. Neither the republicans nor the democrats. Don't forget sure. Trump right now is still saying and a lot of trump's supporters saying that the election in two thousand twenty was rigged. You're not. I think you're not allowed to say that anymore. On social media which kinda shows you some of the problem but the democrats have been saying that the two thousand sixteen was raised from the beginning including hillary clinton including the vanquished candidate. We've had increasingly little little faith. In our elected. I suppose decreasing faith in our elections over the past several cycles. We no longer trust our other established institutions beyond the elections. We just saw leftist militants burned city after city after city last year have lost our rights to go to work in many places our rights to go to church in many places a right to go to the restaurant in many places increasingly. So now. we're we're seeing a less and less faith in our fellow citizens. No one trusts. That joe biden is even awake at this point so no one trusts that. We have a properly functioning president within the constitutional order. even democrats. don't trust that. They believe that the kind of bureaucracy and establishment is running the show which it which it is. Obviously no no. No one believes that. Joe biden is capable at this point of sitting in the oval office and making sophisticated grand strategic decisions about the country. Even if this were him making that it would. It would actually prove the point. All the more looking at what's happened in afghanistan looking at what's happened on the economy looking with happened all over the place. I'm corona virus for that matter. The new york times comes out with a piece. They say how. The taliban turned social media into a tool for control. C tout taliban obviously obviously very bad afghanistan very very bad place. No one's disputing that. But they don't seem to be as they can see what's going on overseas. They can't see what's going on in our own country so in the nineteen nineties. The taliban banned the internet now they use it to threaten and cajole the afghan people in a sign of how they might use technology to build power. Yes just the taliban doing that right right. No one else is using social media as a tool for control social media the big tech companies foreign actually just built as a tool for control as a tool of surveillance capitalism and behavior modification. that's not actually their entire raison-d'etre right. Oh wait it is right. It is the the the regime afghanistan is now using social media to incentivize people to do the things they want to punish them for doing the things they don't want we would never have that in america right. We would never have such control and behavior modification through social media that big technology and the establishment would censor the duly elected sitting president. Right we would never have that here. Good grief man before you accuse me. Take a look at yourself before you cues me. Take a look at yourself. This there was a tweet going around From regarding the taliban and it said now after many years afghanistan has been liberated from regime that forces people to wear facial coverings destroy statues and mutilates. The genitals have children. Oh wait a second. Oh wait who's that describing. I'm not not drawing equivalency between the liberal regime and the taliban. But i am showing you that there are some commonalities here in that state craft in the way that political people use coercion to shape country in the way that the regime's look at their various constituents at various people. And that's a problem. Because i'm i'm not saying that america is like afghanistan that were that were the same sort of place. It's no better here than it is there. I'm not saying that at all. But i am saying that. We're on a bad trajectory. Okay and we're going to need to turn things around. And i think men. I if if we had a thriving country of flourishing country where things were stable and people were free. I suspect there would be little objection to going afghanistan or anywhere else and spreading the american vision of society and exerting our influence but the problem is we can barely keep things together here right now so you got to build up that country a little bit. We can't even bring our guys back from afghanistan. We can't even some in the political will to do that. Joe biden admitted this just yesterday was supposed to give a press conference. He was conspicuously too late again. Wonder why. I wonder what's going on wonder how often joe is lucid during the day. But he shows up finally and he gives his update on the debacle in afghanistan before. I update you on the meeting. That i had the leaders of the g seven earlier today. I wanna say worried about the progress for making on the build back better agenda here at home. Just got off the telephone with leaders in the house today. The house representatives taken significant step toward making historic investments going to transform. America cut taxes for working families in position american konami for long-term long-term growth. Excuse me the country that we have been occupying for twenty years has now collapsed within a matter of days. The taliban has stolen all of our military equipment taken all of our bases. They're now holding. Americans hostage behind enemy lines. The united states is already signaling that they will leave those americans behind. We're all waiting on an update. Because we haven't really heard much from joe biden on this and and you're gonna open the press conference talking about building back better here. You're gonna talk about possible tax cuts. I'm i'm sure that for the american stuck behind enemy lines cowering in huts as the taliban go door to door knock knock knock where the westerners so we can execute. I'm sure it's going to be a great comfort and consolation that they know that joe biden is maybe going to reduce the cost of community college. We're going to build back better. Pre-k has never been so cheap and working families. We'll have it. That's what we all want to hear about right right. No no of course not. Now the reason he's opening his press conference this way he's got nothing on afghanistan. He's got nothing he can't. There is not one single thing that he has done in afghanistan that he can point to and say this was anything less than a disaster and so he's got talk about his plans for lowering the cost of gender studies degree or whatever but he's got nothing on afghanistan so then he goes out he talks about the stupid budget thing and then he says oh yeah by the way and afghanistan were We've we were told by the taliban that we can't get an extension we're completely giving in to their demands We're probably gonna. He's the location is. We're probably gonna leave americans behind enemy lines. okay bye. And then he turns around and he leaves and he walks out build back better. Turn turn your back better. Turn the president's back better on reporters from whom he will not answer a single question because he can't because there's no political win their jen psaki. It was not so lucky. The spokesman at the white house had to go out. Her job is to talk to reporters and she was pushed on this hold on. I thought there were thousands of americans behind enemy lines. They can't get to the airport. You're refusing to send in the the forces necessary to get them out. So are you saying that we're gonna leave. Americans in afghanistan answer's yes say after withdrew. It's done so if one. Us citizen suddenly discovered saying really want to get out. And i'm stuck. Who knows where. Somewhere in afghanistan kabul. He's got a problem with this trigger. A diplomatic military or hands type things to get that person out whatever they are commitment continues to be. Us citizens if they want to leave we will help. Get them out again. We expect there could be some But i i. Don't i'm not going to get into it further. She tried to use this mealy-mouth language and it just didn't work. She said look. We want to get them out. Okay we we hope we want to and if they want to get out we'll try to help them get out but there's like. So what do you expect people there and she says yes we do. But i don't wanna get into it. I bet you don't want to get into it. I bet you don't see your cracking down on our liberties at home. You're cracking down on our our rights. Our tradition our way of life up ending that entirely you can see whether people wearing the Secular keffiyah there in the press briefing room. Masking up they're not even not allowed to go increasingly now. Not allowed to go to restaurants not allowed to go to church not allowed to go to work. So you're going to lock down here and then you're gonna leave us behind overseas. That's that is what this liberal regime is telling you. Oh and i'm sorry one third thing that i forgot. We're gonna ship all the afghani people over here. That's what we're going to do. And we're being told that they're being properly vetted but we've got proof now coming out from the united kingdom that these people are not being vetted they can't be. There's too many a complete dereliction of duty now if you want someone. Who won't derelict his duty to work for your company. I strongly recommend you check out ziprecruiter. I was just in france a few weeks ago. I was over. There was there for a wedding and walking around france. And i noticed something only about one waiter at every restaurant and it's not just because the french are known for a little leisurely take on on labor. No it's because they can't get workers view. Go to restaurants in america. You go to stores in america right now. You can't get workers you you probably know this with your own company. People have not been working all that much of usually because of lockdowns mandates over the past year now businesses reopening. It's very hard to find really good talent. If you wanna find good talent go to ziprecruiter you post your job on ziprecruiter ziprecruiter sense that out to hundred of the top job sites. Millions of possible applicants actively goes at invites people to apply finds you the best person. Time is money when it comes to hiring. Hiring is the most important investment. You're gonna make right now. Try ziprecruiter for free at this exclusive web address. Ziprecruiter dot com slash knowles. That's ziprecruiter dot com slash w. good ziprecruiter dot com slash knowles ziprecruiter. The smartest way to hire with everything going on from the afghanistan debacle to vaccine mandates. I'm not sure there's a better place to talk about at all then backstage. Join us tomorrow. Thursday august twenty six at seven. Pm eastern six pm central daily wire dot com and on our daily wire youtube channel. Don't miss it also today. Is your last chance to submit your song to be the new sweet baby anthem for now. Walsh's sweet baby gang go to daily wire dot com slash sb submissions and tonight at midnight. Go check it out. Also we've got a great exciting announcement to share today. Deadline hollywood just released the details and an exclusive photo up the daily wires. I original movie. It's called shot in directed by dj russo executive produced by daily co-founders a production on the thriller wrapped this weekend. It will be available to daily wire members beginning in january. Twenty twenty two. This film is centered around a young single mother who is barricaded inside a pantry by her violent ex boyfriend while using nothing but her voice to guide her two small children to escape escalating danger. It's an intense suspenseful thriller delivers riveting action without missing a beat. The trailer for shut in will be out. Soon we are members are gonna love this film. We entered the entertainment space in order to send hollywood a message that you no longer have a monopoly in the film industry. The release of shuten is just the next step improving and we'll be right back with a lot more. We're getting a report out of the united kingdom that the supreme vetting of all of our afghan allies. We know we know exactly. Who's coming into the west from this war-torn country which is extremely violent which has had terrible terrorism problems. We know everyone is coming though. We're airlifting tens of thousands of people at a time. We know exactly who's coming in. Except maybe we don't a person just entered the united kingdom from afghanistan who had been on the no fly list now this person with later not deemed by the uk to be a person of interest in whatever terrorism investigation they're undertaking. But it just shows you the problem. The point of the no fly list. Maybe you support the no-fly maybe you don't. But the the premise of the no fly list at least is that people who are considered a threat or not permitted onto airplanes. They're not permitted in. It's a good news. I guess that this person was not considered to be dangerous enough threat to keep out of the country. But how did that person get on the plane in the first place because obviously the afghan people who are now being flown into this country and others by the and hundreds of thousands can't be properly vetted it's not possible. We're already going to leave. Americans in afghanistan americans in afghanistan. There's no way that you can do a proper vetting to get everybody out. Joe biden refuses to force the taliban to extend the deadline to get out. So we're just trying to trying to race against the clock here we are going to take into just this country possibly one hundred thousand afghan refugees. Something tells me they're not all going to be properly vetted now. Many of them were allies of ours. They helped us out when we were afganistan that that's great thrilled. I appreciate. they're supporting us. Do we think that not one bad guy is going to make it in there. Do we think that every single person there is going to be just thrilled to join a mattis. Sonian democracy here. They're all going to just salute the flag and eat apple pie and and sing. The national anthem will frankly most americans these days. Don't sing the national anthem site. Never mind about that. Do we really think there's no problem here. Because the people liberal imperialists up on the left and the right are telling us that if we in any way raise any questions about taking in any fewer than hundreds of thousands of afghan migrants. That is terrible evil immoral. Un-american that is that the case can the united states handle that kind of stuff right now. I'm not even talking about the afghan migrants in particular. Just talking about the open borders taking in the whole world taking in millions of people a year. Are we really in a good position to handle that. Because as as far as i can tell our national policy has been completely bungled. We've lost our way of life. We're losing our national identity and cohesion. I don't even know what the migrants will be assimilated into at this point. What is what do we stand for. What our standards doesn't seem like a great idea. Meanwhile back overseas we. We've now heard from the pentagon. They've admitted that the taliban has stolen all our stuff. They've got all of it but we we actually don't know how much they've got. We don't we don't know the stuff that the afghan army had that the taliban now talk and in case you were wondering no we have no policy solution to fix it here. Effort to tally of the number of us. Weapons and equipment that are now under taliban control and is there any program to mitigate this problem through destruction or confiscating back in back. Yeah mike we. I mean we've talked about this Before i don't have an exact inventory of what equipment the that the afghans had their disposal that that now might be at risk. Obviously we don't wanna see any any weapons or systems That to fall into the hands of people that that That would use them in such a way to to to harm our interests are our partners. Allies. i mean we have a vested interest. Obviously in in not wanting that to happen. But i don't have any policy solutions for you today about how we would or could address that going forward. This is embarrassing to watch. This is like when you're in a meeting at your office and there's the flunky guy there's the flunky guy who you know. Maybe he's a good talker or something but he gets called our says okay. So have you done this thing or this thing. What's what have you. What are you doing what have you. What have you brought to the company here. And he says well. Yeah no i mean look obviously yeah look we wanna do stuff for our for our partners and we want and synergy you know and but no we don't i don't what's your solution then johnny. Well now i don't have. I don't exactly have solutions. But i think it's very important. Look yeah. I don't know i don't have numbers okay or Facts or data or any but yeah. I just think it's important we want to have. We want to have that. We wanna do better. And we're gonna do better. Reich is right. that's that's great. I'm glad you want that. But we need results. We need and we're not getting results from our national leaders. Were not getting results on the kovic lockdowns. Not quite the opposite of that rent. We're we're not getting results. Overseas were not getting results anywhere. Nowhere none of the. We're not getting results on immigration. We're not getting results on the economy. We're not getting results on inflation. We're not getting results on anything. So president trump is deciding to go on the attack. This is probably the strongest evidence yet that donald trump plans to run for president. Again against joe biden. If he's even still in office and we wonder if that is even possible but trump just released this early on twenty twenty one a campaign ad just summing up everything that we've been seeing for the past few months. America is back inflation rate in collaborating. Climb of covert infections amplifier power. We summoned renew strength. This is a recruitment. The embarrassed now. The taliban or bat kabul was not in an imminent threat environment likelihood there's going to be the taliban overrunning everything in owning newham countries is highly unlikely they own the whole country now the taliban now incomplete control of how how did president biden. Get this so wrong. First of all michigan hasn't failed failure. Exactly yes i don't care if you think i'm satan ran carnegie responsible zeros. Birth china is ready for friendly relations with the taliban chanting death to america devastating devastating. And i i do love that. That voice over that you hear there from some protesters and you call yourself on president shave but but other than that everything else was just news reports. Everything else is just joe. Biden's own words or those of his spokesman the the only editorial per one or two lines there from your you know you're a bad president or whatever the rest it was him indicting himself and i don't even just mean to blame. Biden biden has no idea what's going on. It's the whole liberal establishment indicting itself that that ad is more powerful than just about any ad i've ever seen in politics more morning in america. You know sort of ronald reagan touting all of his accomplishments this was like the the flip side of that. This is what happens when everything goes wrong. Now you're not allowed to say make america great again. I guess this gets to the heart of our problem. You're not allowed to root for america. We don't even know what america is if you if you say you wanna make america great again if you salute the flag if you put your hand over your heart when you say the the pledge you are according to the left engaging white nationalism because america's an evil rotten racist bigoted terrible white. Supremacist place. he just take a listen to this. Voicemail voicemail was left on the phone of carter nordmann. he's a representative state rep in iowa. This was a woman who called him because he supported a bill that would have schools. Say the pledge of allegiance in the morning just like we all did when we were kids. Just like has been roofer. A lot of american history. She she got triggered. Yes this message is for. Carter nordmann my understanding that you on the iowa state representative who included language that requires all iowa schools to lead the pledge of allegiance once a day in grades. One through twelve there. When did we start teaching white nationalism in schools. Because that's exactly what the you're doing sir and you have absolutely no right to require something like that. Our children aren't proud to be american. Maybe the white suburban kids out in a dell are proud to be american because their rights are afforded to them every day and they don't have to fight for them but for the rest of us who are women. The poor the elderly the minorities. We're not so proud. what are we proud of. We're proud of our racist. History is proud of our racist fruits. Is that what we're proud of. We're proud of the fact that not all citizens in the united states are afforded the same rights and the same privileges as the blonde haired blue eyed ones. So first of all that woman is the voice of a generation before we make fun of her before we talk about how kooky and crazy she is she is espousing. What is now the mainstream point of view. That if you say anything nice about america or its founding. You are a white supremacist. America's and evil place and we need to undo the founding of the country and refound the country to take away that that racist evil terrible route. It's rotten to the core the second part. That's funny about this is that this woman is almost certainly white right because you hear her say she goes the. Maybe it's fine to salute the flag. If you're one of those white women in the suburbs but for the rest of us who are and then you hear this. A little pause. And so if she's contrasting the white people with someone else with herself she would if she weren't white you probably say with who are hispanic and blah blah or who are black. And who are but. She doesn't do that she she goes. Yeah maybe the white people in the suburbs will do that but not the rest of us who are women. Older women is not the opposite of white or poor i. She's she's not for that woman is not. She does not talk like a poor person. She talks like a rich entitled white liberal receipt. I i can hear it. I'm just. I don't want to rush to conclusions but you can hear these things we we're oppressed. What would we. What would we be proud of in our country and that's the question because after decades now teaching people that there's nothing to enjoy about the country nothing to be grateful for nothing value here that that's what people believe that that We we have nothing to share to people abroad. Which is why. Now we've got to pull everyone in from outside but The country itself is right and so we need to bring in as many other people who are not western were not american To help improve the country and we need to disrespect our losses as best we can because our laws were founded by evil racist white. supremacist people. There is a logic to their madness. It's a it's a it's illeg. it's perverse logic. but there is a kind of coherence in its perversity. There is some good news for the american nation rare. Good news that we get these days especially where good news from the court. The supreme court has done probably not hearing about the story by the way. It's not getting a lot of play. The supreme court has just ruled that the biden rations attempt to end the remain in mexico immigration policy is is not permitted under the law of the land and so the supreme court has refused to block a lower court ruling that will require the government to reinstate the trump era policy. The remain in mexico policy was a brilliant policy. And it's obviously right and just the policy is this. We're told that we've got a zillion asylum seekers coming into america. They're not economic. Migrants are not people who just want a flat our laws and come in and make a buck. They are fleeing political persecution. They'll be killed if they remain in guatemala or honduras or el salvador. And so that's why we've gotta let them into america. It's a matter of life or death if they don't get out of their nation of origin and so the trump administration said okay fine If if people need to come into america to flee death the political persecution than then. We'll do that but if those people make it to another country i where they'll be perfectly safe then. They've got to stay there. And the reason for this policy is that of course. These guys were coming from el salvador. Guatemala nicaragua wherever have to go through mexico so if they were really just fleeing political persecution they would just stay in mexico in the first place they could outside of their own country. But they're not they're economic migrants. Who wanna come here. Our economy's better for how long i don't know but our economy is theoretically better and they they're gonna have a better life here and they they probably would so joe biden comes and he says now. Forget about that. We can't we can't have that policy because that's going to discourage people from illegally coming into our country and that's going to hurt us down the road because we're not going to be able to just bring in voters it legally so what the supreme court did is they actually Watched the left get hoisted on. Its own petard. The supreme court when trump tried to overturn rock obama's unconstitutional daca program. The program that gave executive amnesty to illegal aliens under roughly the age of forty. Even though that we pretend that they're dreamers who are like six years old but they're actually much older than that the court said no. You can't do that you can't you. You're actually not permitted to do that. You can't have that kind of capricious policy. Change left and right. Because then you won't be able to have stable country so you've got to give a compelling reason well they use that same logic year to stop the biden administration from reversing the remain in mexico policy. Great stuff speaking of banning stuff. The founder of only fan only fans is that. It's like a social media website for porn. You you can go onto only fans and produce your own pornography the pictures of yourself and stuff like that. I was considering starting my own just to make a little extra buck. Look i've got a family now. Okay i've got to pay some bills and so you can do that if you're content creator and then people can subscribe to your porn and they'll get special porn. You know even though it's not exactly difficult to find naked ladies on the internet and you don't have spend a lot of money to do it but there's a service where you can spend money and feel like you've got a special relationship with a pornographer so only announced week or two ago that they're going to ban porn from their website which means their website is basically going to have to shutdown. There's that they they are a pornography website so if they ban porn. I'm not sure exactly who's going to be using their website. But they did it and the founder has just explained why it's because the banks. The big banks were pressuring them to because the banks. Don't wanna be involved in this cd business. They don't want to be funding some pimp. Whose name is tim stokely. He's the only fans they don't want to be seen as encouraging eighteen year. Old girls who want to make a quick buck warring thinking clearly go turn themselves into porn stars and they don't want to encourage this sick addiction among men so they say look you guys if you if you want to keep doing business with us then you you gotta get all the out of there. I think this is great. There's an unfortunately there's a code to the story which we'll get to in a second but at least the first announcement. I think this is great. I know that there are a lot of conservatives out there who are going to say. Hold on michael what you think the banks should be able to exert influence. These are the same banks that are that are sometimes going after conservatives. These are the same banks. Were sometimes wielding power to ostracize conservatives from society. so you can't celebrate when they're wielding power to ostracize pornographers. Yes i can. Yes i can't and it's this kind of illogic that has really put the right in a bad position over. The past couple of decades politics is about more than just form. it's also about substance. The fact that banks are doing anything is one aspect of the of the political question. But what the banks are doing is the other aspect. Like for instance when when leftist. Say you know michael if if we tell communists that they can't indoctrinate. Our third graders in the classroom if conservatives were to do that and kick communism out of the classroom why that would make us no better than the left which is trying to kick american patriotism out of the classroom. No no it would make us very different from the left because communism and patriotism or not the same thing our first amendment rights and pornography or not the same thing. I know that people are confused about this today. But for the vast majority of american history it was never understood. That pornography is protected by the rib. Senator is protected by the first amendment. But michael the banks are going after guns so now. you're fine with them going after pornographers. Yes because guns in pornography are different and one is a civil right and one is not and one is generally illegal and even though now we don't understand that but yes those are different things. This guy is a pimp. This even dresses like a pimp. Tim stokely now unfortunately the bad news. We just got an hour ago. Is that the. The only fans has has reversed course. They've secured funding. They pressured the banks. Whatever so now they're gonna keep worn out there. This is bad stuff. Conservatives used to be able to recognize that there's a difference between good and bad and right and wrong. I mean basically the people making the argument that we need to be really worried that a bank suggest pressured only fans to get rid of its porn. Even though it didn't really work they're the ones who are making the same argument drag queens story hours of blessing of liberty like david frenchman. Because they say well who's to who's to say what's good and bad if if we get rid of drag queens story. Our y the left might get rid of church on sunday which they're already trying to do by the way no we actually we can. No we can know the difference between these things unfortunate. Lay a lot of work to do to re- to rebuild our society. a lot of work didn't forget rebuilding afghanistan. A lot of work to rebuild our society even on the right for us to make sense of these things much more. Say we'll have to hold it for tomorrow. i'm michael noses. Michael nelson them if you enjoyed this episode. Don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the word. Please give us a five star review and tell your friends to subscribe. We're available on apple podcasts. Spotify and wherever else you listen to podcasts. Also be sure to check out the daily wire podcasts. Including the ben shapiro. Show the andrew klavan show and the matt wall show. The michael knowles show is produced by. Ben davies executive producer. Jeremy boorda our technical director. Is austin stevens supervising producer mathis lover production manager. Pablo vitebsky editor and associate producer. Danny d'amico associate producer. Justin turley audio mixer. Mike core amina and hair and makeup by nica. Geneva michael knowles show is a daily wire. Production copyright daily wire twenty one only fans announced that it was getting rid of pornographic content but after a huge backlash from the public company has backtracked. What does this whole drama. Tell us about our cultural discussed that today. Also the rapper. Busta rhymes delivers one of the best. Anti mask speeches. We've yet seen and you're probably a governor of south dakota says that she will not prevent employers from imposing vaccine mandates plus planned. Parenthood gets into the trans hormone therapy game. And finally. we'll ask the important question. Is air conditioning racist. The answer might surprise you all of that and more today on wall show.

afghanistan taliban america joe biden faucher michael knowles Dr chee knowles mary louise kelley luis fishman dr fao ouchi joseph mangla Hitler trump george w hitler pfau george w bush administration bill blasios blasio knowles ring
Former Congressman Barney Frank 7-28-29

CATS Roundtable

13:05 min | 2 years ago

Former Congressman Barney Frank 7-28-29

"Good Morning America. This is the cats roundtable John catch him ts here. It's the economy what's going on and a big thing about the economy is our banking systems. It seems like Deutsche Bank in Europe is in trouble bowl with us. This morning is wanting frank. <hes> he was in Congress for ever he was in charge of the banking committee forever and now he's on the board of a major New York Bank Claude we'll signature bank and and I believe Ivanka trump was on that board to at one point and Alfonse D'Amato Good Morning Congressman Frank. How are you this morning? Hunger Alpine tonight served together. I did not overlap well APP with the Ivanka trump but Alan I of course it was back Alan. I actually <hes> I started working together in the ninety s <hes> when he was a chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. I was a high ranking member of the House too many so we've had a pretty constructive working relationship for twenty years. That's when there was an existence of common sense Democrats and Commonsense Republicans that worked there isn't that correct that's correct and that lasted for some some time <hes> when I first became the chairman of the committee was the last two years of the George W Bush administration and I worked very closely because we had the crisis who will know I work closely with all the Bush administration officials the Treasury Secretary Paulson Fed Chairman Banenky F._d._i._C. Chairman <hes> Sheila Bair and I would frankly disappointed that when Obama came in to be honest he never got from Republicans that cooperation we'd given to the Bush administration restauration when he was still in power. Give us an update. I mean I say to all Americans. I would say the whole world. What you believe is happening in banking system? The economy seems to be. Very strong <hes> the market are up interest rates seem soft and headed south. There's talk that there will be a drop in interest rates next fed meeting which is Tuesday Wednesday well. The basic point is our economy is doing well particularly. <hes> you know this long <hes> you you start with a <hes> terrible crisis in two thousand eight but since then during the eight years of Obama now the first couple of here's trump we've we've been doing better than than much of the developed world obviously not up to what what what the developing world does make China where they had this break at but <hes> he's the question for us. It's clear that the <hes> the fiscal stimulus of the first trump was enormous. John Maynard Keynes may be looking down and see Donald trump is his is most <hes> arden advocate because between a very big big budget deficit from spending and the six inch reduction in revenue from the big tax cut because we got a big jolt and so you got three percent growth last year the problem now of course is <hes> in that did that make a permanent improvement economy or was it kind of temporary <hes> stimulus you get in Cajun theory and right now. It looks like it may be the latter because growth in this past quarter was two point one percent now. That's terrible herbal. Let's go to bed to the rest of the world but it's below what the president predicted we would get and in fact the president of south seems to be somewhat pessimistic about the economy because he's putting such pressure on the Federal Reserve to cut interest rate so the question that's the only Yeltsin pound three times a week although what he yells at Powell for is exactly the opposite about what he yelled yelling for <hes> because he committed surfable renewed astray. She said that was helping Obama but now he wants Powell to do the same but maybe aside the politics of it. You obviously don't say that unless you think the economy is is going to be going to be slowing down. And that's the <hes> the question we have is <hes> what is shaping. He kind of does like the Federal Reserve is going to reduce rates <hes> in accordance with the president's request so as for the banking the system <hes> on the other hand. I think I take a victory lap gun for what we did. I just fade away <hes> I think since we pass the legislation signed in two thousand ten <hes> be regulated <hes> financial issue not just the banks. It's actually more was needed for example for the visit derivatives unregulated derivatives for major destabilizing factor and what we've seen since then is an economy that's performing well and particularly remember. The function of the banking system system is to get the money together so that the people who make the productive investments have access to it called intermediation together up money from people who have extra capital and put it together and ended or make it otherwise available to people the productively and I think we have etched into an economy that is stable in fact America meets the world in terms of forms and others adopted ours so that the banks have been able to do their job without taking undue risks concerned frankly. I think there's kind of a contentious of that because well during the trump is the healthcare bill terribly controversial and there were efforts to repeal enough essentially that's been virtually no change one small legislative change in inch reform bill and there appreciably consensus now that that's okay and that issue is settled and now I mean are two top banks Jamie Diamond J. P. Morgan and Brian Morning Hand at Bank of America. I mean Bankamerica besides the dividend and besides record earnings of buying back another ten percent of the bank over the next twelve months I mean isn't that just super. Oh I think so by the way I go back to my. Els As dying money in the bank is based in North Carolina with my constituent on the Wellesley Massachusetts and great guy or close to him gave me. We didn't agree on everything but I think that's exactly right the banks are we. We've hit the balance. The banks <music> are able to do their function which is to make money available to the productive element to the economy that needed and at the same time there is no danger there no imbalance the biggest problem we had before was that financial institutions students incurred debt beyond what they pay. We've controlled to that and yes. I think very good and frankly I think there's a contradiction because the president he's not saying much more. You don't hear them talking much about financial reform but he was. I was saying I it we had somehow choked off the bank system but also had the best economy in the world well. It's kind of hard to have both if your banking system isn't functioning your financial system again will then you'll have a good economy and as I said I think yes absolutely right and what you he is troubles with other banks don't you banks are bank. <hes> had problems you. American banks are in very good shape now. How bad is the European banks were or Deutsche? Bank seems to have a problems but the British banks stood the British banks have the problem of what's going to happen with the with Britain leaving the European Union and ticket with Johnson now prime minister basically saying he's GonNa pull out no matter what <hes> whether or not the deal he that's above because financial interests have been even bigger part of the British economy there ours and they they're welcome to <hes> in two thousand nine ten <hes> but <hes> I think on the one hand they've done well because they adopted some reasonable regulations. What you have is the uncertainty for the British banks of what happened to him in on the part of the European Union? There's something called the passport after European Union that allows them to do business in the entire <hes> population and economy in the Union and they're gonNA lose that so that's the uncertainty over Pretty Franks. It's not that they in any way responsible Deutsche Bank official venture example <hes> but there is an unknown as to how many institutions. You too she's GonNa Leave Right Linden and go to Europe because the the Oh and they're trying to get the Frankford is trying to get it in Paris. That's the uncertainty over the British banks not the practical effects of their banking work but what what what it will mean when Britain leaves your opinion I had lunch last Wednesday with Nigel Farraj <hes> from the Brexit party and I it seems like what the really the Brits are really really upset about. He's there the immigration and they won't say that publicly the immigration <hes> and Britain Great Britain getting invaded from all over the Middle East etc and I said to them why it solve the immigration problem stay with the rest of it but the point by the way with immigration had been is much less people from Africa and the Middle East. It's from elsewhere in Europe in fact the symbol of immigration problems problems in in Britain used to be the Polish plumber remember. That's that's of course <hes> to the extent that you were about immigration that has to do with getting out of the to be said that motivate. You're getting out of the U.. Eastern European talking about Eric Community there were no African or Middle Eastern countries in the European Union the free immigration that's been part of the European Union he seen European and <hes> I think somebody said the second most common language in Ireland Haramain for example which is part of the European Union is Poli <hes> so he being one of the larger countries there <hes> now part of it is by the way those workers that are there who are affording important things to the good economy and I think the like other countries including ours you cut foam immigration. You're cutting off a source of a judge at are done well at reasonable wages <hes> the other thing that strikes me about immigration. Is I notice it Stephen Bannon. Who's been kind of the you? The Google for all these people he just told the meeting of the political parties of your party that they should talk more about economics than immigration <hes> and I think he's he's correct from this point so <hes> yeah there's been this fear get rid England about immigration but they said it's got more to do with eastern Europeans then with the African and Asian and Middle Eastern Immigrants Times for Frank. We got a minute left. It seems like <hes> maxine waters is <hes> who is the new head of the Congressional Committee on oversight on the banks. We Dave entitled. It seems like he's she's calmed down a little bit. Have you noticed that well. I don't notice her. Come down because I work closely with the issue was the <hes> second and third and second in seniority and I knew he was enabled and thoughtful person you know part of the John You know. You're a great student of this. The people see if you through the media isn't necessarily you owe to my husband tells me he he often now that I'm retired and we would be out with people socially they will say to him privately actress. Oh well you know. Mr Frank was calm nicer than I thought that's because a lot of these people the only time they ever saw me with an argument with somebody 'cause that's all television. <hes> presented so maxine is always had a very constructive <hes> role as well and then the other thing too is. I think that famous maxim from ord acting power power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely I think it's the opposite I think with a lot of politicians it's not having power not being held responsible that they get you to be a little wacky and I think you'll want to people when they run the ball on down one of my best friends. Would you call him to calm down Jerry Nadler well I. I have this sympathy with Jerry because he is. I think very unfairly being attacked from his left. I think Jerry <hes> you know nobody can ignore totally totally the political situation <hes> and he's got this <hes> candidate running against him repeatedly. I I guess being Nancy Pelosi has always been very good. I think he's showing her her great value to the country now so.

European Union Congressman Frank Obama Ivanka trump Europe Deutsche Bank Britain president John Maynard Keynes chairman Jerry Nadler Alan I Donald trump Federal Reserve Senate Banking Committee Bank of America Middle East Alfonse D'Amato