Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 5/22/25: DC Embassy Shooting, IDF Fires At EU Diplomats, Trump Ambushes South Africa Pres & MORE!

Episode Date: May 22, 2025

Krystal and Ryan discuss DC Israel embassy shooting, IDF fires at EU diplomats in West Bank, Piers Morgan admits he was wrong on Israel, Trump ambushes South African President, markets panic over Trump budget bill, Trump admin caught faking invasion, Sam Altman joins forces with iPhone creator.   To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.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, Sagar and Crystal here. Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election and we are so excited

about what that means for the future of this show. This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else. So if that is something that's important to you, please go to BreakingPoints.com, become a member today, and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox. We need your help to build the future of independent news media, and we hope to see you at breakingpoints.com. Good morning, everybody.

Happy Thursday. Welcome to Breaking Points. Ryan Grimm, great to see you, sir. Nice to see you too. We have a lot of news to get through this morning, including some breaking news of a dual murder last night in what appears to be a blatant act of political violence. We'll break that down for you.

We also have a lot of updates coming out of Israel and Gaza. We have, and actually specifically out of the occupied West Bank, we had a wild situation unfold in the White House yesterday when the South African president came to visit. And we actually have someone from South Africa had to break down some of the claims that were made in that interaction. Had a wild day in the stock market as well. The bond market also not looking too great. We also should add this in,

they did pass the big beautiful bill through the House. The margin was one vote. I will remind you that we just had one Democrat, Jerry Connolly, pass away. So he literally ends up being the margin. That actually ties into some of what's going Connolly, pass away. So he literally ends up being the margin. That actually ties into some of what's going on with the stock market, too. So we can talk about that there. We have some court updates with regard to deportations. A judge saying that Trump is blatantly defying their court order. And we've got some AI team-ups going on that are kind of interesting, right?

Yeah, more concentration in the tech spaces. That's what we need. Open AI teaming up with Apple to make some type of super smart smartphone. Yeah. Smarter smartphone. Something that I can't even really wrap my head around. But we'll do our best. But let's go ahead and start with that breaking news right here out of D.C. last night. I can put these images up on the screen. Two young Israeli embassy staffers were murdered near the Capitol Jewish Museum in D.C. According to officials, they do have a suspect. We'll tell you more about him in a moment. They were fatally shot, they say, at close range while they were leaving an event Wednesday at that Capitol Jewish Museum in D.C. According to the embassy's spokesperson,

you can put the Axios article up on the screen here, which has some more details. The two victims have been identified at this point as Yaron Lyshinsky and Sarah Lynn Milgram in a statement that was shared to X. Apparently, the suspect has been identified as 30-year-old Elias Rodriguez of Chicago, Illinois. People who were in the area said, Ryan, that he was sort of pacing around this museum. And then when these two young embassy staffers came out, he pulled down a gun and shot him at close range. It seems like he may have tried to get into the event or may have had ideas, plans to get into the event, was not able to do so and so hung out outside and then shot people who had come

outside, killing them both. There's video of him chanting, free, free Palestine, as he's getting arrested. We can talk about this in a second. Ken Klippenstein obtained and posted his manifesto, which is what you would expect from kind of a hard left activist. Yeah. It's, you know, people can find it pretty easily. We could put a little bit of it up. But it's rather kind of standard fare.

Certainly ChatGPT could whip this up for somebody, kind of the sectarian left. Extremist justification. Argue on behalf of the use of political violence. To me, violence against civilians is never justified, period. You'll often have Israel say that they killed someone in the Hamas ministry of finance, which is wrong. And the principle holds across the board. If you're not carrying a weapon in war, then you're not a legitimate target. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, these are two young Israeli staffers. And

if you do care about the cause of Palestine, you also know the way that this will immediately play into the hands of those who seek to tar the entire movement as violent anti-Semitic extremists. At a time when, in some some ways it seemed that the dam was starting to break in terms of both public opinion and, you know, leading figures in Europe and around the world who were starting to speak out. So, you know, it's a horrific act of violence. We actually have that video. We can play a view of the suspect chanting free Palestine as he is taken into custody. Let's go ahead and play that, guys. Come on, guys. Hey.

No, no, no. Free, free Palestine! Free, free Palestine! Free, free Palestine! We can put the manifesto, a piece of it up on the screen, as Ryan said, obtained by Ken Klippenstein. Before I read this, I do want to read Ken's justification for why he published it, because these things can be controversial. He says he's obtained the manifesto, allegedly, alleged manifesto. He mentioned some reasons why he believes the document to be authentic. And then he says that, you know, I'm publishing it here not to glorify

the violence, which I find abhorrent and condemned, but so the public can better understand the truth of what happened. Refusing to confront the content of these texts often creates an information vacuum that is quickly filled by hoax documents, conspiracy theories, or selective leaks from authorities that can distort the facts. I believe sunlight is the best disinfectant, especially when politics is involved, as the document makes clear is the case here. And this was the close to that manifesto, which was some 900 words long. And it says, the action would have been morally justified, taken 11 years ago during Protective Edge, around the time I personally became acutely aware of our brutal conduct in Palestine. But I think to most Americans, such an action would have been illegible, would seem

insane. I'm glad that today, at least, there are many Americans for which the action will be highly legible and in some funny way, the only sane thing to do. And then he says, I love you, mom, dad, baby sis, et cetera, free Palestine, Elias Rodriguez. Yeah, disagree. Legible, but still insane. And now anybody that he's been remotely associated with is being kind of roped into this. PSL, Party for Socialism and Liberation, is an organization that was linked to him in the early hours of this killing, of this twin killing. PSL has said that he's not a member. They disavow any connection to him, that he was involved with one chapter that no longer exists for a very brief time,

like in 2017 or something. But in a time like this, the kind of state consequences for any organization that's remotely associated with him. When you're trying to say that somebody like Mahmoud Khalil is a terrorist who was all about peaceful coexistence and reconciliation and just protesting his violence, when the state is willing to detain him indefinitely without charge and call him a terrorist when he is completely peaceful in what he's doing, to then associate yourself with him and take it upon yourself to commit these acts of violence against civilians is also taking an action that to me you don't even have the right to do. If you consider yourself part of a movement.

If you're part of a movement or you're some atomistic element of some neoliberal vigilante, which is a reactionary right-wing approach. That's absolutely – that is absolutely accurate. And, of course, immediately people are theorizing that it's a false flag, not because there's any evidence of that. There is no evidence of that. But because of how clearly damaged it is. Right, right. Right. How clearly damaging it is at a time when, to your point, you have, creating a massive diplomatic crisis for itself, separate and apart from the crisis of legitimacy from starving and bombing Palestinians and killing so many in what has been a mass slaughter over the past number of days. You know, they certainly

want to paint anyone who objects to that as an extremist, a barbarian, an anti-Semite, a terrorist themselves. And this will only give sucker to the people who would use this incident to further crush dissent and wield the power of the state to make sure that no one can object to what is being done in our names with our money in Gaza. Did we play Muriel Bowser yet? No, we didn't. We can play that, guys. This is actually not, I think the piece we have is not actually Muriel Bowser. This is a representative of the police department here talking about some of the details of the shooting. We can go ahead and take a listen to that.

At approximately 9.08 p.m. tonight, we received multiple calls for a shooting in the area of 3rd Street and F Street Northwest. Offices located one adult male and one adult female unconscious and not breathing at the scene. DC Fire and EMS responded and despite all life-saving efforts, both victims succumbed to their injuries. The preliminary investigation indicates that both victims were exiting an event at the Capitol Jewish Museum located in the 500 block of 3rd Street Northwest when the shooting occurred. We believe the shooting was committed by a single suspect who is now in custody. Prior to the shooting, the suspect was observed pacing back and forth outside of the museum.

He approached a group of four people, produced a handgun, and opened fire, striking both of our decedents. After the shooting, the suspect then entered the museum and was detained by event security. Once in handcuffs, the suspect identified where he discarded the weapon, and that weapon has been recovered, and he implied that he committed the offense. The suspect chanted, free, free Palestine while in custody. The suspect has been tentatively identified as 30-year-old Elias Rodriguez of Chicago, Illinois. So that was D.C. Police Chief Pamela Smith there with some early details. And President Trump has already weighed in. We can put this up on the screen as well, his comments that I think were posted to Truth Social. He says

these horrible D.C. killings based obviously on anti-Semitism must end now. Hatred and radicalism have no place in the USA. Condolences to the families of the victims. So sad that such things as this can happen. God bless you all. So that's what we know. We'll certainly keep you updated about this, you know, horrific events here in D.C. At the same time, we did want to talk a little bit about what is unfolding in Israel. 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. 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.

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. So there was recently a large delegation of diplomats from countries around the world touring the occupied West Bank. And let's go ahead and put these images up on the screen. And you can see one of them here, you know, doing a sort of talk to the camera, a few of them in the background as well. And then what you'll see unfold is there were shots fired by the IDF in their direction.

You can see them become alarmed here and, you know, start to duck and hurriedly move away. Again, these are diplomats from countries around the world, representatives from Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, UK, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Brazil, Canada, a huge delegation that was fired on Ryan by the IDF. And there was a statement put out afterwards in, you know, this was obviously a unbelievable diplomatic crisis statement put out afterwards that said something to the effect of, well, they wandered off of their pre-designated path and we regret the inconvenience.

Right. So even if you take the official Israeli explanation as true from start to finish, it's still quite unhinged. And if you scroll back in the video and look in closely, the New York Times is saying they fired warning shots, shot into the air, all kinds of euphemisms. The guns look like they're pointed pretty closely. Now, they didn't hit anybody, but the guns looks like a little too close for comfort for a warning shot. And if that scene looks familiar to you, it's Janine, and it is very close to where Shireen Abu Akhla was shot and killed by an IDF soldier. It's only a few blocks away from there. So their official version is there was an approved route that they were allowed to take through Janine, and that towards the very end, as they were doing these interviews, they deviated from the route. And that required the Israelis to shoot at them, to get them back

onto their approved route. The organizers say they did not deviate from the route. This was the approved route. They were in consultation with the Israelis the entire time. And the only people there are diplomats and journalists who were interviewing the diplomats. Setting aside the disagreement over whether or not they're on the route, even if they were slightly off the route. Right. In what planet do you fire at them? And then your statements say we regret the inconvenience.

And just the authoritarian nature of requiring that, you know, under pain of gunfire, you must stay on this one specific route also is quite illustrative. And obviously people are going to go, okay, well, if this is how they treat foreign diplomats from their, some of their greatest allies from around the world, how do you this comes at a time where you have Europe increasingly speaking out and threatening actions and taking some actions because of the ongoing starvation, because of just how barbaric the latest ground offensive in Gaza truly has been, the high level of deaths, the continued bombing of the rubble and destruction of hospitals, it's gotten to a point where it does sort of feel like there's a bit of a global dam breaking, where people are starting to realize, whether they're heads of state or whether they're, we're going to tell you Piers Morgan here in a minute, they're starting to realize the way that

history is going to view these actions. Yes, and you've had Spain increasingly cutting economic and military ties with Israel. You had, as you mentioned, the U.K., Canada, and France all putting out a joint statement and promising concrete action if Israel doesn't restrain its assault on Gaza and start letting in humanitarian aid. You've had Netanyahu and Macron going back and forth. You've had the free trade agreement between Israel and the EU kind of up for review as a result of these human rights abuses. Yet in the face of this, yesterday, we can put this up, my colleague Jeremy Scahill over at Dropsite covered this extraordinary Netanyahu speech where he says that at the end of this Operation Gideon's Chariot, that Israel will control all areas of the Gaza Strip. He said that the U.S. and the other Western allies are in full support of killing what he described as, quote, monsters. This is kind of despite what you might hear

he's saying from the press, from the Europeans. He talked a lot about full ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip and repeatedly put it in Trump's mouth. He said, he repeatedly used the phrase, quote, Trump's plan. He called it revolutionary. Trump's plan, of course, is that one where he said it's going to become a Riviera on the Mediterranean. He's going to move the Palestinians out to Libya or, you know, God knows where. Netanyahu said he repeated his stance that Israel will not engage in a permanent ceasefire, only temporary agreements that release Israeli captives and will continue the war of annihilation with the ultimate aim of implementing what he keeps calling, quote, Trump's plan. And then finally, Netanyahu says

it is taking this long to, quote, defeat Hamas because, quote, we want to achieve our goals with minimum loss of IDF soldiers. It won't take another 18 months. And then he added that Israel will only allow aid for Gaza that is distributed in individual meal boxes, not trucks with aid for local distribution, as they've been doing. And they'll create, quote, sterile zones to distribute more food. So continuing to use the starvation as part of his tactic here. Yeah. And one of the things that was really significant from his comments is for the first time, he's now asserting that the implementation of Trump's ethnic cleansing plan is now one of his conditions for ending the war. And he says it's underway, that it's not a future plan, that he is using the starvation to enact this plan. This is all happening while Trump is allegedly, like Biden, getting very frustrated.

Very frustrated behind the scenes. Behind the scenes, very frustrated. And and is continuing with his negotiations with Iran. They're meeting in Rome on Friday while Israel, you could put up C. No, no. Let's let's put up C3 first, because this this is this is relevant to what we were just talking about. Netanyahu has lots of public support like this. He's not going out on a limb here when he's doing this. The survey on Israeli Channel 13 is, does Israel have to let in humanitarian aid to Gaza? 53% of Israelis say no. So 53% of Israelis endorsing just objective war crimes. 34% saying yes. 13% don't know. I would be interested in the religious breakdown in the subtabs. Right, if 10% to 20% are Palestinian citizens of Israel and they're polled there, or Druze citizens of Israel.

Yes. The numbers for Jewish Israelis are almost certainly even higher. Right. Those are tipped. The scales are tipped there by that. So putting up C4, relevant to all this is that this is a follow-up to the CNN story from two days ago, where CNN reported based on American intelligence officials leaking to them that Israel was preparing to strike Iran alone without U.S. support. The update to that is now that Israel is planning to immediately strike Iran if talks between Iran and the United States break down. So they would not, so as long as the talks

are going, according to this report in Axios, Israel will hold back. But the second that Trump announces things are going nowhere, my people need to come home from Rome. Witkoff is done talking. I'm angry at the Ayatollah for whatever, that they're saying that at that moment they're going to strike. With basically the calculation being from Bibi that Trump will be mad and will accept such a thing in that moment of talks breaking down. I saw you and Jeremy speculating a little bit. Who do you think is leaking these reports and what are they trying to accomplish? I think originally it was the one to the CNN was Americans telling basically telling Israel, we're aware that you're doing this and we don't approve of it. The alternative explanation is they do approve of it, could have horrific reverberations around the entire region.

And also for American troops who are in the region. Can it be done without our assistance? They could. They can drop bombs. And this also goes back to a point that I've seen my colleague, Maz Hussein, make that the goal is not necessarily ending the nuclear program. The goal really is to crush Iran politically and substantially, to make it so that Iran is not an economic and political power in the region. An Iran that is no longer sanctioned and is an active and normal part of the global community, even if it does not have a nuclear program, is arguably, from Netanyahu's perspective, a bigger strategic threat than a weakened Iran that does have a nuclear program or is close to getting a nuclear program. So the idea that the bombing is about the nuclear program misses that analysis. That

the idea may be, we'll just bomb them and keep the sanctions on. And then, okay, yes, if we have to bomb them every five years, we'll bomb them every five years. And we'll just do that endlessly. And the last information that we've gotten out of those nuclear talks is not particularly encouraging, although you just never know with the Trump administration where they're going to end up. But you had Witkoff coming out and saying, insisting on zero enrichment as a clear red line. Other administration officials, including Trump himself, has been more like, we'll see. Other administration officials have said other things at other times. But that's kind of where things are right now with regard to that.

Right. It's totally plausible that you could have, you know, atomic inspectors go in and allow for a civilian nuclear program and prevent it from, you know, getting close to breakout. In fact, if you don't do that, you actually make it easier for them to get to enrichment that can break out. Yeah. So, again, the focus on whether or not they're going to get the bomb is once again a distraction, I think, from the broader goal. I think that's well said. The other thing we wanted to bring you an update on is what's going on with Mahmoud Khalil, who has been in prison for how many months at this point? For quite a while. Missed the birth of his newborn son to his wife. His wife is an American

citizen. We can put this up on the screen. He attempted to have a contact visit with his newborn child, who he has not been able to meet yet for, you know, the crime of participating in pro-Palestine protests at Columbia. And that visit was denied. So this is from the ACLU. They say in a decision that underscores the government's ongoing retaliation against Mahmoud Khalil in response to his advocacy in support of Palestinian rights officials from ICE and private prison contractor Geo Group, they're the same ones that had the tussle in Newark, but anyway, have refused to allow a contact visit between him and his family. The officials cite a blanket, no contact visitation policy and unspecified security concerns relating to the presence of a mother and a newborn baby.

I think we may have another piece of this statement here that we can read. ICE's refusal comes after multiple requests from Mr. Khalil's legal team that point to federal policies explicitly encouraging contact visits between detained parents and their children. Mr. Khalil's team has also noted permission for family visits like these are routinely granted at facilities like the Elizabeth Detention Center in New Jersey, where his attorneys have requested he be transferred. And so, I mean, they're treating him like a hardened, you know, the most horrific criminal you can imagine when they've asserted no criminality against him. They've asserted nothing more than him being an active member of a pro-Palestine movement on campus at Columbia. Right. And these contact visits are, they're a normal thing, especially in a country that has, you that has systematized mass incarceration. You go through a metal detector,

you get searched. You and your baby get searched. You go into a room where oftentimes there's lots of other people. They get searched. They come into that same room. You meet in that room. You can hug.

You can sit there. You have a specified amount of time. Everybody's watching. You can sit there. You have a specified amount of time. Everybody's watching, cameras, guards. He goes back to his cell. They go back out. This is very basic stuff. So to deny this is clearly just malevolent and cruelty for the sake of it. Yeah, there's no other reading of 2025.

I know that many of you feel... Good morning, Class of 2025. I know that many of you feel some amount of frustration with me, and I know you feel it with the administration. And I know we have a strong, strong tradition of free speech at this university. And I am always open to feedback, which I am getting right now. The work of your generation will be to shape these interesting times, to define the values. And I know, Ryan, she did also in her comments say something about Mahmoud Khalil and how she understands that a lot of people are regretting his absence that day. But I mean, Columbia is really case in point of the university that

completely bent to whatever the Trump administration was trying to throw at it. And all it resulted in was more and more demands being made of the university versus any sort of appeasement and, oh, they're just going to give up and go away now. Yeah, and Shipman, as a longtime television correspondent before she got into her other career, was a very well-known figure in the 90s and 2000s. Good Morning America was until recently married to Jay Carney, who himself was a top Washington journalist and then became a spokesman for Obama and then a spokesman, I think, for Amazon.

That tracks. Yeah, and so to have a journalist at the helm of this completely embarrassing capitulation is doesn't speak well to the kind of ability of kind of broadcast journalists to stand up for their their their craft and their trade. Yeah. Well, and we've seen plenty of that coming from other news outlets as well. In fact, it's not in the show, but I don't know if you saw, there was some memo that went out from Bob Iger to the ladies at The View that they need to tone down their political rhetoric. So, yeah. Yeah. Broadcast journalism is, are we broadcast journalists? We're broadcasting, but not really, right? Yeah. I don't know. Hope we're not. I don't want to be part of that club right now. No. 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. 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. 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. Speaking of broadcast journalists, Piers Morgan. Yeah, speaking of, how about that? So, you know, Piers really put his YouTube show on the map with these raucous debates over Israel. I mean, he obviously debates all kinds of stuff. But I really feel like those are the ones that brought a lot of people to that program. And Piers has mostly taken the side of Israel. Not 100%. You know, there have been times where he's objected to this or that.

But broadly, he's beened to this or that, but broadly, he's been very pro-Israel. And he had Mehdi Hassan on his show recently, and he said to Mehdi, you know what? Basically, you were right. I don't think that we disagree anymore. He even uses the word genocide in this context. Let's go ahead and take a listen to a little bit of that. You and I have talked about this war in Gaza for ever since it started, this phase of the 75-year conflict. And I have resisted going as far as you have done in your criticism of the Israeli government. I resist no more. I think we've reached common ground about what we view is happening and has been happening through this period of this blockade, which frankly is just starvation of the people there, including so many innocent young women and children. And I think that the incessant bombing and killing, and we don't know how many

civilians have been killed, but it is on a daily basis, it looks like hundreds of people every day, with no apparent attempt, it seems to me, to have any real plan for how this ends or what happens when it ends, other than if you look at what Smodrich has been saying, probably the most right-wing member of a very right-wing government, he is talking in a genocidal language about kicking all the Palestinians out. So I think you and I have reached a place in the last few weeks where we are in agreement. But my question for you, Mehdi, is how does this end? What do you make of those comments, Ryan, and the timing of them?

I think Pierce, because of his program, has had to follow this in an incremental way. True. And because he invites on people from all different walks of life, all different factors, True. isn't actively paid to take a certain position. To just be propagandist, yes. Can only conclude that this is a unique crime against humanity that's being carried out. And so he said it. I don't know. What did you make of it? Yeah. I mean, I just think, as I said earlier,

something about the, I think probably the months of starvation and the images that are coming out of these emaciated babies and, you know, the risk of mass famine and mass death event because of starvation. I mean, you just, how do you justify that? You know, I mean, it's just, you can't say this is, oh, targeted. No, we're going after Hamas when you are intentionally starving an entire population. And then when you see these images of the rubble and then they're bombing the rubble and with gruesome results and they're, they just, you know, smothered and all the, and Netanyahu have just gone mask off at this point. They've taken the layers of Hasbara out and said, I don't know, we want to ethnically cleanse them. We are going with the Trump plan. And even this piddly bit of aid that we might let in is just to enable further war crimes.

If you're actually grappling with that, how can you say other than this is a horror, this is an atrocity? And how can you feel other than when we look at this a decade down the road or however long it is down the road, people are going to have to get asked very hard questions about what did you say? What did you do? Where were you? And so, you know, I think there's a very belated effort to try to end up on the right side of history. And I will just say for myself, I hope there's a real tracking of every journalist who enabled these crimes, every politician who enabled these crimes, every propagandist, every poster. Like, I think it is critical that we look back and understand who justified these atrocities and enabled these atrocities and funded these atrocities and provide a diplomatic cover for these atrocities. I think that's going to be absolutely essential. And so, yeah, I'm, listen,

I don't want to like, I'm glad to hear Piers say it. It's extremely belated. And I do think that there's a sense of like, oh, shit, I better get on the right side of history for him, for some of these world leaders that are coming out and starting to make some noises as well. Right. If you're behind Macron, it's taking you a while. Yeah. But I appreciated Mehdi's response, which he said, where he says, look, I wish I had been wrong. Right. You know, I wish that because in October, November of 2023, the most wild, vulgar assessment of what Israel's approach was and was going to be

turned out to almost underestimate what it was. Right. And there's no satisfaction in being right about that at all. That's right. It would be much better to have been wrong and to have tens of thousands of people still alive and millions of people still in their homes and a path toward peace and coexistence. That's right. Instead, we have this.

We have horror and the cold comfort of, yeah,ence. That's right. Instead, we have this. We have horror and the cold comfort of, yeah, I guess we were right. Yeah. I mean, if you listen to the most maximalist voices on October 8th, or if you went and talked to, you know, Daniela Weiss or some of these other settlers who, or, you know, Smotrich, they, a lot of, I mean, there were people in Israel right away who were saying what their plans were. But they've been saying that a long time and they don't always get to get the reins of power and enact it. To actually enact it. But if you would listen to them and taken that seriously from the beginning, then you would have had a much more accurate understanding versus the spin and the, oh, we're dropping leaflets. And, oh, here's my presentation of how there's actually tunnels

under this hospital. And, oh, that wasn't even us that bombed the hospital. We would never bomb a hospital. It's almost quaint to go back us that bombed the hospital. We would never bomb a hospital. It's almost quaint to go back and think about some of these things that were debated at the time and how we were told, oh, they would never. They would never do the most moral army on the planet. And now they don't even bother to really justify. You know, it's just so out in the open now. Now they're saying, yeah, we're doing it and it's good.

Yeah, and we're getting away. And the world has let us do it. That's what Smotrich said. Meanwhile, public enemy number one has become Ms. Rachel. That's right. She was the subject of this really bizarre New York Times article. Deranged New York Times article. We can talk about it in a moment.

She has not backed down at all. And so I think we have a recent clip that we should post today. A video with a double amputee, Rahaf. Let's roll that. Let's go back to sleep, Rahaf. We're so tired. See the bunny sleeping till it's nearly noon. Shall we wake them with a merry tune? They're so still Are they ill?

Wake up soon! Let's pretend to sleep. Wake up little bunnies! Skip little bunnies Skip, skip, skip Skip little bunnies Skip, skip, skip Skip, little bunnies, skip, skip, skip. Skip, little bunnies, skip, skip, skip. Skip, little bunnies, skip, skip, skip. Skip, skip, skip, and stop. Let's hop again!

Hop, little bunnies, hop, hop, hop. Hop, little bunnies, hop, hop, hop. Hop, little bunnies, hop, hop, hop. Hop, hop, hop, and stop! Yay! And the strangest element of this New York Times piece on her, and I don't even, I don't, I'd like to do some reporting on this, try to figure out how this even got into the piece, is their forwarding of complaints by what they called an advocacy group, Stop Antisemitism. Right. It's not an anti, it's not an advocacy group.

It's like one unhinged person. Twitter troll. Yeah, who posts mostly anonymous nonsense and accused her of effectively being funded to support Hamas, which that's what trolls can do. The internet is filled with URLs that you can buy and you can make claims. It's very crazy for the New York Times to then take this and then report it as something that advocacy groups are saying, which it's not like, again, it's not advocacy group, just it's a nut. And then confront her with it and have her respond to this claim of whether or not she's being funded to support Hamas. And one of the pieces of evidence they forward from this anti-Semitism, stop anti-Semitism

troll account is that for every one post about an Israeli child, she's put up 10 posts about a child in Gaza. It's like, well, that's wildly disproportionate in favor of Israel. Right. Considering that there are 18,000 plus children who've been killed. Right. And it's not 10 to 1. Right. And it's not.

Not to mention children like Rahaf who are surviving. She's alive. And thank God was, I'm going to have trouble talking about this, was medically. Um, her brothers are still in Gaza. Her father is still in Gaza. You know, Ms. Rachel talked about this with, with Medi, like she's a double amputee. I mean, like I said, thank God she's, she was medically evacuated. She's getting the care that she needs, but yeah. How could, and the idea that the only way you could care about that and want to highlight that is if you're being paid by Hamas. Like, it's the height of insanity, of inhumanity, to be so disconnected from human emotions that you think the only reason someone might care about an adorable double amputee like Rahaf

is because they're being paid by Hamas. It's just insane. There was another quote in that article towards the bottom that was quite wild. A person named Stacey Hackner, a teacher at a London shader, said, quote, Ms. Rachel seems to be someone who is really, really good hearted. But in the context of everything that's going on, she says, I care about all children. But really, she's talking about the children of Gaza. That has left a lot of Jewish parents feeling quite isolated, which is, I think what's so startling about that quote is that I believe it is representing her authentic feeling. Like she is genuinely hurt that Ms. Rachel is saying, I care about all children and is talking about the children of Gaza. Like that is, like she feels that as painful and offensive. Right. And where do you go from there?

Like, your only accusation against her is that she says, I care about all children, but really she's talking about the children of Gaza. And it's just understood that there's something wrong with that.

Right. That if you're talking about the children of Gaza, there's something wrong with that. That they don't count as children, that they should be kept separate apart, that if you're talking about the children of Gaza, you don't really care about their children. It represents a view from a just startlingly dark place. Yeah. Yeah, that's exactly right.

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. 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. 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. So, well, let's go ahead and transition to this wild scene that played out in the White House yesterday when the president of South Africa came to visit. South African President Ramaphosa was in D.C. yesterday. And the context here, you know, is that the U.S., the Trump administration, has shut down all refugee admissions. It's except for white farmers that they claim are facing persecution and even genocide in South Africa. So this meeting quickly turned contentious as President Trump basically ambushed him with this whole multimedia presentation of his allegations against what his government is doing in his own country of South Africa. Also, Ryan comes on the heels of President Trump's trip to the Middle East, where he said, we're not going to go around the world lecturing people about their human rights abuses.

We're going to do it from here. Yeah, we'll just do it right here when you come to visit us. So in any case, let me show you a little bit of this. And we are going to have a guest join us in a minute to break down some of the claims that are made here and what the actual reality is. It's means tested. If you have a certain amount of money, then we will not care about your human rights. Well, that actually comes up in this exchange at one point. We'll play you that in a minute where the president of South Africa says, listen, I'm sorry.

I don't have a $400 million plane for you. Basically saying, I guess I didn't have sufficient funds for, you know, to really get on your good side here. In any case, let's go ahead and take a listen to a little bit of how this went down. It will take President Trump listening to the voices of South Africans, some of whom are his good friends, like those who are here. When we have talks between us at a quiet table, it will take President Trump to listen to them. I'm not going to be repeating what I've been saying. I would say if there was Afrikaner farmer genocide, I can bet you these three gentlemen

would not be here, including my Minister of Agriculture. He would not be with me. But Mr. President, we have thousands of stories talking about it. We have documentaries, we have news stories. Even in the parliament. And they're a small minority party, which is allowed to exist in terms of our constitution. But you do allow them to take land.

No, no, no, no. You do allow them to take land. Nobody can take land. And then when they take the land, they kill the white farmer. And when they kill the white farmer, nothing happens to them. No, there is quite nothing happens. There is criminality in our country. People who do get killed, unfortunately, through criminal activity are not only white. Majority of them are black. And we have now utilized the farmers are not black.

I don't say that's good or bad, but the farmers are not black. So what the president is trying to say there, Ryan, is we do have a really significant problem with violence, which is true. There are tens of thousands of workers in South Africa every year. But if you look at the statistics, I mean, it's disproportionately actually the poor, which tends to be black South Africans who are affected. But there is no indication that white farmers in particular are more subject to violence than other groups in a nation that is, again, unfortunately beset by high levels of violence. Right. And it doesn't mean there is never racially charged violence. And I think people here in the United States might have, people on the right might have a better time understanding this if they contextualize it within the United States.

So in South Africa, there are definitely cases where black South Africans have killed white South African farmers and have used racial language when they've done so. Like that has happened. Yes. There's no question about it. There are plenty of witnesses, like, court cases that that has happened. Here in the United States, there have been many cases of white people who have killed black people and have used racially charged language. Also the reverse. People can argue about what the numbers are. It has happened. But nobody would say that white genocide or black

genocide is going on here in the United States just because you can find those examples. So you have to look at it holistically. So that's what I would argue to people on the right who have been convinced by seeing some examples of racial violence and have then gone from there to, oh, this is genocide. Yeah. Why do you think Trump has become obsessed with this particular thing? I mean, there's the obvious, there's a few things that are obvious. Number one, Elon Musk being so prominent. And not just Elon, David Sachs and some others who are close with the administration are also South African. There's tons of South African. Peter Thiel, right? Peter Thiel, also South African, exactly.

So, I mean, that seems significant because in the first administration, we did not see this same focus. There's that this is a fixation with white nationalists. You know, you can see Stephen Miller being really into this kind of thing. This, you know, I've seen all kinds of, you know, commentary on Twitter and et cetera. The other piece is that, you know, South Africa has been one of the leading opponents of Israel's genocide in Gaza. In fact, one of the White House, you know, one of the things that they put out even explained that that was a piece of why they were upset with South Africa. So it's also sort of one of these like up is down, left is right

situations where the very country that is standing strongest against genocide in the context of, you know, Israel and Gaza is now being accused of committing genocide, you know, which is, frankly, a fairly preposterous claim. You also see some lurid arguments on the right that this is what happens if DEI goes on unchecked. Yeah. So they've roped it into their whole DEI argument. I mean, this is in the whole sphere of people who long for the days of Rhodesia and who want to use the breakdown of, you know, the high levels of violence in South Africa also to broadly smear black people as unable to govern. I mean, that's, you know, that's where this whole argument leads into as well. So, you know, I think that's, there's a whole host of

reasons why Trump has probably decided that this is something that he is very interested in. And I think he also just loves, it's kind of a troll, it's kind of a distraction. It's that sort of thing as well to make everybody get upset and talk about it. And the outrageous nature of saying that this particular group is more beset by violence or under threat than people who helped us, our troops in Afghanistan, now that the Taliban's back in power, people from other conflicts around the world, is also just utterly absurd, which is part of why he likes it, because it upsets people like us or liberal commentariat on TV or whatever so much. Right. And so far there's been, what, dozens of white South Africans let in under this program? Yes. And it's basically open to every

white South African for the most part. And there are many, many, what's the population? Hundreds, many hundreds of thousands, if not millions of white South Africans. A lot. So for, you know, 0.000 whatever percent to take it up is not very. 4.5 million according to. White South Africans. Yeah. And 50 to 60 have taken him up on this offer? It's not a very strong argument for them feeling like they're facing

imminent threat of genocide. Yes, that is a good point as well. Let me play you one more clip before we bring in our guest, where the president of South Africa, anticipating that something like this was going to unfold, brought with him first, like, you know, a bunch of white guys that are in his cabin, even some of the white South African golfers. There are a number of them who are, you know, very high level in PGA Tour, et cetera, thinking like, OK, Trump loves them. Yeah, this has got to be the way to get in good with Trump. And there's a moment here, too, that I referenced earlier where he says straight to Trump's face. I'm sorry I didn't have a plane to give you, indicating like maybe I'd be treated a little different if I had some more gifts that I could pony up in exchange. Maybe. Yeah, maybe. Maybe. Yeah, just maybe. So let's let's take a listen to a little bit of how that went down. Mr. President, you welcome white Afrikaner refugees here. Can you explain to Americans

why it's appropriate to welcome white Afrikaners here when other refugees like Afghans, Venezuelans, Haitians have all had their protective status revoked? Well, this is a group, NBC, that is truly fake news. They ask a lot of questions in a very pointed way. They're not questions, they're statements. Today, I have many friends from South Africa, but many of those friends are not, they can't go back. I have, Elon is from South Africa.

I don't want to get Elon involved. That's all I have to do, get him into another thing. But Elon happens to be from South Africa. This is what Elon wanted. He actually came here on a different subject, sending rockets to Mars, okay? He likes that better, he likes that subject better. We have too many deaths, but it's across the board.

It's not only white farmers, it's across the board. And we need technological help. We need Starlink at every little police station. I'm sorry, I don't have a plane to give you. I wish you did. If your country offered the United States Air Force a plane, I would take it. Okay. But coming back to this issue, which I really would like us to talk about,

and talk about it very calmly, we were taught by Nelson Mandela that whenever there are problems, people need to sit down around a table and talk about them. And this is precisely what we would also like to talk about, including, of course, trade matters, investment matters. So the issues that concern you as the United States. Those are all deaths. So he also introduces there another piece of the puzzle of why there might be this particular upset with South Africa,

because Elon wants them to take up Starlink. And there's a provision that would require, I think, Starlink to be owned 30 percent by black South Africans through some subsidiary in South Africa. I think those are the details, guys. You have to go and double check. But in any case, he has felt aggrieved that he hasn't been able to get South Africa taken to take up Starlink. And so that gets a mention there too of, you know, one of the South Africans is like, we really want Starlink. You know, is that going to make you happy with us? Because other countries around the world, that's been the way that they've greased the skins with this administration. And Starlink would legitimately be good for South Africa, right? Because like

they've had such a hard time building up the telecommunications infrastructure that now you can be like, all right, you know what? Skip all that stuff. Let's just jump to the Starlink era, the satellite era. But right, they also have rules around local ownership. And I guess, you know, that's causing problems. Apparently, yes, apparently. And then just too on the nose that the president of South Africa says, well, I'm sorry I don't have a plane. And Trump's like, well, if you had one, I'd take it. Yeah. Come back when you have a plane. There you go.

The word for that is, you know, bribery is one, but tribute is the other. Like for tens of thousands of years, that is how emperors have operated. You pay tribute to the emperor. And you don't necessarily get anything for it, but if you don't pay your tribute, everybody knows then you're not going to get treated as well by the benevolent emperor. No matter how many golfers you bring, apparently.

Although the golfers are tribute also, in a way. In a way. Yeah, they are tribute to Trump's particular interests. All right, let's go ahead and get to our guests who can break down some of the more specifics here. We are now joined by Bulelwal Mabasa, who is a land reform attorney in South Africa. And I was just saying that I reached out to her around midnight her time last night and asked her if she could be on this morning. And if she was asleep, go ahead and reach back out to us in the morning. She said, on a day like today, there's no way I'm sleeping. So what has it been like in South Africa? How are South Africans kind of responding to this

unbelievable scene out of the Oval Office? So interestingly, the responses have been varied from, you know, commentators, intellectuals and academics on one end of the spectrum praising the South African team, saying that they've maintained the, you know, moral high ground, that our president, Sora Maposa, maintained composure, and that he did not descend into the kind of, you know, comical playing out of the, you know, the meeting. And others, you know, kind of a little bit more in the middle saying, well, it was kind of, you know, President Trump being President Trump. It was, you know, kind of a zero out of 10 for the U.S. team and maybe about, you know, 60 out of 100 for the South African team. And the other extreme end, which is kind of this weaponization or weaponizing Nelson Mandela's call for reconciliation

as if that is a trade-off for not transforming the country. And this kind of a begging bowl syndrome, reminiscence of the colonial era, You know, we are the poor African country and we need this rich superpower and we're the small economy and we need you to rescue us. Almost like a, you know, Messiah, you know, to state, you know, metaphorically, almost like a savior coming down.

So the reaction has been interesting from a political lens, but obviously, you know, not being a political commentator in any way, my focus was on the land confiscation issue and how it was addressed. And that's where, yeah, and I think that's what we're going to talk about. Yes, of course. And I wanted to get I wanted to play some of the specific claims that were made by the president, who I said earlier, prepared this whole multimedia presentation for this meeting and get you to address some of the specific claims that were made. This is a five guys, if we could go ahead and play that. Now, this is very bad. These are burial sites right here.

Burial sites. Over a thousand of white farmers. And those cars are lined up to pay love on a Sunday morning. Each one of those white things you see is a cross. And there's approximately a thousand of them. They're all white farmers, the family of white farmers. And those cars aren't driving. They're stopped there to pay respects to their family member who was killed. Have they told you where that is, Mr. President? No, I'd like to know where that is because this I've never seen.

In addition, there were news articles that were printed out about deaths. I know one of them actually had nothing to do with South Africa. It was from another African nation and, you know, was completely unrelated. As you referenced before, we played earlier, there were claims made about land expropriation, and I know that that is your particular specialty. So could you sort through some of these claims that were made and help us understand what's really going on here? Yes. So the visuals around the White Crosses, there isn't actually, that wasn't a burial site. And, you know, with the kind of U.S. machinery, you know, with the intelligence agencies in the U.S. being the most powerful, it boggles the mind that such an untruth could land up in the Oval Office and be presented as truth.

That was a protest in actual fact. Those aren't burial sites. And there isn't, in fact, a burial site of just exclusively farm victims or victims of farm murders that exist in South Africa. And insofar as the land confiscation issue, I think what needed to be put through in that meeting is that President Ramaphosa himself was part and parcel of the negotiations that took place just before South Africa became a democracy. And he was part and parcel of the negotiations that took place just before South Africa became a democracy. And he was part and parcel of a team that formulated our constitution. It was the National Party government at the time and the ANC incoming government.

They negotiated into a constitution how South Africa was going to deal with its land issues. South Africa's constitution recognizes that there was a law which was promul deal with its land issues. South Africa's constitution recognizes that there was a law which was promulgated in 1913, the Natives Land Act, that actually confiscated land from Black people into the hands of the white minority. Black people were dispossessed of 80% of the land that was in the hands of the, you know, 7% of the population. And if there's a historical context that grounds what our land reform policy is, we have in our constitution, section 25, that protects property rights, that says that no one may be expropriated of property unless in terms of the law of general application, so in terms of the rule of law.

But in the same section, it also says that we take into account the past historical injustices that have taken place in our country. And therefore, within that constitution, it invites the state, in fact, it's not even an invitation, it's a direct obligation to the state to say,

the state must take all reasonable legislative measures to ensure that we have land reform in a form of land restitution, land redistribution, and security of land tenure. So that should have been the very first kind of key message to say a land reform project is grounded within the rule of law. It's part and parcel of our constitution. We've got a very rich judiciary where all of this is happening. Every single day, we've got a restitution program in South Africa, for example, where people can lay claim to land that they've lost previously, and they get either provided with the land or compensation.

And this is probably the biggest restitution program in the world. And land transfers are happening peacefully without violence, then they are grounded within the rule of law. So I think that's probably the very key first message that South Africa could have opened up the conversation about. And that there isn't this land confiscation is not, you know, it's not happening. Certainly, it's not sanctioned by law. But I think also most important is to say expropriation that we follow in South Africa is very similar to the laws of eminent domain. In America, in fact, our laws of expropriation borrow from the UK law, the laws in Germany. It's no simple, and you know, I know in the UK, it's called compulsory purchase. And so our law, which is grounded on Roman Dutch law, English law of expropriation is no different. Even in America, there are instances, for example,

where expropriation does take place for the public interest, for environmental purposes and so forth. And this is precisely what South Africa is doing. The only difference that South Africa has, if you had to compare it with the other developed nations, is that we're also using our expropriation laws in order to make land available in line with our constitutional imperatives of transformative justice. So this, to me, feels like the crux of the issue. Like everything else that's going on in the Oval Office there, the fake thousand white crosses or the white crosses representing a fake 1,000 dead people, all the talks about

white genocide, it's all a distraction because what they really want to talk about is this underlying central conflict around land reform. And that is a real conflict. It is a conflict. Yeah. That's a real one. So how does it work? So this is what you do. You work in this field, who is getting expropriated and who is the land being redistributed to as part of that process? Because I really do feel like this is, we should just talk about it, like, because this is what people are really actually genuinely upset about, but they don't want to come out and say it. Yes. South Africa's land policy is grounded on three notions. The first is called land restitution, which means

that people who can prove that they were or their descendants were dispossessed of land without compensation, that it happened after 1913, those people were able to go to the government and make land claims. And if those claims are proven to be valid, those people then could either be given the land that they lost. And be given the land that they lost. And sometimes if the land that they lost is no longer viable for human occupation or it's been built up or it's now a shopping center, they're given alternative land or they're given compensation. That's one arm of it.

That is the restitution program that I spoke about that it started in 1994. Yes, it's been slow paced, but that's one of the land reform pillars. The second pillar is land redistribution. Now, land redistribution, it's also embedded in our constitution. It says the states must take legislative measures to ensure that people who need the land, who need to have access to land, are given the land. Again, the state has been slow. They haven't provided enough resources in order to ensure that the land is redistributed. I think so far, we're only speaking about 10%

of the land that has been redistributed. There's been very poor fiscal support in order to see progress there. The third leg of this is the land tenure of Black people. More than 60% of Black people don't have secure tenure. What that means is that they don't have formal rights, property rights. They live in informal settlements. And this is what the land reform project of South Africa is trying to correct.

When it comes to expropriation, expropriation is actually very simply colorblind. Expropriation is just a tool that the state uses when it needs to use land for a public purpose or a public interest. The best example we can give about expropriation that's been actually implemented is the HAL train. We've got the HAL train, which is a speed train that links people, the public transport system. Those people were expropriated. Those people would have been black, white, Indian, and so forth. It's actually very colorblind.

It's a state tool that is used worldwide. And so the outcry around expropriation without compensation is a little bit, it's hyperbole. Because even in that legislation, it tells you under what circumstances there could be nil compensation. And this way, there's abandoned buildings, you cannot track the owner, where the land is unsafe, there's a safety risk. So it's only within quite determined, you know, easily determinable circumstances where that could happen. But in the main, we don't have an expropriation law in South Africa that promotes expropriation as a wholesale

concept. In fact, when I sat as part of the presidential advisory panel, we found that the democratic state has actually not even used the expropriation powers, although it's sanctioned in the constitution. So all of this is a rather perplexing situation where actually the government has been slow to implement the constitutional obligations for land reform. And yet you find this kind of, it's almost an untruth that has kind of built legs that we saw play out in the Oval House, in the Oval Office. And so what we actually now find is that the land reform question is almost metaphorical for the need to transform South Africa's society at the heart of transformation, whether we're talking about, you know,

labor, land, you know, business and so forth, is the need to transform our society because we're still, South Africa is the most unequal country in the world, skewed against the black majority. We still have the economy in the hands of majority white people. We still have property rights, landowners skewed in favor and held in white hands. And so it's kind

of a machinery that you kind of watch in disbelief because it couldn't be further from the truth on the ground. And lastly, I think the other major question is that of violence. And I know the president was saying that, you know, unfortunately, there is a high level of high level of violence. But that violence is not disproportionately aimed at white people or white farmers. It afflicts, you know, people of all types within the country. Could you speak to some of that and, you know, what the numbers are, what the reality is, and what are some of the, you know, potential sources of that violence? Crime is skewed highly as something that mainly affects poorer communities, where there is lack of policing, the service delivery,

where it is not as good as more the affluent parts of society. The victims of crime, and I don't have the statistics offhand, actually are poor Black people. The majority of people in prisons are Black men. And so the claim that, you know, there's this targeting of a minority group is not borne by the facts or the evidence. And I think there was also too much said around the issues of violence and crime, which distorts the experience, the lived experience of South Africans across the racial lines the lived experience of South Africans across the racial lines.

I think the South African society has progressed to such a, you know, since Mandela became the president, the first democratic president, we have societies that are completely mixed. We live in suburbs that are multiracial. My children go to school in a multiracial. My children go to school in a multiracial school. Um, and you, our society, this society as a, as a, as a, as a, you know, living in a black woman body, I'm in a law firm, um, with a diverse, uh, you know, people from diverse backgrounds. Um, we have black people now living in suburbia so we've got um i think the the the conversation um

focused on the issues of crime which are valid issues was the last opportunity to sell the country that we know and love and we live in um where we've actually in and maybe not completely, but we are the lived examples of the rainbow nation that Nelson Mandela spoke about. And yes, we do have issues to deal with inequality, poverty, unemployment, and not unique to South Africa. And yes, unemployment stats are high at 32%. But I think that South Africa still remains a viable, colorful, complex, but beautiful place to live, work and play.

And I think it was unfortunate that there was this kind of ambush and concentration around finance. And Trump also, last question for me, Trump also in the meeting played a clip of Julius Malema singing or chanting the rap song, like, Kill the Boer, which is Boer white South African. That's a clip that Elon Musk has circulated many times. It's a prominent clip kind of on the right here in the United States. Can you talk just briefly about who is Malema and what should people understand about this? Chourlis Malema actually comes from the ANC, which was the majority ruling party up until the recent elections. He was then expelled. He was formed part of the youth wing. He was expelled from the ANC.

He formed his own party, the Economic Freedom Front. I think up until, I could be inaccurate in terms of percentages, but his party, I think, got 7% of the vote, national vote. Although that's, you know, it's in the minority, he does have quite that's you know it's in the minority he does um have quite a you know his majority of his membership is around the youth um but in terms of the song the the issue was um dealt with by the courts from the high court all the way to the constitutional court and it was not found to be hate speech. And there's a little bit of contextual background around that. During the apartheid era, when the political prisoners were exiled, whether forcefully or voluntarily, the societies that remained behind made up a lot of these chants.

There's hundreds and thousands of them that were kind of yearning for, you know, one day when Mandela's released, we're going to have our freedom back. And it's quite contextual. And the literal meaning then at the time was we're going to put up arms, we're going to revenge the white farmer or the boy. And it is not literal. And in fact, there was a court case that Afroforum launched that was heard by the the high court it went on appeal to other courts and ultimately the highest court of the land found that these songs and this song in particular did not you know it did not, you know, it did not amount to hate speech. And I think the reason for that is that it was contextual. It was around the time no one sings that song and goes and kills, you know, a white farmer.

And I still have songs that I was challenged that we grew up with. You know, some of it goes, we miss you, Mandela, where are you? And in fact, growing up in Soweto, there was a lot of that kind of mystery around where are our political prisoners? When are we going to get freedom? So there's a context to which those songs were played and the chances that were created. But our ultimate highest court in the land has opined on this to say that it doesn't form part of hate speech precisely because of the history and the context. And in relation to Julius Malema, he's quite a noteworthy figure in a political landscape because he did form part of the ANC, which was the ruling party. He was expelled from the youth party and his brand of, I would say, he is regarded to be on the left of our political arena.

But I think what's important to note as well, as Karik has pointed out in the, but in the context of now, so many international right-wing figures talking about the racial tensions in South Africa, has that overlaid a new context that is giving it new meaning that means that it might begin to take literally? It depends on the lens in which you are seeing or perceiving things. If you are a right-wing person who legitimately believes that there's this genocide and there's

this land confiscation, then it plays into the hands of that. But if you are a South African kind of a regular citizen, despite whichever kind of racial or social class that you belong to, that is, it's not something that will have any form of weight in terms of behavior or even conduct to fellow South Africans. Got it. Interesting. Yeah.

Thank you so much for helping us understand some of these different pieces. We really appreciate you taking the time, Balelwa. Thank you. It was great to chat to you. Same. Thanks. Bye-bye. 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. 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. 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 voice sober, 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. Had a pretty significant market sell-off yesterday. And since I got my resident

finance bro, Ryan here, I thought we would go through, there was actually a pretty significant reason why there was a sell-off yesterday. Let's go ahead and put the numbers up on the screen here. This is from CNN. The Dow sinks 800 points as bond market starts to freak out over Trump's tax bill. That was the analysis from CNN. You can put the next piece up on the screen. You can see a little bit more of what was going on here. This is from this account. Do you know how to say this, Ryan? The Kobe-ese letter? Is that how you say it? I don't know. I only ever see it. I don't hear people talk about it. In any case, they have the beginning of the drop that happened at 1 p.m. and they say, well, what actually happened was a weak 20-year bond auction, which sent U.S.

treasury yields soaring. So for those of us who aren't finance bros, Ryan, what effectively happened here is the government went to do a 20-year treasury bond auction. There was very weak demand, meaning people really weren't too psyched about buying this debt at this point. It required a significant increase in the yield that was offered. So the price went down, the yield goes up. And that fit in with the pattern of, OK, we've got a world that's moving away from the dollar. We've got a world that's moving away from the dollar. We've got a world that is no longer fleeing to treasuries as safety. We have this giant bill that's about to pass. It's about to blow up the deficit by some roughly $4 trillion more in service of giving tax cuts to a bunch of people who really don't particularly need a tax

cut. And because of all of those factors, there was a significant reaction in the stock market. And I just checked in with the markets, which are open now, and they are down a bit this morning as well. Yeah. And so this comes after Moody's downgraded U.S. debt from the top to the just underneath the tippy top of the ratings. And the 20-year note, which is what they were auctioning off, is actually a bit of an anomaly. The U.S. didn't sell them for many decades. Steve Mnuchin brought them back. Usually we sell the big ones of the 10-year. 10 and 30. 10 and the 30. He's like, why not bring back the 20s? Everybody loves the 20s. Bizarrely, you can get a higher yield for the 20 than you can for the 30, which doesn't make economic sense because if you're locking

up your money for a longer time, you're supposed to get a higher yield. But because there are so many 30-year notes out there, they're much more liquid, so you can trade them more easily. And so as a result, you get this kind of anomalous situation where you have to, you know, the U.S. has to pay a higher yield for a shorter time period. In other words, you should get rid of the 20 years. Unless you can flood the market with them and create more liquidity, which eventually they could potentially get to. But so they had this auction. And, yeah, at first they're offering like a four, you know, high fours on the on the interest rate. And there weren't enough people lining up to buy them. And we don't know exactly how much of this is just as buyers saying, we don't trust the the market here on these bonds. If you buy if you buy the bond at

this price price and then bond prices collapse over the next few days, then you're stuck holding that bag if you're not planning on keeping them for 20 years. And we don't know how much of it is related to geopolitics of Japan, Canada, China, some of the usual biggest buyers at these auctions saying, F you. Yeah. Why am I going to come in here and make life easier for you when you're actively trying to make life worse for us? Do you have a central banker who's the head of Canada now? Yes, we do.

You never know. You never know what kind of games could be playing there. And we do know the bond market has probably been the most powerful countervailing force against Trump's economic plans of, you know, of all the various factors. You know, he himself admitted, he walked it back, but he himself admitted that when the, what did he say, the bond market started to get yippy? Yippy, yeah. It started getting yippy is when he pulled back from the most maximalist tariff posture that he had originally had. And so, I mean, that's the broader context is you already had, and I think the Ukraine war and the huge sanctions regime we threw at Russia, I think, you know, contributed to this as well. But you already had a world that was starting to move away from dollars reserve currency. Then you have Trump declare trade war on the entire world, not just, you know, China or some smaller subset of countries, the entire world in this very take this very belligerent stance towards, you know, traditional allies like Japan and Canada and other places.

And that has accelerated that move away. What ultimately leads him to back off is the fact that usually when you have this economic chaos and uncertainty, there is a quote unquote flight to safety and people buy up U.S. government debt. And that wasn't happening. Right. And that was what kind of freaked them out and caused them to look. We still have significant tariffs that are on and they're still saying, hey, we're going to go back in and impose more tariffs, whatever, but cause them to back off the most maximalist posture that he originally had. And Moody's and the interest rate moves have ripple effects throughout the entire economy because if you're, you know, let's say you have corporate debt and that corporate debt

is collateralized by some, you know, treasuries held by the corporation or there's some other counterpart of your interplay with the treasuries, now they're no longer AAA. That means that the bonds underneath them, they lose a little bit of value as well, which means all of it creates higher interest rates because the bonds are less valuable, which then creates this vicious cycle where when the U.S. was just absolutely flooding the economy with money and there's basically a 0% or less interest rate going around, you couldn't put your money in bonds because you're getting 0% return for it. So you put it into equities, into the stock market, and that pushed up the stock market like crazy,

pushed up Bitcoin, pushed up all this other stuff, asset bubbles like housing as well. Now that you're looking at the equity market, you're like, hmm, this seems way overvalued. I think this is going to crash because, you know, Trump's still headed for the cliff just at a slightly. Like he was going at the cliff on 145 percent. Right. Now he's going at the cliff at 30 percent.

Right. He's still headed for the cliff. You're still going to the cliff. You're still going to the cliff. Yeah. And you're like, oh, and now I can get, you know, 5.1 percent interest rate for a 20-year note and four something for 10. So then you sell your equities and then you move into these bonds, which eventually should push the bond prices up and the yields down. But it pulls more money out of the stock market at the same time. And if people are trying to decouple from the

dollar, then you can have it all sinking at the same time. You can have the market going down and the bond market going down at the same time, which is unusual but might represent the new path forward. Because you've got people like Jamie Dimon, and we can put up this. This is B3, guys. The weak economic outlook. Jamie Dimon and others keep saying, guys, like things are not good. Things are not as good as the market is saying they are right now. Like the market,

you know, freaked out in April and crashed. And then it climbed mostly all the way back. And then now, you know, now maybe it's on its way back down, but you've got Dimon and a whole bunch of others, things are bad in the United States. Like, we are headed in a not great direction. What on earth is propping this up at this point? And then that's where the bill comes in. So they passed it, like, what, very early in the morning? Yes.

Last night? Yeah. I think early this morning, um, they passed this, uh, the big, beautiful bill that provides lots of money for the police state. They put up before for this. Yeah. Lots of tax cuts for the rich and, you know, at the expense of, um, Medicaid and snap and other programs to define, to, um, benefit middle-class and, um, uh, working class and lower income people. And this is Jason Furman, who was a White House economist under Obama. But he says, I'm not sure I've ever seen such a brutal distributional analysis from CBO. This contrasts the Medicaid and SNAP cuts for the lowest decile with the tax cuts for the top decile. And so you can see the way that the cuts are coming from the

people who can least afford the cuts and the benefits are going to the people who least need the benefits. But, you know, it's a wild chart. It doesn't come and it doesn't come anywhere close enough to like balance out because the tax cuts that are being flooded for the wealthy, the extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act effectively, is a $4 trillion expenditure. So they're making some cuts to Medicaid and to SNAP in particular that are going to be really bad for millions of Americans. But it still doesn't even come close to making up for the largesse that is being showered on the wealthiest among us. Yeah, it looks like a giant heist of money from poor and working class people to rich people. And you wouldn't think ideologically that Wall Street would be opposed to that. Right. They're not. But they're like, whoa, I don't know. I don't

think we can handle this. Like this is a this is a bit much. Yeah. Well, it's also I mean, it's the final like failure and humiliation for Doge, which, again, I've never thought was actually about cost-cutting or efficiency. But that was what they claimed. And they did not actually save any money. They probably cost the government money, especially with the cuts to the IRS, which means that you can't go after rich tax sheets. So there were no deficit—there was no deficit reduction that was achieved there. I mean, what the Wall Streeters would like is for them to take more of an ax to the, you know, Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, et cetera, is what they would really like to see. But, you know, I'm not one to be a big, like, deficit hawk and, like, wring my hands about the debt. You know, I think for a

long time, those concerns have been really overblown. However, we may be entering a new era in global economics and in U.S. economics where the reason we've been able to spend so much without really much care or concern is because we've been the global reserve currency and because we have benefit from what is described as the exorbitant privilege of being the center of the economic world here. And if that is changing, then we're going to have to have a different relationship towards our debt and our deficit than we have in the past. And so far, we still are because the world doesn't really trust anybody else. Right. But you are seeing moves towards people trading in their own currency, which then, you know, right now we have

this like, we're in this glorious position where, you know, if two countries are trading with each other, rather than trading in their own currency, they move it through the dollar system. They don't have to do that. You know, there's all sorts of kind of value in the liquidity and the efficiency of our capital markets that keeps us there. But as that erodes, yeah, then we become like other countries and have to pay for things. Right, exactly. And it wouldn't, you know, people say like, oh, it's just you look at the budget numbers, it's just absolutely impossible. We can't do it.

I mean, it's true you can't balance the budget if you want to cut taxes on the rich. Right. And you're trying to balance it by finding waste in Medicaid. Right. And you could actually go after Medicare and Medicaid and get a significant amount of fraud out of that system. But you're still squeezing, you know, you were talking about hundreds of billions. There's trillions in like over a 10-year period just by tweaking the higher marginal tax rates on the super rich. Yeah. Hey, go take a look at the Pentagon. But instead in this budget, they're increasing Pentagon spending. The budget really does, in my opinion, reflect the priorities of Trump 2.0, which is it's a huge boon to the

oligarchy and huge boon to the police state at the expense of working class people with a few flourishes thrown in, like no tax on tips or whatever, that they can point to and posture as a pro-working class party, even as they effectuate one of the largest upward transfers of wealth in history. Yeah. Also, the billions of dollars that people spend around the country, around the world coming to this country, buying real estate and through tourism and going to universities here is also a significant prop up of the dollar economy. If we lose that, then we're in huge trouble. Yeah. Because we don't make enough stuff. We don't have any other ideas. That's our thing. People want to live here.

It's a nice place to live. And we're very welcoming, up until recently, to foreigners. Yeah. No, that's right. That's right. On the other hand, let's put this up on the screen. There were some decent jobless numbers that came in. Jobless claims dropped a bit last week. This was a little bit below the initial estimates of the previous week's unrevised tally of 229,000. So they dropped to 227,000. So you don't see a huge spike in jobless claims or anything like that showing up yet. And then on the other hand, let's put the next piece up on the screen. You do have some, you know, some indications with retail.

You previously had Walmart, you know, this whole back and forth with Trump, but basically saying like, look, we're going to have to raise our prices because of these tariffs. Now, of course, they would love to raise prices for any number of reasons. And plenty of retailers will take advantage of the tariffs to raise prices even beyond what they have to. But also, when you're talking about a 30% tariff on China, that is going to require some price hikes in order to continue to run a profitable business. This was interesting to me, Ryan. Leave this up on the screen. Target on Wednesday cut its full-year sales outlook. As executives said, weaker discretionary spending, consumer uncertainty about tariffs, and backlash to the company's rollback of key diversity, equity, inclusion efforts hurt its business. So they went away from woke and went broke, apparently. Yes. I mean, the backlash against that was massive.

And a lot of people were like, we're boycotting Target as a result of this. Wow. And it's showing up. So they got it on both sides. They got the boycott for the wokeness and then they got the boycott for the anti-wokeness. Yeah. Interesting. So one indication there of things that may be to come. 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.

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, 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. 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.

Let's go ahead and move on to the latest news with regard to deportations. We have new ICE tactics practically every day. We put these images up on the screen. They're now camping out outside of asylum hearings. This is D0, guys. Camping out outside of asylum hearings and then, you know guys camping out outside of asylum hearings. And then, you know, the minute if a case is dismissed or whatever, they just, you know, I don't know why these like the masking of these agents of the state is deeply disturbing to me. And that is a

common trend now. Actually, Ken Klippenstein did some reporting on exactly this. And even in photos, they're blurring their face or they're turning around backwards so you can't see their faces, et cetera. But this woman was asked, how long were you here for? She said a year. Then they say, were you guys given any type of process? She says, yes, a process of asylum. And then she says, I had my first court hearing. And she goes on. They dismissed my case. So her case is dismissed. And then she's just swept right up by ice. Let's put the next piece up on the screen. This was a significant, significant result in the court system here. A judge has said directly that the

Trump administration is violating their court order with this deportation flight to South Sudan. I'll go ahead and read you this. This is after a deportation flight with eight migrants left Texas reportedly intended for South Sudan. This week, a federal judge on Wednesday ruled the Trump administration had violated a previous order. U.S. District Court Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts said at a hearing the administration had failed to adhere to an injunction he issued in March that prevented people from being sent to countries other than their own without opportunities to raise fears of persecution or torture. And South Sudan, not in a good state right now. There's a State Department warning for Americans to avoid South

Sudan. I think our diplomats have been pulled because of safety concerns. And this is where it appears the government didn't really want safety concerns. And this is where it appears the government didn't really want to give up this information, but it appears that these migrants were sent. And the judge even went, Ryan, so far as to say the department's actions are unquestionably violative of this court's order. So no ambiguity and raise the possibility even of outright contempt. Yeah, this is what contempt is for. There was an order in place, and they clearly had contempt for it. Their argument is that these are terrible murderers and other criminals. If you can't—why can't they figure out a way to do this legally?

If it's true, if you've got a murderer here who's here illegally, you can figure out a way to deport them. If you can't, go to Congress and say, look, we've got a murderer here illegally. And, you know, these judges aren't allowing us. We need better laws on the books. Nobody is going to object to that. It would not be any sort of a problem. First of all, murderers should serve their sentence before they, you know, are released into whatever country you're talking about. But

second of all, there's literally not a single politician who would object to a murderer who's here illegally getting deported somewhere. And it would not be a difficult process to play out. But you ask the question, why don't they do this the lawful way? I mean, that is part of the point, right? They want to test the bounds. They want to outright defy the Constitution and these judicial orders that have been issued and see how far they can go and see what they can get away with. I mean, that is a key part of their strategy here. The other thing that's in this budget that just passed is a huge increase in funding for ICE that makes it, I think, the largest funded federal law enforcement agency in history. So, you know, those are,

you're getting the police state, you're getting the, you know, the military expansion, you're getting the tax cuts for the rich. So, so far, they have not been able to achieve deportation numbers, that approach that are even like commiserate with what Obama, deporter-in-chief, was able to accomplish. They're trying to secure the resources to be able to do that. But in the meantime, they want these displays of lawlessness and cruelty to substitute for that and then to encourage people to self-deport. That's effectively what substituting for, you know, actually following process or, God forbid, going through Congress and actually, you know, passing laws that help you accomplish

the outcomes that you want, which, as we've discussed before, I think Democrats would have absolutely gone along with at the beginning of this administration. Now, I think it would be a bit different. And I don't know what numbers we're going to have available, but it's, you know, it's probably going to work to some degree. You know, I think, you know, within immigrant communities, they have successfully struck, you know, very loud cords of fear. Yes, they're definitely afraid and some are going back. At the same time, they are trying to arrest and detain people as they're leaving, which is counterproductive to the whole idea. Like this is a bizarre trend where people are suing for the right to be able to leave freely.

And then DHS is going to court trying to say, no, no, we want to be able to leave freely. And then DHS is going to court trying to say, no, no, no, we want to be able to detain you and then deport you. Detain you indefinitely and then deport you at some point down the line. Wow. I hadn't seen those cases. That's wild. Which is a real problem with the private detention facility situation. Right. Because they profit. They profit. Right. And now they're going to have this massive budget, which is going to create a lot more profit. And there isn't any money in somebody just buying a ticket and going home. The money is in hiring people to go catch them, lock them up, and then guard them indefinitely.

Right. That's very dark, but very good point. Let's put D2 up on the screen because this really gets the heart too of what's going on here. So there was a memorandum that came out from the administration, from the intel community that said like, basically, okay, we're not being invaded by Trendo Aragua and specifically debunking the alleged connection between the Venezuelan government and this gang. And this is a problem for this administration because that is the pretext for which they used

to invoke the Alien Enemies Act. You know, this is supposed to be used in wartime or in times of an invasion. So they said, we're being invaded by Trender Aragua, preposterous. And the Venezuelan government is directing this invasion. So they fired the people who drafted the original report, and then they did this rewrite from Joe Kent. And he has now been caught directing them to

manipulate the outcome of this report. So let me read you a little bit from this article. They say new emails document how a top aide to Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, ordered analysts to edit an assessment with the hope of insulating President Trump and Ms. Gabbard from being attacked for the administration's claim that Venezuela's government controls a criminal gang. Quote, we need to do some rewriting and more analytic work. So this document is not used against the DNI, that's Tulsi, or POTUS. Joe Kent, the chief of staff to Ms. Gabbard, wrote in an email to a group of intelligence officials on April 3rd, using shorthand for Ms. Gabbard's position as the president of the United States.

Times reported last week that Joe Kent had pushed analysts to redo that assessment dated February 26th on that relationship between Venezuela's government and the gang, Trendo Aragua, after it came to light that the assessment contradicted a subsequent claim by Mr. Trump. Disclosure of the precise language of Mr. Kent's emails has added to the emerging picture of a politicized intervention. But remarkably, even with them like cooking the results of this assessment, they still weren't able to totally validate, like they couldn't go far enough to actually validate the claims that were made in the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. So even with them doing their absolute best to insist we are invaded by Trendo Aragua and it is the Venezuelan government that is directing the, you know, whatever is going on in Aurora, Colorado apartment building or whatever. Even they were not able to fully make those claims. Right. And also, if their argument is there is an ongoing invasion, the invasion is over. That's a problem, too.

Yeah. Emily has made that point. She wanted to ask the administration about, okay, well, you've, you know, the border crossings are genuinely significantly down. So are we being invaded or are we not being invaded and the problem solved? Because you can't have both. I guess you could argue we've been invaded and you have to find all the invaders. I guess that's what they would say. Yeah.

But the other problem they have with this invasion rhetoric is that so much of it was done legally, properly within the immigration system. What's his name? Andre the makeup dude, he made a CBP1 appointment, had an asylum case open, was here legally. That's not how an invasion unfolds. Invasions, you just crash at the castle walls. You're not going through the CBP1 app or waiting for your appointment at the border. And we can put up this next element. D3, he was not alone. More than 50, at least, of the Venezuelans who were sent to El Salvador, according to this investigation and analysis by Cato, right-wing libertarian institute, were here legally. So, and even beyond that, in this analysis, he was actually only able to ascertain the

legal status of 90 of the individuals. And out of that 90, 50 of them came here legally. So, actually, a clear majority of the numbers that he was able to ascertain any information about came here legally. So, you know, it's not a scientific sample, et cetera, but if you extrapolate that out. But there were only, what, 250? How many did they send? Yeah, roughly 250. It's not a ton.

Yeah, roughly 250. So if you extrapolate that out, you know, it's very easy to believe that actually a majority of the people who were sent to a foreign dungeon, potentially for life, came here legally and committed, we already know, a majority committed no crimes. And as Ben Franklin would say, even if it was just one, it's wrong. That's right. And that's why you have due process. So what did he say? I'd rather 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man go to prison. And that's the

founding spirit of our Bill of Rights and our entire kind of rule of law system. Yeah. That it is better to protect the innocent. Yeah. I think the view from the, you know, the extremists in the administration and, you know, which is quite prevalent in Republican influencers, is that the Biden immigration policy was illegitimate. So even if you came here, you know, as a Venezuelan, got temporary protection status, doesn't count. You're still, in their view, you're still illegal because they didn't like that procedure. And so it's illegitimate. This came up during the Haitian situation in Springfield, Ohio, that, you know, they vast majority of them were there legally

through that temporary protected status program or had been here. Actually, a number of them have been here even longer and, you know, had over time moved to Ohio. But that was the view, was that even though they had availed themselves of legal channels, those channels were illegitimate because they opposed them. Right. So.

And so Rick Grinnell, special envoy to Trump in the State Department, returned yesterday from Venezuela with an American who had been held there for a significant amount of time. Grinnell has been—this is not the first American that Grinnell has gotten out of detention in Venezuela and maybe some other countries as well. He's also been in active negotiations with the government there that I guess we technically don't recognize, but

clearly we do. He did an interview yesterday on his way back with Steve Bannon saying that the U.S. is not out trying to enact regime change all over the world. Then this was in the context of the Maduro government in Venezuela. Not all over the world, just in South Africa. Oh, just in South Africa. And so we put this next element of the scoop from the Miami Herald. This is D4. U.S. secretly negotiating deal to let Venezuela sell more oil if it takes more deportees. And this is actually where diplomacy does play a role in our immigration policy. Like, let's imagine that, you know, this is phrased in oil terms, because that's how we understand our diplomacy. China and Russia have been making overtures towards Venezuela. Their oil industry is practically shut down because of sanctions

and the amount of the disrepair that it has fallen into. It's not the easiest oil to refine, apparently, and so it requires significant investment and upkeep, and that's been impossible under sanctions. And so the idea here is that the U.S. would move towards normalizing relations with Venezuela. In exchange, we'd get a bunch of oil. And then when you have normalized they get a deportation order. France takes them back.

We're allies with France. We have normal relations with them. Yeah, we don't with Venezuela, which is why and we have we don't have normal relations with so many countries around the world that we are bullying, you know, because it's just what we do. And so then we have to then, no, we don't have to, but then they choose to send them to El Salvador or South Sudan, or they call up Libya and whoever claims to represent Libya at this point, can you take them? Hey, Somaliland, you want to be recognized as a country? Okay, well, you have to take a bunch of people from Bolivia because we can't send them to Bolivia because we tried to coup their government and we don't have good relations with them. So if you want a rational immigration policy, it would require normal diplomatic relations with other countries, not being a thug in your region.

So I actually wouldn't jump on Grinnell for that. Like if Grinnell can create normal relations with Venezuela, then yes, if there are people here who are getting deported, that as well would then accept them. I'm sort of confused by this though, because Venezuela has accepted, um, deportation flights, but perhaps it was on more of like an ad hoc basis because this is one of the key things that was key details of the, you know, the Venezuelans being shipped to El Salvador instead. Apparently prior to that flight to El Salvador, Venezuela had said, yes, we'll take, you know, deportees from the U.S. And there have been subsequently flights that have left and brought

deportees to Venezuela. But like I said, maybe that was more ad hoc, and this is meant to be a more durable, long-lasting relationship. It's also funny because apparently Maduro, they have an analyst here who says he wants a deal similar to the one granted to Syria. So he's looking for the, yeah, he's like, okay, well, he could do it with them, you know. Why not?

This former al-Qaeda guy. Surely I'm not that bad, right? He literally can't, nobody, who could be as bad as the al-Qaeda guy. Surely I'm not that bad, right? He literally can't. Nobody. Who could be as bad as the al-Qaeda guy? I mean, the former al-Qaeda guy. Like, I think if we can get along. Very strong past. It's a very good point. If you can get along with him, you can get along with Maduro.

I interviewed the Venezuelan foreign minister maybe like a year ago, and he brought up and he mentioned deportations as a place where there could be room for negotiations. If in a world where there was normalized relations. But, yeah, they certainly will take some. And certainly if they're political opponents, Venezuela is happy to take them. Yes. And then beat them up and put them in their jails. Right. The U.S. position, according to this other analyst, said they argue Maduro can become a pro-American dictator. So I mean, it would not

he would not be the first South American, you know, pro-American dictator. Yeah, sure. To fit the mold. So anyway, interesting. We'll see what develops there. But I mean, it would make sense that they're using those deportation flights as leverage to try to roll back some of those sanctions and, you know, secure oil sales on a more permanent basis. Yeah. All right. Let's get to this AI story. This is pretty interesting. We try to follow this closely, put this up on the screen. We've got a new collab between OpenAI and Joni Ive, who is the designer of the iPhone, in a $6.5 billion deal to create AI devices. Let me read you a little bit of this because I'm just going to be honest with you. I have a hard time wrapping my head around what

this tech is actually going to be. But they say they want to move away effectively from the smartphone era to this type of tech that's almost like ambient, like it's not like your glasses or your head. But I don't really know. Anyway, they say in a joint interview, Mr. Ive and Mr. Altman declined to say what such devices could look like, how they might work. But they said they hope to share details next year. Mr. Ive, 58, framed the ambitions as galactic with the aim of creating amazing products that elevate humanity. We've been waiting for the next big thing for 20 years, Mr. Altman added. We want to bring people something beyond the legacy products we've been using for so long. Mr. Altman and Mr. Iver are effectively looking beyond an era of smartphones, which have been people's signature personal device since the iPhone debuted in 2007.

If the two men succeed, and it's a very big if, they could spur what is known as ambient computing. Rather than typing and taking photographs on smartphones, future devices like pendants or glasses that use AI could process the world in real time, fielding questions and analyzing images and sounds in seamless ways. They put out this like funny hype video, like relatively lengthy hype video for this partnership. We pulled a couple pieces to share with you. Let's take a listen to a little bit of what Sam Altman had to say. I think we have the opportunity here to kind of completely reimagine what it means to use a computer. Sam is a rare visionary. He shoulders incredible responsibility, but his curiosity,

his humility, remain utterly inspiring. Johnny is the deepest thinker of anyone I've ever met. What that leads him to be able to come up with is unmatched. I was just thinking what a privilege it able to come up with is unmatched.

I was just thinking what a privilege it is to really connect with somebody new. And it hasn't happened to me in a long time. And the reason I think that it happened is we had both a very strong shared vision. We maybe didn't know exactly where we were going to go, but the direction of the force vector felt clear. And then this deeply shared sense of values

about what technology should be, when technology's been really good, when it's gone wrong. I mean, that was, in a way, one of the basis, I think, for one of the reasons Sam and I clicked, was despite our wonderfully different journeys to this point, our motivations and values are completely the same. In my experience, if you're trying to have a sense of where you are going to end up,

you shouldn't look at the technology, you should look at the people who are making the decisions. And you should look at what drives, motivates, and look at values. So, Donnie and Sam really feeling each other there. Yeah, they really are. You were saying Sam really sounded like Ezra at the beginning. So much. It really does.

Yeah, it really took me through me there at first. And it fits with the abundance agenda. It does. It absolutely does. I mean, I just can't get over Altman taking this nonprofit. It's one of the things I agree with Elon Musk on, taking this nonprofit and trying to turn it into a for-profit. And then he's going to use the billions and, like, rise up in market cap to then buy the guy that helped make the iPhone. I'm sure everybody who else who

participated in making the iphone was like this guy didn't do it he was in the meetings he's just like a brand like he created this brand image around i don't know anything that's why i called him joni and it's actually johnny because i really like i'd never heard this guy but apparently he's a big deal but yeah and it also feels dystopian. Like we all understand the way that, so if you didn't drive before Waze and Google Maps, like you don't know that you actually can get around places. Yeah, there used to be these parts of your brain that were devoted to like actually knowing how to get places. Yeah. And so if you take that and you apply it, you put glasses on and you look this way

and it says tree, like your brain is going to stop working. It's going to shut down. It's going to, it would be like, it's, it's like when you don't walk for a couple of weeks because you're bed ridden, your legs stop working. It atrophies. I have thought that same thing with the exact, the exact like GPS, because when I first started driving, there was MapQuest and those sorts of things, but you had to print out the directions. And then if you screwed up, you had to actually like get on a map and like figure it out or like go to the gas station and be like, where the hell am I? What do I do? And then your brain actually does this thing of learning where you're going and how to get there. I'm going to go to a gas station just for fun and ask somebody how to get somewhere.

They'll be like, uh, 911. I've actually had people on the street, like tourists asked me how to get a place. I'm like, yeah, you're going to get way better. You're going to have much better success with this anyway. Yeah. It is terrifying to think about. And already I think with even the level of AI we've gotten to, um, there is a lot of risk of especially writing ability atrophying. There's all these, you know, stories about college kids just like rampantly treat cheating, which, you know, you could solve that particular problem, force people to write stuff while they're in class or whatever. But when you think about it being almost fully embedded in your life or ultimately what Elon and others want, I mean, it's this like transhumanist vision where the tech is actually

embedded in your head and becomes indistinguishable from you and yourself and your humanity and whatever your own brain would have brought you to. I mean, I don't know how you can feel any other way than that it is frightening and dystopian and that they're playing with forces that even they don't understand. And I think would admit that they don't really understand. And which nobody asked for. And which nobody asked for. That's exactly right. And we're such a broken society now that it doesn't even feel possible to have like a serious adult conversation about the deployment of this technology, the development of this technology, how it should be used, how it should be constrained, et cetera. Let me play a little

bit more of the bromance video with Sam and Johnny there talking about how their belief, they're selling this as like, oh, the iPhone experience, like we're all too locked on the screens and it's, you know, all these alerts and notifications and whatever. And this is going to be a like human centric improvement on the current state of affairs is the way that they're pitching this at least. Let's take a listen to a little bit more of that. You talk to people who use our latest model and say this is like genius level in every field. And you just have to put in the work to pull it all together. But if you have a hard problem, you can have this team of geniuses in all of their different disciplines.

And they report, I'm two or three times more productive as a scientist than I was before. I'm two or three times faster to find a cure for cancer than I was before because I have this incredible external brain. That just didn't exist six months ago. I think this will be one of these moments of just an absolute embarrassment of riches of what people go create for collective society. I am absolutely certain that we are literally on the brink of a new generation of technology that can make us our better selves. Can make us our better selves. That's the

pitch. And look, I mean, there are certain aspects that I'm sure will be beneficial. You know, they like to sell the possible benefits of like medical breakthroughs, et cetera. That'd be nice. Just focus on that, guys. Yeah. Let's just do those pieces. Show us you can make some medical breakthroughs then come back and make us our better selves. Yeah, and be like,

and we're going to eliminate all of the necessity of human labor, by the way. And some of this is already happening. Let's put this up on the screen from Klarna, which is, isn't Klarna the thing where like when you go to pay for something online, it's like you can pay in installments and it's like this sort of like consumer loan.

So they've been having some trouble recently because of consumer sentiment. But in any case, they announced that they already used AI to shrink their workforce by 40%. They said, the CEO said, the truth is the company has shrunk from about 5,000 to now almost 3,000 employees. If you go to LinkedIn and look at the jobs, you'll see how we're shrinking. And if you talk to the leaders of the AI revolution, to a person, they will all tell you that the goal is to eliminate as much human labor as possible.

And look, maybe in a world where you have like a large universal basic income or some sort of, you know, ability to function as a like economic political society and imagine that there might be some solution for this type of mass disruption larger than the Industrial Revolution in a shorter period of time. That's what they're at least promising to deliver. Then maybe you could, you know, imagine a non-dystopian version of this. But as things sit today in U.S. society where we can't even do things like, you know, give parents paid overtime, it's hard to imagine this working out in a way that is beneficial for the masses, especially since it's controlled by these few, highly concentrated tech giants. And this one itself is particularly symbolic because it's a company that is basically a

payday lender trying to grease the wheels of consumption for people who aren't getting paid enough to be able to make ends meet. So there's this company, they'll come in and give you a little loan, and the terms are great, unless you don't pay it, and then the terms are terrible. And so the argument from AI is, we can do this high-tech payday lending with fewer employees. Right. So we're not even getting the job creation of the payday lender. Yeah. It's just like concentrating all of the wealth extraction in the hands of it.

Just a few people. Just a few people. Yeah. We're going to make sure that that happens. It's like, oh, good. Okay, great. Thanks. That's nice.

That makes me feel better. You know, we mentioned the abundance guys earlier. Derek has been doing some work on suggesting that some of this AI job replacement among white-collar employees may already be happening. That there are increasing indications. I mean, one of the things they point to is the number of college graduates who are going straight to law school. Now, that's also kind of a recession indicator. So it could be that going on. Guys, be careful. Like, AI can write legal briefs. Well, and that's the thing. And, you know, you can imagine if you're a big law firm,

instead of hiring, I don't know, 20 of the new associates, you hire five and you give them chat GPT. And a lot of law briefs are, a lot of like grunt legal work is very sort of copy and paste. Especially the corporate filings are just basically like proform and you sub in this company's name instead of that company's name and their valuation instead of their valuation, whatever. What they're finding though is that these AI models are just fabricating a bunch of stuff. Like they're writing these legal briefs and citing cases that don't exist, completely misreading cases that do exist, applying law, making up laws that don't actually exist and putting them in. And you can tell that men designed all of this because it's done with complete authority. It's like, yeah, I can tell you all about that case. And you're like,

this is completely wrong. It really messes with you, too, because it'll be like, you know, 20 citations and 19 of them are spot on. And then one buried in there is just totally made up. It's just completely fabricated. And so the thing that college graduates are hired for at these white-collar jobs is, you know, producing memos for the boss, like organizing, doing research. Be an Excel spreadsheet. Excel spreadsheets. And that's how you learn what the company does, learn how to work in a company, and then rise to the ranks and then become one of the people telling the college graduates what to do.

If those jobs all get cut out, how does that 22-year-old then old then become the 32 year old who's in the, the, the mid job and become the 45 year old who's higher up? Yeah. You're, you're breaking the whole, you're breaking the entire thing. Yeah. I have a daughter who, um, you know, is going to be going to college and she's 17. She has one more year of high school and, um, and she, I think she knows what she wants to do. Um, but if I were to give sort of like broad advice about what would be the right careers to go into that would be like AI proof, it's not an easy thing to figure out.

Not an easy thing to figure out at all because yeah, most of those entry-level white collar jobs that you would get coming out of college seems like they could be hugely impacted by even what we already have, let alone wherever the development ultimately goes. And again, you know, I guess it'd be one thing if there was some sort of a national conversation about what we're going to do about that,

but there's not. It's just total no brakes on the car. We're in a race with China and we have to win. Consequences, we're not even going to think about what the fallout is going to be. And we think about how profoundly our society has been changed by the smartphone and by specifically algorithmic social media. We can't even cope with that apparently. Right. And now we're going to be, you know, have an ambient tech that's informing, you know, that's talking to our brains all the time and, you know,

feeding us answers or insights or, you know, writing our essays or whatever constantly. It's just, I don't think anyone can really anticipate what the fallout could be. Well, luckily the textile mills are coming back, so they can work there. Are they? Are they? Nobody here knows how to sew though, so that's a problem. Well, and certainly, yeah. Well, that was the other thing when Lutnick was talking about, like, the millions, army of millions to screw in little, little screws. If you listen to the whole quote, he actually says, no, that will actually be robots that will be doing that. And he's like, this is out of context.

What you'll actually be doing is you'll be working on the robots. Right, right, but that won't take. And your kids and'll actually be doing is you'll be working on the robots. Right, right, but that won't take— And your kids and your grandkids will also be able to work on the robots. Right. Not the most inspiring vision of the future. And why wouldn't you have other robots working on the robots? I guess the robots are going to break eventually, and the other robots can't figure it out. Maybe.

Maybe there's some role for the human being in there. All right, guys, thank you so much for hanging with us today. Ryan and Emily are going to do the Friday show tomorrow. I'm sure there will be many things for them to discuss. And we are actually going to take Memorial Day off. Enjoy a long weekend. Let our crew and everybody enjoy a long weekend. So we'll see you back here next week. 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. 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. 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.