transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:01] Adam Curry, John C.

Speaker 2:
[00:03] Dvorak. It's Thursday, April 23rd, 2026. This is your award-winning give-a-nation media assassination episode, 1862.

Speaker 1:
[00:10] This is No Agenda.

Speaker 2:
[00:13] Minding the Minds. And broadcasting live from the heart of the Texas snow country here in FEMA Region Number 6. In the morning, everybody, I'm Adam Curry.

Speaker 3:
[00:22] And from Refinery Row in Northern California, we're all asking Donald Trump, Daddy, are we there yet? I'm John C. Dvorak.

Speaker 4:
[00:31] It's Crackpot and Buzzkill.

Speaker 2:
[00:34] So, I don't want to be the one to complain, because I am not the worst wounded on this show. But I have the cedar fever.

Speaker 3:
[00:46] Yeah, the what?

Speaker 2:
[00:47] The cedar fever.

Speaker 3:
[00:48] Oh, cedar. Oh, this is every year this happens.

Speaker 2:
[00:52] Oh, and the, and the, oh, when I...

Speaker 3:
[00:53] I thought you had the HIPAA filter, the HIPAA filter.

Speaker 2:
[00:55] Oh, it's everywhere. And during the, the bat signalling caught in my throat and during this opening caught in my, and it's, ha, and the only cure for a fever is more cowbell. It's just so bad. Anyway, I'll get through it. How are you, man? We, we got a little scare, scare. We were afeard for you.

Speaker 3:
[01:16] I had to go into the hospital for a certain checkup and then they outfitted me with a, with one of these, with a bunch of gear. I got strapped.

Speaker 2:
[01:27] He strapped everybody. What are you strapped with? What are you strapped with? You got a nine, nine mil?

Speaker 3:
[01:32] I got some uncomfortable device on and a, some sort of a pad, some, some weird sticker. It looks like a decal that, that sends, that collects data. Wait, and 24-7 for two weeks.

Speaker 2:
[01:49] Does this send, does this connect it to an iPhone? Please tell me it is.

Speaker 3:
[01:53] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[01:56] To Jae's iPhone? Who's iPhone?

Speaker 3:
[01:57] No, no, this is connected. I, they, they, I had my phone and they said, there's an app, you gotta have it because it collects on the phone.

Speaker 2:
[02:06] Wait a minute, you showed them your phone. They went, what is that?

Speaker 3:
[02:09] They, they said, this phone is old. And I said, yeah, it works. It works. What am I supposed to say? And so they gave me a phone.

Speaker 2:
[02:20] Oh, they gave an iPhone?

Speaker 3:
[02:23] No, not an iPhone, some Android.

Speaker 2:
[02:24] Android, so your Android was not even compatible with today's modern technology. Wow. You know, because here's, I got no information. Did you get my text? I sent you a text.

Speaker 5:
[02:39] Did you get my text?

Speaker 3:
[02:40] No.

Speaker 2:
[02:41] You didn't get my text. It's on your phone.

Speaker 3:
[02:45] On the phone? Oh, you should send it to the text system.

Speaker 2:
[02:48] You are confusing. You text, you call me from your phone, you text me from your phone. Now I start using that. I'm like, hey, this is John's phone. You're in the hospital. And then as like, I might as well not exist. Meanwhile, Horowitz is like, oh yeah, I talked to John, everything's fine.

Speaker 3:
[03:03] Yeah. You know, this Mimi keeps telling me, stop talking to Horowitz. It hurts Adam's feelings. It does. Well, you know, since I didn't hear back from you, like I only talked to Horowitz because they had to skip the show because they were doing something. And they would be this horrible situation occurred with me and a specific doctor at the hospital who I shooed out.

Speaker 2:
[03:29] And then, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, can you talk about it?

Speaker 3:
[03:33] Yeah, I'll talk about it. So I had this doctor that was at the top. There's a doctor that's in charge of the floor.

Speaker 2:
[03:40] Do you mind if I go back a second?

Speaker 3:
[03:43] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[03:44] So I heard that you went to the ER. This is the information I got. Here's how it was conveyed to me. What do you mean?

Speaker 3:
[03:54] Well, I mean, this is going to interrupt my story, but okay.

Speaker 2:
[03:56] Well, I think it flows into your story. So John's in the ER. Okay. Is he okay? Well, yeah. But he's been waiting for hours. And I got the impression that you were lying on a gurney in the hallway.

Speaker 3:
[04:13] It might as well have been though.

Speaker 2:
[04:16] Okay. Because I started pulling the bats.

Speaker 3:
[04:20] So the reason I'm irked about it is because this doctor comes in, a small Chinese woman, and says, we got to keep another day. What? No, I come in and I'm in and I'm out another day. She looked at nothing to determine this. So the next day, I'm upstairs, stuck there, and she comes in, you got to keep another day. Well, no. So I got mad. This was from a long series of things. So I got mad at her and told her she's not interested in the patients whatsoever. Then I said to her, this is very dramatic because Brennan was there witnessing this. Here it comes. I said, you know what? You're a lousy doctor. You have no concern for the patients' needs or desires. Now, I kept reading her the riot act. So she left.

Speaker 2:
[05:20] Wait, she didn't say anything?

Speaker 3:
[05:22] Well, she kind of pushed back a little bit.

Speaker 2:
[05:24] Did she huff? She sort of at least huffed.

Speaker 3:
[05:28] Maybe. She had a mask on.

Speaker 2:
[05:30] Oh, of course, of course, of course.

Speaker 3:
[05:32] She masked all the time. Always masked. And so one of the nurses comes in. I'm gossiping with her because I do that with the nurses. And I said, I did what I did. I told her what I did. And the nurse says, you want to file a report?

Speaker 2:
[05:48] Yes, please.

Speaker 3:
[05:50] And I took about five beats. I said, yeah, yeah. And so she rushes over to the consul and says, tell me everything you know.

Speaker 2:
[06:00] It was obvious to me that this doctor is a problem doctor.

Speaker 3:
[06:06] That was my determination. And so then meanwhile, then the supervisor comes in and grills me and makes me tell the story. And then she's, oh, you know, we were trying to be for the patient, you know, we've.

Speaker 2:
[06:19] When the nurses don't like the doctor, that's a problem with that doctor.

Speaker 3:
[06:24] And then there is a, I don't know that, by the way, what you just said, I'm not sure that's true, but I'm, because I don't want to demean the nurse, but it's probably true. But the, then I got another supervisor comes in. So, what I've done was I, like an A-hole that I can be, if you haven't noticed. No, not at all. I went through the system, because there are ways you can complain, but doing it from the outside in, having worked in a bureaucracy for eight years, doing it from the outside in is not the same as doing it from the inside out. So she's in trouble.

Speaker 2:
[07:09] And rightly so, because she was just trying to up her, do you think she gets paid more by keeping there longer? Is there incentive?

Speaker 3:
[07:17] Well, I may, I concluded the following. If you're a Medicare patient, the money is automatic.

Speaker 2:
[07:25] Right. So the money is coming, they just have to…

Speaker 3:
[07:28] They don't have to fight you for the money.

Speaker 2:
[07:30] So you're a gold mine.

Speaker 3:
[07:33] So Medicare patients, let's do what can we do? And so I think that all these systems, not just the one I'm here with, all these systems across the country are gouging the government. That's why Medicare, oh, what are we going to do? You know, it's going broke. Yeah. For good reason. They're doing everything they can to break it.

Speaker 2:
[07:52] I'm surprised they didn't slap you on a vent for another 11 grand. Let's put this old geezer on a vent. We know that's money in the bank. Money in the bank.

Speaker 3:
[08:04] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[08:04] Wow. Hey, can we publish that data that they're collecting? Can we make like a real-time JCD graph, health graph?

Speaker 3:
[08:11] Well, we're going to try to get all the records.

Speaker 2:
[08:15] Well, I was concerned, you know.

Speaker 3:
[08:19] If I was concerned and if it was bad enough that it involved you, I would have called you. I only called Horowitz because I had to skip the show.

Speaker 2:
[08:28] I know, but the fact that you didn't call or didn't even answer my text made me feel like it was much worse. Because all I got from Jae is, hey, Justin FYI, John's at the ER. Okay. I mean, I'm not complaining.

Speaker 3:
[08:45] By the way, the reason I was in the ER, because when they go in there, you get checked in, that's where you have to go, I was there forever because there was a fiasco situation, which is another whole story which I won't tell.

Speaker 2:
[09:01] There was some kind of horrible accident that took place.

Speaker 3:
[09:03] No, it was just a logistics thing. It was ridiculous.

Speaker 2:
[09:07] Yeah, let me guess. A bunch of illegal aliens had priority over you. That was my conclusion.

Speaker 3:
[09:13] Well, you know, it's possible.

Speaker 2:
[09:16] Anyway.

Speaker 3:
[09:16] As long as they get their money.

Speaker 2:
[09:17] Hey, you know what? You sound good. In fact, do you want to… Shall I just tell you what my text was to you?

Speaker 3:
[09:24] I'm sorry?

Speaker 2:
[09:24] Shall I read you my text?

Speaker 3:
[09:25] Oh, hold on a second. Let me turn off the heater.

Speaker 2:
[09:29] That was going to be my next complaint.

Speaker 3:
[09:33] Now I can hear you.

Speaker 2:
[09:34] Okay. So, here's my text. Hope you're enjoying…

Speaker 3:
[09:42] Never let a good text go to waste.

Speaker 2:
[09:44] Hope you're enjoying your stay. What a bummer. This sucks. Don't worry about clips for Thursday. I'll have us well covered. Just show up and grouse as usual. Come on, man. That's a great text for somebody who's in the ER. Oh, man.

Speaker 3:
[10:00] You're like an amateur writer. Can't throw anything out. Oh, man.

Speaker 2:
[10:08] I'm glad you're okay. You sound great. You sound fantastic.

Speaker 3:
[10:11] Yeah. About an hour from now, I'll be grasping.

Speaker 2:
[10:14] Well, between the two of us, man, I've had this fever. You can literally feel the pollen sticking in your throat. It's nuts.

Speaker 6:
[10:24] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[10:24] You say this every year.

Speaker 2:
[10:25] Well, I had it in January and now it's come back. So this is now, you know, four months.

Speaker 3:
[10:30] That doesn't make any sense.

Speaker 6:
[10:31] No.

Speaker 2:
[10:31] But everyone has it. Everyone has scratchy eyes. Who knows? It's probably the chemtrails.

Speaker 3:
[10:38] You got the hepa going?

Speaker 2:
[10:39] I got the hepa going. I got everything going. The, what really seems to work. Oh, Manuka Gold, the Manuka Gold Honey.

Speaker 3:
[10:48] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[10:49] So I had, along with this, I had really pain in my left side and it kind of went to my back. And I, it was muscle pain, muscle spasm. What? This is old, old guy talk. I sort of, Patina says, Hey, we got some of that Manuka Gold pain relief. So I opened the thing. I was expecting honey goo. No, it's like a, it's like a bomb, you know, but a jelly, a gelatin, a soft gelatin bomb. And I rubbed that and within two minutes the pain is gone. I was blown away by that. That stuff is magic. I can hear Cal from Lavender Blossoms going, Hey, my stuff is better. But I was blown away by the Manuka Gold pain relief. Not a sponsor.

Speaker 3:
[11:40] What's in it?

Speaker 2:
[11:41] Well, CBD to start with. I don't have it here, but it has a whole list of ingredients. It's all natural stuff, mint and this and that, and it smells great. It's not like you have honey sticking to you. The skin absorbs it and it's gone. It's not like it's going to rub off if you go lay in bed or something like that. It's good stuff. There's a tip. So I figured I'd do a little dive in the archives to start us off today because we both have to.

Speaker 3:
[12:12] By the way, I'm more than prepared with clips.

Speaker 2:
[12:16] Excuse me.

Speaker 3:
[12:17] I was just trying to be nice. No, I'm just saying you made it sound like you couldn't do clips. I have backup people and I want to thank them. My wife does some stuff for me. I do my own too, by the way, but Steve Jones loaded me up.

Speaker 2:
[12:30] I know he did. But you don't have to say by the way. I think you're an invalid or something.

Speaker 3:
[12:37] I'm just saying that so I make sure to get my clips in because you've already said that you're going to cover my clips. I just grouse for the show. I just wanted to back you off on that.

Speaker 2:
[12:50] Well, I was not intending to override your clips because as you know, I see your clips when they come in and I thought, wow, Steve got a lot of good clips for John. So, don't worry, don't worry. Don't worry, you can play all your clips. It's fine because that's what you said, you little spoiled brat. But I was going to start us off with something to start you into your clips by going back 15, 12, 9, and 6 years into the No Agenda Archive. Because sometimes, we've just been right for years. We've talked about these jabronis, the SPLC, and I think it was inconclusive, the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Speaker 3:
[13:42] Yeah, you really have a distrust.

Speaker 2:
[13:44] Yeah, I got a real distrust for these guys. What do you know about the Southern Poverty? I mean, what kind of name is that? It's a great name, actually, I should say, as a New World Order speak. Southern Poverty Law Center. Is poverty like for poor people, like it serves poor of the South? Let's just review who they are for a moment. The Southern Poverty Law Center is a group who are always referenced, not just by media, but also by politicians as tracking the evil that exists in America, evil, primarily hate groups, white supremacists, racists, and I've always felt very uneasy about the Southern Poverty Law Center. They are the go-to guys.

Speaker 3:
[14:34] You know what I believe is probably going on here?

Speaker 2:
[14:37] Scam.

Speaker 3:
[14:39] Well, that's a word I very rarely use, but I think it's something like you get with the Rainbow Coalition or that thing Sharpton does, which is me. Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 2:
[14:49] We're going to pester you.

Speaker 3:
[14:50] You want to get off our list? You know, when's our donation coming in? You know, you got the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Speaker 2:
[14:57] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[14:58] Yeah, you want to be a hate group or you want to help us?

Speaker 2:
[15:00] Hate or help? Hate or help?

Speaker 3:
[15:02] Because obviously, if you give us money, you are not a hate group. We can easily take you off the list.

Speaker 2:
[15:07] This is about the Southern Poverty Law Center, who we have been tracking for a decade until it became really popular, and we were pretty much one of the few saying, wow, look at these guys. They got $400, $500 million in this huge endowment, and they build up hate lists, and they just put in...

Speaker 3:
[15:22] Yeah, they became a juggernaut for fundraising.

Speaker 2:
[15:26] Well, and not only that, but they are at the center, at the center of all these fact check networks. So if you want to know if a statement is true, then you go to the fact check... I think it's the International Fact Check Network, which always, all the networks, all the websites, all the news providers, all say that they use the SPLC, the Southern Poverty Law Center, as one of their guiding beacons of light in who is hateful, who is a racist, who's on the list, who's not on the list. Two weeks ago, employees complaining of toxic workplace, only old white men running the show, everything that they accuse others of, the Southern Poverty Law Center, they have been guilty of themselves apparently for a long time.

Speaker 7:
[16:25] Well, there it is.

Speaker 3:
[16:28] Yeah, we never liked these guys.

Speaker 2:
[16:31] No, it was so obvious to us that this is bull crap.

Speaker 3:
[16:36] We have four clips.

Speaker 1:
[16:37] All right.

Speaker 3:
[16:38] First, I got just a simple clip, which is the SPLC fraud charges, because they've been charged with, I'm going to tell you what these clips are about. They've been charged with fraud because they're sponsoring these hate groups. And then, in fact, let me not only tell you what this is about, let me tell you my thoughts on it. They not only go after these hate groups, but to make it so they can fundraise against the hate groups, it turns out, as these clips will provide, they have been financing the hate groups. And in fact, that hate group situation, that whatever the meat, that great meat up, that the very good people on both sides hoaxed, that got Biden to run for office, was financed by the Southern Poverty Law Center. They gave them the money to do that protest. And while everybody's up in arms about this, and I think it is disgusting, I have to say the following. I think this is marketing genius.

Speaker 2:
[17:39] You know, while I was looking for those clips, in fact, I probably have it still in the raw, you said, I've been thinking about this for a long time. We should get in on this game, is what you literally said. This is a great gambit. These guys know what they're doing.

Speaker 3:
[17:57] It's like a marketing taken to the max. Although the way they did it, I guess because they did it over, you know, there was some state, there was some fraudulent stuff going over state lines. There was money laundering. They overcompensated and got themselves in a pickle. And I'm glad they did. I don't like these guys. They're phonies. Obviously phonies, but what happened is they play SPLC fraud charges.

Speaker 8:
[18:19] The Justice Department announced fraud charges against the Southern Poverty Law Center over its non-profit investigations into extremist groups. CBS News Justice reporter Jake Rosen has the details.

Speaker 9:
[18:31] A federal grand jury in Alabama indebted the Southern Poverty Law Center on 11 counts of wire and bank fraud related charges on Tuesday. The Justice Department announced, accusing the group of paying members of extremist organizations as part of its efforts to investigate them without disclosing the practice to donors or banks.

Speaker 10:
[18:48] The SPLC has denied the allegations.

Speaker 9:
[18:50] Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch said at a news conference announcing the charges that the SPLC is, quote, a non-profit entity that purports to fight white supremacy and racial hatred by reporting on extremist groups and conducting research to inform law enforcement groups with the goal of dismantling, but, quote, the SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred.

Speaker 2:
[19:14] You know, I have the indictment in front of me. If I just can go through a few things before we play your next clips.

Speaker 3:
[19:20] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[19:20] This is, I mean, it reads better than any report. So they had fictitious entities, these front companies, with names like Rare Books Warehouse, Tech Writers Group, Northwest Technologies, Fox Photography, and my favorite, the Center Investigative Agency. Yeah, literally CIA.

Speaker 3:
[19:43] That's a little nod.

Speaker 2:
[19:44] That's what you do. That's what you do. So the Nazis, this is the National Alliance member. He was on the payroll for 20 years. And where they went wrong with this is one of these guys broke into a violent extremist group's headquarter, stole 25 boxes of documents. And one of the high level SPLC employees coordinated the theft, knew the documents were stolen, went back, returned the originals, got in again and then published a hate watch article. I mean, these people are completely, they had no-

Speaker 3:
[20:22] You're out of control.

Speaker 2:
[20:23] No scruples. The Imperial Wizard of the United States Clans of America on their payroll. Let's see, the former chairman of the National Alliance was on the payroll. Now, what is interesting is that the bank that they use actually caught them in 2020 and they investigated these shell accounts. SPLC president and board chair wrote a letter admitting that the accounts were open for SPLC operations. Instead of swatch stopping, they switched and started using ACH payments with like Rare Books 050 and IP Research Con 050. And then they would load the money onto gift cards. And of course, that's money laundering. And I think Besant is a part of this because he has been doing a lot of looking at the financial networks. So they were so… What is the term we're looking for? They didn't care. They would just…

Speaker 3:
[21:34] No, they got… This is what happened.

Speaker 2:
[21:36] They got sloppy.

Speaker 3:
[21:37] Yeah. When the bank doesn't do anything and nobody seems to care, especially during the four years of Biden, it just gets worse and worse. But we spotted it early on. I mean, and I think the point you made when you had that earliest of clips where you say Southern poverty law… So, what does it got to do with poverty?

Speaker 2:
[21:56] It's like…

Speaker 3:
[21:56] They've been going after… They got their reputation by going after one hate group some years back. And so, they got their start. And they made a business out of that. They get nothing to do with Southern poverty.

Speaker 2:
[22:08] It's like…

Speaker 3:
[22:09] They're not doing anything for the poor.

Speaker 2:
[22:10] It's like Patriot Act. It's the obvious…

Speaker 3:
[22:13] Yeah, there's nothing patriotic about it.

Speaker 2:
[22:15] No, exactly. And I'm so happy that this is happening. This has been 15 years of the show. We've always been grousing about these guys. And I had completely forgotten. They are at the center of the fact check list. That's why there's almost no M5M coverage of this. Almost none. Because they were all using SPLC. Oh, SPLC says, we have a comment from SPLC. Oh, Southern Poverty Loss Center, blah, blah, blah. They've all been complicit.

Speaker 3:
[22:44] Seen as a resource rather than a target or an investigation.

Speaker 2:
[22:47] Yeah, it's like an authoritative resource. If they say there was Nazis in Charlottesville, then there was Nazis in Charlottesville.

Speaker 3:
[22:58] Yeah, unbelievable. So this, I got three NPR, this is one series of clips from NPR, this is the DOJ. This is somewhat some analysis is pretty good.

Speaker 9:
[23:08] For decades, the Southern Poverty Law Center has been known for tracking hate groups. On Tuesday, the Justice Department announced federal criminal charges against the nonprofit in connection with its use of paid informants to infiltrate extremist groups. NPR Justice Correspondent Ryan Lucas is covering this, and he's with us now in our studios. Good morning.

Speaker 3:
[23:25] Good morning.

Speaker 9:
[23:25] Before we get to the charges, would you just quickly remind us of what the Southern Poverty Law Center does?

Speaker 11:
[23:31] So the Southern Poverty Law Center is also known as the SPLC. It's a 55-year-old civil rights organization. It has a storied history. It's based in Montgomery, Alabama. It started out as a law center doing a lot of civil rights work, trying to help end the vestiges of the Jim Crow era in the South. And its work later expanded to monitoring white supremacist groups, hate groups, including the KKK, and extremist groups more broadly.

Speaker 9:
[23:53] What is the administration saying they did that they say is illegal?

Speaker 11:
[23:57] Well, look, there are 11 counts in this indictment against the SPLC, including wire fraud, false statements to a bank, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. And what the indictment alleges is that the SPLC defrauded its donors by telling them that the group was working to dismantle extremist groups but was in fact using donated money, the DOJ says, to fund extremist groups. Court papers say that between 2014 and 2023, the SPLC paid around $3 million in total to informants affiliated with several hate groups. That includes the KKK. It says the SPLC set up bank accounts in the names of fictitious entities to pay these informants, the idea being to hide that the money was coming from the Southern Poverty Law Center. But the indictment says that in setting up these accounts, the SPLC was making false statements to the bank.

Speaker 2:
[24:41] Can I just play one of their donation ads from the SPLC? This is from 11 years ago.

Speaker 12:
[24:47] I'm Steve Centuria, and I have been a supporter of the Southern Poverty Law Center for at least 20 years.

Speaker 13:
[24:54] It's a fantastic organization that...

Speaker 2:
[24:57] These are all mixed couples, black woman, white man.

Speaker 13:
[24:59] I think that anyone and everyone that is concerned with justice in this country should do what they can to support. It's so amazing to be able to use law to actually achieve justice for people.

Speaker 3:
[25:16] I've often said that Morris Dees in the Southern Poverty Law Center stand between civilization and barbarism. And I think it's the most unique organization in America.

Speaker 8:
[25:28] I talked to my friends who are still teachers about what they can do in their classrooms.

Speaker 14:
[25:32] Some of them do know about teaching tolerance, others don't.

Speaker 7:
[25:35] So I intend to spread the word even more.

Speaker 6:
[25:38] As far as I'm concerned, this is the premier organization to deal with the rights of people who need help and need someone to go to bat for them in the legal system.

Speaker 12:
[25:47] This is the outfit that sued the plan and put them out of business.

Speaker 15:
[25:52] I just couldn't imagine what these guys do on a day-to-day basis.

Speaker 11:
[25:56] It's quite touching.

Speaker 6:
[25:57] My philosophy is, if you don't want to be in the trenches, find the best person you can who is and support them.

Speaker 7:
[26:05] If it takes ten years and all kinds of talent to prosecute someone, your group is willing to do it.

Speaker 13:
[26:10] Fight hate, teach intolerance, make sure we seek justice.

Speaker 3:
[26:14] I want to stand with Morris Dees in the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Speaker 6:
[26:18] When I heard about the Southern Poverty Law Center, I said, oh my, that's another organization that I must support. I said, this is a good place for me to continue to give what little I have and to spread the word as long as I do.

Speaker 2:
[26:31] Yes, and I would like to remind everybody, the No Agenda Show is a value for value podcast. No tricks, no gimmicks, no ads, no levels, no subscriptions. You can support us at noagendadonations.com.

Speaker 3:
[26:44] Yeah. So, back to the NPR. Now, NPR, if you have a notice on the first part of it, they are doing the reporting from the perspective of a skeptic. They think it's the administration. This could be alleged, alleged, alleged. They make it sound like maybe this, they can't quite get over the top with it. I mean, I think they'd like to. But they're still supporting the Southern Poverty Law Center at NPR. It's pretty obvious that they're disappointed that this came to light.

Speaker 9:
[27:18] So how has the SPLC responded to this?

Speaker 11:
[27:21] Well, the group put out a video statement before the charges were announced, saying that the SPLC was under federal investigation. In that video, the nonprofit CEO, Brian Fair, defended the payments made to informants. He says these people risked their lives, infiltrate extremist groups and provide information on their activities. It was done to protect SPLC staff, to gather intelligence on violent threats. He said that information was shared with local and federal law enforcement, including the FBI. And he said that information no doubt saved lives. He also said the SPLC will defend its work.

Speaker 16:
[27:52] We will not be intimidated into silence or contrition. And we will not abandon our mission or the communities we serve.

Speaker 11:
[28:00] Now Fair also argued in that video that the SPLC is being targeted for political reason.

Speaker 2:
[28:08] Yeah. No, of course, of course, the mainstream, they have to defend them because all of their allegations have always been, it's almost like, well, it was in the New York Times. Well, the Southern Public Law Center said it, so it's got to be right. That's what it is. So yeah, and I don't think they're embarrassed about anything. They're bummed. Oh, man, got to find a new guy to do this for us.

Speaker 3:
[28:36] Yeah, that's probably pretty, pretty, accurate. Yeah. Here are the rest of this apology.

Speaker 9:
[28:46] Well, Ryan, we have seen the Justice Department under this administration go after President Trump's critics, often at his explicit direction. So what about fair's argument that this indictment is political?

Speaker 11:
[28:57] Well, look, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch delivered this news at a press conference yesterday. He was asked about concerns about politics in this investigation. Here's what he said.

Speaker 17:
[29:05] Well, I mean, look, it's free from political. There is nothing political about this indictment or this investigation.

Speaker 11:
[29:12] Now, it is no secret, though, that conservatives have been highly critical of the Southern Poverty Law Center for years. They say it unfairly labels conservative organizations. One example they point to is an SPLC report in 2024 that described Turning Point USA. That's the group, of course, that was started by the right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, described it as a case study of the hard right. Then after Kirk was assassinated last year, the FBI ended a long-running relationship that it had with the Southern Poverty Law Center. At the time, FBI Director Cash Patel said that the civil rights group had turned into what he called a partisan smear machine. Now, this prosecution, this case, of course, is just getting underway, so we will see how this all plays out in court.

Speaker 2:
[29:55] Oh, I love the music there, please feel good.

Speaker 3:
[29:58] So, Patel calls it a smear machine. And so what happens to him over the last few days?

Speaker 2:
[30:06] Oh, before you go there, because that is absolutely connected. First, we have to notice that this is now happening now that Pam Bondi is gone and Blanche is the Attorney General. Can you imagine how this would have played out if Bondi had announced this?

Speaker 3:
[30:26] Oh, it would have been pathetic.

Speaker 2:
[30:28] Yes, exactly. Like, eh, meh, meh, meh, meh. No, so you had to go. It was perfect timing. I just want to play a little bit of Blanche, of what he said in this indictment video.

Speaker 3:
[30:41] Yeah, take it, yeah. Then we'll switch over to the smear machine.

Speaker 2:
[30:45] Yeah, we'll get to the smear machine.

Speaker 17:
[30:47] Good afternoon. Today, a few minutes ago, in the Middle District of Alabama, a grand jury returned an 11-count indictment charging the Southern Poverty Law Center with six counts of wire fraud, four counts of bank fraud, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. According to the charges in the indictment, the SPLC is a non-profit entity that purports to fight white supremacy and racial hatred by reporting on extremist groups and conducting research to inform law enforcement groups with the goal of dismantling these groups. As the indictment describes, the SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred. The indictment describes this conduct in detail, but one troubling example is that the SPLC was paying a member of the leadership group that planned the Unite the Right protest in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017 that resulted in the death of one person and injured dozens more.

Speaker 2:
[32:03] Okay. As you said at the top of the show, top of the hour, I believe this goes much deeper than people may see at face value. What the SPLC paid that guy to do, and probably more people, at Charlottesville, was a deliberate attempt to undermine and get rid of Trump because, as you already said, it was the complete precursor to this super clip.

Speaker 18:
[32:32] I ran for president in 2020 because of what I saw in Charlottesville in August of 2017. Extremists coming out of the woods carrying torches. I made the decision to run for president after Charlottesville. Close your eyes and remember what you saw.

Speaker 2:
[33:10] Close your eyes.

Speaker 18:
[33:11] Neo-Nazis.

Speaker 2:
[33:11] Neo-Nazis.

Speaker 18:
[33:12] White supremacists.

Speaker 2:
[33:13] White supremacists.

Speaker 18:
[33:14] And the KKK coming out of the fields with torches lighting, veins bulging, chanting the same anti-Semitic vile heard across European authorities. I spoke to the mom who lost her daughter. It's a consequence of those Neo-Nazis and white supremacists come out of the fields in America with torches. I was carrying Nazi banners, singing the same sick, anti-Semitic, Bile song in Germany in the 30s. And when her daughter was killed, the press went to the then President Trump, and said, what do you think? He said, they're very fine people on both sides. And I knew then, I knew I had to do something. And that's how I decided to run, because democracy was literally at stake. And you know, and then he made, he evidenced everything that we thought. Every other time the Kukas clan has been involved, they wore hoods so they're not identified. Trump. Under his presidency, they came out of those woods with no hoods. He said there were, quote, some very fine people on both sides. Very fine people on both sides. We can't forget what happened in Charlottesville. Even more important, we have to remember who we are. This is America.

Speaker 2:
[35:04] Now, you know, it's easy to forget because we've been inundated with this messaging for over a decade. But the Trump Nazi, oh, he's got Mein Kampf next to his bed. This was all coordinated from SPLC and whoever else is affiliated with them, which is, oh, I don't know, NPR, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC. It got so bad that we started making jingles.

Speaker 19:
[35:33] Donald loves Nazis.

Speaker 2:
[35:45] So of course, this will not stand. So we have to bring in the smear machine.

Speaker 3:
[35:53] Yes. So we have Cash Patel at the center of a lot of this. So we have all of a sudden, he's got to go because he's a drunk.

Speaker 2:
[36:05] Well, what didn't help is the team at the Olympics, where he's guzzling the beer.

Speaker 3:
[36:10] No, that's the whole source of everything.

Speaker 2:
[36:12] Yes.

Speaker 3:
[36:12] Because they got nothing else. I have two ways to go. I got one clip of Cash Patel suing, or I have the origin story, which is the woman who wrote the article in the Atlantic was on a Jen Psaki show.

Speaker 2:
[36:27] Hold on. So, the Atlantic article, from what I understand, I think AP retracted a story they had referencing the article. It seems like the Atlantic may have gotten a little bit over their skis on what was written here.

Speaker 3:
[36:46] Yes, but they're sticking by it.

Speaker 2:
[36:48] All right. So, why don't we play the...

Speaker 3:
[36:50] Let's start with the origin story. This is the Patel origin. This is Sarah Fitzpatrick, the writer of this article. And listen to... I got only two clips. She's on with Psaki, who's out to get everybody.

Speaker 2:
[37:07] Well, another moment...

Speaker 3:
[37:09] She's out to get ratings.

Speaker 2:
[37:10] Another moment in the sun.

Speaker 15:
[37:11] Joining me now is the reporter who broke that story, staff writer for the Atlantic, Sarah Fitzpatrick. Well, let's get into some of the details about this, because Patel's excessive drinking seems to be what is alarming a lot of the sources in here. There are multiple anecdotes that refer to that. That's understandable. They're moving meetings. People couldn't wake him. What more have you heard about the extent of his drinking habits and how it seems to be affecting his ability to serve as FBI director? The key point is that this is happening in places in which it is public. There are lots and lots of people around who are seeing it, who are hearing about it, who are learning about it. For example, we have video of Patel chugging a beer to excess on video. We've all seen it. Everybody's seen it. Yes. And I think it speaks to…

Speaker 3:
[37:56] That was in the locker room.

Speaker 15:
[37:57] He was on official travel at that time. There were ongoing threats in the United States at that time. So it is a very, very clear pattern that has occurred in multiple locations over a long period of time. And it's that pattern which has given everyone pause. These are not one-off events.

Speaker 2:
[38:14] This is almost as good as saying someone's mentally unstable. You know, it's like, I am going to analyze this guy. And because of the way he chugged his beer, I only saw him chugging one bottle of beer. He didn't even chug a whole beer.

Speaker 3:
[38:27] He was in the locker room.

Speaker 2:
[38:29] Most of it went outside of his mouth.

Speaker 3:
[38:32] Of the first time the USA, the coach of the team, of the USA team in the Olympics, was his buddy. They're buddies because Patel plays hockey.

Speaker 2:
[38:42] Yes, he's a hockey dude.

Speaker 3:
[38:43] Now, if you're a drunk, you don't play hockey, but okay.

Speaker 2:
[38:45] So, at least I wouldn't. You play, but maybe not very well.

Speaker 3:
[38:50] So, he was invited into the locker room, which was, you know, I would say probably not the, it wasn't a good idea, but okay, he did it. So, he goes in there and they're all throwing beer and champagne over each other because they won. They beat the Canadians for the first time. It's like Formula One.

Speaker 2:
[39:08] Have we ever seen Formula One with the champagne?

Speaker 10:
[39:11] Or anybody, anybody ever?

Speaker 3:
[39:12] Anything, any basketball championship, any championship, they're spraying each other like, you know, it's very kind of oddly sexual. And they're just shaking the bottle in the wrong spot. It's funny. So, I find it to be disgusting. Yeah. But they're dumping, so he has a beer and he dumps it in his mouth. It's going all over the place. He's not chugging a beer in any common way. And this is the video. This is the key to everything. If he hadn't done this, they couldn't do anything.

Speaker 2:
[39:47] How much, do you think that Psyche is a shots girl? I think she's one of those that gets lost.

Speaker 3:
[39:52] She looks like a jello shot girl.

Speaker 2:
[39:54] Jello shot girl. Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[39:57] That's the type. Let's go to part two of this stupid clip.

Speaker 15:
[40:01] The opening anecdote of the story was incredibly striking for a number of reasons. I mean, striking because he thought he was locked out of an FBI computer system. He grew up incredibly paranoid, thought he was going to be fired. It turned out to be a technical issue. Talk about that level of paranoia. What that tells you, why it was important to kind of lead with that anecdote in the story. The anecdote was just incredibly telling for a couple of reasons. One is that it set off such a panic within the FBI and within Washington. It set off a panic in Congress. The White House was fielding calls. I mean, there was a real lack of understanding about who was in charge at a given moment, which, as you know, as a former member of government, is an incredibly important who is in charge at a given moment. But I also think it speaks to character and impulsivity and the ability to be in a stressful situation and think about what those next steps are. And I think it is also emblematic of other occasions that we have seen that are very public in which information has been shared by the FBI director, which was not yet, that went beyond what the investigation was ready to make public at that time. And that later had to be walked back. And in multiple cases that we have seen, all very publicly reported, the fact that this has impacted the investigation. This has impacted their ability to pursue people that were potentially mass shooters or other things of that nature.

Speaker 3:
[41:29] What?

Speaker 2:
[41:29] Because he's drinking a beer, he can't pursue people who are mass shooters.

Speaker 3:
[41:34] Is that his job?

Speaker 2:
[41:35] That's his job. Yes, that's all he does. This is a mistake. Atlantic made a mistake here.

Speaker 3:
[41:43] Well, they're going to pay for it if all goes well. Now, two more clips. One of them is, let's see, Patel defends. I got an ABC clip and then I have another one. The Cash Patel sues NBC. Let's play the ABC clip.

Speaker 11:
[41:58] Tonight, FBI Director Cash Patel in front of the cameras lashing out at allegations of his drinking and concerns about his job performance.

Speaker 12:
[42:07] I've never been intoxicated on the job. And that is why we filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit. And any one of you that wants to participate, bring it on. I'll see you in court.

Speaker 11:
[42:16] Patel is suing the Atlantic for $250 million alleging defamation after it published a story claiming members of his security detail had difficulty waking Patel because he was seemingly intoxicated. The article also claimed a request for breaching equipment, normally used by SWAT and hostage rescue teams to quickly gain entry into buildings, was made last year because Patel had been unreachable behind locked doors. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch tonight said he had not read the article but disputed the reporting. The Atlantic is standing by its story tonight, David, in calling Cash Patel's defamation lawsuit meritless.

Speaker 2:
[42:55] Isn't this the same playbook they did on Hegseth? He's a drunk.

Speaker 3:
[43:00] Yeah, the drunk thing is very, which is ironic since Trump is the president. No drinking. No drinking. No drinking. So that report seemed like kind of a cookie cutter. Well, listen to NBC do the same report.

Speaker 8:
[43:13] Tonight, a battle over reputation and reporting.

Speaker 12:
[43:16] You want to attack my character? Come at me. Bring it on. I'll see you in court.

Speaker 8:
[43:21] Today, FBI Director Cash Patel filed a defamation suit seeking a staggering $250 million against the Atlantic Monthly Group. After its April 17th story, citing anonymous sources, reported that bouts of excessive drinking and erratic behavior have put his job on the line. NBC News has not independently verified that reporting. The story claims on multiple occasions, the director's security detail had difficulty waking Patel. And states that a request was made late last year for breaching equipment to gain entry.

Speaker 3:
[43:56] Breaching equipment.

Speaker 8:
[43:57] The director's lawsuit calls that claim pure fantasy and states that breaching equipment is provided to all FBI protection details. Patel had faced criticism for this moment when he partied with US men's hockey, winning Olympic gold. He responded that he was extremely humble to celebrate with the boys. The director's lawsuit alleges the Atlantic story contains false and obviously fabricated allegations and ignored the FBI's response before it was published. While the Atlantic says, we stand by our reporting on Cash Patel.

Speaker 2:
[44:32] Now, is it a slander lawsuit? Do we know?

Speaker 3:
[44:37] Well, print, one, there's two ways of, there's two kinds of defamations. One's slander and one is libel. One is in print and one is verbal.

Speaker 2:
[44:48] Right.

Speaker 3:
[44:49] So, it's the one that's in print.

Speaker 2:
[44:50] Yes.

Speaker 3:
[44:51] And I hate to say this, but I do get these mixed up a lot. So, I think it's libel if it's in print.

Speaker 2:
[44:59] You need a law.

Speaker 3:
[45:00] Let's look it up. Look it up. You got to…

Speaker 7:
[45:02] Oh, well, hold on a second.

Speaker 2:
[45:03] What is the question I'm asking here?

Speaker 16:
[45:04] Hold on a second.

Speaker 3:
[45:05] What's the difference between slander and libel?

Speaker 2:
[45:09] In the Book of Knowledge, what is the difference between slander and libel?

Speaker 16:
[45:13] Let's look it up.

Speaker 1:
[45:17] According to the Book of Knowledge, slander is spoken defamation that damages reputation through false statements. While libel is written or published, defamation in permanent form. Thus, it has been written.

Speaker 2:
[45:34] Okay, so easy way to remember, slander is speech. S for speech. S for speech. That's good. Book of Knowledge comes through. Now, what I see here is this is not just about dismantling the decades-old system of the SPLC and the media, and I would just have, I don't even know it's the Democrats. I think it's uniparty. Whoever they need to take down, they'll take down. As Cash Patel shows up, this is my favorite show. I always record Sunday morning, Sunday mornings with the Money Honey, Maria Bartiromo. Cash Patel pops up with this little message.

Speaker 12:
[46:12] Look, I've been with the president nearly since day one on this. As I told you earlier, I was the one that led the effort with folks like Trey Gowdy, Johnny Ratcliffe and Devin Nunes to expose the corruption that tried to thwart President Trump's first presidential election run, and we saw the FISA abuses there, and I lived through it, and the media came at me then too. That just shows you that when you're over the target, you keep pummeling the target because the media is going to try and pummel you. We are not going to take this and have not taken this laying down. We did already indict former director Comey, and that's going to the judicial process, but we also at this FBI, even though we uncovered what we uncovered back in the House Intel days, I had to come in here and find rooms that they hid from the world. I had to come in here and find access on our computer systems in restricted and prohibited case files that they purposely put in places for no one to see and find. We have found all this information. We are working with our Department of Justice partners. And I am never going to let this go because they not only have personally attacked the presidency of the United States and President Trump, but they tried to thwart our elections and rig the entire system. And that is not something that is going to stop. That is not something I'm going to allow on my watch. But you have to remember, they built this disease temple over 20 and 30 years. We've got all the evidence. I can announce on your show that we've got all the information we need. We're working with our prosecutors at the Department of Justice and the Attorney General Todd Blanch. And we are going to be making arrest. And it's coming and I promise you, it's coming soon.

Speaker 2:
[47:39] Did he say disease temple or diseased temple?

Speaker 3:
[47:43] I like disease temple. It's the show title.

Speaker 2:
[47:46] With a D or no D?

Speaker 3:
[47:49] What do you mean? D of course.

Speaker 2:
[47:51] With a D at the end? I thought he said diseased.

Speaker 3:
[47:54] No, no, I don't think diseased. I like the… I don't like it with the…

Speaker 2:
[47:57] Pure disease.

Speaker 3:
[47:59] Just diseased temple.

Speaker 2:
[48:00] I've written it down, diseased temple. And so of course, popping up on MSNBC, there's our boy, John Brennan. Oh boy. Oh, there he is.

Speaker 14:
[48:08] I want to ask you one question that's off-topic, but it has to do with you. James Comey subpoenaed according to MS Now reporting as part of a grand conspiracy.

Speaker 2:
[48:18] You notice how they have to say MS Now. MS Now, they have to think about it still. You know, it's like call it.

Speaker 3:
[48:25] Yeah, of course they do. You would too.

Speaker 2:
[48:27] Station call letter change.

Speaker 14:
[48:29] James Comey.

Speaker 2:
[48:29] It's like, you know, when you re-marry, you don't ever want to call your wife by her old wife's name.

Speaker 3:
[48:35] Oh, not a good idea.

Speaker 2:
[48:35] Never done that one.

Speaker 14:
[48:36] Subpoenaed according to MS Now reporting as part of a grand conspiracy that's being investigated against Donald Trump. There is talk that you might be also involved in this. What have you heard? What are you learning?

Speaker 2:
[48:50] Have you been subpoenaed?

Speaker 14:
[48:52] What do you make of this?

Speaker 2:
[48:53] What are you learning?

Speaker 20:
[48:55] I think you're being against Jim Comey because Jim Comey, myself and others, you know, have received subpoenas from the Department of Justice about some grand conspiracy or the work that we did while we were in government and we're going back basically 10 years or so.

Speaker 2:
[49:11] That sounds so much like we were just following orders while we were in government. Just following orders, sir.

Speaker 20:
[49:17] Or the work that we did while we were in government, and we're going back basically 10 years or so. So, David can speak to the retribution campaign that Donald Trump has been on and what this is an effort to try to harass and to try to ruin people professionally, personally, financially, and so on. And so, it's very, very sad that our government has been doing this to try to destroy people, to try to destroy people professionally, financially, and so on. And so, it's very, very sad that our government, our Department of Justice is engaged in these types of activities. But again, I'm going to do what I need to do in order to ensure that I am following the law and continuing to say that I feel as though everything I did while I was director of the CIA was certainly consistent with my authorities and lawful and appropriate. I would have been derelict and my colleagues at that time would have been derelict if we didn't expose Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Speaker 3:
[50:08] Yeah, you know, I think this is the time to play the old Brennan clip.

Speaker 2:
[50:12] Oh, yes.

Speaker 3:
[50:13] It puts him right in the... This old Brennan clip, this applies to him now.

Speaker 2:
[50:20] Yes, here it is.

Speaker 20:
[50:22] People are innocent until, you know, alleged to be involved in some type of criminal activity.

Speaker 3:
[50:28] That's him.

Speaker 2:
[50:29] Until they're alleged to be in some kind of criminal activity. Thank you. Good callback. I forgot about that one. And he's very dismayed. He's popping up all over the place. Another MS now. Now he's very demure. He's not happy.

Speaker 20:
[50:41] It just shows that over the past 10 years, there's been failure after failure to try to identify something that wrongdoing in this case. But part of this is to harass, to try to hurt individuals reputationally, professionally, financially.

Speaker 4:
[51:00] Same words.

Speaker 20:
[51:00] To keep the story alive as a way to deflect from other issues and challenges that they face.

Speaker 4:
[51:05] Epstein.

Speaker 20:
[51:06] Again, I'm not surprised by this.

Speaker 4:
[51:08] I'm very dismayed and disappointed by it.

Speaker 20:
[51:10] I'm also very troubled that we have people in government who seem to be so mean-spirited that they try to actually to hurt individuals, hurt people, their families and others.

Speaker 2:
[51:22] That's what government does. That's the default of government.

Speaker 3:
[51:24] What about Roger Stone? What's he talking about?

Speaker 20:
[51:27] They claim to be part of the Republican Party. This is not the Republican Party that I work with. There are people of integrity who never would have thought the Department of Justice would have fallen as far as it has.

Speaker 19:
[51:39] Fallen.

Speaker 20:
[51:40] Every day when I wake up, there's something new that I find just being so surreal and separated from the government and the reality that I worked in for 33 plus years. Oh. Again, I take every day as it comes.

Speaker 2:
[51:56] Okay. So, I got two more shorties here.

Speaker 3:
[51:59] 33 to magic number.

Speaker 2:
[52:00] I know. It's in there. So, Trump is only doing this just to distract from his horrible dumb mistakes.

Speaker 20:
[52:10] It's clear that there's this toxic mix of traits that Donald Trump has, which is he's a pathological liar.

Speaker 2:
[52:15] Yeah.

Speaker 20:
[52:16] He is incompetent on so many fronts.

Speaker 2:
[52:18] Yeah.

Speaker 20:
[52:18] And he's also deeply corrupt, which I think is now being manifest, manifesting itself in terms of the Gulf War. That's why you have these wholly incoherent, wholly inconsistent, flailing about, because first of all, again, there was no real rationale for this war. Secondly, he's trying to figure out what his next move is, and he doesn't understand exactly how he's going to get himself out of this mess.

Speaker 2:
[52:39] So, he's coming after me because he doesn't know how to get out of this mess. Okay. And now...

Speaker 3:
[52:46] What's he worried about?

Speaker 2:
[52:48] Oh, Brennan?

Speaker 3:
[52:49] Yeah. What's he worried about if this is all true?

Speaker 2:
[52:51] Brennan's going to the guillotine. Bring that back. That was good.

Speaker 3:
[52:56] We can only hope.

Speaker 20:
[52:57] One more clip. Well, Trump said something this morning that was very telling. When they asked him about the Brits and Prime Minister Starmor, why he has not joined this effort. Starmor told Trump, I need to speak with my advisor.

Speaker 2:
[53:11] Hold on a second. Maybe he's talking about the Iran War. Starmor has not joined this effort.

Speaker 20:
[53:16] Why he has not joined this effort. Starmor told Trump, I need to speak with my advisors. And Trump said, why do you have to speak with your advisors? It just demonstrates that these are all things that he does on his own. And he's not taking the advice and input of others, even though they all seem to be the sycophants here. But you know, Keir Starmor and others are listening to their intelligence professionals, listening to their military experts, listening to their foreign policy advisors and others to see the right way forward. But Donald Trump acts on his gut, on his feelings, which is not the way to prosecute any war especially one that is so needless as this.

Speaker 2:
[53:54] And this is kind of an unfortunate example that former CIA Director Brennan brings up because this is exactly the topic of what is happening in the UK. And I finally put together a couple of clips because it's so entertaining. Starmor listening to his advisors. Let's recap, shall we?

Speaker 10:
[54:15] Let's just recap, Peter Mandelson has been on the rack or had been on the rack twice, twice sacked from the cabinet, the Labour cabinet, Blair's cabinet. First time Blair, second time, I believe, Gordon Brown. First time for taking a big mortgage loan from, interest free, I do believe, from Geoffrey Robertson, the Labour Party's in-house multimillionaire. He bought a house in Notting Hill, didn't tell anyone and then had to declare it, he had to be sacked. It was the scandal hilariously called Notting Hill Gate Gate. He then went on to be restored to the cabinet and then had to be fired for trying to get the very rich billionaire Indian Hinduja brothers, tycoons there in India, British passports under the counter. He had to be sacked for that. And then we had, of course, the Epstein Affair. So all of through that, then Stammer admits in the house when asked by Badenock, did you know that Peter Mandelson had continued a friendship with the convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein while he was in jail and had stayed at his apartment in Manhattan while he was in jail for child sex offences? Did you know that, Prime Minister? Yes, I did. So he knew that, he said that in the House of Commons. He knew about this guy's background, but from what we're hearing, he didn't feel it was worth asking the security services whether or not this man had passed the vetting process. That is either a lie or it is the height of incompetence, unbelievable negligence of duty.

Speaker 2:
[56:06] But he always checks with his advisers, doesn't he? So this is Esther Krakow.

Speaker 3:
[56:11] So Brennan is full of it. What?

Speaker 2:
[56:15] This is a great story. It just gets so deep and it's the connections between what they were. Clearly, this Mandelson, I think it might be in this clip or the next one. They wanted Mandelson close to Trump as soon as possible because they knew that Mandelson, well, they call him the Prince of Darkness. So, they wanted their guy close to Trump as the ambassador in the United States to the UK and Esther Krakow, who is an international affairs commentator, has some background on that.

Speaker 21:
[56:49] So, today during Prime Minister's Question Time, Keir Starmer was forced to admit that he actually did know about Peter Mandelson's association with Jeffrey Epstein in a security briefing. So, he was asked point blank in the dispatch box whether he actually knew during the vetting process which Keir Starmer actually even celebrated Peter Mandelson coming on board before the vetting was complete. So, he'd already made his mind up that this man was going to be the US ambassador. And then, in sort of an embarrassing U-turn, he now had to reveal that he did know, but that Peter Mandelson misled him and his team on the extent of the relationship, which again is quite baffling because this was easily Googleable information. I mean, if a conservative researcher who's about 20 years old can find this on the internet, then the labor vetting team should have been able to. But it's more about why he even brought him back in the first place. Peter Mandelson had to resign twice in disgrace from government back in 1998 and 2001. One of which was because he basically peddled his influence to get an Indian billionaire a British passport. So this is not someone who had a clean track record to begin with. But it's clear that labor is so bereft of talent that they had to bring someone whose nickname is, I kid you not, the Prince of Darkness into the labor high office to try and get anything done. Unfortunately, even during Peter Mandelson's brief stint as US ambassador, no one knew his name because basically Nigel Farage was our de facto ambassador, and he actually peddled more influence for the Americans than Peter Mandelson did. But his association with Jeffrey Epstein has proven to be extremely ugly. He called Jeffrey Epstein being released from prison Liberation Day. The email exchanges between the two suggest that Peter Mandelson was happy to use his influence to try and influence bankers' bonuses during the financial crisis, the sale of a bank, and details about a European bank bailout. This is at a time where the government were really scrambling to try and reassure people. People were losing their jobs left, right, and center their homes. You had basically what was effective with the deputy prime minister at the time, using his influence to get a pedophile financier and his friends, whatever scraps they could. So this is what happens when you resurrect the carcasses of a man like Peter Mandelson's political career. And unfortunately, Keisama is really going to try hard to ride this wave, but I don't think he'll be successful.

Speaker 2:
[59:09] And then finally, this Ollie Robbins character who was the former senior civil servant. I think he quit or he was sacked, I'm not sure. Testifying before the parliamentary committee, which is the nail in the coffin for Starmor and for what I think was a clear gambit to get close to Trump, maybe use some Epstein's sap, who knows? And I think the president, that's when he said, you know, we should probably release all this Epstein stuff. Let's get it all out there.

Speaker 22:
[59:39] Can I ask you this? So let's move on.

Speaker 10:
[59:42] I think throughout January, honestly, my office, the Foreign Secretary's office, were under constant pressure. There was an atmosphere of constant chasing. When will this...

Speaker 22:
[59:59] Daily phone calls?

Speaker 10:
[60:01] I couldn't say for certain daily, but I mean, certainly very frequent. From private office to private office, has this been delivered yet? Never any interest, as far as I recall, in weather, but only an interest in when.

Speaker 22:
[60:16] So when you say private office to private office, are you saying private office of number 10? Yes, I am.

Speaker 10:
[60:24] I'm afraid I walked into a situation in which there was already a very, very strong expectation, and you will have seen the papers released already under the humble address, that coming from number 10, that he needed to be in post and in America as quickly as humanly possible. The very first formal communication of this to my predecessor from number 10 private office being that they wanted all this done at pace and Mandelson in post before inauguration. So I'm afraid what that translated into for my team in the foreign office and certainly the handover briefing I was getting as I arrived at post was what I felt was a generally dismissive attitude to his vetting clearance. The focus was on getting Mandelson out to Washington quickly. Despite this atmosphere, an atmosphere of pressure, the department completed developed vetting to the normal high standard. Because the vetting process is not there to determine fitness for office or reputational risk. It's there to protect national security.

Speaker 2:
[61:29] Yeah. So there you go.

Speaker 3:
[61:31] Oh, wait. So you so your analysis has it that Mandelson was put over here on purpose to do something to Trump.

Speaker 2:
[61:38] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[61:39] He had all the contacts figured to be added to and to or his team did. And then they rolled out all the Epstein stuff and got that guy out of here.

Speaker 2:
[61:47] Mandelson was the first one to go, if you recall.

Speaker 3:
[61:50] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[61:51] He was the first one. And I'm sure that they staggered the files that way.

Speaker 3:
[61:56] Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[61:57] Let's make sure this gets out first. And that.

Speaker 3:
[62:00] Yeah. Let's put this here on page one.

Speaker 2:
[62:04] Let's make sure that you can copy, paste and the redactions are taken out.

Speaker 3:
[62:08] Yeah. Huge humiliation for the Stormer regime.

Speaker 2:
[62:11] The Stormer is on the ropes.

Speaker 3:
[62:13] He should be.

Speaker 2:
[62:17] You know, we still have to try something here at home. We already had the New York Times article with, you know, the Situation Room, Sources Say, Bibi Netanyahu sat at the head of the table. He was, he had the buttons there. He was pushing everything.

Speaker 3:
[62:31] Bibi was running the meeting.

Speaker 2:
[62:33] Trump was serving him drinks and Bibi was doing all this. And now we have a new one. This is one of those former CIA analysts, one of my favorites. They all show up on Sean Ryan show. Larry Johnson, here we go.

Speaker 3:
[62:48] Larry Johnson, okay. Let's stop here so we can preface this. Larry Johnson is some sort of, still working for somebody. Larry Johnson is the worst of the worst. Yes. He's the worst of the worst. Everything is an anti-Trump, it's all, the walls are closing in. He's still back on that theme from 2017. The walls are closing in, type of guy. He is full of it. Larry Johnson is the absolute worst.

Speaker 2:
[63:18] And this is part of the 25th Amendment ploy, I'm quite convinced.

Speaker 23:
[63:23] And then there was a report out that they had an emergency meeting Saturday night. And apparently, well, one report coming out of that meeting at the White House is that Trump wanted to use the nuclear, so-called use the nuclear codes. And in general, Dan Cain stood up and said, no, he invoked his privilege as the head of the military, so to speak. It was apparently quite a blow up. There are pictures of Cain coming out of that meeting with his head down to the ground. You know, there's some very, very bizarre things going on in DC.

Speaker 2:
[63:58] Yeah, I'm pretty sure in every movie I've seen, and we could check with the Book of Knowledge, and the president says, it's time for the new codes. The generals don't get to overrule that.

Speaker 3:
[64:12] No. No, they don't.

Speaker 2:
[64:15] So they're desperate here.

Speaker 3:
[64:17] So this is a bullcrap story.

Speaker 2:
[64:19] Yes, you think?

Speaker 3:
[64:21] Which is what you expect. Yeah. And these guys are really hard up for, I don't understand why they can't focus better.

Speaker 2:
[64:31] Well, you know, the system is being dismantled.

Speaker 3:
[64:34] This is a scatter gun.

Speaker 2:
[64:36] Yeah, there it is. Blunderbuss. Is that a term? Blunderbuss?

Speaker 3:
[64:41] Yeah, Blunderbuss is a type of weapon with a big...

Speaker 2:
[64:44] Yeah, with nails. You put nails in it, don't you?

Speaker 3:
[64:46] Yeah, put nails in it.

Speaker 2:
[64:47] Blunderbuss. Yeah. All right. I got some other stuff, but I'm open to your suggestions.

Speaker 3:
[64:54] Well, we do. I got these two clips from the Kevin, Kevin Warsh...

Speaker 2:
[65:00] Oh, yeah. I watched them...

Speaker 3:
[65:01] .confirmation here. This is kind of in the side, and then we can talk about... I got a number of ways to go after that, but let's get these out of the way.

Speaker 19:
[65:10] All right. The president's choice to lead the federal reserve says he would like the agency to do a little less.

Speaker 9:
[65:16] Kevin Warsh testified before a Senate Committee Tuesday. He said the Fed could do a better job of curbing inflation and unemployment if it was more narrowly focused. One big question is who decides what the Fed does? Warsh was nominated by a president who wants greater control over an independent agency.

Speaker 19:
[65:33] NPR's Scott Horsley remains independent and joins us now.

Speaker 2:
[65:36] Agency?

Speaker 3:
[65:38] Says who? Yeah. What kind of agency are we talking about? It's not a government agency.

Speaker 2:
[65:42] The Federal Reserve is not a government agency.

Speaker 19:
[65:44] Scott, good morning.

Speaker 11:
[65:45] Good morning, Steve.

Speaker 19:
[65:46] What was the hearing like?

Speaker 20:
[65:48] It was quite polarized. Committee Republicans mostly backed the nominee. Democrats were uniformly opposed. One question that came up again and again was whether Warsh would take marching orders from the president who's been demanding lower interest rates. Here's GOP Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana.

Speaker 5:
[66:05] Are you going to be the president's human sock puppet?

Speaker 24:
[66:08] Senator, absolutely not.

Speaker 18:
[66:10] Are you going to be anybody's human sock puppet?

Speaker 24:
[66:13] No, I'm honored the president nominated for the position and I'll be an independent actor if confirmed as chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Speaker 20:
[66:20] Warsh says it's not unusual that Trump wants lower interest rates. As most presidents do. And Warsh says just because Trump is more outspoken than most other presidents, that's not a threat to the Fed's independence.

Speaker 2:
[66:31] Hold on a second. What outfit is reporting this?

Speaker 3:
[66:35] The NPR.

Speaker 2:
[66:36] All right. So they forgot to give you the bit before that, that Senator...

Speaker 3:
[66:41] Which you have, luckily.

Speaker 2:
[66:43] Of course I do. Here is Pocahontas.

Speaker 8:
[66:45] I try to end the independence of the Fed because Trump's economic failures are causing him political problems and he wants the Fed to use monetary policies to artificially juice the economy in the short term, and this is his last chance to do that before the November elections. Having a sock puppet in charge of the Fed would also give the President access to the Fed's powerful authorities to enrich himself, his family and his Wall Street buddies. It could mean granting special accounts to his family's crypto company or bailouts to his friends on Wall Street if they get into trouble. In other words, a Fed under Donald Trump's control creates more opportunities for Trump's corruption.

Speaker 2:
[67:37] It's interesting they didn't put that bit in. She was the impetus for the question.

Speaker 3:
[67:42] It might be in one of the other clips, but yeah, she's the one who brought up Sock Puppet and…

Speaker 2:
[67:48] And they also didn't play it right. They didn't play it right. In fact, hold on, it's short, but this is the full Kennedy quote, which was better. If I was working at NPR, I would have chosen…

Speaker 3:
[68:01] Okay.

Speaker 2:
[68:01] I would have chosen this one.

Speaker 3:
[68:03] The editing is no good.

Speaker 17:
[68:05] No, no, no, they, they, they, eh.

Speaker 12:
[68:07] Professor, what's a sock puppet?

Speaker 24:
[68:11] I heard the reference from Senator Warren.

Speaker 12:
[68:13] Yeah, what is it?

Speaker 24:
[68:14] I'm not sure I know. I think it's a thing. Why don't you stick your hand in?

Speaker 12:
[68:18] Yeah, kind of like this.

Speaker 24:
[68:19] Yes.

Speaker 18:
[68:20] What's a human sock puppet?

Speaker 12:
[68:22] In a human sock puppet, somebody will do what somebody else tells them to do?

Speaker 24:
[68:28] I think that's what the Senator was trying to suggest.

Speaker 18:
[68:32] Are you going to be the president's human sock puppet?

Speaker 2:
[68:35] So what he does, he shows his hand up the puppet's butt. That's the clip. NPR.

Speaker 3:
[68:42] Weak.

Speaker 2:
[68:43] It's weak.

Speaker 3:
[68:45] Yeah, well, it is weak. I'm surprised it didn't work. Well, let's play clip two.

Speaker 19:
[68:51] Although we should mention Trump did more than speak, he's done a lot of things to try to get more control over the Fed. So are Democrats persuaded that this nominee would be independent?

Speaker 20:
[69:00] Well, that was exactly the point that Massachusetts Democrat Elizabeth Warren made. She says Trump hasn't just expressed an opinion. He's gone to great lengths to bend the Central Bank to his will.

Speaker 8:
[69:10] The president has repeatedly and illegally attempted to take over the Fed. His bogus attacks on Governor Lisa Cook and Chair Powell were designed to threaten all the members of the Fed.

Speaker 20:
[69:25] Now so far, those efforts by the president have been blocked in the courts. But Trump's pressure campaign has raised alarms. The Fed is supposed to be insulated from that kind of pressure so that it can do what's best in the long run for the economy, not just what's good until the next election.

Speaker 19:
[69:40] Aside from his independence, this is a chance to find out what it is that Warsh would want to do with this agency. How if at all does he want to change it?

Speaker 20:
[69:48] Yeah, he thinks there is room for lower interest rates but also a lower profile for the Fed. He suggests that policyholders at the Central Bank might hold fewer news conferences and give fewer speeches. He wants to improve the data that they use to measure things like inflation and he wants the Fed to scale back its investment in government debt.

Speaker 2:
[70:06] Oh man, I hope there is more in this third clip because I watched a different hearing than NPR did, I guess.

Speaker 3:
[70:15] It's the same hearing, it's just NPR has their perspective. By the way, I should mention that having less press conferences would be a good thing. The problem they have now is that when the chairman goes and does his press conference, the stock market is all paying attention for code words. And then it makes the market unstable.

Speaker 2:
[70:40] Less press conferences would dramatically lower Andrew Horowitz's blood pressure.

Speaker 3:
[70:45] It would, for sure.

Speaker 2:
[70:47] He's always like, and the market has this price in, and we're expecting this, and nothing will happen. And they think it's going to say this. And what does this phrase mean exactly? Yeah, I'm down with that.

Speaker 3:
[71:01] Play this last clip, and then you can follow up with the real clips.

Speaker 19:
[71:04] What is Worse saying about his own personal investments?

Speaker 20:
[71:08] Not a whole lot. He is worth more than $100 million. That doesn't count his wife, who is heir to the Estee Lauder fortune. But Worse's financial disclosure form is pretty opaque about how and where that money is invested. Senator Warren grilled Worse about whether he has financial ties to the Trump family, or to China, or even to Jeffrey Epstein.

Speaker 24:
[71:26] Senator, I have worked tirelessly with the ethics officials at the Office of Government Ethics.

Speaker 8:
[71:31] And you have not revealed a hundred million dollars in assets.

Speaker 24:
[71:34] I have agreed, Senator, to sell all of my financial assets.

Speaker 20:
[71:39] Worse ducked that question with a promise to sell those undisclosed assets before he starts work at the Fed.

Speaker 19:
[71:44] How soon would he start work?

Speaker 20:
[71:46] Well, possibly as early as next month, but there's a big hurdle to clear first. Republican Tom Tillis insists he will not allow a vote on this nomination until the Justice Department drops that investigation of the Federal Reserve, which critics, including Tillis, say is just another way for the administration to put pressure on the Fed.

Speaker 2:
[72:02] Oh boy. Okay. Well, Elizabeth Warren got her ISOs. That's what it's all about in these hearings.

Speaker 3:
[72:10] Yeah, she's good.

Speaker 2:
[72:12] So there were two questions which I thought were reasonable. Let me see. This first one. Let me see. I don't know who was asking this. The question is about policy.

Speaker 24:
[72:27] Prices went up to the tune of 25% to 35% for virtually all deciles of the American people. That's an indication that the Fed missed its mark. And we are still dealing with the legacy of the policy errors in 2021 and 2022. Once you let inflation take hold in the economy, it's more expensive and harder to bring it down. And so the fatal policy error going back four or five years is still a legacy that we're dealing with. We need, in my judgment, fundamental policy reforms to fix it. And while it's true that inflation is less problematic, meaning the rate of change in prices is less severe than it was some years ago, hardworking Americans are no doubt feeling it. I think that means a regime change in the conduct of policy. I think it means a different new inflation framework.

Speaker 2:
[73:21] There's your headline, regime change. Yes, regime change. That would be a very good idea. And what exactly is inflation? Finally someone who just says what it is.

Speaker 4:
[73:33] Does federal government spending have anything to do with inflation, Mr. Warsh?

Speaker 24:
[73:38] Senator, as we talked about in your office, my view of inflation is a bit different from some. I don't think inflation comes about when the economy grows too much or hardworking Americans get increased in their wages. I think inflation comes about when the government prints too much, by which I mean the central bank, and broadly speaking the government spends too much.

Speaker 4:
[73:58] And so we're spending too much money and now we've been cleaning up their mess ever since.

Speaker 2:
[74:04] Yes, yes, that would be correct.

Speaker 3:
[74:08] Milton Friedman had that, I wish I had, I think there is a clip in there. Milton Friedman had a little inflation clip about, during, I guess it was during the Civil War, there was somebody, one state or somebody just printing, printing, printing money. They had endless inflation. And once they stopped printing money, Yeah, guess what? It stopped, inflation stopped dead.

Speaker 2:
[74:31] Amazing how that works. Last clip.

Speaker 24:
[74:34] The reason why I prefer monetary policy to use interest rates as the dominant force is interest rates affect a far broader cross section of the economy. Interest rates get in the cracks. If we were to cut rates, then broader number of people will benefit from it versus quantitative easing, which tends to move through financial assets first. Half of our fellow Americans don't own any financial assets. So they're wondering what's in it for them.

Speaker 2:
[74:59] Yes, lower interest rates. Exactly. I'm all for that. Lower mortgage, lower car payments. It's a good idea. They're going to fight him, I guess. Elizabeth Warren, she represents the entire banking industry. She's no good. So the Gay General Patent was also testifying. Did you get any of that?

Speaker 3:
[75:29] No, I got none of that.

Speaker 2:
[75:30] Oh, okay. So Scott Bessent, he's a funny guy. But he is in the fight with Operation Economic Fury. And no one likes what Bessent is doing. He's helping Putin.

Speaker 9:
[75:46] We're about seven weeks into the war with Iran. And I wondered, Mr. Secretary, given that your department enforces sanctions, if you have a sense just how much Iran has gained through sanctions relief since the war began, I'll tell you, estimates are $14 billion. Now, President Trump has described the Obama-Iran deal as a disaster and a scandal because of the money Iran got, which was about $1.7 billion. I don't know how you described $14 billion. But you don't have to read the art of war to know that helping your adversaries gain money while you're at war is a terrible idea. And it's shocking to me that the countries currently profiting from the release of sanctions are our enemies. No country has profited more from this war than Russia. Oil and gas prices are up nearly 50% since February. And it would be bad enough if Russia were just profiting from higher global oil prices. But your Treasury Department lifted sanctions on Russian oil, giving them an extra $150 million a day in revenue. And those funds are going not just to kill Ukrainians, but Russia is using its profits to support Iran with drones and intelligence to kill our troops.

Speaker 3:
[77:01] So? Wait a minute. When are Russians giving them drones? This is the king of the drone makers, is Iran. They're the drone gurus. And they're the ones that supplied Russia with their drones. And so now Russia is giving the... Well, they just send the ones they sent back?

Speaker 2:
[77:18] So the distinguished gentleman from Delaware, Senator Chris Coons, Democrat, thinks he can fight gay general patent, who does not come with a bazooka, he comes with his calculator.

Speaker 9:
[77:30] Do you agree that Iran has received significant additional revenue from their sales of oil because of sanctions relief?

Speaker 16:
[77:36] I couldn't disagree more.

Speaker 9:
[77:37] Okay. Do you disagree that Russia has received significant additional revenue from the sanctions relief?

Speaker 16:
[77:44] I couldn't disagree more.

Speaker 9:
[77:45] Okay. Why did you relieve the sanctions against Russian and Iranian oil?

Speaker 16:
[77:50] Think of it this way, sir. There's the straight or foremost.

Speaker 9:
[77:54] Familiar with it?

Speaker 16:
[77:55] There is oil to the left.

Speaker 9:
[77:57] Left and to the right.

Speaker 16:
[77:58] There is to the right. The Treasury was able to, just as you are concerned about gasoline prices for the American consumer and for our Asian allies, as are we, Treasury was able to create the more than 250 million barrels on the water. And the way to think about this is, as they came in today, the oil prices are at $100. If we had not done that sanctions early, they might have been at $150, because the world became very well supplied. So if Russia was selling their oil at a 20% discount, I can tell you that 100% of 100 is less than 80% of 150. And the American consumer has been better off.

Speaker 2:
[78:44] Take that, Senator. You can't do math.

Speaker 16:
[78:46] Well, we also…

Speaker 9:
[78:47] Look, the folks in Delaware are buying $4 a gallon gas today. I don't see that we've seen a significant reduction in the price of the pump or the price on the world markets, but I have two more questions I want to get to. And I look forward to disputing with you the details. I believe that Russia and Iran have benefited from the release of sanctions. And when you said, we're not going to extend sanctions relief and then we're reversed, I was deeply disheartened because we shouldn't be funding Putin's war machine.

Speaker 16:
[79:13] I would like to take that was as a result. Last week was Bank Week, World Bank and IMF Week.

Speaker 2:
[79:19] John, we missed Bank Week?

Speaker 3:
[79:21] Yeah, we missed Bank Week.

Speaker 2:
[79:22] Everybody, it's Bank Week.

Speaker 16:
[79:24] And on Wednesday, it was my belief we would not do it. I was approached by more than 10 of the most vulnerable and poorest countries in terms of energy. And they asked us to extend that sanction. And it's only for 30 days.

Speaker 9:
[79:41] 30 days, $4.5 billion to Putin's war machine.

Speaker 2:
[79:44] Yes, you're a Putin lover. You're all in with Putin. This last clip was, I think, to me, the most interesting because this is where the US dollar comes into play as it diminishes constantly as the reserve asset currency, the reserve currency of the globe. But Gay General Patton has been requested to do things and he is doing them and it will save our bacon.

Speaker 25:
[80:10] Government of the UAE. As I'm sure you probably know, President Trump and his family have done a very brisk business with the UAE over the last few years.

Speaker 2:
[80:22] Hold on a second, is this the right one?

Speaker 25:
[80:23] We understand that the UAE, $1 billion that Sheikh Tahnoun, the UAE's National Security Advisor and brother of the president, invested in World Liberty Financial, which is the Trump family crypto venture right before the president's inauguration. There was the $2 billion in World Liberty's stablecoin that Sheikh Tahnoun used to invest in Binance, a deal that effectively handed World Liberty $2 billion in cash at the same time that the United States government relaxed our export controls on high-end AI and ships to UAE companies. And now I understand that the UAE is looking for a swap line. The war in Iran has already cost us dearly. In my view, it's been a huge mistake, made us less safe and a lot worse off. In addition to lives lost, we're talking about over a billion dollars a day in taxpayer money. We're talking about higher gas prices.

Speaker 2:
[81:36] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 25:
[81:37] Higher prices overall. And now, we understand that the UAE is asking you to provide them a swap line.

Speaker 2:
[81:47] So, just so people understand, this is not like money we're going to give them a swap line as we get their reals, which are pegged to the dollar, so it's exactly the same thing. It's just giving them US dollars to, well, Scott Besson will explain.

Speaker 25:
[82:02] Through the Exchange Stabilization Fund. Mr. Secretary, can you talk about this request and whether or not you expect to support it?

Speaker 16:
[82:13] Senator, I would dispute much of what you earlier said and any linkages to this swap line. Many of our Gulf allies have requested swap lines. You would have just read about the UAE, and swap lines, whether it's from the Federal Reserve or the Treasury, are to maintain order in the dollar funding markets and to prevent the sale of the US assets in a disorderly way. So the swap line would both benefit the UAE and the US. And as I said, numerous other countries, including some of our Asian allies, have also requested them.

Speaker 2:
[82:59] Yes, all oil in US dollars, exactly. That's exactly the right thing to do. These senators, they do not know anything.

Speaker 3:
[83:12] No, they don't.

Speaker 2:
[83:14] They really don't. Well, what are you doing? That's Trump. It's making Trump rich. Okay.

Speaker 3:
[83:24] All right, we can talk about it. Ron, I got these Vax clips I wanted to get out of the way.

Speaker 2:
[83:30] Vax clips? Okay.

Speaker 3:
[83:31] What do you want to talk about the Vax for a while?

Speaker 2:
[83:33] We haven't. What you got in VaxLand?

Speaker 3:
[83:35] Well, I got the, one, I want to play from the last show. I didn't move it over. But let's start with this. This is the, let's start with Ron Johnson going after the Vaxers.

Speaker 5:
[83:53] Finally, let's just put up this graph. Because of your radical transparency, I've got close to 11 million pages. You know, we uncovered, they hid the signal on myocarditis. We also just recently uncovered that they also hid a signal on ischemic stroke for people over 65, but tailing 20, 22, 20, 23. They hid both signals. They downplayed them. But what is most alarming, and we will be holding a hearing on this next week, I've got a draft report. They were made aware, Peter Marks was made aware on March 26th of 2021 that the inventors of the algorithm that analyzes the VAERS data was going to mask adverse events. He was told that by using a different system, they had uncovered 49 examples of extreme masking, 25 significant adverse events including sudden cardiac death, Bell's palsy, pulmonary infarction. So this report will be issued in conjunction with that hearing. Again, I didn't need a sophisticated mathematical model to tell me that we had a safety signal screaming at us. This chart shows the deaths associated with the vaccines all the way going back to 1990 when Bayer started a couple hundred a year. Anaphylactic shock, that type of thing. 2021, over 20,000 deaths and for five years FDA has been saying, we don't see a signal. This was a signal screaming at us to this very day we are covering up. So there are a bunch of people involved in this cover up that still continue to work within the HHS, CDC, FDA. I want your commitment that those people will be made available for interviews. I have to subpoena others. I'm going to dig into this massive government.

Speaker 25:
[85:47] You have my commitment.

Speaker 5:
[85:49] Thank you.

Speaker 3:
[85:49] Yeah, nothing will come of it. But there it is. Now you have to look this one up. This is called Vax Study Batches, two shows ago.

Speaker 2:
[86:03] Vax Study Batches. Vax Batches, maybe?

Speaker 7:
[86:14] That's odd, John. I don't see it.

Speaker 3:
[86:16] Oh, Spell Study with Two T's.

Speaker 2:
[86:23] Oh, no. Vax. Is it Vax with One X?

Speaker 3:
[86:29] V-A-X, all caps. Okay.

Speaker 2:
[86:33] V-A-X. Space. Space, yes?

Speaker 3:
[86:36] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[86:37] S-T-T.

Speaker 3:
[86:39] I'm sorry.

Speaker 2:
[86:40] I don't have it.

Speaker 3:
[86:41] S-T-T-U-D-Y.

Speaker 2:
[86:42] No, I don't have this clip. I can...

Speaker 3:
[86:45] Ah, you have to.

Speaker 2:
[86:46] From how long ago is it?

Speaker 3:
[86:48] Two shows ago.

Speaker 2:
[86:48] Well, let me go look in that bin. Hold on a second. It won't take me but a second. So, from 1860?

Speaker 3:
[86:56] Yeah, from 419.

Speaker 2:
[86:59] I have Vax and Food.

Speaker 3:
[87:01] And Vax Study Batches should be right under it.

Speaker 2:
[87:03] No, it's not in there.

Speaker 3:
[87:04] Well, they got moved up one, maybe, but I didn't see it anyplace else. You'll be on the next show then.

Speaker 2:
[87:11] Okay, hold on. That would be 1861, the last one. And I see there we have... Oh, interesting. Yep, I have it. Okay, we got it.

Speaker 16:
[87:21] We now have key-reviewed published data by Schmeling and colleagues from Denmark.

Speaker 14:
[87:27] Basically, a bombshell study.

Speaker 16:
[87:29] They found that 4.2% of the batches of the doses that were dosed out of that batch accounted for skyrocketing serious adverse events, hospitalization and death. That was 4.2%. They're, in a sense, really bad batches. There was about two thirds of batches that were moderate, pretty low risk, moderate, and then interestingly, a third zero. There was basically that line didn't come off. They took a shot and nothing happened. Nothing happened.

Speaker 2:
[88:01] Yeah. Well, we had reports.

Speaker 3:
[88:03] Which brings me to the point I've been wanting to make, which is liability. This brings us back to the good old days with the swine flu Vax that one of these companies released, if you recall, that was just swine flu. You get a shot, you get a swine flu.

Speaker 2:
[88:20] It killed people.

Speaker 3:
[88:22] Yeah, it killed people. But there's no, they've got, why can't they talk about liability more? Even McCullough, who was there, he's the one giving that yakety-yak. He doesn't mention it. It needs to be mentioned all the time. You can't bring a product out and sell it to the public without liability. You can't be indemnified by the government for bringing out crap. Okay, I'm done with it.

Speaker 2:
[88:52] Well, you know, the RFK Jr. has promised he's going to take care of all that.

Speaker 3:
[88:56] Yeah, he hasn't done anything.

Speaker 2:
[88:57] Well, the only thing he did, just before he gets to your next VAX clip, you know, they did sign that executive order about disclosing all of the side effects of, I don't see if I can find it now, in your advertising.

Speaker 3:
[89:21] Oh, well, that'll do it. And by your thing, by the way, by your theory, that would just draw people to the VAX. That's your cigarette theory.

Speaker 2:
[89:36] Yeah. That theory, yeah, you're right. So, it's either a ban or nothing. You're right. Whenever you say it's going to kill you, people want it. It's crazy.

Speaker 3:
[89:47] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[89:48] It's like, I'm a tough guy.

Speaker 3:
[89:49] Tough guy.

Speaker 2:
[89:50] Ozempic, literally. You don't want to have sex. You get eye cancer. Your liver goes to crap. Your pancreas fails. You want to look good?

Speaker 3:
[90:02] You're looking good. You're looking good. Now, this last one is just kind of an aside, but I think it's pretty funny. This is that, you've seen this character. He's McCullough's right-hand man. He's this kind of dull guy who talks with it. He's just a dull guy. And he's talking about, this is the Vax Flu Shot. Causes dementia.

Speaker 24:
[90:22] The largest single study ever conducted on vaccines and dementia with over 13 million people in it found that vaccinated adults who got flu shots and pneumococcal shots, they faced a 50% increased risk of Alzheimer's and a 38% increased risk of dementia. And the risk increased the more doses they got. So, they started to get more flu shots that they lined up every year to get it. Unfortunately, they faced the highest risks of neurodegenerative conditions. And the risk persisted for over 10 years. And so, it appears once you receive so many of these shots, it is inducing neuroinflammatory injury, dementia and Alzheimer's in vaccinated adults. So, not only now do we know that the flu shot doesn't work, but according to Shrestha and colleagues out of the Cleveland Clinic, flu shots increase the risk of flu by 27%. So, not only do they do that, but now it appears that they increase the risk of dementia, which is absolutely terrible.

Speaker 1:
[91:34] Holy mackerel.

Speaker 3:
[91:36] You didn't hear that one?

Speaker 2:
[91:37] No.

Speaker 3:
[91:38] Oh, yeah.

Speaker 2:
[91:39] And we have a dementia epidemic in our country.

Speaker 3:
[91:43] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[91:43] In Europe, I know lots of people who have parents who have early onset dementia. Wow. You probably have a lot of your friends who have just gone cuckoo.

Speaker 3:
[91:56] Well.

Speaker 2:
[91:56] Losing their minds.

Speaker 3:
[91:57] It's getting there. I mean, it depends. I don't know personally that many people that line up for the flu shot every year anymore.

Speaker 2:
[92:04] But if you have a precondition of being a Democrat.

Speaker 3:
[92:08] Yeah, well, that's for sure.

Speaker 2:
[92:09] That would make it worse.

Speaker 6:
[92:13] Wow.

Speaker 2:
[92:13] Oh, that's. Oh, man.

Speaker 3:
[92:16] And that's again liability flu shot. Who knows what's in the thing that is.

Speaker 2:
[92:21] And besides the fact that you have a higher chance of getting the flu.

Speaker 3:
[92:25] Yeah, well, that's the joke of it. That's almost humorous.

Speaker 2:
[92:28] That is just so lame. So I I listened to the new podcast. The Carlson Kids. Have you heard this podcast?

Speaker 3:
[92:38] No, I heard about it.

Speaker 2:
[92:39] Hey, everybody, it's time for the Carlson Kids. I had no idea Tucker's brother's name is Buckley.

Speaker 3:
[92:46] How white can you get? Well, Tucker and Buckley. Here's my son, Tucker, and here's my other son, Buckley. Let's go have a spot of something, something good.

Speaker 2:
[93:00] I don't know if it's just white or just DC. You know, it's like Buckley. If you're in DC and their dad was, you know, he ran... He was a spook. He ran the broadcast board of Governor's Voice of America.

Speaker 3:
[93:15] Yeah, that's a good job.

Speaker 2:
[93:17] It was a great job. We'd be very good at it. If it still existed, they fired everybody, shut it down, I guess, kind of. Some people had to be unfired. I don't know. But I think if you're in DC and you're probably thinking, Oh, I just, William F. Buckley, he is just so awesome. I think, oh, why don't we, honey, why don't we name our son Buckley? Maybe we'll get invited to the party. Maybe we'll get invited to the cocktail party. So both conservative, apparently, and these clips are relatively short, but both are just so disappointed. They just feel like they've been betrayed, betrayed by Trump.

Speaker 25:
[94:05] Where a lot of people who really like Trump are very disappointed in Trump. In fact, more than disappointed, feel betrayed, or enraged, feel like suckers, feel like they've been taken for a ride. How could they possibly have supported that given what it became?

Speaker 2:
[94:18] Taken out back and thumped a couple of times.

Speaker 25:
[94:22] A lot of people seem to feel that way. But do a lot of people seem to feel that way? Do they actually feel that way?

Speaker 3:
[94:31] They're not happy with what they see. They're not happy with what they see. They're not happy with what they see. They're not happy with what they see. They're not happy with what they see. They're not happy with what they see. Am I wrong?

Speaker 2:
[94:43] You can do that on a podcast. You can do anything you want on a podcast.

Speaker 25:
[94:48] A lot of people seem to feel that way. But do a lot of people seem to feel that way?

Speaker 19:
[94:54] Do they actually feel that way?

Speaker 25:
[94:56] According to polls on CNN, 100% of MAGA voters still support Trump.

Speaker 2:
[95:02] 100%?

Speaker 25:
[95:03] Is that real? Well, it's really hard to know, given how fraudulent so much polling is. So we thought we would speak to the one person we know who sincerely supported Trump from the very beginning. Wrote speeches for Trump in 2015, voted for Trump three times. New people within the Trump White House worked with the Trump White House.

Speaker 3:
[95:27] Nick Fuentes followed, except for the writing speeches, is the same, is he voted for Trump three times?

Speaker 2:
[95:32] All along.

Speaker 3:
[95:32] Bring on Nick.

Speaker 2:
[95:34] Now you already had Nick on. This is a new guest. We've never had this guest on the show.

Speaker 25:
[95:38] In that period, ten years, supported Trump in public, not on television, which is easy, but in his own neighborhood, which was 100% Trump haters. That person is my brother, it turns out. Buckley Carlson, Uncle Buck, as he's known to us.

Speaker 2:
[95:52] Uncle Buck!

Speaker 3:
[95:54] Buck Chuck?

Speaker 2:
[95:55] You don't have brothers or sisters, but I would never call my brother Uncle anything. I don't have a brother. I wouldn't call him Aunt Tiffany, Aunt Willow. Oh, anyway.

Speaker 3:
[96:05] No.

Speaker 2:
[96:05] So here's Buckley, and you can imagine what the breaking point was. What broke these men?

Speaker 25:
[96:10] What was the breaking point for you? Really, initially, it was the attack on Iran.

Speaker 2:
[96:22] Why is he laughing over that?

Speaker 3:
[96:25] He laughs at it. He also has the same intonations that Tucker does, his voice.

Speaker 2:
[96:30] Yeah, it's a million years.

Speaker 25:
[96:32] It was the attack.

Speaker 3:
[96:35] And he also stretches words like was the...

Speaker 2:
[96:39] That's an important DC thing. Yeah, I'm never going to get through these. It's 26 seconds.

Speaker 3:
[96:43] No, you're not. Not with this guy.

Speaker 25:
[96:45] It was the attack on Iran initially last year, when I guess we successfully eradicated all of their nuclear capability. Were you aware? Because it was still on... I'd heard that. It may still be on the White House website because it was on there even when we engaged in this latest war with Iran, this unnecessary, what will be probably a forever war that will... has killed Americans and is going to degrade us as a country. Significantly. Already has.

Speaker 3:
[97:16] Speculation?

Speaker 2:
[97:17] Yeah. Significantly. It already has. I don't know. It's a betrayal of the promises. That's what it is. Because politicians never betray anybody with their campaign promises. President Trump has come through on a number of them, but this one was the breaking point. What?

Speaker 25:
[97:34] And then the war on Iran, which he clearly had no plan for, wasn't enthusiastic about at all. He was fully aware of the risks. He was fully aware that it was a betrayal of his explicit promises for 10 years not to do this. He did it.

Speaker 2:
[97:47] Okay, so he didn't want to do it? No, he said he really didn't want to. He wanted to negotiate and he gave him two weeks and then he struck him early. But you're kind of leading towards something, I think, here, Tucker.

Speaker 25:
[98:01] He did it against his will. That's my-

Speaker 2:
[98:03] Against his will. Okay.

Speaker 25:
[98:06] Highly informed read.

Speaker 2:
[98:07] Highly informed read. Okay. He has what? Yes, he did it against his will. This goes back to the New York Times. He was- Bibi Netanyahu controls Donald Trump.

Speaker 3:
[98:19] Oh, okay. Yeah, there you go. Sorry.

Speaker 2:
[98:21] This is what it is.

Speaker 25:
[98:22] He did it against his will. That's my highly informed read. Yes. I mean, I could be wrong.

Speaker 3:
[98:28] My highly informed read. He goes, it's my highly informed, which is like a cheat word. We don't know if it's highly informed or not. I'm relia- But he says it is, so it must be.

Speaker 2:
[98:41] You and I are reliably informed, and he is only highly informed. I think our reliably Trumps is highly.

Speaker 3:
[98:47] Highly informed read?

Speaker 2:
[98:49] I'm informed I am.

Speaker 25:
[98:51] Yes. I mean, I could be wrong. You know, you don't know what people's motives actually are.

Speaker 3:
[98:55] Could be wrong.

Speaker 2:
[98:56] Could be wrong, weasel.

Speaker 25:
[98:57] From very close vantage, I can say, I don't think he was excited about it, but he did it. Clearly he felt he had no choice. So, and I think that's widely understood.

Speaker 3:
[99:10] Yes.

Speaker 25:
[99:12] But I have no sympathy for him for doing that.

Speaker 2:
[99:15] No, but this is all leading to one thing. Israel.

Speaker 25:
[99:19] It's still reprehensible and it's still a big question mark. Why would someone who has obvious and demonstrated allegiance to a foreign power give Donald Trump $250 million while he's running for president? I mean, how is that defensible? It's really not.

Speaker 2:
[99:36] Wait a minute, how much money did Kamala Harris get in like three weeks, $2 billion?

Speaker 3:
[99:45] $1.5 billion.

Speaker 25:
[99:50] Had given a pack for Trump. You know, if the mayor of Moscow had somehow, you know, assembled an enormous amount of money and put it in a 501C3 for Trump's benefit, would that have been acceptable? Of course, it wouldn't have been.

Speaker 2:
[100:05] Now, where were you when it came down to Hunter Biden getting the money from the mayor of Moscow? What kind of analogy is this?

Speaker 25:
[100:11] Yeah, so what does someone, it's so basic, comes back to the money. Like, what did they get in return for that amount of investment?

Speaker 2:
[100:19] And so the accusation here, I think, is because he got $250 million from a Jew, Miriam Adelson, that that is the reason why he went to war in Iran. For 250-

Speaker 3:
[100:34] He got more money from Musk.

Speaker 2:
[100:35] For $250 million into a PAC. Okay.

Speaker 25:
[100:39] So, what does someone, it's so basic-

Speaker 2:
[100:41] Just make me president, Miriam, and I'll hit Iran for you. I got other things to do, but I'll hit Iran, I promise you.

Speaker 25:
[100:47] Back to the money, like, what did they get in return for that amount of investment? And it's clear. I get it. No, I mean, of course, I agree with every word that you're saying. I just think, given his-

Speaker 2:
[101:00] John, could you say that more often to me?

Speaker 3:
[101:03] I agree with every word you say.

Speaker 2:
[101:05] You have to say, of course, I agree with every 100%.

Speaker 3:
[101:07] Of course, I agree with every word you say.

Speaker 2:
[101:09] 100%. I agree with everything you're saying.

Speaker 3:
[101:11] I'm not using 100%.

Speaker 2:
[101:13] Oh, come on.

Speaker 3:
[101:13] It's racist.

Speaker 25:
[101:14] I'm not an investment. And it's clear. I get it. No, I mean, of course, I agree with every word that you're saying. I just think, given his behavior and his demonstrated disloyalty and viciousness to previous supporters, why wouldn't he display the same lack of loyalty to Miriam Adelson? What? I mean, that's kind of the question. The only people he's been loyal to are the neocons and his donors. So he's attacked, you know, so he attacks Islam.

Speaker 19:
[101:48] Some of us stand up and say, probably shouldn't attack in a religion.

Speaker 2:
[101:53] I don't know. He said, praise be to Allah.

Speaker 3:
[101:57] Yeah, I was that attacking Islam. I mean, that's kind of the question. The actress said inshallah the other day for the new Devil Wears Prada 2 movie and Hathaway. So is that an attack on Islam?

Speaker 2:
[102:14] Who knows?

Speaker 25:
[102:15] The only people he's been loyal to are the neocons and his donors. So he's attacked, you know, so he attacks Islam. Some of us stand up and say, probably shouldn't be attacking a religion.

Speaker 19:
[102:29] Oh, you're a Muslim, secret Muslim, you love Muslims.

Speaker 2:
[102:32] Yes, you are. You do love Muslims. I love lots of Muslims.

Speaker 25:
[102:37] No, just I like reverence and I don't think you should attack people on the basis of their religion. Don't attack the religion.

Speaker 3:
[102:43] Yes.

Speaker 25:
[102:45] And all these like evangelicals are like, oh, you see, you're a Muslim. The next week he attacks Jesus. Okay, because it's all connected.

Speaker 2:
[102:52] He attacks Jesus.

Speaker 3:
[102:55] When did he attack Jesus?

Speaker 2:
[102:58] That's the Messiah meme. He attacked Jesus the next week.

Speaker 3:
[103:02] Oh, the AI art.

Speaker 2:
[103:05] Yes, he attacked Jesus.

Speaker 25:
[103:06] And all these like evangelicals are like, oh, you see, you're a Muslim. The next week he attacks Jesus. Attacks. Okay, because it's all connected, right? Clearly. Of course. Well beyond money, obviously.

Speaker 3:
[103:17] Well, right.

Speaker 25:
[103:18] But the one person he's never going to attack is Rebbe Schneerson.

Speaker 2:
[103:22] A Jew.

Speaker 25:
[103:23] Yes.

Speaker 3:
[103:24] Who?

Speaker 2:
[103:25] Rebbe Schneerson.

Speaker 3:
[103:27] Rebbe Schneerson.

Speaker 2:
[103:28] He's a Jew.

Speaker 3:
[103:29] He's not attacking. And then what about Saul Goldberg?

Speaker 2:
[103:32] How about that? How about Saul Goldstein? Remember him?

Speaker 3:
[103:36] Oh, yeah.

Speaker 2:
[103:37] What was he? What was his show? Channel J?

Speaker 3:
[103:41] Not sure.

Speaker 2:
[103:42] I don't remember.

Speaker 3:
[103:42] A person he's never been. Goldstein. You're talking about the guy who was on...

Speaker 2:
[103:47] Screw Magazine.

Speaker 3:
[103:48] Yeah, Goldstein. He was at the Fact Magazine or one of them. He had some magazine. He had a show on Public Access New York. Yes. Where he just groused. And he just, hey, I'm getting ripped off by... And he tells some story about some company that owes him money.

Speaker 2:
[104:04] He was a great guy.

Speaker 3:
[104:06] Yeah, he was very funny.

Speaker 25:
[104:07] The person he's never going to attack is Rebbe Schneerson.

Speaker 3:
[104:11] Yes. Oh, yeah.

Speaker 25:
[104:13] And, you know, the Habbad leader who's passed, but who I'm not attacking, by the way, but who was regarded as the Messiah by many of his followers. I don't think Trump should attack him, to be clear. Trump would never attack him. That's the one Messiah he will never attack.

Speaker 23:
[104:30] So like, what is that?

Speaker 25:
[104:33] Am I wrong? No, you're not wrong.

Speaker 2:
[104:35] All right, so their whole thing is Israel controls that.

Speaker 3:
[104:38] This is a podcast they put on the air?

Speaker 2:
[104:40] Two hours of it, two hours.

Speaker 3:
[104:42] Of these two guys agreeing with each other?

Speaker 2:
[104:45] Yeah, it was pretty boring, but I sat through it. I want to contrast that with an interview from Associated Press. And I pulled three clips, but I'm only going to play one and it's enough. And this is Eric Weinstein, also conservative. I think probably...

Speaker 3:
[105:02] Oh, Eric, this guy's lost the plot.

Speaker 2:
[105:05] Well, he said something really interesting in this interview.

Speaker 17:
[105:09] He's a wild card.

Speaker 20:
[105:11] There are three people who are doing amazing versions of the drunken boxing game. Kanye, who's probably the first one to really fail, Elon, and Donald Trump. And all three of them tried to do something where you couldn't pin them down, you couldn't figure out what they were going to do next. And that's what The Order keeps trying to do. Will you commit to this? Will you say this? Will you mouth these words? And none of these people would play the game. So that's what Donald Trump is. He's a guy who's got formulas that confuse people like Sam Harris. I think that Trump is an incredibly intelligent man and that there's incredible method in his tweets of old. You can just put them into a data set and you say that there are five or six different types of tweets and then the left falls for every one of them every time.

Speaker 11:
[106:02] What if the one figure everyone called unpredictable was actually the most calculated player on the board? Eric Weinstein flips the narrative, arguing that Donald Trump wasn't random. He was strategically unreadable. Weinstein compares Trump to a drunken boxing master. Impossible to anticipate, impossible to trap. While critics saw chaos, he sees pattern. Messaging designed to confuse opponents, disrupt expectations, and force the system into reacting instead of controlling.

Speaker 2:
[106:36] And I agree with that. That is what I call the Trump algo. And I think you agree with it mostly.

Speaker 11:
[106:44] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[106:45] And he does this over and over again. And that's what the yelling is. And we're going to, you know, I'm going to bomb, Iran will no longer be a civilization. So you know, so many people got upset. How can you condemn Hillary Clinton for laughing about Gaddafi being killed, but you don't condemn Trump for saying he's going to wipe a whole civilization off the face of the map? I said, well, two reasons. One, he didn't do it. And we knew he wouldn't do it. And we said he wouldn't do it. Two, he didn't laugh.

Speaker 3:
[107:18] He wasn't laughing about it.

Speaker 2:
[107:19] He wasn't laughing about a guy being killed and then a rifle stuck up his butt, which is what they did. They might have fired it too. So I personally think, and you know, this is, people go, oh, he's doing 5D, 70, go and chest. Nah, he's strategic. He has patterns. And I personally believe that this president is getting rid of the they that we always talk about. And the they is not a person. It's not Soros. It's not, you know, China. It's an entire system. It's a whole system has been around for well over a hundred years. And he's breaking things apart systematically. And he does not care what Tucker and Buckley think of him. He's doing it ultimately for my grandchild. The way I see it. And this pattern emerged on CNBC when he was grousing about the Supreme Court overruling of his tariffs.

Speaker 3:
[108:17] You know, we had a little setback with the Supreme Court.

Speaker 24:
[108:20] They said I can charge tariffs, but I have to do it a different way.

Speaker 3:
[108:24] And because of what they did, we have to pay back $160 billion. All they had to do is add one sentence, just one sentence. And that's, you don't have to pay anything taken in thus far back. But because they didn't add, and by the way, it was a close call, too. There were justices that were powerful that I was right on the tariffs. But because we lost by just two votes, you know, just little vote, two votes, we have to pay back $165 billion. They could have, with a little one sentence, you don't have to pay back tariffs that have already been received. You start from this point, and you do it a different way.

Speaker 5:
[109:01] So we're doing it a different way.

Speaker 2:
[109:03] So the grousing is about that he has to pay it back. And all the mainstream was like, oh, get your money back, gotta pay the money back, Trump's a loser. And what he's not saying in this clip, he's not saying the tariffs are important for our country, for national security. He just offhandedly says, you gotta do it a different way. He mentions two Supreme Court justices, the two that he nominated, Gorsuch and Amy Barrett. And I think they may have been in on this because just this week, I got this email from the oil baron and he says, there's a run on pipe. What? What are you talking about? Run on pipe, man. Cause the tariffs, the 232 tariffs. Had you even heard about this?

Speaker 3:
[109:52] No, tell me.

Speaker 2:
[109:53] So the 230, so when Trump says, yeah, I got to do that a different way. Well, boy, did he. And this was, this was by executive order, but it came through a recommendation that has to come from the Commerce Secretary. Oh, isn't that coincidental? That's Lutnick. And the change in 232 tariffs is significant and very significant to the oil baron because it changes the tariffs on steel products. And before, so the way it used to be is you paid 50% on the percentage of steel in a product. And now we change it to 50% on the entire product if it contains steel.

Speaker 3:
[110:45] Big deal.

Speaker 2:
[110:46] It's a huge deal. There's also a 50%, there's 25% on downstream products. So if it's foreign steel, it's auto parts, then it's only 25%. 10% if the metal is melted and poured in the United States. So there's all kinds of different tariffs. 15%, under 15%, there's no tariff. But it puts in place a system that reinvigorates, and this is what he promised to do, reinvigorates American steel. There's billions of dollars in steel plants coming online. Right now, they'll be fully operational by 2027, 2028. And yeah, the executive order could be overturned by the next president, or you could have a congressional order to vote to overturn that.

Speaker 3:
[111:36] You could put it in play permanently.

Speaker 2:
[111:37] I don't think West Virginia will vote. You know, it's like the steel producing states will never vote for this. And it would be suicide because this will create, I believe, hundreds of thousands of jobs. And I have a couple clips here from the steel industry executive. You know, this is a lobbying, you know, it's an industry group. So take it for what it is. And he kind of explains how fantastic this change is.

Speaker 12:
[112:05] Now this, President Trump has signed an executive order to revamp his tariffs on steel, copper and aluminum. The White House calls it a move to strengthen economic and national security. Brandon Farris joins me now. He is the Steel Manufacturers Association executive vice president. All right, Brandon, great to have you here. What do these developments really mean for manufacturing and affordability? Tell us.

Speaker 24:
[112:34] Ashley, thank you so much for having us. And we are energized. The steel industry is energized. This is one of the most exciting times in recent history to be involved in the American steel industry. President Trump has done more for the 87,000 men and women who make America steel than any president in modern history. And what he did last week, it was a necessary move. It wasn't optional. He moved the full value of the tariffs to the full product. Before, it was based on percentage of steel. And we saw bad faith importers under reporting the value and avoiding paying the full tariff. And now, they will be paying the full tariff. And the 232s are paying off for the American steel industry.

Speaker 2:
[113:22] Yes. This is a great gambit. Listen how much has been invested.

Speaker 12:
[113:27] I think, Brandon, because there were so many critics of the tariffs saying it's a tax and the American consumer is going to ultimately pay the price. But how successful do you think the tariffs have been in accomplishing the goal that they set out to do?

Speaker 24:
[113:44] Ashley, what we believe is the President's signature trade achievement is the 232 steel tariffs. And they have been historically successful. Over the last few years, in our industry, they've driven 25 billion in investments. And they will put online an additional 4 million tons of steel capacity. And what does that mean? Putting that into perspective, with that additional 4 million tons of steel capacity, you can build 1,000 guided missile destroyers for the Navy. That's not just economic might. That is national security, Ashley.

Speaker 2:
[114:21] And there's your big beautiful ships that we're going to build. We will build them. And you do need steel as national security. And here come the jobs.

Speaker 12:
[114:28] And what about manufacturing jobs in this country, Brandon? Have we seen a turnaround on that level?

Speaker 4:
[114:37] Absolutely we have.

Speaker 24:
[114:38] We've got some very impressive job numbers from March. We're going to continue seeing that as the president's trade policy continues to reshore American manufacturing. The steel industry, those 25 billion in investments, those are going to create tens of thousands of jobs. For every steel job you have, you have six or seven throughout the value chain. And we're going to continue increasing those manufacturing jobs throughout our economy.

Speaker 2:
[115:04] So, for the Carlson kids, I think that this was part of the plan all along. He knew that he would never be able to... These tariffs, they're not going to last through another administration, the ones that he had, put 10% here, 50% here, 100% there. That was just to get everybody, you know, draw them all in. And then this 232, that was done without any big brouhaha, no one reported on it. But they're permanent for all intents and purposes. And by 2028, when there's a new president, regardless of who it is, you won't turn that back. Then, yeah, yes, is it going to cost more? I'm sorry, oil baron, I love him, he's my brother. But okay, you've had a good ride. You can take a little less profit because of your run on pipe for the next two, three years. And then, you know, it will make no sense to buy inferior steel from South Korea or from China or wherever else you get it from. It'll be American steel. And I think it will reinvigorate our country.

Speaker 3:
[116:08] And I like it. Sounds like a good catch.

Speaker 2:
[116:12] I like it. I like it a lot. And, you know, be like, Trouble, go suck them off, you pussy. Well, you know, I got a grandkid coming, so I like it. I don't mind. Yeah, I'll take the pain. I will lay face down in the mud so my grandchildren can walk over my back.

Speaker 3:
[116:32] I got one last little thing here to discuss. Yeah, you're going to make the sacrifice. I like that.

Speaker 2:
[116:39] John's like, hey, Theodore, get off my back. What are you walking on my back for, kid?

Speaker 3:
[116:48] I just want to get this one thing, the cigarette thing out of the way.

Speaker 2:
[116:51] Cigarette thing?

Speaker 3:
[116:53] Yeah, I got one short clip, I think that covers it. WBAL TV Baltimore, UK ban on smoking for anyone born after 2008.

Speaker 8:
[117:04] Countries like the Maldives and Bhutan have enacted total tobacco bans, but with a population of nearly 70 million people, this ban in the UK could have serious and long-term impacts. Under the tobacco and vape spill, the legal age for buying tobacco will increase by one year every year, starting with people born on or after January 1st, 2009. This means children in the UK who are 17 or younger will never be able to legally buy cigarettes.

Speaker 2:
[117:35] I've seen this report and people are like, Oh, can you believe it? They won't let kids smoke? It's about purchasing. They're not going to arrest you if you're smoking on the street.

Speaker 3:
[117:46] Well, the other thing is this. Mimi dug up an interview with the head of Philip Morris from, I don't know, 10 years ago.

Speaker 2:
[117:53] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[117:55] And he predicted this because the company, and nobody's covered this at all. And Philip Morris may be behind this, may be an op. They don't want to sell cigarettes and tobacco products. There's always tobacco products anymore. Because they sell the straight up chemicals and vapes.

Speaker 2:
[118:12] Yes, they want to sell the.

Speaker 3:
[118:13] And they sell the little chewy thing you put in your mouth.

Speaker 2:
[118:16] Yeah, the pods.

Speaker 3:
[118:17] Yes. Yeah, instead of the tobacco chew, there's no tobacco. Because tobacco products are a pain in the ass. They're staying on the shelves. People aren't buying them anyway. They're buying the vapes. And they figure, and the way the CEO told it, there's a clip I could have, but it's hard to clip, was we got China. We got a tobacco price fine. We make tobacco products for China. Those guys love smoking.

Speaker 2:
[118:43] They love smoking.

Speaker 3:
[118:44] And nobody else does. Everyone else wants to vape or they want to chew on a ball, you know, that kind of thing. So, the whole thing is fake.

Speaker 2:
[118:53] Chew on a ball?

Speaker 3:
[118:55] You know that thing filled with nicotine salts.

Speaker 2:
[118:57] I love vaping.

Speaker 3:
[119:00] Yeah, you do. You're a big vaper.

Speaker 2:
[119:01] There's a lot to be said about nicotine.

Speaker 3:
[119:03] But you used to smoke like a… you were a smoker. Yes, I was. I would tell the story out of class. Adam used to not only smoke, but he was a dilettante about it. And he liked to roll his own.

Speaker 2:
[119:17] That's because I was rolling weed in it. I wasn't just smoking tobacco.

Speaker 3:
[119:20] Yeah, you were rolling weed in it, but it was always this rigmarole. He didn't use a little machine to make a cool looking cigarette. You rolled it with your hand rolled. That's gay.

Speaker 2:
[119:29] No, man. I've been rolling my own since I was 15 years old.

Speaker 3:
[119:32] In a little roll, he's rolling his own. That looks just like they all do. They look like shit. No.

Speaker 2:
[119:37] And I had the long filters so they looked like a joint. And they were a joint. They were spliffs, in fact. That is the traditional name for what I would smoke. And I enjoyed it very much. And I'm amazed that Tina married me, despite me being a WakenBake guy. It was amazing.

Speaker 1:
[119:57] She even decided to wake.

Speaker 2:
[120:00] I didn't bake, I didn't even read that one.

Speaker 1:
[120:02] Oh John, I would wake up at three in the morning. These days, since I quit smoking, I sleep like a baby. I sleep all the way through seven and a half hours if I'm really lucky, but six and a half, seven hours. I wake up with my own accord before the alarm. But when I was smoking weed, I would take a 50 milligram gummy, go to bed, and then I'd wake up at three in the morning, like, I'm awake. I go out on the porch, smoke a whole joint, go back to bed. It was pretty severe.

Speaker 2:
[120:31] Now, that's bad.

Speaker 1:
[120:33] You would say that I was a lot more fun back in the day.

Speaker 2:
[120:37] I would?

Speaker 1:
[120:39] Well, you would have, but I don't think I've changed that much.

Speaker 2:
[120:43] I don't think you've changed that much either. To be honest about it, I don't think that the weed thing was, I think it was just habitual. I wasn't really affecting your personality to any extent, except when you first smoke sometimes, I remember the time you were out in front of Mevio, just smoking a joint and as the employees wandered in whenever they felt like it, hey, you'd always greet them, hey, I'm glad you could finally make it to work.

Speaker 1:
[121:12] They were coming in at 10.30.

Speaker 2:
[121:14] One after the other.

Speaker 1:
[121:17] Did that stop pretty quick after I was sitting out there smoking my weed and telling them that I was happy they could finally make it?

Speaker 2:
[121:24] No, not really.

Speaker 1:
[121:25] Yes, it did. It made a difference. It went out of business anyway.

Speaker 2:
[121:31] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[121:31] It wasn't a great idea.

Speaker 2:
[121:32] You're ahead of your time is the reason.

Speaker 1:
[121:33] No, no one's making money on podcast networks.

Speaker 2:
[121:37] Yeah, they're making money by selling to other dummies.

Speaker 1:
[121:40] Well, yes, there's that. But that has always been my plight. I'm always 10 years too early.

Speaker 2:
[121:46] Yeah, I agree.

Speaker 1:
[121:47] Look at that guy. He made a billion dollars. How did he do that? No, we went public in 1996.

Speaker 3:
[121:54] Woo!

Speaker 1:
[121:56] You know, two years later, people, you know, Mark Cuban made $10 billion on selling a domain name. I was the first one.

Speaker 3:
[122:05] No.

Speaker 1:
[122:07] Face it.

Speaker 2:
[122:07] I think it was $3 billion.

Speaker 1:
[122:09] Okay. This is my plight. This is what it is.

Speaker 2:
[122:14] Yeah, Cuban had the domain. Mark Cuban's claim to fame.

Speaker 3:
[122:17] broadcast.com.

Speaker 2:
[122:18] He put up the domain name broadcast.com.

Speaker 1:
[122:21] Pretty much.

Speaker 2:
[122:22] Yeah, I think it was Yahoo that said, we will give you a couple billion for it.

Speaker 3:
[122:26] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[122:26] Okay. That was how he made his fortune.

Speaker 1:
[122:30] He was live streaming.

Speaker 2:
[122:30] He's a marketing genius. He's a business genius. Yes.

Speaker 1:
[122:34] He was live streaming radio stations and selling ads around it. Then he would literally go to the stations and say, I'm becoming a billionaire off of your product. Thanks.

Speaker 3:
[122:46] And they went, Okay, Mark. Okay. Sounds good.

Speaker 1:
[122:50] No, maybe I'm not shrewd enough. I'm a podcast. Let's face it. That's what I am. I've always been a disc jockey. I started when I was 13. I was a disc jockey then. I was a disc jockey on TV. And I'm a disc jockey now.

Speaker 2:
[123:04] It's your calling.

Speaker 1:
[123:05] It's a call of what you want.

Speaker 2:
[123:08] That's what I call it. I have one oddball clip that nobody's covering. It's one of the unreported news.

Speaker 1:
[123:15] Unreported.

Speaker 2:
[123:16] Zelensky, Stolen Art.

Speaker 4:
[123:19] On March 22nd, three paintings by French masters, Cezanne Renoir and Matisse, worth more than $10 million were stolen from a museum near the Italian city of Parma. The theft has since been investigated by Italy's Carabinieri and the Cultural Heritage Protection Unit. Surprisingly, less than a month after the heist, one of the stolen paintings, A Cup and Plate of Cherries by Paul Cezanne, appeared in one of President Zelensky's videos.

Speaker 3:
[123:47] Dear Ukrainians, shortly about this day, the PPO will have a new approach to use.

Speaker 4:
[123:53] Presumably recorded on April 16th, the video shows Zelensky addressing Ukrainians, with a stolen painting appearing on a wall directly behind his back. The video was published on the official website of the President of Ukraine, But has since been removed. This is a rare case of a stolen painting reappearing in public. Chris Maranello, founder of Art Recovery International, says that a very small percentage of stolen art is ever found.

Speaker 5:
[124:19] Five to ten percent of all art that's stolen is ever recovered, which is why we need to start focusing more on prevention.

Speaker 4:
[124:28] He also confirms that stolen art often ends up in countries where the rule of law is weak.

Speaker 5:
[124:34] They moved them on through Belgium or Eastern Europe, countries where due diligence is not often practiced as it is in the West.

Speaker 1:
[124:42] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[124:44] Can you believe that he's got the stolen art? This is a corrupt operation.

Speaker 1:
[124:49] Of course it is. There's no focus on him right now. That's the problem.

Speaker 2:
[124:56] Yeah, I know it's been taken away.

Speaker 1:
[124:58] Yeah, and Trump is only helping Putin kill Ukrainians.

Speaker 2:
[125:02] So, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[125:04] Hey, with that fine little clip that no one's reporting about, I'd like to thank you for your courage. Say in the morning to you, the man who put the C in the Carlson kid. Say hello to my friend on the other end, the one, the only Mr. Still Alive, John C. Dvorak.

Speaker 2:
[125:19] Well, in the morning to you, Mr. Adam Curry. In the morning, Mr. C. Boozmographi is here. Something's in the water. Dames and Knights out there.

Speaker 1:
[125:24] In the morning, to you trolls over there in the troll room. Let me count you for a second. Don't move.

Speaker 3:
[125:27] There we go.

Speaker 1:
[125:32] 1377 in the troll room, listening live. It's noagendastream.com. I've been troubleshooting one of our producers. He's like, I can't hear the stream. I'm getting kicked out. It's da-ba-da-ba. How can I help? Well, I keep getting kicked out, ba-da-ba. Well, are you listening in a podcast app, like a modern podcast at podcastapps.com? Are you listening on a stream? I listen to noagendastream.com. Okay. We don't actually have that domain name. If you have a technical problem, you need to learn to describe a little bit what's going on. I am the help desk for No Agenda. I'm the first line of defense before I toss it over my shoulder and say, Void Zero help. And Void Zero is just one of the many people who help make this show what it is. I mentioned at the top of the show, if you're listening right now, this is a value for value podcast and people have been helping us for over 18 years in so many different ways. No one's a listener. Everybody's a producer. Everybody has an obligation. When it comes around to you and we're talking about something that you know that you're an expert in, you need to e-mail us, which means e-mail me adamcurry.com because no one can spell Dvorak. And it's not dvorak.com either. Huh, how many times has that happened? My e-mail is getting bounced from John at dvorak.com.

Speaker 2:
[127:01] Yeah, okay.

Speaker 1:
[127:03] Is there dvorak.com? Do you have that? You should have that.

Speaker 2:
[127:06] Actually, I do own it. I believe it's never used. Some guy bought it up sometime and gave it to me and I'm not sure who, I'm not sure where the registration is. I had to look it up.

Speaker 1:
[127:18] I went into-

Speaker 2:
[127:18] No, I used.org for a reason. I'm a.org, not a com.

Speaker 1:
[127:21] You're a.org kind of guy. I checked curry.com today. It doesn't expire until 2030. That's good, I'm good. So at that point, I'm done. I gotta end this sometime. How about you? How about you? We've looked for so many exit strategies. At a certain point, when we just be old and tired and just-

Speaker 2:
[127:42] What do you mean 2030? They won't even- The whole- This is- Nah. Get to the next election.

Speaker 1:
[127:49] I'm not doing another presidency. We can't do another presidency.

Speaker 2:
[127:52] Well, that's 2028.

Speaker 1:
[127:53] Okay. I was thinking like 2027 somewhere, you know, before we get to the-

Speaker 2:
[127:59] Now you make my wife nervous. Stop it.

Speaker 1:
[128:04] Mimi's got five businesses she's running. She doesn't need you, the talent. John's the talent. We just do everything around him. I love your family. Your family's great. So just like the Dvorak family, everybody here pitches in and does something for the show. And we ask you to support us by returning the value that you receive from the media deconstruction that we do, which I would say someone emailed me and said, you're not keeping to your promise. What is our promise, John?

Speaker 2:
[128:37] We promise to deliver unbiased news deconstruction on a twice a week basis.

Speaker 1:
[128:43] No, no, no, no.

Speaker 2:
[128:44] Two hours and 45 minutes.

Speaker 1:
[128:46] What does the FAQ say?

Speaker 2:
[128:49] Oh, what does the FAQ say?

Speaker 1:
[128:50] It says we do media deconstruction.

Speaker 2:
[128:51] I should know I wrote it.

Speaker 1:
[128:52] Yes, we do media deconstruction.

Speaker 2:
[128:55] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[128:56] Well, somehow that morphed into, you do fair and balanced media deconstruction. I said, no, that's Fox News stuff, which is a lie.

Speaker 2:
[129:06] Oh, yeah. Fair and balanced, no.

Speaker 1:
[129:09] Fair and balanced is bull crap. We're very unbalanced, in fact.

Speaker 2:
[129:14] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[129:15] We are who we are. And what we don't do is we don't get captured by the audience, like Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson, all these guys.

Speaker 2:
[129:26] Yeah, and start hating Jews for no good reason.

Speaker 1:
[129:31] We don't care. Remember Ukraine? Man, I got flack in Texas for that. That's exactly what they said.

Speaker 3:
[129:43] But you may put me here.

Speaker 2:
[129:45] The guy had a hair lip, basically, right? Pretty much.

Speaker 1:
[129:49] There were Ukraine flags everywhere.

Speaker 3:
[129:51] Like, no, this is a scam.

Speaker 2:
[129:52] Oh, yeah. Remember the Ukraine flags in Congress, which I think is illegal.

Speaker 3:
[129:58] Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[130:00] Ukraine flags everywhere. I think huge Ukraine flags in Dripping Spring. No, Ukraine is one big corrupt country. Always has been. Always has been. And it was us. It was Victorian Newland. It was Brennan. It was Lindsey Graham. They always want. They hate Russia. They want to invade Russia and take Russia's riches. And you still hear Coons. Our number one enemy, Russia. No, he's not. He's not. We're gonna do lots of business. Here's how that call went. About the oil that Scott Besson lifted the sanctions on. Here's how that went. Vlad is Donald. Listen, we're gonna release the sanctions. Whatever you do, don't give it to the Europeans. Okay, Donald, good idea. This sells to Japan. Everybody got oil from Russia, China, but not the EU. And they don't deserve it. They're stupid. Cutting off the oil and gas from Russia. How stupid are they? This is a question you need to answer.

Speaker 2:
[131:10] They're very stupid.

Speaker 1:
[131:12] Very stupid.

Speaker 2:
[131:12] They just have the hard on for Russia.

Speaker 1:
[131:15] Hard on for Russia and for renewables.

Speaker 2:
[131:18] Oh, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[131:20] Windmills.

Speaker 2:
[131:21] Let's shut down the nuclear power plants in Germany. And see what happens. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[131:26] What could possibly go wrong? FDU. That's right. Brooklyn. So yes, time, talent, treasure. As I said, many people put a lot of time and talent into doing things for us. And that includes artists. Now, it used to be really hard for what the artists did. It's gotten a lot easier just prompting some stuff back and forth. I think, I don't know if I remember correctly, did we choose another Darren O compilation here?

Speaker 2:
[131:50] Let me check. Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[131:52] Episode 1861, we titled that The Cone of Uncertainty. This got some good traction on thex.com, which is the only social network I ever look at and pretty much only my inbox or my mentions. And it was indeed Darren O'Neill, but he nailed it. The classic road signs, which were well done in this case. No agenda occurring to Dvorak and then a digital sign. Welcome to Canada. Would you like to die today? And a nice little Canadian maple leaf in the corner. And a lot of Canadians responded saying, unfortunately, this is true. It was like the reality was pressed in front of them. And they went, yeah, that kind of does suck what we're doing over here. So, it worked. It worked. It was well done. Good idea, Darren. We appreciate it. Take a quick look at noagendaartgenerator.com to see if there's...

Speaker 2:
[132:47] Well, there wasn't really anything else.

Speaker 1:
[132:49] Yeah, that's what I'm checking. Let's see.

Speaker 2:
[132:54] I like something and you nixed it.

Speaker 1:
[132:57] It was Constance Granger, the Strait of Whore Moose, which was a toll booth and there was a problem.

Speaker 2:
[133:08] Yeah, you're right. It didn't take much to talk me out of it. If it wasn't a moose head.

Speaker 1:
[133:13] Well, it was a moose dressed...

Speaker 2:
[133:16] It was a pun, but the pun was in the title.

Speaker 1:
[133:18] Yes, dressed as a hooker. And if you look at the title Whore Moose, as in a moose that is a whore, it's funny, but just the art by itself is no one's going to get this. I mean, it's more like one of those riddles. What is it called? There's a particular kind of cartoon. They must have a term for it. Where it's something you have to think about. We can't have people thinking about our art. We just can't. I will say that Rocket Boys, No Agenda, Floss, Free Zone, I think that was used in the newsletter. That was pretty funny.

Speaker 2:
[133:57] Yeah, yeah, that was good.

Speaker 1:
[133:58] I like that one. Dana Brunetti thought that was one of the funniest things he'd ever heard.

Speaker 2:
[134:06] What?

Speaker 1:
[134:06] That I busted you for flossing your teeth on the show.

Speaker 2:
[134:09] He said that it was, I guess, cracked him up.

Speaker 1:
[134:14] Maverick, my periodontist, says, What is this? You're telling people to stop flossing? This is no good. He got so much response.

Speaker 2:
[134:25] You can't floss while you're on the air.

Speaker 1:
[134:26] You can't do that. That's no good. noagendaartgenerator.com. We encourage everybody to prompt around and do some work. And if you are an actual artist, we appreciate that even more. If you feel like it, we would love to highlight your work as the artwork for the No Agenda Show, part of our Time, Talent and Treasure Initiative for the returning of value to the show, which can also come in treasure by going to noagendadonations.com. And we thank everybody, $50 and above. And for those who are fortunate enough to be able to give us $200 for an individual show or more, not only will we read your note, guaranteed, we read lots of notes, but guaranteed your note, which is often some kind of plug for a company, which is okay. Now you get the Associate Executive Producer title, which is good for the rest of your life and is valid anywhere. Hollywood style credits are not just Hollywood style, Hollywood credits are recognized, a real credit. You can even enter it on an account. If you don't have one, you can open one up at imdb.com. $300 or more, you become an Executive Producer. You can put it on your curriculum, you can put it on your resume. I wonder, does Linda Lupatkin advocate for putting your No Agenda Executive Producer credit on your resume that gets results?

Speaker 2:
[135:46] I never asked her, but she might put it in the next note whether she does or not. I think it's pretty cool on LinkedIn.

Speaker 1:
[135:52] It looks great on LinkedIn, absolutely. We also have a special promotion running for the Instant Night Order of the Heart, the Red Heart, which if you don't already have one, you will receive a No Agenda.

Speaker 2:
[136:06] The Red Night.

Speaker 1:
[136:07] The Red Night. What is the exact title? Because I think I'm getting it wrong every time.

Speaker 2:
[136:12] Red Night Order of the Heart.

Speaker 1:
[136:16] All right, so we have Black Nights, but now this will be a forever Black Night, Red Night status Order of the Heart, which includes a handsome lapel pin designed by Sir Paul Couture.

Speaker 2:
[136:27] Yeah, which is coming in May.

Speaker 1:
[136:30] Coming in May. So it's a double bonus. And that will be going to Anonymous, who checked in from Salem, Oregon with $1,000, who wants to be Sir Zedonymous. But I should leave. Oh, he said he wanted to be Sit Zedonymous. But I should leave that for one of the Zeds. No, I think it must have been Sir. Sir Zedonymous. So typo here. If it pleases the committee, may I be Sir X-Nonymous? Well, I'm sure that's not a problem.

Speaker 2:
[137:02] Sir X-Gen.

Speaker 1:
[137:03] Sir X-Nonymous is approved. And you will receive the Red Night Order of the Heart in just a moment.

Speaker 2:
[137:11] Cody Dobson in San Antonio. Just down the road from you, actually. Thousand dollars. In the morning, good sirs. I realize I have been negligent paying the bill for my conspiracy therapist. This donation is a big thank you for all the value you both provide. John, thank God you're still recovering well and in such good spirits. If I can clear out my voice, maybe. Get well soon, Adam. We need more old rock and roll stories. Yeah. Really? I believe this installment makes me a red knight. Please dub me Sir Doby, Destroyer of Libraries. I'd like to request hookers and blow at the round table. That's always there. If the Appearance Committee approves. Sincerely, Cody W. Dobson. Not your neighbor in San Antonio, PS. Space is fake.

Speaker 1:
[138:07] We're both in need of lozenges today. I just popped one myself. Thank you, Cody. Dennis Cadle?

Speaker 2:
[138:17] I'm going to say Cadle.

Speaker 1:
[138:19] No, Cadle. Tampa, Florida. 3.33 and 33 cents. ITM, gentlemen, this donation is a follow-up after all your great feedback about our Bee Well Manuka Honey. Ah! I was just talking about it at manukagold.com, M-A-N-U-K-A gold.com. We sell natural Manuka Honey products. We have an extremely popular line of topical creams, but our best seller is Bee Well, that's B-E-E Well, Manuka Honey blended with ginger, turmeric, lemongrass and MCT oil. Yes, I've been taking a spoonful of that every day in addition to the pain relief. Great for teas or topping yogurt or oatmeal. It's good for everything from inflammation to boosting your immune system and also tastes amazing. manukagold.com is offering the listeners of Gitmo Nation a 20% discount with the code BONGENO. No, I'm kidding. J-C-D, where is Bongeno? Did he stop doing his podcast?

Speaker 2:
[139:15] No, no, he's back on the air doing it. He's a little reticent to talk about his...

Speaker 1:
[139:20] No, I think he's taking a pause again.

Speaker 2:
[139:23] Again?

Speaker 1:
[139:23] I think so.

Speaker 2:
[139:25] I think he got a lot of flack.

Speaker 1:
[139:27] Yeah, for Stolen Valor, 20% discount with the code JCD20. Or for those of you in the Villages Farmer Market in Florida on Saturday mornings, we have a booth from nine to one. If you see us, stop by for a $20 free gift with purchase. The Villages, is that the creepy Disney Village?

Speaker 2:
[139:50] No, that's Celebration.

Speaker 1:
[139:52] Right, I forgot about that. As always, thank you John and Adam. This is still the best podcast in the universe. We're happy to help keeping it going. Don't forget to use code JCD20 for 20% off. Sincerely, Dennis Cadle, Tampa, Florida. It's an outstanding product. I wouldn't say it if it wasn't. Thank you. And you didn't need to donate for me to say it because it's an outstanding product. I could not believe how quickly the pain relief set in.

Speaker 2:
[140:17] And celebrations in Orlando. Have you ever been there?

Speaker 1:
[140:20] No. You?

Speaker 2:
[140:23] Worth the trip.

Speaker 1:
[140:23] You?

Speaker 2:
[140:25] Yeah, oh yeah.

Speaker 1:
[140:25] Isn't that where a whole bunch of like boomers swap wives?

Speaker 2:
[140:30] Maybe.

Speaker 1:
[140:31] Okay. Film at 11.

Speaker 2:
[140:34] It's quite the manicured foe little city.

Speaker 1:
[140:39] And they drive around in golf carts?

Speaker 2:
[140:41] No, no, it's where you wouldn't, you can drive your car through there.

Speaker 1:
[140:44] Oh, okay.

Speaker 2:
[140:44] All right. Max Marder in Van Nuys, California comes up with 33333. Hi Adam and John, he writes. I'm making this donation of 33333 for my wife, Annie Marder for her birthday, April 26. She's a wonderful wife and mother to our two kids. And I can't think of anything she would like more than to be an executive producer for your show. She listens to every episode when they become available and even re-listens to them with me in the car. She adores you guys, especially John. Yeah. Please give her an extra special de-douching for her birthday.

Speaker 4:
[141:24] You've been de-douched.

Speaker 2:
[141:26] Happy birthday, Annie. I love you. Max, Annie's husband.

Speaker 1:
[141:32] That's so lovely. D. Bard in Fenton, Michigan. Row of Ducks, 222.22. First time, long time, and de-douching is an order.

Speaker 6:
[141:46] You've been de-douched.

Speaker 1:
[141:48] A thousand apologies for my belated contribution, but I am poor. It took me the, you should talk to the Southern Poverty Law Center. They might be able to help. It took me the better part of eight months. Wow, this is so appreciated. It took me the better part of eight months to save for this donation, and there is more to come. I know I could have done smaller donations, but my reasons are as follows. One, you two really deserve it, and with JCD's recent health scare, I knew I couldn't wait any longer. And I hope you're feeling better, John, he says. Two, I heard karma really works, and I'm in dire need of all the karma Gitmo Nation can muster. Three, with the very limited wins in my life, I think having the title of associate executive will not only cheer me up, but look good on my resume. Yes, you gotta take that into account, it cheers you up. Four, I could not show my face at the Brighton, Michigan Meetup on the 26th as a douchebag. Wow. So when everybody at the Brighton, Michigan Meetup on the 26th, make sure you say had I had a D, D. Bard. Thank you both sincerely. Again, I need all the karma and prayers, but for the sake of time, I'll settle for an F-35 Karma as my jangle. Love is lit, D. Bard.

Speaker 6:
[143:01] You've got ROOOOOOO Karma.

Speaker 2:
[143:07] Eli the Coffee Guy is here in Bensonville, Illinois. 20423. With all that's going on in the world, no agenda is needed more than ever. All of us producers really appreciate the dedication. You won't get a bad ticker. You won't let a bad ticker or a flight across the pond stop the show. By the way, how's that coming? What? Are you going to go?

Speaker 1:
[143:29] Yeah. Yeah, I'm going.

Speaker 2:
[143:30] Are you going to be able to get back? No. It's a big...

Speaker 1:
[143:33] No, May 6. We're going May 6 and we're supposed to return May 13. The show will continue as regularly scheduled. But if I can't come back, guess what? The show will continue as regularly scheduled.

Speaker 2:
[143:46] Keep up the great work for what happens to the dog.

Speaker 1:
[143:49] Oh, Jill and Mike, they got her at the ranch. She's fine. She loves the ranch.

Speaker 2:
[143:54] Okay, good. For producers who want great coffee, visit gigawattcoffeeroasters.com and use the code ITM for 20% off your first order. Stay caffeinated, says Eli, the coffee guy. You have the next two.

Speaker 1:
[144:06] Yes, it's ITM 20 for 20% off your first order.

Speaker 2:
[144:10] What did I keep saying?

Speaker 1:
[144:11] ITM, just ITMs, ITM 20. We don't want people to get bogued out of their discount. So the next two is interesting because Robert Mussard comes in from Riverside, California, with $200 with no note, so he will get a double up karma.

Speaker 6:
[144:26] You've got karma.

Speaker 1:
[144:30] But then I see Linda Lupatkin, Linda Lu, and it says, see note with her $200 donation. I do not have a note. Do you have a note?

Speaker 2:
[144:41] I didn't look.

Speaker 1:
[144:42] But Jae did not send me a note.

Speaker 2:
[144:46] I noticed.

Speaker 1:
[144:46] Well, this is important. This is Linda Lu, man.

Speaker 2:
[144:51] Well, you know what we're going to do if we don't have, we can't find a note.

Speaker 1:
[144:55] What will we do?

Speaker 2:
[144:56] We'll read her standard sales pitch.

Speaker 1:
[144:59] Well, do you have the standard sales pitch there?

Speaker 2:
[145:02] The last note I have from her is from May 16th.

Speaker 1:
[145:05] From last year? Last year? Well, this is a conundrum.

Speaker 2:
[145:13] We'll have a note from the last spreadsheet. I'll just open that up and it should be good to go.

Speaker 1:
[145:18] Do you have that?

Speaker 2:
[145:20] Yeah, I have it on the download list.

Speaker 1:
[145:22] Good, because I'm on Linux. So.

Speaker 2:
[145:24] Oh, Linux.

Speaker 1:
[145:27] If you can grab it from the last show. I feel horrible because Linda Lu, I don't think she's ever said, see note.

Speaker 2:
[145:34] Never.

Speaker 1:
[145:35] So, there must be.

Speaker 2:
[145:36] Here's what she's normally says this. Jobs Karma, your resume has about 10 seconds to make an impression and most don't. For a resume that gets results, go to imagemakersinc.com. Linda helps professionals and executives turn their executive experience to a clear story of leadership results and impact. That's ImageMakersInc. with a K and Linda Lu, a Duchess of Jobs and writer of winning resumes. Jobs, jobs, jobs and jobs.

Speaker 3:
[146:09] Let's vote for jobs!

Speaker 1:
[146:13] Well, I feel bad because I'd like to do, I'd like to give good service to Linda Lu. But whatever it is, we'll make up for it. We guarantee you that. Continuing the rest of our supporters for today, value for value at noagendadonations.com. There she is, Dame Rita from Sparks Nevada 16362. That is $74.74 plus $88.88. That's the donation amount to keep John ticking and Adam ticks for free. Michael Poling in Hingham, Massachusetts, $155. DeSoto Drone in Southaven, Mississippi, $105.35. Ian Field, $100. That's $105.35. I have to stop and think like I'm on MSNBC. Edward Gardland in Mendon, New York, $100. Ian Field, $100. Marius Uwe Nagel in Norway, $88.88. Calling out Halvar sitting in the sauna as a douchebag. Although he kicked me in the mouth about 2.75 years ago. Keep on keeping on. Thank you, Marius Uwe Nagel. Coming in with a boob donation, $80.08. Sir Kevin McLaughlin from Concord, North Carolina. He is the Archduin of Luke, Lover of America and Boobs. And as always says, God bless America and boobs. Brian Kaufman, Scottsdale, Arizona. No stranger to the donation, 7575. Nicholas Leary from Columbus, Ohio, 7272. Dame Becky Arlington, Washington, 6996. Nice palindrome. Scott Schreiber in Madrid, in Spain. Oh, he sent a Bitcoin donation for 60.09 euros. I'm Scott. I'm in Madrid. Thank you. Those cross-border payments go very fast with Bitcoin. Sir John and Herber Springs. Heber. Heber? Yeah, Heber. What did I say?

Speaker 2:
[148:17] Herber.

Speaker 1:
[148:18] No, Heber Springs.

Speaker 2:
[148:20] Sexist.

Speaker 1:
[148:22] What is this? Arkansas or Arizona? What is AR?

Speaker 2:
[148:29] Arkansas.

Speaker 1:
[148:30] Okay, I need help.

Speaker 2:
[148:31] AZ is Arizona.

Speaker 1:
[148:33] Yeah, $69.88. And he turned $69 today, show day. $0.88 for John's recovery. Matthew Elward from Weatherford, Texas. Small boobs, $60.06, couple of small boobs. Also one from Les Tarkowski in Kingman, Arizona. And Dame Liberty Mom from Vista, California. Then we have Baron Henry of Outpost West in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, $59.95. Another palindrome, $55.55 from Philip Davis in Jessup, Georgia. My dad had a farm. Last week, the citizens of Brantley County, Georgia fought against a proposed data center being brought to their county. This week a fire started. I live a county over and have friends and family in Brantley. Send prayers and Silver Iodide. I can help with the prayers. Cameron Linge, North Branch, Minnesota, Double Nichols and I, 55.1. Back to work, back to supporting, thank you for your courage. Christopher Wexelberger in Leipzig, Germany. Another shameless plug for the Leipzig meetup on April 30th. He sends $54.30. Can't wait to hear the meetup report from that one. Daniel Lindt, Humboldt, Texas, 5374. Happy birthday for his 53rd trip around the sun. Happy birthday to John. So that's, hence 5374. Numerology counts. Chris Rees in Wichita, Kansas, 5333. Margie, Margie, Margie. What is this? Margee. Some kind of pronunciation.

Speaker 2:
[150:06] Can I be Margee? Margee, yeah, Margee.

Speaker 1:
[150:09] It's Margee. No, it says Margee, as in go.

Speaker 2:
[150:13] G-E-E is spelled G.

Speaker 1:
[150:15] It says right here in the notes.

Speaker 2:
[150:17] No, how do you spell? Take the word G. How do you spell it?

Speaker 1:
[150:22] Now, I'm with you on that, but it says here in the note. This is happy.

Speaker 2:
[150:25] Oh, I see it. It will use a hard G. But Dennis, Dennis just.

Speaker 1:
[150:29] He says, please with wish Margee, Margee, a very happy birthday in April 22nd with love from her family in Wichita. Margee, as in geek, Margee. You can argue with me.

Speaker 2:
[150:44] I'm arguing.

Speaker 1:
[150:49] So what makes the show?

Speaker 2:
[150:50] I don't care what it says.

Speaker 1:
[150:52] I know you don't. You just want to argue. You're just here to argue. You don't care what the point is.

Speaker 2:
[150:56] Well, you said so at the beginning.

Speaker 1:
[150:57] James. Did I? What did I say?

Speaker 2:
[151:00] At the beginning. So you got plenty of clips. You're just here to grouse.

Speaker 1:
[151:03] Oh, goodness. Oh, now I get it. That made you mad?

Speaker 2:
[151:07] No, I'm just, no, I took your advice.

Speaker 1:
[151:12] Some things never change. James Bueller, Belleville, Illinois, 5272. William Kidwell, 5272. Charles V. Brachetti, Grove City, Pennsylvania, 5272. Thanks for the analysis. Wishing John a healthy, quick recovery. He's here. Just a few weeks after his chest was cut open, Tyrell McMahan, Somerville, Tennessee, 5151. ITM in 73s from November Juliet, 8X-Ray, 73s. Forrest Martin, $50.05. Andrew Benz, $50.05. He's in Imperial, Missouri. Kat, from Toronto, California. Shout out to Ash Gavai from Toronto, Ontario, who just turned 41. You both love your show. Thanks for what you do. Glad you're okay, John. Now the 50s. Baron Slam Bob, Rolling Knight of the Guadalupe and Sand City in San Jose, California, $50. And he says, I will never leave you and always stand by your side. Alex Delgado, Aptos, California, $50. Simon Smith, South Jordan, Utah. Leanne Shipley in Covington, Washington. Michael Mize in Diamondhead, Mississippi. Woo, almost messed it up. And that's it. Those are the 50s. And that is our list of Value for Value supporters for the Time Talent. And this was the treasure portion for episode 1862. We appreciate everybody who supports us in any manner whatsoever, Time Talent or treasure. But man, it does help when you guys send in some treasure. noagendadonations.com. Everybody can participate. You can do it on your own time, your own dime, your own schedule. Just whenever you feel you got value out of the show, send it back to us. noagendadonations.com. You can even set up a Bitcoin donation or a recurring donation anytime, any frequency. noagendadonations.com. And here are those birthdays. Her entire family says happy birthday to Margie. She celebrated on the 22nd. Kennedy Sage Myers was born on the 23rd yesterday. Well, welcome, brand new human resource. Sir John turned 69. Oh, that's actually today she was born. What? She was born today, Kennedy Sage. Wow. And Sir John turned 69 today. Max Marder wishes his wife and any Marder a happy birthday on the 26th. Daniel Lindt turns 53 and Kat says happy birthday to Ash Gavai from Toronto. Turned 41 years old. We say happy birthday from everybody here. It's the best podcast in the universe. And we have a couple of special people to thank. We have two Red Knights, Order of the Heart, to congratulate. They will be receiving that handsome lapel pin in addition to their night ring. Sir X-Nonomous and Sir Doby, destroyer of libraries. Thanks to your instant night donation of $1,000. Congratulations, and welcome to the Order of the Heart. The Order of the Hearts. The Order of the Heart. Quick blurb for my last 202.02 donation. John, you're sounding like your old grumpy self. Thank you for your service. Amen. Love you, brother. Jingles, Obama, you might die. I can't believe I didn't have that one set up. Where is you might die? I have such a good system. What's what? You might. Where is he? Where is he? Oh, here he is.

Speaker 2:
[155:16] You might die.

Speaker 1:
[155:17] Hardly worth it, but I'm glad I did that. Also, we have a...

Speaker 2:
[155:21] Called by That's True.

Speaker 1:
[155:22] Oh, I was trying to... Jingles I was trying to skip that, but thanks.

Speaker 2:
[155:28] Yeah, I saw that. I wasn't going to let you get even one set. Poor guy. That's true.

Speaker 1:
[155:32] Oh, that's the wrong one. See, that's rough.

Speaker 2:
[155:33] That's good enough. Ha ha ha.

Speaker 1:
[155:37] We have... There's so many of them. I think it has to do with the classic.

Speaker 2:
[155:42] Here we go.

Speaker 1:
[155:42] That's true. Since you called for it. A night from Chris...

Speaker 2:
[155:47] He also said Mimi Rocks.

Speaker 1:
[155:50] That I just missed. I would have said that. I didn't miss that on purpose. Chris Kinney. We learned how to say that on the last show. He said on show 1860, My parents, Mike and Becky Kinney, gifted me an instant knighthood for my 50th birthday. That's right. I would like to claim that knighthood with the following title, which will be Sir Sound Guy Red Knight of Streaming Data Protector of the Transactions. At the roundtable, I would like to partake of Shiner Bohemian Black Lager and True Buffalo Style Hot Wings and Blue Cheese. He likes long stuff. By the way, Mike welcomed JCD to the Zipper Club. The Zipper Club is a club for people who have undergone open heart surgery. It is named after the unique scar running up the sternum that looks a lot like a zipper. You don't say. ITM, Chris Kenny, soon to be Sir Sound Guy. Yes, that is in fact true because we have a couple of Knights to welcome today. And I'm going to bring up my blade. John has a little tiny one.

Speaker 2:
[156:48] I got one right here, the portable.

Speaker 1:
[156:50] Yeah. Chris Kenny, Anonymous, and Cody Dobson, all three of you, hop up here on the podium. You're about to become Knights of the No Agenda Roundtable. I'm very proud to pronounce the KB as Sir Sound Guy, Red Knight of Streaming Data, Protector of the Transactions, Sir X Anonymous, and Sir Doby, Destroyer of Libraries. Gentlemen, for you, we have Hookers and Blow, Rent Boys and Chardonnay, Extra Hookers, as requested, Shiner, Bohemian, Black Lager, and True Buffalo Style, Hot Wings with Blue Cheese. Along with that, we've got Red Eds and Rise, we've got Rubiness, Women and Rose, Gases and Sake, Vodka, Manila, Bunga, Suburban, Spikering, Cider and Escorts, Ginger Ale and Gerbils, Breast Milk and Pablo Man. Mutton and Mead, always available here at your No Agenda Night and Dame Roundtable. And thank you all. Go to noagendarings.com. That is where you can take a look at these wonderful… Do we have the Red Knight pin up there yet?

Speaker 2:
[157:50] I do want to say one more thing. I want to thank Sir Skunkbeard for the card. He sent the card and a coin, which he wanted to remind you was valuable.

Speaker 1:
[158:04] What coin was it?

Speaker 2:
[158:05] It was a little coin. I'll talk to you about it after the show.

Speaker 1:
[158:09] Oh man, like a million dollars valuable?

Speaker 2:
[158:14] We should be so lucky.

Speaker 1:
[158:16] How about a Bitcoin?

Speaker 2:
[158:19] That's good money.

Speaker 1:
[158:20] Somebody should send us a Bitcoin. That would be nice. But we'll take whatever we can get. We appreciate everybody supporting us. noagendadonations.com We always have a list of the Meetups for you. These are the No Agenda Meetups, which you can find at noagendameetups.com. This is where the NoAgenda Nation gets together all around the world. Truly is an international event and happening. You can attend one near you. You can go to noagendameetups.com. This is where you will find people who will give you connection, immediate protection. These are your first responders in an emergency. You can go visit them in the Netherlands. If you are in Schaefeningen on Saturday, that will be the second NoAgenda splash up. Oh, that's where they go swimming. Crazy people. Albuquerque, the 505 Meetup, also on Saturday at 2 o'clock at Tin Can Alley in Albuquerque. The flight of the NoAgenda No. 74 in Toluca Lake, California, Foreman's Whiskey Tavern, that is Leo Bravo. The 74th Meetup he has organized. And there's a lot of people that show up. That's always cool. Central Ohio, the people in California need it, especially Los Angeles area. The Central Ohio Meetup at 5 o'clock on Saturday at Dempsey's Food and Spirits in Columbus, Ohio. And see on Sunday our next show day, M1. No, it's the Michigan Local One. Spring Fling, yes, Michigan Local One, I think one of the oldest meetup groups. One o'clock at Brewery Becker in Brighton, Michigan. Still to come this month, North Toronto in Ontario on the 29th, Alfreda George on the 30th, Leipzig in Germany on the 30th. I'm expecting a lot of people to be there. Let me just take a quick look. We got so many coming up in May, June, July, October's already on the calendar. Go to noagendameetups.com. This is where you can find every single one listed. Now, here's the good news. Doesn't cost anything. You don't have to, there's no, you know, like secret handshake. You just say, in the morning, and everyone, hey, in the morning, how you doing? And you grab a drink, you have a good time to chat about stuff. And you will find that even though everybody's from very diverse backgrounds, from constitutional lawyers to lowly hookers, we have them, they've been to our meetups. And by the way, not all of them are lowly. Why did I even say that? I don't know. Help me. You'll find these people at No Agenda Meetups. And if you can't find one near you, start one yourself, it's easy. noagendameetups.com, guaranteed, always a party. And before we move on to the highly anticipated John's Tip of the... What? I don't see any ISOs.

Speaker 2:
[161:21] I decided to let you have it.

Speaker 1:
[161:24] Oh, what? You're going to do some excuse like dog ate my homework? I was in the ER.

Speaker 2:
[161:27] Dog ate my homework.

Speaker 1:
[161:29] I was in the ER and no one attended to me? Please.

Speaker 2:
[161:32] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[161:32] You know that I tried to get people to help you, right? Did you know that?

Speaker 2:
[161:38] I'm sorry. Like how?

Speaker 1:
[161:40] Oh, I put out a... I put out a...

Speaker 2:
[161:42] Oh, I saw that tweet. Yeah. I said... How did it pay off?

Speaker 1:
[161:45] I got... Well, I had... There was a lot of doctors responded. People were calling nurses they knew. So, I don't know if it helped. It got you a nasty doctor. So, maybe it helped. But then you got the kind nurse who wanted to immediately take your complaint. So, did you get help? Do you feel like you got help? You got a monitor? You got an iPhone? Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[162:08] I'm good to go.

Speaker 1:
[162:08] Okay. Here are my ISOs. You choose.

Speaker 6:
[162:11] These geezers got to be sick of picking ISOs.

Speaker 1:
[162:15] It's just cute. I don't think it's appropriate for an ISO.

Speaker 2:
[162:18] I like it.

Speaker 1:
[162:18] I like it too.

Speaker 6:
[162:19] How about you put some money toward us?

Speaker 1:
[162:21] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[162:23] Yeah. A little bit. A little condescending.

Speaker 3:
[162:26] Nice funny guys. Real sweet.

Speaker 2:
[162:28] Now you're talking.

Speaker 1:
[162:29] Thank you.

Speaker 2:
[162:30] Goodbye.

Speaker 1:
[162:31] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[162:32] Boom.

Speaker 1:
[162:33] Do you like that one? You like the thank you goodbye? Oh, hold on a second. And then the last one is...

Speaker 3:
[162:38] They were right about everything.

Speaker 2:
[162:40] Okay. That's the one.

Speaker 1:
[162:42] I knew I'd nail it eventually. Hey, everybody, it's that time again. John's Tip of the Day.

Speaker 2:
[162:56] This is a crazy one. This comes from producer Zach. He sends me this website and it's like, holy mackerel. If you're a... If you think you're handy or handyman, you need, you know, some sort of a wrench or maybe you need a certain kind of special hammer. Vise grip.

Speaker 1:
[163:14] Vise grip.

Speaker 2:
[163:15] You need vise grips, real ones, the ones that say vise grips on them. They work right, which is not everyone.

Speaker 1:
[163:22] I have vise grips.

Speaker 2:
[163:23] Or you need some tools for a power... You need wires or you need level controls or temperature control devices, filters, filters of any sort. Check out this website. This is a damnedest thing. This is everything known to man. Okay. The name of the website is Master... I'm sorry, what? McMaster, I'm sorry, mcmastermcmaster.com.

Speaker 1:
[163:51] mcmaster.com, wow.

Speaker 2:
[163:54] Wow. Keep scrolling. Wow.

Speaker 1:
[163:57] Oh man. They got hard hats.

Speaker 2:
[164:03] Keep scrolling. You can scroll for days.

Speaker 1:
[164:05] Oh my goodness. This is great. Look at this thing. It's like Home Depot on a website.

Speaker 2:
[164:17] Only easy. On steroids.

Speaker 1:
[164:19] Hand tools. Let's see. Plumbing and janitorial. Do they have toilets? I need a toilet. I need a new toilet. Toilets and urinals. They got toilets. Urinals. Wall-mounted urinals.

Speaker 2:
[164:31] Well, that's what you need.

Speaker 6:
[164:32] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[164:35] They have bidets. They have bidets. I want a bidet. They got... Wow. This is pretty good.

Speaker 2:
[164:42] And you can...

Speaker 1:
[164:43] Oh, you can buy... You can sort it by different bowl. I've been thinking about a new toilet. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[164:55] Well, you know, here's your why.

Speaker 1:
[164:58] I'm good. Why?

Speaker 2:
[164:59] What's wrong with the toilet?

Speaker 1:
[165:01] I don't like our toilet.

Speaker 2:
[165:02] What's wrong with it?

Speaker 1:
[165:04] Why, it's too low and it's cheap. It feels cheap. I want people...

Speaker 2:
[165:09] It's cheap. Go to Costco has nice toilets for good prices.

Speaker 1:
[165:12] I want people to feel like, oh, this is a nice toilet.

Speaker 2:
[165:15] Oh, then you want to get one of those Japanese things.

Speaker 1:
[165:17] Nah, that's naff. I don't want to get one of those.

Speaker 2:
[165:20] So before the guy can say hello, he gets washed.

Speaker 1:
[165:25] No, I don't want to. I like the snowmobile ones. They're really huge. I want it to be a throne. That's what I want for my guests. It's not for me. It's for my guests. mcmaster.com. That is an interesting find.

Speaker 2:
[165:40] I'd say. I was very impressed.

Speaker 1:
[165:41] Yeah, I like that a lot. Well, that's just one of the many tips you get at tipoftheday.net.

Speaker 5:
[165:54] And sometimes, at home. Created by Dana Bernetti.

Speaker 1:
[165:59] And that concludes our broadcast day right on time. It's a beautiful thing. John's going to do his metrics. Now, what is it called? What do they have?

Speaker 2:
[166:13] Physical therapy?

Speaker 1:
[166:14] No, what is it when you do a car diagnostics? No, it's telemetry. There we go. Your telemetry.

Speaker 2:
[166:22] My telemetry.

Speaker 1:
[166:24] Your telemetry.

Speaker 2:
[166:24] I'm going to send it to the home base. On a phone.

Speaker 1:
[166:31] All right, coming up next on noagendastream.com. If you didn't get kicked out, bowl after bowl. Oh, that's Sir Spencer and Dame DeLorean. They'll be doing the show for you. You can just stay tuned to your modern podcast app or noagendastream.com. Remember, we will be here on Sunday to bring you another jam-packed show full of media deconstruction. Tell me you didn't learn something today and you should not come back. If you did, you got some value, return it. So remember, NoAgendaDonations.com. Coming to you from the heart of the Texas Hill Country, right here in Fredericksburg, Texas, in the morning, everybody. I'm Adam Curry.

Speaker 2:
[167:09] And from Refinery Row in Northern California, I'm John C. Dvorak.

Speaker 1:
[167:12] Please remember us at NoAgendaDonations.com until Sunday. Adios, mofos. A hui hui and such. Adios, mofo.

Speaker 3:
[171:02] dvorak.org slash n-a They were right about everything.