The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3554 - The Lost History of Nagasaki; Democratic Spam Scandal w/ Greg Mitchell & Adam Bonica

Episode Date: August 6, 2025

It’s Wednesday and Sam is hosting solo today On today’s show: On CNBC Donald Trump told people to watch Harry “Emden” on CNN to see how great his approval ratings are. So, we checked out Harry Enten and it turns out Trump was lying, his approval ratings are barely above second term Nixon’s. On the 80th anniversary of the US dropping the atom bomb on Hiroshima, we are joined by filmmaker Greg Mitchell to discuss his new film: The Atomic Bowl: Football at Ground Zero and Nuclear Peril Today. The documentary explores a football game that US service-members played on ground zero of Nagasaki. Associate Professor of Political Science at Stanford and publisher of On Data & Democracy , Adam Bonica joins us to discuss his piece The Mothership Vortex: An Investigation Into the Firm at the Heart of the Democratic Spam Machine In the Fun Half: ICE is staging arrests for photo ops in a disgusting display of fascism. Donald Trump rambles to Joe Kernen about how migrant farm workers are born to do that kind of work.”They don’t get bad backs, if they get a bad back they die.” Andrew Cuomo goes on the Brian Lehrer Show to spread more lies as he takes credit for universal pre-k. Sen. Liz Warren excitedly supports Zohran and sees Democratic Socialism as the future of the party. But Big thinker, Bill Maher thinks that Zohran and socialism will guarantee President JD Vance. All that and more plus phone calls an IMs.   The Congress switchboard number is [phone]. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today’s sponsors DELETEME: Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to joindeleteme.com/MAJORITY and use promo code MAJORITY at checkout. NUTRAFOL:  Get $10 off your first month’s subscription + free shipping at Nutrafol.com when you use promo code TMR10 BLUELAND:  Right now, get 15% off your first order by going to Blueland.com/majority SUNSET LAKE: Right now at sunsetlakecbd.com, Use coupon code “Left Is Best” (all one word) for 20% off of your entire order. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech Check out Matt’s show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon’s show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza’s music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder – https://majorityreportradio.com  

You are listening to a free version of The Majority Report. Support this show at join the Majority Report.com and get an extra hour of content daily. The Majority Report with Sam Cedar. It is Wednesday, August 6, 2025. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five-time award-winning majority report. We are broadcasting live. steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, USA.

On the program today, Greg Mitchell, journalist, author, writer, director, on his most recent, the Atomic Bowl, football at Ground Zero, and nuclear peril today. Then Adam Bonica, associate professor of political science at Stanford and publisher of the On Data and Democracy substack on the scam fundraising by a major Democratic affiliated group. Also on the program today in a massive blow to public health, RFKG. Jr. cancels $500 million in funding for MRNA vaccines. Today is the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act. And Section 2 is on the chopping block as Texas's gerrymander is one of its cleavers. Trump says, meanwhile, that he may enlist FBI to kidnap those Texas state lawmakers and bring them back to Texas.

Speaking of which, the Trump regime meeting in a dinner at J.D. Vance's house to discuss the Epstein problem they have. This, as convicted child trafficker who enabled child rape, Jelaine Maxwell claims Trump never did anything that she saw that was concerning. Yeah. What a surprise. Thanks for telling me. You should have said so. Hey God, you have a high bar. Microsoft's cloud platform used to surveil every call and text in Gaza since 2022. Trump regime to target.

to target J.P. Morgan and Bank of America over supposed MAGA discrimination. You'll recall that interview we did with Lauren Windsor about the right going after Bank of America because of their green energy invested. Trump regime reassigns FEMA employees to ICE. And it's day two. of 3,000 Boeing workers on strike in Missouri. And lastly,

Miss USA 2025 files a restraining order against a Florida Republican congressman. All this and more on today's majority report.

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. Thanks for joining us. Emma is off today. we will uh we will get to all of those uh stories and more of course today is not only the 60th anniversary of the voting rights act we're going to have somebody on uh over the next week or two to talk about uh not just the voting rights act but more importantly relative the voting rights act is section two supreme court uh last week i think it was friday night uh took a case that is directly aimed at section two. You'll recall this is the same Supreme Court that has been dismantling

the Voting Rights Act bit by bit since 2013. Section 2 is the part of the Voting Rights Act that ensures in the wake of Jim Crow that large communities of underrepresented people black brown people often um cannot be gerrymandered out of having their will as a majority in certain districts um kept from uh essentially electing people of their preference so the idea is that you know if you gerrymandered in a certain way you could take a state that has a 40 percent black represent a black population and diminish the black vote by taking bits and pieces of that 40% and usually people are uh you know you have communities so people are living next to each other geographically uh segregated often in these areas and uh just taking bits and pieces

shoving them into other districts and preventing any black representation uh in those districts and uh section two is on the chopping block we will get to that over the next uh week or two but it's an important thing to keep in mind because that's what's happening in texas the redistricting would strip the ability of latinos to exercise their political power commensurate with the size of their population and not just latinos but also uh black people more on that later in the meantime you'll recall yesterday we played a clip of donald trump on squawk box he's getting nervous i think because of the jobs numbers and somehow his magic tariffs and his immigration policies are not working the way that he's been told or he is under the

impression they're going to work or maybe he doesn't care but we are starting to see signs of stagflation job losses and a lack of productivity the GDP shrinking so he was on squawk box yesterday and you'll recall he claimed that his approval rating is at 70 percent which would be very astonishing. You'll recall. Publicans, I have a 94 and 95%. No, I'm talking about generally. I have it. Let me put it this way. There was a gentleman on Harry Emden yesterday on CNN, and he went crazy over how well Trump was doing. Now, you know, you don't put that on because I think CBS is a shade.

Actually, CNN's a shade better than NBC. I think NBC is probably the worst of them all. But if you check CNN tomorrow, watch Harry Emden, and you'll see you about the numbers. But that's okay. We have to defend ourselves. Okay. So we decided today is tomorrow. And we decided to check in with Harry Emden. And after not being able to find Harry Emden, we ended up settling on Harry Enton.

Listen, was the president correct? about the polling, though? No, I don't think the president was correct. You know, I give him a fair shake. I don't give him a positive spin. Look, he is not at the highest point he's ever been. Take a look at his net approval rating where it is right now. It's negative.

He's underwater, right? You compare that to where he was at the beginning of this term. He was six points above water. Now he's nine points below water. If we are comparing him to other presidents at this point, in their presidencies, he is the second lowest on record, compared only to himself who does worse. If we're comparing him to other second terms, he's certainly in the bottom of the list, not nearly all the way at the bottom. Richard Nixon

was at a worse position at this point. But when you're comparing yourself to Richard Nixon, and you're saying that you're doing better than Richard Nixon in your second term, that's not exactly a good position to be in. Now, what I find a little bit annoying about this is that the shorter answer is, no, he completely lied. He's not anywhere close to 70% approval rating. He's closer to 30% approval rating than he is 70%. He's at something like, I don't know, 43% approval rating. I wonder if they're a little bit nervous in being that explicit.

But the short answer is no, of course. Trump completely lied. And what's fascinating is he lied with a citation that wasn't, it's not like you have to go, it's not like you have to get a J-store, you know, registration. library exactly then just turn on your stupid TV and of course they're talking about

the next day I just wonder if he doesn't if they like as soon as the poll comes up they run to cover the top where it says approval and disapproval and they just think it's the opposite watch Harry Emden

but no I said Harry Emden it's not Harry Enton I think honestly at CNN they're probably like three days away from changing his name to Harry Menden just so that they don't get in trouble with Trump all right in a moment we're going to be talking to Greg Mitchell he has directed multiple movies on our documentaries I should say on on the on the

the dropping of bombs on Nagasaki in Hiroshima and specifically the way the U.S. government has what they have done in terms of propagandizing this and his latest is the atomic bull

and it is now playing on PBS it is today is the 80th anniversary of the bomb of Hiroshima, his documentary is about Nagasaki. That 80th anniversary is tomorrow. Is it tomorrow? No.

The ninth. I believe that's Friday. Oh, today's the sixth. Right. Three days from today. We'll be talking to him in just a moment. Just a couple words from our sponsors. Delete me.

Makes it easy and quick and safe to remove your personal data online at a time where obviously there's a lot of surveillance there's a lot of um uh scams we've lost a lot of government protections from fishing scams and whatnot and of course uh there's a little bit of political rancor in the air and uh so for many people having their personal information secure and less available and in some instance totally unavailable online is important. I have been using Delete Me probably for the last decade,

way before they became sponsors of the program. And I do that obviously because of the nature of this job. But also, I get the benefit of I get a lot less phishing scams. I'm a lot less worried about identity theft. Here's what happens in that regard. Data brokers, as you know, maybe you don't know,

sell your information online. They'll sell your phone number. they'll sell your addresses, they'll sell your past addresses, they will sell information as to who you might be related to, who might have lived in your home. I mean, all sorts of this information is available for, I don't know, 15 bucks online. And what happens is scam artists, they buy stuff information on the dark web, then they buy, they match it up with information they can get from data brokers, then they can pull all sorts of scams on you, steal your identity, there's a lot of different nefarious things they can do is that scam now where they're

sending packages to people with a fake amazon thing and a QR code and like scan this for a discount and then it goes in and they broke it into your system um well a delete me takes care of this uh what do they do they send you monthly reports on what they scrub from uh these data broker sites because they they repopulate so you it's super easy all you do you go in you give them your your name your email address any information you want deleted and they take care of it you can take control your data keep your private life private by signing up for delete me now at a special discount for our listeners get 20% off your delete me plan when you go to join delete me dot com slash majority use the promo code majority at checkout the only way to get 20% off

go to join delete me dot com slash majority enter the code majority at checkout that's join deleteme dot com slash majority code is majority we'll of course put that in the uh youtube and podcast uh descriptions also um a couple years back notice that was thinning a little bit on top a couple years before that neutral fall had uh uh asked to sponsor the show. We didn't have anybody who was interested at the time. And I decided I wanted to try it after a couple years. And I've been using it now for a couple years.

And it's been incredibly effective. If you're dealing with any type of hair issues like thinning or shedding but feel stuck on what to try, I get it. There's a ton of products out there. And for me, I didn't want to take. drugs. That's why I gave Nutrafol a try. It is not just hype. It is physician formulated, clinically tested, and even recommended by dermatologists. Nutrifal is the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement brand. It's trusted by over one and a half million people. You can feel great about what you're putting into your body since Nutrafall hair growth

supplements are backed by peer reviewed studies and NSF content certified. It's the gold standard and third-party certification for supplements. And the thing with Nutrafol is they don't just rely on studies about the ingredients. Neutrophol clinically test their final formulations to make sure the efficacy using a variety hair measurement tools like hair counts, pull tests to assess growth, quality, shedding, and texture. Adding Neutrophol into your daily routine is simple. You can see thicker, stronger, faster-growing hair with less shedding in just three

to six months with neuterful. And for a limited time, NutraFal offering you $10 off your first month subscription in free shipping. When you go to NutraFal.com, enter the promo code TMR-10. It's all one, no spaces. It's TMR, the number 10. Find out why NutraFall is the best-selling hair growth supplement brand at NutraFol.com, spelled the N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L dot com, promo code T-M-R-10. That's NutraFal.com, promo code TMR-10.

And lastly, today's episode sponsored by Blue Land. Blue Land is fantastic. I think I am now almost totally blue-landed out. I'm looking over there because we use our, the blue land hand soap. It comes in tablets. You can use hand soap. We have, I have all the cleaning products at my house, bathroom window, and the everything cleaner. Our blue land, they come in three different color-coded plastic bottles, but they are reused bottles.

I have no more single-use plastic. I don't, I use this for. For my cleaning products, you drop a tablet in. Tablets cost like 250, very reasonable, and they're excellent at cleaning. I have the same thing for my dishwasher. I use the tablets, not the ones covered in plastic, because that plastic goes somewhere, either into the ocean or into our bodies. Same thing for my laundry, tablets.

All of this stuff works great, and the refills are really inexpensive. And I no longer am dealing with, A, microplastics, B, the big jugs of laundry detergent or dishwashing liquid that I got a lug home from the supermarket, and then take up half of my, you know, apartment space, and then have to take it to the recycling. This is all, it is so much simpler. It's so much easier. It's so much easier, save so much space, so much cleaner in many respects. Blue Land was named an EPA safer choice partner of the year. Like I say, cleaning sprays, toilet bowl, oh yeah, I got these toilet bowl bombs. Bluelands formulas are 100% microplastic free.

They're made with certified clean ingredients free from chlorine, bleach, and harsh chemicals. So you can use around your cats, your kids, your puppies. It's great. stuff. And it really does clean, I mean, absolutely no drop-off on any of the cleanings. Right now, Blue Land has a special offer for our listeners. You get 15% off your first order by going to Blueland.com slash majority. You don't want to miss this. Blueland.com slash majority for 15% off. That's Blueland.com slash majority. 15% off. Check it out. do yourself a favor get a bunch of stuff with that 15% off up front all right uh quick break

when we come back greg mitchell journalist author writer director of his most recent the atomic bowl football at ground zero and nuclear peril today Just the Yeah, and so much. Yeah. Yeah. I'm not going to be, you know. And so many, you know, I'm going to do, jill, to, you know, to, to, you know, to, the, to, to, and, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, the

We are back. Sam Cedar. Majority report, Emma Viglin off today. It is a pleasure to welcome back to the program. Greg Mitchell, journalist, author, writer, director of multiple documentaries. And his most recent, the Atomic Bowl football at Ground Zero and, nuclear apparel today um gregg welcome back to the program oh thank you always happy to be here um today is the uh 80th anniversary of hiroshima um and we're three days off from the 80th anniversary

of the bomb uh being dropped on nagasaki um and uh what it characterized for us how i mean the the thing that you focus on seems to me in terms of like you know with the with a decent sense of your body of work, at least in the context of the atom bombs, is both to reveal what's been covered up and the idea that it was covered up at the time and that history was revised almost contemporaneous, contemporaneous to the dropping of the bomb. You start with a football game. This is nuts. I mean, I had no idea about this, but a football game that was played at ground zero. Walk us through that football game and why you started there. Okay. Well, again, the bomb was dropped on August 9, 1945. The U.S. occupation of Japan began

about six weeks later. Tens of thousands of troops then went into Hiroshima and Nagasaki and began this occupation, which very few people really know much about much of the focuses on the European occupation, not much know about Japan, and certainly even fewer. know about Hiroshima Nagasaki, a huge number of people in there. And, of course, so the first part of the film talks about the soldiers arriving and the problems they faced, radiation they were still exposed to, they weren't warned very much, it was not monitored very well, and there are all sorts of, you know, conflicts with Japanese and attempts at friendship and so on and so forth.

And then in December, 1945, a military commander had the idea of having a football game in Japan with an all-star military teams. And for some reason, he decided to have it in Nagasaki, of all places. And they even cleared a field in front of a middle school where 175 students and teachers have been killed by the bond. This is like four months later. So it was a true killing field, you might say. And so they scheduled this game. And it was quite a got quite a bit of publicity at the time. It featured a Heisman award winner, Angelo Bertelli, a quarterback from Notre Dame,

and one of the top pro running backs, Bill Osmansky of the Chicago Bears. So it got a lot of press attention at the time. I go into the sort of this is the first real exploration of this game. I've got the first photos and firsthand accounts and so forth. So none of this has really come out before or very, very, very little. And it got a lot of publicity for a couple days in the U.S. press. It was dubbed the Atomic Bowl. This was back in the days when all the bowl games were played on New Year's Day.

It was what you did on New Year's Day. And so this was played on New Year's Day, 1946, and it got a lot of early publicity. and then for some reason, it got sort of lost to history. The media never printed any photos. They never returned. Nagasaki itself has gotten very little coverage over the years, but this game kind of disappeared. The players never talked about it with their children.

I talked to several of the children of players, and it really kind of disappeared in the history. So, you know, we can speculate on exactly why that was, whether they ultimately the Americans' felt shame or or not. It wasn't that important in the scheme of things how we were viewed

after the use of these two atomic bombs. And, you know, that kind of, you want to say, backclash set in later. Was the impetus to, and we should say, they had to play two-hand touch because of

both like shards of glass on the field, but also there was a sense of like there could be because maybe the, the, the, the, the radiation fall out and what, is, was the game itself a way to sort of say like, I mean, what was there rumors or, you know, the, the U.S. government had a sense of, of, of what the implications of this radiation was, not as widely known outside of that. Was this a sort of a way, was this like, I guess, like analogous to, um, I don't. I don't know, Barack Obama going and drinking Flint, drinking water and saying like, I mean, was it, was it one of those type of things? Well, it's interesting. It wasn't covered that way, but it's certainly the image, I mean, I'm sure many people at the time when they first read about it, some would have said, oh, cool.

And some of them would have said, really, they can play football there. But the fact is that soldiers have been stationed there and going in and out of ground zero and clearing the rubble and drinking the water, as many said. And already by January 1st, you know, there were many who were complaining of health effects. You know, we talked about it a bit in the film, you know, that they were suffering from, you know, teeth falling out and all sorts of skin issues and hair falling out and things like that. And then, of course, when they came back to the states, these reports continued, and ultimately there were reports of, you know, leukemia and cancer and so on and so forth. So, you know, the government denied it for many decades. They then started offering some compensation many, many years later, 50 years later. So you can't, it's not like it's, like with most things with radiation, you can't say, you know, X caused Y.

but certainly the symbolism of playing a game right at where you had just wiped out 75,000 people I guess the message could be different for different people but certainly when people hear about it today they're horrified and just to mention another kind of incident that kind of goes with it in a way it was about three months after the Atomic Bowl and again I write about this in my book and in the film the military sponsored a Miss Atomic Bomb.

That was my next question because that's... Yeah, beauty pageant in Nagasaki. I mean, Japanese women and they had Miss Atomic Bomb Beauty Pageant in Nagasaki. So, you know, there certainly doesn't sound like there was a sense of we should really turn the page and quietly go about our business here. But it does feel like, I mean, that Miss Atomic Bomb sounds to me like trying to, you know, make the the bomb feel like a friendly like a friendly thing on some level

we would call that normalizing or sane washing you might watch this film and say this is a great example of sane watching as we would call it today but yeah that I mean that happened and of course the occupation went on for a few more years and then the U.S. left and and this whole incident got lost to history.

And I, you know, I think it's, I mean, we can do four more shows just talking about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And with Nagasaki, I've always written more about them a lot of people because it's always been the forgotten bomb. And there are so many lessons and warnings from Nagasaki that aren't, you know, even beyond Hiroshima. So I was happy to be able to do a film focusing mainly on Nagasaki, which, you know, to this, date is still the, you know, the little, little explored and, you know, a little talked about. Well, what I did not know until your film, and we should say also there is a companion book as well, that Truman didn't even know that this was going to happen. How is that?

Okay, go on. How does that happen? Well, it was, I like to call the, or I hate to call, I'm not sure which, the Nagasaki bomb in the, you know, assembly line or the first automated atomic attack, because he did give an order weeks earlier for, to use the bombs as they're ready. Okay, so you had this momentous Hiroshima blast. He had a, they'd worked for weeks on it, and now how it would be announced. They would also be announcing the fact that the Manhattan Progeny invention, there was a lot to unpacking. unpacked 80 years ago today as we're speaking. And Nagasaki was like an after, it was like, you know, three days later, thanks to General Leslie Groves, who pushed, it was a super hawk, you might say,

on this head of the Manhattan Project. Thanks to him pushing, promoting, they really pushed that second bomb forward. And, you know, Nagasaki wasn't even the primary target, but that's a whole other story, I guess. So Nagasaki gets a bomb, and Truman, who's coming back from Potsdam on a ship, is surprised to learn of this. Yes, he knew we might have other bombs to drop or it might happen, but he hadn't given a specific order. In fact, Groves bragged that he didn't need Truman's okay in this. So there's evidence that Truman was surprised and that in whatever case the next day he ordered that explicit order, no more bombs would be dropped.

We had one more ready and could have been others soon. But he explicitly, and he even referred to, he didn't want to see more kids killed, as he put it. Of course, maybe 100,000 kids had already been killed in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, but he didn't want any more kids killed. So Nagasaki is, in some ways, it's always, I don't say, left a bad taste with many members of the media and historians who have embraced the Hiroshima bombing,

there's always been this kind of, well, Nagasaki, it kind of sounds like a war crime, maybe. And so let's not, let's ignore it. But there have been others like Marty Sherwin and Kurt Vonnegut, of course, called Nagasaki, next to human slavery, the worst crime of last 300 years. and others said similar things. So, and that kind of plays into the film in this, the bomb, the football game,

because there was a sense of, Nagasaki, it's a third rail, it's a raw nerve, it's, you know, it's, it's kind of nasty. So I think it is, it's worth exploring that and then bringing it to the present day. What are the lessons or what's happened since then? What, what, walk us through some of those lessons relative to Hiroshima. We should also say one other thing I found fascinating was the, the orders were that if you did not have clear vision of the target, you don't drop the bomb. They did not have clear vision of the target. they dropped the bomb, not where they had anticipated it or we're planning to.

And I think it was maybe to a mile to the, I can't, off of target. Tagasaki. Yeah. And which ultimately may have actually inadvertently saved lives. Right. But walk us through. What are the distinct lessons of Nagasaki? as opposed to Hiroshima?

Yeah, well, that's a good question. I mean, I'll just talk about distinctions of Nagasaki. One was that unlike Hiroshima, it did not have a major military base. And there were less than 500 military personnel were killed, and the rest were all civilians. So you get a little bit of that. I mean, the fact is we could, you know,

If Hiroshima showed that we could, in a way, consider civilians, you know, collateral damage or acceptable loss of life, Nagasaki really, really made that kind of a horror story. And, you know, we see the lesson today with all the... And we should say, Nagasaki, I mean, up to, I don't know, 70, 80,000 people, I don't know if we can know exactly. But, I mean, certainly no less than 50,000 people die. Yeah. Yeah, probably more than that, but that's a low end, but that's fine. But, I mean, but the, you know, so you have that, of course, we see this in Gaza today. There are people who compare images of Gaza from the air with what Nagasaki looked like.

It's really not that far off, not as limited. You don't have fallout today, radiation, things like that. But so I mean, that's one thing. You mentioned this, the bombing of Nagasaki and the cloud cover. And they went on, Nagasaki was not the primary target. It was almost like a drone attack of today's modern drone attack. It's like they sent, General Grove sent this plane off with the payload. And it got to Kukura and then decided, well, that's too much cloud cover.

So this plane or like almost drone flew on to Nagasaki. It also was covered by. clouds and they thought they might have found a small gap. So they dropped the bomb no matter what. They're going to drop the bomb or ditch it in the ocean. So they dropped the bomb. Again, something a drone might do. And as you said, it landed over a mile off target. And then the plane barely made it back to the base because of a broken fuel pump. And again, it's sort of like The crew was expendable, and the ship was, the B-29 was expendable. So again, sort of like a drone today.

It also has, in a way, has elements of AI, you know, where AI is making decisions to go ahead with this bombing run at the earliest possible time. So instead of Groves making a decision, it could have been an AI, it's going to go ahead, and this is how it's going to be carried out, is going to be carried out no matter what. And, of course, we see this warnings today about AI in our nuclear systems. So that's just a couple. There are more, even more.

But the Nagasaki bombing is, you know, it's talking. And it does have these lessons. And, you know, of course, some people feel it was justified. Okay. Have, has, has the, has the, has the, has the, is, is your sense that there has been any sort of a significant change in the perception of, of both Nagasaki and Aroshima or specifically one or the other over the past, I don't know, several decades. I mean, I know you've been writing about this topic for years in different ways. And really, I mean, you know, I think to the extent that there have been people's minds changed, I would imagine that you're one of, you know, one of the major reasons, at least out there in terms of we're pursuing the reinterpretation of this stuff.

but is it your sense that there's a people reflecting on this differently? Well, actually, it's a very timely question because just last week I was writing about a new Pew survey. Gars Pew is a very well-respected holster. And they did their first poll in a long time on this very question. And so you'll be interested in the results. Traditionally, Gallup and others who've done polls have found about maybe 53% support the bombing of Hiroshima and maybe 41 opposed it and the rest don't know enough to say anything. This Pew survey found kind of a dramatic change. So I'm roughly, I don't have the number, but it was roughly 35% supporting the bombing, 30% opposing and 30% didn't have an opinion.

and that, of course, reflects the maybe lack of information knowledge that a lot of people have now today. But it was the closest we've ever seen to an even split, and then a lot of other people, let's say, persuadable. And the other interesting thing is that the first time I've ever seen, they did a gender and age breakdown. And there's a tremendous gender gap of women who oppose the bombing and a tremendous age gap with younger people opposing it. so it's quite dramatic maybe a turning of the tide on this and so we'll see but I do think that the Hiroshima narrative is changing a bit I will add though that this poll I've never seen any poll did not specifically ask about Nagasaki they didn't say what do you think about the Rochama bombing and then what do you think about now you would have had a lot more people

would have said I don't have an opinion on the Nagasaki because I don't know hardly anything about it. But nevertheless, I've never seen it broken down with the two separate bombings. Greg Mitchell, the movie is the Atomic Bowl football at Ground Zero and nuclear apparel today. And, of course, there is also a book. We will link to both. Folks can watch the film right now on PBS's site. Is that the case?

Right. It's airing on PBS stations, but on different. nights in different places, so I can't really give a, like Ken Burns might be able to give you a date, but it's PBS.org, it's streaming, any PBS app you have on your TV or on your phone, you can find it easily. So it's streaming everywhere, and it's showing on the stations around the country, but on different dates. And we, again, we will link to that in the podcast and YouTube description. Greg,

thanks for coming on and talking to us about this. Thank you, Sam. I appreciate your interest. All right, folks. We're going to take a quick break. When we come back, we're going to be talking to Adam Bonica.

He is an associate professor of political science at Stanford, publisher of the On Data and Democracy Substack. And he did a deep dive into an enterprise called The Mothership, which has raised millions upon millions upon millions of dollars from presumably democratic donors, likely, online via

emails, you've definitely gotten emails from them. And it turns out something like, I can't even say, two cents per dollar has ended up to candidates. We'll take quick break. We'll talk to Adam Bonica right after this. We are back, Sam Cedar on the majority report. Emma Viglin is out today. I want to welcome to the program, Adam Bonica,

Associate Professor of Political Science at Stanford, publisher of On Data and Democracy Substack. We'll put a link to that, of course. Adam, am I saying your last name right? Bonica. Bonica. Okay. I always have to ask because 90% of the time I am not saying it right. Anybody's last name.

This story, I mean, it's not so much, I mean, well, walk us through. What is Mothership? Let's start with that. Okay, so Mothership is a Democratic fundraising consulting firm. It is a outgrowth of the D-Triple-C, so the Democratic, campaign, congressional campaign committee. So we're one of the big national party committees that focuses on fundraising to help Democrats win elections and congressional seats.

We should say mothership is a firm. It's an outgrowth in the sense that for that people who used to work for the D-Triple-C essentially privatized, decided they're not going to work for the D-Triple-C anymore. they're going to do what they were doing at the D-Triple-C, but they're just going to do it for themselves. For profit, yes. Yes. Yeah, and so they left the D-TCCC.

There were three former staffers there, and they founded this firm, and they took the sort of dirtiest tactics that were being used by the party at the time to fundraise, and they just turned up the knob to like 11. And early on, what they did is they started up their own pack, which was called N Citizens United. Some of you may have encountered it because they spam you all the time. And they started to use that as their first client, and they started to

build a business off of this. Fast forward, that was back in 2014 when they founded it, 2015, when Encitizens United came out. And they have been sort of in the shadows of democratic fundraising for quite some time now. And over time, they have sort of built this network of packs that have been using these tactics, like the spam tactics, to fundraise a lot of money. And most of it has either been spent on fundraising expenses or been funneled back to smother ship's strategies of the firm. So it's almost like, I'm trying to make an analogy that people would understand, but it would be, you know, I start my podcast and then I also start an adolph.

advertising business and I pay myself the advertising. I pay the advertising business 35% of what podcast does. And then also I have a temp agency that sends out producers and I pay the temp agency to send me producers. So I'm basically just, I'm dealing with myself. I've opened up all these different satellite shops around me that ultimately pay me in like I have six different revenue streams um so this is out there we should also say uh i think i can end citizens united right now uh i i read somewhere that they're they actually were like sending out an email with a poll talking about corruption uh which i thought was rather poetic um so this mothership these guys come from the the thing and i i remember that era of d triple c emailing there was

a lot of concern by activists and people sort of like in the fundraising world that this whole strategy of sending email saying like we're we're going to lose we're you know like and and every 15 minutes we're doing it all yes what there's a term for it that you use in your in your piece um like turn and burn essentially yeah yeah yeah so turn and burn it go ahead Tell us the different philosophies that you could have theoretically for fundraising before we get to the sort of really the most grotesque part, but mothership. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, I should state out up front that in terms of the fundraising strategies, the reason I started to invest, like looking into all this is because this approach to fundraising where you're essentially being deceptive, predatory, and trying to find marks who will donate to you is just.

hugely detrimental to the party's reputation. And so one of the strategies that has really taken hold among a lot of these sort of powerful fundraisers is this churn and burn strategy where you just say whatever you need to say. You make up stuff. You try to confuse people to like click on your links. You say that like there's a $800 match. These are all lies, right? These are very deceptive tactics. So that turn and burn is basically do anything you can to raise a buck. A better fundraising strategy is one where you inspire donors through having good policies or doing something courageous to donate to further the cause. And I think that's the dichotomy here, where you can think of getting people to donate to you because you're doing good things

and you're inspiring them. That's the model that should be forefront. The model right now of this churn and burn is just it is doing so much damage to trust between the party and and donors and trust between and the brand of the party now is the party and i want to make sure that we we we distinguish here between the party in terms of like and mothership with that said and then then we could talk about though the problematic sort of you know uh they would call it synergy or that that exists there but i want to i would be like It seems that the churn and burn is not as intense as it was at other periods, and that some politicians choose to use it and some don't based on that.

I mean, you know, and but if you're mothership, you don't, you don't pass policies, right? Like, you don't, you're not people, the deceit is a lot of times, where it's like Zoron Mamdani is one and, uh, you know, help support, uh, Zoran's, uh, you know, uh, uh, you know, policies by donating here. And it's really just like anybody could say that about anything, right? Like it could say, you know, um, you know, America's, uh, you could, I mean, the Zoron thing is a perfect example. They probably done that, I would say. Um, and that's the deception, right?

like the idea that somehow uh this money is going to go somehow support zoron and in fact it's not but it's not even going to support anybody that's really sort of the most scandalous thing i mean like we can have debates it seems to me about what's what's an effective email strategy and are there moments where we desperately need money to get people on the ground game And so, yes, we're going to sacrifice, you know, best long-term email practices over the next three months and do it. But I mean, that's, that's, you know, sort of debatable, arguable, I guess, you know, but the rest of it is just astonishing. Walk us through how you found out where the money was going. Yeah. So that was, I started out with the debate that you were just talking about. Like, I just thought it was not a good strategy. And so I looked into, okay, so who is sending me all these texts? Right. Like, I literally just received one right before I got on about Texas redistricting that has nothing to do with it. And so I was getting these spam texts. I was like, well, there's an identifiable set of packs that are sending it. And so I went and just started looking at those packs. So I spent a

lot of time in campaign finance data. It's sort of the area of my research. And so I started pulling on this thread of, okay, all these spam packs, where are they, like, who are they paying? What are the firms that are central to this operation? And they all led back to this one operation mothership strategies. And it was not a difficult thing to find. And so I included like all the data online, you can just sort of look it up yourself on the FEC website. It's just a very clear pattern of you just look up these packs. If someone spams you, look up the pack on the FEC and see who they're paying money to. They happen to be the sort of nexus of packs where they're doing transfers between each other. And so, for instance, Progressive Turnout Project

is one of the main ones where a lot of the other packs like Stop Republicans will send money to Progressive Turnout Project. And then Progressive Turnout is sort of like a shell game where they'll raise a bunch of money, transfer it over to another pack, and so it's harder to track. But it doesn't take that much work to just look at these patterns of transfers and these patterns of spending, and you can sort of track how much money is going back to mothership, and it's most of it. Okay. So who started these packs? Like I was not terribly savvy to how a pack can be a scam in and of itself like uh and uh years ago uh i knew a guy who uh you know uh i was sympathetic to he was setting up a pack to help uh unions and uh so i

did a little something to help promote promote it i may have interviewed him i can't remember exactly but it wasn't until later where i'm like wait a second he's not taking any money from the pack but the pack was sending him was covering all his expenses to go and give talks to unions who would pay him money and the whole thing was like just a way to get other people to cover part of his essentially business uh a thing and uh i i became very skeptical of of of packs there are some obviously that are that are that are good and are genuinely and they're transparent but who owns these different packs like who started them um so often that information is only partially transparent um what you can see is that there's about four or five

of the main packs that have been feeding mothership are run by the same treasurer So you can identify who the person who's sort of running the operations of the pack is. I believe his name is Harry Pascal. And there's networks of these that sort of exist. And that's part of the issue. So if you set up like multiple packs and you're transferring money between them and then all this money is being funneled up to one strategy firm, that raises a bunch of questions about what you're exactly doing with that money.

And so, for instance, I mentioned Progressive Turnout Project. They're a PAC that they claim to focus on turnout efforts. And yet they've raised about, let me say, $10.8 million so far this election cycle. And so far, they've already spent 9.2. And it hasn't been an election. So it's hard to really make sense of where, if that's going towards turnout efforts. And so if I follow, what happens is, A progressive turnout project will raise $10 million, let's just say, or let's just call it a progressive, progressive project just for the sake of, and they raise $10 million, and they send $5 million to, you know, progressive win project.

and they send three million to a progressive progressive progressive win project and now it looks like okay they're sending money out to other operations but all three of these operations are funneling 80% of that money to mothership for services rendered essentially and so each one looks like they're distributing to other places they're not spending the money we're just helping other entities that are doing good stuff and they all just happen to use mothership as a okay and so um and this is legal we should say yeah this is as far as i can tell all of this is legal i have not uncovered any legal activity as far as i know um it's amazing um i mean these are uh would they refer to themselves as as uh

or social entrepreneurs, I guess. And so in what does then the mothership do? I mean, aside from obviously pay their people, but I mean, there's costs associated with sending out a bunch of emails and texts and this and that, but it's all just sort of business costs. How much money ends up going to clients?

Like the number that you found since 2018 mothership linked packs raised approximately $678 million this number excludes money raised by the firm's other clients like candidate campaigns

so they have some candidates I mean I went to the mothership website it's sort of fascinating but specifically on this sort of like network almost like this beltway of packs of that total fundraising haul

159 million was paid directly to mothership strategies for consulting fees that's not the expenses associated with sending out stuff that's just like how do we do this and um that's the vast majority of well not the vast but more than half of what mothership has been paid by all of its clients so what appears to be 60% of its business is just raising money really for themselves. And then they're surrounded. Then they sort of like put, you know, some, I wouldn't call window dressing, but it's sort of like, it's almost like if I'm not suggesting any criminal activity here.

I'm just coming up with an analogy. I'm, you know, and I'm not saying that mothership is money laundering at all. but like if I had a sporting goods store and was getting money funneled in there, but I'd still really try and sell sporting goods. And so I'd have two revenue streams, the sporting goods store and then there's sort of like other one that is sort of a little bit more dubious. What is the relate? So they're building relationships.

I just want to make like understand. like why they have been able, I mean, surely people have been aware of this. And you and I don't know. I don't know if you know and it would be good if there was reporting. But it seems hard to imagine that a professional in this industry wouldn't be aware of this. Yet, mothership has developed, had preexisting relationships with the Democratic Party. They're doing fundraising for other people. Like, you know, I went to their website.

It's also fascinating. there is no about us on the website like you can't tell who this is uh they just sort of forefront um uh the their clients and they mix in their clients it's interesting because they do you you can go to their website and almost it it it sort of expresses that dynamic like it shows like all the different people here um you know bold democrats and citizens united quality pack and then there's um john ossif uh and um jimmy harrison for and demand justice i mean you know demand justice is a very i think legitimate organization uh and actually like very clearly has an agenda but it's sitting next to you know uh defend the vote and i don't know you know

like packs that are a little bit dubious is that seem to be like what's going on there? Yeah, there are a network of packs that basically just exists to be in this mothership infrastructure, but then there are a bunch of packs that are genuinely legitimate and have just thought, decided that these tactics, which are extremely underhanded, handed and predatory, are acceptable ways to proceed. And I think that's sort of how you think about it. It's not, this is condoned by many aspects of the democratic establishment, is one way to think about it. But there's a lot of people in that arena who really dislike what this is and have been pushing back. And so I think one of the big questions is, what does

sort of the Democratic establishment do now? Do they try to snuff this out or do they allow it to proceed as it's been? It's technically profitable, but it's not actually producing significant resources in the way that you would want to win elections. It's just, sort of like a it's these guys to saying like well we need a subsidy to do this when in fact you really don't I mean that's a pretty juicy subsidy I imagine

you've gotten a lot of emails over the past you published this I think only a day or two ago I imagine you've heard from a ton of people both reporters and Democratic operatives who were coming and going like

I've noticed this is there anything like in a vague sense can you Tell us, like, what you've maybe seen from, uh, from Democrats, both like sort of like professional, you know, like DNC people and. Yeah. So there are a lot of people who like work in democratic politics who have been like, someone's found mothership. Like they've known about this and they're like, they, they dislike it.

They really hate the tactics. And so there's, there's that element of it. There's another element of people who are like, I've, and this is sort of really sad that people like, I've been giving to these packs. I had no idea, and I've been struggling to, you know, like, work it into my budget, and, you know, these are, this is where it's sort of like the predatory tactics come in. So I've heard a lot from a lot of those people, and that sort of breaks my heart that they've been taken for a ride. The one group I have not heard from is the D-Triple-C or the DSCC or the DNC. I've not heard anything from them, and I am unsure how they're going to respond to this all.

is there anybody out there that you're aware of that has just like a clearinghouse of like you know you see things like charity navigators is there a um a deep you know a a center to the left you know pack navigator um so a lot of people are pointing to charles gabba's um website i don't have the exact website generally speaking if you're giving directly on act blue to candidates that's going to be legit um for the most part i wouldn't worry about that uh and that's why incidentally uh the the trump uh regime is coming after act blue that's because that is the the best the most efficient way um both in in in multiple ways most efficient way to uh support democratic candidates yes yeah it is

act blue in terms of like candidates fundraising on the site there's that's not implicated at all in this I would hope that act blue and they are working to sort of clear out these types of less legitimate packs and so I know that they have efforts internally where they're trying to make sure that there's less of this on the platform and more of the legitimate fundraising how does these packs get their email or phone number lists? I would love to know the answer to that. My assumption is that they purchase them somehow, but that's not transparent at all in the FEC data.

Interesting. And you were saying that Gaba's site has at least some type of clearinghouse of a ranking of these things? Yes. When I went to it, it sort of lists out all the different races and candidates that you could be giving to. It's just sort of a nice way to just break everything down to see, like, who's running in your district, who might be running in your state, who might be running in competitive districts. And it just links to that blue pages. And again, so it's just sort of an easier way to make sure that you can navigate this whole fundraising mess where you don't have to worry so much about being caught up with any,

any packs that may not have the candidate's interest at front and center. And does anybody know how to get off these lists? I mean, I have always had multiple email addresses that I use as like not burner accounts, but like spam accounts. I was very fortunate like 15 years ago to have some tech guys and say like, oh, I've got a spam email. And I'm like, oh, I'll do that. Is there any way, once you're on?

Because it just seems like they just sell it around and around. Yeah, I mean, this is something that people have been commenting on. They say, like, I say stop to quit, like it said. And then they just send it from like another one of these groups, right? So there's not to my knowledge an easy way to get off the list. The answer to this is hopefully having someone, you know, with authority at the party level decide that they should not be part of the fundraising ecosystem and get ourselves off like get everyone off the list how would that happen i mean i know this isn't

necessarily your uh party your portfolio but i mean would uh the the chair of the democratic party party say um anybody who works uh until i am convinced that mothership is in compliance with these ethical guidelines anybody who works with them we're cutting off Is that basically it? Yeah, you put them on a list and say anyone who work, that firm and anyone who is a vendor for that firm is on a list of vendors and consultants that are not going to get paid by the party. And the party is going to say that the candidates shouldn't pay them either. If you have a, you know, they tried to do, like there was an attempt to do that with consultants who had worked for primary challengers. They have the ability to do it.

And that's not something outside of their purview. They should be policing the space. They have a responsibility to do that. Again, this might be a little bit outside your portfolio, but it seems to me that this is not on its face part of an interesting ideological battle. But one step forward. or back downstream or upstream from it, it feels like it, it, it, it seems to me that it is, that there is a consultant class within the Democratic Party that, you know, we have this

problem with, with Harris's campaign, like, you know, that was a lot of money. And we know that media buys enriches consultants. much more than let's say canvassing does um and um there is just a sort of corporate mentality about like i'm here i you know the the days of the company man uh you know that was a quaint notion in the 50s it's really like i'm here i'm in a corporate structure how do i enrich myself as much as possible within this sort of like consultant world and that to me has some ideological basis it feels like yeah i would yeah i think the framework i tend to think about it in is sort of like a more traditional establishment versus the anti-establishment framework within the party

um for instance there are a lot of candidates a lot of members of the democratic party who really dislike the consulting class as it exists. And that's one of the dividing lines within the party. And I think it breaks along the sort of traditional establishment versus more anti-establishment element to the party. And that can break across ideological, sort of like progressive versus more centrist framework. You can be anti-establishment anywhere along that framework. And I think that's a really important divide within the party right now.

and one that's playing out that I think that this is the election cycle where the party decides whether it's going to move forward with this traditional consulting class or whether it's going to try to do something different. I guess, you know, and one thing to watch out in the event that that happens, is one thing to shatter the old boy network, for lack of a better term, which undoubtedly involves people of all genders and and ages, but the old boy network, you don't want it to be replaced by just a new boy network, as much as you want one to be replaced by a competent network. And that's always a danger.

Well, I hope that there are a half a dozen reporters who have contacted you and for the stories that they're going to write on this, because this feels like something, where the more exposure it gets and frankly, the more blame the Democratic Party apparatus gets whether they're directly responsible for this or not, the more pressure on them because they are the ones who are in most,

the best position to shut this down. Are there other entities aside from mothership that you've come across? Are you starting, is this like become like a little of a project where you're, you're starting to look at other constellations of these super packs, or is this, is the mothership the mothership of this? I haven't, but there is good research in political science that uses machine learning methods to identify scam packs. And so, I just wrote this a few days ago, as you noticed, but

I am looking into whether, you know, I can make, you know, broader research agenda out of looking for how to identify these types of groups building off of existing research. And so it's a known problem, and I'm only adding a little bit to the broader perspective, but I think this is a really important spoke and hub of this type of bad actor in the space. And so I do hope that there is a response. Well, we're going to link back to your substack, to the specific piece and the substack more broadly so that we can follow up on on the work you're doing really appreciate it uh it is i feel like something that there was a people maybe had a vague awareness that there was something

wrong here and i think uh this is uh clearly it and and maybe more uh but uh really appreciate the work and uh you're coming on to talk about it well thanks for having me on that's so great all right folks we're going to we again will link to Adam Bonica's piece and his

substack on data and democracy somebody making fun of my just like just announced the launching of Matt Pack is oh

congratulations that's great that's great it honestly is as easy as that I mean you need to file you need to file but I mean I the thing is so much of this happens on the right

so much of it happens on the right and the real problem Well, aside from it being predatory, you know, like Trump does this on a daily basis. I mean, someone put us on the, you know, we, we signed up for Republican mailers, and like, our email inbox has, like, emails from Trump three times a day. They're coming for me. And it's, you know, get your wallet out. And, yeah, it's like, here's a, you know, like a, you know, like a, a, you know, like a, a, you know, like a, a. a coin to buy, whatever it is.

A bigger problem is that there's just not as much resources, broadly speaking, that are floated around. I mean, I know it looks like it, but there's just simply not as much resources, the center left, and certainly not as much resources. If grandma's given money or you're giving money or your kid's given money, or your kids giving money, you want that to go to candidates

and ideas that you really legitimately support. You know, just because the name Progressive is in there or equality or End Citizens United. Let America vote. Progressive Caucus.

You know, these, you know, elect women. the whole churn and burn conversation is fascinating because you know i think a lot of the unpopularity is because of you know the support for a genocide and that sort of thing but how much of it is because they've been doing this thing and you search churn and burn sales technique strategy where companies focus on aggressively acquiring new customers um while neglecting customer retention leading a high customer turnover aka something you can only do for so long yeah and so we decided to do it for like the past five 10 years maybe i mean if you're look if you're getting paid

70 million dollars a year uh how many years do you need it to work for who cares if everyone hates the party in five years no well that's the thing is like i mean this is not this is not i mean you know there is i think it's important to distinguish at least on some level my candidate is going to lose unless we have the money to put out, you know, paid support staff for volunteers. And so I'm going to use tactics that are short-term tactics versus I'm going to make $70 million if I do this this year. And if I could do it for two or three years, I am by myself.

Epstein's Island. The fools, if we say fascism is coming, they click at a 3% higher rate. I, I, I, the only, the only thing I would argue about that statement is that it's probably at a higher rate. But those words

undoubtedly, wherever, you know, because I'm on the mothership website, and there is, the only thing is careers or contact us. Like there's no like who are we come work with us um it is uh fully remote god knows what you're doing okay today's assignment today's assignment today's assignment um

wow means i can work from the isla man actually you know listen they get uh health care Generous time off, 401k, profit sharing, student loan assistant. Are they really? Food and snacks? They send you food. What the? Free Uber Eats. This is nuts.

I mean, I may apply. I'm just a two weeks notice incoming. I'm actually getting really freaked out about this fascism now. All right. Well, we're going to take a break ahead into the fun half. We're going to start off with some disturbing ice footage that we've got our hands on. this footage is from well actually let's play it now this footage is from June 30th and in out in LA there was a protest going on around to Sepulveda and trying to stop

ice raids that were happening out excuse me July 30th out in LA so about a week ago And this footage is particularly disturbing because you're going to have to look behind these ice guys who are trying to block the camera person because behind them, you can see that they have, they have restrained a guy who is presumably. Well, it's their target. I don't know, I don't know anything about him. But there's a guy with a 35 millimeter camera who is shooting pictures of this, the subject. And the ice guys, they have him constrained or restrained. Then it appears like the photographer says, give me that again. and they drop the guy to the ground and struggle with him more as the guy is taking pictures.

So we've got to go through this video somewhat slowly. This is really disturbing stuff. Now, I know that the ACLU in L.A. has filed suits against ICE. And I think around, at least involving events on this day. Okay, watch this. I'm going to be right here, my friends. Okay, stop it right there. You see the guy in the back in the darker suit.

You can just, yeah, right there where he's got a 35 millimeter camera. And, you know, often you'll see these ice guys with videos that they're shooting the protesters. This is their, this is basically publicity stills. We don't know what they're using it for, but go ahead. so the guy is standing right they've got the guy is standing right they've got two guys on him the guy in the white shirt behind there he comes into frame right there they've got him okay What is your? What is?

Back up. What is? Back up. What is your name and badge right now? Name and badge? So you can see, and he, right behind there, they've already got him. He's cuffed, his hands behind his back,

and they're going to take him back down to the ground to take photos. This way. Other one. They just did it. They just dropped them. Okay. Now, that guy right there with that, the cap that's facing us is now shooting pictures of him on the ground. You are going to be federally charged. Right there. Right on.

Whoa, dude, that's cool. This guy's cool. Oh, this guy's got a fucking cafe. What is? What is? Who is? Who is in Troca? You got his name and number?

You got his name and number? You got his name and number? Okay, little boys. It's good thing they got 25 military geared up guys. Are you ready for the court marshal? Are you?

In particular. You look like you wouldn't do well in prison. Badges or faces? Badge, please, my friend. Badge number right now. We're not police. Yes, you are. You're a federal officer.

Yes, we don't have that number. Yes, you do, little boy. CB 12, fucking loser. What? Don't worry about it. bro you have a CN grenade you're such a fucking pussy oh my god pause it right there the guys literally got some type of like gas canister on his uh i mean this is just absurd but they're using uh they're they're dropping this guy down to the ground to take like publicity stills or something it's like bukele all the local cb the border patrols like if you look at the arizona one the soCal one the l central one they're making like influencer videos for their they're making like fake films about their arrests

and everything with like color correction and like dramatic music and everything that it's exactly what Buckele's doing in El Salvador are these really glossy we saw those from Seacott yeah Seacot promotion videos where you can't actually get lawyers in there but you can get film crews

um we will uh you know we'll find out what happens next but that's basically one guy one guy they got one guy they got one guy with those six cars and all that gear all the face masks

insane all right just a reminder your support is what makes this show possible you can become a member at join the majority report.com when you do you only get the free show free of commercials but you also get the fun happen. You can I.M. Us and

scary Mountain Wizard says everyone needs to do what that guy is doing, just make fun of them to their faces, without a doubt. Make fun, have fun again. Sam and MacArthur Park, L.A. You could see the same cameraman

walking around filming. It's also like, I can't imagine there isn't any type of law about like making a publicity video, although the problem with like immigration, it's a sort of a nether world

of law and there's no they've built this system now so that there's really no mechanism for accountability. Also, don't forget just coffee.com. Fair Trade coffee, hot chocolate, use the coupon code majority, get 10% off.

Matt, left reckoning. Yeah, we had Kelly Chung on last night talking about her new book, Coercion, and why abusers love abortion restrictions. I had no idea. I feel pretty naive that a lot of states won't let you get a divorce, even if your husband's abusive, if you happen to be pregnant, and other sorts of horrible things like the snitch line that Texas tried to set up, where you could report women for. seeking abortion. So I

check that out last night. Left Reckoning. Subscribe on YouTube. Patreon.com slash left reckoning if you want to support my pack. See you in the fun half. Three months from now, six months from now, nine months from now. And I don't think it's going to be the same as it looks like in six

months from now. And I don't know if it's necessarily going to be better six months from now than it is three months from now. But I think around 18 months. out we're going to look back and go like wow what what is that going on it's nuts wait a second hold on for hold on for a second Emma welcome to the program hey fun hat what is up everyone what is up everyone no mckey you did it let's go Brandon let's go Brandon Bradley, you want to say hello? Sorry to disappointment.

Everyone, I'm just a random guy. It's all the boys today. Fundamentally false. No, I'm sorry. Women's? Stop talking for a second. Let me finish. Where is this coming from, dude?

But dude, you want to smoke this? 7.8? Yes. All right. Is this neat? Yes. It's a sneak. It is you

It's me I think it is you Who is you? No sound Every single Frickin' day What's on your mind We can discuss free markets

And we can discuss capitalism I'm gonna guess no way Who libertarians They're so stupid though Common sense says of course Gobbled E gook We fucking nailed them So what's 79 plus 21

Challenge men I'm positive typically clovering. I believe 96, I want to say. 857, 210, 35. 35. 501. One half. Three-eighths. 9-11, for instance. $3,400, $1,900.

$6.5,4, $3 trillion sold. It's a zero-sum game. Actually, you're making think less. But let me say this. Poop. You can call it satire. Sam goes to satire. On top of it all, my favorite part about you is just like every day, all day, like everything you do.

out of doubt. Hey, buddy, we see you. All right, folks. Folks, folks. It's just the week being weeded out, obviously. Yeah, sundown, guns out. I don't know. But you should know.

People just don't like to entertain ideas anymore. I have a question. Who cares? Our chat is enabled. Wow, I love it. I do love that. Got a jump. I got to be quick.

I get a jump. I'm losing it, bro. Two o'clock, we're already late, and the guy's being a dick. So screw him. Sent to a gulaw? Outrage. Like, what is wrong with you? Love you.

Love you. Bye-bye. Thank you.