The David Pakman Show - 10/5/22: GOP Abortion Collapse Exposes Stunning Hypocrisy

Episode Date: October 5, 2022

-- On the Show: -- Jessie Singer, journalist and author of the book "There Are No Accidents: The Deadly Rise of Injury and Disaster – Who Profits and Who Pays the Price," joins David to discuss accidents, malpractice, negligence, freedom, and more. Get the book: https://amzn.to/3SD55gT -- In the wake of the Herschel Walker scandal, Republican suddenly don't care about abortion being "murder" as long as it keeps a Democrat out of office -- Georgia Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker falls slightly behind incumbent Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock in the latest polls -- Georgia Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker is extremely confused about electric vehicles -- A new report exposes that failed former President Donald Trump asked his own lawyer, Alex Cannon, to lie to the government -- According to new reporting, Donald Trump personally packed a stash of the documents he took to his house -- A very scared Donald Trump appears on the Joe Pags show to claim that the FBI may have both planted and stolen evidence from his Mar-a-Lago home -- Secretary of Transportation hilariously humiliates radical Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene during a Fox News appearance in response to her recent absurd comments -- Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert's lead in her re-election campaign shrinks to a new low -- Voicemail caller is very confused about David's connection to the Democratic Party -- On the Bonus Show: Dr Oz branded "sick" by opponent amid report about dog experiments, Gavin Newsom signs bill decriminalizing most jaywalking, The Onion defends right to parody, much more... 💸 GiveDirectly: Send cash DIRECTLY to families in need at https://givedirectly.org/pakman 🌿 Sunset Lake CBD: Get 20% OFF using code PAKMAN at https://sunsetlakecbd.com ❄️ ChiliSleep by SleepMe: Get 25% OFF your bed-cooling system at https://chilisleep.com/pakman 💪 Athletic Greens is offering FREE year-supply of Vitamin D at https://athleticgreens.com/pakman 👍 Get 20% off an Allform sofa or armchair at https://allform.com/pakman 🥄 Use code PAKMAN for $5 off Magic Spoon at https://magicspoon.com/pakman -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- Subscribe to Pakman Finance: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanfinance -- Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidpakmanshow -- Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow -- Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

. You know, we suspected for a while that when many of these right wingers say abortion is murder, they don't really mean that it's something they say if it's convenient, if it helps them raise money. Now, of course, some of them sincerely mean it. And I mean the voters. But when you look at the polls, you see that support for abortion being legal in most cases has increased over the last 50 years quite steadily. And so intuitively, there have to be some shills out there who are only claiming to have these positions about abortion to the extent

that it's useful to them politically. But they don't really care about it that much. Donald Trump is a really great example. The Herschel Walker scandal, as it's being called, wherein despite claiming to be pro-life, despite claiming that abortion is murder, no exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the mother, despite saying all of those things, he now has been credibly accused with receipts of urging and paying one of his ex-girlfriends to get an abortion, paying for one of his ex-girlfriends to get an abortion. So, of course, the Republicans will now denounce Herschel Walker. Right. We cannot support a man who.

No, it's not happening. It turns out apparently they don't really care about abortion being murder. Here's Dana Loesch Lesch, who says quite straightforwardly, she's a right wing radio host. I don't care if Herschel Walker paid to abort endangered baby eagles. I want control of the Senate. So does this change anything? I mean, do you want my opinion? Are you listening?

Yeah. Not a damn thing. Oh, how many times have I said four very important words? These four words. Winning is a virtue. Oh. What I'm about to say is in no means a contradiction. Okay.

Or a compromise of a principle. So in other words, it is that. And please keep in mind that I am concerned about one thing and one thing only at this point. So I don't care if Herschel Walker paid to abort endangered baby eagles. I want control of the Senate. Right. If the Daily Beast story is true, you're telling me Walker used his money to reportedly pay some skank for an abortion and Warnock do, but they're willing to vote for the murderers anyway, if it's politically convenient. Republicans think abortion is murder, except when the Senate is on the line. Here's Don Lemon on CNN last night speaking to right wing, you know, whatever right wing strategist, right wing

analyst consultant Alice Stewart. And this is just unbelievable position here because the entire time that we've been on the air together, you said that the reason that you held your nose and voted for Donald Trump was because of his stance on abortion. Right. And now you're saying it doesn't matter that that Herschel Walker is hypocritical about an abortion and and allegedly has paid for one right. An abortion that it is now OK because. Of inflation. So now what is it?

Listen, guys, abortion is murder. But have you seen these gas prices? What I'm saying right now, if I were back in my home state of Georgia and I had to decide between a candidate like Herschel Walker, who may or may not have paid for one abortion or Raphael Warnock, who is supportive of taxpayer funded abortions for everyone. I think the choice is very simple. Herschel Walker's policies are more in line with Republicans and conservatives in the state of Georgia.

And moving forward, this is going to be a tremendous. How do you know he's telling you the truth about those issues if he's not telling you the truth about abortion? We'll just have to take his word for it. Right. Like you took his word about the abortion thing, right? Wow. Wow.

And then rounding this out is new Gingrich, who talks about how Walker's deeply committed to Christ and also has had many concussions. So I guess it's OK what he did. I don't know. I talked to her show about this this morning and I've known her so good. Well, oh, well, if you've known him for a long time, then certainly please proceed. I think he's a remarkable person. I think he's the most important Senate candidate in the country because he'll do more to change the Senate just by the sheer presence, by his confidence, by his deep commitment to Christ. Right. By the degree

to which he is. You know, he's been through a long, tough period. He had a lot of concussions coming out of football. Yeah, listen, you can't blame the guy who says abortion is murder for paying for an abortion. He could be concussed for all we know. That's newt gingrich's take. These people are completely pathetic. These people are hypocrites.

These people. So I tweeted about this and there's kind of there's really two possibilities here. OK, one, they do believe abortion is murder. They really do. They just don't care about voting for so-called murderers as long as it keeps a Democrat out of office. That's one possibility.

The second possibility is they don't really believe abortion is murder. It's just something that they say when it's convenient in order to raise money. And it is becoming extremely obvious the more that this Herschel Walker thing goes. Let's now talk about the polling in that race. So I have new polling from the Herschel Walker, Raphael Warnock race. But what I want to make sure everybody knows is that this polling is from before the abortion scandal. OK, so it's we don't yet know the effect of the abortion scandal, but there is some good news based on new polling. There's a Fox News poll that now is part of the mix. And I know people say Fox News, Fox News polling is actually fine. It's a totally fine pollster. On average, Raphael Warnock is now ahead of Herschel Walker by one point three points.

Now, again, important caveats. All of this polling is from before the abortion scandal, and I'm calling it that. I don't believe abortion is a scandal, but it's the abortion scandal, meaning Herschel Walker for a year campaigning on abortion is the absolute worst thing in the world now credibly accused of having paid for a woman's abortion after urging her to get that abortion. So the polling is from before that scandal. We don't know yet how that scandal will affect the polling. And number two, this is too tiny a lead to really bank on.

Right. So up until a few days ago, Walker was up by like under one point. Now Warnock is up by a little over a point. This is all way too small a lead to assume anything one way or the other. Everyone must vote. I hope that you're registered in Georgia and I hope that you plan to vote because this is you know, we talk about what are the most important Senate races on which this election could could hinge. Control of the Senate could hinge. Pennsylvania is at the top of the list, but Georgia is close as well.

Five thirty eight has one of these sort of I don't know what you call it, forecasts. I think they call it they They are calling the Georgia Senate election a toss up, but it is swinging more and more in Warnock's favor. Yesterday they had it at a fifty four percent chance that Warnock wins. Now, 538 has it at a fifty five percent chance that Warnock wins. Now, that's that's basically a coin flip, right? If you get to flip 100 coins and one guy wins 55 and the other, you know, it's had 55 times entails 45. That's very, very close to a toss up. And as you can see, there has been a little bit of a bump recently for Warnock, but really not much. So we'll see what the effect of the abortion scandal is. But don't think for a second that staying home in this one is a good idea because control

of the Senate could hinge on it. Let's hope that Warnock grabs a couple of points thanks to this abortion related Herschel Walker scandal. All right. What? Just one more one more Herschel Walker clip for today. It's totally unrelated to the Walker scandal. All right. What? Just one more. One more Herschel Walker clip for today. It's totally unrelated to the abortion scandal. I just want to let you all know that Herschel Walker has now jumped on the electric vehicle tirades, I think is what we're calling them.

Marjorie Taylor Greene has been blasting electric vehicles while understanding very little about it. Trump has been attacking electric vehicles to some degree. Here is Herschel Walker visibly confused about electric vehicles, what they are, how they work. And this is now a theme among Republicans. They're very, very angry about something they don't really understand. You know, they're talking about an electric car, right? Solar panels. It's like right now, solar panels. I want to afford groceries. I want to afford eggs and milk. You're talking about me getting solar panels, giving me a tax credit to buy an electric car. That's cost more than my house. So I'm putting a solar panel on my roof of

my house, on the roof of my car. Oh, and that's what I'm living in. I said, let's get down to the true facts. The true facts are. This is not the new normal for. Right. This is this is definitely not. I hope that candidates like Herschel Walker are not the new normal. Now, oftentimes I'll look online at different, you know, discussions about electric vehicles and the exact same stuff that Herschel Walker is saying here. It's all confused. It's gobbledygook. It doesn't make any sense. It's the same stuff that many of the anti electric vehicle people say in their online forums. They're tapping out these angry messages furiously. It's the exact same stuff that many of the anti-electric vehicle people email me about. OK, it might not hurt him at all in the polls because a lot of the people already supporting him believe all the same stuff

that he's saying. Oh, they want to force these expensive vehicles on us. You've got to take it point by point on price. The mini SC electric and the Nissan Leaf are under thirty thousand dollars. The Chevy Bolt and the Mazda MX 30 are just over thirty thousand dollars as new vehicles use. They are even less. You will save on gas. So some of the cost now is made up for later as you don't have to pay for the gas that they say is so overpriced and expensive in terms of the cars cost more than houses. I'm aware of houses in some parts of the country that are like 30 grand. I recently became aware that there are thirty thousand dollar houses, but Herschel Walker has a multimillion dollar mansion.

And so the electric vehicles are definitely not more than his house. That's for sure. Now, there are real problems with electric vehicles to be solved. There's real problems with internal combustion engine vehicles as well. We could be working on solving the problems with electric vehicles rather than dealing with these very silly and uninformed attacks. Well, there's not enough charging stations. All right. Well, Joe Biden's trying to work on that and just put forward a bunch of money in the infrastructure bill to build more charging stations. Electric vehicles don't fix the issue of just too many

individual people driving around in cars. We would be much better off with maybe more work from home combined with better funding public transit. And you just get cars off the road. Great. An electric vehicle is better than an internal combustion engine. But it would be better for that person not to be driving around in an individual vehicle anyway. Well, but Republicans are against funding public transit, the material intensity and the waste and the need for so-called conflict minerals for electric vehicles and batteries. What do we do with the batteries after their useful life is over? There are real issues here, like with just about anything that exists on our planet. They will improve with time,

but they will improve much more quickly if instead of fighting idiotic statements about electric vehicles like the ones we've heard from Herschel Walker and Marjorie Taylor Greene and others, if we would actually spend time dealing with the problems better than internal combustion engine, of course, can it improve even further? Yes. But these Republicans are actively trying to sabotage it. They really are horrible. All of the clips I've played for you in these first three segments, But these Republicans are actively trying to sabotage it. They really are horrible. All of the clips I've played for you in these first three segments, you can watch them on our Instagram at David Pakman show and you can react.

Let me know what you think about the anti E.V. nonsense by finding me on Twitter at Deepak. Right now, many of us are asking ourselves, what's the best way to help the people affected by the recent hurricanes? And the truth is, giving them cash is one of the best things you can do because cash is so cost effective. When you give families cash, you're also empowering them to choose for themselves how to best improve their situation. And I've talked before about our sponsor, Give Directly. Give Directly is a

nonprofit that just lets donors like you send cash directly to families who need it the most. Give Directly is a great organization I've been following for years. A lot of their focus is on impoverished families in Africa. But right now, Give Directly is also allowing you to send cash directly to families impacted by hurricanes Ian and Fiona. During Hurricane Ian, more than two and a half million people were ordered to leave their homes. Expenses are rising. They need food, shelter, transportation. Hurricane Fiona hit Puerto Rico on September 18th. More than 12000 people displaced. The island is still in a state of emergency and people need help. Visit give directly dot org slash Pacman

to learn more and send money directly to someone who needs it. Use the link in the podcast notes. One of the best things about being an independent show is that I can pick advertising partners that share our values and our sponsor, Sunset Lake CBD, grows the highest quality CBD you can find anywhere. And it's an awesome company. It's a hemp farm outside Burlington, Vermont. I love Burlington that uses sustainable farming practices and is majority owned by its employees. Last year, Sunset Lake CBD donated over sixty thousand dollars to drug decriminalization, animal shelters, public radio stations, union strike funds, nature conservation, food shelves and refugee resettlement organizations. I really enjoy The David Pakman Show David Pakman dot com and promo code Pacman gets you 20 percent off everything.

The info is in the podcast notes. All right. Some extraordinarily explosive new allegations that have surfaced in the last 24 hours regarding the former guy, that guy, the orange menace, Mango Mussolini, whatever. Right. You know, the guy I'm talking about. The first is that failed former President Donald Trump asked his lawyer to lie to the government for him.

And this is just an unbelievable story. Best Levin from Vanity Fair reporting. Surprise. Trump, a pathological liar, reportedly asked his lawyer to lie to the government about his classified document cash. The ex-president wanted his lawyer to say he the government about his classified document cash. The ex-president wanted his lawyer to say he'd returned everything in February, which was obviously not the case. This relates directly to the other Trump lawyer, Christina Bob, who eventually did make the claim that everything was returned. It was a lie. And as I told you on,

I believe, Monday, she has now lawyered up MAGA, making attorneys get attorneys. Best Levin writes in quoting The Washington Post, The Washington Post reports that in early twenty two, the ex president asked Alex Cannon, an attorney who'd worked for both the Trump Organization and the Trump campaign, to tell the National Archives and Records Administration that all materials requested by the agency had been turned over, despite the fact that Trump was still in possession of thousands more government documents. Now, another thing we learned yesterday is Trump personally packed a bunch of those documents. But we will get to that.

But the point is, Trump knew the documents hadn't been returned because he had them. OK, according to The Post, Cannon, who had, quote, facilitated the January transfer of 15 boxes of presidential records from Mar-a-Lago to the National Archives after archives officials agitated for more than a year to get all original presidential records, did not feel comfortable making such a claim. In other words, it was a lie. He reportedly told people he didn't know if all the requested material had been returned and quote.

Other Trump advisers also encouraged Cannon not to make such a definitive statement. Did Cannon hesitate because he was aware of the fact Trump had a long history of lying about everything all the time. Who is to say can and didn't respond to the post's request for a comment? So think about how absurd this story has gotten. We still don't really know the motive for why Donald Trump kept these top secret and other documents. We don't know where the ones that are still missing to

this day went. That's another story. There's a dozen layers to this. We have the picture of the folders for top secret and otherwise restricted documents, which were empty when the FBI found them. Obviously, Donald Trump didn't take empty folders, meaning the documents are somewhere and we don't know where are they at Bedminster, another one of Donald Trump's clubs, golf clubs, whatever you want to call them. We don't know. We see. But the point is, not only do we not know the whereabouts of some of those documents, we still don't really know the motive for taking them because the stories we've been told don't make any sense. Trump wanted it for his library. He never talks about his library. He doesn't care about his library. Trump wanted

them to read. Trump doesn't read. Trump wanted them in order to write his memoirs. Trump doesn't write. There's no plausible, innocent reason why he would want those. And then you get into the not so innocent reasons, which include selling them or whatever the case may be. The other aspect to this is that, remember, the Justice Department thought the situation was serious enough to conduct a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. Now, this isn't a criticism of that decision. This is just a reminder that if the Justice Department felt this was that serious, there may have been reason they believed something was about to happen with these documents. If the impetus for the search warrant was less about we're imminently charging Trump, but more about we have reason to believe he's about to do something with these documents, then that would be a whole other

area of exploration. But then there's Trump wanted his lawyer to lie. Trump knew the documents hadn't been returned and he instructed his lawyer to lie. His lawyer didn't do it. Alex Cannon. Eventually, Christina Bob, another lawyer, was willing to make that claim on paper, and she has now obtained a lawyer and is willing to cooperate with the Department of Justice. And she herself is facing possible legal trouble. And then the next part of this is something else we learned yesterday. Trump personally packed a stash of documents to take to his house. This next story makes yesterday's clip from the interview that Donald Trump did with Maggie Haberman even more extreme.

And we're going to get to that in a moment. Donald Trump is now reported to have personally packed a stash of documents returned from Mar-a-Lago, and he kept hundreds more until the FBI sees them. Remember all these questions about, oh, did Trump know? Did Trump do it himself? Of course not. Of course not. The new report per The Washington Post is that Donald Trump personally packed 15 boxes of material returned to NARA in January. He trialed but tried but failed to get a lawyer to claim that was all he had. That's the previous story about Alex Cannon. Many secret and classified records were later found in an August FBI raid at Mar-a-Lago. Remember that yesterday we played

a clip for you, which I'm going to play again right now as a reminder of Donald Trump. It's a recording of Donald Trump talking to the New York of the New York Times, Maggie Haberman, where the question of documents came up. Lo and behold, it turns out Trump was lying. That you had with Donald Trump, where you brought up the correspondence he had with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, the New York Times released audio of this. Now we have audio of this conversation, so let's listen. Did you leave the White House with anything in particular? Are there any memento documents you took with you?

Anything of note? Nothing of great urgency. Okay. I have great things there. You know, the letters, the Kim Jong-un Jong Un letters and many of them, you were able to take those with you. What's happening now? I think that has the I think that's in the archives, but most of it is in the.

Trump knew when he made that claim that he had taken a bunch of stuff. And the report now is he did it in himself. He did it himself. And this puts an entire new light on this entire story. Took him himself, allegedly told his lawyer to lie about it. And this is the pattern looking for someone else to take the fall. Now, Alex Cannon made the made the right decision, made the right decision to not sign off and say everything's been returned. He suspected seemingly that Donald Trump was full of you know what? Christina Bob then signed off on the documents, swearing we did a sweep. We know it's all gone from Mar-a-Lago.

We don't have any more documents. Now she has had to hire a lawyer. And this last detail, because remember, all along at the end of the day, whether the documents were planted or whether they were there or whatever, Eric Trump and others insisted Trump doesn't personally pack. He's a billionaire. He's the president. He's not personally stuffing documents into a box. The new report from The Washington Post is that that is exactly what Donald Trump did. And it certainly removes any specter of plausible deniability. Let's now see what the latest claim is from Trump himself.

Donald Trump gave a very strange interview to a guy named Joe Pags. I don't know who Joe Pags is, but he really likes Trump. And during this interview, Donald Trump went back to the story of the FBI might have planted the documents to frame me or they might have stolen documents. Wait, the FBI planted or they stole, they brought in or they took out. And if that's the case, how did you know to telepathically declassify the very documents that the FBI planted? None of it makes any sense. But Trump is back on this train once again. And they wouldn't let us have lawyers there. They wouldn't let us have any representation. So who knows what was planted?

Who knows what was put in there? Who knows what was taken out? And you know, if you look at the group, it's largely radical left run narrow. And you look at it. It's all there. They're quite frankly, communists, folks. This was generally speaking, a really wild interview. Trump is doing very minor shows by phone, not even taking the time to get in front of

a video camera. That's the theme. Desperation to be interviewed anywhere that will have him. He's welcome on this program anytime, by the way. Let's listen to a little bit more of this Joe Paggs interview. And you'll notice it's not exactly hard hitting. You're beyond very good. So I was a television news anchor in Michigan for eight years. I was on the streets as a reporter. I know that very well. They love you there. And I'll never forget what you did in 2016 at about three o'clock in the morning in Grand Rapids and about 5000 people

showed up to cheer you on as you wanted to beat Hillary Clinton. Why is Michigan so important to you? Yes. Tough question, by the way. Well, I just seem to have an affinity for the state. I was given the man of the year award, Joe, years ago, like that's a lie. That's a lie. First question. First answer. That's a lie. This is old ground. Trump has repeatedly claimed that he won Michigan's Man of the Year Award. The award does not exist.

Seven seconds in. Trump has already told a lie 11 or 12 years ago, and I used to tell them, why are you countries like Mexico to take your cars, your automobile manufacturing business away? And I don't know, I've always felt that Michigan just let so much get away. It's got such assets and it just lets so much go away. I mean, anyway, so it's just lies and lies and lies. Let's just jump, you know, randomly into the middle of the interview just to get a little bit more of the flavor. Mr. President, the only time we found out anything that may or may not have been at Mar-a-Lago was after they took it and started leaking it out. So what do you think the game

is here? You know what you see? Hard hitting. No, like, why did you have the documents? It is very interesting. Nobody ever heard any leaks or anything, any problems. And then all of a sudden when they take it out and they put it into NARA or wherever they have it, all of a sudden things started leaking out. The documents are it's all leaking everywhere. So a very strange interview riddled with lies as usual. And the theme is nobody's even having Trump on in terms of the serious network. It's Joe Pags and Real America's Voice and Right Side Broadcasting, Wild Times. And just imagine what's going to happen over the next week as all of these different legal issues come to a head. We'll take a quick break

and be back with Jesse Singer right after this. The science tells us that one of the best ways to get consistent deep sleep is lowering your core body temperature. When your body stays cooler at get a free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, free, by keeping you cooler at night. There are three different chili sleep systems. There's the ruler, the cube and the new dock pro with double the cooling power. All three systems are water based temperature controlled mattress toppers that fit over your existing mattress to provide you with

your ideal sleep temperature. You can go as cool as fifty five degrees. You can go really hot if you want. I keep mine at 60. Beautiful temperature for me. Don't wake up hot and sweaty. Chili sleep keeps me asleep all night. It feels great. I didn't know it was possible to love sleeping even more than I already did. Go to sleep dot me slash Pacman to learn more and get 25 percent off your new chili sleep system.

Click on our chili sleep link in the podcast notes to start staying cool at night. the exact nutrition of all of my meals. But our sponsor, Athletic Greens, just makes it easy to make sure I'm getting the nutrients I want. I've been using it for almost a year now, and it's great. AG1 by Athletic Greens is a delicious plant based blend of 75 high quality vitamins, minerals and probiotics from whole food sources. If I have just one small scoop of AG one a day, I know I'm getting the nutrition and nutrients that I want that support all of the things that are important to me. The only alternative would be to take 20 different vitamin pills and things every day. I'm not doing that. I don't want to do that. AG one is super tasty. You can put it in a smoothie. I drink it straight.

Achieving good nutrition and feeling your best does not have to be complicated. You can make age one part of your daily routine the way I have done. When you go to athletic greens dot com slash Pacman, you will get a one year supply of vitamin D and five free travel packs. That's athletic greens dot com slash Pacman for a one year supply of vitamin D. The link is in the podcast notes. Today, I'm going to be speaking with Jesse Singer, who is a journalist and also author of the book. There are no accidents, the deadly rise of injury and disaster. Who profits and pay and who pays the price? Jesse, great to have you on.

I really appreciate it. Thank you so much for having me, David. So you know, in the context of these, I'll start with something kind of micro and then we'll go from there. There's often these stories of, oh, there was an accident with a gun. Someone was shot. It was an accident. A guy accidentally shot his daughter while cleaning

the gun or something like this. And we often will talk about on the show where, OK, yes, we sort of understand socially what the term accident means under the law. This is often called the negligent discharge of a firearm. And sometimes it is something that people are charged with and it's considered a crime, at least in theory. But the term accident sometimes puts like a very particular spin, as it may be, on our understanding of sort of like what happened. You talk about this at the corporate and the industrial and other levels. Talk a little bit about what does it mean for something to be an accident in the context of law and

our understanding of what took place to just kind of get us into the discussion? Yeah, I mean, it's a really tricky term in that sense, because, you know, it means so many different things to so many different people and then has this specific legal definition of the line between intentional violence and maybe an act of God, you know, someone who dies during a hurricane, for example, totally out of our control. And it is a way of, I found in the book, absolving certain people when things go wrong and punishing others, you know, and so we see really different outcomes depending on who's shot in the case of an accidental discharge, you know, who the victim is, and whose gun it was, and whether or not we

want to put blame on them as a society. And this even breaks down to the smallest levels. Like if you look at people being killed by drivers in like jaywalking crashes, um, um, or like drunk, drunk driving crashes in particular, um, where someone's, you know, struck by a driver, the race of the victim correlates with sentence length. So that if the person struck by a drunk crossing the street by a drunk driver is black, the sentence length of the driver is significantly lower. Um, so there isn't an area of accidental, so-called accidental death, where, you know, we're not seeing huge variations in how the term is understood to, you know, kind of equate for different punishments. And then since so many

of these things are not individual acts of human error, but really predictable, preventable, systemic causes. We see the least culpability when it comes to the actual like corporate perpetrators of these crimes, you know, and like how the make and model of a gun and the design of a gun and the way that the gun has not been regulated is actually the real problem here, rather than whether or not it went off when you were cleaning it. You know, there's this book I read a few months ago. I think it's it must be about 20 years old now. It's called Normal Accidents by a guy named Charles Perot, I think is the pronunciation

of his last name. And in the book, he talks about a lot of different areas. He talks about aircraft accidents. He talks about nuclear heat to all these different areas. He talks about aircraft accidents. He talks about nuclear. He did all these different areas. And he kind of distinguishes what we might call like systemic accidents, which are in a sense predictable, where we might say here is a system. Here are the tolerances. Here are the ways the system can fail. And we can sort of make a prediction as to how common these things will be. And it's not going to be zero.

Almost certainly it's not going to be zero. And one of the really interesting things he writes about in the book is that as you add mechanisms to try to make a system more safe, the added complexity and the fact that you now have systems interacting can actually keep the odds of an accident so-called roughly the same or sometimes even even kind of increase them. We know that to some degree these accidents are predictable in systems because actuaries in insurance, part of their job is to sort of like put a monetary value and a number on how likely are some of these things to happen on this on the issue of predictability and preventable when it comes to industrial type stuff. We often will learn after

the fact that industry knew about a lot of these risks very specifically, and they either minimized it, covered it up, whatever the case may be. What are the kind of counter pressures that the public can sort of exert or the tools that exist not after the fact to do a class action lawsuit or a mass tort, but in the lead up to these systems sometimes failing? And what, as you write about also are predictable ways? Absolutely. Yeah. Perot is like kind of one of the classics of this field who really like gave us a framework for understanding. And one of the things I try to do in the accident is a thing that exists in four walls, a nuclear power plant, an oil tanker, this contained thing. But something I try and do is blow out that theory to look at the much larger systems we have that correlate directly

to accidents. And that's income inequality. That's racism. That's corporate power and a lack of union power. You know, because we talk about these things as random. And if it was true, you know, then an injury related death would be randomly distributed across the country. But it isn't true. People of color, people living in poverty are most at risk. And what we see is that, you know, most people who die in accidents don't die in Charles Perrault's accidents, you know, nuclear meltdown. Right.

Now, ones and twos every day on our roads, in our homes and in our workplaces. And so to answer like what the solution is, at the core of it is that these accidents where people of color and people living in poverty are most at risk are accidents where policy and infrastructure make the difference between life and death. So the safety of our homes, the safety of our roads, the safety of our workplaces. And that's where we see these huge disparities in accidental deaths. So to name one, Black people die in house fires at twice the rate of white people. Indigenous people are struck by cars at twice the rate of white people. So these aren't, you know, you know, matters of individual error. These are matters of different conditions that different people are facing, whether or not your apartment is a fire

trap and whether or not your government is regulating your apartment and holding your landlord to account. And so the big picture answer is that, you know, regulating corporate power and forcing policy to protect everyone universally, primarily through government regulation and access to the social safety net, will reduce the way that risk is currently unequally distributed across the U.S.. It seems there's also sort of like a psychological component. Like if we think about drug overdoses, as an example, recently at his rallies, Donald Trump has been too much praise from the audience talking

about we should do the death penalty for drug dealers. They do it in China. Quick trial, 100 percent conviction rate, you know, all sorts of authoritarian dystopian nightmares. But the crowd loves it and they cheer. And there is something about when there's an individual, here's the guy on the corner who gave me the drugs versus here's a pharmaceutical company that uses sales reps to encourage the over prescription, which then you get from a doctor filled by a pharmacist. The personal blame seems much easier psychologically when it's the guy on the corner to some degree. And that's probably much to the delight of the big pharma companies

and their lobbyists. Right. Like that's by that's a feature for them. Yeah, absolutely. And I think you often see, you know, today from pharma companies, but throughout the history of accidental death, whenever there's a rise in one specific type of accidental death, you see corporations pushing these bad people stories. And so you see it directly. I'm going to quote one of the Purdue Pharma leaders who was like, the problem here early in the opioid epidemic is the criminal addicts, the abusers. They're the problem. Not how we're marketing an addictive drug is non-addictive, but these individuals. And that is deeply comforting for us as people. We are comforted and feel permitted to move on from what seems like random tragedy when we can find a bad guy.

Because it's a way for us all to say, I wouldn't make those decisions. I'm not like that person. That person who died, that person who hurt someone, I'm nothing like them because they're bad. And when we define them as bad, we can see ourselves as good, as smarter,, you know, on the little ones, like a traffic crash or, you know, a fire where a kid was playing with matches, finding the bad person, you know, blaming the parent, blaming the jaywalking pedestrian is a way for us all to say, it can't happen to me. I'd make better decisions. Um, and we see throughout the history of accidental death, even all the way back to the industrial revolution, you know, when workers were dying in untold numbers in factories and coal mines, we see industrialists pushing this idea of the accident prone worker and this caricature and stereotype of a drunk immigrant who doesn't speak English, sloppy worker that was really the cause of this massive accidental death toll. And in fact, it was actually that the factories and the coal mines were incredibly dangerous. And we know this because when we start to regulate those factories and coal mines, accidental

death on the job plummets. Yes. So speaking of that, I mean, I think it's not at all a one. It's an all of the above for me, not a one of these things. We have ways in which regulation can make things safer, whatever it is those things we're talking about are. There's also those who say to different degrees, technology is going to dramatically improve these things as we learn more about how to design roads, self-driving cars. You have all of these ideas that at some point, technology is going to make a lot of things much safer technology in factories that is going to

reduce injury, for example. The counter to that seems to be that the new technology allows the limits to be pushed for profit again. So like now you have sort of like the same amount of safety, but there's more profit and more productivity. And so you have to know kind of how to counterbalance that. But to what degree is it fair to believe that technology will be a factor in making the world safer? You know, so this is this is an old story, and there's always been huge advances in technology that have reduced the accidental death toll, but only under one condition, which is when they are regulated. And so if you look at technology like seatbelts, airbags,

collapsible steering columns, these were in the car, huge advances in safety, but only once they were regulated into every American automobile. And when they're not, when you have government regulatory agencies that are afraid to regulate like NHTSA is today, we get into a situation where rich people survive and poor people die. So like fully autonomous driverless cars are a way off. But there's a wealth of life-saving technology that already exists, is tested and proven, automatic emergency braking, intelligent assist speed governors that are regulated in other countries where accidental death is far lower. But we don't mandate them here. Cars are underregulated, so only the rich are protected. The rich pay for features that could save everyone's life if the government forced it. And we see the same thing as far back as the Industrial Revolution. There were technologies, a few companies were putting them forth, but the overall death rates weren't falling

because the government wasn't forcing corporations to account. And when that happened, we saw results. Last thing I want to talk about. Inevitably, one could imagine this kind of caricature of the overregulated nanny state where we take everything you and I are talking about to the absolute extreme. And, you know, science fiction I are talking about to the absolute extreme. And you know, science fiction movies are made about it and it's all very, very scary. And to some degree, I'm like sort of joking about it. But also, I think even people who are in favor of a stronger regulatory infrastructure would concede that there's some limit at which we say, well, here are some choices we simply

allow people to make. But we want to limit the collateral damage that might be associated with those choices. So it's really a choice that only affects the person making the decision. How do we start to think about where on the slider we sort of put that pin between the idea of freedom and safety? Or do you think that that is not even a valid spectrum for discussion? I think it is a notably new spectrum to discussion that I think we spend a little too

much time on. We're talking about more than 200000 people every year in the U.S. that are dying completely preventable deaths. And those numbers are infinitely lower in other wealthy countries. The rate of accidental death is so much higher here because we have this rhetorical conversation about freedom. But when it comes down to it, I think the nanny state is wonderful if you don't want to die an early death. I mean, what's a nanny? It's someone that rich people pay to protect their children from death. We should all have that. Americans will respond to what our leaders promote. This country did not start to reject the protections of a benevolent government like on its own. It's a product of corporate propaganda sold through the mouthpiece of anti-government, anti-regulatory presidents.

And that's been happening for decades. I don't think Americans want to die horrible, painful, early deaths in the name of freedom. We just need politicians brave enough to protect people and to tell a better story than this anti-government, anti-regulatory propaganda that we've been sold. Yeah. Crying about a nanny state often is a way to kind of invalidate conversations about just reasonable regulations that that should exist. It's sort of a way to kind of clamp down on debates. It's kind of similar to I'm offended. I'm oh, well, OK, the conversation's over then. I guess it's a similar cudgel in a sense.

Yeah, absolutely. And it leaves us in this place where people die incredibly preventable deaths every day in ones and twos. And we all tell a story about personal responsibility and the fact that maybe they were bad people, even though they're simply protectable. We're not going to fix human error. We're not going to make people perfect. But there are so many ways we could protect them from harm that we are disregarding for a conversation about freedom in the nanny state and the need for personal responsibility. Speaker 1 Jessee, last thing, lowest hanging fruit in terms of preventable death that could be improved relatively simply or easily.

We know what to do. What are the areas that people may or may not know about where the numbers are high and could be lowered dramatically. Speaker 1 It's true in every area of accidental death by simply empowering our regulatory agencies so people are better protected and reviving the social safety net so people can afford to better protect themselves, you know, not drive an old car, take the most dangerous job, live in a firetrap apartment. And because accidental death is so broad, there are a million ways to do it. In your community, you can advocate for traffic calming and public transit expansions because you're far less likely to die or to kill someone if you're

riding the bus than you are if you're in your own car. You can fight for safe injection sites and the free distribution of naloxone, which directly dramatically reduces accidental overdose deaths. Pushing for ADA accessibility, like ramps and grab bars in your workplace and in your apartment building is going to reduce accidental death. Making sure fire safety regulations are on the books and enforced, sprinklers, self-closing doors, all this stuff. It doesn't reduce the likelihood of you making a mistake or a kid playing with fire or someone not being a distracted driver just reduces the likelihood that it's going to kill anyone. It just protects people. We have been talking with Jesse Singer, who is a journalist and also author of the book. There are no accidents,

the deadly rise of injury and disaster, Who profits and who pays the price? Jesse, really appreciate your time today. Thanks so much for having me, David. One of our sponsors is all form the easiest way to design your own custom sofa. I have one from all form. Unlike other companies, all form lets you choose the fabric, the size, the shape, color, even the color of the legs. I have not one but two all form sofas. I've had them for years. They look good as new. Definitely the most comfortable furniture I own. And it gets even cooler because all form sofas are completely modular. You can buy a sofa and if you move, you can adapt it to the new space by adding on to it or rearranging its elements. That is definitely not something you get from your typical sofa

company. All form has everything from eight piece sectionals to love seats and armchairs. Everything is made in the USA using premium materials. All form makes sure that assembly I'm David Pakman, the David Pakman orders at all form dot com slash Pacman. That's A.L.L.F.O.R.M. dot com slash Pacman. The link is in the podcast notes. Our sponsor, Magic Spoon, is the breakfast cereal that tastes amazing, but without the sugar, carbs and the crazy ingredients. Magic Spoon has taken your favorite childhood cereals and brilliantly transformed them into something you can feel good about eating because each serving has zero grams of sugar under five net carbs and is packed with 13 grams of protein. So it'll work for keto and low carb, but it's really perfect for anyone who wants the occasional sweet, crunchy treat without

the sugar. Their portfolio of eight plus unique, delicious flavors allow you to never get bored. My favorite is maple waffle, but they've got the classics like cocoa, fruity, frosted, also cinnamon roll, blueberry muffin. Our entire team has been eating magic spoon for years. We love it. But if you don't, they send you all your money back. It's really easy. Magic Spoon has been supporting the David

Pakman show for a long time. They always give my audience five dollars off when you go to magic spoon dot com slash Pakman and use the code Pakman. You can just tap the link in the podcast notes. I've told you before that Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg is really, really good when he appears on right wing media and when he's responding to his right wing critics. Well, Pete Buttigieg decimated the homophobic comment of Marjorie Taylor Greene from over the weekend. Let's start with her comment. Now, I you could check out my live stream from over the weekend from the Trump rally. I saw Marjorie Taylor Greene talks about Pete Buttigieg without even seeing the clip. I assumed and I know that sometimes when you assume you end up made made a fool of.

But I assumed that if Marjorie is talking about Pete, it's probably homophobic. It just the odds are if you've got if I had to bet, I would say if Marjorie Taylor Greene is talking about Pete Buttigieg, there's probably some homophobic element to what she says. And indeed, there was indeed there was. Here is what Marjorie said about the secretary of transportation. More American than the roar of a V8 engine under the hood of a Ford Mustang or Chevy Camaro. An incredible feel of all that horsepower. But Democrats like Pete Buttigieg want to emasculate the way we drive.

Right. Right. Of course, the gay secretary of transportation wants to emasculate the way people drive. Now, what does that mean? Emasculate the way people drive? I don't know, but it probably has something to do with electric vehicles, right? And force all of you to rely on electric vehicles after they shut down your great Michigan auto industry. And by the way, many Michigan based automakers are making electric vehicles, making that comment particularly stupid. Let's go now to Pete Buttigieg's response.

He appeared on Fox News with Neil Cavuto. He was asked about these comments and his answer is pretty funny. First, you've been pushing for this. You've been very consistent with that. But Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia Republican at a rally in Michigan, said this past weekend that Mr. Buttigieg is trying to emasculate the way we drive by, as she goes on to explain, by supporting environmentally friendly transportation. But what did you think of her wording? He's trying to make everybody feminine by making us drive really cool, fast cars that

you don't need to gas up and can charge in your driveway. It's really, really feminine of him. I literally don't even understand what that means i mean my sense of manhood is not connected to whether my vehicle is fueled by gasoline or whether it's fueled by electricity well maybe it should be pete this is a practical matter you offended by that because even people who you know share her politics didn't share that view It was a strange thing to say. You know, to be honest, there are other members of Congress that I pay more attention to when I'm thinking about opinions that really matter or ideas that are going to be critical to

engage with. I do think we need to zoom out a little bit. And I know people want to make this ideological. They want to make it political. We're talking about something like electric vehicles. We're talking about a very practical matter, which is imagine taking the issue of getting off of fossil fuels, at least at the tailpipe for the way we drive around and thinking that the issue really is about how the secretary of transportation wants to emasculate others.

And implicit in that, of course, of course, is the fact that Pete Buttigieg is a gay man. It's just unbelievable. And I know I've told the story before, but I'll remind you of it. I've experienced this. There's something about the electric cars that really triggers a lot of these right wingers. And I've described before more than a couple dozen instances where when I

go anywhere and I park in the parking lot, you know, a grocery store or not a Starbucks, of course not. But, you know, we're at places I really do go. I will often park like in the furthest spot from the front door. And I've always actually done this just because I just walk more. Right. I'll get an extra walk. I walk more to the front door and then I walk more back to my car. But also I am kind of protective of my electric vehicle and I don't want to park near people and I like to keep it far away. And a couple dozen times I will come out and there is one of these big just gas guzzling behemoth pickup trucks with a thin blue line sticker. And once it was with a Confederate flag parked right next to my car, they're intimidating

me. They're really intimidating me. And also just on the road, the pickup truck people with the with the stickers, the Trump stickers, whatever at the at a at a green light when a red light goes green, just zooming off and leaving leaving me in a cloud of black smoke probably cost them costing them a dollar in gas for that show of manhood. There's something wrong with these people. There really is. And Marjorie Taylor Green talking about a V8 Camaro and Mustang and electric vehicles being emasculating is basically

the exact same thing. Will they ever come around? Yeah, I think eventually they will, because electric cars are clearly the way things are going. So I think eventually they will come around. And some right wingers have that that that F-150 Lightning pickup truck electric is selling pretty damn well, I have to say. For those who were assuming that Lauren Boebert's reelection was a foregone conclusion, it may not be. It may not be. We have some new polling that shows it's not as bad as maybe it seems. Axios reporting Lauren Boebert's reelection in jeopardy, according to a new poll by the numbers.

Boebert received support from 47 percent of likely voters. Democrat Adam Frisch landed at forty five. This makes the race a statistical tie within the four point four plus or minus percentage point margin of error. Seven percent of voters are undecided. This is a survey from September twenty nine to October 2nd taken by Keating Research. It is a Democratic firm, but it is also one of the most historically accurate pollsters in Colorado. This is a five point swing towards Frisch. In July,

it was Boebert, 49, 42. And this is a five point swing. The big takeaway is that with Boebert under 50 percent, it means she is vulnerable to losing the race. Frisch still has a lot of work to do, but it is something now it's important to understand, as the Axios article points out, the third district in Colorado overwhelmingly favors Republicans and it is not actually considered competitive by national experts. Typically, typically, this is a situation where the undecided swing towards the Republican in that district. Five thirty eight has one of these forecasts.

It currently has it at a ninety eight percent chance of Boebert being reelected and only a two percent chance of Adam Frisch winning. Not a lot of polling in this one. It is worth voting. If you live in the third district of Colorado, I know we have viewers in that area because you've emailed me about this race vote. Do not concede. It costs you nothing to also fill out the ballot for member of Congress. And if Boebert could be defeated, it would be a major victory for Democrats. We will see. We will follow the race. Our voicemail number is two one nine two David P. And you can call that voicemail number anytime. Here is a viewer who, unfortunately, like many

of my viewers and listeners, is really confused about my view of the Democratic Party. Take a listen. I just want to know why you think the Democrats are so great. I mean, put me on a show. I don't care if you do or not. I heard this message. Explain to me how the Democrats are so great. Yeah. Higher gas prices. races. Unemployment at an all time high. I can keep naming a bunch of borders. Come on, man. Wake up. Yeah. So listen, first of all, almost nothing this guy said is true. Open borders. Border policy is almost completely unchanged from Trump to Biden. Almost completely unchanged. Record high unemployment. We have record low unemployment, record low unemployment, mid threes. We are essentially at full employment. High gas prices, gas prices are down dramatically. And really,

they have very little to do with the president of the United States. I didn't blame Trump when gas prices went up and I didn't praise Trump when gas prices went down. I didn't blame Trump when gas prices went up and I didn't praise Trump when gas prices went down. I didn't blame Biden when gas prices went up and I didn't praise Biden when gas prices went down. It really doesn't have much to do with the president at all. But maybe the most important confusion that this caller has is I don't say the Democratic Party is so great, not even a Democrat. Again, my view is that the Democratic Party is an organization whose main goal is to preserve

its own existence, preserve its own existence. I don't care about the party at all, to the extent that in any particular race, the better candidate is a Democrat. I'll vote for the Democrat. That's as far as my allegiance goes to any political party. And so this is not a show where I say vote blue no matter who or the Democratic Party is great or whatever the case may be. This is a show where I say I don't care about political party.

I'm not a member of any political party. I evaluate candidates for their policy and for their platforms. And I decide who closely or more closely aligns with me. Sometimes it really is an option of bad and less bad. And I choose the less bad option. I think most reasonable people would. And sometimes there are actual Democratic candidates that I like and I sort of willingly and gladly vote for as well. But please criticize me for things I actually say, not things you imagine. I said we have a great bonus show for you today.

We are going to talk about this wacky Dr. Oz story where experiments, research he was involved in reportedly led to the deaths of more than 300 dogs. The story is a little more complicated than the headlines make it out to be, which is why I'm glad to have the opportunity on the bonus show to discuss it. California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, who is a potential 2024 presidential contender, has signed a bill decriminalizing most jaywalking in California. Who cares? Right.

Jaywalking is actually a tool that is used to criminalize and to create a pretext for interactions between police and citizens and residents. And it's actually a really important bill. We're going to talk about why. And The Onion, the satirical publication, defends its right to parody in a very real Supreme Court brief relating to a satirist. This is also a when these folks on the right talk about free speech, they really are talking about free speech of a certain type for certain people. They claim it's about all free speech, but it's really not. This is a really interesting case actually about free speech. All of those stories and more coming up today on the bonus show.

Thank your lucky stars every day. You're not Dave Pakman. Well, I have the pleasure of hosting the bonus show every single day. You can sign up at join Pakman dot com, become a member, and we will see you on the bonus show in just a moment. Otherwise, we'll be back tomorrow with a brand new program. It's madness in Motor City. As NASCAR on Prime heads to Michigan International Speedway.

200 miles per hour feels even faster than it sounds. These white knuckle, three white thrills bring us one of the fastest tracks in the Cup Series. So strap in and stream Michigan Sunday at 1.30pm Eastern. NASCAR. It's on Prime.