Podcasts about us code

Dr. James S. Robbins is a national security columnist for USA Today, Senior Fellow in National Security Affairs at the American Foreign Policy Council and a former special assistant in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Organized, violent attacks on Tesla for political reasons fit the legal definition of domestic terrorism under US Code & Leaking of Trump Admin war plans to Atlantic reporter, what that means for national security and the varying opinions discussed. Having dialogue is a good thing, perhaps seeing under the hood not so much.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act has been a mainstay of corporate culture for the last quarter-century, and has cost companies millions, sometimes even billions, of dollars in fines. And that's before you start counting the lawyers' fees. This law, used to prevent US businesses from engaging in bribery to win foreign business, has seen a major uptick in enforcement over the last 25 years. And, over that period, it has become a major revenue driver for elite law firms. Some say that the law keeps companies honest, and actually benefits corporations by providing them a shield for responding to requests for bribes. But last month President Donald Trump said the law “sounds good on paper but in practicality, it's a disaster.” Trump signed an executive order pausing the initiation of new investigations for 180 days and meanwhile ordering the AG to issue updated guidelines. On the latest episode of On The Merits, leading FCPA practitioner, Martin Weinstein, the chair of Cadwalader's compliance, investigations & enforcement practice, talks about the impacts of a law he calls the “greatest tariff in the US Code” and what it could mean for business if enforcement winds down. And Bloomberg Law reporter Roy Strom discusses the impact on large law firms, which have built premier practices focusing on this law. Do you have feedback on this episode of On The Merits? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Tom Wheelwright is back by popular demand, our most recurring guest in GRE show history. He's a CPA, an International Authority on Tax, and Best Selling Author of “Tax-Free Wealth” amongst many other titles. We focus on the potential unrealized capital gains tax, which would tax the increase in property value even before sale. Tom explains the implications of this proposal and the broader impact on tax policy.  We cover the Democrats' proposal for capital gains tax at ordinary income rates, capital gains on gifts, and capital gains when you die. The proposal for a billionaires tax, which would tax unrealized gains at $100 million, could potentially extend to lower net worth individuals over time. Real estate income can result in a negative tax rate, increasing cash flow after taxes. Learn about the benefits of working with a knowledgeable tax advisor. Resources: GetRichEducation.com/tax Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/519 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”  GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREmarketplace.com/Coach Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Automatically Transcribed With Otter.ai      Keith Weinhold  00:01 Welcome to GRE. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, this week we're talking about the value of the raw land that comes along with your property, the importance of an as built survey in real estate. Then it's tax topics with pro Tom wheelwright, the specter of an unrealized capital gains tax, higher capital gains tax rates, how gambling is taxed, and how to permanently reduce your overall tax burden. Today on get rich education,     00:33 since 2014 the powerful get rich education podcast has created more passive income for people than nearly any other show in the world. This show teaches you how to earn strong returns from passive real estate investing in the best markets without losing your time being a flipper or landlord. Show Host Keith Weinhold writes for both Forbes and Rich Dad advisors, and delivers a new show every week since 2014 there's been millions of listener downloads of 188 world nations. He has a list show guests and key top selling personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki, get rich education can be heard on every podcast platform, plus it has its own dedicated Apple and Android listener phone apps build wealth on the go with the get rich education podcast. Sign up now for the get rich education podcast or visit get rich education.com   Corey Coates  01:18 You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  01:34 Welcome to GRE from Essex County England to Essex, Massachusetts and across 188 nations worldwide. I'm Keith Weinhold. You're listening to get rich education before we talk taxes, let's talk about the land, the raw land, the lot that comes along with your property. Investors don't spend much time thinking about it. Yet the land is sometimes worth more than the home or structure that's on it, per the FHFA, land constitutes 32.2% of the value of the average US single family property in a metro area. Now the inexpensive land prices nationally, they are predominantly in what I'm classifying it as three US areas, the Midwest, the southeast and Appalachia well, where you have inexpensive land. Oh, that also happens to be where the cash flow for long term rentals resides. Land costs more by the water because people want water activities, water proximity and water view. So the lower costs are inland, and land also costs more by the water, because coasts and shorelines constrain development, sprawl that limits supply and a limited supply of buoys up prices. Consequently, the highest land values are mostly in the Northeast Corridor, from Boston to DC, Miami, coastal California and Honolulu. Yes, Manhattan values are flat out extortionate for raw land now, Seattle, Madison, Wisconsin and Boulder, Colorado. They are three places with really high land values as well. Seattle and Madison are on geographic isthmus. And isthmus is a narrow strip of land with water on both sides. It's interesting how Nashville's nascent population influx made its land values surge inside a cheap sea of southeastern US land values now costly land areas like these ones that I've been talking about on the coasts, they could work well for short term vacation rentals like Airbnb and VRBO, your classic waterfront and beachfront weekly rentals, but they do not work for long term rental cash flow. Texas Land values are sort of low to medium. Land near the Mississippi River and its major tributaries have low costs because rivers are efficient transportation networks, prohibitively high land costs. That's one reason, actually, why alternative building methods just really aren't as cost effective as some people think. I'm talking about things like 3d printed homes, prefabbed homes, tiny homes and shipping container homes, well, all of them have got to sit on land, just like conventionally build homes do. And there is a land cost. Talk to a tear down specialist, and they'll tell you that in some older homes, 100% of the total value is in the l and. And in practicality, it's actually even more lopsided than that. The structure can have negative value because demolition is not free. So for you to get an idea yourself, your property tax bill, it's going to show you your split. That's where you'll see the assessed values broken out for both your structure and the land. So the bottom line here is that cash flowing properties have low land values, typically 25% or less of the total property value. That's generally what you want to look for. And I swear the only thing that's more barren than raw land is the creative naming process for new developments. There is such a lack of creativity in these development names. I'm talking about names like Willow Creek Estates, stone bridge crossing, or what else do they name a new housing development? How about VISTA, view heights? They all have these idyllic sounding names that somehow just all sound like each other. Well, we're talking about raw land when you get in contract to buy a property, the seller side is expected to provide you with an as built, it often still comes in the form of an old fashioned piece of paper and as built survey, what it is is a plan view, a bird's eye or aerial view of your property. It's not a photograph, but a drawing, and it shows you the dimensions and the placement of structures on your property, and it includes things like fences and other features like easements. Now, lenders don't always require an as built before granting a loan, but it's a good idea to ask to see one before you wrap up your next deal. If you want to in your offer, you can even require that a recent as built be done by a surveying company. All right. Well, what exactly do you look for on an as built once you have one in hand, first see that the house or apartment building that you're buying is properly set back from the property lines to meet zoning requirements. If the six foot side setback is only five feet 10 inches, then you'll have to address that before you buy even if it's five feet 11 inches. Now it's possible that the jurisdiction that you're buying in will grant a letter of non conforming status, but if not, the structure is going to have to be adjusted. Another item to look for on an as built are encroachments. This is where part of a neighbor structure protrudes over the lot line and onto your property. And encroachment is really only acceptable if you're willing to grant the neighbor an easement in perpetuity for their encroachment onto your land. But why would you want to do that? The third thing that I want to mention that you should look for an as built is the existence of easements. An easement that just means that another party has a legal right to come over onto your land and use it. Yeah, and easements are actually quite common. It's not as threatening as it might sound. A common one is that as your as built would show, say, a five foot wide by 60 foot long easement. Is there that a utility company has access to. Well, that's something that makes sense. It's for the common good, but just be mindful that an easement cannot have a structure with a permanent foundation built on top of it, alright, because an electric company or a water company might have to excavate there. Most people think of easements on the raw land, but there are also aerial easements, for example, an overhead power line where the roof eaves are not allowed to intrude on that airspace. So to review what you learned so far today, the best cash flow properties typically have low land values, often about 25% or less of the tolerable property value. And an as built survey is an aerial view drawing of your property and its dimensions on an as built look to see that it meets zoning requirements like setbacks and look for encroachments and easements. It is resale properties where it's more important to look at as builts than it is for new construction properties.  As we're about to bring in tax pro Tom Wheelwright shortly, business owners and real estate investors really get so many of the best tax breaks in the US Code. But you've got to know. How to find them, or else work then with a CPA that does know how to find them, that really knows how to navigate their way around the tax code, people that make high salaries pay high taxes, as much as 50% you remember I did that episode a few months ago, high salaries don't create wealth. Taxes are one big reason why, say, for example, a chiropractor makes $1.2 million a year in salary. But if that chiropractor becomes an investor by buying and selling other Chiropractic Clinics or investing in real estate, their tax rate will drop by half or more, and that's because capital gains tax rates are about half of ordinary income tax rates. So see, you don't want to be a super earner. You want to earn enough money to invest and become a super owner, but tax policy could change Tom and I will discuss that first. Then we'll talk about reducing the amount of tax that you pay. Today is a new punishing unrealized capital gains tax coming that you will have to pay. What this means is that if you have a $500,000 home, and it rises in value to $550,000 well, you would have to pay tax on your $50,000 of profit, but you haven't sold your home. So this feels so wrong, because you haven't realized any profit at all. This is what unrealized capital gains tax is. And also, where are you going to get the cash to pay the tax on your 50k of profit just because your home rose in value yet you didn't realize it? I mean, might you have to sell your home in order to get the cash to pay the tax. And then what if you though could pay the tax on your unrealized capital gain so you do pay it, but then the following year, the home goes down in value. Well, would you get a refund then? So the unrealized capital gains tax proposal is a mess. Let's learn about it and more. This week's guest is a best selling author, CPA and an international authority on tax. He's brilliant because he actually makes taxes fun, easy and understandable. He's familiar to you because he's the most recurrent guest in show history. Welcome back to GRE Tom Wheelwright.   Tom Wheelwright  12:48 thanks always good to be on your show.   Keith Weinhold  12:50 Tom probably with more than 30 show appearances here now you are 6% of GRE episodes.   Tom Wheelwright  13:00 That's a little scary. But you know, taxes are your single biggest expense, so why not?   Keith Weinhold  13:05 It's appropriate. And yeah, I guess all these appearances are certainly an endorsement of how much you help our audience. It's also a reflection of how tax and legal are not my strong suit. So it really helps to have you here absolutely the all time, assists leader in GRE history then and Tyler. An awful lot of timely tax topics going on that are probably first and foremost in more people's news feeds than they usually are. As we're here during presidential campaign season, the one that it really seems to revolve around the most is this potential tax proposal on unrealized gains. I've been around long enough where I seem to see this proposal come up more often, but it never seems to go anywhere. So first, why don't you tell us what unrealized gains are?   Tom Wheelwright  13:51 it actually goes beyond that. Interestingly enough, what the Democrats are proposing is, first of all, they're proposing capital gains rates at ordinary income rates. So they're proposing doubling the capital gains rate. That's actually as important as anything else. The second thing is, they're proposing capital gains on gifts. So if you give it, if you give your business to your child, you have a capital gains ordinary income rates. They're proposing capital gains when you die. So not only an estate tax, but also a capital gains tax. So then you get taxed twice when you die. So about 80 to 90% of your estate goes to the government when you die. If you're a business owner, as an example, then they're proposing eliminating the 1031 exchange, which would mean that on a trade of real estate, you'd have a capital gains tax at ordinary income rates. Then they're talking about this unrealized capital gains so if you do nothing but build your business or your real estate, the increase in value is subject to capital gains taxes at ordinary income rates. Now you know their proposal is, we have this tax. Tax when you're over $100 million that is not seem to be in the news feeds right now, but that's what it is. They call it the billionaires tax, and they're calling it an alternative minimum tax on billionaires. But clearly, 100 million is not a billion. That's only a 10th of a billion. And the biggest issue, of course, is if you tax unrealized gains at 100 million, soon you're going to tax them at 10 million, then it's going to be 1 million. Because history. That's the history of our tax law. The history of our tax law. Remember, in 1913 when we passed the 16th Amendment, it was passed because it was only a tax on the rich, right? It would never have passed if it was going to be a tax on the average person. And yet it passed. Because great, we're okay taxing somebody else, as long as it's not our tax. We're okay taxing somebody else. That's pretty much what's going on with this unrealized gains tax is, oh, well, it's on somebody else and they have enough money. It's no big deal. Therefore, I'm okay with that, because why shouldn't they pay more tax? That is what this is about. The challenge is, is, as we saw with the income tax, eventually it will reach the average person, or at least the average entrepreneur, real estate investor. Because think also, let's say that you build your wealth in real estate, and then when you retire, you say, Well, look, I don't want to be doing active real estate anymore. I'm going to trade my single family homes or my apartment building. I'm going to trade for a Walgreens a triple net lease, well under their proposal, that would be taxed because, again, no 1031 exchanges over $500,000 so that means that if you accumulate your wealth through business or real estate, you pay a much higher tax rate than if you accumulate your wealth by investing in Wall Street through a 401k because if you invest in Wall Street through a 401K, you only have to pay tax as you pull that out, you're not going to be paying tax on the value. Now that's assuming that they don't tax the increase in value of your 401K, which is also obviously a possibility. Interesting enough people talk a lot about the constitutionality of this. The challenge with that is that we already have taxes unrealized gains. If you're a dealer in stocks, in securities you do mark to market, that is meaning that you're going to pay tax on unrealized gains. And so there is actually precedent for this, and that's the scary thing, is that they could point to that precedent and say, Well, wait a minute, it's just an income tax, it's not a wealth tax, that's what they're going to say. They're going to say it's an income tax, not a wealth tax, because it's on appreciation, and appreciation is income. That's how they're going to go down this road. Will it start at $100 million Absolutely, that's where it will start. Will it then drift down? Who knows? But likely that's the history of our tax system. Yeah. I mean, we've talked before about the phenomenon of the camel getting its nose under the tent. However, in this case, I didn't realize there's already precedent for unrealized gains, in a sense, as potentially, if this is approved for those with $100 million net worth, and in next it's 10 million net worth, $1 million net worth and so on, like you described there, when you talk about capital gains tax rates being stepped up so that they're at ordinary income tax rates. It's actually somewhat of an interesting philosophical discussion, in a way. It sort of makes sense that a person's gains from investment could or should be taxed at the same rate as one's income when they go to their day job. However, why don't we do that by lowering income taxes rather than doubling capital gains? Wait a minute, no, because it's a double tax. Let's say that you're a business owner. Why does your business increase in value? Well, because you're making income, but you're already being taxed on that income. It's called income tax. What we do in this country, which a lot of countries don't do, by the way, is we tax it a second time. We call that a capital gains tax or a dividends tax. We tax it twice now. Now we're going to have that second tax at the same rate of the original tax. So if you think about it, you're being taxed on the same income twice because it's your income that determines your value, so you're being taxed twice. It's really not the same. It's fine if you're invested in the stock market, and that's where your capital gains are. That's a hard one to argue too much, although it does take liquidity out of the market, because the problem with capital gains tax is being taxed over 28% it's about 28% is that you actually lower the contribution to the Treasury because there will be fewer capital gains. There will be so many fewer capital gains that you actually lose money. The Tax Foundation, taxfoundation.org, I'd refer people to, has done lots of studies on this, and it's very clear. Here that high capital gains rates actually reduce the amount of money that comes to the government. So this is purely political. This has nothing to do with let's generate more revenue, one of the challenges so you have to score this, right? So that means that you're scoring what's the revenue that's going to be produced? You have two types of scoring. One is called static scoring. The other is called dynamic scoring. Static scoring means that we're going to look at the capital gains we already have, and we're just going to, if we double the rate, we're going to double the revenue. So that's assuming that we're going to have the same number and amounts of capital gains as we add at the lower rates, right? Dynamic scoring means that we're going to take into account how people behave motivationally when you double the tax rate. Yeah. Well, let me give you an example. So I'm a business owner. My wealth is in my business primarily. Do you think, really, I'm going to sell that business and take the capital gains immediately and be done with it? But if I have a high capital gains rate, I'm going to sell this over 20 years. So I'm actually going to defer my capital gains as long as I can, because I don't want to pay those high capital gains rates. So that means less money to the government. That's what it means. So it actually reduces on a dynamic scoring if you look at truly how people behave and have behaved in the past. So this isn't a new thing, right? We've had high capital gains rates before. It's not like we don't know. It's not like we haven't seen this before. It's that, for whatever reason, politically, they've decided that, wait a minute, the rich are out of favor. We need to tax the rich more. That's a very popular line, and therefore this is a way to do that, even though it by all calculations that are dynamic, it would actually reduce the amount of funds that come to the Treasury.   Keith Weinhold  22:00 That does make sense about the double taxation. Case in point, with an apartment building, if you increase its noi, you have more income than pay tax that if you increase the noi, therefore you've increased the value of the building. Consequently, the capital gains tax that you might have to pay down the road Tom, maybe current capital gains tax are higher than I thought, is the 28% capital gains tax. Number You mentioned, current or proposed. What is that?   Tom Wheelwright  22:24 Well, right now we have a 24% capital gains tax, okay, we have 20% pure capital gains tax, plus we have a 3.8% net investment income tax. Doesn't apply right now if you're a real estate professional, but applies to everybody else under the Harris proposal formally adopted Biden's plan under the Harris proposal, then you would get a actually 39.6% rate, plus 5% net investment income tax, regardless of whether you're your real estate Professional. So that is 44.6% that's the 45% the 28% number I threw out is that's the number the Tax Foundation says is the maximum you can raise it to without losing revenue.   Keith Weinhold  23:11 That puts things into perspective, as real estate investors, for a long time, we've appreciated substantial tax shelters. What are they being the 1031, tax deferred exchange, like you mentioned, that's been around for more than 100 years. Does that have any realistic shot of being shot down? Of course, Trump shot down substantial parts of the 1031 outside of strict real estate investing.   Tom Wheelwright  23:32 He did, and he actually set the precedent for eliminating it. So by doing that, because he eliminated it on everything except real property, right? I mean, actually, and even before that, there was a time, and there's still ways you can do it with paper assets. But it's not a 1031 exchange. So 1031 exchange has it evolved. It's gotten it's shrunk. It keeps shrinking. Even three or four years ago, no realistic possibility of eliminating 1031 exchange. The challenge, of course, is it would have an impact on the liquidity of the market. However, big deals never do 1031 exchange. Ever you don't see big multifamily developments sold in 1031s. The only time you see that happen is when they've used the Delaware statutory trust. And then you've got some of the investors who use it. And some of them who don't, you can do that in the Delaware statutory trust, but the regular developers, I haven't seen a 1031 done by a syndicator in years. So could they eliminate? Yeah, they could.   Keith Weinhold  24:33 yeah, that would be concerning. Are there any other presidential hopeful proposals that have to do with taxes that are germane, and our audience should know about?   Tom Wheelwright  24:41 my heavens. So the Democrats want to raise taxes by $5 trillion they want those taxes to all be on investors. And the reason I say that is because typically, people who make less than $400,000 which is their threshold, are not major investors. Most of their money goes to spending. Money. If you're making under $400,000 you can easily spend $400,000 a year. Oh, yeah, okay, that's not that hard, especially in today's world. It's a transfer from high net worth individuals who invest their money in long term projects like real estate, like energy, like business, and it's going to be a transfer to people who spend the money and they're going to spend it, my prediction is that if the Democrats get their way, we enter into a long term period of stagflation, high unemployment and high inflation. Because if you transfer $5 trillion from people who aren't spending it in the first place to be able who do spend it. You've got $5 trillion of new money going into the marketplace. Now it could depress asset values. So that could be good for investors, okay? Because you don't have as much cash available to the I'll call it the investor class, to go into real estate. If that's the case, then you have $5 trillion less, right? I mean, it's not a huge portion of the market, but it's big enough. If you take $5 trillion out of investment capital, then that would put a downward pressure on asset prices, which would include real estate.   Keith Weinhold  25:29 we're talking about potential changes to the tax code. It's always a germane discussion, because taxes are the biggest expense in your life. We're talking with Tom wheelwright. We come back, we're going to talk about the real estate tax laws as they are now, for example, how your rent income is taxed differently than your job income, and also, what are taxes like on sports, gambling. You're listening to get rich Education. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold.   Keith Weinhold  26:45 hey, you can get your mortgage loans at the same place where I get mine, at Ridge lending group NMLS 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than any provider in the entire nation because they specialize in income properties. They help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. You can start your pre qualification and chat with President Caeli Ridge personally. Start Now while it's on your mind at Ridgelendinggroup.com that's Ridgelendinggroup.com   Keith Weinhold  27:16 you your bank is getting rich off of you. The national average bank account pays less than 1% on your savings. If your money isn't making 4% you're losing your hard earned cash to inflation. Let the liquidity fund help you put your money to work with minimum risk, your cash generates up to an 8% return with compound interest, year in and year out. Instead of earning less than 1% sitting in your bank account, the minimum investment is just 25k you keep getting paid until you decide you want your money back. Their decade plus track record proves they've always paid their investors 100% in full and on time. And I would know, because I'm an investor too. Earn 8% hundreds of others are. Text FAMILY  to 66866, learn more about Freedom Family investments Liquidity Fund on your journey to financial freedom through passive income. Text FAMILY to 66866.     Blair Singer  28:29 this is Rich Dad, sales advisor, Blair singer. Listen to get rich education with Keith Weinhold. And above all, Don't Quit Your Daydream.   Keith Weinhold  28:48 welcome back to get rich education. We're talking with tax pro Tom wheelwright. He's been talking to us about some of the proposals that presidential candidates have here in a campaign season, and whether these things become true or not. Sometimes it seems like just the fact that they're proposing. They're proposed, or if they get instituted at a small level years down the road, it can blow up into something bigger. So Tom tell us more about some of the proposals that are on the table.   Tom Wheelwright  29:12 So we talked about the democratic proposals, which also include things like a $6,000 tax credit for babies. It also includes an enhanced Child Tax Credit. Also includes some other there's lots of provisions in there, right? So it's a transfer. It's just a transfer of money from one group of people to another group of people. On the Republican side, we haven't talked about that now they want to extend the 2017 act. They've been very clear, that's what they want to do, which is an estimate $4 trillion so the other direction. So basically, you're talking about a $9 trillion swing between the two parties. We've never seen this before, ever in a presidential election. Now, that big of a difference, one major tax increase, one party proposing major. Tax increases, the other proposing major tax decreases in the same election. It's something that I'm glad people are paying attention to, because it's a little overdue in this election cycle. Because really, when you talk about policy, that's probably the biggest policy difference between the two parties.   Keith Weinhold  30:18 Now one thing we've learned over time from talking with you is these presidential wish lists, if you want to call them that. Well, these tax changes are things that require congressional approval, and we have a divided Congress currently. So what do you think the prospects are of really any of these things becoming new law?   Tom Wheelwright  30:36 First of all, remember, most of the 2017 act expires at the end of 2025 so something will have to be done next year. They don't have a choice, either that or is just expires, and then we're back to what we had. We have smaller standard deductions, we have alternative minimum tax again. We get a deduction for state income taxes, right? That comes back the one. We lose our 20% Small Business deduction, the only thing that stays permanent is the corporate income tax rate that was permanent in the original bill. So there is going to be something, you're right, if there is a divided Congress, and I say that if, because if one party sweeps, then, especially on the Democratic side, the Republicans don't seem to be as cohesive as the Democrats are on these things. And if the Democrats sweep, I would say, remember, we don't have Kyrsten Sinema, we don't have Joe Manchin from happening. And so would the Democrats sweep all these through, not all of them, but you're going to see a major tax increase for sure, on the Republican side, would you see the 2017 act extended? You'll probably see it, but you're right that otherwise, if it's a divided Congress, we're going to have something in between. We thought we would get a divided Congress in 2020 though, remember and we didn't. So I would not count on a divided Congress   Keith Weinhold  31:59 erstwhile 2017 Trump tax cuts in JOBS Act brought the highest marginal income tax bracket from 39.6% under Obama down to 37% as I remember it. Some thought Biden would take it back up to 39.6 but he hasn't and it's just stated 37 All right, so if Republicans stayed in power, presumably that 37% would go ahead and carry on. That's what we think about as our w2 income. Tom, why don't we talk about the taxes that actually exist today? I think a lot of real estate investors just don't understand the difference between how your w2 job income is taxed versus your taxes on real estate rent. Can you talk to us about that?   Tom Wheelwright  32:42 The reason it's confusing is because they're both considered ordinary income, right? The difference is, is that one is business income and one is non business income. Your wages are non business income. You don't get deductions against non business income, but you do get deductions against business income. So your rental income is considered business income for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code. What that means is you get deductions for taxes. You get deductions for interest, you get deductions for maintenance, you get deductions for depreciation. That's why, when you have your income from your rentals. Typically taxed much lower than your income from your salary, because you get no deductions against your salary like you do against the rentals.   Keith Weinhold  33:30 Maybe it would help to introduce an example here. I don't know if this will complicate things too much or not. If a real estate investor has, say, a single family rental property with $2,000 of rent, income, $1,000 mortgage, $800 in operating expenses. How is that tax that leaves them with $200 of cash flow?   Tom Wheelwright  33:50 You have $200 of cash flow, but then you probably have depreciation on top of that, which is a non cash deduction. And so let's say your depreciation is $500 that means you actually have a $300 loss that, in many cases, you can use to offset income from your w2 so you actually have a negative tax rate. In other words, you're making money from taxes. So actually, is that an increase to your cash flow? So it's a way to think of it is, I have $200 of cash flow from my tenant, if I have a $300 loss for tax purposes, let's say I'm in a 33% tax bracket. I have $100 of income from the government. So that means my cash flow is really after tax. Cash flow is $300 not $200 whereas if you have the same $200 of income from your wages. Let's say you have just the net, right? Let's start with the net. You have $200 well, you're going to be taxed. And let's say that again, your 33% tax rate, that means you're after tax, right, is going to be roughly $125,000 okay, under $30 so $130 we're. $300 so it's like twice as much. In fact, all of that difference is because of the tax law.   Keith Weinhold  35:06 Gosh, that was a great breakdown. I'm really glad that I introduced that example, $2,000 in rent, minus $1,000 for the mortgage, at $800 in operating expenses, again, leaving you with $200 in cash flow with that example. There's probably more going on here with taxes. Because, of course, with that $1,000 mortgage amount, some is going to be principal, some is going to be interest. In part of that interest can be tax deductible.   Tom Wheelwright  35:31 I'm assuming it's all interest, because if it were not, we'd have a higher taxable income. Remember, your principal payment is not deductible. So in your example, I was assuming that the $1,000 mortgage payment was all interest. If it was only $800 then you'd have $400 of income before depreciation. You don't have $100 loss, because, remember, your principal's not deductible, so therefore you have to add that back into your taxable income.   Keith Weinhold  35:58 Will you talk to us about how to apply depreciation to this income versus expenses. Example, is there anything else you can speak to when it comes to that $800 of operating expenses in this example, and those expenses include things like property insurance, property tax itself, maintenance repairs and utilities.   Tom Wheelwright  36:19 Right but also, for example, you might run your rental real estate business out of a home office in your home so you could have a home office deduction. You might have your use your car for the rental purposes, and then you get a deduction for your car. So there are additional expenses that aren't even in that $800 that you could pick up that would not otherwise you'd never get a deduction, and you're really not spending any more money. You're just using it for business, and therefore getting a business deduction. So it's really all about what do I get to deduct? Remember that if you own a home for yourself, you don't get to really deduct the taxes. You have a limit on how much you can deduct. So taxes are limited in deduction. Mortgage Interest may or may not be limited. Remember also that if you have a mortgage, you're limited to how much a $750,000 mortgage being deductible, whereas if you it's a rental property, it could be a seven and a half million dollar and mortgage, and you still get the deduction, so you're not limited like you are. On top of that, again, it's a business, so let's say that you put solar panels on your personal home, you'd get a 30% tax credit, but you'd get no depreciation deduction. If you put solar panels on your rental house, you get the same 30% tax credit, but now you also get a depreciation deduction of probably another 30 $40,000 in the first year. So there's always more deductions in a business setting than a personal setting.   Keith Weinhold  37:56 Well, real estate has been around a really long time. Often laugh when people talk about non conventional investments and put real estate investing in their real estate's about the most conventional investment that we can possibly think of. It's been around a long time. We think about a newer thing that people do with their money, but I sure don't call it investing. That's sports gambling, and it's something that you and I haven't talked about before. Here Tom in 2018 the Supreme Court opened the way for states to legalize sports gambling, and at last check, 38 states, plus DC and Puerto Rico have legalized at least some form of sports gambling. So now it's a more germane conversation for you and I to have than it was a few years ago. Can you tell us about sports gambling, taxes and how it's treated.   Tom Wheelwright  38:41 So remember, all income is taxable. So that includes gambling winnings. They are taxable. In fact, you'll get a 1099 just like you would if you rendered services, you'd get a 1099 or you have interest income, you get 1099 you get 1099 from gambling. What you actually have to show is that you actually have gambling losses. So you have to track those gambling losses to show the IRS that you got gambling losses. But your gambling losses can never be more than your gambling winnings. You never get to generate a tax loss on gambling. What that means is, is that if you win $10,000 during the year, and you can prove that you lost $8,000 during the year, you're going to be taxed on $2,000 but if you can't prove the 8000 you're going to be taxed on 10,000   Keith Weinhold  39:33 so you the gambler, have the burden of tracking this, and I guess tracking your losses. I'm not a gambler. How would one track their losses?   Tom Wheelwright  39:42 I would keep detail ledger. Personally, I probably have a separate bank account just for gambling. Gosh, I'm not a gambler either, so that's what I would do. I would have a bank account just for gambling, by the way. It's also a good way to budget your gambling so they, you know, get in trouble, right? So just set up a separate bank account. Don't put whatever money you say, I'm comfortable with this money, I'm going to gamble with this money put in that bank account, and then you have a ledger that shows the money that went in and the money you lost, the money you won, and don't do anything but gambling in that bank account.   Keith Weinhold  40:15 Hey, that separate account's a great way to hide it from your spouse, not that I'm suggesting. Not bad.   Tom Wheelwright  40:22 Interesting. You went there.   Keith Weinhold  40:23 I'm not a gambler at all. Can't even believe I was thinking that far ahead. What are the gambling tax rates like?   Tom Wheelwright  40:31 They're ordinary income tax rate. So gambling winnings are just ordinary income. They're the same as your wages. They don't have social security taxes their income, just like any other kind of income, nothing special. And this all applies to whether it's sports gambling or general gambling, like lotteries and sweepstakes?  Just remember, all incomes taxable unless the government says it isn't all income, okay? And then there's some types of income that are taxed at special rates, like capital gains, but gambling has no special rates. By the way, gold also has special rate for when you sell gold, it has its own tax rate. Gambling has no special tax rate, so it's just your ordinary income rates.   Keith Weinhold  41:11 To me, it seems like it's hard to break even with gambling over time, and then when you take the tax adjusted earnings that you get from it, you know, over the long term. I just don't think Harris and Bally's Casino is really incentivized to inform gamblers on how punitive this can be with ordinary income tax rates applied to gambling winnings.   Tom Wheelwright  41:30 No, but they will send you your 10909g I guarantee that, that's for sure.   Keith Weinhold  41:34 Well, Tom has helped business owners and real estate investors permanently reduce their taxes. He does it like virtually no one else in the world does by keeping it simple, by helping you find deductions that other CPAs can't do. You can learn more about how Tom and his team can actually help you. You can get a free consultation. You can do that at getricheducation.com/tax. And Tom tell us more about the importance of a business owner or a real estate investor or anybody else really being connected with the right kind of tax professional that can permanently reduce your taxes.   Tom Wheelwright  42:12 So remember that if you want to change your tax, you have to change your facts. It's that simple. What you have to do is you need to know what facts you need to change. That's where a good tax advisor comes in. Is what facts do you need to change in order to change your tax now good news is, wrote tax through wealth. So you got an idea of what that is, but the tax law is very detailed. You must dot your i's cross your t's, so to speak, so that you make sure that you meet all of the rules, such as documentation, for example, for your business expenses. When you do that, you're going to get a better tax result, especially if your tax advisor is also preparing your tax return. Because really, your tax return is just part just how you implement your tax strategy, right? That's how you do it. So we launched, just recently, a franchise of tax advisors, and now we actually have much, really good control, quality control with our tax advisors, and they use our software system. It's very important that you have somebody, if not us, find somebody who you know you can actually give tax free wealth too, and say what cares make sure that we're doing it this way. But if the easy button is really the getricheducation.com/tax.   Keith Weinhold  43:27 Tom Wheelwright,  It's been valuable as always. Thanks so much for coming back onto the show.   Tom Wheelwright  43:33 Thanks, Keith.   Keith Weinhold  43:40 Yeah, key insights from Tom as always, taxes are complicated. Tom's Network helps sort it out for you. We've already covered a lot of ground on this week's episode with raw land values as built, proposed tax plans and how to reduce your tax burden within the existing tax system. Tom and I talked, and he will be back yet again with us later this year for more tax wizardry. Now, just recently here, Kamala Harris proposed a smaller capital gains tax hike than Biden. She's starting to put sort of her own policy spin on things, breaking with the President on the size of a proposed increase on the capital gains tax rate that is a 28% top tax rate when investments are sold for those that make a million dollars plus. So that's more than the current 23.8% top rate, but less than the 39.6% rate that Biden had supported all income is taxable. Therefore it is axiomatic that the fastest way to increase your ROI is to work with a tax advisor that can find you all of the biggest deductions right away. You can read Tom's book Tax Free Wealth, get a good system of documentation going and get connected with Tom's team. At the end of an episode at times, I like to leave you with the most actionable resource on the topic that we covered. You can schedule a free call to see how Tom's team can help you out. At getricheducation.com/tax. That's getricheducation.com/tax. Until next week. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, Don't Quit Your Daydream. 45:33 Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of Get Rich Education LLC, exclusively. Keith Weinhold  46:01 The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth, building, getricheducation.com.  

On January 6th, 2021, Trump incited an insurrection, and as a result, he is pending federal prosecution for his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Trump's angry mob showed their determination to "stop the steal" on January 6th by carrying upside-down American flags.Days later, Justice Samuel Alito's home was flying an upside-down American flag in what appeared to be solidarity with Trump's "stop the steal" efforts. There are now at least two Supreme Court justices who are disqualified from deciding January 6 cases: Alito and Clarence Thomas. Indeed, the federal law, 28 US Code section 455, requires a justice to disqualify himself from sitting in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. If the Supreme Court is to begin clawing back some of its legitimacy, Alito and Thomas must recuse themselves from ALL J6 cases.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On January 6th, 2021, Trump incited an insurrection, and as a result, he is pending federal prosecution for his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Trump's angry mob showed their determination to "stop the steal" on January 6th by carrying upside-down American flags.Days later, Justice Samuel Alito's home was flying an upside-down American flag in what appeared to be solidarity with Trump's "stop the steal" efforts. There are now at least two Supreme Court justices who are disqualified from deciding January 6 cases: Alito and Clarence Thomas. Indeed, the federal law, 28 US Code section 455, requires a justice to disqualify himself from sitting in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. If the Supreme Court is to begin clawing back some of its legitimacy, Alito and Thomas must recuse themselves from ALL J6 cases.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

 According to a lengthy new analysis of Donald Trump's tax records, the former president appears to have written off losses for his Chicago skyscraper in two separate tax years, meaning that he was double-dipping on tax breaks. If this audit is correct, that means that Trump scammed the government out of roughly $100 million that he could be forced to pay back once the IRS has finished with him.Also, Donald Trump no longer has to violate the gag order against him because his family and friends are doing it for him. This week, both Eric Trump and Donald Junior appeared to violate the gag order by attacking witnesses and the family of the judge, respectively. Eric's might be a little bit more severe considering the fact that he actually attacked the witness - Michael Cohen - while posting on social media from inside the courtroom.And  people on social media were frantically alerting the Secret Service this week after one of Donald Trump's aides revealed that he likes to get innocent people arrested. The aide, Johnny McEntee, boasted on a podcast of handing out fake money to homeless people who will then use the money to buy things and get busted for using counterfeit money. If his story is true, then this constitutes a crime under US Code.Finally, Michael Cohen dropped a lot of bombshells during his testimony in the early part of this week, but one item that really stuck out the most doesn't even have relevance to the case. According to Cohen, it was Melania Trump's idea to spin the Access Hollywood tape as "locker room talk," showing that Melania is just as big of a scumbag as the rest of the Trump family. She also doesn't seem to realize that this was her husband admitting that he cheats on her all the time, or at least she didn't seem to care. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to stay up to date on all of Farron's content: https://www.youtube.com/FarronBalancedFollow Farron on social media!Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FarronBalanced/Twitter: https://twitter.com/farronbalancedInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/farronbalancedTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@farronbalanced?lang=en

J6 Jake Lang's father Ned Lang talks about the inhumane conditions his son is forced to be subjected to. Attorney Joseph McBride speaks about 18 US Code 1512 and Trump's Persecution. Use Promo Code: DIAMOND or TRUMPWONDiamondandSilk.com1. https://DrStellaMD.com2. http://PatchThat.com3. https://www.KattsRemedies.com/shop/ ?aff=34. https://TWC.Health (Spike Protein Support)5. https://CardioMiracle.com6. https://MyPillow.com/TrumpWon7. https://TheDrArdisShow.com/shop-all/8. https://www.Curativabay.com/?aff=19. http://MaskDerma.com10. https://GiveSendGo.com Follow on https://ChatDit.comhttps://FrankSocial.com/u/DiamondandSilk LINDELL TV, CTATV, RSBN, GETTR, RUMBLESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, Andrew and Liz welcome back to the show National Security Counselor Kel McClanahan to break down a bunch of filings pursuant to the Classified Information Procedures Act, and tell us how to keep our eyes on Judge Cannon! Notes Chris Geidner "Law Dork" on the Fifth Circuit https://www.lawdork.com/p/fifth-circuit-adf-training-book-ban-social-media CIPA - Appendix 13 to Title 18 of the US Code https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18a/compiledact-96-456 Trump's motion for CIPA Section 4 scheduling https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.160.0.pdf DOJ CIPA Section 3 Brief https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.162.0.pdf Nauta/DeOliveira CIPA Section 3 Brief https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648654/gov.uscourts.flsd.648654.163.0.pdf DOJ CIPA Motion Under Seal in DC ( cover page) https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67656604/59/1/united-states-v-trump/ -Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/law -Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs -Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ -For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki -And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com

SEASON 2 EPISODE 42: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: Now we get the just-before-midnight answer to the Gag Order request, as insane as anything else since Friday, written not for legal purposes but to please Trump. Quote: “the proposed Gag Order is nothing more than an obvious attempt by the Biden Administration to unlawfully silence its most prominent political opponent, who has now taken a commanding lead in the polls. Keenly aware that it is losing that race for 2024, the prosecution seeks to unconstitutionally silence Trump's (but not President Biden's) political speech on pain of contempt)." Trump's ambulance chasers slipstream behind his threats against NBC, referring to “President Biden and his surrogates (including those in the corporate media.” They dance along the lines of absurdity. There has been no intimidation of witnesses because quote “no witness has suggested that he or she will not testify because of anything president Trump has said.” It is impossible to believe their rhetoric will have any impact on Judge Chutkan. It doesn't have to. It was written so Trump could get excited by it. Jack Smith has until Saturday to answer. And the late response was only the last of a string of insane moments by Trump or on his behalf. Yesterday - ten days after Hunter Biden was indicted for buying a gun when he was legally ineligible to do so… Trump in South Carolina bought a gun or tried to, when he was legally ineligible to do so. And all THAT followed worse. Under 18 US Code 4241 a prosecutor can request that the judge order that the defendant must undergo a psychiatric or psychological examination to determine if he's competent to stand trial and unable to aid in his own defense and when it is proved that he isn't, the judge can order him institutionalized and Jack Smith should make the request and Judge Chutkan should grant it because in the 72 hours before his lawyers were supposed to submit an argument against issuing a gag order on him as they did with exceptional lameness just before the clock struck midnight eastern last night after he'd threatened the court and tried to poison the jury pool, Trump demanded that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff be executed, insisted NBC News was guilty of something he made up called “Country Threatening Treason” because it had published a poll about him that he didn't like, promised that as president he would make it and other news organizations “pay a big price,” and argued that the homes of all Democratic Senators be raided just cause, and bought a gun or tried to, and conflated the Bush Brothers and I don't mean Billy. B-Block (22:45) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS (28:08): The gold bars are funny but isn't the issue with Senator Menendez the, you know, spying? Fox News was kind enough to just disprove the Hunter Biden/Joe Biden/Burisma phony story. And after she gets 35,000 people to register to vote in one day, a GOP propaganda site attacks... Taylor Swift? AND her fans? THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD (28:08): Congresswoman Sage Steele? The district they want her to run in wraps around but excludes the ESPN campus. Last year the Congressman won a Family Award. This year his missus says he's abandoned his family. And Kathleen Parker, who infamously wrote it'd be ok even if Trump won, tops herself: insisting Trump is "well-dressed." C-Block (33:25) THE FINAL WORDS ON DAVID BROOKS AND HIS $78 WHISKEYBURGER TWEET. Obviously, whose words would be better to use, than Brooks' own?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In today's longform podcast - Glenn talks about Donald Trump's continued dangerous rhetoric which is inspiring and inciting his supporters to violence. He discusses the recent threats against Judge Tanya Chutkan and the Georgia grand jurors. He explains how detaining Trump pending trial will help neutralize the ongoing threat. Then, dueling trial date proposals in Trump's DC prosecution - Glenn discusses Jack Smith proposing January 2nd 2024 and Trump's defense attorneys absurdly proposing April 2026. Next, after being released by the DC judge and being told that the "most important condition of his release" was that he NOT commit any crimes - federal, state or local - while on release, Trump almost immediately violated those conditions by unlawfully attempting to influence a grand jury witness in Georgia. Glenn says this should result in Trump being revoked on release and detained pending trial. Then finally, as victims of Trump's conspiracy to deprive the American people of their voting rights, American voters have federal statutory rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act to view the January 6th trial and many people feel it should be aired live on TV for everyone to watch. Glenn says you should copy the following paragraph and send it to your elected officials because you have a right to watch it and MAGA should see what he actually did.Call to action: Please copy and share! Ask for your right to view Trump's trial!Dear _____________ (elected official),In Count 4 of his most recent indictment, Donald Trump is charged with victimizing the American voters by conspiring to deprive us of our right to vote. As crime victims, the American people have a right "not to be excluded" from Trump's trial, which will be held in Washington, DC. I am asserting my rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 US Code section 3771(a)(3), not to be excluded from the trial. Given that the courtroom has a limited capacity, if the trial is not televised, I will be excluded from the courtroom in violation of my federal legal statutory rights. Accordingly, I respectfully request that you do everything in your power to ensure that my legal right to attend Donald Trump's trial is not violated. Thank youSincerely,________________________NameSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In today's longform podcast - Glenn talks about Donald Trump's continued dangerous rhetoric which is inspiring and inciting his supporters to violence. He discusses the recent threats against Judge Tanya Chutkan and the Georgia grand jurors. He explains how detaining Trump pending trial will help neutralize the ongoing threat. Then, dueling trial date proposals in Trump's DC prosecution - Glenn discusses Jack Smith proposing January 2nd 2024 and Trump's defense attorneys absurdly proposing April 2026. Next, after being released by the DC judge and being told that the "most important condition of his release" was that he NOT commit any crimes - federal, state or local - while on release, Trump almost immediately violated those conditions by unlawfully attempting to influence a grand jury witness in Georgia. Glenn says this should result in Trump being revoked on release and detained pending trial. Then finally, as victims of Trump's conspiracy to deprive the American people of their voting rights, American voters have federal statutory rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act to view the January 6th trial and many people feel it should be aired live on TV for everyone to watch. Glenn says you should copy the following paragraph and send it to your elected officials because you have a right to watch it and MAGA should see what he actually did.Call to action: Please copy and share! Ask for your right to view Trump's trial!Dear _____________ (elected official),In Count 4 of his most recent indictment, Donald Trump is charged with victimizing the American voters by conspiring to deprive us of our right to vote. As crime victims, the American people have a right "not to be excluded" from Trump's trial, which will be held in Washington, DC. I am asserting my rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 US Code section 3771(a)(3), not to be excluded from the trial. Given that the courtroom has a limited capacity, if the trial is not televised, I will be excluded from the courtroom in violation of my federal legal statutory rights. Accordingly, I respectfully request that you do everything in your power to ensure that my legal right to attend Donald Trump's trial is not violated. Thank youSincerely,________________________NameSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In today's longform weekend podcast - Glenn gives us an update on Donald Trump's federal election interference trial. First, Special Counsel Jack Smith proposes a speedy trial date in the DC case to fulfill the people's right. Glenn talks about how the Speedy Trial Act has taken the spotlight and in the court filing by the DOJ - he discusses how Jack Smith corrects Trump's attorney John Lauro, on who the Speedy Trial Act actually benefits. Then, people are saying Lauro is acting more like a campaign chairman than a lawyer - spreading Trump's propaganda in and out of court. Glenn explains why that's unprofessional and says he should be referred to the Bar Counsel for misconduct. And finally, many people feel the January 6th trial should be aired live on TV for everyone to watch. Glenn says you should copy the following paragraph and send it to your elected officials because you have a right to watch it.Call to action: Please copy and share! Ask for your right to view Trump's trial!Dear _____________ (elected official),In Count 4 of his most recent indictment, Donald Trump is charged with victimizing the American voters by conspiring to deprive us of our right to vote. As crime victims, the American people have a right "not to be excluded" from Trump's trial, which will be held in Washington, DC. I am asserting my rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 US Code section 3771(a)(3), not to be excluded from the trial. Given that the courtroom has a limited capacity, if the trial is not televised, I will be excluded from the courtroom in violation of my federal legal statutory rights. Accordingly, I respectfully request that you do everything in your power to ensure that my legal right to attend Donald Trump's trial is not violated. Thank youSincerely,________________________NameSummarySee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In today's longform weekend podcast - Glenn gives us an update on Donald Trump's federal election interference trial. First, Special Counsel Jack Smith proposes a speedy trial date in the DC case to fulfill the people's right. Glenn talks about how the Speedy Trial Act has taken the spotlight and in the court filing by the DOJ - he discusses how Jack Smith corrects Trump's attorney John Lauro, on who the Speedy Trial Act actually benefits. Then, people are saying Lauro is acting more like a campaign chairman than a lawyer - spreading Trump's propaganda in and out of court. Glenn explains why that's unprofessional and says he should be referred to the Bar Counsel for misconduct. And finally, many people feel the January 6th trial should be aired live on TV for everyone to watch. Glenn says you should copy the following paragraph and send it to your elected officials because you have a right to watch it.Call to action: Please copy and share! Ask for your right to view Trump's trial!Dear _____________ (elected official),In Count 4 of his most recent indictment, Donald Trump is charged with victimizing the American voters by conspiring to deprive us of our right to vote. As crime victims, the American people have a right "not to be excluded" from Trump's trial, which will be held in Washington, DC. I am asserting my rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 US Code section 3771(a)(3), not to be excluded from the trial. Given that the courtroom has a limited capacity, if the trial is not televised, I will be excluded from the courtroom in violation of my federal legal statutory rights. Accordingly, I respectfully request that you do everything in your power to ensure that my legal right to attend Donald Trump's trial is not violated. Thank youSincerely,________________________NameSummarySee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today - Glenn explains how you can assert your right to watch the January 6th criminal trial of Donald Trump.Call to action: Please copy and share! Ask for your right to view Trump's trial!Dear _____________ (elected official),In Count 4 of his most recent indictment, Donald Trump is charged with victimizing the American voters by conspiring to deprive us of our right to vote. As crime victims, the American people have a right "not to be excluded" from Trump's trial, which will be held in Washington, DC. I am asserting my rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 US Code section 3771(a)(3), not to be excluded from the trial. Given that the courtroom has a limited capacity, if the trial is not televised, I will be excluded from the courtroom in violation of my federal legal statutory rights. Accordingly, I respectfully request that you do everything in your power to ensure that my legal right to attend Donald Trump's trial is not violated. Thank youSincerely,________________________NameSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today - Glenn explains how you can assert your right to watch the January 6th criminal trial of Donald Trump.Call to action: Please copy and share! Ask for your right to view Trump's trial!Dear _____________ (elected official),In Count 4 of his most recent indictment, Donald Trump is charged with victimizing the American voters by conspiring to deprive us of our right to vote. As crime victims, the American people have a right "not to be excluded" from Trump's trial, which will be held in Washington, DC. I am asserting my rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 US Code section 3771(a)(3), not to be excluded from the trial. Given that the courtroom has a limited capacity, if the trial is not televised, I will be excluded from the courtroom in violation of my federal legal statutory rights. Accordingly, I respectfully request that you do everything in your power to ensure that my legal right to attend Donald Trump's trial is not violated. Thank youSincerely,________________________NameSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Since May 2022, Congress has held three hearings looking into Unidentified Aerial Phenomena and the possibility of non-human intelligent life flying aircraft on Earth. In this episode, hear testimony from three Defense Department officials and three credible whistleblowers, whose testimony is often as contradictory as it is shocking. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via Support Congressional Dish via (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Background Sources Whistleblower Protections Clayton E. Wire. 2020. Ogborn Mihm LLP. Security Classifications Security Classification of Information, Volume 2. Principles for Classification of Information. Arvin S. Quist. Oak Ridge National Laboratory: 1993. UAP Background Brian Entin. June 6, 2023. NewsNation. Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal. June 5, 2023. The Debrief. May 16, 2021. 60 Minutes. Ralph Blumenthal. December 18, 2017. The New York Times. Helene Cooper et al. December 16, 2017. The New York Times. Independent Research and Development National Defense Industrial Association. SCIFs Derek Hawkins et al. April 26, 2023. The Washington Post. Kirkpatrick Response Letter D. Dean Johnson (@ddeanjohnson). Twitter. Audio Sources July 26, 2023 House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Witnesses: , Former Commanding Officer, United States Navy Ryan Graves, Executive Director, Americans for Safe Aerospace David Grusch, Former National Reconnaissance Office Representative, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force, Department of Defense Clips timestamps reflect C-SPAN video 4:30 Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI): The National Defense Authorization Act of 2022 established the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office or AARO to conduct or to coordinate efforts across the Department of Defense and other federal agencies to detect, identify and investigate UAPs. However, AARO's budget remains classified, prohibiting meaningful oversight from Congress. 19:50 Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA): We know the Senate is taking up an amendment to their defense authorization bill which will create a commission with broad declassification authority and we should all agree that that is an important step. 27:40 Ryan Graves: Excessive classification practices keep crucial information hidden. Since 2021, all UAP videos are classified as secret or above. This level of secrecy not only impedes our understanding, but fuels speculation and mistrust. 27:55 Ryan Graves: In 2014, I was an F-18 Foxtrot pilot in the Navy fighter attack Squadron 11, the Red Rippers, and I was stationed at NAS Oceana in Virginia Beach. After upgrades were made to our jet's radar systems, we began detecting unknown objects operating in our airspace. At first, we assumed they were radar errors. But soon we began to correlate the radar tracks with multiple onboard sensors, including infrared systems, and eventually through visual ID. During a training mission in Warning Area W-72, 10 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach. Two F/A-18F Super Hornets were split by a UAP. The object, described as a dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere, came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft and was estimated to be five to 15 feet in diameter. The mission commander terminated the flight immediately and returned to base. Our squadron submitted a safety report, but there was no official acknowledgement of the incident and no further mechanism to report the sightings. Soon these encounters became so frequent that aircrew would discuss the risk of UAP as part of their regular pre-flight briefs. 29:00 Ryan Graves: Recognising the need for action and answers, I founded Americans for Safe Aerospace. The organization has since become a haven for UAP witnesses who were previously unspoken due to the absence of a safe intake process. More than 30 witnesses have come forward and almost 5000 Americans have joined us in the fight for transparency at safeaerospace.org 29:20 Ryan Graves: The majority of witnesses are commercial pilots at major airlines. Often, they are veterans with decades of flying experience. Pilots are reporting UAP at altitudes that appear above them at 40,000 feet potentially in low Earth orbit or in the gray zone below the Karman Line, making unexplainable maneuvers like right hand turns and retrograde orbits or J hooks. Sometimes these reports are reoccurring with numerous recent sightings north of y and in the North Atlantic. Other veterans are also coming forward to us regarding UAP encounters in our airspace and oceans. The most compelling involve observations of UAP by multiple witnesses and sensor systems. I believe these accounts are only scratching the surface and more will share their experiences once it is safe to do so. 31:30 David Grusch: I became a whistleblower through a PPD 19 urgent concern filing in May 2022 with the intelligence community Inspector General following concerning reports from multiple esteemed and credentialed current and former military and intelligence community individuals that the US government is operating with secrecy above congressional oversight with regards to UAPs. My testimony is based on information I've been given by individuals with a long standing track record of legitimacy and service to this country, many of whom also have shared compelling evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony to myself and my various colleagues. I have taken every step I can to corroborate this evidence over a period of four years while I was with the UAP Task Force and do my due diligence on the individual sharing it. Because of these steps. I believe strongly in the importance of bringing this information before you. 33:30 David Grusch: In 2019, the UAP Task Force director asked me to identify all Special Access Programs and Controlled Access Programs, also known as SAPS and CAPS. We needed to satisfy our congressionally mandated mission and we were direct report at the time to the [Deputy Secretary of Defense]. At the time, due to my extensive executive level intelligence support duties, I was cleared to literally all relevant compartments and in a position of extreme trust both in my military and civilian capacities. I was informed in the course of my official duties of a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program to which I was denied access to those additional read-ons when I requested it. I made the decision based on the data I collected to report this information to my superiors and multiple Inspectors General and, in effect, becoming a whistleblower. 35:20 Cmdr. David Fravor: We were attached to carrier 11, stationed onboard USS Nimitz and began a two month workup cycle off the coast of California. On this day, we were scheduled for a two v two air-to-air training with the USS Princeton as our control. When we launched off Nimitz, my wingman was joining out, we were told that the training was going to be suspended and we're going to proceed with real world tasking. As we proceeded to the West, the air controller was counting down the range to an object that we were going to and we were unaware of what we're going to see when we arrived. There, the controller told us that these objects had been observed for over two weeks coming down from over 80,000 feet, rapidly descending to 20,000 feet, hanging out for hours and then going straight back up. For those who don't realize, above 80,000 feet is space. We arrived at the location at approximately 20,000 feet and the controller called the merge plot, which means that our radar blip was now in the same resolution cell as a contact. As we looked around, we noticed that we saw some whitewater off our right side. It's important to note the weather on this day was as close to perfect as you could ask for off the coast of San Diego: clear skies, light winds, calm seas, no white caps from waves. So the whitewater stood out in a large blue ocean. All four of us, because we were in an F/A-18F F, so we had pilots and WSO in the backseat, looked down and saw a white tic tac object with a longitudinal axis pointing north-south and moving very abruptly over the water, like a ping pong ball. There were no rotors, no rotor wash, or any sign of visible control surfaces like wings. As we started clockwise towards the object, my WSO I decided to go down and take a closer look with the other aircraft staying in high cover to observe both us and the tic tac. We proceeded around the circle about 90 degrees from the start of our descent, and the object suddenly shifted its longitudinal axis, aligned it with my aircraft and began to climb. We continued down another 270 degrees, and we went nose low to where the tic tac would have been. Our altitude at this point is about 15,000 feet and the tic tac was about 12,000. As we pulled nose-on to the object within about a half mile of it, it rapidly accelerated in front of us and disappeared. Our wingmen, roughly 8000 feet above us, lost contact also. We immediately turned back to see where the whitewater was at and it was gone also. So as you started to turn back towards the east the controller came up and said "Sir you're not going to believe this but that thing is that your cat point roughly 60 miles away in less than a minute." You can calculate the speed. We returned to Nimitz. We were taking off our gear, we were talking to one of my crews that was getting ready to launch, we mentioned it to them and they went out and luckily got the video that you see, that 90 second video. What you don't see is the radar tape that was never released, and we don't know where it's at. 37:55 Cmdr. David Fravor: What is shocking to us is that the incident was never investigated. None of my crew ever questioned and tapes were never taken and after a couple days it turned into a great story with friends. It wasn't until 2009 until J. Stratton had contacted me to investigate. Unbeknownst to all, he was part of the AATIP program at the Pentagon led by Lue Elizondo. There was an unofficial official report that came out it's now in the internet. Years later, I was contacted by the other pilot Alex Dietrich and asked if I'd been contacted and I said "No, but I'm willing to talk." I was contacted by Mr. Elizondo, and we talked for a short period of time, he said we'd be in contact. A few weeks after that I was made aware that Lue had left the Pentagon in protest and joined forces with Tom DeLonge and Chris Mellon, Steve Justice, and others to form To the Stars Academy, an organization that pressed the issue with leading industry experts and US government officials. They worked with Leslie Kean, who is present today, Ralph Blumenthal, and Helene Cooper to publish the articles in the New York Times in 2017. It removed the stigma on the topic of UFOs, which is why we're here today. Those articles opened the door for the government and public that cannot be closed. It has led to an interest from our elected officials, who are not focused on Little Green Men, but figuring out where these craft are, where they are from, the technology they possess, how do they operate. It also led to the Whistleblower Protection Act in the NDAA. 39:45 Cmdr. David Fravor: In closing, I would like to say that the tic tac object we engaged in 2004 was far superior to anything that we had on time, have today, or are looking to develop in the next 10 years. If we, in fact, have programs that possess this technology and needs to have oversight from those people, that the citizens of this great country elected in office to represent what is best for the United States and best for the citizens. I thank you for your time. 40:20 Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI): Are your pilots, or pilots that you interact with as part of your organization, do you feel adequately trained and briefed on how to handle encounters with UAPs? Ryan Graves: No. Right now, military witnesses to UAP have limited options for reporting UAP. But more more concerning is that the commercial aviation sector has not adapted to the lessons that the military has implemented. The military and Department of Defense have stated that UAP represent a critical aviation safety risk. We have not seen that same language being used in the commercial markets, they are not acknowledging this. 41:05 Ryan Graves: Right now we need a system where pilots can report without fear of losing their jobs. There's a fear that the stigma associated with this topic is going to lead to professional repercussions either through management or perhaps through their yearly physical check. So having a secure system, reducing the stigma, and making this information available through the public is going to reduce the concerns that aircrew have. 41:30 Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI): Can you just give me a little idea the degree to which reports in the past are not made public right now? Ryan Graves: Well, I don't think there has been a proper reporting system to gather those reports and thus not report them. So to answer your question, I think there is a dearth of data due to the fact that the reporting has been limited up to this time. 41:45 Ryan Graves: There's certainly some national security concerns when we use our advanced sensors and our tactical jets to be able to identify these objects. However, there's no reason that the objects themselves would be classified. I would be curious to see how the security classification guideline actually spells out the different nuances of how this topic is classified from the perspective of UAP, not national security. 43:00 Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI): Mr. Fravor, the tic tac incident that you were engaged [in] occurred in 2004. What kind of reporting took place after that incident? Ryan Graves: None. We had a standard debrief where the back-seaters went down to our carrier intel center and briefed what had happened, and that was it. No one else talked to us. And I was in the top 20 in the battle group, no one came that the Captain was aware, the of Admiral was aware, nothing was done. Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI): Did your commanding officers provide any sort of justification? Ryan Graves: No, because I was the commanding officer of the quadron. So no. Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI): Was this incident the only UAP event that you encountered while you were a pilot? Ryan Graves: Yes, it was. 43:50 Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI): Do you believe UAPs pose a potential threat to our national security? Ryan Graves: Yes, and here's why: the technology that we faced was far superior than anything that we had, and you could put that anywhere. If you had one, you captured one, you reverse engineered it, you got it to work, you're talking something that can go into space, go someplace, dropped down in a matter of seconds, do whatever it wants and leave. And there's nothing we can do about it. Nothing. 44:20 Ryan Graves: I would also like to add from a commercial aviation and military aviation perspective, we deal with uncertainty in our operating space as a matter of our professional actions. Identifying friend from foe is very important to us. And so when we have identified targets and we continue to ignore those due to a stigma or fear of what it could be, that's an opening that our adversaries can take advantage of. 44:55 Ryan Graves: There needs to be a location where this information is centralized for processing and there needs to be a two-way communication loop so the operators on the front end have feedback and can get best practices on how to process information, what to do, and to ensure that their reporting is being listened to. Right now there is not a lot of back and forth. 46:25 Ryan Graves: When we were first experiencing these objects off the eastern seaboard in the 2014 to 2015 time period, anyone that had upgraded their radar systems were seeing these objects. So there was a large number of my colleagues that were detecting these objects off the eastern seaboard. They were further correlating that information with the other onboard sensors. And many of them also had their own eyesightings, as well, of these objects. Now, that was our personal, firsthand experience at the time. Since then, as I've engaged this topic, others have reached out to me to share their experiences both on the military side as well as the commercial aviation side. On the military aviation side, veterans that have recently got out have shared their stories and have expressed how the objects we are seeing in 2014 and 2015 continued all the way to 2019, 2020, and beyond. And so it became a generational issue for naval aviators on the Eastern Seaboard. This was something we were briefing to new students. This is something that was included in the notice to airmen to ensure that there was no accidents. And now with commercial aviators, they are reaching out because they're having somewhat similar experiences as our military brothers and sisters, but they do not have any reporting system that they can send this to. 47:55 Cmdr. David Fravor: It's actually, it's a travesty that we don't have a system to correlate this and actually investigate. You know, so if you took the east coast, there's coastal radars out there that monitor our air defense identification zone. Out to 200 miles, they can track these. So when you see them, they could actually go and pull that data and get maneuvering. And instead of just having the airplanes, there's other data sources out there. And I've talked to other government officials on this. You need a centrally located repository that these reports go to. So if you just stuck it in DOD, you wouldn't get anything out of the Intelligence Committee because they have a tendency not to talk. But if you had a central location where these reports are coming in, not just military, but also commercial aviation, because there's a lot of that going on, especially if you talk to anyone that flies from here to Hawaii, over the Pacific they see odd lights. So I think you need to develop something that allows you a central point to collect the data in order to investigate. 51:20 Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA): Mr. Grusch, finally, do you believe that our government is in possession of UAPs? David Grusch: Absolutely, based on interviewing over 40 witnesses over four years. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA): And where? David Grusch: I know the exact locations and those locations were provided to the Inspector General, and some of which to the intelligence committees, I actually had the people with the firsthand knowledge provide a protected disclosure to the Inspector General 52:15 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Mr. Graves. Again, I'd like to know, how do you know that these were not our aircraft? Ryan Graves: Some of the behaviors that we saw in a working area. We would see these objects being at 0.0 Mach, that's zero airspeed over certain pieces of the ground. So what that means, just like a river, if you throw a bobber in, it's gonna float downstream. These objects were staying completely stationary in category four hurricane winds. The same objects would then accelerate to supersonic speeds 1.1-1.2 Mach, and they would do so in very erratic and quick behaviors that we don't -- I don't -- have an explanation for. 55:50 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Mr. Fravor, do you believe that you witnessed an additional object under the water in relation to your encounter? Cmdr. David Fravor: I will say we did not see an object. There was something there to cause the whitewater and when we turned around, it was gone. So there was something there that obviously moved. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Okay, it was not the same object, though, that you were looking at, correct? Cmdr. David Fravor: No, we actually joked that the tic tac was communicating with something when we came back, because the whitewater disappeared. 56:15 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): We were, in another instance, told about the capabilities of jamming when there were some people chasing some of these objects. Did you experience any of that jamming, or interrupting your radar or weapon system? Cmdr. David Fravor: My crew that launched, after we landed, experienced significant jamming to the APG 73 radar, which was what we had on board, which is a mechanically scan, very high end system, prior to APG 79. And yes, it did pretty much everything you could do range, velocity, aspect, and then it hit the lock and the targeting pod is passive. That's when we're able to get the video on. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): I'm about to run out of time, but are you aware of any of our enemies that have that capability? Cmdr. David Fravor: No, no. 57:40 Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): You've identified these as taking place on the East Coast. Is it just on the East Coast where these encounters have been reported? Ryan Graves: No. Since the events initially occurred, I've learned that the objects have been detected, essentially where all Navy operations are being conducted across the world. And that's from the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office reporting. 58:50 Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): Are there common characteristics to the UAPs that have been sighted by different pilots? And can you describe what the convergence of descriptions is? Ryan Graves: Certainly. We were primarily seeing dark gray or black cubes inside of a clear sphere. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): I'm sorry, dark gray or black cubes? Ryan Graves: Yes, inside of a clear sphere where the apex or tips of the cube were touching the inside of that sphere. And that was primarily what was being reported when we were able to gain a visual tally of these objects. That occurred over almost eight years, and as far as I know, is still occurring. 59:45 Ryan Graves: I think we need both transparency and the reporting. We have the reporting, but we need to make sure that information can be propagated to commercial aviation as well as the rest of the populace. 1:05:00 Ryan Graves: In the 2003 timeframe, a large group of Boeing contractors were operating near one of the launch facilities at Vandenberg Air Force Base when they observed a very large, 100-yard-sided red square approach the base from the ocean and hover at low altitude over one of the launch facilities. This object remained for about 45 seconds or so before darting off over the mountains. There was a similar event within 24 hours later in the evening. This was a morning event, I believe, 8:45 in the morning. Later in the evening, post sunset, there were reports of other sightings on base including some aggressive behaviors. These objects were approaching some of the security guards at rapid speeds before darting off, and this is information that was received through one of the witnesses that have approached me at Americans for Safe Aerospace. 1:06:15 Ryan Graves: I have not seen what they've described. This object was estimated to be almost the size of a football field, and I have not seen anything personally that large. 1:07:05 Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL): With the FAA, to your understanding, pilots that are seeing this, commercial airline pilots, are they receiving cease and desist letters from corporations for coming forward with information in regards to safety for potential air airline passengers? Ryan Graves: I have been made privy to conversations with commercial aviators who have received cease and desist orders. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL): So the American public should know that corporations are putting their own reputations ahead of the safety of the American people. Would you agree with that statement? Ryan Graves: It appears so. 1:08:15 Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL): So what about G forces? Let's talk about G forces in those vehicles. Could a human survive those G forces with known technology today? Cmdr. David Fravor: No, not for the acceleration rates that we observed. 1:08:45 Cmdr. David Fravor: So we got within a half mile of the tic tac, which people say that's pretty far, but in airplanes that's actually relatively close. Now it was perfectly white, smooth, no windows, although when we did take the original FLIR video that is out there, when you put it on a big screen it actually had two little objects that came out of the bottom of it. But other than that, no windows, no seams, no nothing. 1:09:05 Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL): Mr. Grusch, as a result of your previous government work have you met with people with direct knowledge or have direct knowledge yourself of non-human origin craft? David Grusch: Yes, I personally interviewed those individuals. 1:09:40 Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL): Do you have knowledge or do you have reason to believe that there are programs in the advanced tech space that are unsanctioned? David Grusch: Yes, I do. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL): Okay. And when you say that they're above congressional oversight, what do you mean? David Grusch: Complicated question. So there's some, I would call it abuse here. So congressional oversight of conventional Special Special Access Programs, and I'll use Title X, so DOD, as an example. So 10 US Code section 119 discusses congressional oversight of SAPS, discusses the Deputy Secretary of Defense's ability to waive congressional reporting. However, the Gang of Eight is at least supposed to be notified if a waived or waived bigoted unacknowledged SAP is created. That's Public Law. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL): I don't want to cut you off, but how does a program like that get funded? David Grusch: I will give you generalities. I can get very specific in a closed session, but misappropriation of funds. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL): Does that mean that there is money in the budget that is set to go to a program but it doesn't and it goes to something else? David Grusch: Yes, have specific knowledge of that. Yep. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL): Do you think US corporations are overcharging for certain tech they're selling to the US government and that additional money is going to programs? David Grusch: Correct, through something called IRAD. 1:12:45 Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-VA): Mr. Grusch, in your sworn testimony you state that the United States government has retrieved supposedly extraterrestrial spacecraft and other UAP related artifacts. You go so far as to state that the US is in possession of "non human spacecraft" and that some of these artifacts have circulated with defense contractors. Several other former military and intelligence officials have come forward with similar allegations albeit in non-public setting. However, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, the Director of AARO, previously testified before Congress that there has been and I quote, "no credible evidence" thus far of extraterrestrial act activity or "off world technology" brought to the attention of the office. To your knowledge, is that statement correct? David Grusch: It's not accurate. I believe Dr. Kirkpatrick mentioned he had about 30 individuals that have come to AARO thus far. A few of those individuals have also come to AARO that I also interviewed and I know what they provided Dr. Kirkpatrick and their team. I was able to evaluate -- Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-VA): Okay, I need to go on. David Grusch: Sure. 1:21:25 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Has the US government become aware of actual evidence of extraterrestrial or otherwise unexplained forms of intelligence? And if so, when do you think this first occurred? David Grusch: I like to use the term non-human, I don't like to denote origin, it keeps the aperture open scientifically. Certainly, like I've just discussed publicly, previously, the 1930s. 1:21:45 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Okay, can you give me the names and titles of the people with direct, first-hand knowledge and access to some of these crash retrieval programs and maybe which facilities, military bases that the recovered material would be in? And I know a lot of Congress talked about, we're gonna go to area 51. And, you know, there's nothing there anymore anyway, it's just you know, we move like a glacier. And as soon as we announce it, I'm sure the moving vans would pull up, but please. David Grusch: I can't discuss that publicly. But I did provide that information both to the Intel committees and the Inspector General. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): And we could get that in the SCIF, if we were allowed to get in a SCIF with you? Would that be probably what you would think? David Grusch: Sure, if you had the appropriate accesses, yeah. 1:22:30 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): What Special Access Programs cover this information? And how is it possible that they have evaded oversight for so long? David Grusch: I do know the names, once again, I can't discuss that publicly. And how they've evaded oversight in a closed setting I could tell you this specific tradecraft used. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Alright. 1:22:50 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): When did you think those programs began and who authorized them? David Grusch: I do know a lot of that information, but that's something I can't discuss publicly because of sensitivities Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Alright. 1:24:05 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Title 10 and title 50 authorization, they seem to say they're inefficient. So who gets to decide this, in your opinion, in the past? David Grusch: It's a group of career senior executive officials. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Okay. Are they government officials? David Grusch: Both in and out of government and that's about as far I'll go there. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Well, that leads to my next question, which private corporations are directly involved in this program? How much taxpayer money has been invested in these programs? David Grusch: Yeah, I don't know the specific metrics towards the end of your question. The specific corporations I did provide to the committees in specific divisions, and I spent 11 and a half hours with both Intel committees. 1:25:30 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Has there been an active US government disinformation campaign to deny the existence of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena? And if so, why? David Grusch: I can't go beyond what I've already exposed publicly about that. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Okay, I've been told to ask you what that is and how to get it in the record. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL): What have you stated publicly in your interviews, for the Congressional Record? David Grusch: If you reference my NewsNation interview, I talk about a multi-decade campaign to disenfranchise public interest basically. 1:28:00 Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY): When it comes to notification that you had mentioned about IRAD programs, we have seen defense contractors abuse their contracts before through this committee. I have seen it personally, and I have also seen the notification requirements to Congress abused. I am wondering, one of the loopholes that we see in the law is that there is, at least from my vantage point, depending on what we're seeing, is that there are no actual definitions or requirements for notification, are there? What methods of notification did you observe? When they say they notified Congress, how did they do that? Do you have insight into that? David Grusch: For certain IRAD activities....I can only think of ones conventional in nature. Sometimes they flow through certain out of say SAP programs that have cognisant authority over the Air Force or something. And those are congressionally reported compartments, but IRAD is literally internal to the contractor. So as long as it's money, either profits, private investment, etc, they can do whatever they want. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY): To put a finer point on it, when there is a requirement for any agency or company to notify Congress, do they contact the chairman of a committee, do they get them on the phone specifically, is this through an email to hypothetically a dead email box? David Grusch: A lot of it comes through what they call the PPR, Periodic Program Review process. If it's a SAP or Controlled Access Program equity, and then those go to the specific committees. 1:30:40 Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY): For the record, if you were me, where would you look? Titles, programs, departments, regions? If you could just name anything. And I put that as an open question to the three of you. David Grusch: I'd be happy to give you that in a closed environment. I can tell you specifically. 1:35:40 Cmdr. David Fravor: Things are over-classified. I know for a fact the video or the pictures that came out in the 2020 report that had the stuff off the east coast, they were taken with an iPhone, off the east coast. A buddy of mine was one of the senior people there and he said they originally classified a TSS CI, and my question to him was what's TSS CI about these? They're an iPhone, right, literally off the vacates, that's not TSS CI. So they're over classified, and as soon as they do that, they go into the vault, and then you all have to look for them. 1:37:20 Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO): Has any of the activity been aggressive, been hostile in your reports? David Grusch: I know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured. Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO): By UAPs, or by people within the federal government? So there has been activity by alien or non-human technology and or beings that has caused harm to humans? David Grusch: I can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed, and I have to be very careful here, because they tell you never to acknowledge tradecraft, right. So what I personally witnessed, myself and my wife, was very disturbing. 1:38:20 Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO): You've said that the US has intact spacecraft. You said that the government has alien bodies or alien species. Have you seen the spacecraft? David Grusch: I have to be careful to describe what I've seen firsthand and not in this environment. But I could answer that question behind closed doors. Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO): Have you seen any of the bodies? David Grusch: That's something I've not witnessed myself. 1:40:45 Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO): These aircraft, have they been identified that they are being produced by domestic military contractors? Is there any evidence that that's what's being recovered? David Grusch: Not to my knowledge. Plus the recoveries predate a lot of our advanced programs. 1:48:05 David Grusch: I've actually never seen anything personal, believe it or not. 1:51:00 Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC): If you believe we have crashed craft, stated earlier, do we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted this craft? David Grusch: As I've stated publicly already in my NewsNation interview, biologics came with some of these recoveries. 1:51:15 Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC): Were they human or non human biologics? David Grusch: Non human and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge on the program I talked to that are currently still on the program. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC): And was this documentary evidence video, photos, eyewitness like how would that be determined? David Grusch: The specific documentation, I would have to talk to you in a SCIF about that. 1:53:10 Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Commander Fravor, we've all seen the floating tic tac video that you engage with on November 14, 2004. Can you briefly talk about why you were off the coast of San Diego that day? Cmdr. David Fravor: Yeah, we were at a work up with all the battle groups. So we integrate the ships with the carrier, the airway with the carrier and we start working. So we were doing an air-to-air defense to hone not only our skills, but those of the USS Princeton, and when they had been tracking him for two weeks. The problem was, there were never manned aircraft airborne when they were tracking them. And this was the first day and unfortunately, we were the ones airborne and went and saw it. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Do you remember the weather that day? It was a cloudy or windy or anything out of the ordinary on the Pacific coast. Cmdr. David Fravor: If you're familiar with San Diego, it was a perfect day. Light winds, no whitecaps, clear skies, not a cloud. For flying, it was the best. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Now, is it true that you saw, in your words, a 40 foot flying tic tac shaped object? Cmdr. David Fravor: That's correct. Or for some people that can't know what a Tic Tac is, it's a giant flying propane tank. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Did this object come up on radar or interfere with your radar or the USS Princeton? Cmdr. David Fravor: The Princeton tracked it, the Nimitz tracked it, the E2 tracked it. We never saw it on our radars, our fire control radars never picked it up. The other airplane that took the video did get it on a radar as soon as it tried to lock in to jam the radar, spit the lock and he's rapidly switched over to the targeting pod which you can do in the F/A 18 Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): From what you saw that day and what you've seen on video. Did you see any source of propulsion from the flying object including on any potential thermal scans from your aircraft? Cmdr. David Fravor: No, there is none. There is no IR plume coming out. And Chad who took the video went through all the EO, which is black and white TV and the IR modes, and there's no visible signs of reflection. It's just sitting in space at 20,000 feet. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): In your career. Have you ever seen a propulsion system that creates no thermal exhaust? Cmdr. David Fravor: No. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Can you describe how the aircraft maneuvered? Cmdr. David Fravor: Abruptly, very determinant. It knew exactly what it was doing. It was aware of our presence. And it had acceleration rates, I mean, it went from zero to matching our speed and no time at all. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Now if the fastest plane on Earth was trained to do these maneuvers that you saw, would it be capable of doing that? Cmdr. David Fravor: No, not even close Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Just to confirm, this object had no wings, correct? Cmdr. David Fravor: No wings. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): Now the aircraft that you were flying, was it armed? Cmdr. David Fravor: No, never felt threatened at all. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY): If the aircraft was armed, do you believe that your aircraft or any aircraft in possession of the United States could have shot the tic tac down? Cmdr. David Fravor: I'd say no. Just on the performance, it would have just left in a split second. 1:58:10 Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN): Is there any indication that these UAPs could be essentially collecting reconnaissance information? Mr. Graves? Ryan Graves: Yes. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN): Mr. Grusch? David Grusch: Fair assessment. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN): Mr. Fravor? Cmdr. David Fravor: Very possible. 1:59:05 Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN): Mr. Graves and Fravor, in the event that your encounters had become hostile, would you have had the capability to defend yourself, your crew, your aircraft? Ryan Graves: Absolutely not. Cmdr. David Fravor: No. 2:00:55 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): I might have asked this before, but I want to make sure. Do you have any personal knowledge of someone who's possibly been injured working on legacy UAP reverse engineering? David Grusch: Yes. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Okay. How were they injured? Was it something like a radioactive type situation or something we didn't understand? I've heard people talk about Havana syndrome type incidences. What what was your recollection of that? David Grusch: I can't get into specifics, but you could imagine assessing an unknown unknown, there's a lot of potentialities you can't fully prepare for. 2:02:10 Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Are you aware of any individuals that are participating in reverse engineering programs for non terrestrial craft? David Grusch: Personally, yes. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): Do you know any that would be willing to testify if there were protections for them? David Grusch: Certainly closed door, and assurances that breaking their NDA, they're not going to get administratively punished. 2:03:45 Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL): Referring to your news nation interview, you had referenced specific treaties between governments. Article III of the nuclear arms treaty with Russia identifies UAPs. It specifically mentions them. To your knowledge. Are there safety measures in place with foreign governments or other superpowers to avoid an escalatory situation in the event that a UAP malevolent event occurs? David Grusch: Yeah, you're referring to an actual public treaty in the UN register. It's funny you mentioned that, the agreement on measures to reduce the risk of outbreak of a nuclear war signed in 1971, unclassified treaty publicly available. And if you cite the George Washington University national security archives, you will find the declassified, in 2013, specific provisions in this specific Red Line Flass message traffic with the specific codes pursuant to Article Three and also situation two, which is in the the previously classified NSA archive. What I would recommend and I tried to get access, but I got a wall of silence at the White House, was the specific incidents when those message traffic was used, I think some scholarship on that would open the door to a further investigation using those publicly available information. 2:05:20 David Grusch: I have concerns, based on the interviews I conducted under my official duties, of potential violations of the Federal Acquisition Regulations, the FAR. 2:06:10 Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): What was your general attitude or perspective on the UFO discussion before that happened? Cmdr. David Fravor: I never felt that we were alone with all the planets out there. But I wasn't a UFO person. I wasn't, I wasn't watching History Channel and MUFON and all that. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): And have you had any experiences or encounters since that happened? Cmdr. David Fravor: No. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): And so, have you formed any general conclusions about what you think you experienced then? Cmdr. David Fravor: Yes, I think what we experienced was, like I said, well beyond the material science and the capabilities that we had at the time, that we have currently, or that we're going to have in the next 10 to 20 years. 2:06:55 Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): You've been able to answer in great detail on certain questions, and then other things you say you're not able to respond to. Can you just explain where you're drawing the line? What's the basis for that? David Grusch: Yeah, based on my DOPSR security review and what they've determined that is unclassified. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): I see, so you're answering any questions that just call upon your knowledge of unclassified questions, but anything that relates to classified matters you're not commenting on in this context? David Grusch: In an open session, but happy to participate in a closed session at the right level. 2:08:15 Ryan Graves: Certainly I think the most vivid sighting of that would have been near mid air that we had at the entrance to our working area. One of these objects was completely stationary at the exact entrance to our working areas, not only geographically but also at altitude. So it was right where all the jets are going, essentially, on the Eastern Seaboard. The two aircraft flew within about 50 feet of the object and that was a very close visual sighting. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): And you were in one of the aircraft. Ryan Graves: I was not. I was there when the pilot landed. He canceled the mission after. I was there. He was in the ready room with all his gear on with his mouth open. And I asked him what the problem was and he said he almost hit one of those darn things. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): He said he was 50 feet away from it? Ryan Graves: Yes, sir. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): And his description of the object was consistent with the description you gave us before? Ryan Graves: A dark gray or black cube inside of a clear sphere. Rep. Jaime Raskin (D-MD): Inside of a clear sphere. With no self evident propulsion system. Ryan Graves:: No wings, no IR energy coming off of the vehicle, nothing tethering it to the ground. And that was primarily what we're experiencing out there. April 19, 2023 Senate Committee on Armed Services Witnesses: , Director, All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office Clips 2:00:50 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: The AARO team of more than three dozen experts is organized around four functional areas: operations, scientific research, integrated analysis, and strategic communications. 2:01:25 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: Consistent with legislative direction, AARO is also carefully reviewing and researching the US government's UAP-related historical record. 2:02:05 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: AARO is the culmination of decades of DOD, intelligence community, and congressionally directed efforts to successfully resolve UAP encountered first and foremost by US military personnel, specifically navy and air force pilots. 2:03:15 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: However, it would be naive to believe that the resolution of all UAP can be solely accomplished by the DOD and IC alone. We will need to prioritize collection and leverage authorities for monitoring all domains within the continental United States. AARO's ultimate success will require partnerships with the inner agency, industry partners, academia and the scientific community, as well as the public. 2:04:15 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: I want to underscore today that only a very small percentage of UAP reports display signatures that could reasonably be described as anomalous. The majority of unidentified objects reported to AARO demonstrate mundane characteristics of balloons, unmanned aerial systems, clutter, natural phenomena, or other readily explainable sources. While a large number of cases in our holdings remain technically unresolved, this is primarily due to a lack of data associated with those cases. Without sufficient data, we are unable to reach defendable conclusions that meet the high scientific standards we set for resolution, and I will not close a case that I cannot defend the conclusions of. 2:06:00 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: AARO is a member of the department's support to the administration's Tiger Team effort to deal with stratospheric objects such as the PRC high altitude balloon. When previously unknown objects are successfully identified, it is AARO's role to quickly and efficiently hand off such readily explainable objects to the intelligence, law enforcement, or operational safety communities for further analysis and appropriate action. In other words, AARO's mission is to turn UAP into SEP, Somebody Else's Problem. 2:07:30 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: I should also state clearly for the record that in our research, AARO has found no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity, offworld technology, or objects that defy the known laws of physics. In the event sufficient scientific data were ever obtained that a UAP encountered can only be explained by extraterrestrial origin, we are committed to working with our interagency partners at NASA to appropriately inform [the] U.S. government's leadership of its findings. For those few cases that have leaked to the public previously and subsequently commented on by the US government, I encourage those who hold alternative theories or views to submit your research to credible peer reviewed scientific journals. AARO is working very hard to do the same. That is how science works, not by blog or social media. 2:13:20 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: How are we going to get more data? We are working with the joint staff to issue guidance to all the services and commands that will then establish what are the reporting requirements, the timeliness, and all of the data that is required to be delivered to us and retained from all of the associated sensors. That historically hasn't been the case and it's been happenstance that data has been collected. 2:17:20 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: As of this week we are tracking over a total of 650 cases. 2:17:45 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: Let me walk everyone through what our analytic process looks like. We have essentially a five step process. We get our cases in with all the data, we create a case for that event. My team does a preliminary scrub of all of those cases as they come in, just to sort out, do we have any information that says this is in one of those likely categories? It's likely a balloon, it's likely a bird, it's likely some other object, or we don't know. Then we prioritize those based off of where they are. Are they attached to a national security area? Does it show some anomalous phenomenology that is of interest? If it's just a spherical thing that's floating around with the wind and it has no payload on it, that's going to be less important than something that has a payload on it, which will be less important than something that's maneuvering. So there's sort of a hierarchy of just binning the priorities, because we can't do all of them at once. Once we do that and we prioritize them, we take that package of data in that case and I have set up two teams, think of this as a Red Team Blue Team, or competitive analysis. I have an intelligence community team made up of intelligence analysts and I have an S&T team made up of scientists and engineers, and the people that actually build a lot of these sensors are physicists, because you know, if you're a physicist, you can do anything. But they're not associated with the intel community, they're not intel officers. So they they look at this through the lens of the sensor, of what the data says. We give that package to both teams. The intelligence community is going to look at it through the lens of the intelligence record, and what they assess, and their intel tradecraft, which they have very specific rules and regulations on how they do that. The scientific community, the technical community is going to look at it through the lens of "What is the data telling me? What is the sensor doing? What would I expect a sensor response to be?" and back that out. Those two groups give us their answers. We then adjudicate. If they agree, then I am more likely to close that case, if they agree on what it is. If they disagree, we will have an adjudication. We'll bring them together, we'll take a look at the differences, we'll adjudicate. Why do you say one thing and you say another? We will then come to a case recommendation that will get written up by my team. That then goes to a Senior Technical Advisory Group, which is outside of all of those people, made up of senior technical folks and intel analysts and operators retired out of the community. And they essentially peer review what that case recommendation is. They write their recommendations, that comes back to me, I review it, we make a determination, and I'll sign off one way or the other, and then that will go out as the case determination. Once we have an approved web portal to hang the unclassified stuff, we will downgrade and declassify things and put it out there. In the meantime, we're putting a lot of these on our classified web portal where we can then collaborate with the rest of the community so they can see what's going on. In a nutshell, that is the process. 2:27:10 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: There are emerging capabilities out there that in many instances, Russia and China, China in particular, are on par or ahead of us in some areas. So previously, I used to be the Defense Department's intelligence officer for science and technical intelligence. That was our job to look for, what does all that look like? And then my last several years of course, in Space Command, doing space. The adversary is not waiting. They are advancing and they're advancing quickly. If I were to put on some of my old hats, I would tell you, they are less risk averse at technical advancement than we are. They are just willing to try things and see if it works. Are there capabilities that could be employed against us in both an ISR and a weapons fashion? Absolutely. Do I have evidence that they're doing it in these cases? No, but I have concerning indicators. 2:43:45 Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick: So the vision is, at one point, at some point in the future, you should not need an AARO. If I'm successful in what I'm doing, we should be able to normalize everything that we're doing into existing processes, functions, agencies and organizations, and make that part of their mission and their role. Right now the niche that we form is really going after the unknowns. I think you articulated it early on, this is a hunt mission for what might somebody be doing in our backyard that we don't know about? That is what we are doing, but at some point, we should be able to normalize that. That's why it's so important the work we're doing with joint staff to normalize that into DoD policy and guidance. We are bringing in all of our interagency partners. So NASA is providing a liaison for us, I have FBI liaison, I have OSI liaison, I have service liaisons, half of my staff come from the [Intelligence Community], half of my staff come from other scientific and technical backgrounds, I have DOE. So what we're trying to do is ensure, again, as I make UAP into SEP they get handed off to the people that that is their mission to go do, so that we aren't duplicating that. I'm not going to go chase the Chinese high altitude balloon, for example. That's not my job. It's not an unknown, and it's not anomalous anymore. Now it goes over to them. May 17, 2022 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, and Counterproliferation Witnesses: , Deputy Director, Office of Naval Intelligence , Under Secretary of Defense Intelligence and Security, Department of Defense Clips 10:00 Ronald Moultrie: The NDAA for fiscal year 2022 has helped us to establish a dedicated office to oversee processes and procedures for the timely collection, processing, analysis, and reporting of UAP related data. 10:15 Ronald Moultrie: What are UAP? Put simply, UAP are airborne objects that, when encountered, cannot be immediately identified. 10:25 Ronald Moultrie: It is the department's contention that by combining appropriately structured, collected data with rigorous scientific analysis, any object that we encounter can likely be isolated, characterized, identified and if necessary, mitigated. 10:40 Ronald Moultrie: We know that our service members have encountered unidentified aerial phenomenon. And because UAPs pose potential flight safety and general security risks, we are committed to a focused effort to determine their origins. Our effort will include the thorough examination of adversarial platforms and potential breakthrough technologies, US government or commercial platforms, Allied or partner systems, and other natural phenomena. 11:15 Ronald Moultrie: We also understand that there has been a cultural stigma surrounding UAP. Our goal is to eliminate the stigma by fully incorporating our operators and mission personnel into a standardized data gathering process. We believe that making UAP reporting a mission imperative will be instrumental to the effort's success. 11:45 Ronald Moultrie: To optimize the department's UAP work, we are establishing an office within the Office of the Secretary of Defense. That office's function is clear: to facilitate the identification of previously unknown or unidentified airborne objects in a methodical, logical, and standardized manner. 13:50 Scott Bray: Since the early 2000s, we have seen an increasing number of unauthorized and or unidentified aircraft or objects in military controlled training areas and training ranges and other designated airspace. Reports of sightings are frequent and continuing. We attribute this increase in reporting to a number of factors, including our work to destigmatize reporting, an increase in the number of new systems such as quad copters and unmanned aerial systems that are in our airspace, identification of what we can classify as clutter (mylar balloons and other types of of air trash), and improvements in the capabilities of our various sensors to detect things in our airspace. 14:50 Scott Bray: The basic issues, then and now, are twofold. First, incursions in our training ranges by unidentified objects represent serious hazards to safety of flight. In every aspect of naval aviation, safety of our air crews is paramount. Second, intrusions by unknown aircraft or objects pose potential threats to the security of our operations. Our aviators train as they would fight, so any intrusions that may compromise the security of our operations by revealing our capabilities, our tactics, techniques or procedures are of great concern to the Navy and Department of Defense. 16:40 Scott Bray: The direct result of those efforts has been increased reporting with increased opportunities to focus a number of sensors on any objects. The message is now clear: if you see something, you need to report it. And the message has been received. 18:55 Scott Bray: As detailed in the ODNI report, if and when individual UAP incidents are resolved, they likely fall into one of five potential explanatory categories: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, US government or US industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, or another bin that allows for a holding bin of difficult cases, and for the possibility of surprise and potential scientific discovery. 22:20 Scott Bray: If UAP do indeed represent a potential threat to our security then the capabilities, systems, processes and sources we use to observe, record, study, or analyze these phenomena need to be classified at appropriate levels. We do not want, we do not want potential adversaries to know exactly what we're able to see or understand or how we come to the conclusions we make. Therefore, public disclosures must be carefully considered on a case by case basis. 23:35 Rep André Carson (D-IN): This is the third version of this task force and, to be frank, one of Congress's concerns is that the executive branch, in administrations of both parties, has been sweeping concerns about UAPs under the rug by focusing on events that can be explained and avoiding events that cannot be explained. What can you say to give the American people confidence that you aren't just focusing our attention on low hanging fruit with easy explanations? Ronald Moultrie: Congressman, I'll start and then Mr. Bray, please feel free to weigh in. So the way that we're approaching it is with a more thorough, standardized methodology than what we have in the past. First and foremost, the Secretary Defense is chartering this effort, this is not someone lower in the Department of Defense, and he is assigned that task to the Office of Secretary of Defense's Under Secretary for Intelligence Security, that's me, because I'm responsible for looking at intelligence matters, I'm responsible for security matters, and this is potentially both. So we're concerning ourselves with the safety of our personnel, the safety of our installations and bases. There's no other higher power than what we have in actually getting after this. And as you have stated, we have been assigned that task to actually stand up an office, the AOIMSG, which I believe the name server will likely change, but we have moved forward in terms of moving to establish that office. We have, as of this week, picked the director for that effort, a very established and accomplished individual. 42:00 Scott Bray: I would say that we're not aware of any adversary that can move an object without discernible means of propulsion. The question then becomes, in many of these cases where we don't have a discernible means of propulsion in the data that we have, in some cases, there are likely sensor artifacts that that may be hiding some of that, there's certainly some degree of something that looks like signature management that we have seen from some of these UAP. But I would caution, I would simply say that there are a number of other events in which we do not have an explanation. There are a small handful in which there are flight characteristics or signature management that we can't explain with the data that we have. 43:40 Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA): With respect to the second two videos showing the small triangles, the hypothesis is that those are commercial drones that because of the use of night vision goggles appear like triangles, is that the operating assessment? Scott Bray: Some type of drone, some type of unmanned aerial system, and it is simply that that light source resolves itself through the night vision goggles onto the SLR camera as a triangle. 47:55 Scott Bray: Allies have seen these, China has established its own version of the UAP task force. So clearly a number of countries have observations of things in the airspace that they can identify. Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH): And do we share data with some, with all? Are they sharing with us? Scott Bray: We share data with some and some share data with us. Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH): But not necessarily all that have publicly reported something? Scott Bray: That's correct. 52:25 Scott Bray: When I say we can't explain, I mean, exactly as you describe there, that there's a lot of information, like the video that we showed, in which there's simply too little data to create a reasonable explanation. There are a small handful of cases in which we have more data that our analysis simply hasn't been able to fully pull together a picture of what happened. Those are the cases where we talked about where we see some indications of flight characteristics or signature management that are not what we had expected. When it comes to material that we have, we have no material. We have detected no emanations within the UAP task force that would suggest it's anything non-terrestrial in origin. 59:35 Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): There have been no collisions between any US assets and one of these UAPs, correct? Scott Bray: We have not had a collision, we've had at least 11 near misses though. 59:55 Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): And there's been no attempt, there's no communications, or any kind of communication signals that emanate from those objects that we've detected, correct? Scott Bray: That's correct. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): And have we attempted to communicate with those objects? Scott Bray: No. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): So we don't we don't even put out an alert saying, you know, "U.S., identify yourself, you are within our flight path," or something like that? Scott Bray: We haven't said anything like that. We've not put anything out like that, generally speaking. For example, in the video that we showed earlier, it appears to be something that is unmanned, appears to be something that may or may not be in controlled flight, and so we've not attempted any communication with that. 1:00:55 Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): And I assume we've never discharged any armaments against a UAP, correct? Scott Bray: That's correct. 1:01:05 Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): How about wreckage? Have we come across any wreckage of any kind of object that has now been examined by you? Scott Bray: The UAP task force doesn't have any wreckage that isn't explainable, that isn't consistent with being of terrestrial origin. 1:01:20 Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL): Do we have any sensors underwater to detect on submerged UAPs, anything that is in the ocean or in the seas? Ronald Moultrie: So I think that would be more properly addressed in a closed session. 1:05:30 Ronald Moultrie: So one of the concerns that we have is that there are a lot of individuals and groups that are putting information out there that that could be considered to be somewhat self serving. We're trying to do what's in the best interests of, one, the Department of Defense, and then two, what's in the best interest of the public, to ensure that we can put factually based information back into the mainstream and back into the bloodstream of the reporting media that we have, so people understand what's there. It's important because we are attempting, as this hearing has drawn out to understand, one, what may just be natural phenomenon, two, what may be sensor phenomenology or things that were happening with sensors, three, what may be legitimate counterintelligence threats to places that we have or bases or installations, or security threats to our platforms. And anything that diverts us off of what we have with the resources that have been allocated to us, sends us off in the spurious chases and hunts that are just not helpful. They also contribute to the undermining of the confidence that the Congress and the American people have that we are trying to get to the root cause of what's happening here, report on that, and then feed that back into our national security apparatus so we are able to protect the American people and our allies. So it is harmful, it is hurtful, but hopefully, if we get more information out there, w

COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN: EPISODE 252 A-Block (1:42) SPECIAL COMMENT:  As they say at the big sports DRAFTS: Jack Smith, you are ON the clock. As soon as midnight passed on the east coast, the Special Counsel's window of warning to the recipient of the Target Letter closed. Donald Trump has had his chance to testify to the Grand Jury or demand that evidence be submitted to the Grand Jury or other witnesses be questioned BY the Grand Jury and all evidence suggests he didn't even bother to say ‘no thanks' and Smith can and will indict him at any time on god-knows-HOW-many-violations of US Code 18 Section 241 Conspiracy Against Rights (the suppression of vote counting statute, with or without violence), US Code 18 Section 371 Conspiracy To Defraud The United States, and US Code 18 Section 1512 Corruptly Obstructing An Official Proceeding – and the only question is, WHEN Smith notifies him and when Trump pauses from chain-eating cheeseburgers and threatening revolutions long enough to leak the news. On “The Simon Conway Show” in Des Moines, just getting viral last night, Trump again stochastically threatens terrorism if he's jailed, saying his supporters are 200 times more fired up than last time. And forgetting he now longer is in charge of the tanks. You will also recall on the 27th of last month when McCarthy went on CNBC and said “Can Trump win that election? Yeah he can. The question is, is he the STRONGEST to win the election? I don't know the answer” and within hours he was back on TV insisting oh yes he DID now the answer and it was Trump is stronger than Hercules and it was clear Trump had yelled at McCarthy, possibly on the phone and possibly simply by opening the window and yelling at him across the country. Politico reports Trump demanded of McCarthy “he needs to endorse me – today!”   McCarthy, who is of course WITH Trump Win, Win, or Tie, had to come up with a bullshit excuse to NOT endorse Trump. Quickly. So quickly you wouldn't believe it. To his credit he cobbled together some sophistry - that he had to remain neutral through the primaries because if he didn't, HIS relationship with HIS caucus could influence which ones of them did and didn't endorse Trump. Trump bought it but was still enraged and demanded a pound of McCarthy and now McCarthy made his fatal mistake. “The house would vote to expunge the two impeachments against the former president. And as McCarthy would communicate through aides later the same day, they would do so before August recess.” And now, Politico says, “we're told that Trump brings up the matter in EVERY CALL he has with McCarthy, prodding the speaker about WHEN he will bring expungement to the floor.” Oh and guess what. Doesn't look like McCarthy has the votes! B-Block (22:31) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: The RFK Junior hearing. NOT GOOD, BOB. A bad idea just before you don't tell the truth about your past antisemitic and anti-vaccine comments, to remind everybody that you are on the record and under oath. And first they bought Clarence Thomas. Then they bought him good pub. (27:23) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Jim Jordan actually repeats the fascist bullshit that my friend Henry Aaron died from a Covid-19 vaccination. Ron DeSantis explains how you can sue Ron DeSantis. And Tucker Carlson's Videopalooza was so effective it would've gotten "The Q Anon Shaman" MORE time in prison. C-Block (34:20) FRIDAYS WITH THURBER: Two stories of Man Versus Life and why you should just leave mediocre enough alone: The fable of The Mouse Who Went To The Country, and Nine Needles.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

EPISODE 251: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:42) SPECIAL COMMENT: The same-day reporting on what was in Jack Smith's 2nd Target Letter to Trump was incomplete (possibly because Trump was the direct or indirect source and he only skimmed the letter and saw only the Statute Heading not the statute itself). If the Letter is any guide, The Special Counsel's centerpiece to the January 6th prosecution of Donald Trump is US Code 18 Section 241 - originally a Reconstruction-era law designed to prosecute Ku Klux Klan members for terrorizing freed slaves and keeping them from voting. It later morphed into the preferred tool for voting fraud and was affirmed in a Supreme Court ruling written by Thurgood Marshall in 1974, per The New York Times. It would fit all the "Fake Electors" schemes, but it would match what Trump tried to do ("I just want to find 11,780 votes") perfectly. It is the denial of the most fundamental constitutional right. Bottom line: Smith wants to prosecute Trump for trying to have a RIGGED THE ELECTION. For ELECTION INTERFERENCE. For FIXING THE VOTE. It would be an irony that would ring through the ages. I'll assess its meaning and how and why we missed it (John Barron? John Miller?) on Tuesday night, plus Trump's disastrous legal day. PLUS: Trump may not have had the WORST day. Ask Marjorie Groomer Greene, who spent the day showing America her porn collection: giant blown-up photos of Hunter Biden having sex. It was so bad, and the Republicans so beclowned themselves, that Congressman Jared Moskowitz quipped "Maybe now we need to call HUNTER Biden 'The Big Guy.'" B-BLOCK (21:43) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: Stanford's student-run campus newspaper wins all the awards: its investigation of the University president's academic research work just led to him quitting. This flashed me back to how MY university president's academic qualifications (Dean of Engineering; co-discoverer of Element Number 85) saved the two of us from getting on a damaged Allegheny Airlines plane they were trying to repair with paper towels (29:12) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: If they're gonna make up Biden Million-Dollar Bribes, go big. And who better to believe anything than Maria Bartiromo. There's also the Maryland Congressional candidate who didn't know he was one, and the self-martyring saga of Twitter clown Catturd. C-BLOCK (35:20) EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY: The sad tale of Fizz in the NYC pound (36:25) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: My producer had to explain to me that no, Rachel Maddow wasn't going to be on our MSNBC primary night coverage because my boss actually had LIED when he said he'd signed her to a contract, and we were about to lose her to CNN because Larry King offered her $250 to work there that night. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A SPECIAL TRUMP INDICTMENT WEEKEND EDITION; EPISODE 224: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:41) SPECIAL COMMENT: I am sorry only sorry the 37 counts in the indictment of Donald Trump is not a capital case. It is that bad, and he will remain a threat to every man, woman and child in this country as long as he lives. Worse yet, the running joke yesterday was Trump spilled all of our secrets - on the floor at Mar-a-Lago. How could all of the foreign spy organizations have NOT stolen them? How do we know they didn't? How can we be certain? “The classified documents Trump stored in his boxes included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries,” reads the indictment. The next sentence is worse. Trump had documents detailing “United States nuclear programs.” There are references to a document about American nuclear weaponry and another about another country's nuclear capacity. The next sentence is WORSE. He had “potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack.” The next sentence is WORSE. He had America's “plans for possible retaliation to a FOREIGN attack.” All that keeps us safe from countries that still harbor dreams of attacking this country – North Korea, Russia, maybe China… all that could have ENABLED those countries to transform those dreams into battle plans… all of that, Donald Trump stole and kept. And kept near the club pool. And near the liquor supply closet. And other documents were kept in the bathroom, next to the toilet. It. Is. That. Bad. It is as bad as the Rosenbergs, as bad as the other nuclear spies of the 1950's, as bad as Rick Ames and Robert Hannssen. It is, in fact, worse. B-Block (29:07) THE REST OF THIS PODCAST IS REPEATED FROM FRIDAY'S EDITION: Donald Trump has been indicted on seven charges and the foremost of them is  a violation of the Espionage Act, specifically designed to send to prison for ten years, someone who was legally allowed to possess UN-classified National Defense Information, but refused to return it to the proper government authorities. It's 18 US Code 793-D. It fits the allegations against Trump better than any of his suits. It erases all his stated defenses and excuses, like Trump's belief he owned a magic wand of declassification, and a new one posited in just the last few days that he was the president so of COURSE he had the right to possess defense information. It describes a crime involving information that ISN'T classified, which the defendant at some point HAD the right to possess. Trump lawyer James Trusty says even he hasn't even seen the actual indictment but only had broad strokes painted to him, and mentioned the Willful retention part of the Espionage Act (confirming 18 US Code 793-D), multiple charges about false statements, conspiracy, and quote “several obstruction-based charges” including witness tampering. At approximately 7 PM Eastern Daylight Time on Thursday June 8, 2023, his attorneys were informed by the Department of Justice by PHONE, and HE was informed by those attorneys, that Trump had been indicted in Miami on seven separate SEALED counts of criminal conduct none of them yet formally revealed to the public but clearly pertaining to the classified and defense documents he stole and kept in his home and office at Mar-a-Lago and reportedly including charges of Illegal Retention of National Defense Information, Conspiracy To Obstruct Justice, False Statements to government investigators. Seven counts. For context: the usual number of indictments for former presidents or current presidential candidates is… approximately… zero. CBS News is reporting that for all his bravado, Trump reacted to the indictments with anger because Trump had quote “people in his inner circle who reassured him for months that it was very unlikely to happen.” And this momentous day in history is capped by the worst home video ever recorded. It is a masterpiece of missteps. On the Rushmore of Rushed-Work. A new high in low. Trump posted it at 7:57, from his golf club in Bedminster New Jersey, he is standing in front of a large painting, seemingly depicting a White House office scene from the late 19th Century. Trump has been positioned directly under a spotlight of some kind so his Flock of Seagulls combover that he has honed to exactly his preferred shade of spray-on Gold Rust-O-Leum has been bleached white and it looks like a yarmulke that has slid forward towards his bright white eyebrows. He is also perfectly placed in front of the painting in such a way that a man shown standing in the painting now appears to be one foot tall and standing ON TRUMP'S SHOULDER. And were that not stupid enough, he is twirling his mustache like Snidely Whiplash just back from tying Sweet Nell to the train tracks. It's startlingly fitting.  C-Block (49:40) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: SCOTUS shocks with voting rights decision that could tip House to Democrats; Chris Licht is gone but so are CNN's ad revenues; We cross our 10 millionth download! (52:00) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Why bash Gene Simmons because he knows about the politics of Northern Ireland? You can still taste the air on the Atlantic seaboard but Fox will still mock it all. And OF COURSE George Santos's lawyer went to the Capitol on January 6th!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

EPISODE 223: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:42) SPECIAL COMMENT:  Donald Trump has been indicted on seven charges and the foremost of them is  a violation of the Espionage Act, specifically designed to send to prison for ten years, someone who was legally allowed to possess UN-classified National Defense Information, but refused to return it to the proper government authorities. It's 18 US Code 793-D. It fits the allegations against Trump better than any of his suits. It erases all his stated defenses and excuses, like Trump's belief he owned a magic wand of declassification, and a new one posited in just the last few days that he was the president so of COURSE he had the right to possess defense information. It describes a crime involving information that ISN'T classified, which the defendant at some point HAD the right to possess. Trump lawyer James Trusty says even he hasn't even seen the actual indictment but only had broad strokes painted to him, and mentioned the Willful retention part of the Espionage Act (confirming 18 US Code 793-D), multiple charges about false statements, conspiracy, and quote “several obstruction-based charges” including witness tampering. At approximately 7 PM Eastern Daylight Time on Thursday June 8, 2023, his attorneys were informed by the Department of Justice by PHONE, and HE was informed by those attorneys, that Trump had been indicted in Miami on seven separate SEALED counts of criminal conduct none of them yet formally revealed to the public but clearly pertaining to the classified and defense documents he stole and kept in his home and office at Mar-a-Lago and reportedly including charges of Illegal Retention of National Defense Information, Conspiracy To Obstruct Justice, False Statements to government investigators. Seven counts. For context: the usual number of indictments for former presidents or current presidential candidates is… approximately… zero. CBS News is reporting that for all his bravado, Trump reacted to the indictments with anger because Trump had quote “people in his inner circle who reassured him for months that it was very unlikely to happen.” And this momentous day in history is capped by the worst home video ever recorded. It is a masterpiece of missteps. On the Rushmore of Rushed-Work. A new high in low. Trump posted it at 7:57, from his golf club in Bedminster New Jersey, he is standing in front of a large painting, seemingly depicting a White House office scene from the late 19th Century. Trump has been positioned directly under a spotlight of some kind so his Flock of Seagulls combover that he has honed to exactly his preferred shade of spray-on Gold Rust-O-Leum has been bleached white and it looks like a yarmulke that has slid forward towards his bright white eyebrows. He is also perfectly placed in front of the painting in such a way that a man shown standing in the painting now appears to be one foot tall and standing ON TRUMP'S SHOULDER. And were that not stupid enough, he is twirling his mustache like Snidely Whiplash just back from tying Sweet Nell to the train tracks. It's startlingly fitting.  B-Block (22:00) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: SCOTUS shocks with voting rights decision that could tip House to Democrats; Chris Licht is gone but so are CNN's ad revenues; We cross our 10 millionth download! (25:00) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Why bash Gene Simmons because he knows about the politics of Northern Ireland? You can still taste the air on the Atlantic seaboard but Fox will still mock it all. And OF COURSE George Santos's lawyer went to the Capitol on January 6th! C-Block (32:00) FRIDAYS WITH THURBER: Some James Thurber stories are funny and some are poignant and some are supernatural. But some also have plots worthy of Arthur Conan Doyle writing Sherlock Holmes. And such a one is "The Catbird Seat."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

EPISODE 222: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:42) SPECIAL COMMENT: The White House correspondent for the UK newspaper “The Independent” Andrew Feinberg reports that Special Counsel Jack Smith will ask his Washington grand jury to indict Donald Trump for violating the Espionage Act and for obstructing justice – no later than a week FROM today and as early as today. The Independent also reports that Smith has been RATHER clever. The anticipated indictment of Trump about the stolen documents will be for violating 18 US Code 793, Gathering, Transmitting or Losing Defense Information, a part of that does NOT require that any actual documents in question to be CLASSIFIED, but merely that there is defense information involved and the accused stole it or told others about it or lost it. That in turn means that the cornerstone of Trump's defense: a president can declassify whatever he wants, he doesn't have to tell anybody he's done it, he just does it by thinking about it with his superior mind – is irrelevant. Classified, shmassified. Those guilty of doing it “shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years or both” The timing caveat, quoting The Independent:” It is understood that prosecutors intend to ask grand jurors to vote on the indictment on Thursday but that vote could be delayed as much as a week until the next meeting of the grand jury to allow for a complete presentation of evidence, or to allow investigators to gather more evidence for presentation if necessary” unquote. The caveat from a news consumer's P-O-V should be: as of recording time, there is no separate reporting confirming what The Independent published. However, The Guardian says Trump's lawyers were told LAST WEEK by Smith's office that he is a prosecutorial target on the stolen documents and obstruction of justice. The New York Times says Trump's legal team was notified he is the target on the HANDLING of the documents, but no idea when. ABC, CNN and Politico report the lawyers were sent a target letter.  The Times adds “Aides and advisers to Mr. Trump spent the day in a state of high tension.” I BET THEY DID. The Trump response to all of this, on social media: “No one has told ME I'm being indicted.” The felon is always the last to know! B-Block (13:37) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: CNN fired Chris Licht - at dawn - in Central Park - explains what caused all the damn SMOKE here. He was fired for being a schmuck. He should've been fired for not understanding that the cable news "middle" he pursued doesn't exist, will never exist, hasn't existed for 25 years. Journalism and "advocacy" and profits can all be made. You just have to be what he wasn't: Good At It. C-Block (29:40) UPDATE: Fox is telling Tucker Carlson he can't DO a "series" on Twitter. They have a contract with him, he can't create video content for any rivals, and they're right. Besides, Episode 1 revealed his awful secret: Tucker Carlson sucks  at just staring at a camera and yammering. Take the cash, Tuckson (30:40) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: I've been talking about Chris Licht since August 19 of last year - the 15th episode in this series. I want you to listen what I said then, the day after he cancelled the network's only show that recognized the threat to democracy that was Fox News and its imitators.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

EPISODE 194: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:44) SPECIAL COMMENT: TRUMP'S GLITCH SNITCH: Putting together scoops by CNN and The New York Times it sure looks like somebody - maybe Trump - is going to be charged with destroying or altering security video of the Mar-a-Lago storage room and the boxes of classified documents kept there. That could be a how-to-manual on breaking 18 US Code 1519 and when it's video or digital evidence, it often really does become a jail sentence of 20 years. And the Times says prosecutors have a cooperating witness from inside Mar-a-Lago and we don't know if that's the same snitch from last August, or a new one.  (11:00) SPECIAL COMMENT: THE SUPREME COURT: Then there's Clarence The Corrupt and Mrs. Clarence The Corrupt. The Thomas Scandals are coming so quickly now they're going to have to coordinate schedules to avoid having them collide with each other. Megadonor/Fascist Harlan Crow's flunkies admit to Pro Publica's latest from the AM, that he paid for some of the tuition for Thomas's grand-nephew (whom he was raising "like a son"). But nobody's commenting on the PM scandal: The Washington Post reports Megadonor/Fascist Leonard Leo not only steered "Another $25K" to Ginni Thomas but did so with the involvement of Kellyann Conway AND Leo instructed her to leave Thomas's name off the paperwork. And this time there is something for the Senate to do about it. Not the Judiciary Committee, but Finance: get all their tax returns and get somebody to give up Clarence The Corrupt. B-Block (19:05) EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY: The inaptly named Venom, on death row in NYC (20:30) IN SPORTS: Saturday, May 6, the sports world will do what it always does on May 6: celebrate the most remarkable track and field milestone of the 20th Century (and maybe of all time). It is now 69 years since Roger Bannister became the first man to run a mile in four minutes or less. It was an accomplishment as unbelievable as the Moon Landing; so unbelievable that an editorial in The New York Times asked if it would ever be accomplished again. Roger Bannister won immortal praise, for the rest of his long life and beyond, despite racism and controversy and one minor detail. He could not POSSIBLY have been the first man to run a mile in four minutes or less. There is ample evidence of runners - other British runners in fact - performing the feat as early as 1770. And yet the history of these earlier athletes has been forgotten or erased - or deliberately purged. Why? C-Block (37:20) IN SPORTS PART TWO: The erasure of the runners who "broke" the four-minute mile barrier in the 18th Century (or earlier) was no accident. It was the deliberate result of the flourishing of the fetishization of amateurism, first in Great Britain in the 1800's, and then throughout the world through the Olympic movement. And it also involved something even worse: blatant, obvious racism. It's an extraordinary story and you should learn the details so you can yell at everybody who tells you about the "great" Roger Bannister.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on Monday Minutes, Tom Dunlap discusses the recent case of a 21-year old National Guard member who allegedly leaked classified documents onto Discord. Tom breaks down the Espionage Act and another section under the US Code: their origins, what they mean, and what their sentencing would entail. As the National Guard member put the documents online, this further complicates the matter. Tune in to find out why.

EPISODE 162: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:41) Special Counsel Jack Smith is reportedly constructing a conspiracy charge - Conspiracy To Obstruct A Congressional Proceeding - against Trump. CBS News reported this once, buried it, doesn't seem to realize what it has. If the charge hangs off the statute 18 US Code 1512 (c) (2) it carries a maximum sentence of 20 years, and Robert Costa reported Smith is "looking into a possible conspiracy case against Trump and people around him trying to block the Congressional proceedings on January 6th" and says witnesses "are being asked about what kind of NATIONAL SECURITY LEVERS Trump was asking about in those final days." And Smith's other primary investigation - the Classified Documents Trump stole and were found at Mar-a-Lago - are still very much in play. Meanwhile back at the ranch: Trump has now made all three possible statements about his possible indictment in the Stormy Daniels case: A) He's Being Arrested B) The Case Has Been Dismissed C) He Really Doesn't Have Any Idea. And Stormy Daniels herself breaks a MAGA critic in half. The MAGA-splainer tweets Trump wouldn't touch Daniels with a 10-foot pole; she slams back: no, he did it with a 3-inch pole. Which circles back neatly to the idea that Trump could go to jail with his national defense lever in his hand. B-Block (15:37) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: Israel falls apart and 16% of the nation protests fascist changes there; pay attention, we may have to protest this way here. And Elon Musk has only lost $24,000,000,000 on Twitter in five months but he can make it up if everybody buys a $7 checkmark. EVERYBODY. (21:10) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: Marsha Blackburn attacks Democrats for trying to "ban" everything. She's tried to ban at least 7 things in the last two years; The John Fetterman's Been Replaced By A Body Double conspirators get a tremendous disappointment as Facts ruin their fun. And this is 57-dimensional chess: You know what the Russian Sputnik Covid vaccine was for? To put chips in Russians so they can be targeted by...American missiles? Huh? C-Block (26:40) EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY (27:40) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: I can tell you from my own experience - four different times - that there's nothing fake about receiving "fake anthrax" in the mail, as Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg did Friday after Trump's threat of "death and destruction."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

EPISODE 132: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:41) SPECIAL COMMENT: We'll get Breaking Balloon News out of the way: four in eight days IS a lot, but our ability to recognize them grew exponentially after the first one, and experts suggest the Pentagon has been flummoxed by unknown aerial craft for years. Meanwhile, Trump's newest Classified Documents crime may seem trivial but is extraordinarily important. Giving docs to a campaign staffer to scan into a laptop and a thumb drive is a textbook violation of 18 US Code 798 (a) "DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION." And it raises a peck of new questions: why did CNN identify the staffer in a tweet, then delete the tweet without explanation? What do you mean the staffer they named spent time studying in Russia? Was the laptop attached to the internet? Were the classified documents transferred to ANOTHER computer? What was the thumb drive for? And honestly, couldn't Trump's newest new newer lawyer come up with a better excuse for Trump having the classified documents folder in his bedroom than "he liked to use it to cover the light on his phone that used to interrupt his sleep?"  B-Block (18:36) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: My gun rights are more important than your physics, said the late gun rights advocate to the MRI staff. Matt Gaetz invites the wrong Vet. And Chris Licht's latest idea to save CNN is: Charles Barkley doing the news. (23:13) IN SPORTS: Not only was the Super Bowl decided on a penalty that they might as well have called "Defensive Sneezing," but those gambling ads are going to make outcomes like this look worse and worse. Plus one of those commercials seems to have purloined my catchphrase; Fox again finds the worst ex-baseball player to join its baseball show; and ESPN - and I - mourn our veteran producer Barry Sacks. C-Block (32:45) EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY: Theodore, in St. Louis (33:40) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: YOU think the Super Bowl controversy is that lousy holding call with 1:52 left. Today in Washington, the political media thinks the Super Bowl Controversy is the fact that President Biden didn't do an interview with Fox for the Pre-Game Show! As somebody who hosted that show AND a presidential inauguration in a span of thirteen days, I can tell you that the politicos have no clue how unpopular politicians who inject themselves into sportscasts are. I came thisclose to having to do "that" interview in 2009 and I tried to get them to just cancel it. The President who does not a news interview on Super Bowl Sunday but instead puts $100 Million of the nation's money on a series of prop bets and does an interview about THAT will get himself re-elected.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jeffery and Pat are joined by independent newspaper publisher Todd McGreevy. Located in the Iowa and Illinois Quad Cities region, the River Cities' Reader monthly print publication and daily website has been asking too many questions since 1993. The fifth protected right in the Constitution's First Amendment is the Petition for Redress of Grievances and in this episode several instances of such petitioning are explored. McGreevy asserts that the petition clause is the only right that has not been adjudicated at the Supreme Court level, as evidenced by the dozens of years of effort by Bob Schulz and the We The People Foundation. The rights for patients to petition for redress when their doctor's prescription for live saving ivermectin is at the core of the case Dr. David Hartsuch filed in Scott County, Iowa. Link: https://www.rcreader.com/news-releases/iowa-doctor-and-former-senator-accuses-boards-unlawfully-endangering-iowans Hartsuch also authored this piece about how hospitals are not about patient results, and tied it into Jerry McGuire film. Link: https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/the-things-we-think-but-dont-say McGreevy talks about the Brunson vs Congress case that is being reviewed in a January 6, 2023 Conference by SCOTUS. The case is vilified by some as "hopium" and "Q-Anonsense" while McGreevy asserts that US Code does state that if anyone gives aid to an enemy during war that is treason and makes an office holder incapable of holding that office. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381. The gist of the Brunson case is that over 100 congress people called for investigations of election fraud in 2021 prior to approving the Electoral College votes. And rigging an election is an act of war. McGreevy asserts that there's no risk or harm in waiting this one out to see if the effort gains any traction at SCOTUS. More info at https://7discoveries.com The ultimate petitioning for a redress of grievances is protesting at the door steps of the government offices while they conduct their duties as their oath of office requires. This is what was occuring on January 6, 2021 McGreevy asserts. And the story published a year ago in the Reader is reviewed where Pat and four others provided first hand accounts of what they saw on Jan 6. Link: https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/in-their-own-words-january-6-2021 Follow Us!!! twitter.com/ConspiracyFarm1 Support the show: Healthy Soil = Healthy Food: www.soilsavior.com/ Simple Clean Food: www.thrivelife.com/pjmiletich Black Gold Oxygen Boost: www.organicsupersoldier.com Chemical Free Body Supplements www.chemicalfreebody.com use promo code PAT1776

Rip debunks the false assertions that Title 42 of the US Code "suspending the right to introduce certain persons into the United States from countries where a quarantinable communicable disease exists" was established by the Trump Administration (as it has existed since the 1940s) and Rowe and Amelia discuss the movie "I Wanna Dance with Somebody" outing Whitney Houston as bi-sexual and the erosion of integrity in US politics. 

Welcome to Episode 57 of the Monday Night MasterDebaters where I am joined by Ryan from Dangerous World Podcast, Brandon Williams from OneStupidFuck.com, Bob from Hidden in Plain Sight Podcast and Nate from Reality Czars Podcast. Tonight we dive into the United States Corporation and legal system. We look at definition of citizen/United States/United States Citizen, Black's Law, Law vs Statue, States are sub-corporations of US Corp in DC, US Codes, US National vs US Citizen, liens, role of notary, signature vs autograph “without prejudice” References from the show: https://www.law.cornell.edu 18 US Code 1545 18US Code 112 18 US Code 242 18 US Code 241 19 US Code 81o 26 USC 7701 UCC1-308 UCC 9-307H 22 CFR 51.3 Please leave a review & share the show! Go support the great guests at: Brandon Williams from https://onestupidfuck.com Free ‘Contract Killer Course' Moral Bob from Hidden in Plain Sight Podcast & Flat Earth School Series https://www.instagram.com/spaceisfakeandgay/ IG: @thehiddenpod actualactivists.com https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-in-plain-sight/id1507833371 Nate from Reality Czars https://www.instagram.com/realityczarspod/ altmediaunited.com/reality-czars https://www.youtube.com/@RealityCzarsPod Ryan from Dangerous World Podcast Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/DangerousWorldPodcast/posts IG: @dangerousworldpod Merch: https://dangerousworldstore.com/ Mat from The Great Deception Podcast Linktree: https://linktr.ee/thegreatdeceptionpodcast IG: https://www.instagram.com/thegreatdeceptionpodcast/ YouTube: https://youtube.com/user/Barons44 Email: thegreatdeceptionpodcast@gmail.com --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/realityczars/support

Welcome to Episode 57 of the Monday Night MasterDebaters where I am joined by Ryan from Dangerous World Podcast, Brandon Williams from OneStupidFuck.com, Bob from Hidden in Plain Sight Podcast and Nate from Reality Czars Podcast. Tonight we dive into the United States Corporation and legal system. We look at definition of citizen/United States/United States Citizen, Black's Law, Law vs Statue, States are sub-corporations of US Corp in DC, US Codes, US National vs US Citizen, liens, role of notary, signature vs autograph “without prejudice” References from the show: https://www.law.cornell.edu 18 US Code 1545 18US Code 112 18 US Code 242 18 US Code 241 19 US Code 81o 26 USC 7701 UCC1-308 UCC 9-307H 22 CFR 51.3 Please leave a review & share the show! Go support the great guests at: Brandon Williams from https://onestupidfuck.com Free ‘Contract Killer Course' Moral Bob from Hidden in Plain Sight Podcast & Flat Earth School Series https://www.instagram.com/spaceisfakeandgay/ IG: @thehiddenpod actualactivists.com https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-in-plain-sight/id1507833371 Nate from Reality Czars https://www.instagram.com/realityczarspod/ altmediaunited.com/reality-czars https://www.youtube.com/@RealityCzarsPod Ryan from Dangerous World Podcast Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/DangerousWorldPodcast/posts IG: @dangerousworldpod Merch: https://dangerousworldstore.com/ Mat from The Great Deception Podcast Linktree: https://linktr.ee/thegreatdeceptionpodcast IG: https://www.instagram.com/thegreatdeceptionpodcast/ YouTube: https://youtube.com/user/Barons44 Email: thegreatdeceptionpodcast@gmail.com To Make Contributions: PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/MatthewTerrillion?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US Venmo: https://account.venmo.com/u/Matthew-Terrillion Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thegreatdeceptionpodcast Merch: https://my-store-cb4b4e.creator-spring.com --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/the-great-deception-podcast/support

Part 3 of 4. Dr. Shaun Baker and Senior Fellow Alvin Townley continue to discuss the use of the US POWs as propaganda tools during the Vietnam conflict. How did the US Code of Conduct apply to the American POWs? How did captivity, cooperation, and leadership lend itself to a reinterpretation of the code? What does BACKUS mean, and how did it impact the actions of the POWs? And what is the significance of the statement "Return with Honor"?

Derek Johnson is a US Army Veteran, public speaker and Country Music Artist. He is best known for his two hits "Real Cool Kinda Hot" and "Right Beer Right Now." When Derek was in active duty, he had top-secret military clearance. Active military is bound by oath and honor not to disclose information about what is happening to the general public. Because he is no longer "active" he is not restricted from disclosing information he learned in his role during active duty. Derek is currently on the road with the Truth Tour 2 traveling the country and spreading the message that Donald Trump may still be President under military law. On September 12, 2018 President Donald J. Trump signed executive order 13848 imposing certain sanctions in the event of foreign interference in a United States election and many other executive orders pertinent to what we are seeing unfold. Derek also references 47 US CODE 606 "War Powers of the President" extending Donald Trumps powers as Commander In Chief and that the United States Military is in complete control. According to Derek, on January 20th, 2021 by Military and Constitutional Law, President Trump received a full grade military and constitutionally regulated Inauguration ceremony at Joint Base Andrews. Follow Derek and his music: Website: derekjohnsoncountry.com Facebook Music: www.facebook.com/derekjohnsoncountry 1776 Nation: www.facebook.com/1776nation Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/4LpnkCX90qkKLc45KKssMz?si=6jL6Fm0lTfmS59isJNqrnQ Instagram: @derekjohnsoncountry Truth Social: @derekjohnson Telegram: @rattletrap1776 Join us on Liberty Monks Live on Monday and Wednesday evenings at 9pm EST. Subscribe to FreedomFirst.TV and use the code "Monks" to receive a 25% discount on your Freedom First TV membership and enjoy full access to the entire archive at Freedom First TV! Please subscribe at www.libertymonks.com to get up to date info on all of our latest episodes! Follow us on our Facebook page Follow us on: Twitter and Gettr See Select Videos on: YouTube Rumble Brighteon Listen on iTunes, Spotify and Anchor

HERSCHMANN SINKS TRUMP A BLOCK (1:45) SPECIAL COMMENT: Eric Herschmann may be today's John Dean. In 2021 he warned Trump to return all the classified documents he took with him. Because Trump ignored his advice that gives prosecutors a smoking gun (3:35) Because the Espionage Act requires the perp to have "WILLFULLY" concealed the stolen secrets (3:50) And 18 US Code 2071 also says any convicted "SHALL BE DISQUALIFIED FROM HOLDING ANY OFFICE UNDER THE UNITED STATES." (4:32) Herschmann has already testified against Trump at the House 1/6 Committee and is to testify to a Federal Grand Jury. (5:31) And Trump's handpicked 'Special Master" Raymond Dearie demands they tell him what Trump claims to have declassified and when, sending Trump's lawyers into a panic (7:53) While Trump is only worried about where Biden sat at Queen Elizabeth's funeral service and even in that, he inadvertently admits Biden is president, and he isn't (9:12) Meanwhile: Told you so: The DeSantis Migrant Kidnapping disaster is being investigated as a crime in Texas. B BLOCK (14:00) EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY: Colson (15:22) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: Sad sack New Hampshire Senate candidate Don Bolduc steps in it; GOP threatening to investigate its beloved U.S. Chamber of Commerce?; And what does TV news do, now that Elizabeth has finally been buried? (18:43) IN SPORTS: Now the Saudi Blood Money Golf Tour sends Greg Norman to DC to lobby on its heinous behalf. (20:50) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: The GOP Congressman who confesses that unpaid student debt is the greatest recruiting tool for the US military, vies with a NYPD Lieutenant with 52 disciplinary allegations, and the Funeral Spider, for the honors. C BLOCK (25:24) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: It's 40 years since CNN let me spend well into three figures to take the three key figures from the Players Union to dinner during the 1982 NFL Strike. I'll even reveal the day a players' negotiator tried to strangle an owners' negotiator.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3 STEPS TO STOP TRUMP TODAY A BLOCK (1:48) SPECIAL COMMENT: Ron DeSantis didn't "pull off a political stunt." He is guilty of kidnapping and human trafficking and must be arrested. (3:42) He's violated 8 US Code 1324 and (5:31) his agent lured people onto the flight to Massachusetts. There are 50 counts; it's 5 years each (8:09) Incredibly, the White House already had a meeting scheduled today about "litigation options" against DeSantis and Abbott (8:49) And we must stand up against the psychopathic scum the way our ancestors did against the psychopathic scum of 1860 (10:30) Plus: there's a three-step process to bypass the corrupt Trump-appointee who just erased American law to protect the pimp who put her on the bench: Appeal, Waive All Executive Privilege, and INDICT THE M'F'ER NOW, especially after the interview (13:05) in which he made seven separate incitements to another insurrection in just 37 seconds of an interview.(14:30) A reminder: the bully understands only the kick in the crotch. B BLOCK (19:10) EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY: Cooper, in Los Angeles (20:42) POSTSCRIPTS TO THE NEWS: Marjorie Taylor Greene tries three times to kick and push a Young Voters' Organizer, finally gets her, no word on charges; Chris "Eats Paste" Licht demotes CNN's top liberal primetime host to co-host of the little-watched morning program (alongside a former reporter for "The Daily Caller"), WSJ whiffs on Biden's Railroad (25:30) IN SPORTS: Federer goes, Ohio Republicans vote themselves the right to inspect undressed teenaged girl athletes, Washington Commanders can't tell WHICH Washington (28:22) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: D'Souza confuses an arrested Republican for a Democrat, Mike Lindell literally forgets This-Is-A-Hardee's and Blake Masters wants to fire all the generals as they vie for hours. C BLOCK (34:10) FRIDAYS WITH THURBER: The Secret Life of Walter Mitty!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Derek John, US Military Veteran, had top-secret military clearance. He is not violating any military regulations. Everything you've witnessed in the last five years is the most monumental historical covert operation to date and Donald Trump is your President by law by order and by regulations of the military and the constitution and the way its proven is by National Guard who is activated outside of their state and outside of our country and the only activations of the National Guard came from President Trump. Active military cannot tell civilians what is going on, by oath and by honor. This is why you have not heard about what is happening in the background, because it is a military operation and the military cannot break their oath. He mentions pertinent executive orders such as 13848 (Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election), Military Law, National Guard Activation in all 50 states, Declaration of Independence, USA Revolutionary War, the fake inauguration of fake President in 2021, Quantum.gov, and SO MUCH MORE!!! 47 US CODE 606: “War Powers of the President”, which extends President Trump‘s power as President in war WHICH WE ARE IN 59:00 min mark: Jan 20, 2021 by Military Law and Constitutional Law, President Trump received a full grade military and constitutionally regulated Inauguration ceremony at Joint Base Andrews: • He exited Marine One, on the red carpet roll out, on 4th Ruffle of “Hail to the Chief”, the 21-gun salute started. The official presidential salute battery was at the ceremony. Only Presidents receive this. • Both Air Force One's we're present that day at Joint Base Andrews. On January 20, 2021, Joe Biden was given and received a full-grade military regulation funeral service. They left the capital in a funeral procession and went to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. There was a 3-volley salute with 13 fires which is for funerals only. Biden is a “Minister Resident” - A person who takes up temporary residence in a foreign territory. They did not play “hail to the chief”, they played “Honors March One” which is only played for a Minister Resident. He was sworn in at 11:47am EST, which is a violation of the 20th amendment of the constitution of the USA which specifically says the President's term is to begin at 12:00 noon. GITMO: 4-5 aircraft daily from Mar-A-Lago to GITMO. President Trump and the Pentagon “are spending” $500 million with additional court rooms and space for tens of thousands of prisoners. There are 300 military aircraft in the air every day over the USA extending to GITMO. Biden did not get the 21 gun salute at his fake inauguration: https://write-aholic.com/why-didnt-biden-get-a-presidential-battery-salute/ President Trump is Commander in Chief of our Military who is in control. A MUST WATCH FOR EVERY AMERICAN RIGHT NOW! THIS MAN IS ON FIRE! WAKE UP AMERICA!!! https://www.facebook.com/derekjohnsoncountry https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtMhQvBQzftBzIYVQD_8v1w https://www.instagram.com/derekjohnsoncountry/

If you or anyone you know is President Biden, please dear god listen to this episode and then get the word out. The FEC has been broken and corrupted by Trump appointees. Biden could have easily done something about it from day 1 of his administration and he just... hasn't. Listen to the full story and see example #9,576 of why Trump and Republicans can never be trusted in office. In the first segment, we get a big update on the Musk Twitter deal. Andrew nailed another one! Links: 52 US Code § 30106 - FEC, 52 US Code § 30107 - Powers of Commission, 52 US Code § 30108 - Advisory opinions, 52 US Code § 30104 - Reporting requirements, Hillary campaign FEC, FEC ruling, conciliation

If you watched Tuesday's hearing, you saw the heartbreaking story of how these two amazing women were viciously slandered by Rudy Giuliani and other members of the big lie insurrectionists. Their lives were absolutely turned upside down by complete racist fabrications. Do they have recourse? What will happen? Then, Andrew breaks down the complete breakdown of the legal fabric of our society. Say goodbye to any meaningful sense in which you have the right to remain silent! The Supreme Court has gutted Miranda rights, because why the f not, apparently. Oh but they make up for it by eroding states' ability to restrict open carry of guns. So that's cool. Links: environmental lawyer quote, Freeman and Moss v Giuliani, Giuliani idiot motion to dismiss, Maryland Code, Public Safety § 5-306, Vega v. Tekoh, 42 US Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

Author and leader Thann Bennett shares insights from Washington D.C. where he says the tone feels like a mountain of crises. He talks about rising gas prices, the fall-out from the Supreme Court leak, the January 6 hearings, and more. Thann's book is “My Fame, His Fame.” To find the law mentioned, Google search US Code 18 USC 1507

Author and leader Thann Bennett shares insights from Washington D.C. where he says the tone feels like a mountain of crises. He talks about rising gas prices, the fall-out from the Supreme Court leak, the January 6 hearings, and more. Thann's book is “My Fame, His Fame.” To find the law mentioned, Google search US Code 18 USC 1507

Another horrific mass shooting has us all asking WTF can we actually do about this? There is plenty of reason for pessimism, but Opening Arguments is here to break down what might realistically be done. This is part 1, focusing on why gun companies are immune from civil actions and what we should do about that. Part 2 will be about the police response. In the first segment, we give an update on Elon Musk. There was a filing that went virtually unnoticed but sheds more light on the Twitter situation. Links: Musk SEC filing, letter to himself, 15 US Code § 7902, Definition: qualified civil liability action from 15 USC § 7903, Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of US Mass Shootings

Some folks on the internet have been trying to "one weird trick" our way to saving Roe by claiming that tribal sovereignty could help ensure abortion access. Well, not only is this wrong, it's offensively wrong. OA brings you the deep-dive on Indian Law (yes, that's what it's called...) with a refresher on McGirt v. Oklahoma, and why none of that equals an instant abortion rights fix. After that, a wildcard question – now that Roe is being overturned, does that mean justices committed perjury in their confirmation hearings? Links: McGirt v. Oklahoma, 18 US Code § 1153 - Offenses committed within Indian country, The Hyde Amendment, Indigenous Women's Reproductive Rights: The Indian Health Service and Its Inconsistent Application of the Hyde Amendment

The 5th Circuit has never been in the top 10 circuits in terms of not being insane, but now it has gone even more off the rails. Andrew takes us through the deep dive on a terrible decision that will decimate the SEC's ability to do anything, and why the logic will be applied elsewhere. Before that, a quick update on how much Elon Musk sucks and has completely blown it with the Twitter deal. And a quick word on primaries. Links: Twitter says it will 'enforce' Elon Musk's $44 billion acquisition deal, 28Patriot” v. SEC, 15 US Code § 78u–2 - Civil remedies in administrative proceedings, Jellum & Tincher, “The Shadow of Free Enterprise”, Are the SEC's Administrative Law Judges Biased? An Empirical Investigation, Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC, 138 S.Ct. 1365 (2018), Summary of Administrative Law Judge Responsibilities

A wire fraud suspect, Adedunmola Gbadegesin was on Monday April 26, 2022, extradited to the United States where he is wanted in a case of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering.The offences contravene Title 18, US Code, Section 1349 and 1956 (h) and carries a maximum jail term of 20 years.His extradition was coordinated by the EFCC, following a request from the office of the Attorney General of the Federation, pursuant to a February 11, 2022 Order by Justice D.E Osiagor of the Federal High Court, Lagos, in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/765/21, which granted a request to extradite the suspect to the United States to answer to criminal charges bordering on romance scam, wire fraud and money laundering.Gbadegesin who was arrested on September 2, 2021, is alleged to have defrauded an America lady living in Kentucky, United States, of over $148,000

As you've no doubt already heard, a totally unqualified, Trump appointed, 34 year old Florida Judge has completely destroyed the national travel mask mandate with the stroke of a pen. Andrew breaks down how dumb the opinion is, and Thomas laments that Democratic leaders are somehow still pretending we live in a society. After that, we've got a deep-dive into bankruptcy, inspired by both Alex Jones and the Health Care Sharing Ministry Sharity. Sharity declared bankruptcy leaving 10,000 members holding the bag for $50 million in unpaid bills. Who could have possibly predicted this except oh yeah see OA497: Christian Health Sharing Is a Scam. Links: 86 Fed Reg 8025, The Opinion, 42 US Code § 264, Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, Sharity Leaves 10K Families with Millions in unpaid bills, Infowars Bankruptcy Petition, Infowars form 202, Jones thinks he set up a trust, 28 US Code § 1334 - Bankruptcy cases and proceedings, 28 US Code § 1452 - Removal of claims related to bankruptcy cases, CT bankruptcy removal, Sharity Plan, Objection, Summary

Amazon workers in Staten Island overcame extensive union busting efforts and won a vote to unionize! This is great news, and we can only hope it has a snowball effect. Listen as Andrew breaks down the journey, the conditions that led to the effort and the disgusting lengths Amazon went to to punish the employees who started organizing. In the A segment, we get a delightful little Alex Jones update. He finally showed up for a deposition! Links: Docket, Jones moves to purge contempt, small wrinkle, NLRB order on bogus Amazon election, Smalls fired, Exhibit 13, Amazon racist comments, 29 US Code § 157 - Right of employees as to organization, 29 US Code § 158 - Unfair labor practices

We have some new laws! In this episode, a brief overview of the government funding law that (finally) funds the government for 2022 and provides money and weapons to Ukraine, a new law that protects drinking water, a new law that slightly reduces the corruption of Puerto Rico's financial oversight board, and a new law that guarantees you rights that corporate contracts have been taking away. Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal Support Congressional Dish via Patreon (donations per episode) Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536. Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Executive Producer Recommended Congressional Dish Episode CD076: Weapons for the World Background Sources Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes CD248: Understanding the Enemy CD244: Keeping Ukraine CD229: Target Belarus CD170: Electrifying Puerto Rico CD147: Controlling Puerto Rico CD128: Crisis in Puerto Rico Recommended Congressional Dish YouTube Videos What is the World Trade System? Revolution of Dignity or Regime Change? Ukraine 2014 Explained. Earmarks Jamie Dupree on Twitter Jamie Dupree. Mar 10, 2022. “Russian oil ban heads to Senate.” Regular Order by Jamie Dupree. Continuing Resolution Mary Ellen McIntire. Mar 9, 2022. “House Democrats' retreat upended by spending bill delays.” Roll Call. Ballotpedia. Updated February 11, 2021. “Election results, 2020: Incumbent win rates by state.” Red Hill Water Contamination Sophia McCullough. Mar 7, 2022. “Pentagon to permanently shut down leaking Red Hill fuel tank facility.” Hawai'i Public Radio. Scott Kim. Mar 4, 2022. “Tap water declared safe for 3 more Pearl Harbor neighborhood zones.” Hawai'i Public Radio. Sophia McCullough. Mar 1, 2022. “Confused about the timeline for the Red Hill fuel storage facility and contaminated water? Read this.” Hawai'i Public Radio. Associated Press, HPR News Staff. Nov 22, 2021. “Navy says 14K gallons of fuel and water leaked from a 'drain line' near the Red Hill facility.” Hawai'i Public Radio. Scott Kim and Catherine Cruz. Oct 27, 2021. “Navy says operator error was the cause of a May fuel leak from the Red Hill storage facility.” Hawai'i Public Radio. Lead Pipes Karen Pinchin. Sep 10, 2019. “The EPA Says Flint's Water is Safe — Scientists Aren't So Sure.” Frontline. Brittany Greeson. “Lead Pipes Are Widespread and Used in Every State.” Natural Resources Defense Council. Puerto Rico Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. Feb 18, 2019. “Informative Motion Regarding Publication and Filing of Final Investigative Report – McKinsey & Company, Inc.” Case: 17-03283-LTS. Forced Arbitration Matt Stoller. Mar 7, 2022. “Monopolies Take a Fifth of Your Wages.” BIG. Laws H.R.2471 - Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 House Vote Senate Vote Law Outline DIVISION C: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Title VII: General Provisions Sec. 8139: $300 million from the "Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide" account must be used for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative The money can be used for "salaries and stipends" of Ukraine's military in addition to equipment and support Sec. 8140: Prohibitions against Russia will not be lifted until "the armed forces of the Russian Federation have withdrawn from Crimea, other than armed forces present on military bases" agreed upon by the Russian and Ukrainian governments. Sec. 8141: "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide arms, training or other assistance to the Azov Battalion. DIVISION K - DEPARTMENT OF STATE, FOREIGN OPERATIONS, AND RELATED PROGRAMS Title VII: General Provisions Sec. 7047: "None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be made available for the implementation of any action or policy that recognizes the sovereignty of the Russian Federation over Crimea or other territory in Ukraine." This will end when the Secretary of State certifies that "the Government of Ukraine has reestablished sovereignty over Crimea and other territory in Ukraine under the control of Russian-backed separatists." DIVISION N: UKRAINE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT Title I: Department of Agriculture $100 million for Food for Peace grants Title III: Department of Defense $195.5 million for US military personnel $213 million for Air Force procurement $5.5 billion for operations and maintenance $3.5 billion of this is for replacing weapons given to Ukraine and for "defense services" and "military eduction and training" provided to the Government of Ukraine. Title VI: Department of State Authorizes $4 billion for direct loans to Ukraine and NATO countries, along with permission to reduce or cancel their obligations to pay us back. Amount provided this way "shall not be considered assistance for the purposes of provisions of law limiting assistance to a country" $2.65 billion to countries housing Ukrainians refugees for emergency food and shelter $1.4 billion for refugees $1.12 billion for Ukraine and "other countries" - Poland and Hungary in particular - that are enacting IMF economic reforms and expanding the private sector $650 million for the "foreign military financing program" for Ukraine "and countries impacted by the situation" $647 million for the "Economic Support Fund" which can be transferred to fund activities "related to public engagement, messaging, and countering disinformation." Expands the emergency powers of the President in 2022 to allow him to provide $3 billion in military equipment, services and money to foreign countries and international organizations, instead of the usual limit of $100 million per year Increases the amount of weapons that are allowed to be exported from $2.05 billion to $3.1 billion $120 million for "Transition Initiatives" H.R.6617 - Further Additional Extending Government Funding Act Law Outline DIVISION A - FURTHERING ADDITIONAL CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2022 Sec. 101: Extends government funding at 2021 levels until March 11, 2022. Allows the Department of Defense to spend their Operations and Maintenance and emergency funds to respond to the Red Hill Bulk Storage Facility spill but caps the spending at $53 million. Adds $250 million to their budget for 2022 to address drinking water contamination caused by the spill. Adds $100 to their budget so they can comply with the Hawaii state order to remove the fuel from the Red Hill facility. H.R.1192 - Puerto Rico Recovery Accuracy in Disclosures Act of 2021 House vote: 429-0 Senate: Unanimous Consent Law Outline Sec 2: Disclosure by Professional Persons Seeking Approval of Compensation Under Section 316 or 317 of PROMESA Requires attorneys, accountants, appraisers, auctioneers, agents, and other professional persons to file a disclosure listing their conflicts of interest with debtors, creditors - or their attorneys and accountants - and the oversight board members, directors, and employees. Failure to file the disclosure, or an incomplete disclosure, will prevent that person from being paid. Being "not a disinterested person" or having an "adverse interest" will also disqualify that person from compensation. This will only apply to cases filed AFTER enactment of this law (January 20, 2022) H.R.4445 - Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 Committee Report House Debate Law Outline Sec. 2: Predispute Arbitration of Disputes Involving Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment. Invalidates predispute arbitration clauses in contracts if the person alleging sexual harassment or sexual assault or a representative of a class action lawsuit elects to go to court instead of use arbitration. This will apply whether the case is to be filed in Federal, Tribal, or State court. The decision over where the case will be heard will be made by a court, not by an arbitrator regardless of what is in the contract. Sec 3: Applicability Will only apply to any dispute or claim that "arises or accrues" on or after the date of enactment. Hearings and Debate House Debate on H.R. 1192: Puerto Rico Recovery Accuracy in Disclosures Act of 2021 February 23, 2022 Highlighted PDF of debate on the house floor Clips 1:19:09 Jennifer Gonzalez-Colon: Representative Velazquez and myself have proposed this bipartisan initiative in the last two congresses having achieved passage in the house during the last session Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX): In response to dire fiscal issues facing Puerto Rico at the time, Congress passed the Puerto Rico oversight management and economic stability Act, or Preska in 2016. That legislation established the financial oversight and management board with control over Puerto Rico's budget laws, financial plans and regulations and the authority to retain professionals to assist the board in executing its responsibilities. Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY): The Puerto Rico recovery accuracy in disclosures act of 2021 or product eliminates a double standard currently facing Puerto Rico. On the US Code and federal bankruptcy procedure. Any conflicts of interest or even the perception of such conflict between those working on the bankruptcy and the debtor there are required to be disclosed. However, a loophole in the current law prevents this requirement from being extended to the people of Puerto Rico. Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC): Most significantly the gap in the 2016 law created a potential for undisclosed compensation terms and undiscovered conflicts of interest visa vi parties and interest for professional serving in Puerto Rico's bankruptcy. Resident Commissioner Jenniffer González Colon: Learning that someone was involved in businesses of one of the parties in the case only after they are named and working on the case does not create assurance of their commitment to the best interest of Puerto Rico or even managing the depth. Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC): This builds disclosure and oversight requirements increase the likelihood that conflicts of interest will be caught and timely addressed before compensation decisions are made. Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY): While we can have different opinions on how effectively the oversight board is carrying out its mission, one thing should be clear. The island's residents should be entitled to the same rights and protections of any debtor on the mainland. House Debate on H.R.4445 - Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 February 7, 2022 Highlighted PDF of debate on the house floor Clips 9:21 Rep. Michelle Fischbach (R-MN): If H.R. 4445 becomes law contracts will be far less likely to include the option to arbitrate. 10:28 Rep. Michelle Fischbach (R-MN): Why are some in Congress so intent on taking this legislation forward today? For years, Democrats have tried to gut arbitration agreements for all kinds of different claims and plaintiffs. If Democrats had their way, everyone from consumers to civil rights plaintiffs, to those with antitrust claims, to individuals using financial service products and others would not be able to contract in advance to resolve disputes through arbitration. 47:33 Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): We know that if parties can't agree in advance to arbitrate then they are unlikely to agree to arbitrate after there has been a dispute. As a result, the plaintiff may never get to arbitration. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility: The Current Crisis, the Response, and the Way Forward House Armed Services Committee, Subcommittee on Readiness January 11, 2022 This hearing conducted oversight into the Navy's maintenance of the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, the Navy's investigation into and response to the November 2021 release of fuel from Red Hill facility impacting drinking water, its impacts on service members and civilians, clean-up and remediation efforts, and next steps forward. Witnesses: Vice Admiral Yancy Lindsey, Commander, Navy Installations Command Rear Admiral Blake Converse, Deputy Command, U.S. Pacific Fleet Rear Admiral John K. Korka, Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command Chief of Civil Engineers Rear Admiral Peter Stamatopoulos, Supply Corps, United States Navy, Commander, Naval Supply Systems Command and 49th Chief of Supply Corps Captain Michael McGinnis Pacific Fleet Surgeon, Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet Clips 9:05 Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA): Why does Red Hill exist in the first place? Even before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States had grown concerned about the vulnerability of above ground fuel storage tanks in 1940. The construction began on the Red Hill bulk fuel storage facility, a one in a kind engineering innovation that secured the fuel from enemy aerial attack. The facility holds 250 million gallons of fuel in 20 steel lined underground tanks encased in concrete. These tanks are connected to three gravity fed pipelines, running two and a half miles to Pearl Harbor fuel appears. However, a statistic less commonly quoted by the DoD is that the facility is also 100 feet above the groundwater aquifer that provides water to the residents of Oahu. Thus, it has always been the responsibility of the military to ensure that these tanks are maintained in a manner that not only protects the wartime fuel supply, but the people have a Oahu water supply 18:45 Rear Admiral Blake Converse: I want to start by saying that the Navy caused this problem, we own it, and we're gonna fix it. 19:45 Rear Admiral Blake Converse: Beginning on November 28, residents of certain neighborhoods on our Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam here in Hawaii in military housing began recording vapors, discoloration and contamination of the water provided by the Navy. The Red Hill shaft well, which sits near the Navy's Red Hill bulk fuel storage facility was immediately suspected to be the source of this contamination as that was the source of the drinking water for those affected neighborhoods. So it was shut down that evening, November 28. And it just remained isolated since that day. Later, samples from the Red Hill shaft well would confirm the presence of petroleum contamination. 39:40 Captain Michael McGinnis: Medical teams have screened over 5900 patients during this event. The vast majority were conducted within the first two weeks of our response. patient's symptoms were consistent with an acute environmental exposure event. patient's symptoms consistent with the following nausea, vomiting, headache, diarrhea, skin or eye irritation. Once patients were removed from the water source, the symptoms rapidly resolved. 42:12 Rear Admiral Blake Converse: Our best information is that this recent spill was due to operator error. 1:31:45 Rep. Kaiali'i Kahele (D-HI): Tanks number three, number four and number 11 have not been inspected for approximately 40 years. So my question to Navy Supply Systems Command is why are these tanks still in operation? And how can you assure this committee and the people of Hawaii that tanks three, four and 11, that have not even been looked at in the last 40 years, are safe to use and meet current API 653 guidelines for bulk fuel storage underground facilities. Rear Admiral Peter Stamatopoulos: Yes, sir. Thank you for the question. Yes, you are correct. There are tanks, as you mentioned, that have been out of periodicity for quite a long time. 1:41:27 Rep. Jackie Speier: Are the commanding officers and our executive officers that are assigned to Red Hill trained in petroleum management? Rear Admiral Peter Stamatopoulos: I'll take that question ma'am. The answer is no. Impact of Continuing Resolutions on the Department of Defense and Services House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Defense January 12, 2022 Witnesses: General David H. Berger, Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps General Charles Q. Brown, Jr., Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force Admiral Michael Gilday, Chief of Naval Operations of the U.S. Navy General Joseph M. Martin, Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army Mike McCord, Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) General John W. Raymond, Chief of Space Operations of the U.S. Space Force Clips 29:51 Mike McCord: First, as I believe you're all aware a full year CR, we reduce our funding level below what we requested and what we believe we need. On the surface at the department level as a whole, the reduction to our accounts would appear to be about a billion dollars below our request, which would be significant. Even if that was the only impact. The actual reduction in practice will be much greater. Because we would have significant funding that's misaligned, trapped or frozen in the wrong places and unusable because we don't have the tools or flexibilities to realign funds on anything like the scam we would need to fix all the problems that the chiefs are going to describe. 30:27 Mike McCord: I know all of you are very familiar with the fact that virtually all military construction projects in each year's budget including the FY 22 budget are new starts that cannot be executed under a CR. 34:00 Mike McCord: The six longest CRs in the history of the Defense Department have all occurred in this last 12 year period. We have turned a 12 month fiscal year into an eight month fiscal year in terms of our ability to initiate new starts and enter contracts. This should be unacceptable and not the new normal. It's hard to see this full impact because or in the inefficiency from looking from outside because the organization has of course adapted to its circumstances just as organisms do. Nobody plans to enter into contracts in the first quarter of a fiscal year now because the odds that we would actually be able to do so are so low. Therefore we in turn, have no significant contract delays to report to you when we're under a CR. 1:44:02 Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI): This is about decreasing domestic spending and increasing defense spending. 1:44:20 **Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN):**This was my effort to quash those who are talking about year long CRs. No one on the Appropriations Committee is, yet you see things in the news. And unfortunately, sir, it's usually from your side of the aisle, and I'll pull it again. And it's a December 1 quote, and I can get you the gentlemen, the person who said it. Republicans should be in favor of a CR until Biden is out of office, so they're not going to talk about a one year CR. That would be the proper Republican thing to do. And anybody saying otherwise is deeply foolish. I know you and I, sir, do not agree with that sentiment. And my my goal here is to educate other members who don't understand the appropriations process as well as you and I, and many other of our colleagues that we serve alongside with. Silenced: How Forced Arbitration Keeps Victims of Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment in the Shadows House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law January 16, 2019 Witnesses: Eliza Dushku, Actor/Producer & Graduate Student Myriam Gilles, Professor of Law, Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Lora Henry, Canton, OH Andowah Newton, New York, NY Sarah Parshall Perry, Legal Fellow, Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage Foundation Tatiana Spottiswoode, Law Student, Columbia Law School Anna St. John, President and General Counsel, Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute Clips 30:59 Anna St. John: Instead, it's worth considering that taking away the possibility of arbitration for these victims is a top-down, heavy handed approach that denies them the advantages of arbitration as a means of adjudicating their claims. 41:04 Sarah Parshall Perry: Since the 1980s, the progressive leadership of this and the upper chamber has sought to curtail the protections of the Federal Arbitration Act through bills including the Arbitration Fairness Act, Arbitration Fairness for Students Act, Consumer Mobile Fairness Act, Fairness and Nursing Homes Act, Sonsumer Fairness Act, Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act, the Forced Arbitration Justice Repeal Act and many, many more. 47:13 Sarah Parshall Perry: arbitration agreements are not mandatory. No one, and the Supreme Court has held, is forced to sign a contract. But curtailing access to arbitration would injure, in the end, the very people that Congress has sought for nearly a century to protect. 54:50 Myriam Gilles: First, the entire regime is shrouded in secrecy. And not just because victims want to keep these issues confidential, which by the way is up to them, right? They should have the autonomy and the choice to decide. But because companies want to keep this stuff under wraps, they want to hide and shield sexual predators, and they don't want their business in the public eye. They don't want to deal with regulators or even with lawsuits. The secrecy here on its own just makes this a terrible way to deal with sexual harassment because it means that victims of sexual violence in the workplace who bravely tried to come forward are prohibited from telling their stories in a public forum. Instead, they're forced into this private process where everything is under wraps and siloed. Right, so this is the second bad thing. Victims can join together, even when their injuries stem from the same wrongdoing, even when they've occurred at the hands of the same perpetrator. Even when the company's tolerance for sexual harassment is structural and pervasive. Victims have to go it alone, never knowing about one another. They have to go into arbitration single file. I don't know where all these statistics are coming from about how great arbitration is how people win it all the time, because the truth is, no one goes into arbitration because it's siloed because it's secret because they don't know about what else is going on in the workplace. The secrecy that blankets these individualized proceedings prevents one victim from ever learning whether others right in the cubicle next to them might have experienced the same, the same tragedies, the same traumas and when vid when survivors are in the dark about cases filed by others in the workplace that makes coming forward that makes being the first person to come forward that much harder. As a corollary, and this is an important corollary, the relief that is available to the individual claimant doesn't prevent the wrongdoer from preying on other women doesn't prevent the predator from having all sorts of misconduct against other women in the workplace. The proceedings are one on one and the relief that arbitrators are allowed by contract to grant is individualized. They can't ever order any changes beyond what can help this one individual that happens to have the courage to come before them. I mean, can you imagine a worse system for dealing with toxic corporate culture because I can't. Third, and I think this is really important and all the survivors who've spoken about this forced arbitration is a system where the employers write the rules, and they pick the arbitral provider. Which means that victims of sexual harassment are shunted into a regime that stacked against them from the get go. First, because the arbitrators economic interest is to be very good to the repeat player employer so that they can be chosen for another arbitration next time. So the repeat player problem has been well documented, and I think it's alive and well in arbitration. And the secrecy protects that. And second, because the employer designs the entire arbitration process, it does so to serve its interests, not the interests of its workers, but its interests which again, are to keep discrimination and harassment under a veil of secrecy and out of the public eye. So given all of these things, given how bad this system is for victims of sexual harassment, it's no wonder that so few ever decide to go into private arbitration. I wouldn't. I think it sounds terrible. 1:04:00 Myriam Gilles: When an arbitration complaint is filed, it's filed in secret. In other words, the only entities that know that the arbitration has even been filed are the the employer, the employer, the complaining employee and the arbitration entity. The AAA or JAMS are one of these arbitration providers. Nobody else knows. Contrast that with court. I go down to the DC District Court today and I file a complaint, that complaint is on the public record. Right. And so as the defendants answer or motion to dismiss all the pleadings, their public litigation in the public court system, it has power, and the power it has is the power of signaling, not only to the defendant that I've sued, but to all similarly situated defendants that this is a wrong. This person has complained about something she's told her story, and she plans to prove it. None of that happens in arbitration from the beginning. It is private throughout the entire proceeding, which is held in a secret location, no public no press. All of it is private. Arbitrators don't write decisions. There are only three states in the union that currently require minimal disclosure of arbitrations pretty redacted and hard to read. If you're a researcher like I am about these issues. Other than that, everything that happens in arbitration is a black box. 1:32:18 Tatiana Spottiswoode: And the forced arbitration is so unfair. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA): I understand you you think forced arbitration is unfair, that's great. Most of the people on that side want to eliminate it for everything not just situations like this. Other representative: will the gentleman yield for a question? Rep. Darrell Issa: I will not. 1:49:15 Myriam Gilles: The FAA was enacted in 1925. But it was enacted so that sophisticated business people could negotiate for arbitration provisions and those provisions would be respected by courts. It was never intended to be imposed via standard form contract. And in fact, if you read the legislative history, if you read the legislation, it accepts and exempts employees. So the idea that the FAA applies to employees is something that was created by a conservative majority of the Supreme Court in 1991, in a case called Circuit City, sorry, first actually was Gilmer and then Circuit City, I can't keep all the bad cases straight. And those are the cases in which the Court interpreted, I would say misinterpreted, the FAA to apply to employees like this. So that now employers can just stick these clauses into job applications, orientation materials, even an innocuous email from HR can include a forced arbitration clause. That was not what the 1925 Congress intended they they'd be rolled, they should be rolling in their in their grades. This is not what they intended. This is what a Supreme Court intent on protecting corporations intended beginning in the 1990s. 2:39:26 Rep. Michelle Fischbach (R-MN): You know what's happened to so many women and others in the workplace is terrible but I really am concerned that by involving the government in these contracts between adults in the area of sexual harassment and assault we're opening a door for more government involvement in other areas of contracts. 2:42:09 Rep. Michelle Fischbach (R-MN): And I would argue that you have you sign it it is not you know even though we use the it's forced arbitration as people are saying it's not really you you have signed something that you have agreed to it. Justice Denied: Forced Arbitration and the Erosion of Our Legal System House Committee on the Judiciary November 16, 2021 Witnesses: Gretchen Carlson, Journalist and Advocate Myriam Gilles, Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Phil Goldberg, Managing Partner, Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P. Deepak Gupta, Founding Principal, Gupta Wessler PLLC Andrew Pincus, Partner, Mayer Brown L.L.P. Lieutenant Commander Kevin Ziober, Lieutenant Commander, U.S. Navy Reserves Clips 26:35 Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI): You'll hear a different view from me. Eliminating arbitration achieves one thing, it enriches trial attorneys. 29:11 Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI): The AAJ, or American Association for Justice, is the nice sounding name of the plaintiffs attorneys lobbying organization. It also happens to be a huge donor to Democratic candidates, contributing millions of dollars each cycle to their campaigns. 29:52 Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD): Mr. Chairman, point of order. Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) What is your point of order? Rep. Jamie Raskin: My question is just can we impute the policy positions that members of the committee take to campaign contributions? Because if so, I think I'd be doing it a lot more frequently. I thought that's something that we don't do. Rep. David Cicilline: It's an excellent point of order, I'm sure Mr. Sensenbrenner didn't intend to communicate that in that way. Rep. Jamie Raskin: We're gonna be hearing a lot more of that in our committee if that's permissible, but I'm just curious. Maybe we can have some research done. Rep. James Sensenbrenner: Will the gentleman yield? Rep. David Cicilline: I think we don't need to engage with you. I this is an important issue with strongly held beliefs on both sides. [crosstalk] 36:00 Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY): We used to have a concept in law. When I went to law school they still taught it called contracts of adhesion where a contract was unenforceable if one party had no choice in entering into it. All of these arbitration clauses almost are contracts of adhesion. You try when you want to get a credit card, try crossing out the fine print if you can find it without the magnifying glass that that says that you will settle all all disputes in arbitration, cross it out, see if you get the credit card. See if you get the bank loans if you get the mortgage. You have no see if you get the car loan, you have no choice. 1:42:00 Gretchen Carlson: arbitration means that you have no way of knowing that anyone else is facing the same thing within the confines of the workplace structure. There's no way to know because the whole process is secret. And as I described during my testimony, if you do muster up the courage to go and complain, and you have an arbitration clause, that's a good day for the company, because no one will ever know anything about your story. The worst ramification of all of this is that the perpetrator gets to stay in the job. And I think one of the reasons that we've seen this cultural revolution that we're experiencing right now is because the American public was actually so angry about hearing about these stories, and they were wondering, why didn't we know about this? And the reason they didn't know about it, is because of forced arbitration. 2:00:30 Deepak Gupta: I've gone back and looked at the history of the act from 1925. People weren't blind to the possibility of abuse. They raised these concerns before this, this committee, in fact, and the and the architects of the legislation were clear, this is about letting businesses have equal bargaining power that want to resolve their disputes out of court, letting them do that, and I have no objection to that. That makes perfect sense. But but the the drafters were clear this is not about foisting this on people who don't consent through, take it or leave it contracts. And in fact, Congress put in a provision section one of the Federal Arbitration Act that says this shall not apply to any class of workers. Remarkably, the Supreme Court has read that language to mean precisely the opposite. And now it can apply to any class of workers. And so so we have just we've strayed so far away from what Congress intended in 1925. And that's why only this body Congress can set things right. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)

Last week, you heard us play a few clips of John Eastman lying his ass off on Lawrence Lessig's Another Way podcast. Well, now Professor Lessig is here to give us an expert breakdown of some of the election law issues raised by team big lie. Also, how is our election system vulnerable to the next Republican attack in 2024? Links: Friday eastman pleadings, court response, Opening Arguments on Twitter live tweet thread, Ruling, 1/6 brief, Eastman memo, 3 US Code § 15 - Counting electoral votes in Congress, Longer Eastman memo, Eastman reply

The Senate Judiciary Committee must released a report titled, "Subverting Justice: How the Former President and His Allies Pressured DOJ to Overturn the 2020 Election." Among other crimes, the Senate details how Trump pressured acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to overturn the election results. The conduct described in the report makes clear that Trump committed the crime of Coercion of Political Activity, 18 US Code section 610. This video reviews s the elements of that crime and how Trump's conduct violated the federal law prohibiting such coercion. In a related story, October 7 was a deadline for Steve Bannon, Mark Meadows, Kash Patel and Dan Scavino to provide documents that had been subpoenaed by the House Elect Committee investigating the January 6 attack on the US Capitol. This video also reviews the various options Congress has to enforce its subpoenas when witnesses fail to comply. For our Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise shop, please visit: https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkirschner/ Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner My podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts. To subscribe to the podcast: https://link.chtbl.com/JusticeMatters Follow me on: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Social media outlets like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube claim that they can censor any content they don't like because they are private companies and they can do what they want. They claim that the first amendment does not apply to them for that reason, and it's all because of a provision in Federal Law called the "internet Good Samaritan" law found at 47 US Code sec 230 (c)(2). Find out why this law is being abused with all the censorship going on in today's episode of Constitution Corner.

Senator Ron Johnson tells outrageous lies during the Senate hearing into the January 6 attack of the US Capitol. Indeed, CNN reported: "Ron Johnson just dropped a ridiculous conspiracy theory at the Senate Capitol attack hearing."  Johnson's lies clearly were designed to give aid and comfort to the insurresctionists. In this video we tackle the following question: do Johnson's lies constitute the federal offense of Accessory After the Fact, in violation of 18 US Code, Section 3?  Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner My podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts. Follow me on: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2 Support the show (http://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of the Dudes n Beer podcast host Christopher Jordan welcomes recurring guest, Investigator and head of 5x5 News, Mike Turber to the show to discuss the recent full throttle announcement that the US Space Force has officially opened its bay doors for business and new information released on the 9/11 attacks, the flight now known as call-sign “Gofer 6” and their testimony as well as the 1974 Privacy act, US Title 50 Code 3093 regarding Clandestine Operations and how they figure into the equation!With the recent announcement that the “new” United States Space Force has gotten it's flag to fly and had it's first official mission launch with the unmanned X-37B becoming the poster child vehicle of choice for the latest branch of the United States military. But is the concept of a “Space Force” a new one? With the X37-B space plane having been performing experiments far overhead secretly since before 2010 and even had a record-breaking mission of an uninterrupted 780 days in orbit! But is the X-37B the only “space plane” of it's kind? Are there other models out there or currently in production and how long has the plan for this branch of the military actively been in the books? In the second part of the episode we break into the latest bombshell revelations to be released regarding the infamous 9/11 attacks. What about the interview with Lt Col Steven O'Brien, USAF who was flying his C-130 as call-sign “Gofer 6” on that fateful day, as well as how this and other information revealed in the case relates to the Privacy Act of 1974 and Title 50 of US Code 3093 regarding Presidential approval and reporting of covert actions as well as the Congressional Research Service's Covert Action and Clandestine Activities of the Intelligence Community report from 2019.Join us for this in depth episode as we explore the past, present and future of the US Space Force as well as the incredible new data in the investigation in to 9/11 with Investigator and head of 5x5 News Mike Turber.