Tangle - Trump gets barred from the Colorado ballot.

Starting point is 00:00:00 Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime. Police have warned the protesters repeatedly, get back. CBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News.

Starting point is 00:00:29 Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to

Starting point is 00:01:05 your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul. Today is Thursday, December 21st, and we are covering maybe one of the biggest stories of the year. I think arguably the biggest story

Starting point is 00:02:05 of the year. Donald Trump has been ruled ineligible for the 2024 election by the Colorado State Supreme Court. We're going to talk about exactly what they said, how they got there, and then as always, share some views from the left and the right. Before we jump in though, as always, we're going to kick things off with some quick hits. First up, China's President Xi Jinping told President Biden last month that he plans to reunify with Taiwan and prefers to assume control peacefully, according to a new report. Number two, former President Donald Trump asked the United States Supreme Court to delay considering whether he is immune from federal prosecution in the Justice Department's election interference case, while an appeals court considers the

Starting point is 00:02:55 question. Number three, the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry said the death toll has now surpassed 20,000 people in Gaza, while roughly 134 Israeli soldiers have been killed and 1,400 people were killed in Hamas's initial attack. We have an explanation on how the health ministry calculates those deaths, which can be found with a link in today's episode description. Number four, separately, President Biden told reporters that he does not expect a new hostage deal between Israel and Hamas soon, but said that the United States is pushing for one. Number five, the United States released a close ally of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from prison in exchange for 10 Americans in prison in Venezuela, as well as a former Navy contractor

Starting point is 00:03:36 who organized a bribery scandal and was a fugitive from the U.S. government. Let's turn now to some breaking news in the 2024 presidential election, a ruling just coming down from Colorado's Supreme Court. The majority of the justices in the state declared Donald Trump is ineligible, saying he should not be allowed on the state's primary ballot. The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled former President Donald Trump is not eligible to be on the state's primary ballot and is in fact disqualified from being president again. In a four to three decision, the court ruled Trump violated the U.S. Constitution by inciting the mob that attacked the Capitol on January 6th. This morning, former President Trump is vowing to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court

Starting point is 00:04:30 after Colorado's high court ruled he is not eligible to be on the state's ballot because of his role in the January 6th insurrection. They want to silence me because I will never let them silence you. And in the end, they're not after me. They're after you. On Tuesday, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled four to three that Donald Trump cannot appear on the 2024 presidential primary ballot because of his actions on January 6th, 2021. In the first ruling of its kind in American history, the court sided with a group of voters who argued that Trump is disqualified from elected office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The clause, which was enacted in 1866 after the Civil War, said that no person shall be a senator or representative in

Starting point is 00:05:16 Congress or elector of president and vice president or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. The majority found that Trump incited and encouraged the use of violence and lawless action to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power on January 6th. Prior to this ruling, Trump had prevailed in a number of cases where voters tried to remove him from state primary ballots under Section 3. Just last month, Minnesota Supreme Court rejected a bid to remove him from the primary ballot, while a judge in Michigan ruled that the issue was a political question that could not be resolved by the courts. A Colorado State District judge had ruled last

Starting point is 00:05:58 month that Trump did engage in insurrection, but stopped short of removing him from the ballot, saying that the 14th Amendment's disqualification clause did not apply to the presidency. That ruling was appealed to Colorado's Supreme Court, which found that the 14th Amendment does apply to the presidency and agreed that Trump participated in an insurrection. While Trump lost Colorado in both 2020 and 2016, and the state is not critical for his general election chances, the ruling could give momentum to other 14th Amendment challenges underway across the country. At least 16 other states have pending legal challenges to remove Trump from the ballot on the same grounds.

Starting point is 00:06:35 We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us, the court's majority opinion said. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law without fear or favor and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach. President Trump did not merely incite the insurrection. Even when the siege on the Capitol was fully underway, he continued to support it. These actions constituted overt, voluntary, and direct participation in the insurrection. The ruling applies to both the general election as well as the Republican primary. Trump's campaign promised to appeal, and the United States Supreme Court is expected to quickly intervene and resolve the argument.

Starting point is 00:07:14 During the appeal, Trump will remain on the ballot in Colorado, though the state said the issue must be resolved before January 5th, the day primary ballots need to be printed. The Republican primary is scheduled for March 5th. the day primary ballots need to be printed. The Republican primary is scheduled for March 5th. The ruling drew immediate outrage from Trump's campaign, which called it completely flawed. His team also began fundraising on the news with an email blast to supporters. Democrat Party leaders are in a state of paranoia over the growing dominant lead President Trump has amassed in the polls, Trump spokesperson Stephen Chung said. They have lost faith in the

Starting point is 00:07:45 failed Biden presidency and are now doing everything they can to stop American voters from throwing them out of office next November. Meanwhile, every one of Trump's remaining rivals in the Republican primary criticized the ruling, either pledging to drop out of Colorado's primary or saying the decision should be left up to the voters. All seven justices on Colorado's Supreme Court are Democratic appointees. The three justices who wrote in dissent argued that the state's election code is not the avenue for finding guilt of insurrection, noted that Trump has never been criminally charged for insurrection, and warned that this ruling could violate his due process rights. Even if we were convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past, dare I say,

Starting point is 00:08:24 engaged in insurrection, there must be procedural due process before we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past, dare I say engaged in insurrection, there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office, Justice Carl Samore wrote in dissenting opinion. Separately, the Supreme Court is already considering whether Trump is immune from prosecution for his actions on January 6th in the election interference case being brought by special counsel Jack Smith. Today, we're going to take a look at some opinions from the right and the left on the case, and then my take. We'll be right back after this quick commercial break.

Starting point is 00:09:07 First up, we'll start with what the right is saying. The right is disgusted by the decision and says the Supreme Court should overturn it unanimously. Some say the Colorado Supreme Court's legal reasoning is deeply flawed and ignores the intent of the 14th Amendment. Others suggest Democrats are becoming the threats to democracy they claim to fear. In the New York Post, Jonathan Turley argued that SCOTUS should rule unanimously that the Constitution matters more than defeating Trump at any cost. January 6, 2021 was a riot. That does not excuse those who committed crimes that day, but it was not an insurrection, Turley wrote. The majority on the Colorado Supreme Court adopted sweeping interpretations of every element of the decision to find that Trump not only incited an insurrection, but can be disqualified

Starting point is 00:09:50 under this provision. It does not matter that Trump has never been charged with even incitement or that he called for his supporters to go to the Capitol to protest peacefully. In finding that Trump led an actual insurrection, the four justices used speeches going back to 2016 to show an effort to rebel before Trump was ever president. We need clarity, clarity of purpose and principle. The Supreme Court plays a unique role in our system at times like these. It must at times defy us in rejecting racism as cases such as Brown v. Board of Education. At other times, it has protected in rejecting government overreach as in cases such as Katz v. United States, demanding warrants to overcome the reasonable expectation of privacy. This is a time where it can unify us, Turley said. The court could help unify this country

Starting point is 00:10:35 in a way that may be unparalleled in its history. It can show that justices who hold vastly different ideological views can be unified on core principles. National Review's editors wrote that Colorado forces a 14th Amendment crisis to get Trump. While there are a number of subsidiary legal questions under Section 3, the biggest problem is that the Colorado court got it wrong on the merits of the case. While Section 3 was not limited to the Civil War, it was aimed to disqualify active Confederate rebels and political leaders of the Confederacy from returning to government. Those were people who made war on the United States or materially supported armies in the field to do so. The original public meaning of Section 3, as illustrated by decisions of Congress in the late 1860s on whether to seat Southern members, barred only

Starting point is 00:11:19 active participants in an ongoing rebellion, the editor said. The Colorado court ignored the contemporaneous evidence of how Congress construed its own amendment. It is a serious stretch to convert Trump's lassitude and a few tweets during the riot into active participation in the riot. More than some vague tweets ought to be required before depriving tens of millions of Americans of a candidate who may be their choice. In The American Spectator, Dove Fisher said the court's decision transcends hypocrisy. Trump claims the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him. Many of us agree, although we approach the claim differently from how he does, Fisher said. So, in the face of Trump claiming that Democrats stole the 2020 election from him,

Starting point is 00:12:01 how do the geniuses on the Democrat left proceed to convince all Americans of all stripes that Trump was not really cheated out of the presidency? Of all the lame-brained schemes imaginable, they do so by brazenly trying to cheat him out of the 2024 election by denying him the right to run. Frankly, it is they who repose the foundation of the insurrection. All it took was three Democrat Colorado governors to name seven Democrat Colorado state Supreme Court justices. And even then, three of those jurors held their noses while the bare majority of four voted to deny Trump and his 75 million or more voters a fair and free election in Colorado. Sure, the United States Supreme Court will overthrow this one before they allow that kangaroo court to overthrow America, but it demonstrates how

Starting point is 00:12:43 close we are to the end of our democracy as we know it. Alright, that is it for the rightist thing, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left is split on the validity of the court's reasoning, though many worry about the precedent the ruling would set if upheld by the Supreme Court. Some praise the court for using conservative text-based legal theories to justify its decision. Others say the court's interpretation of the 14th Amendment is wrong and call on the Supreme Court to overturn its ruling. The Washington Post editorial board said, not so fast to disqualifying Trump from the ballot.

Starting point is 00:13:25 Obvious as this analysis might seem to citizens appalled at the then-commander-in-chief's conduct on January 6, 2021, the law is not so clear. The court had to answer yes to a vexing series of questions. Does Section 3 apply to the presidency? The answer here is probably yes, the board wrote, yet these puzzles are relatively mundane compared with the case's most consequential conundrum, whether Trump really did engage in insurrection. What's missing from the majority's analysis is due process of law. Not only has Mr. Trump not been convicted of insurrection either by a jury of his peers or from the bench by a judge, he hasn't even been charged with it, the board added. Disqualifying a candidate based on an accusation, albeit one blessed by a state court judge, is in the Colorado case,

Starting point is 00:14:09 but not in an actual conviction, is dangerous. The potential for abuse is ample. In The Nation, Ellie Mistal called the court's ruling sharp as hell. The Colorado Supreme Court has gone and used the conservatives' own obsession with the state's rights against them, literally. The court quoted Justice Neil Gorsuch in an election law opinion from when he was a judge on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees Colorado, Mistal said. Despite the fact that the text of the law, conservative ideology, and some of the justices' own words are on the side of Colorado in this case, I fully expect the Republicans on the Supreme Court to ignore all that and restore Trump to the Colorado ballot. You see, the problem with beating

Starting point is 00:14:48 conservatives at their own game is that they don't care about their own rules, Mistal said. I'm still guilty of believing there is a chance the Supreme Court sides with Colorado. There's a chance that Gorsuch listens to himself. There's a chance that Roberts' political preferences are such that he understands the grave threat a second Trump term presidency poses to the country and the Supreme Court's own power. In Slate, Lawrence Lessig wrote that the Supreme Court must unanimously strike down Trump's ballot removal. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness

Starting point is 00:15:30 to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. What is not ambiguous is whether it would be absurd to exclude the president from the reach of Section 3, because it is plainly not absurd. Indeed, excluding the president and vice president from the scope of the clause makes Section 3, because it is plainly not absurd. Indeed, excluding the president and vice president from the scope of the clause makes perfect sense, Lessig said. There's an obvious reason why the only two nationally elected officers would be excluded from its reach.

Starting point is 00:16:34 It took mere moments after the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling to see why, as Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick threatened to remove President Joe Biden from the Texas ballot as retribution. All this will be enough for the Supreme Court to see why there is no argument from absurdity that justifies stretching the words of the 14th Amendment to cover this extreme case, Lessig added. Again, electing Trump would be the worst political decision of the nation since the Civil War, but excluding him wrongfully by a close vote of the Supreme Court could well trigger the next Civil War. We must defeat him politically, not through clever lawyer interpretations of him wrongfully by a close vote of the Supreme Court could well trigger the next civil war. We must defeat him politically, not through clever lawyer interpretations of ambiguous constitutional texts. All right, that is it for what the right and the left are saying, which brings us to my take.

Starting point is 00:17:26 So I think this is the wrong decision legally. I think it is incredibly dangerous politically, and it will rightfully have close to zero chance of standing up to Supreme Court scrutiny. First, the legal decision. Every court's job is to act with no or very, very minimal consideration for politics or public reaction. So any conversation about this decision should focus on the legal questions first. The most important of those questions to me, the one that ends this case where it starts, is that Trump is not guilty of insurrection. He has not even been charged with insurrection. He has not been found guilty of any federal crime as we sit here today on December 21st,

Starting point is 00:18:05 He's not been found guilty of any federal crime as we sit here today on December 21st, 2023, nor has he been convicted by any political body of any crime. He was impeached twice, and the Senate acquitted him twice. The idea that four justices in Colorado have the authority to declare him an insurrectionist and then remove him from the ballot isn't just anti-democratic, it is, in a legal sense, absurd. Please consider again the words of the three dissenting justices who advanced this argument in such simple terms that I am unsure how the four in the majority got around it. Quote, even if we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past, dare I say, engaged in insurrection, there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office.

Starting point is 00:18:46 This wasn't just the position of the dissenting justice, but the position of several courts and judges that have already ruled on similar challenges. Fundamentally, I don't know how a court can determine someone is ineligible for office due to a crime that no court or jury or political body has said that they are guilty of. Again, it is worth emphasizing the Justice Department has charged Trump for his actions on January 6th. His charges are conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official government proceeding that is the tallying of the Electoral College vote, conspiracy against the rights of voters to have their votes properly counted, and obstructing and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding.

Starting point is 00:19:24 votes properly counted, and obstructing and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding. First, those are all charges, not convictions. Second, none of those charges is insurrection. At the absolute worst for Trump, they leave open the possibility of him being accused of insurrection and rebellion. At which point, as former Republican Representative Peter Meyer from Michigan, who voted to impeach Trump, argued, there is enough ambiguity in the law for the courts to leave this question to the political process to resolve, that is, to let the voters decide. The second legal question is whether Section 3 of the 14th Amendment even applies to Trump. When Trump's team argued this case before the lower state court, and I read that they were arguing that Section 3 didn't apply to him, I scoffed. My initial reaction was that this was a silly legal strategy. Of course it applies to

Starting point is 00:20:10 the president, I thought. Instead, his legal team should argue that he isn't and has never been found guilty of insurrection and win the case there. But the lower court ultimately agreed that Section 3 didn't apply to him, which piqued my interest and made me read more about the arguments. And the more I read, the more I was convinced that the lower court was right. The most obvious point is that the plain text of Section 3 makes no mention of the president. As Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig wrote, this was not a sloppy omission. Lessig painstakingly explained how we know the 14th Amendment's authors intentionally excluded the offices of the president or vice president. The decision was, in part, to prevent the chaos of individual states,

Starting point is 00:20:50 like, say, Colorado, trying to throw a presidential race. Rather than being a mistake, it was a brilliant piece of foresight, and it isn't hard to see why. Shortly after the Colorado Supreme Court ruling, Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick vowed to remove Biden from the Texas state ballot. How is that for a sign of things to come? So, legally, it is a simple fact that Trump has not been found guilty of, or even been charged with, insurrection. Additionally, I find it convincing that Section 3 intentionally omitted presidents and vice presidents so states could not do exactly what Colorado is doing. All of this, of course, is to say absolutely nothing about how the 14th Amendment is a dormant civil war provision written in 1866 to apply to people waging actual war and rebellion against

Starting point is 00:21:36 the United States and is now being wielded to take down Trump. Politically, the decision is even worse. Everything about it is going to aid Trump in telling his supporters that the establishment will do anything to stop him. His opponents in the Republican primary, even Chris Christie, are now all stuck criticizing the Colorado Supreme Court and insisting that this should be left to voters. The Republican Party is up in arms. Scores of sensible left-of-center politicians and writers, even those who are ardent Trump critics like Lessig, are making the obvious points about this being a weak legal case and a political powder keg.

Starting point is 00:22:11 And, on top of all of that, the Supreme Court is all but guaranteed to come in and overturn the ruling anyway. In fact, I'll take this moment to do one of my rare bits of political prognostication and wager that the high court rules 9-0 in Trump's favor. All told, this is terrible for our country. Colorado's decision legitimizes a new mechanism for state actors to try to impede federal elections. It adds state supreme courts to the list of institutions whose public trust is crumbling, it will throw gas on the fire of paranoia that burns through homes all across America, and it will ultimately do absolutely

Starting point is 00:22:45 nothing to slow down or stop the person that is supposed to be the threat to democracy. If anything, it will galvanize his campaign. As I've said before and will say again, January 6th was a disgrace. It was the first and only non-peaceful transfer of power in United States history and constitutes one of the worst stains on our nation. We should take every legal measure possible to prevent it from happening again, because it could be even worse a second time. Passing reforms to the Electoral Count Act, as Congress recently did, are the right ways to address what happened, and I support more legislation like it that clarifies Congress's role in certifying elections. Former President Donald Trump is, by my best guess,

Starting point is 00:23:26 guilty in the classified documents case, and he faces serious legal threats in Georgia's and the Justice Department's election interference cases. His actions have thrust us into uncharted legal territory, and he very well may be a federal criminal by inauguration day in 2025. He, of course, bears responsibility for his decisions. And not for nothing, but nearly a quarter of Trump voters say he shouldn't be nominated if he gets convicted of a crime. The justice system is working right now, with the federal cases largely playing out in court how they should, with this obvious exception. Hopefully, the Supreme Court ends this 14th Amendment charade, rules that Trump is not

Starting point is 00:24:05 immune from prosecution, and lets the other legal challenges move forward. Then, the rest will be left up to voters, as it should be. We'll be right back after this quick break. break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one is from Dak in Rhode Island. Dak said, in light of how the media is reporting the war in Gaza and how your Instagram post was taken down just because it had a certain narrative, would you consider doing a Friday piece on media and social media bias in this war? So I said most of what I said about the ills of social media censorship in yesterday's reader question, but if you're interested in reading more, you can check out some of my past posts on misinformation and censorship that I've published here in Tangle. We'll leave a link to

Starting point is 00:25:01 some of them in today's podcast description. That being said, I did just finish recording a fresh YouTube video about all of the misinformation about the war in Gaza that is spreading like wildfire on social media. In my opinion, this is one of the most important videos that we've recorded since we launched our YouTube channel. I'm probably going to send an email to everyone when it goes live. But in the meantime, I encourage you to just go subscribe to our YouTube channel so you'll get it when it's posted. And you can check out our latest video with Kyla Scanlon while we're putting the finishing touches on our new video. I'm sure, of course, there'll be lots more to come on all of this. So, you know, stay tuned. All right, that is it for our reader

Starting point is 00:25:43 question, which brings us to our under the radar section. House Republicans who hated House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's debt deal over the summer are now using it as leverage in their budget showdown with President Biden. Six months after the agreement was struck, the GOP hardliners who led the way in removing McCarthy as speaker for striking the deal recognized that the terms have become favorable for them. The McCarthy deal mandates across-the-board cuts or caps to spending if lawmakers can't reach an agreement to fund the government for the fiscal year that ends in October. Initially, that agreement was going to result in deeper cuts to defense spending than non-defense

Starting point is 00:26:19 spending, a reality conservatives disliked. But non-budget scorekeepers readjusted their calculations, which now show non-defenseget scorekeepers readjusted their calculations, which now show non-defense spending would get slashed more deeply than defense spending if Congress continues to implement temporary continuing resolution spending fixes, which gives Republicans newfound leverage in negotiating. Thomas Massey, the representative from Kentucky, called it an ace being dealt to House Speaker Mike Johnson. Politico has the story and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section.

Starting point is 00:26:55 Donald Trump's net increase in GOP primary polls one week after he was indicted in New York City on charges of falsifying business records in March was plus 4.6. Trump's net decrease in GOP primary polls one week after he was indicted on federal charges related to his handling of classified government documents in June was 0.9. Trump's net increase in GOP primary polls one week after he was indicted on federal charges related to the certification of the 2020 presidential election in August was 0.1. His net decrease in GOP primary polls one week after he was indicted on charges related to interference in the 2020 presidential election was 0.2. Trump's net increase in GOP primary polls since his first indictment through December 20th, 2023 is plus 15.8 percentage points. The percentage of Republican primary voters who say that if Trump wins the primary, he should remain their nominee,

Starting point is 00:27:51 even if he is subsequently convicted of a federal crime, is just 62%. The percentage of all voters who say Trump should be found guilty if his 2020 election interference case goes to trial is 47%. election interference case goes to trial is 47%. All right, and last but not least, our Have a Nice Day section. The Hopkinsville Police Department in Kentucky recently swore in a new officer, a pit bull named Bolo. Arriving at the station as part of a publicity program for the nearby Christian County Animal Shelter, Bolo was only meant to stay for a day and contribute his handsome face to the department's social media posts as a means to help him find a home. But the station couldn't bear to let him go. Oddly enough, everybody fell in love with him, Police Chief Jason Newby

Starting point is 00:28:34 said. So when it came time for him to go back that day, they got him in his cage and he kind of dropped his head and whimpered and everybody's heart melted and we decided to adopt him. Now, Bolo is Hopkinsville's first ever Paul Troll officer. Good News Network has the story and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. Please keep an eye out for tomorrow's episode. It is a special edition, a little bit of a wrap up on our year before we take a couple of weeks off. So heads up, that is coming. It's probably going to be a crazy couple of weeks because they have to rule on this case sometime before January 5th. So

Starting point is 00:29:16 my vacation might get dynamited, but we're going to try and get some time off. We'll see you soon. Have a good one. Peace. Okay. Phoebe's here. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by John Wall. The script is edited by our managing editor, Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Bailey Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was designed by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go to readtangle.com and check out our website. site. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel

Starting point is 00:30:29 a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

Tangle - Trump gets barred from the Colorado ballot.

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.