Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 2/8/24 BREAKING: Special Counsel Says Biden 'TOO OLD' To Convict For Crimes, Pakistan Election REJECTS US Backed Regime

Episode Date: February 8, 2024

Krystal breaks down the bombshell Special Counsel report stating that Biden is too old to be convicted by a jury, and Ryan covers the Pakistan election where Pakistanis have rejected the US backed regime. To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/   Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case. If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

High key. Looking for your next obsession? Listen to High Key, a new weekly podcast hosted by Ben O'Keefe, Ryan Mitchell,

and Evie Audley. We got a lot of things to get into. We're going to gush about the random stuff we can't stop thinking about. I am high key going to lose my mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl, the way she about to yank my bank account. Correct.

And one thing I really love about this is that she's celebrating her daughter. Oh, I know. Listen to High Key on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I always had to be so good no one could ignore me. Carve my path with data and drive. But some people only see who I am on paper. The paper ceiling. The limitations from degree screens to stereotypes that are holding back over 70 million stars.

Workers skilled through alternative routes rather than a bachelor's degree. It's time for skills to speak for themselves. Find resources for breaking through barriers at taylorpapersilling.org. Brought to you by Opportunity at Work and the Ad Council. Hey guys, got some breaking news for you. So the special counsel who was investigating Joe Biden over his handling or mishandling of classified documents has returned his report. And there's a piece of this that is not shocking. They are filing no charges.

But there is another piece of this which is really wild, which the reason part of the reason he gives for not charging Joe Biden is effectively that he says he is too feeble minded for a jury to find him guilty at this point. Let me just break this down for you. Everything we know at this point, because it really is a very wild development. So this is from the Washington Post headline, special counsel, no charges for Biden and classified documents probe evidence of willful mishandling of classified papers, but not enough to win a conviction, according to the special counsel. A read to you from The Washington Post. They said Joe Biden carelessly handled classified materials found at his home and former office after his vice presidency and shared government secrets with his ghostwriter. But that evidence was not strong enough to justify charging him with crimes, according to a long awaited special counsel report released Thursday. The 345 page

Justice Department finding ends an investigation that has hung over the president's head for more than a year. The report could prove to be a political liability, however, because it describes President Biden, 81, as a forgetful old man who kept notebooks and documents with classified information at his home, a stinging characterization that will likely be used against him by Republicans. I think anyone who has seen him recently might think twice about their desire to have him in the White House again, based not only on that, but on his recent actions. Biden, in a written statement, defended himself as someone who has always taken seriously the protection of national security secrets. I cooperated completely, threw up no roadblocks and sought no delays. In fact, I was so determined to give the special counsel what they needed that

I went forward with five hours of in-person interviews over two days amid the U.S. government response to an international crisis, Biden said, referring to the Hamas October 7th attack on Israel. I just believe that's what I owed the American people so they could know no charges would be brought and the matter closed. Special Counsel Robert Herr, who interviewed the president at the White House himself, found evidence that Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen, but concluded that evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Also, Herr's team said prosecuting Biden would be, quote, unwarranted based on our consideration of the aggravating and mitigating factors laid out in Justice Department prosecution policies to secure a conviction.

Officials would need to prove to a jury that Biden retained the information willfully. And they go on to say that that would be an obstacle because the jury would likely find Biden to be a sympathetic figure and a, quote, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. The president of the United States, that's who we're talking about here. Prosecutors also suggested might not have struck Biden as noteworthy pull up for you some of the specific parts of this report that mention the memory lapses that Biden apparently suffered from during this interview. This is from Branko Marcicich, who read through the report and pulled out some of the critical pieces that showed Biden's, quote, diminished faculties and faulty memory. According to the report, in both interview recordings with his ghostwriter and when they interviewed him, during which the report says

he had gotten worse, he could not remember when he was vice president and he couldn't remember within several years of when his son had died. Let me read you these sections from the report. Here's one piece. He says, in addition, Mr. Biden's memory was significantly limited during both his recorded interviews with the ghostwriter in 2017 and in his interview with our office in 2023 and his cooperation with our investigation, including by reporting to the government that the Afghanistan documents were in his Delaware garage will likely convince some jurors that he made an innocent mistake rather than acting willfully that is with intent to break the law as the statute requires. Here's another piece. Mr. Biden's memory also appeared to have significant limitations. Both the time he spoke to Zwanitzer in 2017, as evidenced by their recorded conversations,

and today, as evidenced by his recorded interview with our office, Mr. Biden's recorded conversations with Zwanitzer from 2017 are often painfully slow, with Mr. Biden struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries. That's from 2017. That was some years ago. And they said that his memory had gotten worse. In his interview with our office, Mr. Biden's memory was worse. He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended, quote, if it was 2013, when did I stop being vice president? And forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began in 2009, am I still vice president? He did not remember even within several years when his son, Beau, died and his memory

appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he had a real difference of opinion with General Carl Eikenberry when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden signed approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to President Obama. Last piece here, they say, given the intelligence of military officials present, the top is discussed. Mr. Biden should have realized the notes did or likely to contain classified information. But take us in a whole. The evidence will likely leave jurors with reasonable doubts about whether Mr. Biden knew he was sharing classified information with Zwanitzer. That's his ghostwriter and intended to do so. For these jurors, Mr. Biden's apparent lapses and failures in February and April will likely appear consistent with the diminished faculties and faulty memory he showed in Zwanitzer's interview recordings and in our interview of him.

Therefore, we conclude that the evidence does not establish that Mr. Biden willfully disclosed national defense information to Zannitzer. So absolutely stunning that in this report, special counsel from within Biden's own DOJ, they are saying they did not charge him in part because he was too old and feeble-minded to really know what he was doing, was unable to cite even with several years when his own son, Beau, died. Biden team out blasting the report saying, we're glad you didn't charge us, but this was inappropriate. They don't say what was inappropriate, but we can all guess what part they object to here. Biden legal team blasts special counsel's inappropriate report saying that they were trashing the president. President Biden's legal team on Thursday blasted parts of a report by special counsel Robert Herr accusing him of investigative access that resulted in trashing the subject of an investigation. Bob Bauer, Biden's personal counsel, said in a statement shortly after the

report's release that the public's findings violate well-established department norms, that it was essentially trashing the subject. Quote, the Department of Justice inspector general observed only a few years ago that high profile investigations, such as those of a president, may be subject to scrutiny not typical of the average criminal case, but that does not provide a basis for violating well-established department norms and essentially trashing the subject of an investigation with extraneous, unfounded, and irrelevant critical commentary. The special counsel could not refrain from investigative excess, perhaps unsurprising given the intense pressures of the current political environment. Whatever the impact of those pressures on the final report, it flouts department regulations and norms.

White House also pushed back, calling parts of the report inappropriate and inaccurate. We disagree with the number of inaccurate and inappropriate comments in the report. Nonetheless, the most important decision that no charges are warranted is firmly based on the facts and evidence. Again, they did not mention which part was inappropriate, but we are presuming it's the part describing Biden as a quote, sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory and conveying that Biden's memory had significant limitations. Guesses that that is the part of the report they find to be inappropriate and are objecting to. I don't know what to tell you guys. It is absolutely wild that this is the part of the report they find to be inappropriate and are objecting to.

I don't know what to tell you guys. It is absolutely wild that this is where we're at, that these are the two candidates that we're faced with, that the Democratic Party shut down any and all possibility of having a Democratic choice in the primary. You know, they claim to believe this election to be existential. They claim to believe democracy is on the line. And yet here we are with a man who, by his own Justice Department's accounting, is too feeble-minded to even remember the basics of when he was vice president and when his own son died, or the basic contours of debates. Of course, this comes amid a rash of reports about, and not just reports, but video that we can all watch of how much he is struggling on a daily basis to recount basic facts, stories, figures, faces from his life. We now have two

incidents within a week's time of him telling a story about some world leader and him naming two different world leaders who have been dead for years. We had another incident where he was attempting to update us on a Hamas response to a ceasefire proposal where he painfully struggled to recall the word Hamas had to be sort of prompted by someone who was nearby. These lapses are common, but they're becoming more and more and more regular. His team also, and he also recently deciding not to do a Super Bowl interview sit down. This is the second year that they've decided to do that, but this year it would have been with a relatively friendly news outlet and of course passing up on the chance to get himself in front of millions

and millions of voters at a time when he trails often in the polls to Donald Trump. So voters say overwhelmingly his age and ability is a top, top concern for them. And needless to say, this report will do absolutely nothing to alleviate their concerns. All right. Welcome to a special issue of Breaking Points. Pakistani voters went to the polls across the country today. And I am kind of new to handling the different devices on this Riverside Live thing. So what I'm going to do, I'm going to turn it over to you, Murtaza Hussain, my colleague over at The Intercept First, to give us a little bit of background. We're also going to be joined by Wakas Ahmed,

who's a Pakistani journalist, to talk about the absolutely shocking election results so far. And then I'm going to play a little bit of videos that we've picked up from social media and also from my questioning of the State Department earlier today. So, Maz, kind of catch us up. What's going on so far? So for the past couple months the pakistani military or beyond that even the pakistani military has been working to effectively rig the pakistani elections of course the intercept we've done some reporting showing how the u.s was involved in deposing imran khan who's by polls show the most popular prime minister in pakistan the most popular politician in pakistan the former prime minister. And Mr. Khan, you know, has been banned from the elections. His party has been more or less dismantled or made effort to dismantle them by the military.

And yet it seems that despite all these massive roadblocks and impediments put in their way, the Pakistani Tarik-e-Insaf, as it's called, looks set to win the elections according to early polling results. And not just win the elections, but decisively win the elections. So I think it's quite a resounding sort of message to the military that despite their attempts to suppress Mr. Khan's party, suppress him personally, he's currently in jail, the people of Pakistan clearly have evident strong favorability towards him and his party in whatever efforts they've undertaken to block his

electoral chances or even impugn his credibility reputation they have not seemed to resonate with the people of Pakistan as we're seeing tonight with these results yeah and the most blatant thing they've done I guess has been you know abduct abducting candidates uh to prevent them from even running and then then also knocking down mobile service and the internet leading up to the election. But they also not only jailed the leading candidate, Imran Khan, but effectively, like you said, dismantled his party. And so as we talk about these results,

we're going to be talking about independents who are backed by the PTI rather than PTI candidates. And Waqas, why is that? Well, PTI has been actually banned from running as a party. So PTI candidates cannot run as members of PTI and they're supposed to run as independents. So what we're now seeing like results are we're seeing the effects of that what was intended initially. They wanted PTI to be off the pallet so that when results start coming in we do not see PTI victory decisively. We stay confused about which candidates are actually winning because because now they have independent in front of their name instead of PTI. So I'm looking at results like out of 483 that have currently come in,

283 are independents. We don't know if they're PTI, they're most likely PTI. So overwhelmingly these independent candidates are winning. But one way to look at it is by giving votes to these independent candidates overwhelmingly against all other parties that were favored by the military, people have actually rejected those parties and actually favored independents, which are basically members of PTI. All right, that's important context for the question that I had at the State Department today for Vedant Patel. So I'm going to pull this up and then we can talk about what his answer, what his answer means. So here this goes. Following up on Pakistan, thank you for taking the question. So far, the preliminary

results have Imran Khan's party, I think, at this point with leading in 136 districts, but three times the next closest one. We're now seeing reports in Pakistan of two separate things. One, the army is in the streets, the police are in the streets, the surrounding polling stations. We're seeing a lot of reports and videos of efforts to change the vote, to bring election officials out. A lot of concern that that number, 136, by tomorrow morning in Pakistan could be pushed down lower.

Separately, you're seeing also in Pakistan attempts by military-connected officials to take the independents who are associated with the PTI and pressure them to join other parties. So even though in one country you might win a majority, after torture and bribery, you could have a different government take power. You, on the podium, stood up for free and fair elections. But free and fair elections are one thing, but if you torture your way to a majority after that, that doesn't quite live up to the values that you were stating. This seems like a pretty pivotal moment in America and the tax cancellation.

The thing about preliminary results is that they are preliminary, and I am not going to get ahead of any official results. I'm not going to comment or speculate further on what government could look like, what the makeup could be, or anything like that. What I will just reiterate again is that we condemn all instances of election-related violence and some of the kinds that you were describing that took place in the weeks preceding the election as well as on election day. We also believe that these kinds of actions have affected a number of political parties across Pakistan. And we're also concerned about the steps that were taken to restrict freedom of expression, specifically around Internet and cell phone use. But again, I'm just not going to speculate on results or government makeup.

But let's say the Pakistani people do elect a majority of independents associated with the PTI. But then after a bunch of backroom negotiations, which are accompanied by reports of torture, all of a sudden there's another candidate that has a majority. Would that be okay with the United States? I'm not going to, I'm not going to, I'm not going to hypothesize on a made up situation that you're just describing right now. We will, at some point, I have no doubt that the United States of America will comment on the election, official election results when they happen. But till then, we will defer to the electoral process. We believe we take very seriously.

All right. Well, what was your reaction to that answer? This is honestly disgusting at this point, because what we have to take into account what has happened on the ground in Pakistan, they have tied the legs and arms of one political party. And he just said that it has happened to a number of political parties named two. There is no other party that this has happened to. It has only happened to one political party. And they have tied the arms and legs of this political party. They have put people in jail, thousands of people, including the leaders. They have banned this party. Yet today we see this party winning in absolute crazy numbers.

And this is something inspirational. It is about the indefeatableness of the human spirit. It's something like that. It's something epic that has happened to Pakistan. And then to steal this from Pakistani people who have resisted the military junta for so long and who have fought so bravely and so amazingly using democracy and no violence, nothing at all. And now they have voted the people that they have chosen. And this mandate is about to be stolen from them. And all of these people who have stayed quiet for two years and who have condoned this violence that has happened

with Pakistani democracy, they will continue to do so. It will honestly be so disgusting to watch. Yeah. Maz, what was your reaction when you saw the statement? What do you think? What should we draw from that? Well, he's clearly not very happy with your consistent questioning of him at these conferences. But I think it's interesting to draw a juxtaposition between his response and the way they respond in countries where there's similar or even less egregious or, you know, vote rigging that takes place beforehand.

And the U.S. Department of State Department is quite vocal about it. They're quite, you know, enthusiastic in condemning those cases. He's so, you know, cautious in this case about saying that. And at the end, if you notice, he doesn't even say that we take the results, the election process as legitimate. He says we take it seriously because he posits on itself. It's impossible to say anything otherwise at this point. So I think, you know, unfortunately, a lot of people in Pakistan as Bokas was saying, you know, they do very strongly believe in democracy despite all these

roadblocks put in their way. And they're counting on, because of the role the U.S. plays in Pakistan as a de facto part of the ruling compact in some way, the influence it has. And given the U.S.'s vocal support of democracy globally, they expect some sort of consistency and some sort of reliability from the U.S. government. Unfortunately, they expect that, and it doesn't seem to be forthcoming.

So I think that if it were to come to pass that even after this very significant and I think shocking in many ways election result to come out this way despite all these roadblocks. If the U.S. government sits quietly or even endorses an outcome which is clearly unfair and clearly unjust from the perspective of Mr. Khan's supporters, I think you'll see a great disillusionment. You'll see that the U.S. ability to speak in other contexts will be greatly hindered as well. And related to the State Department, I wanted to quickly share this New York Times article that was updated just maybe 10, 20 minutes ago. It says here, as a result, this is from the New York Times, the coverage of the election,

as results began to trickle in Thursday evening, the party of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, the military's preferred party of the moment, was still expected to win, but it did not look like it would pull off the easy victory that was widely predicted. So to describe this earlier, I think it described them as neck and neck, but it's been updated even since then. So they took out the kind of neck and neck verbiage, but they left in was still expected to win, which to me is such a striking phrase because they might actually be correct, like from the perspective of the State Department and the New York Times, regardless of the fact that the votes are so heavily in favor of the PTI at this point, the New York Times and the State Department may still expect Nawaz Sharif to win. So, Waqas, setting aside who got more votes, what would you say about who's expected to

win at this point? Well, independent is not a party. If independent was a party in Pakistan, it would be the biggest party in Pakistan's history right now. The way independents have won. So technically, and all of the things that State Department says and the Pakistani government says is technically true. Technically, PMLN might be the biggest party but independence will, they still have more independence than them so they'll have to get all these independence on board

and that will usually happen with military's coercion, threats, bribery and all of that. So State Department will be able to continue, they'll be continue to be able to say that technically PMLN emerged as the biggest party. New York Times would like truthfully say that PMLN is the largest party. But the context of that is that PTI has been banned. All of the PTI members are independents and independents has won. So how would they, how would independents and independents as one. So how would they how would independents actually go about forming a party? I assume they'd have to find a kind of rump faction of a party that they could then all join with. What is the PTI strategy? Assuming let's pretend that they

can get through the overnight shenanigans and the torture and everything that we're going to see over the coming days, and they do emerge with a certified majority, like how do they enact that majority in the parliament without having a party? Like who do they align with? Well, they can form their own party or they can basically form a forward block within the PTI. Or this decision, the court decision that actually banned PTI is in the process of being appealed. And if in appeal it goes and then PTI gets its symbol back, gets its party back, then PTI might be able to form a party in the parliament if nobody is able to get to them. That means that they might be able to vote for their own prime minister and they might be able to vote for their own cabinet and if that happens PTI would, it's really possible that they can have a party. So they're still in the game despite everything that has happened. And the major upset in this today's election

was that PMLN did not win a clear majority and they would not be able to form a government and now Pakistani parliament is in any case no matter what happens it is going to be hung. What I'm playing here this is footage of police officials who are kind of surrounding a polling location you're seeing tons of this from everywhere around the country. I can try to share a little bit more of it. There we go. See, I told you I'm not very good at doing this. Let me try again. Let me pull up a different one. If you go to my Twitter feed, you go to what cost is your feed, it's W-O-R-K-S, you'll find these videos everywhere.

But it looks to be one of the most documented attempts to steal an election, documented on social media. Here's somebody who's kind of been captured. You have other videos of ballot boxes getting stuffed. You have you have ballots on fire. You have military figures throwing boxes into jeeps and riding off of them. Imaz, do you think that it's, do you think the hill is too steep for the military to climb here to flip this election?

Or do you think that nothing is kind of out of reach here? Well, the thing is, they went to such extraordinary steps before the election to rig it with the internet shutdowns. You wrote a great article on The Intercept about it, actually,

all the ways that they'd gone above and beyond to try to fix this election beforehand, not least what they did with Imran Khan, personally, as well, too. So, you know, after the vote, now, that having strategy having failed so visibly, and so hugely in a way, now there's almost these very comically extreme attempts with stealing votes, stuffing ballots, much of it captured in video. I think that the subtext of all this is that the Pakistani military has been caught flat-footed

by the way that ordinary people have been empowered by social media in a sense, because obviously PTI used social media very extensively, Imran Khan used it extensively, and now they have these sort of very unsubtle forms of manipulation of ballots, but people can record them and share them. So when everyone's seeing what's happening, it's all documented. It's not very effective anymore.

It kind of implies more or shows more what's going on. So I think what may happen is that, you know, they still have all the guns in Pakistan. They still have all the institutional power. They may still be able to rig the vote in some other way by forcing, you know, people to change parties. You know, various different ways of applying coercion to do that. But I think what's going to happen is if they're still, you know, engineered and resulted in what they like, they're going to have such a crisis of credibility and lack of public consent because of all pakistan's democratic shortcomings you need some critical mass of people who at least abide that this is legitimate government and if you don't have that in the military's case it'd be very difficult to govern

over a long time so i think what could happen in the long term is you could see a return to military rule in pakistan which has happened many times in the past. There could be consequences, potentially in terms of sanctions from the U.S. and the international bodies. But, you know, if the Pakistani military sees it between a choice of losing power entirely or becoming a pariah and ruling directly, it may choose a lot. And, Wakaz, I have to agree with you that watching people turn out in such force in the face of such repression was nothing short of inspiring. It became totally clear that the Pakistani people had immensely more faith in democracy than, for instance, the State Department. You know, the United States has been practicing democracy for more than 200 years and was kind of shown, I think, by the Pakistani people what democracy actually means.

And they went out knowing that there would be all of these different elements of repression, too numerous and too absurd to even get into. So as you're watching these results come in, where would you suggest that people go to be able to follow this? Because I know that people are getting really interested in this in this incredible story of resilience by the Pakistani people. But it's very hard to find anywhere where you can actually kind of follow it in a reliable way. So like where do you go for your news and where should English English speaking and reading audiences go where they can where they can follow it in a reliable way. So like where do you go for your news and where should English speaking and reading audiences go where they can follow it? Well, it's mostly on x.com, Twitter, everything is there. Pakistani media isn't that reliable,

but there are some websites that are collecting data. So the data that has come in so far has been somewhat reliable because they're coming directly, that data is coming directly from polling station. So if you go to Twitter, there might be some... Which accounts are on it? Well, PTI account itself is a very good resource to follow about all the videos that are coming in because they have a huge network so if you follow PTI Official you'll see all the videos that they have been collecting about rigging attempts and successful rigging attempts you'd get to see those and then there's a journalist

Imran Yaz Khan I've recently heard he was kidnapped for five six months I think by the military was He was kept there. But if you search Imran Yaz Khan's name again, you'll see that he's still, he's active again. And I've heard that they probably might attempt to kidnap him again. So like journalists in Pakistan who... Incredibly courageous because he went through hell. Yeah, he was in custody for eight months. Yeah, he was tortured. He was alone. He wasn't in police custody.

Nobody knew where he was. So when he came out, he was quiet. He couldn't even speak properly. He was stuttering for a month. And now he's able to write about things. So he's saying things again. And he might be picked up but this is the problem with following credible like famous people in Pakistan because they get picked up so you have to rely on anonymous accounts and you basically have to do your own fact-checking you have to collate your

own data and see if it's correct or not it's like very few resources available in Pakistan. But if you go to Twitter, you get some idea of what's happening. Yeah. And I guess the last point I'd want to make is to thank everyone, the editors, fact checkers, producers over at The Intercept that helped us do the reporting um on on the uh on the cable that you were talking about earlier wakas and there's no guarantee that this is that this is going going to hold but at some point i don't i don't think that the generals are going to be able to hold back uh this tide but this would be you know the second kind of reverse regime change operation so

to speak that the intercept would have been involved in in recent years. And, you know, our colleagues down at the Intercept Brazil exposed corruption that had led to the jailing of Lula da Silva down in Brazil. He was freed from office and the Brazilian people restored him to the presidency. You know, we're in the middle of an epic moment here, but we don't know where it ends. But it's certainly something that I think the Pakistani people should be proud of. Any last words from either of you that you wanted to add? Yeah, I can add something. America and American government says it values democracy and it backs democracy all over the world. We have clearly seen what Pakistani people want, what the democratic aspirations of Pakistani people are. To continue to deny them is

the United States and Biden administration would be thinking in a very short term to do that because if they continue to deny these people their democratic aspirations, you're turning a whole generation of Pakistanis into anti-American people. And that is not really, that doesn't really work for the American government. Pakistan is a big major country and eventually if you can deny them their right for now, for one month, for one year, for five years, but eventually people will get what they're aspiring for. And when they do that, you don't want Pakistan to be like a second Iran, where the revolution brings in a government that is

completely anti-American. So it is so important to engage with these people. Their aspiration is not invalid. And it's so important that the United States government understands this. Yeah, very well said. That was what I was trying to get at with my question with Vedant, that this is a moment where, despite everything that the U.S. has done, that this is a moment where if they did recognize the democratic results from this election, I think that would go a long way to mending some of the fences that they broke over the last over the last few years. But but we'll see if we're going to continue to follow it. Maz, Wakas, thank you both for joining me. I really appreciate it. Over the years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned no town is too small

for murder. I'm Catherine Townsend. I've heard from hundreds of people across the country with an unsolved murder in their community. I was calling about the murder of my husband. The murderer is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case. If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line

on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I always had to be so good no one could ignore me. Carve my path with data and drive. But some people only see who I am on paper. The paper ceiling. The limitations from degree screens to stereotypes that are holding back over 70 million stars. Workers skilled through alternative routes rather than a bachelor's degree. It's time for skills to speak for themselves. Find resources for breaking through barriers at taylorpapersilling.org. Brought to you by Opportunity at Work and the Ad Council.

High key. Looking for your next obsession? Listen to High Key, a new weekly podcast hosted by Ben O'Keefe, Ryan Mitchell, and Evie Oddly. We got a lot of things to get into. We're going to gush about the random stuff we can't stop thinking about. I am high key going to lose my mind over all things Cowboy Carter. I know. Girl, the way she about to yank my bank account.

Correct. And one thing I really love about this is that she's celebrating her daughter. Oh, I know. Listen to High Key on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.