Why Louisiana Stays Poor

With all Louisiana’s wealth in natural resources and industry, WHY DO WE STAY SO POOR?

Comments

Wow, as an outsider (not from Louisiana) I’ve visited the state numerous times, and the impression is always the same—shocking poverty and decay. I’ve always thought of Louisiana as an under-developed state that has just been passed-by the 20th & 21st Centuries. To learn that economically, it’s a very wealthy state with huge economic production and growth from which residents are deriving little to no benefit SCREAMS exploitation. This is a clear lesson in the vital importance of taxes and how they are used.

 

I am a native Louisianaian. If the people would stop electing and re-electing corrupt politicians we could be such a better state. Louisiana is a fantastic state but corruption has ruined us.
I remember working at a hotel when I lived in New Orleans and met a man from there that had moved to Colorado. He told me prior to moving to Colorado he never left Louisiana and thought it was the best state ever. He then said “I got so use to seeing the clean interstates and meeting nice people in Colorado, I came back here to visit 3 years later. I looked around and realized this is a NASTY ass city with no opportunities I can’t believe I stayed here most of my life”. He was happy he left and at that moment I started a plan to leave. I’ve been gone for 4 years and never going back.
The world’s shortest book is entitled “A List of Honest Louisiana Politicians.”
This is why I moved to Texas 16 years ago. EVERY citizen in Louisiana needs to see this. Thank you so much for making this video.
This is absolutely amazing I live in Louisiana and I am one paycheck away from being homeless and corporations get away with murder this absolutely sickens me
“If the wealth of a nation is mostly dug out of the ground, it is a terrible place to live, because a gold mine can run with dying slaves and still produce great treasure.” -CGP_Grey [Rules for Rulers] Corollary: Great places to live are founded on the economic strength of happy productive citizens.
Great video. Another thing to keep in mind is Louisiana has some of the highest sales tax rates in the country, and they are high partly to make up for the lost property tax revenues. Sales taxes hit the poorest the hardest.
I cried watching this. I was born and raised here. I’ve watched my friends and family vote consistently for politicians who sell them out. They worship Industry and Big Oil, they think bending over & letting the big companies have their way is the only path to economic opportunity. I have such a deep connection to this land, such a love and appreciation for it, but I just can’t be here anymore. I can’t watch the thing I love and cherish be ripped apart and torn asunder so greedy politicians and corporations can glean every last drop of wealthy we have.
I’ve lived in Gonzales, Louisiana my entire life. I can count on one hand the times I’ve left the state longer than 48 hours in my 21 years. Honestly until seeing this video I’ve felt very optimistic about living in this state, and have always wanted to come back home anytime I leave. I grew up thinking we were one of the best states because the amount of plants ascension pairsh, and neighboring parishes have to then see/hear all of this. It’s a real slap in the face, and we all deserve better. If it wouldn’t for me honestly not having the means to leave, and how much I love my community I’d leave. The other states I’ve been too not every so I don’t know for sure the people aren’t as kind, nore hospitalitie as us in Louisiana are. My take on all of this is that we as citizens of this great state need to fight for our share of what WE ALL put in with taxes. Let’s not forget the men, and women working the plants who have some pretty dangerous jobs who are nothing but numbers. Finally how about all of us who don’t work in that industry? We have the Devine “privilege” of breathing, smelling, and for some living in such close proximity to them all. For that alone we deserve some sorta system related to Alaska where it’s citizens get a percentage of the revenue in OUR pockets, and more importantly that these multi billion, maybe trillion dollar companies pay AT LEAST a fair share of the property value/profits!!!!
Great video… I went to school in Louisiana, now living in Texas. I’ve always been amazed at the stark contrast in infrastructure… as soon as I cross the border from Texas into Louisiana, the roads are noticeably inferior. I’ve never been able to explain this, since both states have similar natural resources… this video makes sense. Thank you for doing this.
As an immigrant I feel this video resonating with the reasons we leave our counties, it’s not because we are land poor without the beautiful riches nature has to offer but because they are poorly managed and hoarded by a small corrupt few. Louisiana looks more beautiful, and I regret not going out during the reconstruction after Katrina and offering my little grain of sand when I had the chance.
And don’t forget Louisiana’s “cancer alley”, where the rates of cancer are significantly higher than the national average. This is so bad that it was used as a case study in one of my environmental courses for how bad out of control pollution can get.
I’m from western New York and this just stuns me. I thought the disparity and corruption is bad here but it doesn’t hold a candle to this. I hope the people of Louisiana get justice and a properly funded future!
it’s amazing that corporations can be exempt from property tax but that individual’s homes cannot.
My uncle served in the Air Force in Louisiania and absolutely loved that state, but he was shocked by the poverty and the rampant corruption.
This was an outstandingly professionally produced video.
As someone who works in data, great job keeping this data driven and factual and not based on “Feelings”. Its very easy to follow your research and understand a cause and effect relation. I’m not from Louisiana but I’m from another “traditionally poor state” – Michigan and I think some of the problems you face are some of the same ones we also face. I hope your politicians can turn it around.
It wasn’t until I moved away from Louisiana that I realized how bad the situation was there. I love my people, but it is too hard for me to see them taken advantage like this and just roll over for it. All of this wealth rightfully belongs to the people of Louisiana, but they don’t even realize it. Honestly, once my mother passes away, I probably won’t ever return to the state. It’s too heartbreaking for me.
As a foreigner living in the US, I’ve always wondered why the “South” is always so poor. This explains so much. Thank you for explaining this.
So glad to know you exist and are fighting against these inequities with great skill, and showing some results! It gives me hope for the state where family and friends still live. I left Louisiana decades ago for college out of state. I saw how other states operated and never seriously considered returning. I sadly began to see Louisiana a a state operating much like a Central American kleptocracy, but embedded in the US. Even the most corrupt other states had nothing on Louisiana.
This is absolutely terrifying. I honestly wonder if Louisiana’s natural resource infrastructure and tax exemptions are part of the reason why school privatization was pushed so hard in New Orleans after Katrina hit.
I’m German, could care less and stumbled upon this video by accident – but my God did they do a good job in presenting this!!! One of the best visualizations and presentations I’ve ever come across and I work in white color automotive. Congratulations! Hope this had the wanted outcome and the situation has gotten better for the people …
I tend to be one of the last to support a tax increase, and being Louisiana, my initial thought was of corruption and levee funding being diverted. But this is a very solidly argued point that Louisiana went way too far in practically exempting industrial properties from property taxes. Then my next reaction was that there was no way the political fight would be won so I was pleasantly surprised to see the progress shown at the end. Congratulations to you guys for helping to create a significant improvement in public policy! Now I hope the money will be well-spent.
With those property tax exemptions, there’s also the point of them not paying for services and public right of ways that they need to operate. More dense development typically is the only property that returns more than it costs cities to maintain. This means not only are the urban poor subsidizing suburban development, but they’re subsidizing the giant corporations they work for. And they’re not even paid a fair living wage to begin with due to deregulation.
Let me just take a wild guess and say that practically everything has gotten worse and almost nothing has gotten better for Louisiana residents since this video was produced. Get out while (if) you still can. I’ve struggled here my whole life and I’ve finally had enough. I’m selling my possessions and moving away with whatever fits in my beat up 90’s car as soon as I can manage it, and I will never look back.
I’m from Mississippi, a genuinely poor state with poor natural resources and high corruption – not so much on the corporate-political level, but rather internally to our politics. Both sides of the government participate in these practices, and its no wonder that our state remains poor. Whenever I cross over into Louisiana, however, I’m always shocked at how destitute things are. Like this video states, there are so many reasons that Louisiana should be one of the richest states in the United States, and I’ve been aware of them for a long time. It’s baffled me for years that a state so strategically placed and rich in natural resources could possibly be on a level of poverty like Mississippi. Now I know why, and it breaks my heart to see a state that could be so prosperous falling to corruption and poverty that has no business being in it. Unlike Mississippi, there is no excuse for Louisiana to be at the bottom. I sincerely hope this changes.
You think those good ol’ boys on the state board might be getting some kick backs from all those tax exemptions they hand out so freely ?
Having lived in Alaska, where every citizen received a yearly dividend from investment of oil lease fees, this is sickening to hear. Louisiana should be one of the most flush states in the nation if it weren’t for trickle-down economics and tax breaks for the wealthy. The impact of these industries should be beneficial to the area not debilitating. The bottom line is that the people of the state of Louisiana are paying (or losing out on) the taxes that should be spread out to all the consumers. Good luck to all in Louisiana, I hope you finally get this corrected.
“No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems – of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.”
OMG, I had no idea how bad this was. I lived in New Orleans, Louisiana for 10 years. I actually left because of lack of opportunities, widespread poverty and lackluster healthcare system. I also knew that my life expectancy would go down drastically if I stayed. I did develop endocrine health issues during and and immediately after living there. It took 10 years to figure out what was wrong with me. My DNA may have been predisposed to these problems, but maybe they may never have come up if I never lived there.
This could also be useful to show to the decision makers in most other states if nothing else to show what not to do.

Let’s talk about the people Trump doesn’t know….

0:00
well howdy there internet people it’s bo
0:02
again so today
0:04
we’re going to uh talk about how trump
0:07
doesn’t know these people
0:09
you know
0:11
it’s a common refrain
0:13
many of the people who criticize him
0:17
when
0:18
their
0:19
criticisms become public
0:21
he says he doesn’t know him
0:23
never knew her never met him coffee boy
0:28
right and his base buys this
0:33
and
0:35
the thing is
0:37
i feel like by this point they should
0:38
know
0:39
that this is just how he disavows people
0:41
and throws them under the bus and he did
0:43
it to them
0:47
what happened on the sixth
0:50
his base will call legitimate political
0:52
discourse
0:53
a tourist visit
0:55
a protest
0:57
what did trump call it
0:59
a heinous attack
1:06
because it could have came back on him
1:08
right
1:10
looked bad on him so he disavowed it
1:13
tried to move away from it
1:17
to uh the people who were there
1:19
you know the people wearing like all the
1:21
maga stuff
1:23
very much
1:24
his supporters his movement what did he
1:27
say
1:28
you will pay
1:31
you
1:32
do not represent our movement
1:36
you do not represent our country
1:41
those people
1:42
that now
1:43
he’s pretending that he cares about
1:45
because it’s good for him politically
1:47
the day after
1:48
they weren’t his people he didn’t know
1:51
them
1:52
never met him right
1:55
certainly didn’t encourage them
1:58
to go to the capitol
2:00
didn’t say that he was going to walk up
2:02
there meet him there all of that stuff
2:06
they went under the bus just like
2:07
everybody else
2:09
it’s what he does
2:11
this is how he disavows people it’s how
2:14
he
2:15
separates himself
2:17
from his mistakes
2:20
and lets other people pay for them
2:25
so many people
2:28
going out of their way to try to show
2:30
loyalty
2:32
to the former president
2:35
when
2:38
it will never
2:39
be returned
2:42
even those people
2:44
willing to put themselves at risk
2:48
those people willing to quite literally
2:51
stand on the front lines for him
2:54
those people
2:56
willing to be in custody for him
3:02
they’re not part of his movement
3:06
and they became not part of his movement
3:09
as soon as he uh no longer had a use for
3:12
him
3:14
anyway
3:15
it’s just a thought
3:17
y’all have a good day

Comments

Trump was initially unpredictable because he didn’t act like a normal politician—or human being—but once you get that he doesn’t act like a normal human being, he’s surprisingly predictable.

 

 

Trump was initially unpredictable because he didn’t act like a normal politician—or human being—but once you get that he doesn’t act like a normal human being, he’s surprisingly predictable.

The Supreme Court is laying the groundwork to pre-rig the 2024 election

Six Republicans on the Supreme Court just announced—a story that has largely flown under the nation’s political radar—that they’ll consider pre-rigging the presidential election of 2024.

Republican strategists are gaming out which states have Republican legislatures willing to override the votes of their people to win the White House for the Republican candidate.

Here’s how one aspect of it could work out, if they go along with the GOP’s arguments that will be before the Court this October:

It’s November, 2024, and the presidential race between Biden and DeSantis has been tabulated by the states and called by the networks. Biden won 84,355,740 votes to DeSantis’ 77,366,412, clearly carrying the popular vote.
But the popular vote isn’t enough: George W. Bush lost to Al Gore by a half-million votes and Donald Trump lost to Hillary Clinton by 3 million votes but both ended up in the White House. What matters is the Electoral College vote, and that looks good for Biden, too.
As CNN is reporting, the outcome is a virtual clone of the 2020 election: Biden carries the same states he did that year and DeSantis gets all the Trump states. It’s 306 to 232 in the Electoral College, a 74-vote Electoral College lead for Biden, at least as calculated by CNN and the rest of the media. Biden is heading to the White House for another 4 years.
Until the announcement comes out of Georgia. Although Biden won the popular vote in Georgia, their legislature decided it can overrule the popular vote and just awarded the state’s 16 electoral votes to DeSantis instead of Biden.
An hour later we hear from five other states with Republican-controlled legislatures where Biden won the majority of the vote, just like he had in 2020: North Carolina (15 electoral votes), Wisconsin (10), Michigan (16), Pennsylvania (20) and Arizona (11).
Each has followed Georgia’s lead and their legislatures have awarded their Electoral College votes—even though Biden won the popular vote in each state—to DeSantis.
Thus, a total of 88 Electoral College votes from those six states move from Biden to DeSantis, who’s declared the winner and will be sworn in on January 20, 2025.
Wolf Blitzer announces that DeSantis has won the election, and people pour into the streets to protest. They’re met with a hail of bullets as Republican-affiliated militias have been rehearsing for this exact moment and their allies among the police refuse to intervene.
After a few thousand people lay dead in the streets of two dozen cities, the police begin to round up the surviving “instigators,” who are charged with seditious conspiracy for resisting the Republican legislatures of their states.
After he’s sworn in on January 20th, President DeSantis points to the ongoing demonstrations, declares a permanent state of emergency, and suspends future elections, just as Trump had repeatedly told the world he planned for 2020.

Sound far fetched?

Six Republicans on the Supreme Court just announced that one of the first cases they’ll decide next year could include whether that very scenario is constitutional or not. And it almost certainly is.

Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution lays out the process clearly, and it doesn’t even once mention the popular vote or the will of the people:

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress… [emphasis added]
“The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons … which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President…”

It’s not particularly ambiguous, even as clarified by the 12th Amendment and the Electoral Count Act of 1887.

Neither mentions the will of the people, although the Electoral Count Act requires each state’s governor to certify the vote before passing it along to Washington, DC. And half of those states have Democratic governors.

Which brings us to the Supreme Court’s probable 2023 decision. As Robert Barnes wrote yesterday for The Washington Post:

“The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will consider what would be a radical change in the way federal elections are conducted, giving state legislatures sole authority to set the rules for contests even if their actions violated state constitutions and resulted in extreme partisan gerrymandering for congressional seats.”

While the main issue being debated in Moore v Harper, scheduled for a hearing this October, is a gerrymander that conflicts with North Carolina’s constitution, the issue at the core of the debate is what’s called the “Independent State Legislature Doctrine.”

It literally gives state legislatures the power to pre-rig or simply hand elections to the candidate of their choice.

As NPR notes:

The independent state legislature theory was first invoked by three conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices in the celebrated Bush v. Gore case that handed the 2000 election victory to George W. Bush. In that case, the three cited it to support the selection of a Republican slate of presidential electors.”

That doctrine—the basis of John Eastman and Donald Trump’s effort to get states to submit multiple slates of electors—asserts that a plain reading of Article II and the 12th Amendment of the Constitution says that each state’s legislature has final say in which candidate gets their states’ Electoral College vote, governors and the will of the voters be damned.

The Republicans point out that the Constitution says that it’s up to the states—”in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct”—to decide which presidential candidate gets their Electoral College votes.

But the Electoral Count Act requires a governor’s sign-off, and half those states have Democratic governors. Which has precedence, the Constitution or the Act?

If the Supreme Court says it’s the US Constitution rather than the Electoral Count Act, states’ constitutions, state laws, or the votes of their citizens, the scenario outlined above becomes not just possible but very likely. Republicans play hardball and consistently push to the extremes regardless of pubic opinion.

After all, the Constitution only mentions the states’ legislatures—which are all Republican controlled—so the unwillingness of the Democratic governors of Michigan, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to sign off on the Electoral College votes becomes moot.

Under this circumstance DeSantis becomes president, the third Republican president in the 21st century, and also the third Republican President to have lost the popular vote election yet ended up in the White House.

This scenario isn’t just plausible: it’s probable. GOP-controlled states are already changing their state laws to allow for it, and Republican strategists are gaming out which states have Republican legislatures willing to override the votes of their people to win the White House for the Republican candidate.

Those state legislators who still embrace Trump and this theory are getting the support of large pools of rightwing billionaires’ dark money.

As the highly respected conservative Judge J. Michael Luttig recently wrote:

“Trump and the Republicans can only be stopped from stealing the 2024 election at this point if the Supreme Court rejects the independent state legislature doctrine … and Congress amends the Electoral Count Act to constrain Congress’ own power to reject state electoral votes and decide the presidency.”

I take no satisfaction in having accurately predicted—in March of 2020—how Trump and his buddies would try to steal the election in January of 2021. Or how the Supreme Court would blow up the Environmental Protection Agency.

Trump’s January 6th effort failed because every contested state had laws on the books requiring all of their Electoral College votes to go to whichever candidate won the popular vote in the state.

That will not be the case in 2024.

As we are watching, the Supreme Court—in collaboration with state legislatures through activists like Ginny Thomas—are setting that election up right now in front of us in real time.

We damn well better be planning for this, because it’s likely coming our way in just a bit more than two short years.

The Supreme Court is laying the groundwork to pre-rig the 2024 election
Six Republicans on the Supreme Court just announced—a story that has largely flown under the nation’s political radar—that they’ll consider pre-rigging the presidential election of 2024.Republican strategists are gaming out which states have Republican legislatures willing to override the votes of t…
Wikipedia:  Moore v. Harper (Case scheduled for Oct)

 

But how does bitcoin actually work? (2017)

The math behind cryptocurrencies.
Help fund future projects: https://www.patreon.com/3blue1brown
An equally valuable form of support is to simply share some of the videos.
Special thanks to these supporters: http://3b1b.co/btc-thanks
This video was also funded with help from Protocol Labs: https://protocol.ai/join/

Some people have asked if this channel accepts contributions in cryptocurrency form. As a matter of fact, it does:
http://3b1b.co/crypto
ENS: 3b1b.eth

2^256 video: https://youtu.be/S9JGmA5_unY

Music by Vincent Rubinetti: https://soundcloud.com/vincerubinetti…

Here are a few other resources I’d recommend:

Original Bitcoin paper: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Block explorer: https://blockexplorer.com/

Blog post by Michael Nielsen: http://3b1b.co/crypto
(This is particularly good for understanding the details of what transactions look like, which is something this video did not cover)

Video by CuriousInventor: https://youtu.be/Lx9zgZCMqXE

Video by Anders Brownworth: https://youtu.be/_160oMzblY8

Ethereum white paper: https://goo.gl/XXZddT

 

Other Videos by video creator

 

Comments

this was awesome! I was having trouble on understanding the nodes vs. miners as well as the random number / difficulty adjustment but this totally cleared it up!
It’s an extremely information dense lecture. You have to watch portions of it again and again to grasp the underlying concepts. But once you’ve finished it, you feel so damn confident.
5 years later and I still comeback to this Blockchain explanation to check if my understanding, love it
You have no idea how much I’ve tried to find an article or video actually explaining how cryptocurrencies work. Everyone else just goes around with analogies. They probably don’t understand fully themselves. Thanks man.

 

This is the clearest video I’ve ever seen, and I still don’t get it.
10:00 “The history of transactions is the currency” interesting Edit: 17:30 I love how I now know what a block chain is, and it wasn’t as mind blowing as people on the internet made it seem. And I’m pretty sure blockchains are done in introductory coding courses. (Though not as complex). Edit 2: 18:25 so THAT’S why mining is profitable. I get it now. That circles back to the claim made ~10 mins in. Edit 3: 21:15 So, bitcoin ‘authority’, in essence, is computing power, and bitcoin ‘identity’ is the a blockchain made by the original owner? Great video. As you can see I am still shaky on complete understanding, BUT this was the only useful explaination of Bitcoin and crypto I’ve seen so far (for me). So I am greatful. and maybe this will lead me to understanding others.
Prior to watching this I didn’t really understand the link between mining and validating the transactions. Its quite interesting how the system can self-adjust to make sure that mining\validating is always profitable, and therefore even if there is a big crash in mining profitability it should just result in a slowdown of transactions until the system balances. I guess the issue is that there is a big problem if the coin is used for real large scale commerce\business that rely on guaranteed volume. If a large enough proportion of bitcoin transactions were for real vital goods and services, then a crash in mining profitability could drive he value to zero since the value would be much more tied to the amount of volume the system can handle. Lack of trust could continually inflate it, which would then continually make it harder to restore validation capacity. Volatility is an issue for real world business even if the overall trend is continually upwards. If I am correct, then it would suggest that bitcoin will remain a speculation asset and a store of value rather than a replacement for sovereign currencies?
at around 20:30, theyre discussing how it isnt viable for Alice to try to commit fraud because she cant out-compute the other miners on the network all by herself. could someone explain what would happen if a group of miners (that formed the majority of the network) decide to commit fraud together?
>>  It’s 100% possible. And in fact, the top 4 miners of bitcoin have more than 50% of the network’s total hashing power. However, if you have 50% of the total mining network’s computation, you’re probably better off using it to make ~$2.2 Million a day with honest mining than you to defraud a single individual.

 

>> the specific name for this scenario is a “50% attack”

 

 

CIA Propaganda SHUT DOWN By Journalist In Real Time | The Kyle Kulinski Show

00:00
matt lee is uh an associated press
00:04
foreign policy correspondent or state
00:06
department uh journalist and
00:09
he
00:11
really questioned this guy ned price the
00:13
state department spokesperson very
00:14
aggressively over this new claim that’s
00:16
emerged
00:17
that
00:18
we now know russia is planning a false
00:20
flag attack uh to invade ukraine and
00:25
you know therefore it’s like
00:28
basically whatever the us wants to do in
00:29
response is justified because we we
00:32
didn’t start it we didn’t do anything we
00:33
didn’t do anything wrong here and so if
00:36
we want to deploy troops to the border
00:38
tens of thousands of them if we want to
00:40
have the tanks ready to go
00:42
if we want to do sanctions not just of
00:44
the oligarchs but even russian civilians
00:46
hey don’t question us we’re telling you
00:49
we we know we have the smoking gun
00:50
evidence that they’re gonna do a false
00:52
flag attack and we need to be prepared
00:54
for that so this journalist has been
00:56
around the block
00:57
and he’s going to do a very simple thing
00:59
he’s going to ask for evidence and look
01:00
at how comical this back and forth is uh
01:03
we told you a few weeks ago that we have
01:05
information indicating russia also has
01:07
already pre-positioned a group of
01:09
operatives to conduct a false flag
01:11
operation in eastern ukraine so that map
01:13
to your question is an action that
01:15
russia has already taken it’s an action
01:17
that you say that they have taken but
01:19
you have shown no evidence to
01:22
to to confirm that and i’m going to get
01:24
to the next question here which is what
01:26
is the evidence that they i mean this is
01:28
like crisis actors really this is like
01:31
alex jones territory you’re getting it
01:32
too now
01:34
um what evidence do you have to support
01:36
the idea that there is some propaganda
01:39
film in the in in the making
01:41
now this is derived uh from information
01:44
known to the us government intelligence
01:46
information that we have declassified i
01:48
think okay well where is it where is
01:50
this information it is intelligence
01:52
information that we have declassified
01:54
well where is it where is the
01:55
declassified information i just
01:57
delivered it
01:59
look no you made a series of allegations
02:02
would you like us to print out the
02:03
topper because you will see a transcript
02:05
of this briefing that you can print out
02:06
for yourself it’s not evidence ned
02:08
that’s you saying it that’s not evidence
02:10
i’m sorry
02:13
what would you like matt
02:14
i i would like to see some proof that
02:16
you that that
02:18
that you can show
02:20
that
02:20
that matt
02:22
that shows that that that shows that the
02:24
russians are doing this ned i’ve been
02:26
doing this i know that was my passion
02:29
you have been doing this for quite a
02:30
while you know that when we declassify
02:31
intelligence information we do so in a
02:34
means
02:43
where is the declassified information
02:45
other than you coming out here and
02:47
saying
02:48
matt i’m sorry you don’t like the format
02:50
uh but we have
02:51
format it’s the content i’m sorry you
02:53
don’t like the content i’m sorry you i’m
02:56
sorry you are doubting the information
02:57
that is in the possession of the us
02:59
government
03:00
what i’m telling you is that this is
03:01
information that’s available to us we
03:03
are making it available to you uh in
03:05
order uh for a couple reasons one is to
03:08
attempt to deter the russians from going
03:10
ahead with this activity two in the
03:12
event we’re not able to do that in the
03:14
event the russians do go ahead with us
03:16
to make it clear as day to lay bear the
03:18
fact that this has always been an
03:20
attempt on the part of the russian
03:21
federation to fabricate a pretext
03:25
yeah but you don’t have any
03:28
any evidence to back it up other than
03:30
what you’re saying
03:31
it’s like you’re saying
03:32
we think we we have
03:34
information the russians may do this
03:37
but you won’t tell us what the
03:39
information is and then when when you’re
03:41
that is the idea behind deterrence that
03:43
is
03:59
moving forward with this type of
04:00
activity that is why we’re making it
04:02
public today if the russians don’t go
04:04
forward with this that is not uh ipso
04:07
facto an indication that they never had
04:08
plans to do so uh but then it’s
04:11
unprovable
04:12
my god what is the evidence that you
04:14
have that suggests that that the
04:16
russians are even planning this i mean
04:17
i’m not saying that they’re not but you
04:19
just come out and say this and expect us
04:21
just to to believe it without you
04:24
showing a shred of evidence that it’s
04:26
actually true other than
04:28
when i ask or what anyone else asks
04:30
what’s the information you said well i
04:32
just gave it to you which was just you
04:34
making a statement matt you said
04:35
yourself you’ve been in this business
04:36
for quite a long time you know that when
04:38
we make information uh intelligence
04:40
information public we do so uh in a way
04:43
that protects sensitive sources and
04:45
methods you also know that we do so we
04:49
declassify information only when we’re
04:51
confident in that information if you
04:53
doubt if you doubt the the credibility
04:55
of the us government of the british
04:57
government uh of other governments and
04:58
want to uh
05:00
you know find uh solace and information
05:02
that uh the russians are putting out uh
05:04
that is that is for you to do so in
05:07
other words you are a russian
05:09
propagandist or a russian stooge or a
05:12
dupe
05:13
um
05:14
or a foreign asset
05:16
because you’re trusting them over us
05:18
when all he’s doing is saying i’m
05:20
agnostic i just want to see your
05:21
evidence if you’re gonna make a claim
05:23
the burden is on you to provide the
05:24
evidence that’s how it works that’s how
05:26
it’s supposed to work but usually the
05:29
rest of the media when they’re state
05:30
department sources or their cia sources
05:32
uh tell them something they’re
05:34
stenographers they take it at face value
05:37
because they’re suckers who are putting
05:39
these positions specifically for that
05:41
reason i’m surprised this ap guy hasn’t
05:43
been fired already because there’s a
05:44
number of times he’s held this slimy
05:47
weasel
05:48
ned price accountable
05:50
and he’s so bad at the job he’s so
05:52
terrible at this he’s like we know that
05:54
the russians are are now doing this
05:56
what’s your evidence i just told you
05:58
that we know that that they’re gonna be
06:00
doing this that’s not evidence that’s
06:02
not evidence now understand something
06:04
just like ned says i’ll say the same
06:05
thing
06:06
i don’t know is it possible that they’re
06:08
going to do that sure
06:09
but this is not an agency that has a
06:12
track record of truth telling in fact
06:14
quite the opposite they have a long
06:16
record of lying about everything
06:18
these are the same people that got us
06:20
into the iraq war now i’m sure some
06:21
people involved in the stuff behind the
06:23
scenes maybe really believe the [ __ ]
06:25
really believe the line of argument and
06:26
so they were acting in good faith even
06:29
though they were wrong but there’s also
06:30
people who might not be who might not be
06:32
acting in good faith who are lying and
06:34
know that they’re lying
06:36
but at the end of the day all that
06:37
matters is whether or not what they’re
06:39
saying is true and what that means we
06:40
should do about it now look i’m on
06:43
record are there certain things that are
06:45
on the table in a negotiation with
06:46
russia that are more like hardline
06:48
approaches absolutely absolutely so for
06:52
one thing
06:53
um the nordstrom 2 pipeline should the
06:55
u.s use that as leverage sure absolutely
06:58
in other words look if we find some sort
07:00
of peace agreement and a way out of this
07:01
then you can have the north stream two
07:03
pipeline if you don’t we’re gonna
07:05
undercut it not let you have it and the
07:07
u.s will sell our natural gas to germany
07:09
and we’ll sell the same price as you
07:10
guys even if it’s at a loss
07:12
that’s one thing you could put on the
07:13
table another thing is uh like it or not
07:16
these nations are sovereign nations that
07:18
were the post-soviet states so
07:22
having them armed so they could defend
07:24
themselves yeah that’s absolutely on the
07:26
table that makes perfect sense they’re
07:27
sovereign nations they get to do that if
07:29
they want to do that now these are
07:30
things that all these things russia
07:32
views as red lines that you can’t do
07:36
no
07:37
don’t agree and that’s the whole point
07:38
of a negotiation now are there other
07:41
parts of the deal that would be
07:42
concessions to russia well yes because
07:43
again that’s part of a negotiation as
07:45
well
07:46
and so
07:47
uh i want peace i want to avoid world
07:49
war iii
07:50
so
07:51
um does that mean we’re not gonna do war
07:53
games on russia’s border anymore with
07:55
nato yes does that mean we’re not gonna
07:56
have missiles pointed directly at russia
07:58
in in an ally state of ours yes
08:01
does that mean that you know uh nato
08:04
should not move an inch closer to
08:05
russia’s border absolutely all those
08:07
things are true but it’s also true that
08:09
other things are on the table but
08:11
what the us government is trying to do
08:12
is lay the groundwork and set the
08:14
preconditions to allow us to do anything
08:18
and play the victim and
08:20
play like we’re acting defensive every
08:21
step of the way but it is the same
08:23
organization that led us into the iraq
08:25
war you know the state department the
08:26
cia if these are the same outlets that
08:28
lied about russiagate relentlessly for
08:30
years straight and they are
08:32
well then you shouldn’t take their word
08:33
for it they need to actually show
08:34
evidence if they have such evidence
08:36
they’re not showing the evidence which
08:37
means they don’t have such evidence
08:38
again that’s not to say it’s impossible
08:40
that russia would do this but you need
08:43
to prove it you need to show it you
08:45
absolutely need to show it and so this
08:46
is a rare instance of a journalist doing
08:48
their job doing their job right
08:51
doing their job effectively and really
08:53
unmasking
08:54
the the little weasel state department
08:56
spokesperson here
08:59
so
09:02
there you have it i really hope that the
09:04
negotiation works and we can find a way
09:06
to back out of this feud because
09:10
in the nuclear age with two
09:11
nuclear-armed states you don’t even want
09:13
to be this close
09:15
to some sort of
09:17
fight
09:19
you don’t
09:20
it’s for the future of humanity it’s a
09:23
necessity that you find a way
09:25
out of this situation
09:27
and you need to use all the negotiation
09:29
skills all the diplomacy in the world
09:31
and you need to be fair-minded and
09:32
reasonable and unfortunately i do not
09:35
trust the us at all to do that i don’t
09:37
really trust russia either
09:39
but i also
09:41
know
09:42
that our government has lied
09:43
relentlessly
09:45
about this stuff and
09:47
finally somebody’s holding them
09:48
accountable if you want to see me and
09:50
crystal ball interview legends like noam
09:52
chomsky cornell west and more subscribe
09:54
to crystal kyle and friends on sub stack
09:56
five dollars a month get you the video
09:58
version a day early remember we take
10:01
zero ad dollars for this podcast or you
10:03
can sign up on sub stack for free and
10:05
get the audio version a day later link
10:07
in the video description box below

Let’s talk about guns, gun control, school shooting, and “law abiding gun owners”

Part 1:

 

Part 2:

 

Follow-up:  New Army Gun will alter Gun Control Debate