Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 3/14/24: TikTok Sale Or Ban Passes House, Judge Tosses Fani Willis Trump Charges, RFK Jr Considers Aaron Rodgers For VP, Ben Shapiro Owned On Social Security, Don Lemon Contract Terminated By Musk, Former Ambassador Predicts Haiti Revolution

Episode Date: March 14, 2024

Saagar and Ryan discuss the TikTok ban or sale bill passing the House, judge tosses Fani Willis Trump charges, RFK Jr considers Aaron Rodgers for VP, Ben Shapiro owned by facts and logic on social security, Elon Musk terminates Don Lemon X contract, and former Ambassador Dan Foote joins predicting a Haitian revolution.    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 irresponsible son, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. They could lose their family and millions of dollars? Yep. Find out how it ends by listening to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week

early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. and seeker of male validation. I'm also the girl behind Boy Sober, the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, Boy Sober is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process.

Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.

We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that. Let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody. Happy Thursday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. Extra amazing bro show. People live for the pound there. It's good to see you, Ryan. It's going to be amazing. That's right. It's going to be amazing. Crystal is off today, but we still have an amazing array of topics. I got to do the tough part. I actually got to set up this damn show. So what are we covering today? TikTok. So the House passed a piece of legislation that would either force a

sale or ban TikTok if their parent company, ByteDance, does not agree to sell it. We're going to talk about that. What exactly is in the bill? Who is for it? Who is against it? We're going to present all sides. Maybe we'll have a little bit of a debate here. State of Georgia also throwing out some very critical charges on the Donald Trump case down there, specifically actually related to that, quote, perfect phone call with Brad Raffensperger. So excited to break some of that down. RFK Jr. making waves, possibly announcing his vice, well, definitely announcing his vice presidential candidate next week. Some interesting names there on the list. Aaron Rodgers, Jesse Ventura, all kinds of different folks. Ben Shapiro, by his own admission, lighting the internet on fire,

coming out against Social Security and the retirement age. Let's just say interesting, to say the least. Ryan in particular is going to break that one down. And then Don Lemon dropping an interview or doing an interview with Elon Musk and unceremoniously being fired by Elon with his new partnership on Twitter before it even began. So hilarity ensued for every party involved. And then, Ryan, you've got a great guest for us today. His name is Dan Foote. Yeah, he was the envoy to Haiti who resigned in protest a couple of years ago. If you read his resignation letter, what he said would happen as a result of Biden's policy towards Haiti, it's precisely what has unfolded for the last couple of years. Well, I'm excited to talk to him. You in particular have been such a fantastic resource on Haiti. So I'm really,

really glad that we could have you in the chair today. So, all right, let's go ahead and start with, oh, before I get to that, of course, if you want to be a premium subscriber, BreakingPoints.com. Support our work. We've got all that extra special stuff that is coming down the pipeline. Just had a meeting about it yesterday. Can't give away too much. Can't give away too much. Unless you become a premium subscriber, it's not going to happen.

That's right. And that's right. Unless you become a premium subscriber and you're going to be the first to know about it as always. So let's go ahead and start with TikTok. So there was a major legislation passed the House of Representatives yesterday. Let's go and put this up there on the screen, how each House member voted on the bill that could ban TikTok. Overall, it was a pretty overwhelming majority that went ahead and passed. You had 352 votes that supported. You had 65 votes that opposed. In terms of the breakdown, 155 Democrats voted yes, GOP 197. 50 Democrats voted no. 15 Republicans voted no. There were

14 overall who did not vote and only one person who voted present. That one person is Yasmine Crockett. I wonder what her objection or not objection to the bill was. But anyway, so that's the overall breakdown. In terms of the people who voted no and who are Republicans, I think this is pretty noteworthy. A lot of them were Freedom Caucus, more libertarian types. We have Andy Biggs, Dan Bishop, Warren Davidson, Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Clay Higgins, and let's see, Nancy Mace, Thomas Massey, Tom McClintock, Alex Mooney, Barry Moore, Scott Perry, David Schweikert, and Greg Stubbe. So disproportionately kind of the dissident right or MAGA, libertarian, freedom caucus. Exactly. A pretty bipartisan, I would say, in terms of the support. Now, there's been a lot of discussion on what the hell is in this bill or not. We're going to break that

down. But I thought it would be useful for everyone to present the cases for and against by kind of the two major legislative champions on either side. First is gonna be Congressman Mike Gallagher, who co-sponsored and authored the legislation. Here's what he had to say in his case for the bill. TikTok is a threat to our national security because it is owned by ByteDance,

which does the bidding of the Chinese Communist Party. We know this because ByteDance, which does the bidding of the Chinese Communist Party. We know this because ByteDance leadership says so and because Chinese law requires it. This bill therefore forces TikTok to break up with the Chinese Communist Party. It does not apply to American companies. It only applies to companies subject to the control of foreign adversaries defined by Congress.

It says nothing about election interference and cannot be turned against any American social media platform. It does not impact websites in general. The only impacted sites are those associated with foreign adversary apps, such as TikTok.com. It can never be used to penalize individuals. The text explicitly prohibits that, and it cannot, cannot be used to censor speech. It takes no position at all on the content of speech, only foreign adversary control. Foreign adversary control of what is becoming the dominant news platform for Americans under 30. Hang on to that foreign adversary. That's going to be a line of contention. Let's hear from Congressman Thomas Massey, who laid out the case against the bill.

Let's take a listen. They've described the TikTok application as a Trojan horse, but there are some of us who feel that either intentionally or unintentionally, this legislation to ban TikTok is actually a Trojan horse. Some of us are concerned that there are First Amendment implications here. Americans have the right to view information. We don't need to be protected by the government from information. Some of us just don't want the president picking which apps we can put on our phones or which websites that we can visit. We don't think

that's appropriate. We also think it's dangerous to give the president that kind of power, to give him the power to decide what Americans can see on their phones and their computers. To give him that sort of discretion, we also think is dangerous. Now, people say that this TikTok ban will only apply to TikTok or maybe another company that pops up just like TikTok. But the bill is written so broadly that the president could abuse that discretion and include other companies that aren't just social media companies. OK, so that's where it is, Ryan. I've talked a lot here. So give us your reaction. What do you think? I mean, I've got a couple of different reactions. One, I think you can't even respond to, which is that, okay, I can understand why no country would want a different country controlling its news environment. Like, you wouldn't want kind of Russia owning NBC News or whatever.

Take Russia out of it. Let's just say any country. China, any country, fine. Even a neutral, Brazil. I love Brazil. Like, from the perspective of U.S. national security interests, I can see the argument. I don't care. I'm not a part of U.S. national security interests.

And I think most people who use TikTok also don't care. And I think particularly with what the U.S. has done with its hegemony around the world since World War II. It has not earned the kind of moral credit among a lot of Americans to say, you know what? So you say you need these extraordinary powers to crack down on my social media apps so that you can continue to do what you've been doing for the last 50 to 70 years around the world. No, no thanks.

Let Chairman Xi have a shot. So here's what I would say in response, Ryan, is that take national security out of it. I believe very strongly in U.S. markets and in our principle of sovereignty and reciprocal trade. So, for example, President Biden yesterday came out against the acquisition of U.S. steel by Nippon Steel. Well, Japan is one of our great allies. I mean, unlike the Europeans, they actually produce things and, you know, are important to the global economy. And they, are willing to defend themselves if we ever give them the ability. So there's a lot going on for Japan. I love Japan. I don't foresee any problem in the future

from a national security perspective. That said, we can't allow a Japanese company to own US steel. US steel we recognize 100% as critical infrastructure. And I wonder where you draw the line. So for example, Huawei. Huawei, which was banned by the Trump administration from critical access to telecom. So in that scenario, like, I mean, seems to make sense to me. We have critical infrastructure, the wirings literally of U.S. communications. Well, there doesn't seem to be all that much of a substantive difference between the two. And really, when it comes down to, again, even taking national security out of it, baseline fairness level. American companies can't do business in China. Even if you want to do business in China, you have to have a Chinese subsidiary

that owns 51%. Our tech companies are completely banned over there. You may not like the tech companies. I don't. But they're at least under our jurisdiction. They're U.S. citizens. They're subject to U.S. law. TikTok and ByteDance are not subject to any of that. I will give the counter case, and I would like for you to expound on some of this. Michael Tracy, I think, has done the best job of overlaying some of the biggest concerns within the bill. Let's go ahead and put this up there. On the screen, he says, here are some of the extensive points that I have raised about this bill itself. The bill goes well beyond banning TikTok targeting any, quote, website, desktop application, mobile application, or augmented or immersive technology application claimed to be a, quote, foreign adversary controlled.

That includes China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. He says, I agree with Congressman Warren Davidson, who pointed out in his floor speech that the wide-ranging definition of application could be future attempts to prohibit other widely used apps like Telegram. The bill authorizes the future expulsion actions to be taken unilaterally by the president, provided that he determines that an application preventing a significant threat to national security of the US. He says, he talks specifically about the president possibly making unilateral determination. I quibble actually with Michael's definition here. And he says, I don't support handing radical new speech abridging powers to either Biden or to Donald Trump. Go ahead, Ryan.

So the broader point that Michael is making is one that you need to take into serious consideration, which is be careful what power you give to the United States government. As you should. I agree. Whenever Congress says like, look, I promise, this is all we care about, just this one little thing. Because what you're saying is reasonable. Every country should be able to have sovereignty over its critical infrastructure.

If you don't, you don't really have democracy. You don't have a country, honestly. You wouldn't have a country. As a democratic public, you elect representatives who then are going to execute the expression of the will of that public. But if they can't actually do that, if they don't have the levers because some other country has the levers, yeah, then you don't have a country anymore. So fine, I get now setting aside whether I support the U.S. being a country and given everything it's done around the world. Okay.

Yeah, okay, fine. That makes sense from a kind of basic level. But as Michael is saying, what else does this allow the government to do? And do we trust the government to stay within the lines? So, for instance, is Telegram next? Telegram founded by a Russian who now has, I think he fled Russia in 2014. I think he now has dual French and Emirati citizenship. So Emiratis are currently our friends or the French, right?

Neither would qualify under the bill. But he's Russian. He's got a Russian name. Well, he is about to IPO his company. And so that means it would be publicly traded, which means it actually wouldn't even be subject to this. But and that's kind of what it gets. So if TikTok goes public, then it's cool. Okay. Well, okay. That's up to ByteDance. You know, ByteDance, hey, if you are welcome to actually publicly trade here on the New York Stock Exchange and bring your company into full compliance with US law, guess what? They will

never do that because they are controlled again and owned by the Chinese. And I don't even care about that. You run your country the way you want. I'm not saying we should democratize China or whatever. I don't care what the Chinese want to do in their own country. My point is only that if you look at this from basic level, and even with the bill, I completely understand. Look, I came out, for example, Restrict Act. Do you remember that one? The Restrict Act. Do you remember that one? The Restrict Act? This is the previous iteration. This is the previous iteration of the TikTok ban. It would have given broad authority to the US government to basically designate the president solely to unilaterally declare any application as a threat to US

national security. Absolutely no way. However, I have read this bill. It's only 12 pages long. And actually, I'm going to ask my team, we're going to put a link to the bill in the description. I want everybody to go and read it for themselves. And 12 pages is tiny because they only use like a third of the page. That's right. It's really not big. Like it's not long. It's like triple space. Only, you know, what, maybe a thousand words or something. My monologues are longer than the bill. It's not hard to understand. Friend of mine, Brendan Carr, he's an FCC commissioner. He put together kind of a rebuttal to some of these arguments. Let's put this up there. I'm going to read

from some of them. He says, quote, if you are an individual user, this bill confers zero authority. I think that's very important because you're not going after TikTok users specifically. Second, this bill applies only to applications controlled by one of four foreign adversary governments previously codified into law by Congress, China, Iran, North Korea, or Russia. The bill is clear that it is not enough to simply waive operations there or to do business there. It must be controlled by one of those four governments. I want to really spend a lot of time on this because this is where I think Michael gets it completely wrong. One of four foreign adversary governments as again, codified into law by Congress. The bill does not say, so for example,

if President Biden wanted, let's make up a country, Zimbabwe. If President Biden wanted to just say, Zimbabwe is now a threat to national security, it would require Congress to actually codify into law that Zimbabwe is now a foreign adversary control government. Now, do I trust Congress 100%? No, I don't trust Congress. Do I trust the president, Trump, Biden, either? Absolutely not. My point, though, is that it is not unilateral in the way that the Restrict Act was, and it would require, at least theoretically, democratic agreement to confer foreign adversary status. This is where I've seen a lot of people who are like, well,

Rumble and Twitter are next. It's like, hey, guys. No, they're not. First of all, Rumble is a publicly traded company. You can go and look who owns their shares or not. I actually looked it up right before we went. Guess what? It's not 20% controlled, which is the threshold for foreign ownership. That's number one. Number two, Saudi Arabia, for example, owns, I forget, some small stake in Elon's Twitter. Well, first, Saudi Arabia's not on that list. Second, even if they were, it's not up to 20%. And my other take here would be, well, any company that I think is even remotely important, I don't really think a 20% ownership should be had by a foreign government, period. I'm kind of a radical on that, but you can argue with me if you would like. I'm just coming back to the fact that, look, I understand the concerns

about overreach and I understand people are like, oh, Patriot Act 2.0. The Patriot Act was, what, 350 pages? This is not the Patriot Act. It's not even remotely the same. There are a lot of things in here which have a lot more onerous control. He also, Brendan, points out it is only after a public process and Congress has been reported to and then codify this new thing could even this specific national security threat then come in. And then finally, every single one of these hoops must be cleared and met. More so, what everybody is ignoring, and if you will see too, if you were happy to read in the bill, is that any company that is subject to any of this legislation enforcement then has a 180-day period to actually challenge this and have their day in court. ByteDance, TikTok, and others fully

would be able to bring a challenge in the U.S. District Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia. And then if they want to, they can kick it up to the Supreme Court and they can rule on the constitutionality of this legislation. But having read it and all of that, I don't think it violates the Constitution from a basic trade reciprocal perspective. And, you know, given the fact that you have access to the U.S. court system, you have a pretty onerous process. I mean, when's the last time Congress agreed on anything other than Ukraine on what is a foreign adversary or whatever? Look, I would just ask you to at least admit this. It's not the Patriot Act 2.0.

You can oppose this and at least admit it is not the Patriot Act. No, it's definitely not the Patriot Act 2.0. And I think one thing that annoys me about how this has unfolded, and this doesn't really undermine your point, but I think it's important context, is that the U.S. allowed this to happen by empowering our kind of tech oligarchs. And then the Obama administration, then Trump, allowing all sorts of mergers and then allowing this like catch and kill where anytime there was a decent app that was about to take off,

Facebook or Google or somebody else would like buy it up and then just kill it so that our like crappy little apps and social media companies continued to be the only ones thinking that the world had no alternative, no way to challenge them because they would just come in and beat them.

And then TikTok comes along and does something that people like more. And it caught our protected industry, protected by our kind of monopoly anti-failure to enforce antitrust policy, caught them sleeping. And at the same time, we were working hand in glove with these tech companies, spying on Americans, spying on everybody around the world, and allowing them to just hoover up

everybody's data so that we can have a little backdoor to it. And so it's a failure to take any responsibility for doing your own industrial policy, for guiding your own kind of social media policy, for protecting the civil liberties of your own population. And so when they then come crying about TikTok, it just lands on deaf ears. I get that. And you know what my response would be? You know what?

Luckily for you and me, we live in a democratic country and we can vote. Lena Khan is coming for them. Yeah, exactly. We, you know, our government, we elected Joe Biden. He appointed Lena Khan. She is currently sticking it to big business and to these tech companies. I would also say Joe Biden has actually had a significant number of executive orders that have impact on data transfer to China and all of that. So look, I mean, for me, a lot of this comes back to,

it's just like, then you don't believe in the government at all. And if you don't believe it, but then just be a libertarian. Like, I don't know what to say. You know, then be Ben Shapiro and come out against an income tax. Like, it's like, I believe in the government. I believe in the American government. I believe in the concept of government, not the current government. I believe in the American people. I believe that representative democracy on a long enough timeline eventually does deliver roughly what some people want. It's not always easy and it's not nearly as, what, actionable as it should be. And I would like to return to that. That said, it's not China. And like, when I look at this, it is very obvious that a forced sale, again, not a ban, a forced sale

is the most elegant option. You force them to sell it. They get to get all these TikTokers and all these content creators. I don't want them to lose it. Listen, I don't like TikTok. I don't use TikTok. But it's a free country. You can use it.

You want to rot your brain 75, what is it, 75 minutes a day on social media, be it Twitter, TikTok, or everybody else? That's your business. You can do what you want. Now, they're saying they're not going to sell it. Do you believe them? I don't believe them. Well, okay. We'll put it two ways. To explain to people that the bill forces a sale within 180 days. By ByteDance.

By ByteDance to an American, or I guess they could go public too. And if they don't do that, then it is banned. Then it is banned. And so the head of TikTok is saying, we're not going to sell it. It will be banned. Well, I think that's a negotiating position because what they want to do is they want to get all these TikTokers to come out and lobby against Congress, which, by the way, has actually massively backfired, hilariously enough. But, I mean, at the end of the day, it's really up to ByteDance. Are you going to say no to, I mean, the sale price of TikTok is probably going to be nearly a trillion bucks. Like, it's going to be $800 billion, $900 billion. There's already multiple U.S. investors that have lined

up. And let me head that off, too, because Crystal brought this up. She's like, well, Sam Altman and Open AI have said they're going to buy it. I'm like, yeah, I wouldn't agree with that. And luckily for me, I live in the United States of America, where our court system can block that if we want to. Yeah, exactly. Regulators have a say over who gets to buy it or not. Unfortunately, the real thing that could happen is this could become a geopolitical football. And don't forget, because ByteDance doesn't get to run its own business, the CEO, Zhang Ziming, even if he does want to sell it to whoever, somebody here in America, some investor conglomerate or something like that, he would still have to get sign off from Chinese regulators. So I don't think it's actually a

matter of whether Jiang Zemin or the ByteDance wants to sell it. This is all in Xi Jinping's court, whether it's really up to him. I mean, just yesterday, the Chinese Ministry of Affairs came out and said, they came out and said, it is unfair and goes against the principles of market fairness. And this is what drives me nuts. I'm like, okay, name one US tech company that gets to do business in China. One, just one. The only one that comes in remotely close is Tesla. And there's a lot of problems with Elon's relationship right now with that. So any final thoughts before we move on? I just also find it wild that the American politicians basically blame TikTok for young people being against genocide in Gaza. I think you're right. This is a fair concern.

That seems to be the thing that really pushed them over the top. I think you were right, and that is a fair concern. And if I were you, I would bring up the exact same thing. What is the impetus, the action of why? I unfortunately do think that Israel and all of that did play a significant thing. And if it was a ban, I think I would speak out against it at this point because I don't think that that's right. But given the fact- What happens if it does get banned? Well, I mean, that's the thing. Let's say that we're bluffing in some ways. Yeah. Let's say they call our bluff

and actually just not take it down. I think it would be unfortunate, but I think that the principle of reciprocal trade is too important. And I would also say, I blame Trump a huge part of this. He should have finished the job in 2019. I, people can go roll the tape. I've been talking about this since 2017. I appreciate you believing in the idea of government. Yeah. I mean, it's just, it's just this. I do believe that the government can and has worked in the past. Relatively recently, it's really totally gone off the rails, you know, since what, the post 9-11 security state. But, you know, we've been through very dark periods. That doesn't mean that we can't reclaim it.

I believe very much in democracy and the American project. Self-government. Yeah, I think that's a good thing. And that's why we are very lucky, I think, to live in a country where we actually get to vote as opposed to a literal dictatorship, which is completely controlled by this company. If this brought about genuine self-government and actually representative government, hey. Let's put about it this way. And this is what I would say to Crystal, too. She's like, well, young people will rise up.

Good. Okay. If people are pissed off, and that's the other thing. Look, this is my people will rise up. Good. Okay. If people are pissed off and that's the other thing, look, this is my opinion. This is my voice. If enough young people or whomever TikTok users, cause not just young people get pissed off about this, you are welcome to have a campaign and to vote and to extract a promise from the, uh, from your legislature and from Joe Biden or Donald Trump, whoever, would be the next president. And you can use, luckily, again, your voice to overturn this. You be my guest. I would fight

against it, but I believe very much in their ability to try and campaign against it. So that kind of brings it kind of to the core principles, I think, that are in the debate. Even though I think my opinion is strong, I wanted to make sure you got your voice in and also to voice Thomas Massey's opinion, Michael Tracy. I highly recommend. I have great respect for those two individuals, so I'm not going to tarnish them or anything. I think they have a legitimate point of view, and we'll see what happens. What did Ben Franklin say? We have made a sticky algorithmic app if you can keep it.

I like it. I like it. I like it a lot. In terms of the future, I don't know where this is going to go. From what I have heard, I'm curious what you think. At the very least, it's going to take a while in the Senate if it ever does pass. I'm dubious that it passes at all, personally, just because you got Democrats who control the chamber. Do they really want to be on the, you know, let's say the app does get banned. Do they seen the numbers. Do they really want to, you know, get screwed by something like that? I don't think they're willing to take that risk. There's not enough weed that you could legalize

to earn back the numbers that you're going to lose from banning TikTok. Well, we'll see. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right.

It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and reexamining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian,

creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind VoiceOver, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't

being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily it's your not the father week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This author writes, My father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son,

even though it was promised to us. Now I find out he's trying to give it to his irresponsible son instead, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. So what are they going to do to get those millions back? That's so unfair. Well, the author writes that her husband found out the truth from a DNA test they were gifted two years ago.

Scandalous. But the kids kept their mom's secret that whole time. Oh my God. And the real kicker, the author wants to reveal this terrible secret, even if that means destroying her husband's family in the process. So do they get the millions of dollars back

or does she keep the family's terrible secret? Well, to hear the explosive finale, listen to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, let's move on to the next part. This is Georgia. Major news out there. Ryan, I'm actually very curious for your take. I'll just set up the details. Let's put this up there, please, on the screen. The judge who is currently overseeing that 2020 election interference case involving Trump has actually thrown out six

separate charges, quashing the six counts in the indictment, three actually against Trump. The judge has left in place 10 other counts that Trump faces, and the prosecutors are now saying they're going to try and seek a new indictment to reinstate the ones that he had dismissed. They write, this is the Associated Press, the ruling is a blow for Fulton County DA Fannie Willis, who already is facing an effort to have her removed from the prosecution over her romantic relationship with a colleague. We will get to that. It is the first time, actually, that any charges against Trump in any of his criminal cases have been dismissed. And much of this traces back

to the use of a Georgia RICO law, which was associated previously with mobsters, that was then used to go after Trump in this particular case. The defense attorneys obviously said that this was the correct decision. But the reason why this is especially big is that one of these counts stems from that, quote, perfect phone call where Trump told Brad Raffensperger to, quote, find 11,780 votes. The reason that it was dismissed, again, has something to do with some of the complicated minutiae over Rico. But considering how that was such a flagship public part of the case against Trump, Ryan, I'm curious what you think about this in terms of the case. Basically what the judge, so to step back, what prosecutors had to do in order to make this case was to kind of lay on a set of facts

onto a series of laws that were not really written with this specific thing in mind. Like when Georgia sat down and wrote its election laws, they were not thinking in the back of their mind that the actual president of the United States would be putting pressure on lawmakers, on the governor, on election officials, on regular poll workers to find the votes, to flip the votes. So because they didn't have that in the back of their mind,

they didn't specifically say the president of the United States shall not use his office to pressure poll workers to find 11,000 votes. And so what they had to do is take other laws that are written around the idea of protecting election infrastructure and protecting the integrity of elections. And they just basically took every law that they could find and slapped it into the indictment. And what the judge ruled here is that you didn't make your case about how these specific actions actually tie specifically to these laws. And so now what the prosecutors are saying are like, okay, well, we consider these to be edits and red lines. We're going to send you a new indictment that actually does spell out with more clarity on why we think that these laws actually do apply to the perfect phone call or to the other elements of what they say is a crime.

So I think that's the problem that we're having. It wasn't designed with this in mind. And so they're trying to shoehorn in laws that do exist because they're like, well, this must be illegal. Now let's go find the laws that show that it's illegal. Excellent point. The other really noteworthy thing to me about this was that the timeline just got pushed out. So for example, now the judge has granted actually a six-month window to have to resubmit this case to the grand jury. Yeah, what date is it? It's March 14th. So now you got six months. I mean, who knows? Look, especially with all this other

nonsense going on in that office, can you imagine how difficult it must be to actually get some work done? And who's the lawyer who's going to be doing it because it ain't going to be Nathan Wade? Well, he has or she has to then find a new prosecutor. They have to redo the case. They have to re-grand jury the case. Don't forget, the last time we did grand jury this case was, what, over a year ago now at this point. This stuff takes a long time. So they've got to drop new charges, then go to the grand jury, then go through legal review.

They're running out of time. They're running out of time They're running out of time. I mean, how are they gonna try and Kate try this case before I remember I just go with the charges you've got but they can't because they need that phone call charge They have because it's such a critical you can't bring up the phone exact because the phone call charge is such a critical piece of the public case Against Trump's one of the things that people- It's the thing. Yeah, I mean, it is the thing. It's like the thing that publicly, and let's be honest, like this isn't just about application of the law, right?

Like a lot of this is political. Well, within that, then they need this particular thing. Unless they do come to the conclusion that they do wanna try and have the trial beforehand and move ahead, but that's not what they've at least said for now. So that brings us to a couple of the other criminal cases. Right now, the only criminal case going forward against Trump before the election, almost 100%, is that dumbass Stormy Daniels case in New York State, which nobody cares

about. Which he can get convicted of and- Right, pay a fine. Right. Yeah. I think it's like probation or whatever, but it's not- I want to see him doing community service. Right. And even then, I think rich people can buy their way out of community service. Isn't that true? Like the whole Jeffrey Epstein thing where you can like use your nonprofit or what? That's actually a crazy loophole in the justice system. That's a whole other. Yes. And judges can try to stop that if they're being petty or just whichever way you want to say it. Sure. Yeah. Yes. Okay. Like they can assign specific stuff. Okay. That's good. But then it gets into the hands of the social, like the other side and they can buy their

way out of it. So you're right. You're definitely right. Being rich in this country is always a favor. Let's go to the next part in terms of the Hill. Please put that up there on the screen where they talk about the disqualification trial that's actually coming up. It's a hearing.

So a Georgia judge, the same judge, is expected now to actually hear this week arguments as to whether Fannie Willis herself should be booted from this entire case, the office being brought then by the Trump team. So obviously this goes back to the torrid affair between her and Mr. Nathan Wade and then the psychotic and insane divorce case proceedings, which were broadcast live for everyone to see. She claims that she reimbursed him hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash with no records, no withdrawal receipts or others. Maybe you see if you can believe her. There's no way to prove what she's saying. And Ryan, as you've laid out previously, we don't care about the affair. We care about the in-kind gifts because Mr. Wade was paid upwards of what, $700,000 by the state of Georgia. And obviously, if he's both profiting from the state and then giving possibly in-kind

gifts to his lover and or girlfriend with state money, that is a blatant violation of Georgia law. That's the reason not to hire your girlfriend or your boyfriend with public money because then you need to have an accounting of every time you go on a date or a vacation. Otherwise, you're in violation of these kickback laws. But obviously, you can't have a paper trail or a public accounting if it's an affair. So those two things are in direct conflict. Keeping your romantic relationship secret and documenting it is going to undermine the whole point of having an affair. So therefore, you probably shouldn't hire your person you're having an affair with. That's a pretty basic principle. That's pro tips out there.

Right. Not really sure why it even needs to be said, but the ladies on The View will defend her. But as I pointed out, in terms of how this would come, this week we'll find out whether she gets to stay on the case or not. Then, if she doesn't get to stay on the case, then there actually could be a new prosecuting office, which would delay the case even further. And it says that currently any delay would be then exacerbated by the appeal of that decision by the current district attorney's office. So if there is a ruling in this, it is going to drag this thing out even more months. He's got the bozo down in Florida that he appointed that is delaying that trial. Right. Right. You got the Alvin Bragg thing, which nobody cares about.

You've got this punted past the election. Bingo. What about the wannabe Elliot Ness guy? How's that one going? I'm actually not 100% sure. So, okay, the documents case, that was another one I think that's been pushed. January 6th. So yeah, this is a real issue. My other favorite part of this is that even if she is upheld by the judge, then Trump gets to appeal this decision about Fannie Willis, could then, could immediately take it either post-trial or pre-trial, depending on how they decide. This would be post-presidency at this-trial, depending on how they decide. This would be post-presidency at this point. The defense would then have to request discretionary review by the appellate court,

according to the Georgia judicial system. And if they do, then that would take another 10 business days. The dangerous thing that this sets up is a situation where Trump is president and then has all of these criminal cases. That's the most likely scenario. Hanging over him. Right. Which we've seen how that works with Netanyahu. So Netanyahu has these criminal cases waiting for him once he's finally out of power. And so he just does everything he, like there's already a will to cling to power and all of these politicians. You add, oh, and by the way, you're going to jail if you leave office, then they are willing to just do anything to stay in power. That's not, that's not what you want with Trump. Now I don't think he can stay in power because he doesn't have, I don't think the Supreme

Court would side with him trying to get another term and I don't think the military would do it. So I don't think he has, there's no path like for him doing more than four years, like the system is ready to spit him out, but he will have an intense incentive to stay if he's got those cases hanging over him. Obviously, very astute and correct. And it just sets up for— I mean, it's just going to be an insane situation. Just pardon him to Mar-a-Lago.

Well, what if he tries to pardon himself? Okay, good. I actually think— But it's a state case, though. Oh, that's true. That's right. Yeah, so that would apply— He can pardon the federal cases.

That would apply for both the federal cases, but it would not apply. It would also be a huge stress test to the Supreme Court. And I think of—what is it? There's some 1973 memo in the Department of Justice. The president can't pardon himself. Well, shh. It goes back to Watergate. You know what?

What are you going to do with a memo? This would be fun. Honestly, I feel like law school clerks or law school teachers are having the time of their lives right now. In terms of Supreme Court, constitutional law and all that stuff. I almost wish that I was in law school just so that I could study some stuff like this. Because when I was in school, it was boring as hell. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left.

In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and re-examining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long.

You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation.

To most people, I'm the girl behind VoiceOver, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship

that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily it's your not the father week on the OK Storytime podcast. So we'll find out soon. This author writes, My father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us.

Now I find out he's trying to give it to his irresponsible son instead, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. So what are they going to do to get those millions back? That's so unfair. Well, the author writes that her husband found out the truth from a DNA test they were gifted two years ago. Scandalous. But the kids kept their mom's secret that whole time.

Oh my God. And the real kicker, the author wants to reveal this terrible secret, even if that means destroying her husband's family in the process. So do they get the millions of dollars back or does she keep the family's terrible secret? Well, to hear the explosive finale, listen to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. So I'm going to go ahead and read some of these for you. First and what the biggest headline-grabbing one is Aaron Rodgers, the current NFL quarterback. What is it? For the New York Jets, right?

Yeah, four downs for the Jets. Four downs for the Jets. I believe—is he injured? Is he still on the roster? Yeah, he said he's coming back. Okay, he said he's coming back. Yeah, busted his ACL or whatever. Aaron Rodgers is big there on the list.

Obviously, Aaron Rodgers has spoken extensively about RFK Jr. on the Joe Rogan experience and elsewhere, aligning with him particularly on his views on vaccines. But in general, kind of being a relative, I guess, what, skeptic, I guess you could say, of elites. The other person that really shot out to me was Jesse Ventura, which I actually think Ryan would be a smarter move. And I'm curious what you think, given his past political experience. I mean, he was literally the governor of the state of Minnesota. And look, you can love, you can hate Jesse. I've kind of find him a, frankly, inspirational figure. This is a guy who used and had his, he used and had his personal like popularity with his very anti establishment politics, gets himself elected governor and then becomes like a real voice and force against a lot of people and the establishment kind of in the interim 20 years. He was strong on

the Iraq war and all that, for example. So that would be an interesting case. And I think it would align more with RFK Jr. He's very, he's very RFK Jr. I'd love to hear, I'd love to hear their unvarnished conversations. Like we're, we're only getting the stuff that, that, that they're willing to put out there. Ventura is fascinating. He like went to move to Mexico basically and became a hermit down on the beach. Like the kind of, the kind of lifestyle that everybody dreams of. Like, I'm out of here, man. I'm done. The other ones they list, Rand Paul.

Hard to imagine him actually accepting that. I mean, he's a Republican. Tulsi Gabbard. That I could see. That'd be interesting. Andrew Yang was thrown out there. Mike Rowe. Mike Rowe.

See, Mike Rowe, actually, that'd be kind of smart, I think. Your guy, Tony Robbins? So, he's not my guy, let's be very clear. That said, Tony Robbins, I think, would be smart just because Tony Robbins is incredibly popular and famous, and everybody knows who he is. So, there is like a name ID element to this. I don't know much about Tony Robbins, at least in the, I feel like he was a big thing when I was a kid, like maybe 20 years ago. That's when his tapes and his CDs and all of that were really taken over. I don't know how well his business is doing, all this, I assume pretty well. I still wonder what would have happened in a world where RFK Jr. had, instead, he just has this reflexive, ultra hawkish approach to Israel that came out since October 7th

and he's dug in on it. Like that's who he is. Yeah, that's who he is. That's what he believes. But he flows out of RFK Senior, he ran as an anti-war candidate in 1968. What if instead of that position, he had a different position where he was against the war

and you combined his ability to pick up the Joe Rogan podcast world, which is tens of millions of people with the disaffected under 30 people. And he started having Bernie size rallies. That political coalition is a force that can get you to a third of the vote in states, which makes you then a major party contender. I think the only explanation is he believes it. He's not a stupid man. But let's say he did. Could you—am I crazy?

Is there a path— No, I think you're right. I think you're 100% right. —where he could get to 30%, 35% on that? See, the thing is, what I think he would need to do is he doesn't even need to be like a full-blown left poster. He just needs to be like, I would run the war differently. And I feel like that would be enough for a lot of these people.

So if you were to co-opt, yeah, I mean, think about it. Obama, I mean, let's be honest. Like, he was anti-war. But in the midst of the actual 08 campaign, he wasn't really anti-war. He had the whole good war rhetoric. And then we all know how he ran. But enough people, even idiots like me, were like, yeah, I hate the Iraq war. Like, let's go. You know, I was like a teenager. Well, I think a lot of people would be feeling exactly the same way.

The thing, so I want to just like spend time on Aaron Rodgers specifically. Let's put this up there. Adam, what is this man's name? Adam Schefter. I know. Okay. NFL people, please don't judge me. I don't watch the NFL. I know this man is like a famous person in that world. He says Aaron Rogers is officially on the RFK Jr. shortlist to be his running mate on the independent financial or presidential ticket, as he confirms in ESPN and first reported there by the New York Times. Aaron, okay. From a pure political popularity perspective, I don't think it would be bad. Because NFL is the only thing that actually unites this country in terms of viewership. It's literally the only massive event that Americans—

He's a pretty polarizing figure in the world of the NFL. Okay, so that's my question, is how many people are even familiar with his, like, vaccine Epstein views on Pat McAfee as opposed to—I mean, how old is he? He's like 40 years old? He's been a—look, I don't watch the NFL NFL and I know who freaking Aaron Rodgers is, right? Like he is a level of pop culture name ID, which is very, very difficult to beat as opposed to all of these other people on here. I'm not saying he would be a good vice president. I don't honestly know anything about him other than listening to him on the Joe Rogan experience. But if your goal is to just, I mean, get the bros out there,

get name ID, you know, go viral and all of that and just get awareness. I don't think it would be a bad move, honestly. I mean, he did cause a lot of drama within the NFL and on his team with his like refusal to take the vaccine and sort of like lying about it. Well, I don't, okay. So this is the other thing. What did he say again? He said he was immunized. Uh, I don't want to, I don't want to, I don't want to get all this again. I mean, he says he has an allergy. I mean, I believe him. Also, I, I would like at the time, even at the time I was like, look, if the guy says he had COVID, like, right. What do you do? What do you care? That's right. You, you do actually have just as much immunity from getting COVID than, than taking the vaccine. But yeah, it was a

controversial position. So that's all I'm saying, even though the NFL is the one thing that our monoculture is still agreed upon. But the other fun part is, I like this about him. Apparently, he's at an ayahuasca retreat. Yeah, let's put that up there on the screen. The news broke of him being on the list while he was on an ayahuasca retreat in Costa Rica. I believe this is his second, or at least not his first visit down to Costa Rica for his ayahuasca retreat, which he has spoken about publicly. He credits ayahuasca with kind of opening his mind and changing the way that he sees the world, which I hope that doesn't discredit it to everybody else who's like, sees where he's gone with it. I mean, I do love that he's,

you know, as you called it, skeptical. The problem from my perspective with people like Aaron Rodgers is that they're not actually skeptical. They just say, okay, anything that this side says, I immediately believe the other side. And if you have a conspiracy theory for him, he's like, I'm in. That's not skepticism. That's gullibility. I think you've got to be skeptical across the board. However, I do love that he's searching for his soul down there in Costa Rica and opening his mind.

Everybody should do ayahuasca. Imagine this. If he did win, he'd be the only politician ever to pass the Graham Hancock test. So Graham Hancock, the famous, what is it, ancient civilizations guy, I've heard him say this multiple times. He was like, I believe that every politician should have like 10 ayahuasca journeys or experiences. So, I mean, I don't know what number Aaron is at, but he would be the only person actually to pass the Graham Hancock test. So maybe that's a reason to vote for him. Nonetheless, I mean, look, the problem that RFK Jr. has is he could very quickly fall into the it's a joke category where people who would seriously consider voting for him would see the Aaron Rodgers pick and would be like, okay, come on, this is ridiculous. I would much more

think that somebody like Jesse Ventura, Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang, any of the folks we listed with genuine political experience would be a lot better because they've got a relatively little, you know, they've got some more name ID. They've got name ID in terms of the political system, but these are like lawmakers or former presidential candidates who have actual experience kind of within the system. And it would make him, I think, appear more legitimate if he were to pick those types. It is telling about the way that our culture and our politics have shifted that he felt like this could be his list. In the past, when you've got a third party candidate who's trying to project legitimacy, they go and get some retired general. Who did Ross Perot get? Admiral, yeah, this was Admiral Stockdale, who had this funny line that went viral before there was social media in a

vice presidential debate where he's like, who am I? Why am I here? And it really sounded like he was genuinely curious. Okay, but James Stockdale was also a hero. I mean, don't forget. Exactly. This is, he's a medal of honor winner. This is a Perot felt like he needed somebody to assure the American people that he would be a good shepherd of the national security state and as commander in chief. RFK Jr. is like, me and Ann Rogers got this. And that is, I think, indicative of the distrust that now exists between that American. You just gave me an idea. He's too old because I just looked it up. Wesley Clark, I feel like would have been a great pick. He's super skeptical of the US intelligence agencies, of the security. He has that famous clip about the post

Iraq discussions about invading Libya and all that. He really was a peacenik actually, but former four-star general, a guy who really, you know – he's proven his anti-war bona fides, and he's somebody who legitimately has that type of experience. But he's 79, so I think he's way too old. But that said, he wouldn't be a bad pick. He's like right in the middle of our other candidates. That's right. I mean he is – but in terms of assuring people, you have a 72-year-old and I think RFK is 72, and a 79-year-old up against an 81-year-old and what is it? A 78-year-old. RFK 72 and a 79 year old up against an 81 year old and what is a 78 year old, 78 year old. Not necessarily all that inspiring, but yeah, if Wesley Clark was younger, I feel like he would

actually be a great pick. He could be Stockdale-esque. So anyway, my advice to the campaign, not that they care or what I say or listen, would be to pick somebody with some political experiences and make yourself feel more legitimate instead of just a castaway protest vote. You don't want to fall into the joke category. You want to fall into the serious category. The media is already going to try and paint you as a joke as it is. So I wouldn't pick a Mike Rowe or an Aaron Rodgers. But also wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for name ID.

So we'll see. And we'll see what happens. Yeah, I just don't see. Yeah. And what does Aaron Rodgers add? Everybody who likes Aaron Rodgers already likes RFK Jr. Good point. Great point, actually.

That's right. It's not necessarily additive. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin,

it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and reexamining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and

subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships.

I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it.

Listen to Boy Sober on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily it's your not the father week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This author writes, my father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us.

Now I find out he's trying to give it to his irresponsible son instead, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. So what are they going to do to get those millions back? That's so unfair. Well, the author writes that her husband found out the truth from a DNA test they were gifted two years ago. Scandalous. But the kids kept their mom's secret that whole time. Oh my God. And the real kicker, the author wants to reveal this terrible secret, even if that means destroying her husband's family in the process. So do they get the millions of dollars back or does she keep the family's terrible secret? Well, to hear the explosive finale, listen to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast or wherever you get your podcasts. Our man, Ben Shapiro, as he says in this clip we're about to play, he blew up the internet

by being a little twerp suggesting that old people need to work longer. And also coming after Social Security, which comes after Donald Trump very stupidly, in my opinion, just pragmatically from a political perspective, suggested that actually, yes, he told CNBC, yes, there are ways that we can cut Social Security and Medicare, which is CNBC has been slobbering for those cuts. And the thing that people liked about Trump was that he was willing to tell CNBC, no, you owe that to people. You're not taking it away from them. So Ben Shapiro jumps in and sees an opportunity to go back to this old conservative canard of, we're going to do this.

Actually, we're finally going to come for these entitlements. Let's play a little bit of our man, Ben Shapiro. So yesterday, I apparently blew up the internet. I blew up the internet because of something that I said on this show. What exactly did I say that blew up the internet? Well, I touched the political third rail. I talked about social security.

Now, I know what you're thinking. What's so spicy about social security? And I will admit, I was thinking the same thing, because there are a few simple facts in the matter with regard to social security. One, we don't have the money for it, and it's a Ponzi scheme. And two, with regard to sort of the personal decision to retire, very often when people retire, they're making a bad decision. And let's be real about this.

It's insane that we haven't raised the retirement age in the United States. It's totally crazy. Joe Biden, if that were the case, Joe Biden should not be running for president. Hey, Joe Biden is 81 years old. The retirement age in the United States at which you start to receive Social Security and you are eligible for Medicare is 65. Joe Biden has technically been eligible for Social Security and Medicare for 16 years, and he wants to continue in office until he is 86,

which is 19 years past when he would be eligible for retirement. No one in the United States should be retiring at 65 years old. Frankly, I think retirement itself is a stupid idea unless you have some sort of health problem. Everybody that I know who is elderly, who has retired, is dead within five years.

And if you talk to people who are elderly and they lose their purpose in life by losing their job and they stop working, things go to hell in a handbasket real quick. It was an attempt to get older workers off the payrolls to make room for younger workers. The first kind of full social security scheme was put in place by Otto von Bismarck in Germany. And it was a way of clearing the older payrolls of older workers because they weren't as effective. And in fact, older workers fought it. All right. There's a lot going on there, Ryan.

Yeah. And first of all, he could just have Googled social security retirement age at 67. They bumped it up. That's correct. It's not 65. Just a weird mistake in there. Secondly, and I think we can put this next element up here. Good community note. One of the reasons that you have such low life expectancy

from back in the day is infant mortality. That's exactly right. You go back and look at during the time of the founding of the country, life expectancy is like 40 or something. And you're like, what? How is that possible? People only live till 40? And then you're like, wait a minute, but Ben Franklin was like 80 years old. He's signing, how is this possible? And it turns out that when you read further,

like they had 10 children, only five lived past the age of three or four. And you're like, oh, I see. So the average is, now if you make it into adulthood, then your life expectancy at the time was close to 69. Basically, it hasn't risen much. And actually, life expectancy over the last couple of years is dipping back downwards. So he should actually adjust his talking points if we're headed that direction.

Let me add on to something like that. Often people will say that's because of COVID. That is absolutely not true. We've done multiple monologues here on the subject. It has been ticking down since 2017. And unfortunately, it's actually fentanyl. It's one of the major reasons. Because you're losing 100,000 people plus a year

at the age of 20 or 21. So you have fentanyl being the number one cause, or overdose being the number one cause of death for people who are, what is it, 20 to 55, prime age, working years. On top of, you have horrible chronic health conditions and obesity. So you put that all together, our society is on like a Soviet-esque decline.

But separately, let's talk about the lack of any imagination in the mind of Ben Shapiro. I think it is true that there are people who get their meaning through their routine of going to work and coming home in the weekend and then they retire and they're lost. Like, I think he's- It's probably more true for people like us, right? It's, even people who, you know, work manual jobs.

So I'm saying, though, that's kind of an important distinction, and that kind of gets me to the superhero element. But the answer to that is not to say, well, don't ever stop that routine and drive yourself until you are in the grave. It is, well, don't ever stop that routine and drive yourself until you are in the grave. It is, well, what's wrong with all of this? Like, let's find more spiritual value, and spiritual doesn't have to be religious at all. Let's just find more meaning in our daily lives, in our social relations, in the way that we not just work but also play, and the way that we kind of love each other as a community, as a family, et cetera. Like, let's have better lives our entire lives. One of the reasons why I think retirement age is so, or sorry, retirement,

Social Security, and all that is so imperative is that we have a huge manual labor underclass in this country of which their body literally gets broken down. And if you look at some of the poverty statistics from the 1930s, it is horrifying. I know that in AMI and all of those, it's like, it kind of popularizes this image that it was working age people who were in Hoovervilles. And that is certainly true to some extent, but a lot of the people who were starving to death and dying, they were just old. They were pensioners. But I mean that they went broke, their bank were gone, and these people, guys, they died of literal starvation because they were so poor and they could not go or even qualify under this. And then finally,

there's a basic aspect of fairness. I've been paying in this damn program my entire life. Every time I look at my paycheck, I say, I remember the very first time I got paid. What is that? I said, what the, this is FICA shit, you know? And then I was like, oh, it's social security. I'm like, okay. But that's part of the thing is that every American who works in this country, we have paid into this system. Right. Fairly or not, you can say reform, et cetera. I'm like, no, no, no, no, no. You took a hell of a lot of my money over the years, not even close to what I'm going to get back out of it. At the very least, I'm going to get something. So the idea that it's going to get abolished is completely outrageous. And the idea that it's a Ponzi scheme is also just

factually incorrect. Like ask Ben Shapiro, name another Ponzi scheme that hasn't missed a payment in 81 years. Like it's a sustainable program. Right Ponzi scheme that hasn't missed a payment in 81 years. Like it's a sustainable program. Right. And we, because, and you know how I can say that we have sustained it for 81 years. We can, we can continue to sustain it. If you need to make some tweaks and Ben Shapiro has to pay a little bit more into it to help some, some other people, fine. That's different. But to, to your point, there is still a word kind of in our vernacular that comes from the period before Social Security, and the word is the poorhouse. Yes, that's right. You would hear it from your parents, your grandparents, you're going to put me in the poorhouse.

The poorhouse was an actual thing. And it was basically a charitable run organization. Sometimes it would get a little bit of money from the town or from the city or the state, where when elderly people who could no longer make income, they would just get put in the poorhouse. These were the most decrepit, disgusting, degrading, undignified places that you could put elderly people. And the other place, and I interviewed Dingell about this, whose father was the author of the Social Security Act. He said when he was a kid, his house was filled with Dingles and other Polish relatives. What would happen is everybody would just move into a house that had a little bit of room. That was it.

You had the poor house and you had elderly people moving in with whatever cousins, nephews, nieces, or grandchildren or anybody else that could take them in. If that's how you wanna do it, like if you want to have a multi-generational home where the mom and the dad are supporting the children and the grandparents, go ahead. You should do that if you want to do it. Everybody was forced to do it.

Social Security is around the world the greatest poverty reduction program that has ever existed in human history. Let me get on to talk specifically to that. 40.2% of people who are older and eligible for Social Security, their only income is Social Security. Those people are heading to the poorhouse. What are they going to do? They're going to die. They're literally going to die without Social Security. Those people were headed to the poorhouse. Yeah, they were going to die. Poorhouse. They're literally going to die without Social Security and Medicare. Now, I want to be clear, that's not a good situation. And if you are my age or your age, Ryan,

please stay for retirement. Please. I'm begging you because you don't want to be in this position. That said, 40% of the country is. So clearly, we're screwing up and we've done a hell of a lot wrong in terms of setting and financially educating people. But it is what it is. We're going to let these people just die, you know, in complete obscurity and poverty. You cut a couple hundred dollars from them just to save Ben Shapiro money on his taxes. The choices that they then have to make are just brutal. It's devastating. And Ben would never have any idea about that type of a choice. The other thing that they point out is that so 40%, but actually more than 50% of people 65 or older receive at least 50% then of their income after age 67 from social security. So then now imagine that, as you just said, you know, you cut a hundred bucks, 5% doesn't sound like a lot to you

or I when the price of eggs goes up by 20. Yeah, it actually does make a huge difference. A lot of these people also live by themselves or, you know, in a sole household. You couple that with a lot of these nursing homes and, you know, the Medicare fraud and all that stuff that goes on. You know, it's not an easy life to just be living purely on the government dime. Again, why I'm begging you, please take some responsibility and try and save for retirement. But if you do find yourself in this situation- After you've paid for your breaking points sub, though. Yeah, right. Of course. I would never advise that. But- Yeah, but say it first.

You don't want to be in this position, and I really hope that nobody is. I wouldn't wish it on anybody. But we have to deal with reality. 40, 50% of the country is living in this position. Well, now what? I think we have, you know, look, we have a well-defined program here. And again, all those people, at least, you know, the way the program is designed, they paid into it. We're all paying into it. It would be outrageous to rob us of the similar thing. It also comes to a matter of emphasis, which is what Mike Cernovich kind of put, and I really love this framing. Let's put this up there on the screen. He says, reminder, Ben Shapiro advocated for every war in the Middle East. When the rich kids of DC that America can't afford foreign aid and foreign wars, then we can maybe talk about making grandma

starve. Until then, no thanks. I totally agree. You want to save money? The Biden administration just put out a defense budget of $842 billion. $842 billion. That would be almost nearly a $100 billion increase in what, just five years? That's a lot of money, right? That is a lot of money. Seems easy to cut there, isn't it? And if Biden were smart, he would lean into this, and you are seeing the Biden campaign hitting Trump on this. And you've actually seen the Trump campaign, one of their responses was they tweeted out an article of mine that I wrote in 2020 that said that Joe Biden has been trying to cut social security for 40 years. And it's true, he was, but he is a politician. He saw which way the wind is blowing. There are now

about 210 Democrats who have signed onto a social security expansion bill in the House of Representatives. Nancy Pelosi kept it off the floor because she is at heart an austerity and wouldn't, it probably would have passed if she would just put it on the floor, John Larson's bill. That's political gold for Democrats. No, not only-

What kind of expansion? What does it do? It means like on the lower end, 50% and below, would get actually more social security in their checks. And then it closes some of the tax loopholes in order to make, and it makes it sustainable for like another 50, 75 years. But people like Ben Shapiro would have to pay more in. And so people like Ben Shapiro would rather it be cut

and you just keep working. But he's trying to pretend he's actually doing it for your own good because spiritually and psychically, he's just nervous about your soul. Well, this is crazy. So I didn't even realize this. The average social security benefit in 2023

is $1,700 a month. Right. I don't even know how you survive on that. Where are you even gonna get, yeah. Right. Can you even pay rent on $1,700 a month. Right. I don't even know how you survive on that. Where are you even going to get, yeah. Right. Can you even pay rent on $1,700? I mean, in a medium to high cost of living area, that's going to be stretching it. That's really tough.

You better live in a rural place if you want to make it on food and on housing. Which then it's hard to get around. Yeah. The whole thing is, people are screwed. You can't, there's no way you're going to make a car payment on $1,700 with all those other things too. That's another thing. Let me just advocate for, buy your house, make sure you pay off your mortgage. is people are screwed. You can't, there's no way you're making a car payment on $1,700 with all those other things too. That's another thing.

Let me just advocate for buy your house, make sure you pay off your mortgage, make sure you have retirement. And it's another, this is something that doesn't get talked about enough in the squeeze on the economy. So many people our age are helping their parents out. That's true. That's really unfortunate. Well, look, as you can see.

You do it because you, you know, we're not talking about the right thing to do, but it hurt. It's people unfortunate. Well, look, as you can see- Which you do it because you- We're not talking about- It's the right thing to do, but it hurt. It's tough. These people are not living, what is it, high on the hog? They're not living high on the hog here. We're talking about $1,700, $1,800 for an average check. Let's say a married household, that's still only $3,600. I mean, that's 30, what is that? $3,600 is like 40 grand or something like that after tax. That's below the average income actually for a household in the United States. So just a reminder and remember what really this program is, what the implications of all of that would look like.

I understand people don't want to pay or think it's unfair and all that. I think there's still a lot we could do in terms of making the Social Security benefits actually go a lot farther and give people some optionality. But the program itself is 100% gold and it should stay where it is. This has got to be the funniest story of all time because everyone involved looks terrible, which is why it's amazing. So we'd previously brought everybody the news, Don Lemon fired by CNN for, what did he say, that women aren't in their prime, like in terms of their birth? He said women are only in their prime during their birthing years.

Oh, yeah. Yes. Something only a gay man could ever think to say. It was just the final straw for him. Right. After years of just psychotic behavior there over at CNN. Well, he decided to sign a program, sign a deal with X, with Elon Musk. Sign, yeah. Well, yeah, we'll get to that. He said he agreed to a program where he would broadcast in partnership on X, formerly known as Twitter, the way that Tucker Carlson does right now, while also simultaneously posting elsewhere. He was going to get paid tens of millions of dollars. As the broadcast actually was set to debut on March 18th, he decided his first interview would be with Elon

Musk. Now, we don't know exactly what happened in that interview, but we do know that immediately after the interview, Elon canceled his entire con. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment

and reexamining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and see. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other.

It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it.

Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily it's your not the father week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This author writes, my father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us. Now I find out he's trying to give it to his irresponsible son instead, but I have DNA proof

that could get the money back. Hold up. So what are they going to do to get those millions back? That's so unfair. Well, the author writes that her husband found out the truth from a DNA test they were gifted two years ago. Scandalous. But the kids kept their mom's secret that whole time. Oh my God. And the real kicker, the author wants to reveal this terrible secret, even if that means destroying her husband's family in the process. So do they get the millions of dollars back or does she keep the family's terrible secret? Well, to hear the explosive finale, listen to the OK story time podcast on the iheartradio app apple podcast or wherever you get your podcasts tracked here's what don had to say immediately afterwards hi everyone elon musk is mad at me and i just put out a statement about what happened between him

me and the interview that he is apparently so upset about. So speaking of free speech, right, I thought the first person interview, no brainer, Elon Musk, the man who calls himself a free speech absolutist. I asked him to do it. He willingly agreed to the interview. Throughout our conversation, I kept reiterating to him that although it was tense at times, I thought it was good for people to see and hear our exchange and that they would learn from our conversation, learn more about him, learn more about me. But apparently, free speech absolutism doesn't apply when it comes to questions about him from people like me. What did we talk about? Why is he so upset? Oh, interesting. So what did they talk about? It turns out, Ryan,

some of this stems back to questions that Don asked Elon about ketamine drug use. He played some of these clips last night on CNN, ironically, running to his former employer, the moment that he needs a little bit of airtime. Let's take a listen. You talk about your ketamine use and depression. You also have said- The reason I should say, the reason I mentioned the ketamine prescription on the X platform was because I thought maybe this is something that can help other people. That's why I mentioned it. Obviously, I'm not a doctor, but I would say if someone has depression issues, they should

consider talking to their doctor about ketamine instead of SSRIs. Do you believe that X and you have some responsibility to moderate hate speech on the platform? That you wouldn't have to answer these questions from reporters about the great replacement theory as it relates to Democrats? I don't have to answer these questions. The great replacement theory as it relates to Jewish people. Do you think that? I don't have to answer questions from reporters.

Don, the only reason I'm doing this interview is because you're on the X platform and you asked for it. Otherwise, I would not do this interview. So you don't think, do you think that you wouldn't get in trouble or you wouldn't be criticized for these things? I'm criticized possibly. I could care less. So that's it. Apparently, that's what did it. Immediately after, let's put this up there on the screen. Immediately after, Ryan, of the conclusion of this interview, Elon texted Don Lemon's representatives and just simply said, contract canceled. Don's lawyers have since

responded saying that they will be suing X for the payments that he is due. They put out a statement, let's put that up there, please. It says they canceled the partnership, et cetera, et cetera. The interview will still air. It'll be on YouTube podcast. It'll still broadcast on X. But it turns out, Ryan, that there actually was no signed contract between Don Lemon and between Elon. And any of this went up and that it will be, I mean, again, if you only verbally agreed to something, you didn't sign anything. Elon does appear to be within his rights to cancel your ass. So what have we learned about this? Elon, incredibly thin-skinned, literally canceled somebody for a single interview,

which is like, I mean, look, I hate Don Lemon. That was not adversarial at all. I will watch the full interview. We'll see. But if you really can't take that, come on, dude. And then on Don, how did you ever expect this to play out, bro? What did you think?

Kara Swisher, who broke the news, said she told him, told Don Lemon. Yeah, we can put that Swisher's tweet up. She's like, look, I told Don Lemon this is exactly how this would end. He is the, I mean, billionaires are all thin skinned and something about being a billionaire, I think makes you more thin skinned

because you're just around people who are kissing up to you constantly because they want your access to your wealth. And so then when you get even the slightest whiff of somebody not kissing your butt, you can't handle it anymore. And so I would assume, I don't know if Elon's always been this thin-skinned, but living the life he's lived for the last 10, 20 years, I think helps to produce that in people. But yeah, I mean, the whole thing is utterly hilarious. Although on both of those questions,

I was kind of on Elon's side. It's like, okay, I think his drug use beyond ketamine is an interesting thing to explore for his investors and for other people. On the question of ketamine, if he's got a prescription for ketamine and he is telling people that if you're suffering from depression, anxiety, something else, ask your doctor about ketamine as an alternative to SSRIs.

I think he's obviously correct about that. Good for him. And as he said, he's not a doctor. He's not prescribing anything for you, but you should be aware of this possibility that SSRIs might not be the path out of whatever problems you have at the moment. And that ketamine might be a better alternative. Talk to your doctor about it. Good for him. We'll see what the rest of the interview comes up with. But it wasn't that adversarial.

But also from Elon's perspective, that's like, come on. You can't handle a tiny bit of that. Like I said, we can let the Contract 101 people in the comments section sort out whether this is binding, where it's binding. It seems like they're just hoping that Musk will say, all right, here's a percentage to end this court battle. Maybe you're right. I don't know. That said, he's a very rich man and he's also very petty. Right. So he might be like, you know what? I will burn the whole cost of the contract. I will spend more. Which, look, I will be honest, that would be the most hilarious outcome of all of this,

is Lemon being broke and also Elon being revealed for who he is. But what was Elon thinking that? So let's put this up. We have Elon's response. Let's put Elon's response. He says his approach was basically just CNN, but on social media, which doesn't work as evidenced by the fact that CNN is dying. And instead of it being the real Don Lemon, it was really just Jeff Zucker talking through Don. So it lacked authenticity. All this said, Lemon and Zucker are, of course, welcome to build their viewership on this platform along with everyone else. I do see a little bit of a problem with this is if you thought Don Lemon was just Jeff Zucker talking through Don, then why did you hire him? He says instead of being the real Don, there's no real Don Lemon. He's a sociopath.

He doesn't believe anything. Yes. As Crystal, Crystal was so, so on point. Whenever she was like, he's gonna pivot back to being a right winger

as he was under the, remember he had that whole monologue where he's like, what did he say? He's like, black men, pull up your pants. Yes.

He's like, act to his decorum or something like that. He doesn't believe anything. He was that guy that he was a resistance star and then he was the morning show misogynist. And now he's a free speech. Absolutely. Don doesn't believe in free speech. He advocated for Trump being banned off of Twitter in the first place. He's a chameleon like Chris Cuomo. All these guys want to be as relevant and rich. And so obviously Elon should have seen through that. But he's the one who wanted to pay him in the first place. And then apparently, Ryan, they were touting the crap out of this deal to all of their advertisers being like, see, we're going to have Don Lemon here on the platform as a counter. It's not just

white nationalists or whatever. Yeah, it's not just bad people, not just Tucker Carlson. It's also Don. And then boom. It's like, come on. What do we, what do we. Yeah. There's two ways of putting it. Either there is no real Don Lemon or this is the real don lemon and in either case yeah why would you come on elon musk right who did you think you were getting this is you hired you hired don lemon you hired him and you got don lemon right yeah well we're exactly who did you think his audience was anyway the whole the deal never made sense from the beginning like who are the don the Don Lemon stans? Don Lemon's ratings at near the end of his tenure were like 400,000 people total. And they're all watching CNN. Yeah, they're boomers. Yeah, exactly. It was like maybe 60K in the key demographic. It was just insanity that this was

like a play in the first place. So look, yeah, it's hilarious. There's not much else to say, I think, about it. Everybody involved just comes out looking bad. And we will continue to keep everybody updated on the contract machinations. We have a great guest standing by, though, Ryan Danfoot. Tell us a little bit about him, and then we'll get to him. Danfoot was Biden's envoy to Haiti, and he resigned in protest a couple of years ago. And in his protest letter, he forecast what would happen if Biden did not change course in Haiti. And basically, he's predicted everything from that day to this day. Got it. All right. Well, let's get to it. Let's hear from a man. The United States government is forming another government for

Haiti in a hotel in Jamaica. We'll see how that works out. To talk about this, we're going to be joined by the Biden administration's former envoy to Haiti, Ambassador Daniel Foote. Ambassador Foote, thank you so much for joining us here. Good to see you, sir. Good morning. Thanks for having me. So we want to start by getting your reaction to Secretary of State Antony Blinken's comments yesterday, which come after his effort to kind of put together this transitional government on behalf of the Haitian people. But for the Haitian people, let's roll a little bit of the Secretary of State here.

I was in Jamaica just a couple of days ago with all of the countries from the Caribbean, CARICOM, with other partners including Canada, including France, including Mexico, all of this in support of Haitian-led efforts to find a political path forward, to get to a political transition. And that's exactly what was agreed the other day. The prime minister, Prime Minister Henry, stepped down along with his government. A transitional presidential council or college, as they call it, is being stood up. It's inclusive. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often

unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and reexamining the culture of fatphobia

that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind VoiceOver, the movement that exploded in 2024.

VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family.

I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to Boy Sober on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance.

Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily it's your Not the Father Week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This author writes, my father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us. Now I find out he's trying to give it to his irresponsible son instead, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. So what are they going to do to get those millions back? That's so unfair.

Well, the author writes that her husband found out the truth from a DNA test they were gifted two years ago. Scandalous. But the kids kept their mom's secret that whole time. Oh my God. And the real kicker, the author wants to reveal this terrible secret, even if that means destroying her husband's family in the process. So do they get the millions of dollars back, or does she keep the family's terrible secret?

Well, to hear the explosive finale, listen to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Brings together most of the major parties in Haiti, as well as other key stakeholders like the private sector, like the interfaith community, to choose a new prime minister, an interim prime minister, to establish a national security council and to put in place an electoral commission. That creates the pathway, the transition to elections and to a constitutionally mandated government. Now, what struck me about the creation of this, quote-unquote, transitional government that the U.S. is creating in Jamaica for Haiti is that one of the requirements to be part of this

transitional government is that they must agree to allow in a U.N., quote-unquote, kind of peacekeeping force, which would be made up of Kenyan mercenaries funded by the United States, which the United States then says means that the troops are there at the invitation of the Haitian government, if you can follow that kind of NASCAR circular logic there for a moment. So what was your reaction to the Secretary of state's uh remarks yesterday i'm flabbergasted ryan the hypocrisy and the naivete continues and it's it's startling you just heard tony say that he mentioned what 10 different countries there that were there to figure out the way forward one country that was absent in that list is haiti and what they're doing is trying to pull a solution out of thin air, but make it look like the Haitian-led solution. The international community chose seven people representing seven sectors, including the failed government of the past 14 years, which the Haitians won't accept.

And then they want these seven people to name a government. They gave them 24 hours, but it appears to be fungible because that's gone on about 72 hours now. I quit 30 months ago to try and get the right solution for Haiti to continue to work with the Haitians. I've been channeling the Haitians voice for a long time. And if the U.S. insists on pulling a solution out of thin air, saying it's a Haitian led solution and making the Haitians follow that, we haven't seen anything yet in Haiti. The people are not going to put up with this. And the violence over the last 10 days is just a little bit of a tease for what you're going to see.

Wow. And for people who haven't been following this for that long, can you talk a little bit about, you know, why you resigned and under what conditions? Sure. So as most people know, in July of 21, President Joe Nomoyes of Haiti was assassinated in his bedroom by foreigners, which kind of hurt the Haitians' feelings. They're upset. They're embarrassed. Their sovereignty has been overcome many times throughout history. And 10 days after that, so the guy who was the acting prime minister at the time stepped forward and said, okay, I'm in charge, despite the fact it was not constitutional. There was nothing constitutional. The constitution broke. The U.S. and the international community, 10 days after the assassination, named Ariel Henry the acting prime minister via press conference, despite my and the Haitians' loud protestations. And at the time, we said this will not work. Even if the guy manages to hold elections,

the people won't accept him. Now we're at the same point. He aligned with the gangs, did nothing for two and a half years. Haiti's gotten much worse, much worse. The Americans have supported him the whole time. Finally, the Haitians stood up when he went out of the country and the gangs were part of it, but the entire country is united and said no more of this guy, wouldn't let him come back. At that point, the internationals panicked. Haiti's been a failed state and hasn't been in the control of anybody for the last 32 months. This guy can't get back in the country and the U.S. all of a sudden needs to jam a solution in the Haitian people's ear that includes a military intervention that they need,

but it won't work unless it's in support of the Haitians' way forward, not Tony Blinken's and the Mexicans and the EU and Canada and blah, blah, blah. The Haitians. And this is just another example of them meddling and installing a white anointed government, a white conceived government. And it's going to fail. And I'm telling you, the Haitians have dealt with at least five U.S. political interventions in the last 109 years.

They're not going to put up with a sixth. And I'm telling you, the violence you've seen is nothing compared to what you will see if they try to ram another prime minister that's illegitimate up the shorts of the Haitian people. Yeah. Mr. Ambassador, maybe you could lay that out for us, sir, about some of the consequences. We've already seen widespread gang violence. We previously had a guest on our show who said that some of that could be coming down as they anticipate maybe their potential roles in a future government. You seem to be predicting that this is not going to quell that violence at all. Maybe lay some of that out for us. Everyone has sort of been united for the past 32 months

that Henri can't do it. He needs to go. Hey, you need somebody else. The gangs were kind of, you know, the gangs just went about their business for quite a period. Ariel was paying them. They were not doing stuff. He stopped paying them.

He removed some fuel subsidies, which hurt their revenues. He left the country. The gangs turned against him. Now, I believe if the U.S. just doesn't do anything stupid and gives Haitian society a little space, that they're going to come together and reach a similar political consensus as they had two years ago, which the U.S. and international community ignored, upon which they can build a solid political foundation. And the Haitian people who will be represented in this may be able to trust eventual elections. That's the goal here, that the Haitian people can trust eventual elections. Not that we can hold elections, that's easy. They held them in 2015 and 2016,

and neither one worked. So they need to trust the elections or we're rushing to failure. And that's exactly what we're doing. You see, Secretary Blinken thinks elections is the magic pill, and it's not if the Haitian people don't feel they're a part of it and they don't accept the results of the election. We're going to be right where we are now and worse. The wild card here seems to be the figure of Guy Philippe, who's this extraordinarily controversial figure who played a leading role in the ouster of Aristide in 2004, later elected to the Senate.

Before he could take office in the Senate, the US kind of renditioned him over here and locked him up for money laundering charges related to drug trafficking for about six years. Now he's back, and he seems to be on the ground in Haiti speaking this kind of revolutionary language, this language of kind of Haitian sovereignty and dignity that is resonating with people. I think a lot of people probably don't believe that he's necessarily earnest about the rhetoric that he's using, but at least he's saying it and at least he's in Haiti. But I'm curious from your perspective,

how popular is Guy Philippe and is there a world that he actually ends up taking power as a result of the ability of the gangs and others to just keep out anybody who is installed kind of from Jamaica. Because getting from Jamaica to Haiti is still something that they have to pull off if they're going to install a government. Oh, don't worry about it. The Haitians weren't invited to Jamaica. They're still in Haiti. So if they set up a government, they're already there. They weren't even invited to set up their own. Right, true. So what about Guy Philippe? Guy has always been able to mobilize a lot of people

and has a pretty broad constituency in Haiti because people think he kind of tells the truth. He's been involved in heavy drug trafficking. He just completed a seven-year sentence in the States for money laundering because they were unable to come up with the evidence to get him on what they really thought they had him for. And they sent him back. Part of me scratches my head and say, is there a scheme going on? Why would they send him back at Part of me scratches my head and said, is there a scheme going on? Why would they send him back at this point in time? But we'll just ignore that. And Guy was a member of the former Haitian army, which we forced President Aristide to dissolve in 1994.

There's still about 4,000 of these old buggers running around the hills of Haiti. They have weapons. They can mobilize. They can mobilize. They're old. The weapons are old. But if they align with the gangs and Guy Philippe and Moise Jean-Charles, who is a communist politician from up north, is part of Guy Philippe's thing.

Because of the anarchy that's going on now, if we inject another bonehead move, puppet into the Haitian environment right now, it's very possible that Guy-Philippe Moishe and Charles or Barbecue might wind up taking power. However, if we give them time and space, the gangs have already quieted down. You notice that, haven't you? Ariel stepped down. They quieted down. You notice that, haven't you? Ariel stepped down, they quieted down, they stopped breaking stuff because they were breaking stuff to tell Ariel don't come back and tell the international community, don't put another pup in. Well, Ariel listened so far, the internationals haven't. So who knows what's going to come out of this? The key is it's Haitian

led and it's going to be Haitian led one way or the other. If the U.S. injects somebody in through this seven-headed Hydra presidential council, the people will rise up and it'll be a Haitian-led solution. Or if we give them space, it'll be a Haitian-led solution. And the revolutionary rhetoric is real. Guy is not coming up with that as the intellectual author. That's the feeling on the states, the feeling on the streets. The feeling on the streets is we didn't finish the job in 1804. We've let the white people push us around for the last 209 years. And at this point, we're going to finish the Haitian revolution and be independent one way or the other. It'll be interesting, sir.

We really appreciate your analysis and your expertise. So thank you so much for joining us. Anytime, thanks, guys. Absolutely. Thank you guys so much for watching. Ryan, appreciate you, man. Another revolution. Yeah, exactly, we need another revolution here.

The last one, what are the best books you've ever read on Haitian Revolution? Black Spartacus was the most recent Toussaint Louverture biography. It's so much better than the previous ones, which painted him as a megalomaniac. Something did change in the historiography or in the way that historians understood Toussaint that finally gives him some serious respect and dignity. So check out Black Spartacus. There you go. All right, I'm going to pick it up, actually,

on your recommendation. So there you go. All right, we'll see you guys later. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily, it's your Not the Father Week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon.

This author writes, my father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us. He's trying to give it to his irresponsible son, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. They could lose their family and millions of dollars? Yep. Find out how it ends by listening to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids,

promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame

one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. I'm also the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, VoiceOver is about understanding yourself

outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.