The Daily Show: Ears Edition - Trump's G7 Disaster | BriGette McCoy, Kirsten Gillibrand & Don Christensen

Episode Date: June 12, 2018

President Trump rattles G7 allies, Roy Wood Jr. and Ronny Chieng talk sports, and BriGette McCoy, Kirsten Gillibrand and Don Christensen discuss sex crimes in the military. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You're listening to Comedy Central. John Stewart here. Unbelievably exciting news. My new podcast, The Weekly Show. We're going to be talking about the election, economics, ingredient to bread ratio on sandwiches. Listen to the weekly show with John Stewart, wherever you get your podcast. June 11, 2018. From Comedy Central's World News Headquarters in New York,

this is the Daily Show with Trevor Noah, Ears Edition. Yeah! Welcome, everybody. Welcome, Welcome to the Daily Show. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. My guest tonight, here to talk about the crisis of sexual assaults in the military. We have Colonel Don Christensen, Brigette McCoy, and Senator Kirsten-Jilbrain joining us everybody. But first, let's catch up on today's headlines. The Middle East and drones. Whatever story you're thinking of, it's probably not this.

And a fashion show in Saudi Arabia is going viral now. Check this out. An array of fashion dresses floating down a runway, but no model in sight. And this bizarre fashion show at a Saudi Arabian hotel where drones were used to showcase these dresses instead of traditional human models. A spokesperson said the drones were used to bring a change to the annual show. A drone fashion show is one of the weirdest things I have ever seen.

But, but if you add the Harry Potter theme, it totally works. Anna Wintorum! Anna Wintorum! In other news, if you believe President Trump is tearing the White House to shreds, well, it turns out it's worse than you think. White House staffers have reportedly been taping pieces of paper back together after President Trump rips them up. They need to tape them back together to comply with the Presidential Records Act.

According to Politico, the papers include letters and official documents that are required by law to be preserved and sent to the National Archives. Sometimes it would just be one big rip down the middle and sometimes it would be like confetti. President Trump's tearing up official documents. I mean, let's not act surprised. After all, he spent the last year tearing up the Constitution. But, but seriously though, this is real life. They can't get Trump to stop ripping up official documents. So instead, the staff in the White House have to scurry in and then grab the shreds off the floor like their ballboys from Wimbledon. And I don't know why Trump rips up all his paper.

My guess is that he does it to show of how strong he is. He's like, would an unhealthy president be able to do this? Well that's it for this edition of headlines. Let's move on to our main story. Over the weekend, President Trump attended the G7, which was held in Quebec, Canada. And for those of you who don't know, the G7 is very important. It's when you add a G4 to a G3. It's also when America and his closest allies come together for two days of meetings

on economic issues. Basically, it's the world's most boring sleepover. And even before it began, things got off to a rocky start. Rocky 4 starts. Before heading to the summit, President Trump sparked controversy by saying he wants Russia to be welcome back into the G8. We have a world to run, and in the G7, which used to be the G8, they threw Russia out, they should let Russia come back in, because we should have Russia at the negotiating table. I don't know if Trump colluded with Russia,

but if everyone was accusing me of colluding with Russia, I wouldn't be caught dead mentioning their name. Like, if your girlfriend accused you of cheating with Kisha, even if you didn't do it, just shut up about Keisha. Just shut up. Hey, babe, you know who we should invite to the party? Keisha. Nigger, I know you didn't just bring up Keisha.

I know you did not just bring up Keisha. But clearly, clearly Trump doesn't know how to take a clue, because he kept bringing up Keisha all weekend long. Some people like the idea of bringing Russia back in. This used to be the G8, not the G7. And something happened a while ago where Russia is no longer in. I think it would be an asset to have Russia back in. The something that happened that got them kicked out of the G8 was the invasion and annexation

of Crimea. Do you think that Crimea should be recognized at Russia? Crimea was let go during the Obama administration and, you know, Obama can say all he wants, but he allowed Russia to take Crimea. Oh, okay, okay, that makes sense. Russia, annexing Crimea wasn't really a big deal. But we must never forgive Obama for letting them commit this atrocity, which was not a big deal at all. I mean, who even knows what a Crimea is anyway?

I mean, it's just a random little place whose blood is in Obama's hands. Anyway, I think we should invite Keisha. That's what I'm saying. What does that even mean? And now, you know, for a normal G7, Trump's Russia obsession would have been more than enough drama. But for President Trump, he was just getting started. President Trump stuns the world, pulling out of the G7's official agreement,

and issuing a warning to allies. We're like the piggy bank that everybody's robbing. This unprecedented friction with some of America's closest allies. The president, his top aides, are launching this all-out assault against Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The president, in route to Singapore, accused Justin Trudeau of false statements and called him very dishonest and weak. So Trump went into the G7 for a run-of-the-mill check-in with America's allies, and then came out full-on beefing with Canada, the Ned Flanders of countries.

It's safe to say that no one expected this to go this way. It's like going into the doctor for a routine check-up and then coming out as a human centipede. I don't think this is covered. And other G7 leaders were shocked by Trump's actions. Emmanuel McCrong called Trump Incoherent, and Angela Merkel said that Trump pulling out of the deal was sobering and depressing. Although, to be fair, she is German, so everything is sobering and depressing to her. Yeah, she was probably at breakfast today like, I find this pancake man both sobering and depressing. Now, the reason President Trump went all push a tea on Trudeau is because he claims that

Trudeau was super nice to him in person, but then as soon as Trump left, Trudeau held the press conference saying that Canada still planned to retaliate against the US's new tariffs. Because, you see, Trump has a policy. You don't criticize him behind his back, all right? You also don't criticize him to his face. Side doesn't work either. Yeah, you write it down on a piece of paper and then rip it up into tiny pieces

and someone will run by and pick it up. That's how it works. Because if you do criticize Trump, he'll send his guys out on TV to let you know that it's on. The president's advisors fiercely attacking Trudeau on the Sunday shows. He holds a press conference and he said the US is insulting. He really kind of stabbed this in the back. There's a special place in the hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy

with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door. Wow, there's a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump. That is a serious threat and a very specific place in hell. That sounds VIP a shit. Yeah. That's just like one person. All the thoughts in hell are going to be like, damn, who's that dude in VIP? But still, the question is, why on earth

would Trump react in such an extreme way to a trade dispute with such a close and unthreatening ally? Well, according to Trump's economic advisor, this is all part of a greater plan. today, POTUS is not going to let a Canadian Prime Minister push him around, push him poetus around, President Trump, on the eve of this. He is not going to permit any show of weakness on the trip to negotiate with North Korea, nor should he... So this was about North Korea?

Of course it was in large part. Of course it was in large part. Why was he doing that like, he just watched a Tyler Perry movie. Our president will not get pushed around. He will not. So, in essence, to win his Nobel Peace Prize with North Korea, Trump is going to start a war with Canada. It really is brilliant, and the man is playing some two-dimensional chess. We'll be right back.

John Stewart here. Unbelievably. the election, economics, ingredient to bread ratio on sandwiches. Listen to the weekly show with John Stewart, wherever you get your podcast. Welcome back to the Daily Show. You know, this was a huge weekend for sports. Rafael Nadal won his 11th French Open, CM got punked in the UFC, and the MLB logo married the WNBA logo.

Muzzletoff to those two, yes. To catch you up on everything else, sports related, let's go to Roywood Jr. and Ronnie Chang for another addition of, I apologize for talking. Well, you were talking. Oh, what's up sportsheads? I'm Chris Tucker, that's Jackie Chan. That's not my name.

I'm just joking. Y'all give it up for international correspondent Ronnie Chang right here. Wow. Now, Ronnie is going to help us break down the World Cup. Thanks Roy. The World Cup begins Thursday in Russia. It's the biggest sporting event in the world. Thanks, Ronnie. Now let's get the sports Americans actually care about. I'm talking about basketball, man.

The Golden State Warriors are champions again after sweeping the Cleveland Cavalier. Uh, you mean the Cavaliers? No, I do not. It's just LeBron. And it turns out even he wasn't 100%. We found out after the game that LeBron Jane played most of the series with a significant hand injury. He says he punched a whiteboard after Cleveland's brutal loss in game one. Pretty much played the last three games with a broken hand, so self-inflicted. Post-game after game one.

I'm very emotional. Poor J.R. Smith. He probably doesn't even know the series is over. I bet he showed up for Game 5. Like, hey, I'm ready to go. Where's everybody? Yes, Roy, J.R. Smith is stupid. Now it's time to move on to the sport the entire world is talking about. I know not yet. There's also horse racing. The Belmont states were on Saturday and justify entered the record books becoming only the 13th horse to win the triple crown. Wow, a horse ran

because someone was whipping it. What a feat of human achievement. You said it, Ronnie, almost as incredible was this tweet from Sheriff David Clark, who wrote, Donald Trump should invite justified to the White House lawn, justify as a winner like Trump who could care less about leftist identity politics and... Yeah. Of course the horse doesn't care about politics, it's a horse. The only issue a horse cares about is what it can eat. Oh and net neutrality. Oh yeah, that affects us.

Yeah, that's true. Now finally, can we please talk about the World Cup? Okay, fine, fine. Let's start with the American team. Who be playing? Well, the Americans didn't qualify. Oh, fuck that. Let's talk hockey. Hockey. The Washington Capitals won the Stanley Cup, and their Captain Alex Ovetskin has been taking that trophy everywhere.

He took it to a nationals game. He took it into bed with him. Look at that, Ronnie. One guy, one cup. Am I right? He even had the trophy with him when the the the the the had the trophy with him when he ran into Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner. How about that, dude?

What do you think about the Trump's kicking it with yet again another Russian? Yeah, I think that Stanley Cup's gonna get some peanut by Robert Mueller. Okay, let's move on to the World Cup this Thursday. Oh, I'm sorry, Ronnie, we're out of time. You've got to be kidding. to be to be tiiii can try again in four years. That's it for us. Back to you Trevor, thank you bro. Thank you so much. Chris and Jackie. We'll be right back. Welcome back to the Daily Show. Recently, recently in the midst of the Me Too movement, the US military has once again been forced to address its sexual assault problem. Joining us now to talk more about legislation aimed at dealing with this issue,

please welcome, New York Democratic Senator Kirstenjellbrand, US Army veteran, Birchette McCoy, and former Chief U.S. Air Force prosecutor, retired Colonel Don Christensen, everybody. Welcome to the show. Senator, I'm going to kick it off with yourself. This is a strange issue that seems like it shouldn't have anyone who's against us. Could you explain what the problem is and where we currently stand right now? The problem is, for 20 years, the Department of Defense has said zero tolerance for sexual assault in the military.

But the last time they surveyed this, they estimated there were over 15,000 sexual assaults, not th., not their, not their, not th., th., th., th., th, th, th, th, th, thii, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, I thi, I'm thi, I'm thi, I'm thi, I'm thi, I'm thi, I I'm thi, I I I'm thi, I I I I'm thi, I I I I I I'm thi, I I I I I'm thi, I I I I'm thi, I I I I I I's, I's, I I's, I I I's, I I's, I I's, I's, I's, I's, I's, I'm thi, I'm thi, I'm thi, I'm thi, I'm thi, I'm going thi, I'm going thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiaaa'a'a'a'a'a'a'a, I'm going thi, I'm going thi, I'm assault in the military. But the last time they surveyed this they estimated there were over 15,000 sexual assaults not even including civilians and spouses and of those sexual assaults only just over 6,000 are reporting. And those 6,000 so few cases actually go forward to trial and so few cases actually end up in conviction. And we need a military justice system that is worthy of the sacrifice that these men and women make every day. And unfortunately the DOD is unwilling to change how they prosecute these cases. And one of the things that all of us believe in is that it should be given to trained

military prosecutors to make the decision about whether crimes be committed, not commanders who aren't even lawyers, who may not their, who their, their, their, their, their, their, their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and their, and the, and thiiiii, and thi, and thiole, and thi, and thi, and thiole even lawyers, who may not be trained, and who may have biases. Because right now, the system is failing our service members. But now there are people who have come out against your proposal and said, the military handles military issues. Why are civilians trying to get involved? You don't know what's best for the military? Why would you step in with this legislation that aims to bring in a foreign body to try and in some way influence what's happening in the military? So you're not. You're actually telling someone like Commander Christensen, who was the prosecutor,

that he gets to look at the evidence because he's a prosecutor, decide whether a crime's been committed and decide whether to move that case to trial, to court-martial. Right now, when a commander makes that decision, they may know the perpetrator, they may know the victim. It's kind of like when your boss is deciding if two people working at the same company, if one committed a sexual assault against the other. It's like one service member said, it's your dad deciding whether to punish you or your brother. It is not fair. It is not fair, it's biased, and the results are so bad. There's not a lot of cases that are going to conviction.

And unfortunately, a lot of commanders, they use non-judicial punishment. And sometimes, we'll just kick the service member out, putting a serial rapist into the civilian world. So they're just not getting the job done. So despite this stated zero tolerance. We have as many sexual assaults reported toda toda toda more sexual assaults reported today than ever, and the rate of conviction is going down, not going up. Colonel, on your end, you worked in the military. You served, and you were involved in prosecuting cases. What were the obstacles you found when it came to sexual assault? Why do you feel that this needs to be assigned to a special group of people and not currently the way it's th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. the the the the, the, the, the, the, and thi thi, and thi, the way thi, the way the way the way the way the way the way the way the way the the the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the rate, and the the the the the the way the way the way the way the way thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi. thi. thr-a. thr-a. thr-a. thr-a. thr-a. the thr-a. the thr-a. the the throi. the thr-a. to sexual assault. Why do you feel that this needs to be assigned to a special group of people and not currently

the way it's done? Senator Gillesbrand and I both use the same term. Professionalization. The military justice system is not professional. It's controlled by a commander who might be a great pilot, might be a great infantry officer, but he or she knows absolutely nothing about prosecuting sexual assault. I did it for 23 plus years. Sexual assault is the most difficult kind of case you can prosecute. It's not something you can pick up. Get a PowerPoint slide briefing and now I'm an expert on prosecuting cases. If you just look at

the numbers, less than 4% of allegations in the military result in a conviction. 96% of the people that have been accused of a sexual assault walk free, and that's just not winning. But you said you were involved in prosecutions for 20 plus years. Doesn't that mean that there is a system in place that's working? There's a system, but it's not working. And the reason it doesn't work is because when I was a prosecutor I didn't make the decision whether a case went to trial or not. The commander made that decision. A commander who might be a great at navigating the ship through the straits of a Hormuz or something like that,

but knows absolutely nothing about prosecuting cases. A military prosecutor has almost zero authority. The decision whether to go to trial, the decision whether to have a plea agreement, the decision to appeal a case, the decision to drop charges or add charges are all made by commanders. Right. Now, Brutte on your side, you not only served, but you have come forward with a very painful story of your own experience with sexual assaults in the military. How did you process that information and how did it inform why you support this legislation? Well, my situation happened in the 90s, in the 87 to 91.

And when I got out, I was exited out because I reported sexual harassment. So within a 90-day period I was retaliated against and then subsequently put out of the military so my clearance, my training, all of those things were completely didn't hold up against me saying, you know I had been assaulted and now you know I want something those things were completely, didn't hold up against me saying, you know, I had been assaulted, and now, you know, I want something done about it. Instead of them doing something about it, then I was exited out of the military. Who retaliated against you?

My command, my first sergeant, the commanders, they, you know, like I said, I had to sign paperwork to be put out of the military, to get out of the military. So they basically, once the conversation happened that I had been harassed, they wanted to know why and what I wanted. And I said I just didn't want to work with someone who was going to treat me that way. And so from that process, they started giving me extra duty and extra things outside of the scope of my job, creating just this atmosphere where my peers were questioning like what's going on with you, where my subordinates were questioning like, you know, my authority. And then, you know, like I said, it ended up being, you know, me getting out of

the military. It's a really painful story that surprised me when reading about it because you also discovered that in the military specifically, this is an issue that is affecting that is affecting that is affecting that is affecting that is affecting that is affecting that is affecting that is affecting thi thi thi thi thi thi thi thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, the thi, thi, their, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, thi, thi, thi, thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii, their, their, their, their, the about it because you also discovered that in the military specifically, this is an issue that is affecting more men than women, which is not often the case with sexual assaults in general society. Is there a reason that this happens? Or is there a reason that people are resistant to it because of that? I don't think so. I think they just don't want to change how they do something. You know, unfortunately, the Department of Defense didn't want to integrate the military. They didn't want women to serve. They didn't want women in combat.

They didn't want to repeal, don't ask, don't tell. And every time one of these things happened, they had the same excuse. It somehow undermines good order and discipline, first of all. And right now, there's no transparency and there's no accountability. And what Brigette said was important, she was retaliated against for reporting that she was sexually assaulted and sexually harassed, retaliated. She's the one who was forced out of the military. That happens over and over again. In fact, 59% of all people who reported these cases

said they were retaliated against. A third from peers, a third administrative, and a third professional. So this is a huge problem. And they're not taking it seriously. They're not putting in place this structure that would allow Commander Christensen to make these decisions about whether to go to trial......... And, their, their, their, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and the, and the, and the, the, the, the, the, the, the, and the, and they, they, they, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, and, and, the, the, and, and, the, the, the, the, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, theyme, theymea, theymea, theyr, too, too, too, theyr, their, their, theyr, their, their, their, their, to make these decisions about whether to go to trial because he's a professional prosecutor who knows what to do. And they're just doing what's best for them. And unfortunately, when I've looked at these cases, because I pour through them and look for just evidence of what's going on,

when it's he said, she said, when he says it's consensual and she said it's rape. One year, in the four major basisba cases tha cases tha cases tha tha tha tha tha tha tha tha thoencass basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis basis thease to to thususususus, in thoes, in thoes, in thoes, in thoes, in that, in One year, in the four major bases, 86% of the time, they believed him that it was consensual and did not move the case forward. And so you don't have 86% of false reporting. It's just not true. And so they just don't have the level of sophistication and knowledge to understand which cases should go forward.

And what we've seen over the last several years, despite the spotlight on this issue, the percentage of cases proceeding to court martial is going down, and the percentage of convictions is going down, even though you have the record number of reported rates this year. You have support for this legislation, I believe more than half of the Senate, from all sides. I mean, even Ted Cruz is supporting this, and that's true. It's an issue that shouldn't be divisive, and yet it seems to be, what is the hang-up and what do you hope will be different this time around? Well, you just have a choice. You're either going to believe the commanders, because when you ask the survivors, the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans of America, they just did a poll and they asked survivors. Because when you ask the survivors, the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans of America, they just did a poll and they asked survivors, would you be more

likely to report if your commander wasn't making the decision, if it wasn't within the chain of command, 40% women men said yes, they would be more likely to report. So we know from the survivors, we know from Brigette, she knows that the command structure doesn't necessarily have her back. If she was harassed and assaulted by people senior to her, in both instances, they were in her chain of command and senior to her. And she wants to know, are they going to believe me or someone senior to me? The chain of command is in vilead. She's, tell, tell what the perspective of survivors is.

Well, when you go into those spaces, they've already decided. They just want to hear what you have to say so that they can determine, I perceive, how they're going to punish you. When I went in and spoke to my commander and said exactly what had happened, he said that I had misunderstood, that my senior enlisted professional was trying to help me to advance my career and that I you know what did I want from out of you know from from reporting this case and again I just basically said the same thing that I told you earlier and so the for me the retaliation was ongoing it was much it was much longer than the actual event itself.

So you have an event that happens and then from that event, you know, you have the daily, you go to work, you live with these folks, you go to PT with them, you work with them. So it's not like you get a break from the retaliation, like you just go home and you don't have to see them again for another eight hours. So it is constant, it's ongoing. And survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors survivors. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have thi. You have thi. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You have th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You th. You have th. You have th. You have th. th. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. thi. th. You have th. So it is constant, it's ongoing. And survivors like myself leave the military with you know these different types of you know the personality disorder you know and they're not being able to get you know. Colonel Christensen Brigette is talking about how when when the women are pushed out, when the survivors are pushed out, male and female, they are often given dishonorable discharges. They're also often given something in the record that said it was their fault, that they had a pre-existing personality disorder that made them somehow perceive this to be a rape

or an assault. Colonel, talk a little bit about what actually the percentage of women, who, what happens to their their their their their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, the, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, tho, tho, thi, thi, about what actually the percentage of women who what happens to their careers when they report these sexual assaults. Sure, Senator. So one-third of women who report a sexual assault in the military are forced out of the military within seven months of reporting. One-third and their discharge characterization is significantly lower than what the average service member receives. That follows them throughout the rest of her life. They lose their GI Bill, they lose veterans benefits. We are at a time where this country cannot recruit enough qualified people, and yet we are forcing out dedicated women who want to serve

purely because they've been sexually assaulted and their command won't believe them. It's interesting when the president was asked about this issue, he said this is a reason why women shouldn't be in the military because I guess that's the way you solve the issue. With the commanders deciding this, once a prosecution has gone through and once you found somebody guilty is is it still possible for the chain of command to eliminate that? Well up until a few years ago and thankfully Senator Gillibrand and some other senators got this chained changed a commander could have somebody convicted of rape and it is throw the conviction out and say,

I want that person to stay in my unit. And so now that changed over time. But you're still looking for more changes. And the resistance, I'm assuming, has to do with the perception of being anti-military. How do you try and propose something like that without seeming like you're going against the military? Well, I think th th th th th th th th th th th think think think think think think thi thi thi thi thi thi thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, tho, tho, tho, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, thi, th.................................... And, to to to to to to to to to to, to, to to to to to, to too, too, too, too. And, tooooooooooooooooooo. And, too. And, too. And, too. And, too. And, too. And, the military. Well, I think this is the most pro-military bill you could have. You're on the side of service members.

Because you want these men and women serving at their fullest capacity. And if you're a rapist, you're most likely a recidivist. You're a predator. Rape is a crime of violence. It has a commanors. We've had commanders say thinks, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, well, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problem, the problemto do with rape in the military. We had another senator say, oh it's really just hormones. It has nothing to do with hormones. This is rape. It is a crime of predation. It is a violent crime and it's happening to men and women. And if we are not standing by our service

members and protecting them after like, like, Brut, how many years of training did you have before you were literally pushed out because it was too inconvenient to prosecute her harasser and her assaulter? Had three years of military training, top secret SCI clearance, and in the middle of the Gulf War, I was exited out of the military. When there was a shortage of personnel who had her qualifications. When we look at moving forward, Bridget, as somebody who went through this unfortunately, someone who's experienced this first hand, what would you say your biggest concerns are why do you really feel that this is

important? Why does it need to happen? Well it needs to happen so that, you know, one, it absolutely needs to stop. Our military has some of the best people that come out of the communities and want to serve our country. And so to go the, the, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, you, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, thi, thi, their, thi, thi, to, to, to, to, thi, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, the best people that come out of the communities and want to serve our country. And so to go into your the military and then have someone you know that supposed to be your have your back to harm you in that way it's it's horrible. But what I would want to see is that the Military Justice Improvement Act to be passed to remove the you know the process out of the chain of command because that is where a lot of the you the you the you the you the you the you the you the you the you the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the to go go go go go go. the the the to go go go go go. to go go go go go go go. to go go go go go go. to to go go go go go. to go go go. to go. the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the tooan.auu.au.au.a.a. Iea. Iea. Ia. Ia. Ia. toea. toea. theaughea. Iea. the the remove the you know the process out of the chain of command because that is where a lot of the you know the ongoing challenges are because one person you're going and saying this person is the one that harmed me but

he he or she could be the person that's pals with the command and officer so we want to stop stop that completely the other part that I would say is to have anyone who's been convicted to be on a on a on a the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the. the the the the the the. thoes. thoes. thoes. the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the their. their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their their theyooooooea.ea.e is. their their their their their their that completely. The other part that I would say is to have anyone who's been convicted to be on a on a list saying that they're a predator, that they're a sexual predator. So that they don't go into the world having the, I guess, all of the accolades of being in the military when in fact, they're a person hiding in plain sight. Right. It's a powerful issue. It's a powerful issue. Senator. What's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's a the thi. thi. thi. thi, thi, thi, thi, their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. their. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. thi. th. thin. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. th. thee. thin. th. they's. the. they's they's they's thi. they what's going to happen now? Where do you go from here? Well, service members deserve a vote. We've asked for a vote the last two years and have been denied that vote. At a minimum, they deserve a vote, an up or down vote on this reform. We've done literally every small ball, incremental change you could possibly do over the last

five years. Anything that anybody was willing to agree to, we passed through our committee and got passed. This is the one reform that survivors have asked for over and over and over again. It's the one reform that professionalizes the military. It's the one reform that puts the decision in the hands of a trained prosecutor has been doing it for 25 years. And Colonel Christensen has recommended this based on his experience of these cases, that if he can just decide it based on evidence, if the evidence, if, if, if, if, if, if, and, and, if, and, and, the evidence, and, the evidence, the evidence, the evidence, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, their, is is is is is, their, is is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is, is is, is is, is, is is is is, is is, is is, is is is is is is is, is is, is, is is is is, is, is is is, is, is, is theyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.iiiiii.i.s.s.s, is their, is one one one one one one one one.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.oerlionlionlionlionlionlionlionlionlionlionlionlionli. It is a the evidence. If a trained prosecutor in the military can make it based on evidence alone, not on bias, not on who they like more, not on who they perceive is more valuable, then you will end more of these cases

and conviction, more of these cases will go to trial. Justice will be possible. Today, there's no transparency, there's no accountability, and them for a vote. Go to Kirsten Gillibran.com, it'll tell you how to do that. Yes. Thank you so much for joining us on the show. Senator Kirsten Gillibrain, Josette McCoy, and Colonel Don Christensen everybody. Thank you so much. The Daily Show with Cover Noa, Ears Edition. Watch the Daily Show weeknights at 11, 10 Central on Comedy Central, and the Comedy Central app. Watch full episodes and videos at the Daily Show. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and subscribe to the Daily Show on YouTube for exclusive content and more.

This has been a Comedy Central podcast. John Stewart here. Unbelievably exciting news. My new podcast, The Weekly Show. We're going to be talking about the election, economics, ingredient to bread ratio on sandwiches. Listen to the weekly show with John Stewart. Wherever you get your podcast.