The Majority Report with Sam Seder - 3596 - The Existential Threat from the Right's Attack on Science w/ Dr. Michael Mann

Episode Date: October 6, 2025

It's Fun Day Monday on the Majority Report. On today's show: ICE, CBP and other federal agencies continue their assault on Chicago as they recklessly unleash CS gas in front of an elementary school in a busy neighborhood resulting in the hospitalization of at least two children. ICE is gassing everyone in Chicago including the local police officers. Dr. Michale Mann, Climatologist, Geophysicist, Director of Center for Science, Sustainability & the Media at University of Pennsylvania, joins the program to discuss his new book - Science Under Siege: How to Fight the Five Most Powerful Forces That Threaten our World co-authored with Dr. Peter Hotez. In the Fun Half: More coverage of ICE atrocities as they arrest people with no warrant or reason, detain the lawyers that are speaking on behalf of terrorized immigrants and mace young girls at point blank in the face. The only thing that seems to get ICE officers to back off is a person in an inflatable frog suit casting spell. Van Jones, Thomas Friedman and Bill Maher share a good laugh at Van's "dead Gaza baby" joke. Greta Thuneberg addresses the media in Greece after being released by the IDF. All that and more The Congress switchboard number is [phone]. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. 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 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: WILD GRAIN: Get $30 off your first box + free Croissants in every box. Go to Wildgrain.com/MAJORITY to start your subscription. COZY EARTH: Go to cozyearth.com/MAJORITYREPORT for up to 20% off. SUNSET LAKE:  Head to SunsetLakeCBD.com and use the code JustTreats25 to save 30% on all their gummies for sleep, focus, and relaxation 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/

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 Monday. October 6th, 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, Dr. Michael Mann, climatologist, geophysicist, director of the Center of Science, Sustainability, and the Media at University of Pennsylvania, and also perhaps his co-author, Professor Peter Hotez, Professor of Pediatrics and Molecular Virology and Microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine. It's Monday, folks. They have co-authored a book Science Under Siege, How to Fight the Five Most Powerful Forces that Threaten Our World. Meanwhile, also on the program, ICE continues its assault on Chicago. as Mayor Brandon Johnson makes city property off limits for any federal immigration work. Meanwhile, Trump shopping for military force to invade Portland as a MAGA judge issues a temporary restraining order. Illinois sues the Trump administration over the National Guard.

deployment. After reports of torture and mistreatment, Israel deports at least 300 of the flotilla activists still holding at last count nearly 140, were by all accounts hostages held by the Israeli government. South Carolina judge who was targeted by Stephen Miller has her house burned down. Supreme Court rejects Galane Maxwell's appeal. Not uncoincidentally, Mike Johnson still has not sat latest elected Democratic Congresswoman

or, uh, also known as the 218th vote. on releasing the Epstein files. Trump claims over the weekend that the United States has killed more Venezuelans in a boat. It is day six of the government shutdown. Vaguely seems like the Democrats may be winning the messaging fight. Roy Cooper breaks fundraising numbers in North Carolina.

Senate race. And speaking of polling, California Prop 50, which is the redistricting proposition, now polling at 54%. All this and more on today's majority report. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. It is a fun day Monday. Fund day Monday. And as you can tell, by the enthusiasm in MS.

voice, we're certainly feeling the fun. And the sirens in the background. Yeah. Exactly. Hopefully not for us. Thanks for joining us at the beginning of the week. The weekend was a total crap show. Yep.

Really starting Friday afternoon, I think I spent like the next 16 hours straight on Twitter. So that would have taken me to about four in the morning. That tracks with my lack of sleep. We have more information on the ice attack on. on that Chicago apartment building, it appears that the landlords called ICE because they had many, many, many code violations and are now looking to evict all of the residents there because, of course, ICE came in and destroyed the place. So you're playing the game called capitalism.

Yeah. I would also say insurance fraud on top of that. Well, fraud is a part of the whole deal, it seems like. There's been some good local reporting on this. I think this is called Block Club Chicago. It's a nonprofit paper there. But they basically reported that the ownership, it traces back to this Wisconsin-based investor Trinity Flood.

And according to public records, Flood is facing a $27 million foreclosure lawsuit for not making loan payments on three South Shore properties. She bought for $18 million in 2020. So maybe a... COVID deal. The city also filed soon in February against her LLC over 15 building code violations at the South Shore Drive property dating back to 2023. So they're trying to clear out the property by neglecting it, it seems like, because it's quite expensive. And what better way to do that

than to have ICE come in, terrorize your tenants, and trash the place? Very reminiscent of the last report that we had of trend to argoa infiltrating an apartment building uh that one i think was in ohio was it colorado colorado in the run up to the election meanwhile in chicago ice has gone completely out of control we have a lot of clips that will play later in the program including uh the uh chicago police department getting uh uh tear gassed by um ice um we have a lot of footage of Chicagoans pushing back against ice in multiple different ways, but just to give you a sense of how completely out of control, I mean, unprofessional, forget about, these people are just thugs. They're thugs, their goons, they don't care about public safety whatsoever. As far as

they're concerned, they're in enemy territory. Now, this ice guy, stuck in traffic, it's possible that there was a scooter in front of them that had stopped on purpose. Regardless, there's absolutely no justification for what you're about to see. You should also know this is across the street from a school and a two-year-old who was in a nearby car had to be taken to the hospital because they were overcome with this tear gas. Play this clip. Look at the white car. That's ice.

Mass man attempts to throw tear gas, basically throws it on himself. Bounce off the mirror or something. Look at that. They're throwing, they're still throwing tear gas from multiple cars. And this stuff lingers.

Oh, my gosh. I mean, for hours, if you've ever... You see people, you know, behind them trying to get out of the way because the wind's blowing in there. If you're ever even close to tear gas, I mean, just in covering protests, I got some, you know, in my airspace and you're, like, I was not even in the thick of it. And, like, teary, teary, red eyes for hours and hours. Imagine if you were right near there.

Imagine if you're a two-year-old, you're sent to the hospital. It's not like ICE has any compunction about harming children. We've seen multiple occasions where they have left children along the side of a highway without their parents. They have shoved children out of the way when they're ripping their parents away from them, and whether it's like hallways in front of courtrooms. This is a clip. This was from Friday. Chicago alder person Jesse Fuentes is at the hospital and this is posted by Chicago

Tribune reporter Jake Sheridan's ex account here are ICE agents confronting the alder person and they want a person in the hospital the hospital's private property And so the alderman is asking, or an alder person, I should say, is asking for a warrant. He has constitutional rights. No. He has constitutional rights. Do you have a sign? No.

Do you need a warrant for me? Turn around. You're turning. He is under arrest. I'm going to be placed under arrest. You are going to be placed under arrest. Do you have a sign to be a warrant for him? that's a guy who's acting out of a little bit of anger can somebody go in the hallway and get Lisa for me this is an older person who's being under arrest i need my other staffer who's in the hallway by registration to come here please

you are hurting can somebody get my staffer please this is a hospital do you have a sign to this reward for him i am asking i am asking i did not touch you I do not touch you. I do not touch you. I did not touch you. I ask you if we had a sign to this is a warrant for him. It is very simple. It is very simple. That man has constitutional rights. I do not touch you. It is a public space. I am not trespassing. I am asking you. Do you have a sign to this your warrant? I am asking. Do you have a sign to this warrant for me? It is a question, sir. You are an agent, you are a fellow agent. We do not need a warrant for someone.

I am an election. I'm asking. Do you have a signed to this award? Can you keep recording on your car? Oh, that's when the guy finds out that he's just arrested in an alderman. And, well, whoopsie. And that's when they know they're being videotaped. Let's just like, there are a bunch of other instances when you're talking about the

mistreatment of children that horrific ice raid on the building that we just spoke. about the reporting was about how some of the children were naked outside um sometimes children sleep naked that's something that happens and uh there's not video footage of it so you have all these right wing bots casting aspersions on the reporting and it's just absolute insanity because when you we have these recordings they dismisses entirely anyway we've got a lot of other um clips that we're going to be playing in the context of the the show also all that alderman did was asked to see a warrant i mean god even in the decades of copaganda that's been on tv we know our rights is this number seven here oh no this is yeah

we'll play um well let you let's play this um this is number 13 right yeah let's play this one um You don't necessarily have to allie yourself with cops in these protests. Also, be clear, ICE is now spending millions of dollars, millions of dollars, putting out ads, this is according to the AP. They're spending millions of dollars on television advertising in select metro areas around the country. aimed at recruiting local officers frustrated with their city's restrictions on immigration enforcement into Donald Trump's mass deportation efforts. So they are targeting cops because they know that this is going to be a problem. Remember, they have $30 billion, $30 billion to hire 10,000 more deportation officers.

um thugs that's part of the 77 billion that the trump uh regime is looking for uh to spend broadly on ice the rest of it all goes to private prison uh companies but in chicago don't know the circumstances but it's quite clear from the video that this is the case ICE, Mace, or I should say tear-gast, Chicago Police Department officers. Take a look at this. Don't throw you in my question. Don't throw you in the fire, no, understand. And just tear gas, they don't give a fuck about you either.

And there's other, do we have that other. clip there was a second clip of uh of that too nevertheless uh a bunch of them not just those two uh there's another clip with at least a half a dozen other chicago pd uh who were clearly um tear gassed and that's the message uh for the cops ice doesn't care about you either they're certainly not there to protect your community they replace you i mean the abolish the police I guess and just replace them with

Stephen Miller's Gestapo federal Gestapo well it's also get on board or get out of the way get on board with like the machinery that has been gifted to police departments over the past two decades

the left over basically wartime machinery that we've given out to police departments Now we're superseding those folks to just have a federal Gestapo do it instead. But what's the whole point of doing this for cops? If you're just going to have Stephen Miller's stormtroopers. I mean, it really is. Like this is the end result of the erosion of our rights.

And we've brought the war on terror here to domestic soil and immigrants. And folks in those communities as well are the ones on the front lines. In a minute, we're going to be talking to Dr. Michael Mann. climatologist, geophysicist, director of the Center of Science and Sustainability and the Media at University of Pennsylvania, co-author of Science Under Siege, How to Fight the Five Most Powerful Forces that Threat in Our World. First, a couple of words from our sponsors. This episode of The Majority Report is brought to you by Wild grain. They're a new sponsor. And it's awesome stuff.

What did Brian call it? Pa bake? I can't remember. Wild grain is the par bake. It is the first bake from frozen subscription box for artisanal breads, seasonal pastries, and fresh pastas. All the items conveniently bake in 25 minutes or less. This is not store-bought stuff. Wild grain uses a slow fermentation process that's easier on your belly.

It's richer in nutrients and antioxidants. It's made with simple ingredients you can pronounce. I will also tell you this stuff is absolutely 100% delicious. Wild grains boxes are fully customizable. They're adding seasonal and limited time products for you to enjoy. In addition to their classic box, they now feature a gluten-free box and a plant-banks box. I've made a bunch of croissants that we got. Some apple cider donuts.

Very nice. Some ravioli with squash and I can't remember what kind of cheese, like a ricotta cheese, I think, which was amazing. But it's like it's homemade pasta. But they have like not Legos, but like the sort of, I can't remember what the name of it is, but they're like cookies that are ridges on it. I don't know. But great bread, really fantastic, super easy. You get it in a box, almost all the stuff in there is recyclable. You put it in your freezer and you pull it out when you need it.

You drop it on a tray 20 minutes later, 15 minutes later, 25 minutes later, you have fresh baked bread. It's amazing. This fall, treat yourself and your family to warm sour dough breads and seasonal baked goods from wild grain. rumor has it they have apple cider donuts i can confirm and pumpkin cinnamon biscuits so get them before these seasonal items sell out for a limited time wild grain is offering our listeners thirty dollars off their first box plus free croissants in every box when you go to wildgrain dot com slash majority to start your subscription warm croissants oh my may be the absolute best thing you've ever eaten and you heard me here free

in every box 30 bucks off your first box when you go to wildgrain.com slash majority that's wildgrain dot com slash majority or you can use promo code uh majority at checkout don't miss their seasonal products do yourself favor try it try it once you will i guarantee you will enjoy this it's delicious and it's so much i well i can't even compare it to actually cooking a bread from scratch because I've never done that. You don't make croissants? Yeah. Yeah.

Sounds hard. I know it's surprising. I know I come off as a make my own croissant type of guy. You always wear a chef hat when you're walking in here. Yeah. Oh, all right. Let's talk about something else that is one of my favorite things, too. Of course, I now wear my sweatshirt is almost like a daily.

My hoodie is my almost. like daily thing uh because it is awesome it works in every temperature it it's like lightweight but warm it is warm but it's also cool it is a cozy earth's hoodie and they have joggers that are exactly the same material and they're fantastic they um they maintain their form i guess i don't know how to say that in a way that like you don't feel embarrassed walking around on them they look like pants they're structured yeah but they're also incredibly soft um and they're cool but they're warm i don't know really the sheets are also exactly the same way they are temperature regulating they are guaranteed to give you a comfortable night's sleep they're made from viscouse

viscose rather uh which is uh from bamboo they naturally wick away heat and moisture from your body help you sleep several degrees cooler which is extremely important to me They have something called the bubble cuddle blanket. I've not tried this, but it is an ultra-soft blanket that has a combination of comfort and style. It is a mid-weight faux-fur blanket that's great for lounging anywhere in your home. I think my kids and my cats would like that. Honestly, the betting is fantastic, incredibly soft, incredibly temperature-regulating. the hoodie and the joggers super comfortable when the betting 100 night sleep trial you try them out

if you don't love them you return them hassle free it's got a 10 year warranty because frankly when you feel this comfortable when you're sleeping you'd want it to last for 10 years thanks to cozy earth for sponsoring this episode head to cozy earth dot com use our code majority report one word for up to 20% off that's cozy earth dot com Code is Majority Report, and if you get a post-purched survey, tell them you heard about Cozy Earth right here on the Majority Report. Home isn't just where you live. It's how you feel. Cozy Earth, use the code Majority Report. We'll put all that information in the podcast and YouTube description. Quick break when you come back, Dr. Michael Mann.

Thank you. Thank you. We are back, Sam Cedar We are back, Sam Cedar. Emma Viglin on the majority report, it is a pleasure to welcome back to the program, Dr. Michael Mann, climatologist, geophysicist, and director of the Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media at the University of Pennsylvania, co-author with Dr. Peter Hotez, Professor Pediatrics and Molecular Virology and Microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine. Their

latest book, Science Under Siege, How to Fight the Five Most Powerful Forces, that threaten our world. Professor, I know that Dr. Hottes may be joining us in a bit. It is great to see you again. We have had many conversations over the years about, in particular, I mean, both about climate change, but about specifically, I know you and I have had this conversation for quite some time about scientists' role in this sort of new world, which is now probably 10, 12, 40, 20 years old of dealing, and mostly in the context of climate change, but the sort of the, I guess the palette has extended to all sort of science in, in a broad stroke, to pushing back on this, tell us a little bit, you've written about the five But before we get there, just tell us about, like, over the course of your career, how the environment has changed, not literally the environment, but the environment to talk about the environment.

Yeah, thanks, Sam. It's great to be back with you. And indeed, over the years, we've talked many times about climate disinformation and this concerted effort by bad actors to sort of cloud the public discourse to prevent us from taking the needed action. And, you know, it was sort of PTSD for me because the attacks on me, the attacks on climate science go back more than two and a half decades, really. In my case, back to the late 1990s when we published the now well-known hockey stick curve that really laid bare the reality and threat of human-caused warming that made it a threat to fossil fuel interests and those promoting their agenda.

And so for me, back, you know, about five years ago, it was PTSD to watch my friends, my colleagues in the public health space, Peter, Peter Hotez, my co-author, Tony Fauci, and others come under attack by folks, the very same folks using the same tactics looking to discredit them and their science for ideological reasons. And so I reached out to Peter. I felt like we had lessons to provide to them. We became friends, and we decided we had a book right here, about, you know, as you alluded to, this sort of metastasization of what was once this sort of, to use of public health analogy, a localized cancer that is now metastasized to impact, not just all of science or any areas of science that are policy relevant,

but are, you know, fact-based discourse itself. How much do you think this? I mean, it seems to me there's sort of like two different players who sort of cross over at least at least in the genesis of this because you know and i i only know this quote because it it included in a book i wrote in 2006 from gertrude hilmafarb who is irving crystals or was irving crystal's wife bill crystal's um uh mother interesting she in two in 2005 she was talking about the uh mechanistic and reductionist interpretation of all the all human life, including its emotional intellectual dimensions in the name of Darwinism. This is more than science, it's scientism, scientism with a vengeance, and science that is now

presumed to be the only access to comprehensive truth. They have been attacking in the conservative movement science for decades and decades, because this narrative ultimately helps them, whether it is, we shouldn't have lead in the gasolines, we shouldn't pour mercury into our water. Yeah. And so when climate change comes along, there's a, like, sort of almost like a pre-built mechanism to attack the science. Absolutely. Yeah, there was a pre-existing playbook.

It was the playbook that was used by, in all of these other cases you cite, was used by the gun lobby. Most famously and most relevantly, it was used. by the tobacco industry. And there is a document, sorry, there is a line from the reports that the tobacco industry was forced to make public as part of a settlement with a number of states' attorneys general back in the 1990s. They were forced to bribe over these internal documents, one of which I believe it was Brown and Williamson, but this applied to all of the tobacco companies, the tobacco industry. Doubt is our product. That's a line from the

the tobacco industry. And what they meant there was they need to sow doubt and confusion about what their own internal research actually validated. Their own internal research showed that their product was killing people. That was bad for their business model. And so they hid that from the public. The fossil fuel industry used exactly that same playbook. And in fact, they're now famously internal documents, Exxon Mobil document from 1982, where their own scientists referred to the potential consequences of continued extraction and burning of fossil fuels as catastrophic. That wasn't Al Gore. That wasn't the intergovernmental panel on climate change, the UN. It was ExxonMobil's own scientists. And as we know, they came out with that report. ExxonMobil

apologized and said they would do everything they could. No, of course, we don't live in that universe, that alternative universe. No, they hid the report. And now we are bearing the brunt of that. If we had acted decades ago, we could have prevented a lot of the damage that we're now seeing. And Sam, you put your finger on something really important here, is, you know, what joins these things together? And we can talk about, you know, the lockdowns where a threat to the Koch brothers, the largest publicly held fossil fuel interest, and these libertarian funders of sort of the conservative echo chamber front groups and, and astroturf organizations, and producers of misinformation and disinformation. So they had a specific reason to oppose climate action,

but they also had a specific reason to oppose the public health messaging on COVID as the pandemic became, you know, the pandemic started up because lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, all of these things would, and they did reduce fossil fuel usage, reduce transportation. They would slow down the economy. they would reduce demand for fossil fuels, and that would hurt their bottom line. And so they weaponized misinformation and disinformation to try to oppose those efforts,

and ultimately that rabble that they created, which was opposed to the messaging of public health scientists, would naturally become anti-vaxxers as well. And that was truly tragic. That, as Peter has pointed out, led to hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths here in the United States alone. But there's a larger thing here, and sorry, that's really what you put your first, finger on, which was a world without objective truth, a world without trusted messengers, a world without, you know, science-based policymaking is a world where the bad actors reign, run free. And that's what they want. And that's what they've been working towards

for a number of decades. And that scarcely enough is where we are now. Yeah, I would add, too, that there was a paper written by Sam Baganstowse, who is a professor at University of Michigan, on a lot of the COVID-era sort of subsidies, and they found that like the, the polling on these subsidies, actually, the value of these subsidies people, at least as a political matter, was reduced dramatically because those same interests that you're talking about, fossil fuel or just big money, wanted people back at work. And so diminishing the subsidies and stigmatizing them and keeping people safe, which meant less engaged with things on a day-to-day measure or you've got to put protections in was just not in their economic interests. Yeah, absolutely. Let's turn to the five P's that you talk about, just to sort of organize where these

threats come from and what we're getting from each one of these. I do want to talk to you about like sort of the, you know, and then you obviously you have a big part of like going forward, what are the strategies and tactics that we need to employ and who needs to be employing those. But let's start with the first P, plutocrats. We've sort of touched on it a little bit. But expand on that. Yeah, these are five P's in a pod, if you like.

And the first of those P's plutocrats. So these are the Elon Musks of the world. Elon Musk has bought Twitter and weaponized it as a massive sort of producer and disseminator of misinformation and disinformation on climate on COVID-19. it's become sort of a tool for these bad actors to spread their disinformation. Rupert Murdoch, another plutocrat, who, of course, the News Corp, Fox News, Wall Street Journal editorial pages, his media empire is the largest media disseminator of misinformation and disinformation. By the way, Elon Musk's buyout of Twitter was leveraged by Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Do you think that's a coincidence? it's not. Those are sort of two of the premier petra states. They don't want climate action. They don't want us to move forward towards renewable energy. And they have weaponized social media using bot armies and troll farms to promote disinformation to prevent, you know, aimed at preventing any public action here. There are other plutocrats as well. Many of them fund this massive infrastructure, the Koch brothers we mentioned, who fund this sort of libertarian infrastructure, these various organizations, front groups, misinformation, disinformation websites that are all aimed at pumping misinformation and disinformation out into the public sphere that opposes

science-based messaging on climate or on COVID-19 or anything that in any way threatens their libertarian vision of the world, their agenda. I have to say, I had forgotten. I mean, it just, I don't know why. it had never occurred to me that Russia, and for that matter, Saudi Arabia, but in particular Russia wouldn't have the same incentive structure as the Koch brothers. The price of oil that Russia sells is intimately tied to the price of oil that the Coke brothers are going to sell. They are a petra state, Sam. That is their large. I mean, of course. Of course. It's just like because it's Russia, it hadn't occurred to me.

would operate in the same way that it would be more, you know, to the extent that they want to destabilize things in the United States. It's not necessarily to no end. It is specifically they want to help the forces that will put more money in their pocket like anybody else. And it's both. It's both. They want to do both of those things. So it's a it's a two-fer, if you like. And we talk about that in the book, destabilizing Western civilizations and enabling their business model at the same time. And it depends on enclosure, right? I mean, just to stick on this for just a second,

these are dinosaur companies, at least with the fossil fuels, that need to delay, delay, delay, as they've been doing for decades, concealing this information for their business model to continue. But it also helps. The dinosaur analogy, by the way, is a good one, because we're literally talking about fossil fuels that were buried 100 million years ago or more,

and they're bringing them to the surface to burn them. Right. And it's just, it just is amazing to me how quickly these financial forces were able to completely overtake our communications channels and how easily an environment of full disinformation where nothing means anything or anything can mean anything abets a fascist project because it gives, it creates such an advantage or you can start the race so much earlier than everybody else who's. catching up to the facts that would be relevant. Yeah, well, you know, Emma, I think you've brought us to the last of the piece, the press. And by that, we mean the media writ large. And obviously, the conservative media, you know, the Murdoch Media Empire, conservative news organizations that promote climate denialism, that promote anti-vax rhetoric. But also, we take aim in the book at the legacy media, the mainstream media, which is,

so guilty today of what we call performative neutrality, this idea that we have to elevate anti-science to the same level as the actual consensus of the world's scientists, you know, balance in favor of accuracy. And, you know, on the pages of the Washington Post in the New York Times, you will find that sort of misinformation, disinformation, or framing that is advantageous to these bad actors, whether it's the New York Times on Sun Day, this was a few weeks ago, a day when we are supposed to be sort of embracing solar energy as part of the clean energy transition. And they wrote, they published an op-ed about geoengineering. No, we don't have to reduce carbon emissions.

We'll just pump particles into the stratosphere to block out the sun. What harm could possibly come from that. Ironically, yes, that's one way to try to cool down the earth. It actually does block some of the sun, so it makes solar energy even less viable on Sunday. they published that. And the Washington Post and the New York Times have platformed the lab leak theory on many occasions, the lab leak theory of COVID-19, though there's no scientific evidence for it. There's no peer-reviewed literature behind it. The overwhelming evidence is in favor of zoonotic spillover that bats and pangolins, you know, these viruses are passed along through interactions

between different species and ultimately to us. And so that's been a real problem. And the other thing, you know, and Emma, I think you're referring to, you know, you're underscoring this. A lot of our mainstream media are now actually being bought out by plutocrats. Every day, there's a new headline of a new, what we used to think of as a mainstream media organization that is being bought out by a conservative plutocrat. What could possibly be the agenda? We know what the agenda is there. They don't care if they return a profit.

We know this with Amazon. We know this now with CBS and perhaps time. Warner, Viacom with Ellison coming in, Barry Weiss, who was the lead promoter of Jordan Peterson and Dave Rubin and Weinstein brothers. The Weinsteins who are at the forefront of all of this, right, where they have, I'm sorry to cut you off, Sam, but like this, this, this alternative media, like, I guess the way that they present themselves, but they are now in bed with like this. Plutocrat representative Barry Weiss and like that it's this illusion of the democratization of information where it's actually even more insidious than than it was 10 years ago. Yeah, absolutely. In terms of the peas, we covered also Petro states simultaneously following the plutocrat.

What about the pros as it were? Yeah, and we'll combine the pros and the propagandists. These are the people who are down in the trenches. of disseminating misinformation and disinformation, often making money from doing so, whether it's fossil fuel industry-funded talking heads who are actually paid to promote their talking points in op-eds on news programs,

or as Peter has talked about quite a bit, these sort of public health influencers, there's a movement that the sort of, the sort of, I'm forgetting the exact term that we use, but there's a health movement right now among conservatives that basically rejects the messaging and the wisdom of the public health community and turns to these alternative, you know, sort of maha people. The MAHA, exactly. RFK Jr. is now the figurehead of that.

He's the head of health and human services. At the very top of our government, our policy now is run by, you know, individuals who are tied to this sort of fake health industry, and they make money by selling these miracle cures. And people won't buy their miracle cures if they believe in the efficacy of the conventional cures, vaccines, and masks and all the other measures that the public health community has been promoting. And so they need to discredit the public health community to sell their product. And that's become an important part of the Maha movement. And when you still, at those very press conferences, at that press conference where RFK Jr. was trying to blame vaccines and Tylenol for COVID-19.

He was actually marketing for autism. Sorry, for autism, blaming it for autism. Sorry, he was actually, he mentioned a product that is one of those miracle-tural products that one of their, one of their friends is making whole lot money marketing i mean you really only need to be on instagram for like 10 minutes to get an example of what you're talking about like if they're not selling something at that moment it takes about like uh 60 to 90 days maybe some number their followers whatever it is they're talking about yeah dementia or parking you know, like, or even like sleep apnea or whatever it is, there is always like the traditional medicine is not working in this way. Here are the, there's, uh, you know, a study that shows that

lysine is going to fix everything about you. And it just so happens that I sell, uh, lion's mane, which is also the key ingredient in this. And I, you know, I don't know if it, lions mean's going to hurt you. Uh, some of these will. Some of these, yeah, chlorophy or quentin, some of these actually, Ivermectin, can do real damage. Yeah, and I have no doubt that there's also, you know, supplements out there, you know, the magnesium helps you sleep. And there are things that are good there, but it is, there is such, and it is very, very difficult to be a lay person and to assess this. To litigate the actual medical science here, and they take advantage of that. In an environment where there's massive misinformation, people don't know who to turn to,

they turn to the charlatans. And I remember the term, it's the health freedom movement. And notice how freedom is there, right? Because it's trying to tap into sort of the ethos of today's conservative movement. They want to take away your freedom, whether it's, you know, the hamburgers and the flights to see grandma, you know, because of climate lockdowns. you know, they're not going to let you out of your home anymore. They're actually using the same messaging when it came to COVID-19 because it fed that same

sort of conspiratorial. These people want to take away your freedom. And so you're right. There's a very specific interest, these charlatans, these, you know, these that are making huge amounts of money off of these fake cures. But then at the same time, it's feeding this libertarian agenda of, you know, that seeks to basically, you know, that seeks to eradicate trusted messengers, that seeks to eradicate trust in expertise, because in that environment where misinformation and disinformation

thrives, they went. Well, it's anything, it seems to me, that is even remotely communitarian, right? like you there is uh science is not uh straightforwardly democratic but there is like a peer review process and there is a sense of like the scientific community puts out uh you know information and science of course is also necessarily going to be used by uh governments to do things and none of those almost none of those things they do is going to be favorable to incorporate, to, excuse me, to incumbent corporate powers. You may end up subsidizing, you know, solar or, you know,

and eventually they'll become the incumbent. And maybe it's then, I don't know, water or whatever, it's going to be 100, 200 years from now. But that is, that is why I think it has been just a long-term agenda item for conservatives broadly speaking, to undermine science because that type of objective reality ends up taking things out of the realm of a supposed religious informed morality. And that's basically the whole recipe. Exactly. You know, in an absence of fact-based discourse, again, their alternative facts and conspiracy

theories get purchased. And that's what we're seeing today. I don't know, Emma and Sam, if either of you, I suspect you, neither of you are old enough. I grew up watching Carl Sagan, watching the Cosmos series, and you can still view it. And Sagan was sort of this great science philosopher and public figure of my generation when I was growing up, you know, that my generation grew up with. And he would talk about sort of the self-correcting machinery of science and how important it is to our way of life.

And he, there's a, there's a very haunting passage in his, his last book. It was published in 1997, the year he passed away. The demon-haunted world science has a candle in the dark. There's this passage, and you can go online and find it where he has this premonition of a future, you know, at the time of his grandchildren. Basically right now, if you extrapolate, he's talking about now. where people become so unable to understand the science and technology that runs, you know, rules their lives, that they become hostage to.

He really emphasized pseudoscience and misinformation of that sort. He was very worried about horoscopes and crystal healing and that sort of pseudoscience. I don't think he quite envisioned how anti-science would be weaponized, that corporate actors would actually weaponize that to advance their education. agenda. And so it's even worse than what's, in some respects, than what Sagan presaged. I, I, in a similar age to you. And I, you can find, I think Sagan was on with Charlie Rose when he really articulated that fear. It is eerie. And, but I also have to say, I mean, and this is sort of my little uh bailiwick is the the the the blind spot to the corporate interest that were then

championed by conservatives um was there then and it was a blind spot because there was this sense that like well we all go to the same country club we care about democracy we care of it right and like the idea of like well you know the the theory well they have to live on this planet too but the attitude i think that they have is like well that's why i have all the money to insulate me from the implications and a naive assumption of good faith yeah and that really was our that that was the weakness as you say uh let's talk about uh strategy and and like what the response is i mean one of the conversations i i i am quite sure that that we've had in the past was the disadvantage science and i think it's the same thing with education i came across the same

sort of dynamic when people want to attack education when people want to attack science it is people who are specifically propagandist communicators who are coming into this space and going up against, let's say, in the context of educators, like education is very sort of student-oriented. It's very hard to have a broad ideology about education because it is so specific to who you're teaching at any given point. And in the battle of ideas, that's a disadvantage. And science is the same way.

you rely on nuance you rely on the idea of like what is true is what is most provable at this time that evolves over time and what in science is a process uh and it is not a sort of like a static thing that's a really hard argument to make if the guy you're arguing against is just saying like well i don't think so uh you guys don't agree with what you did five years ago yeah we're trying to build something. They're trying to tear it down. And there's a fundamental asymmetry there. That is the asymmetry that we're seeing writ large in our politics today. And they just have to confuse. We need to educate. And science is tough to start with, right? I mean, and it's often laden and jargon. And scientists have to work very hard to be able to explain things in terms that

are accessible to non-experts. It doesn't come naturally. And it's hard. But it's a whole lot harder if you're communicating against this massive headwind of a disinformation machine that is trying to confuse the public, that is trying, and they win, right? If they can confuse the public. And so their strategy is to throw so much mud on the wall that there's just no way that you, as the person is trying to clarify this things, can scrape it all off. And so there's an asymmetry in this battle to begin with. Now you add the fact that they have the leading plutocrats of the world, the world's wealthiest people funding their disinformation effort. And we've got a sort of a rag-tag team of, you know, communicators and scientists who are in it because they're trying to do the right

thing, not making a whole lot of money doing so. There are so many layers of asymmetry here that's in the book, in the closing message is sort of I borrow sort of, you know, I wax Tolkienesque. We wax Tolkienesque, because this is an epic battle for the future of humanity. And there's no guarantee that we win this battle, right? And as I say, no white wizard will come to our defense here to save the day. But we do have truth on our side, and the stakes couldn't be greater. So we have to fight this battle. What are some of the, you know, as what is your message to scientists? and then let's talk about lay people in terms of dealing with this. Yeah, I mean, my message, our message to scientists is that we have to be out there being

willing to speak truth to power, to speak up. The other side is doing everything they can to silence us, to intimidate us. That's why they come after Peter. That's why they come after me. And we detail some of our numerous adventures in the crosshairs of the disinformation machine in the book. But that hasn't deterred us because we know that the stakes are so great. They're literally the future of human civilization as we know it.

And so we ask scientists to be brave, to be willing to speak truth to power, to be willing to work together with organizations because alone we're very vulnerable. As individuals were vulnerable, but there's strength in numbers. And as we work together, as we team together, and we work with scientific organizations and the scientific societies to try to push back against the misinformation, to push back against the disinformation, we can make some progress there. But here's the thing, and this is the larger message, you know, there are lots of specific things we can do.

We can try to, you know, create more opportunities for young scientists who have a proclivity and interest in science communication to get engaged in that. we can try to work closely with opinion leaders, journalists, and others, to form sort of an ecosystem for getting, you know, actual scientific information out to the public and policymakers. But again, this is an asymmetric battle. There are overwhelming forces mounted against us. And in the end, if we don't change our politics, there isn't any obvious way forward. The most important thing that we can do is to participate in the political process. Because if we don't win back, you know, our federal government for the side of science and fact-based discourse, our democracy is so fragile at this point.

We are at such a vulnerable point right now that I fear that if we don't see people rise up, turn out in massive numbers in the midterm elections, where there's still maybe some time to steer this shift. If that doesn't happen, it's hard to see a way forward for the United States. And we see other Western nations also becoming vulnerable to some of these same, you know, sort of authoritarian headwinds, tailwinds, rather. We're seeing a movement towards authoritarianism in many other Western nations. And so, you know, we are at, you know, a juncture at a crossroads right now. And it's important that we recognize that we recognize that we are in the midst of a, you know, What is truly a battle, an existential battle for the future of humanity as we know it.

And it's happening right now, as Sagan and others predicted. Well, there's also the fact that this, and we're talking, I think, about our democracy, and you are correctly talking about these threats to the United States. But we don't exist in the vacuum, obviously. I mean, we started the conversation with you speaking about some of these other incentives of who, you know, invested in Twitter and that kind of thing. I mean, where does China play into all of this? Because China seems to be outpacing the United States technologically quite rapidly.

And it is both, it's just maddening to see because you have disinformation, like, weighing down progress in this country, like ankle weights. and it's just, it's, talk a little bit about China and that competition and the role that that plays. Yeah, thanks so much for that question, Emma, you know, there's a line that, again, that I borrow, we borrow from Lord of the Rings, you know, our list of allies grows thin, those of us fighting back against these forces, our list of allies grows thin. And so we look for who are the allies here. And sometimes they may come from sort of unexpected places, right?

China is an ally when it comes to the battle for a livable planet. They are now leading the world. In the absent with the United States now, having become a petro state itself, our policies right now are dictated by the fossil fuel industry, that really leaves only China as sort of a superpower that is actually prioritizing environmental health and the climate crisis. And they're doing that in a number of ways. They're actually taking actions. President Z, actually, in his, essentially his response to Trump's climate denial speech at the U.N. General Assembly, Z, responded to that, not by name, but basically saying, you know, we don't care if the United States is falling into sort of denial and opposition to, you know, to action.

you know, adopting an agenda of inaction, we will still lead, and we will lead by reducing our own emissions. And keep in mind, China doesn't have a legacy of two centuries of fossil fuel burning. And so arguably, they, you know, they can rightly say, we should get our turn too. So for them to reduce their carbon emissions is far more aggressive an action on their part than for the United States, which has two centuries of doing this. And they are reducing their carbon emissions. They're taking leadership there. And they're providing clean energy infrastructure, you know, renewable energy, solar panels, sort of electric vehicles to the rest of the world. They're reducing global carbon emissions by doing that.

So, I mean, they have the capacity to have a 10, 20, 30-year vision. And in 30 years, I mean, 30-40 years, regardless of what scenarios play out, the world is going to be significantly more solar-powered and significantly more electric vehicle-powered than it is today. And the question is, who's going to capture all of that, um, that manufacturing behind that and that technology. And China is like somehow has leapt ahead of us. They seem like they're now like 10 years, 15 years ahead of us on that. They're, they have the EVs that that go 400 miles and cost 20 grand. Um, it is, uh, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, It's, I mean, and I only bring that up in the sense that, like, one, it almost like speaks to the lie of even the nationalism that they, that that is being promoted by the same science desire, the deniers.

Because if you were genuinely interested in the American project, you would look to what China is doing in terms of EVs instead of cutting subsidies to this. in three months um absolutely yeah well you know i'll just say i want to ask you though yeah is there a move in academics like like like like obviously like i i couldn't agree more in terms of the political situation and the urgency and immediacy of that yeah i wonder if in the context of the scientific community particularly on the university level is there an awareness that like you know this happened in the 80 i guess in the 80s in the 90s like business school said like we we're going to have an ethics class and because they were realizing it was going i didn't seem to work that well but uh but is there a move within the context of the scientific community

to say part of our job now to the extent because i maybe this is my own sort of like a bias but scientists aren't necessarily, you know, the most sort of, like, necessarily the most communicative, and, you know, that's not where their skills set lies. I'm trying to be insulted, Sam, but I agree with you. Present company accepted. We're not trained that. Right. Right.

And you're not, you're not self-selecting for those attributes. I mean, if I actually had to work, you know, as opposed to just talk for a job, then I would be, You know, I would have gone and done it. Absolutely. But is there any effort to, I don't know, either create a new discipline within the context of like science departments or, you know, you're on the science communication tract or just broadly speaking, some, you know, training for how you, I don't know, apply for grants, you know, in the face of. of a system that is stacked against it. Like there's capitalism in scientific grants as well.

I mean, so I mean, what's the answer on that? Yeah, thanks for asking. And I'll say I was, for nine months, I'd taken up a new position at Penn. I was a university administrator. I was the vice provoked for climate science policy and action. And I stepped down a few weeks ago, a couple weeks ago, because I felt in this moment,

I couldn't be a university administrator. We have a policy. The university has a policy of neutrality on controversial topics. I had to be out there speaking truth to power at this moment. And so I stepped down from that position, from that administrative position. I'm still direct a center here at Penn. I'm still a professor here at Penn, but I'm not a university administrator. And I feel it frees me up to talk about these things because we have to be able to be out there talking about this.

And as you say, you know, do we need? need a new sort of, you know, area of sort of academic inquiry, science communication. I think so. I think communication is a field, and I think increasingly there's a lot of support and interest in sort of science communication as an academic discipline in our center here at Penn, which is partly in the School of Arts and Sciences, and it's also partly in the Annenberg School for Communication. In our center actually works towards, you know, the science of science communication, how can we be more effective? How can we provide more opportunities? And again, we need to provide, not tell every scientist that they should be out there, you know, speaking to the

public, because you put your finger on it. A lot of them shouldn't be out there speaking to the public. Their talents lie best in them being in the laboratory, doing the science that they do. But for those scientists, and there are who have a proclivity for communicating, who have an interest in a passion for doing so. We've got to provide the opportunities. We've got to provide the training. And that's what our center does here at Penn. That there are a lot of other sort of similar centers and institutes around the country that recognize that we need at least some set of the scientific community to be properly trained and equipped to be out there, you know, speaking to the public and policymakers because, as I've often said, if we're not out there, we leave a vacuum and we know whom that vacuum is going to be filled with. It's going to be filled with the disinformation specialists. the bad actors. And that's where we are right now. We're late in the game, right? So we can't wait

to train a whole new generation of scientists to do battle against disinformation and misinformation. It'll be too late. So we've got to go to battle with, if you will, to quote a public figure from some decades ago with the army that we have. That's where we are right now. yeah i mean i wonder too if if ultimately as this you know hopefully we have the opportunity for this type of movement to mature you know which i do think it's like you know we're in a very very tentative period of time um but ultimately i mean if we look at who the for lack of a better term enemies of science are they have been the huge money interests who are making money off of stuff that is harming the planet.

It is, you know, whose interests are against the idea of government regulation, broadly speaking, right? Broadly speaking, because government regulation, broadly speaking, inhibits corporate power. That's largely what it does. And also, the, this, you know, the idea that like sort of the wellness industry is so huge right now and it is driven by a series of like many many many hundreds if not thousands maybe millions of sort of wellness entrepreneurs right who all sort of plug into this it's also a function it seems to me of both a lack of regulation and a sort of a level of desperation that comes with a government that has not addressed sort of the economic well-being of people.

Like, if you, you know, if your choice out there is to believe that, like, this substance is going to, you know, cure people's cancer and you can stop your medications and it's a combination of salt water and also just the commodity that I sell, then you're going to do it. They're very cheap, and so they can make a lot of money, and it goes along with consultations, which they charge huge amounts for, and so you're right. There's an immense amount of money that's being made here, and it is a product of the deregulatory sort of environment that was created by conservatives and libertarian activists. Decades ago, they were working.

The health freedom movement was spurred onward by libertarian activists, because they want to get rid of regulation, whether it's for public health, whether it's for fossil fuels or anything else. And that's why we're, you know, in the tight spot that we're in right now. So in the book, we talk about, you know, it's obviously important to restore common sense regulations. We need to be regulating social media companies that have allowed misinformation and disinformation. How would you do that? So there are models for that. Other countries like Australia, for example, are doing that. They do have, like, Canada, they do actually have laws that sort of rein in. We used to have the fairness doctrine, right? Which mandated that

media outlets present information in a balance and accurate way. One of the first things that Ronald Reagan did was to get rid of his FCC got rid of that. And so there was once an infrastructure for doing that. It's been dismantled. We have to rebuild it. And again, it comes down to how do we do any of that? We, you know, we can't do any of that if we don't restore some semblance of sanity to our federal government. If we don't elect representatives at all levels, all the way up to president, that will represent our interests rather than be rubber stamps for the bad actors that currently run the show. And that's where we are right now. In a year, we're going have a midterm election which will determine whether we are able to write this ship and people

should be doing everything they possibly can to motivate everybody they know to participate in that election because it really is an election that will determine the future of our democracy and possibly the future of human civilization. I couldn't agree more. And one final question. are there social movements out there like uh uh electoral politics obviously like it's an urgent period of time there's no guarantee there's going to be an election in 2026 is not something i would have said maybe four months ago but uh the pace in which these things are going it's almost seems harder to imagine that trump won't say like well we need to we need 30 days before we have this a let whatever it is i have that same fear redistricting whatnot

the only other backstop we have and these are not the mutually exclusive things in fact i would argue that they are absolutely uh necessary for each other are social movements um and uh structures that um are exist where people organize around at the moment like and they're trying to push back against that as well as you know that's all of this anti antifa they want to intimidate anybody who would think to speak out, anybody who would organize in protest. That's what they're doing right now. Yep. Are there, are there, are there, do you see unions as, do you see like other organizations that are structured around fighting corporate power, which is largely, you know, what we're talking about here as being important to this fight? Yeah. I mean, there's

You know, there's a civic infrastructure in this country. You can be involved, various groups, non-governmental organizations that are working towards change. And recognizing, and this isn't important, it's easy to become very depressed here, given what's happening in the United States. But as I remind people, all the United States gets to determine here is what it is going to do moving forward. China, European countries, Australia, the rest of the world is moving forward, moving forward with science-based policies, and they're the ones who are going to prosper. China, Europe, they are going to prosper as they pursue sort of science and technology and where it's leading us. if we turn our back on science and technology, which was ultimately this country was built on it, and if we turn our back on that, as you alluded to earlier in the conversation, we're going to fall behind the rest of the world.

And so I'm pretty confident that the world will move forward, that we will get off fossil fuels, will move towards renewable energy. We're already doing that. We're already seeing that happen. All the United States gets to determine at this point is will it be part of the solution or will it be part of the problem and if it's the latter then the other countries of the world are going to have to have a really tough conversation about what to be done about the bad actor the bad state actors russia saudi arabia and do we want to be in that group dr michael man climatologist a geophysic director of the center for science sustainability in the media at the university of pennsylvania the book is science under siege how to fight the five

most powerful forces that threaten our world, written with Dr. Peter Hotez. Please give him our thanks for the work that he's been doing as well. I really appreciate you coming on today. We'll put a link to that book at Majority.fm and the podcast and YouTube description. Thank you. It was a pleasure talking with both of you. Hope to come back again soon. So thanks so much. Thanks. Likewise. All right, folks. We're going to take a quick break. We're going to head into the fun half or as we call it around here

the done half no I don't think so just trying to keep people's spirits up it's Monday got a full week of this ahead and we'll just start all over again the heat is on them when they do this

yes yes we'll have a fun clip you know that's the thing about Chuck Schumer always trying to keep things like fun up there. The levity. Oh, wait, do you see the jokes? Oh, man.

It is so funny. It is. All right, folks, just a reminder to your support that makes this show possible. You can become a member at join the Majority Report.com when you do, you not only get the free show free of commercials, but you get the fun half. And perhaps most importantly, you help this show survive and thrive in the nearer. which is, you know, that's so great. It's not the best era of a little bit of disturbance. May you live in an interesting times.

Yeah, I'll pass. I'll pass on that. But what are you going to do? Also, just coffee. Dot co-op, fair trade coffee. Use the coupon code majority. Get 10% off. Matt, what's happening on Left Reckoning?

Yeah, Devin Thomas O'Shea. back on for our Sunday show patrons patron dot com slash left reckoning we talked about one bad laugh or another which I saw and thought was awesome and I'm probably going to see again is that that uh Paul Thomas Anderson I was I was front row uh center seat and it was glorious that's great you got to go see it in 70 millimeter that's what I saw you saw it I won't say it with theater okay yeah yes I'm going to go see it again. Stephen Miller might burn the theater down.

All of a sudden, it's like a bunch of cinnophiles around here. Oh, come on. We've got to get Matthew Film Guy on. He will shit all over that movie. I am sure of it. I don't know. He's a PCA. You know, Paul Thomas Anderson always, like, has a little bit more artifice than I think

a film guy Matthew likes. What kind of bull is this? All right. I don't want to get into it. I don't even know if that's Matthew Films. guy's opinion so i'm not going to go after it first of all um you get to an argument with him about superman too all right folks now he's better than superman superman who gives a shit about superman well you talked about it for quite a long time well this is we got to take a quick break

we'll end into the fun half first and I may have a disagreement. Yeah, you can't just say whatever you want about people just because you're rich. I have an absolute right to mock them on YouTube. He's up their buggy whipping like he's the boss. I am not your employer. You know, I'm tired of the negativity. I'm sorry.

I didn't mean to upset you. You're nervous. You're a little bit upset. You're riled up. Yeah, maybe you should rethink your defense of that, you're fucking idiots. We're just going to get rid of you. All right. But dude.

Dude. Dude. Dude. Dude. Uh, you want to smoke this joint? Yes. Do you feel like you are a dinosaur? Some good shit.

Exactly. I'm happy now. It's a win, win, win. Uh, hell yeah. Now listen to me. Two, three, four, five times, eight, four, seven, nine, six, five oh, three, one, four, five, seven, two, thirty-eight, five, seven, two, thirty-eight, five, six, twenty-seven, one-half, five-eight, three-eight, three-nine. billion. Wow. He's the ultimate math, thirt. Don't you see?

Why don't you get a real job instead of steering vitriol and hatred you left wing limbaugh? Everybody's taking their dumb juice today. Come on, Sammy. Dance, dance, dance. Grand Paul, I had my first post-coital scene with a woman. I'm hoping to add more moves to my repertoire. All I have is the dip in the

swirl. Fine, we can double dip. Yes, this is a perfect moment no wait what you make under a million dollars a year you're scum you're nothing excuse me fuck you you fucking liberal elite i think you belong in jail thank you for saying that sam you're a horrible despicable person all right gonna take quick break i want to take a moment to talk to some of the libertarians out there take whatever vehicle you want to drive to the library what you're talking about is jibber japs classic i'm feeling more chill already Good.

Donald Trump can kiss all of our asses. Hey, Sam. Hey, Andy. Are you guys ready to do some evil? Hitler was such an idiot. You think I might get Nazis. Agree. No.

Death to America. You. Yes. Wow. Wow, that's weird. No way. Unbelievable. This guy's got a really good hook.

Grow our hands are. Wow. But, Sam, I've got to get off. No worries. I want to just flesh this out a little bit. I mean, look, it's a free speech issue. If you don't like me, hey, hey, hey, hey, shut up. Thank you for calling into the majority report.

Sam will be with you shortly.