1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,639 Speaker 1: All right, guys, So we're joined this morning by Ken Klippenstein, 2 00:00:02,720 --> 00:00:05,160 Speaker 1: who is a journalist in many. 3 00:00:05,080 --> 00:00:06,760 Speaker 2: Regular watchers of the show will. 4 00:00:06,559 --> 00:00:09,160 Speaker 1: Recognize him as a fantastic substack where he breaks a 5 00:00:09,160 --> 00:00:12,760 Speaker 1: lot of national security news in particular, and that has 6 00:00:12,800 --> 00:00:16,760 Speaker 1: become quite relevant in our national conversation because there has 7 00:00:16,920 --> 00:00:21,680 Speaker 1: long been a jd Vance dossier compiled by the Trump 8 00:00:21,720 --> 00:00:24,600 Speaker 1: campaign that we've known for months now had been hacked 9 00:00:24,640 --> 00:00:27,080 Speaker 1: by some actor. Put a pin in that there are 10 00:00:27,080 --> 00:00:29,280 Speaker 1: suggestions it might be iron we'll get Ken's thoughts on 11 00:00:29,320 --> 00:00:31,240 Speaker 1: that as well, but put a pin in where it 12 00:00:31,280 --> 00:00:35,120 Speaker 1: came from. And quite a variety of mainstream news outlets 13 00:00:35,120 --> 00:00:38,959 Speaker 1: were refusing to publish it now. They cited two primary reasons. 14 00:00:39,159 --> 00:00:43,320 Speaker 1: One was because it was a hacked document, and the 15 00:00:43,440 --> 00:00:47,280 Speaker 1: other was that in some estimations it was deemed to 16 00:00:47,320 --> 00:00:50,080 Speaker 1: be not newsworthy. Well, Ken was able to get his 17 00:00:50,159 --> 00:00:54,360 Speaker 1: hand on that dossier published it to his substack. In fact, 18 00:00:54,400 --> 00:00:56,880 Speaker 1: I can pull this up while we're talking about it, 19 00:00:57,280 --> 00:00:59,680 Speaker 1: so that people could judge for themselves whether or not 20 00:00:59,840 --> 00:01:03,480 Speaker 1: it was in fact newsworthy and see what sorts of 21 00:01:03,560 --> 00:01:08,080 Speaker 1: concerns the Trump campaign had internally about jd Vance and 22 00:01:08,120 --> 00:01:13,400 Speaker 1: his selection onto the ticket as Donald Trump's vice presidential pick. 23 00:01:13,520 --> 00:01:16,039 Speaker 1: So Ken joins us now to talk about that, but 24 00:01:16,160 --> 00:01:19,840 Speaker 1: also to talk about the fallout after posting this dossier. 25 00:01:19,880 --> 00:01:23,640 Speaker 1: He's now been banned on Twitter. Elon Musk has gone 26 00:01:23,680 --> 00:01:28,200 Speaker 1: after him, personally describing the publishing of this dossier completely 27 00:01:28,280 --> 00:01:32,119 Speaker 1: unredacted as quote evil. So we want to talk about 28 00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:35,679 Speaker 1: all angles of this this topic. Ken, thank you so 29 00:01:35,760 --> 00:01:37,920 Speaker 1: much for spending some time with us this morning. Could 30 00:01:37,920 --> 00:01:39,959 Speaker 1: it be with you, Yeah, of course. So first, just 31 00:01:39,959 --> 00:01:43,040 Speaker 1: take me through your thinking why you came down in 32 00:01:43,080 --> 00:01:45,800 Speaker 1: a different place on publishing this dossier than other news 33 00:01:45,800 --> 00:01:46,440 Speaker 1: outlets did. 34 00:01:46,760 --> 00:01:49,320 Speaker 3: Yeah. A number of other news outlets acquired this, included 35 00:01:49,320 --> 00:01:52,600 Speaker 3: The New York Times, Politico, the Washington Post. And I 36 00:01:52,680 --> 00:01:55,520 Speaker 3: just thought it was the worst of media paternalism to 37 00:01:55,600 --> 00:01:57,960 Speaker 3: decide that the public that they knew better and the 38 00:01:57,960 --> 00:02:00,280 Speaker 3: public doesn't need to know these things. And to the 39 00:02:00,320 --> 00:02:01,840 Speaker 3: extent that they did talk about it, I mean, they 40 00:02:01,840 --> 00:02:05,160 Speaker 3: were happy to paraphrase some of the contents. So I thought, well, 41 00:02:05,160 --> 00:02:07,800 Speaker 3: why not just show people the underlying thing instead of 42 00:02:07,800 --> 00:02:10,760 Speaker 3: relying on their paraphrase. And an initial concern I had, 43 00:02:11,200 --> 00:02:12,840 Speaker 3: having worked in media for a number of years now 44 00:02:12,919 --> 00:02:15,480 Speaker 3: and seeing how when media tries to make the judgment 45 00:02:15,480 --> 00:02:17,480 Speaker 3: about what people are going to be interested in and 46 00:02:17,520 --> 00:02:20,160 Speaker 3: misreads what the general public might be interested in because they're, 47 00:02:20,240 --> 00:02:23,679 Speaker 3: you know, overwhelmingly focused on other things. I think that 48 00:02:24,040 --> 00:02:26,000 Speaker 3: turned out to be true in this case. I encourage 49 00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:28,640 Speaker 3: people to go and read the actual document and compare 50 00:02:28,680 --> 00:02:32,280 Speaker 3: it with the articles that were said to have paraphrased 51 00:02:32,280 --> 00:02:34,200 Speaker 3: it and which the media was saying, Look, we've already 52 00:02:34,200 --> 00:02:36,320 Speaker 3: basically talked about what's interesting there, what's the you know, 53 00:02:36,320 --> 00:02:39,000 Speaker 3: what's the what's the deal here? Look at the actual document. 54 00:02:39,000 --> 00:02:41,040 Speaker 3: Compare that with reporting, and you're going to notice a 55 00:02:41,160 --> 00:02:44,280 Speaker 3: gulf between those two things, a huge difference in terms 56 00:02:44,320 --> 00:02:48,720 Speaker 3: of this specific parts of the document that were never 57 00:02:48,760 --> 00:02:52,560 Speaker 3: mentioned in any stories, and just the tone of the campaign. 58 00:02:52,560 --> 00:02:55,040 Speaker 3: To me, the most interesting thing is not the disclosures 59 00:02:55,080 --> 00:02:58,320 Speaker 3: looking at this as something like the steel dosier that's 60 00:02:58,360 --> 00:03:01,280 Speaker 3: going to have all this salacious detail that was never 61 00:03:01,320 --> 00:03:05,320 Speaker 3: what this was. What's interesting about this is the meta 62 00:03:05,360 --> 00:03:07,920 Speaker 3: textual point of that. It gives you insight into what 63 00:03:07,960 --> 00:03:11,160 Speaker 3: the campaign thinks is problematic about VANCE and what's interesting 64 00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:14,480 Speaker 3: about it is overwhelmingly the theme that they focus on 65 00:03:15,720 --> 00:03:19,680 Speaker 3: being his liability is what makes him trumpy. It's like 66 00:03:19,720 --> 00:03:23,040 Speaker 3: the maga dimension to his character that they seem uneasy with, 67 00:03:23,080 --> 00:03:25,800 Speaker 3: which is funny and interesting because it shows that the 68 00:03:25,840 --> 00:03:29,600 Speaker 3: party is in conflict with Trump. They both need him 69 00:03:29,600 --> 00:03:33,400 Speaker 3: to win and they're uneasy with They're uneasy with with 70 00:03:33,480 --> 00:03:40,280 Speaker 3: his policies, particularly the ones that tend towards isolationism and protectionism. 71 00:03:40,600 --> 00:03:42,680 Speaker 1: Yeah, there were definitely some things in here that made 72 00:03:42,720 --> 00:03:45,560 Speaker 1: me personally like, oh, if this was the JD. E. 73 00:03:45,680 --> 00:03:48,040 Speaker 1: Vance that was put forward, I would be more receptive 74 00:03:48,120 --> 00:03:50,640 Speaker 1: to him. Like, for example, he was critical of Donald 75 00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:54,800 Speaker 1: Trump when he assassinated Irani. In general custom Solimani, he 76 00:03:54,880 --> 00:03:57,680 Speaker 1: describes himself as a non interventionist. These were all things 77 00:03:57,680 --> 00:04:01,680 Speaker 1: they flagged as like potential political problems for him. And 78 00:04:01,760 --> 00:04:04,200 Speaker 1: the two things that I found interesting was number one, 79 00:04:04,240 --> 00:04:07,640 Speaker 1: as you're laying out, the two big areas that they 80 00:04:07,760 --> 00:04:10,560 Speaker 1: thought were of vulnerability for Vance were number one, his 81 00:04:10,920 --> 00:04:13,480 Speaker 1: overwhelming past criticism of Donald Trump. And I do think 82 00:04:13,480 --> 00:04:15,280 Speaker 1: that that turned out to be somewhat of a focus 83 00:04:15,280 --> 00:04:18,240 Speaker 1: of conversation, somewhat of a liability for him. And there's 84 00:04:18,320 --> 00:04:21,080 Speaker 1: chapter and verse of him going through, you know, all 85 00:04:21,160 --> 00:04:23,200 Speaker 1: the ways that he used to hate Donald Trump and 86 00:04:23,240 --> 00:04:26,680 Speaker 1: think that he was unfit and believe his sexual assault accusers, 87 00:04:26,680 --> 00:04:28,760 Speaker 1: and all of those sorts of things, right, which you 88 00:04:28,839 --> 00:04:33,040 Speaker 1: probably many people will be familiar with the what jd 89 00:04:33,120 --> 00:04:34,880 Speaker 1: Vance has said about Donald Trump in the past because 90 00:04:34,920 --> 00:04:39,880 Speaker 1: of mainstream coverage. The other bucket was him being a 91 00:04:39,920 --> 00:04:44,200 Speaker 1: non traditional conservative and having views that for example, you know, 92 00:04:44,320 --> 00:04:47,640 Speaker 1: talking about how he thought Democrats had some policies that 93 00:04:47,680 --> 00:04:50,360 Speaker 1: would be favorable to the working class, how he had 94 00:04:50,400 --> 00:04:54,040 Speaker 1: said some favorable things about unions, for example, and they 95 00:04:54,080 --> 00:04:58,039 Speaker 1: saw that as a liability, which is interesting in and 96 00:04:58,080 --> 00:05:00,440 Speaker 1: of itself. But the other piece that I found interesting, 97 00:05:00,560 --> 00:05:03,520 Speaker 1: Ken is what wasn't in this dossier, which is that 98 00:05:04,600 --> 00:05:08,240 Speaker 1: I wondered if they had surfaced some of the comments 99 00:05:08,240 --> 00:05:10,839 Speaker 1: that have genuinely been a problem for jd. Vance, which 100 00:05:10,880 --> 00:05:13,360 Speaker 1: is like his whole you know, his whole motif on 101 00:05:13,520 --> 00:05:18,760 Speaker 1: childless cat ladies, and similarly, you know, situated commentary about 102 00:05:19,160 --> 00:05:21,640 Speaker 1: women and what he thinks role for women should be, 103 00:05:22,000 --> 00:05:26,599 Speaker 1: and this very sort of narrow and contemptuous view that 104 00:05:26,680 --> 00:05:29,400 Speaker 1: he has of women who don't fit the prescribed roles 105 00:05:29,440 --> 00:05:30,640 Speaker 1: that he would like to. 106 00:05:30,600 --> 00:05:31,120 Speaker 2: See them in. 107 00:05:31,800 --> 00:05:34,440 Speaker 1: And that was none of that was in here at all. 108 00:05:35,120 --> 00:05:38,160 Speaker 1: So I mean that's interesting in one regard because there 109 00:05:38,240 --> 00:05:41,240 Speaker 1: have been a question about whether Donald Trump really realized 110 00:05:41,279 --> 00:05:42,800 Speaker 1: all of these things about him, whether he would have 111 00:05:42,800 --> 00:05:44,159 Speaker 1: put him on the ticket if he knew he had 112 00:05:44,200 --> 00:05:46,760 Speaker 1: said all of these things, And also interesting because you 113 00:05:46,839 --> 00:05:51,040 Speaker 1: realize how these standard issue Republican consultant consulting firms which 114 00:05:51,080 --> 00:05:54,640 Speaker 1: would have been behind this type of this type of dossier, 115 00:05:55,320 --> 00:05:59,039 Speaker 1: how blind they were to what the actual liabilities would 116 00:05:59,040 --> 00:06:01,480 Speaker 1: be for him in this camp exactly. 117 00:06:02,040 --> 00:06:05,680 Speaker 3: And I should note a campaign in which policy is 118 00:06:05,720 --> 00:06:08,120 Speaker 3: not centered. I mean, this is a ViBe's campaign. I 119 00:06:08,320 --> 00:06:11,440 Speaker 3: as a reporter, am trying to find something anything to 120 00:06:11,440 --> 00:06:13,760 Speaker 3: be able to talk to readers about what these people 121 00:06:13,800 --> 00:06:15,400 Speaker 3: stand for and what we can expect will happen. And 122 00:06:15,440 --> 00:06:17,640 Speaker 3: it's really hard because they don't talk about I'll give 123 00:06:17,640 --> 00:06:21,040 Speaker 3: you an example. I went through the not just the 124 00:06:21,040 --> 00:06:24,440 Speaker 3: Republican Convention, but the Democratic Convention collectively. They mentioned the 125 00:06:24,440 --> 00:06:28,600 Speaker 3: word healthcare twice during the entire speeches, and in both 126 00:06:28,640 --> 00:06:31,240 Speaker 3: references they had essentially nothing to say about it. And 127 00:06:31,279 --> 00:06:36,560 Speaker 3: then you look at national security basically like slightly more 128 00:06:36,560 --> 00:06:38,920 Speaker 3: to say about that, but still basically nothing. I mean 129 00:06:38,960 --> 00:06:40,640 Speaker 3: it's really hard to define what they're doing. And so 130 00:06:40,760 --> 00:06:42,680 Speaker 3: when you have a document like this that gives you 131 00:06:42,720 --> 00:06:46,359 Speaker 3: some sense of not just what the attitudes of the 132 00:06:46,360 --> 00:06:48,400 Speaker 3: party are, but I think too why they're so quiet 133 00:06:48,400 --> 00:06:50,360 Speaker 3: about a number of things, because they're uneasy with their 134 00:06:50,400 --> 00:06:52,880 Speaker 3: position on a lot of different things, including on things 135 00:06:53,080 --> 00:06:55,800 Speaker 3: which it wouldn't be it's sort of counterintuitive that they are. 136 00:06:55,880 --> 00:06:58,200 Speaker 3: So if this document, as was suggested by the media, 137 00:06:58,200 --> 00:06:59,960 Speaker 3: oh it's just going to be based on polling or whatever, 138 00:07:00,440 --> 00:07:03,160 Speaker 3: then they're going to talk about overwhelmingly the cat lady 139 00:07:03,200 --> 00:07:05,680 Speaker 3: stuff that you're saying. Because because gender is a huge 140 00:07:05,720 --> 00:07:08,680 Speaker 3: issue of it's a huge problem Republican's face. It relates 141 00:07:08,720 --> 00:07:12,680 Speaker 3: to the abortion question and is central to I think 142 00:07:12,720 --> 00:07:16,040 Speaker 3: their main liability going into this election post Dobbs decision 143 00:07:16,040 --> 00:07:18,960 Speaker 3: of the overturn of Row. But instead they're interested in 144 00:07:19,040 --> 00:07:23,520 Speaker 3: these positions that you know, it could be characterized to 145 00:07:23,560 --> 00:07:27,200 Speaker 3: be definitely popular among the you know, isolationist wing of 146 00:07:27,240 --> 00:07:31,280 Speaker 3: the Republican base, probably so among reporters generally, and they 147 00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:33,000 Speaker 3: acted as though it's a liability. That tells you that 148 00:07:33,040 --> 00:07:35,320 Speaker 3: they're not primarily concerned with public opinion. They have other 149 00:07:35,360 --> 00:07:37,840 Speaker 3: concerns I mean, I'm guessing where their money comes from. 150 00:07:38,160 --> 00:07:38,400 Speaker 1: Point. 151 00:07:38,480 --> 00:07:39,840 Speaker 2: That's a very interesting point. 152 00:07:40,240 --> 00:07:42,360 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean they had lots in there about you know, 153 00:07:42,400 --> 00:07:44,840 Speaker 1: they knew the fact that he had these fringe extreme 154 00:07:44,960 --> 00:07:49,160 Speaker 1: abortion views would be a potential problem, although it's kind 155 00:07:49,200 --> 00:07:51,080 Speaker 1: of down the list in terms of the areas that 156 00:07:51,120 --> 00:07:53,840 Speaker 1: they were concerned about, which is also interesting to me. 157 00:07:54,840 --> 00:07:57,600 Speaker 1: But you know, there's also a quality to these, you know, 158 00:07:57,640 --> 00:08:02,240 Speaker 1: official campaign like vetting documents where it doesn't take into 159 00:08:02,320 --> 00:08:05,320 Speaker 1: account any of the quote unquote X factor, like whatever 160 00:08:05,400 --> 00:08:08,440 Speaker 1: it is about Jade Vance that just judging by the 161 00:08:08,480 --> 00:08:10,840 Speaker 1: polls and the fact that he has the lowest favorability 162 00:08:10,920 --> 00:08:13,920 Speaker 1: rating of you know, the set of the four Kamala 163 00:08:13,960 --> 00:08:16,160 Speaker 1: tim Walls, Donald Trump and him, he has the lowest 164 00:08:16,160 --> 00:08:20,640 Speaker 1: favorability ratings. There's no real putting your finger on whatever 165 00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:23,120 Speaker 1: that lack of an X factor or whatever, the off 166 00:08:23,160 --> 00:08:25,760 Speaker 1: putting nature of him, which I think is tied up 167 00:08:25,840 --> 00:08:28,600 Speaker 1: in some of this like weird childless cat lady type 168 00:08:28,640 --> 00:08:32,720 Speaker 1: comments that is completely absent from this as well, which 169 00:08:32,760 --> 00:08:34,520 Speaker 1: to me was an interesting insight too. 170 00:08:35,920 --> 00:08:36,240 Speaker 2: Ken. 171 00:08:36,400 --> 00:08:39,080 Speaker 1: Before we move on to you know, sort of what 172 00:08:39,160 --> 00:08:43,040 Speaker 1: has happened with you and Twitter, etc. Since this was published. 173 00:08:43,760 --> 00:08:49,200 Speaker 1: The handling of these hacked documents obviously very different from 174 00:08:49,360 --> 00:08:53,280 Speaker 1: how the media handled the Hillary Clinton campaign hacked documents 175 00:08:53,400 --> 00:08:57,480 Speaker 1: back in twenty sixteen. Now, one argument you could say is, 176 00:08:57,640 --> 00:09:00,240 Speaker 1: you know a lot of liberals were very us said 177 00:09:00,240 --> 00:09:02,920 Speaker 1: about that. People like you and me supported the you know, 178 00:09:02,960 --> 00:09:06,239 Speaker 1: publishing of those hacked materials because guess what, journalists get 179 00:09:06,840 --> 00:09:10,040 Speaker 1: weird source materials from sketchy people all the time. You 180 00:09:10,160 --> 00:09:12,760 Speaker 1: factor in their motivation, but if it's legitimate information, the 181 00:09:12,760 --> 00:09:15,079 Speaker 1: public deserves to see it. So we supported that, but 182 00:09:15,120 --> 00:09:17,120 Speaker 1: a lot of liberals didn't. And so one of the 183 00:09:17,240 --> 00:09:19,720 Speaker 1: arguments is, okay, well, the news outlets were pressured by 184 00:09:19,720 --> 00:09:22,160 Speaker 1: liberals to change their ways, and they basically quote unquote 185 00:09:22,200 --> 00:09:25,439 Speaker 1: learned their lesson and decided this time around they were 186 00:09:25,480 --> 00:09:28,640 Speaker 1: not going to publish hacked materials that may have come 187 00:09:29,000 --> 00:09:31,679 Speaker 1: from an Iranian government actor. And again, we'll put a 188 00:09:31,720 --> 00:09:34,240 Speaker 1: pin in that and discuss that more later. What is 189 00:09:34,280 --> 00:09:37,760 Speaker 1: your sense of why the handling this time appears to 190 00:09:37,800 --> 00:09:40,680 Speaker 1: have been so different from the handling back in twenty sixteen. 191 00:09:41,480 --> 00:09:43,280 Speaker 3: I think the point that you made is essentially right, 192 00:09:43,320 --> 00:09:44,840 Speaker 3: and that's kind of half of the story. I'll get 193 00:09:44,840 --> 00:09:46,600 Speaker 3: to the second half in a moment, but the first 194 00:09:46,640 --> 00:09:48,600 Speaker 3: half of the stories that media has locked themselves into 195 00:09:48,600 --> 00:09:51,520 Speaker 3: this narrative. I don't mean to say they've said this explicitly, 196 00:09:51,840 --> 00:09:54,280 Speaker 3: but the kind of vibe in twenty sixteen or twenty 197 00:09:54,280 --> 00:09:56,920 Speaker 3: seventeen was oh, on the part of a huge number 198 00:09:56,920 --> 00:10:00,319 Speaker 3: of liberals was oh Trump, you know, Trump won because 199 00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:02,920 Speaker 3: of election interference from the Russians. Now, if you actually 200 00:10:02,920 --> 00:10:04,559 Speaker 3: break down the data and look at that, I don't 201 00:10:04,600 --> 00:10:07,160 Speaker 3: think there's a lot of evidence. Yeah, not the case, 202 00:10:08,120 --> 00:10:10,319 Speaker 3: but that was the vibe and because of it, and 203 00:10:10,679 --> 00:10:14,080 Speaker 3: when the media affirms that, then they lock themselves into 204 00:10:14,120 --> 00:10:16,640 Speaker 3: that rationale. And so then when you have another foreign 205 00:10:16,679 --> 00:10:21,640 Speaker 3: interference case like this, well we've already gone pot committed 206 00:10:21,720 --> 00:10:24,160 Speaker 3: for this narrative before, so I guess we have to 207 00:10:24,160 --> 00:10:26,240 Speaker 3: follow through with it. And in the next case, and 208 00:10:26,280 --> 00:10:28,319 Speaker 3: that happens to be about a Republican It's very strange. 209 00:10:28,320 --> 00:10:31,720 Speaker 3: It's very surreal to see these publications Democracy dies in darkness. 210 00:10:31,760 --> 00:10:35,679 Speaker 3: I mean some of the most stridently you know, liberal 211 00:10:35,760 --> 00:10:38,280 Speaker 3: and resistance figures being like, no, we can't use this 212 00:10:38,320 --> 00:10:41,560 Speaker 3: thing about JD. Vance. It's like surreal. I didn't this 213 00:10:41,600 --> 00:10:43,680 Speaker 3: is completely assided from why I published it because I 214 00:10:43,760 --> 00:10:47,280 Speaker 3: just generally think if something's about a public official and 215 00:10:47,280 --> 00:10:50,200 Speaker 3: it relates to policy, like that's fair game. But it's 216 00:10:50,320 --> 00:10:53,679 Speaker 3: just bizarre to watch. As to the second dimension that 217 00:10:53,720 --> 00:10:56,920 Speaker 3: I mentioned before, I think that that is much more 218 00:10:56,920 --> 00:10:58,720 Speaker 3: in sitious one that's not being talked about very much. 219 00:10:58,760 --> 00:11:01,320 Speaker 3: There has been, and I've reported on this on my 220 00:11:01,440 --> 00:11:04,480 Speaker 3: sub stack the last five months or so that we 221 00:11:04,600 --> 00:11:10,000 Speaker 3: run it on the obsession with foreign influence campaigns, including disinformation. 222 00:11:10,240 --> 00:11:14,560 Speaker 3: They have up new offices across the federal government to 223 00:11:14,600 --> 00:11:17,520 Speaker 3: focus on this purported problem. Now, I don't deny that 224 00:11:17,600 --> 00:11:20,280 Speaker 3: it exists. I don't deny that the Iranians, the Russians 225 00:11:20,760 --> 00:11:23,240 Speaker 3: in the Chinese are doing this. I take the intelligence 226 00:11:23,240 --> 00:11:27,520 Speaker 3: communities assessments at their word, at least in at least 227 00:11:27,520 --> 00:11:30,800 Speaker 3: in broad strokes. But the efficacy of those programs there's 228 00:11:30,880 --> 00:11:35,040 Speaker 3: almost no evidence to suggest that they're broadly efficacious. 229 00:11:35,200 --> 00:11:38,360 Speaker 1: It's often very selective. It's only the official bad guys 230 00:11:38,400 --> 00:11:41,839 Speaker 1: that we get upset about when they're interfering in our elections. 231 00:11:42,160 --> 00:11:44,480 Speaker 1: There's been quite a bit of reporting, including by Haratz 232 00:11:44,520 --> 00:11:50,120 Speaker 1: and The New York Times, about Israeli official government influence operations, 233 00:11:50,280 --> 00:11:53,840 Speaker 1: and those don't get the same level of national security 234 00:11:53,840 --> 00:11:54,880 Speaker 1: state scrutiny to. 235 00:11:54,800 --> 00:11:57,840 Speaker 3: Stay the least exactly, So setting all that aside for 236 00:11:57,840 --> 00:12:01,199 Speaker 3: a moment, the media sees that, and frankly, it's scary 237 00:12:01,200 --> 00:12:03,160 Speaker 3: to them. I mean, when I worked at the Intercept, 238 00:12:03,200 --> 00:12:06,200 Speaker 3: I got a number of the Tertiarra documents early and 239 00:12:06,240 --> 00:12:08,320 Speaker 3: I wanted to just publish the underlying documents, and they 240 00:12:08,440 --> 00:12:11,959 Speaker 3: balked because I don't remember how I was described exactly, 241 00:12:12,520 --> 00:12:17,880 Speaker 3: but there was clearly concern about just the whole There's 242 00:12:17,960 --> 00:12:20,680 Speaker 3: just this ambiance our national security and the FBI, and 243 00:12:20,679 --> 00:12:23,240 Speaker 3: oh god, what do we do? And so I really 244 00:12:23,240 --> 00:12:25,160 Speaker 3: think that part of part of this, which is not 245 00:12:25,240 --> 00:12:30,200 Speaker 3: talked about, is that when the government obsesses with foreign 246 00:12:30,559 --> 00:12:32,760 Speaker 3: influence campaigns, and you saw it in the case of 247 00:12:32,800 --> 00:12:37,559 Speaker 3: this ridiculous those those Tenet media guys, and I mean, 248 00:12:37,760 --> 00:12:40,120 Speaker 3: it's just so ridiculous. Yeah, And obviously I'm fine with 249 00:12:40,200 --> 00:12:43,160 Speaker 3: DJ prosecuting that. Nope, I mean that makes sense. But 250 00:12:43,280 --> 00:12:44,960 Speaker 3: you look at the actual numbers of the videos and 251 00:12:45,000 --> 00:12:47,960 Speaker 3: you guys get more views than them in like a week, 252 00:12:48,120 --> 00:12:50,400 Speaker 3: it's than they did in an entire year. I mean, 253 00:12:50,400 --> 00:12:53,680 Speaker 3: these are not huge operations. And again I would like 254 00:12:53,720 --> 00:12:56,599 Speaker 3: for them not to happen, but to just throw the 255 00:12:56,640 --> 00:12:58,280 Speaker 3: baby out with the bathwater and say, you know, we've 256 00:12:58,280 --> 00:13:01,319 Speaker 3: got to stop doing news and get the public access 257 00:13:01,320 --> 00:13:03,880 Speaker 3: to things for fear of this abstract thing, which again 258 00:13:04,080 --> 00:13:05,800 Speaker 3: there is no evidence that it has swung in a 259 00:13:05,840 --> 00:13:10,920 Speaker 3: presidential election before. There just isn't right, and there's there's 260 00:13:10,960 --> 00:13:15,520 Speaker 3: a lack of evidence that it's swung elections down ballot either. 261 00:13:15,640 --> 00:13:17,960 Speaker 3: And so you can both think it exists and think 262 00:13:17,960 --> 00:13:20,600 Speaker 3: it's bad, but then have a sort of rational and 263 00:13:20,600 --> 00:13:25,080 Speaker 3: proportional response to it which doesn't include this just freak 264 00:13:25,120 --> 00:13:28,880 Speaker 3: out about it, you know, just upending American society, Like 265 00:13:29,160 --> 00:13:32,320 Speaker 3: that's not easy to do our own politicians can't propagandize 266 00:13:32,400 --> 00:13:34,280 Speaker 3: us effectively. Do you know how hard that is? 267 00:13:34,800 --> 00:13:35,000 Speaker 2: Hard? 268 00:13:35,040 --> 00:13:37,920 Speaker 3: That is culturally to do that? From a different I always. 269 00:13:37,640 --> 00:13:40,040 Speaker 1: Think about that too. I mean, billions of dollars will 270 00:13:40,040 --> 00:13:42,640 Speaker 1: be spent on the election trying to move the needle 271 00:13:42,679 --> 00:13:45,679 Speaker 1: by a half a percentage point, and yet somehow people 272 00:13:45,679 --> 00:13:47,880 Speaker 1: will can be convinced that you know, a handful of 273 00:13:48,080 --> 00:13:51,840 Speaker 1: poorly worded, like awkward Russian memes through the election to 274 00:13:51,880 --> 00:13:53,760 Speaker 1: Donald Rummer twenty sixteen, is like, all. 275 00:13:53,679 --> 00:13:54,439 Speaker 3: Right, exactly. 276 00:13:54,480 --> 00:13:57,720 Speaker 1: So I think there's also a real paternalism about deciding 277 00:13:57,800 --> 00:14:01,000 Speaker 1: what you think the public can handle, what information you 278 00:14:01,120 --> 00:14:04,440 Speaker 1: think the public is allowed to have access to, if 279 00:14:04,440 --> 00:14:08,080 Speaker 1: it's accurate information and it's newsworthy, you know, to me, 280 00:14:08,400 --> 00:14:11,040 Speaker 1: that's that's sort of the bar and the standard. And 281 00:14:11,320 --> 00:14:13,680 Speaker 1: I think that's you know, that's what you've articulated as well, 282 00:14:14,200 --> 00:14:16,319 Speaker 1: just very quickly, you know, is it your sense put 283 00:14:16,320 --> 00:14:18,800 Speaker 1: this up on the screen while you're talking, but is 284 00:14:18,840 --> 00:14:21,920 Speaker 1: it your sense that these were documents that were hacked 285 00:14:21,920 --> 00:14:25,000 Speaker 1: by the Iranian government? That's been sort of suggested but 286 00:14:25,120 --> 00:14:29,640 Speaker 1: not definitively, you know, asserted. The Trump campaign certainly seems 287 00:14:29,680 --> 00:14:32,200 Speaker 1: to suggest that. We also just got this news that 288 00:14:32,360 --> 00:14:36,320 Speaker 1: federal grand juries indicted multiple Iranian nationals for their involvement 289 00:14:36,440 --> 00:14:38,920 Speaker 1: in a plot to hack and steal non public materials 290 00:14:38,920 --> 00:14:42,960 Speaker 1: from form President Trump's campaign. Could be that what you 291 00:14:43,040 --> 00:14:46,040 Speaker 1: receive this JD vance, you know, vetting document, could have 292 00:14:46,120 --> 00:14:49,160 Speaker 1: been among those non public materials that were hacked by 293 00:14:49,280 --> 00:14:52,560 Speaker 1: Iranian nationals. What is your sense or what is your 294 00:14:52,600 --> 00:14:53,680 Speaker 1: view of that? 295 00:14:53,680 --> 00:14:56,440 Speaker 3: That's my guess, yes, But I'm glad that you pointed 296 00:14:56,440 --> 00:15:00,000 Speaker 3: out that, you know, this is just a possibility. Here's 297 00:15:00,160 --> 00:15:02,120 Speaker 3: a lot of sloppy media coverage around this. I've read 298 00:15:02,120 --> 00:15:04,880 Speaker 3: the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, that's the 299 00:15:05,920 --> 00:15:09,560 Speaker 3: agency that oversees the whole intelligence community, and their statements, 300 00:15:09,640 --> 00:15:13,280 Speaker 3: if you read them carefully, they've said that there's malicious 301 00:15:13,320 --> 00:15:18,960 Speaker 3: cyber activities from the you know, I Iranian connected directed 302 00:15:19,000 --> 00:15:21,600 Speaker 3: at and they even named Trump, which is unusual, but 303 00:15:21,680 --> 00:15:25,480 Speaker 3: they won't say which. There's no specifics as to which articles, 304 00:15:25,520 --> 00:15:29,400 Speaker 3: which hacks, which you know what specific information, and so 305 00:15:30,200 --> 00:15:32,720 Speaker 3: that would certainly apply to all of this and what 306 00:15:32,760 --> 00:15:35,000 Speaker 3: I'm working with. So it makes sense. But the truth is, 307 00:15:35,040 --> 00:15:36,800 Speaker 3: we just don't know, and we have to be careful 308 00:15:36,800 --> 00:15:39,160 Speaker 3: with it, not just in the abstract, because going back 309 00:15:39,160 --> 00:15:42,800 Speaker 3: to twenty sixteen, for example, there were Russian state backed 310 00:15:43,160 --> 00:15:47,080 Speaker 3: hacks of democratic information, but there was at the exact 311 00:15:47,120 --> 00:15:50,400 Speaker 3: same time contemporaneously a hack of Hillary Clinton's emails by 312 00:15:50,480 --> 00:15:54,200 Speaker 3: just some random I'm trying to remember what country it was, 313 00:15:54,280 --> 00:15:56,760 Speaker 3: Romanian national. I think he went by the Hanngele Guchafer 314 00:15:57,120 --> 00:15:59,200 Speaker 3: And it came out that he was just some dude 315 00:15:59,320 --> 00:16:01,520 Speaker 3: that was just like didn't like Hillary Clinton. It was like, 316 00:16:01,560 --> 00:16:03,720 Speaker 3: I'm going to hack intor emails that he did it, 317 00:16:03,520 --> 00:16:07,440 Speaker 3: and any reasonable observer at that time I probably would 318 00:16:07,440 --> 00:16:09,360 Speaker 3: have just assumed, Yeah, it's probably the Russians, because that's 319 00:16:09,360 --> 00:16:11,960 Speaker 3: what they're doing too. But the world is complicated and 320 00:16:12,120 --> 00:16:14,520 Speaker 3: chaotic and there's so many different things, so, you know, 321 00:16:14,800 --> 00:16:17,120 Speaker 3: gun to my head, would I guess it's er Anians? Yeah, 322 00:16:17,120 --> 00:16:19,080 Speaker 3: I would guess that, but I don't know, and I'm 323 00:16:19,080 --> 00:16:21,480 Speaker 3: careful to say that I don't know, and I resent 324 00:16:21,960 --> 00:16:23,840 Speaker 3: that when you were careful to try to get the 325 00:16:23,840 --> 00:16:25,480 Speaker 3: facts right, people like, oh, are you trying to defend 326 00:16:25,480 --> 00:16:27,800 Speaker 3: your Antians? No, we just don't know, and I'm trying 327 00:16:27,800 --> 00:16:30,000 Speaker 3: to be careful with that, you know, Yeah. 328 00:16:29,720 --> 00:16:31,040 Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely all right. 329 00:16:31,120 --> 00:16:34,480 Speaker 1: So let's move on to the subsequent events which have 330 00:16:34,560 --> 00:16:37,040 Speaker 1: made you a central part of this story, which is 331 00:16:37,040 --> 00:16:42,680 Speaker 1: that after you publish this dossier and you posted about 332 00:16:42,680 --> 00:16:45,960 Speaker 1: it and linked to the substack, your substack where the 333 00:16:46,000 --> 00:16:50,280 Speaker 1: dossier was posted, you were banned by Elon Musk and 334 00:16:50,360 --> 00:16:53,000 Speaker 1: I want to put up on the screen you posted. 335 00:16:53,000 --> 00:16:56,040 Speaker 1: This is also from your sub stack. I want to 336 00:16:56,080 --> 00:17:00,080 Speaker 1: put up here the reason that they gave you, and 337 00:17:00,120 --> 00:17:05,680 Speaker 1: so it says your account has been suspended for violating 338 00:17:05,680 --> 00:17:08,160 Speaker 1: the X rules. Due to a user report, specifically for 339 00:17:08,560 --> 00:17:12,560 Speaker 1: violating our rules against posting private information. You may not 340 00:17:12,680 --> 00:17:16,120 Speaker 1: publish or post other people's private information without their express 341 00:17:16,160 --> 00:17:23,520 Speaker 1: authorization and permission. So they're asserting that they took down 342 00:17:23,720 --> 00:17:26,560 Speaker 1: your account and by the way, banned people from even 343 00:17:26,720 --> 00:17:32,200 Speaker 1: linking to your substack because of effectively of doxing you 344 00:17:32,280 --> 00:17:38,000 Speaker 1: published this entire report, including some information about jd Vance, 345 00:17:38,040 --> 00:17:42,680 Speaker 1: including a portion of his social Security number, an email address, 346 00:17:42,880 --> 00:17:46,760 Speaker 1: and a home address. So, first of all, you know, 347 00:17:46,920 --> 00:17:49,639 Speaker 1: just give me your reaction if you think that's really 348 00:17:49,680 --> 00:17:54,560 Speaker 1: the reason why twitter Is has suspended your account and 349 00:17:54,720 --> 00:17:59,440 Speaker 1: is banning the linking to this report, and also your 350 00:17:59,560 --> 00:18:04,200 Speaker 1: rationale for why you didn't take out those private personal details. 351 00:18:04,520 --> 00:18:06,560 Speaker 3: Okay, so first of all, I think I think that's 352 00:18:06,560 --> 00:18:08,239 Speaker 3: a pretext. Of course, Elana is not going to come 353 00:18:08,240 --> 00:18:10,320 Speaker 3: on and say we don't like his politics. He's criticizing 354 00:18:10,320 --> 00:18:11,679 Speaker 3: the guy gave a bunch of money too, and we're 355 00:18:11,680 --> 00:18:12,879 Speaker 3: gonna get rid of him. They have to come up 356 00:18:12,880 --> 00:18:15,040 Speaker 3: with something else. And every time I've done a high 357 00:18:15,040 --> 00:18:17,920 Speaker 3: profile story, this is what happens. They find some detail 358 00:18:17,960 --> 00:18:20,200 Speaker 3: to to try to make the story about that. Now 359 00:18:20,400 --> 00:18:24,159 Speaker 3: I'll explain in a moment why we decided to publish 360 00:18:24,200 --> 00:18:27,040 Speaker 3: what we did, which it included what you said. But 361 00:18:27,040 --> 00:18:28,199 Speaker 3: first of all, I want to point to something that 362 00:18:28,240 --> 00:18:30,280 Speaker 3: was really weird and interesting in that screenshot that you 363 00:18:30,359 --> 00:18:34,359 Speaker 3: showed viewers describing my suspension from Twitter. So it of 364 00:18:34,400 --> 00:18:37,000 Speaker 3: course includes the link to the Vance dossier, but includes 365 00:18:37,040 --> 00:18:38,760 Speaker 3: a second one, and nobody seems to have noticed this, 366 00:18:38,800 --> 00:18:42,000 Speaker 3: and it's really important. The second tweet, foreign Influence, is 367 00:18:42,040 --> 00:18:44,359 Speaker 3: me saying foreign influence operations are a joke and if 368 00:18:44,359 --> 00:18:46,359 Speaker 3: you think they can swing an election, a presidential election, 369 00:18:46,440 --> 00:18:48,280 Speaker 3: you need to take a deep breath. And it links 370 00:18:48,320 --> 00:18:50,359 Speaker 3: to my story making that case. There is no private 371 00:18:50,359 --> 00:18:52,800 Speaker 3: information in that tweet. That was articulating the point that 372 00:18:52,840 --> 00:18:54,840 Speaker 3: we've just been talking about this past few minutes. And 373 00:18:54,880 --> 00:18:56,960 Speaker 3: it's very interesting that that was included in the band 374 00:18:57,000 --> 00:18:59,760 Speaker 3: because there's no again, there's no private information to speak of. 375 00:19:00,119 --> 00:19:02,720 Speaker 3: It's just making the case that I that I said before, 376 00:19:02,720 --> 00:19:05,960 Speaker 3: which I think is uncontroversial, but which there's currently I 377 00:19:05,960 --> 00:19:08,440 Speaker 3: think a sort of moral panic around that the government 378 00:19:08,480 --> 00:19:11,000 Speaker 3: is gonna there's some foreign government is going to redirect 379 00:19:11,040 --> 00:19:13,960 Speaker 3: an election, and which social media companies are terrified of 380 00:19:14,000 --> 00:19:16,640 Speaker 3: getting called in front of Congress and asked questions about 381 00:19:17,240 --> 00:19:20,680 Speaker 3: and and you know, drilled about and are making every 382 00:19:20,680 --> 00:19:22,560 Speaker 3: effort to look like they're complying with what the federal 383 00:19:22,600 --> 00:19:25,399 Speaker 3: government wants, which I think is problematic. And so I 384 00:19:25,480 --> 00:19:27,800 Speaker 3: really want to know why they included that among it, 385 00:19:27,840 --> 00:19:30,480 Speaker 3: because those are the only two emails listed. Again, that 386 00:19:30,600 --> 00:19:32,359 Speaker 3: was just an analysis piece. I think I interviewed a 387 00:19:32,400 --> 00:19:35,000 Speaker 3: couple of people, but there were no documents. And so 388 00:19:35,600 --> 00:19:37,520 Speaker 3: that makes the point that that I want to make 389 00:19:37,520 --> 00:19:39,920 Speaker 3: with all this, which is that these companies are terrified 390 00:19:39,920 --> 00:19:42,960 Speaker 3: of having the government say, hey, you didn't respond sufficiently 391 00:19:43,240 --> 00:19:45,919 Speaker 3: to this threat after the election doesn't go one party's 392 00:19:45,920 --> 00:19:48,480 Speaker 3: way or the other's way. And to the question, to 393 00:19:48,520 --> 00:19:51,639 Speaker 3: the point about the addresses and the partial Social Security number, 394 00:19:51,920 --> 00:19:54,119 Speaker 3: all of that information is publicly available. It is not 395 00:19:54,160 --> 00:19:56,720 Speaker 3: factually true to say that that you can say informally, 396 00:19:56,800 --> 00:20:02,400 Speaker 3: you can say sort of like informally that's private information. 397 00:20:02,640 --> 00:20:04,760 Speaker 3: But media companies buy it for research. I could go 398 00:20:04,760 --> 00:20:06,400 Speaker 3: on my computer right now and in two minutes pull 399 00:20:06,440 --> 00:20:09,119 Speaker 3: up an address, put and pull up any of this 400 00:20:09,160 --> 00:20:11,560 Speaker 3: information that they're talking about. Journalists do it all the time. 401 00:20:11,720 --> 00:20:15,120 Speaker 3: Corporations are selling this stuff. The people running those people 402 00:20:15,240 --> 00:20:18,080 Speaker 3: running for office preside over a legal system which does 403 00:20:18,119 --> 00:20:20,840 Speaker 3: not regulate that kind of information. So it's out there 404 00:20:20,840 --> 00:20:23,120 Speaker 3: in the open. You can literally google and find all 405 00:20:23,160 --> 00:20:26,240 Speaker 3: of those addresses that were listed on there. The reason 406 00:20:26,280 --> 00:20:28,440 Speaker 3: we did this, and it was an intentional was because 407 00:20:28,480 --> 00:20:30,200 Speaker 3: the whole point of the story is that we are 408 00:20:30,400 --> 00:20:35,280 Speaker 3: tired of adhering to these norms that exists to deprive 409 00:20:35,320 --> 00:20:37,760 Speaker 3: people of information. And it felt dishonest to decide, Oh, 410 00:20:37,800 --> 00:20:40,000 Speaker 3: but we're going to do this for a public figure 411 00:20:40,040 --> 00:20:43,200 Speaker 3: who's running for vice president, who the media has done 412 00:20:43,280 --> 00:20:47,240 Speaker 3: segments of in front of his house early including last week, 413 00:20:48,040 --> 00:20:51,199 Speaker 3: like including on the house, like the address label, like 414 00:20:51,240 --> 00:20:53,080 Speaker 3: in front of the door. So I think that this 415 00:20:53,280 --> 00:20:55,760 Speaker 3: entire thing is a tempest in the teapot, and to 416 00:20:55,800 --> 00:20:57,359 Speaker 3: the extent that people are oh, I, you know, I 417 00:20:57,359 --> 00:20:59,000 Speaker 3: sympathize with this kind of thing. He's not a private 418 00:20:59,000 --> 00:21:02,200 Speaker 3: individuals not at that house. That's not how this works. 419 00:21:02,240 --> 00:21:06,520 Speaker 3: He's going around campaigning, And I guess more generally, I'm 420 00:21:06,560 --> 00:21:10,480 Speaker 3: just frustrated by the there there's there's a mission creep 421 00:21:10,680 --> 00:21:12,320 Speaker 3: that exists when the media is like, oh, we got 422 00:21:12,359 --> 00:21:13,560 Speaker 3: to get you know, you can't do this, You can't 423 00:21:13,600 --> 00:21:15,399 Speaker 3: do that. And then I was going through the document 424 00:21:15,400 --> 00:21:17,920 Speaker 3: and thinking about this, and it occurred to me, there's 425 00:21:17,960 --> 00:21:20,080 Speaker 3: all kinds of address stuff for businesses, does that count 426 00:21:20,080 --> 00:21:22,959 Speaker 3: of something you'd redact? And then for associates businesses, And 427 00:21:22,960 --> 00:21:25,159 Speaker 3: it's kind of like this whole game that I just 428 00:21:25,280 --> 00:21:26,960 Speaker 3: I have played it in the past. You know, I'll 429 00:21:26,960 --> 00:21:29,120 Speaker 3: be candidate about that, but at a certain point, I'm 430 00:21:29,160 --> 00:21:30,320 Speaker 3: just like, what is the point of any of this? 431 00:21:30,400 --> 00:21:33,320 Speaker 3: Is this is a public figure that has a security 432 00:21:33,359 --> 00:21:38,679 Speaker 3: detail and is facing less. You know. It's just so 433 00:21:38,680 --> 00:21:41,280 Speaker 3: it's kind of a philosophical point. And I understand that 434 00:21:41,280 --> 00:21:42,800 Speaker 3: I probably in the minority there, but that is the 435 00:21:42,800 --> 00:21:45,120 Speaker 3: philosophical position that we have on freedom of information. 436 00:21:45,480 --> 00:21:48,080 Speaker 1: So let me lay on the countercase and you can, 437 00:21:48,240 --> 00:21:50,600 Speaker 1: you know, you can respond to it. So the countercase 438 00:21:50,600 --> 00:21:53,600 Speaker 1: would be, listen, he may not be there, but his 439 00:21:53,680 --> 00:21:58,480 Speaker 1: family is, and yes, this information if you want to 440 00:21:58,520 --> 00:22:01,520 Speaker 1: dig and find his address, there's no doubt that you can. 441 00:22:01,840 --> 00:22:04,120 Speaker 1: But you know, as public figures, you and I being 442 00:22:04,480 --> 00:22:07,000 Speaker 1: less of public figures than dat e vance, but still 443 00:22:07,000 --> 00:22:09,960 Speaker 1: being public figures, you know it if it takes a 444 00:22:10,000 --> 00:22:12,639 Speaker 1: few hoops for people to jump through to find my 445 00:22:12,720 --> 00:22:15,840 Speaker 1: home address, I prefer it that way because you're just 446 00:22:15,880 --> 00:22:18,600 Speaker 1: going to end up with a little bit less crazy 447 00:22:18,640 --> 00:22:21,479 Speaker 1: at your doorstop and your mailbox, etc. If you make 448 00:22:21,640 --> 00:22:24,840 Speaker 1: it widely available, you open up the funnel, so you're 449 00:22:25,000 --> 00:22:27,680 Speaker 1: likely to get a little more weirdness at your doorstep. 450 00:22:27,800 --> 00:22:30,440 Speaker 1: That's that's one piece, And then, of course this is 451 00:22:30,480 --> 00:22:34,320 Speaker 1: all in the context of his running mate having just 452 00:22:35,040 --> 00:22:37,520 Speaker 1: you know, gone through two different assassination attempts. 453 00:22:37,840 --> 00:22:38,600 Speaker 2: And then the other. 454 00:22:38,440 --> 00:22:41,840 Speaker 1: Piece is like, it's hard to argue that a partial 455 00:22:41,880 --> 00:22:45,160 Speaker 1: social Security number and a home address have any sort 456 00:22:45,160 --> 00:22:48,480 Speaker 1: of news value, So why not just air on the side, 457 00:22:48,920 --> 00:22:51,159 Speaker 1: which is kind of standard practice. As I think you 458 00:22:51,200 --> 00:22:54,960 Speaker 1: would you would acknowledge of just taking those details out 459 00:22:55,200 --> 00:22:59,760 Speaker 1: since they really aren't important, newsworthy details for the public. 460 00:23:00,040 --> 00:23:00,879 Speaker 2: What's your response to that. 461 00:23:02,520 --> 00:23:05,160 Speaker 3: I spent a long time interrogating my views on because 462 00:23:05,240 --> 00:23:07,640 Speaker 3: this whole story is about what I said before, media paternalism, 463 00:23:08,640 --> 00:23:11,040 Speaker 3: and you know, the media knows best this kind of thing, 464 00:23:11,320 --> 00:23:14,320 Speaker 3: and at a certain point, I'm just like, how do 465 00:23:14,480 --> 00:23:17,480 Speaker 3: I'm still if you're drawing a line somewhere, you're ultimately guessing, 466 00:23:17,560 --> 00:23:19,679 Speaker 3: and you're doing that, and it felt hypocritical in the 467 00:23:19,680 --> 00:23:21,840 Speaker 3: context of the story that we're doing, which is like 468 00:23:21,880 --> 00:23:24,359 Speaker 3: a response to media paternalism to be like, oh, but 469 00:23:24,440 --> 00:23:28,840 Speaker 3: we know about this. And I considered the you know, 470 00:23:29,600 --> 00:23:32,160 Speaker 3: knock on effects, and I thought, you know, a home 471 00:23:32,760 --> 00:23:34,800 Speaker 3: and then I mean, it's that you can't tell what 472 00:23:34,840 --> 00:23:36,520 Speaker 3: the social security number is. I think half of it 473 00:23:36,600 --> 00:23:38,919 Speaker 3: is redacted. That's why it's in the report. That's how 474 00:23:38,960 --> 00:23:42,720 Speaker 3: they were able to get it. And that was ultimately 475 00:23:42,960 --> 00:23:45,640 Speaker 3: my view. It just felt fake. It felt it felt 476 00:23:45,640 --> 00:23:48,840 Speaker 3: phony to say, hey, media doesn't no best, then we 477 00:23:48,880 --> 00:23:49,320 Speaker 3: know best. 478 00:23:49,800 --> 00:23:51,800 Speaker 1: So let me put this up on the screen from 479 00:23:52,600 --> 00:23:56,240 Speaker 1: Glenn Greenwald, who you know was broadly supportive of you 480 00:23:56,400 --> 00:23:59,320 Speaker 1: and has been fairly consistent on freedom of speech issues, 481 00:23:59,359 --> 00:24:01,480 Speaker 1: you know, whether it was Hillary Clinton or the Hunter 482 00:24:01,520 --> 00:24:03,960 Speaker 1: Biden laptop. We'll talk more about the Hunter Biden laptop 483 00:24:04,000 --> 00:24:07,080 Speaker 1: and potential hypocrisy with the handling or the treatment of 484 00:24:07,119 --> 00:24:11,040 Speaker 1: that from the right, or you know, with regard to 485 00:24:11,480 --> 00:24:14,960 Speaker 1: pro Palestine speech. Like he's been fairly consistent. So he says, 486 00:24:15,040 --> 00:24:17,240 Speaker 1: there's no question the Vance report that was published did 487 00:24:17,240 --> 00:24:20,200 Speaker 1: contain information that should have been redacted prior to publication, 488 00:24:20,240 --> 00:24:23,200 Speaker 1: including Vance's home address, but not only that. The solution 489 00:24:23,359 --> 00:24:26,080 Speaker 1: is to take that down, repost a redactive version, and 490 00:24:26,119 --> 00:24:30,760 Speaker 1: reinstate Ken's account. What is your opposition to You know, 491 00:24:30,880 --> 00:24:34,440 Speaker 1: you wouldn't even have to necessarily take this version down 492 00:24:34,840 --> 00:24:38,200 Speaker 1: just posting a separate version that doesn't have those details 493 00:24:38,280 --> 00:24:41,840 Speaker 1: and then linking to that on Twitter, and that way 494 00:24:41,840 --> 00:24:44,240 Speaker 1: you're kind of calling Elon's bluff of like, all right, well, 495 00:24:44,240 --> 00:24:47,720 Speaker 1: it's really about this quote unquote docxing. Here's a version 496 00:24:47,760 --> 00:24:49,840 Speaker 1: that has all the details that you want stripped out, 497 00:24:49,840 --> 00:24:53,000 Speaker 1: stripped down. Now, am I good to go? And you know, 498 00:24:53,040 --> 00:24:54,840 Speaker 1: if the answer is yes, okay, that's one thing. If 499 00:24:54,840 --> 00:24:58,800 Speaker 1: the answer is still know, then the ideological motivation behind 500 00:24:58,800 --> 00:25:00,359 Speaker 1: this action becomes even more clear. 501 00:25:01,280 --> 00:25:03,320 Speaker 3: Yeah, it's funny you say that, because that is exactly 502 00:25:03,400 --> 00:25:06,920 Speaker 3: what we were planning to do shortly, oh yeah, and 503 00:25:07,080 --> 00:25:10,480 Speaker 3: put the onus on him and still have that, still 504 00:25:10,480 --> 00:25:12,920 Speaker 3: have that document available, because there's all kinds of ways 505 00:25:12,960 --> 00:25:15,080 Speaker 3: that you can that you can host things. But then 506 00:25:15,200 --> 00:25:17,439 Speaker 3: see and then say, okay, well, so Elon, so this 507 00:25:17,520 --> 00:25:19,600 Speaker 3: is all about that, then what's what's this about? I 508 00:25:19,640 --> 00:25:21,320 Speaker 3: think what you'll find is that it's going to show 509 00:25:21,359 --> 00:25:24,000 Speaker 3: that this this whole thing wasn't about that. It was 510 00:25:24,000 --> 00:25:26,280 Speaker 3: about the it was about the hack of a political 511 00:25:26,280 --> 00:25:29,679 Speaker 3: candidate whom he has given large sums of money and 512 00:25:29,720 --> 00:25:31,480 Speaker 3: helps that will win. Yeah, so I guess, well, I 513 00:25:31,520 --> 00:25:32,479 Speaker 3: guess we'll see what happens. 514 00:25:32,720 --> 00:25:34,520 Speaker 1: We will see what happens. Oh, we got a little 515 00:25:34,520 --> 00:25:37,000 Speaker 1: breaking news from you. I appreciate that. Let me get 516 00:25:37,080 --> 00:25:39,560 Speaker 1: you to respond directly to what Elon said here. 517 00:25:40,400 --> 00:25:41,800 Speaker 2: He describes this as. 518 00:25:41,760 --> 00:25:46,200 Speaker 1: One of the most egregious evil doxing actions we've ever seen. 519 00:25:46,640 --> 00:25:50,000 Speaker 1: Presidential candidates are not speculatively in danger. There have already 520 00:25:50,000 --> 00:25:53,160 Speaker 1: been two attempts on Donald Trump's life. Moreover, the doxing 521 00:25:53,240 --> 00:25:58,879 Speaker 1: included detailed information on the addresses of their children. So 522 00:25:59,080 --> 00:26:03,080 Speaker 1: what is your response to Elon's commentary here, specifically saying 523 00:26:03,160 --> 00:26:06,679 Speaker 1: this was an evil one of the most egregious evil 524 00:26:06,760 --> 00:26:08,920 Speaker 1: dosing actions that he has ever seen. 525 00:26:09,320 --> 00:26:12,200 Speaker 3: Well, this is the same guy that said that somebody 526 00:26:12,240 --> 00:26:15,600 Speaker 3: posting public information about the location of his private jet 527 00:26:15,680 --> 00:26:18,199 Speaker 3: are assassination coordinates. So am I surprised that he's being 528 00:26:18,240 --> 00:26:21,000 Speaker 3: a little hysterically here, No, that's who he is. I mean, 529 00:26:21,040 --> 00:26:24,280 Speaker 3: I hope that people recognize it's hysterical and that these 530 00:26:24,280 --> 00:26:26,200 Speaker 3: comments come in the context of these other crazy things 531 00:26:26,200 --> 00:26:28,400 Speaker 3: He said about is. I mean, these billionaires, they want 532 00:26:28,400 --> 00:26:30,359 Speaker 3: a degree of privacy that nobody else has. That's the 533 00:26:30,359 --> 00:26:33,639 Speaker 3: point of this this information. Anybody with an Nexus account 534 00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:37,080 Speaker 3: can access literally in ten seconds. Corporations have it, the 535 00:26:37,160 --> 00:26:40,720 Speaker 3: media has it, with the one audience that can't seem 536 00:26:40,760 --> 00:26:43,080 Speaker 3: to have access to it as regular people, and that's 537 00:26:43,080 --> 00:26:45,000 Speaker 3: frustrated to me. I understand that this is sort of 538 00:26:45,040 --> 00:26:51,560 Speaker 3: a abstract point that I'm making, but I don't know. 539 00:26:51,760 --> 00:26:53,960 Speaker 3: Just a lot of people disagree with me. A lot 540 00:26:54,000 --> 00:26:55,600 Speaker 3: of my friends disagree with me, But I'm just trying 541 00:26:55,640 --> 00:26:58,800 Speaker 3: to candidly articulate, like what my point of view on 542 00:26:58,880 --> 00:27:00,680 Speaker 3: it is. I mean, I don't want anybody to get hurt. 543 00:27:00,720 --> 00:27:03,080 Speaker 3: I don't want anybody to get threatened, and when we 544 00:27:03,119 --> 00:27:05,880 Speaker 3: publish it, my honest guess was that they wouldn't. And 545 00:27:05,920 --> 00:27:12,120 Speaker 3: I'm frustrated that he says that, you know, this plays 546 00:27:12,160 --> 00:27:15,040 Speaker 3: into these streats. The threat matrix, as I've reported, as 547 00:27:15,040 --> 00:27:18,080 Speaker 3: I've gone on the show to talk about, exists because 548 00:27:18,119 --> 00:27:20,240 Speaker 3: of the breakdown of the national security state that is 549 00:27:20,280 --> 00:27:23,879 Speaker 3: pushing this entire threat inflation ideology in the first place, 550 00:27:24,200 --> 00:27:26,760 Speaker 3: that they the fact that a shooter can even get 551 00:27:26,760 --> 00:27:29,600 Speaker 3: on a roof that is a profound failure on the 552 00:27:29,640 --> 00:27:32,280 Speaker 3: part of these agencies. It is not speech that's causing 553 00:27:32,720 --> 00:27:36,760 Speaker 3: these things to happen, and the insinuation that that's kind 554 00:27:36,800 --> 00:27:39,480 Speaker 3: of the catalyst for this is very dangerous and takes 555 00:27:39,520 --> 00:27:43,479 Speaker 3: the onus off of these ridiculously incompetent agencies to do 556 00:27:43,600 --> 00:27:46,240 Speaker 3: the most basic function of their job, which is protect 557 00:27:46,400 --> 00:27:51,240 Speaker 3: current informer presidents. And so yeah, that really pissed me off. 558 00:27:51,720 --> 00:27:55,560 Speaker 1: So one of the responses that resonated with me, and 559 00:27:55,960 --> 00:27:58,360 Speaker 1: just to be candid, like I would not have included 560 00:27:58,600 --> 00:28:00,919 Speaker 1: those details. I don't think it's the biggest deal in 561 00:28:00,960 --> 00:28:02,520 Speaker 1: the world that you did. As you said, this is 562 00:28:02,560 --> 00:28:06,399 Speaker 1: you know, largely publicly of it is publicly available if 563 00:28:06,440 --> 00:28:08,320 Speaker 1: you search for it. But I would not have made 564 00:28:08,359 --> 00:28:11,159 Speaker 1: that choice. I'm also not a journalist. But one of 565 00:28:11,160 --> 00:28:13,480 Speaker 1: the things that I thought was important to note is, 566 00:28:13,960 --> 00:28:17,120 Speaker 1: you know the right and Elon Musk specifically made a 567 00:28:17,160 --> 00:28:21,200 Speaker 1: big deal of the fact that the information on that 568 00:28:21,200 --> 00:28:23,840 Speaker 1: that was you know, taken from the Hunter Biden laptop, 569 00:28:24,119 --> 00:28:27,159 Speaker 1: that that was blocked on Twitter, that you couldn't share it, 570 00:28:27,240 --> 00:28:29,800 Speaker 1: You couldn't even DM it if you shared it. Even 571 00:28:29,880 --> 00:28:32,439 Speaker 1: you accounts are getting banned just from sharing links to 572 00:28:32,560 --> 00:28:37,399 Speaker 1: this information. And you know that was described by the 573 00:28:37,480 --> 00:28:41,880 Speaker 1: right as election interference, and you know, I was sympathetic 574 00:28:41,920 --> 00:28:43,360 Speaker 1: to that. I don't think it you know, through the 575 00:28:43,400 --> 00:28:45,880 Speaker 1: election for Joe Biden. But I don't think that it 576 00:28:45,920 --> 00:28:48,040 Speaker 1: was the right choice that was made there in terms of, 577 00:28:48,120 --> 00:28:50,320 Speaker 1: you know, in the interest of free speech and in 578 00:28:50,360 --> 00:28:52,480 Speaker 1: the interest of you know, public having all of the 579 00:28:52,480 --> 00:28:54,840 Speaker 1: information they possibly can to make an important decision about 580 00:28:54,840 --> 00:28:56,400 Speaker 1: who they're going to vote for for president of the 581 00:28:56,440 --> 00:29:00,160 Speaker 1: United States. But Leifong, who you know, we both know, 582 00:29:00,320 --> 00:29:02,920 Speaker 1: and who's a former colleague of yours, says the Hunter 583 00:29:02,960 --> 00:29:05,120 Speaker 1: Biden laptop, which had news where the info that was 584 00:29:05,160 --> 00:29:08,720 Speaker 1: fair game, also had personal docs info far more than 585 00:29:08,760 --> 00:29:12,200 Speaker 1: this vance doc. The Biden laptop had bank and credit cards, 586 00:29:12,240 --> 00:29:16,240 Speaker 1: personal addresses, nudity, etc. You can still link to those 587 00:29:16,280 --> 00:29:19,720 Speaker 1: Biden docks on x, but the vance doc link is 588 00:29:19,840 --> 00:29:22,760 Speaker 1: banned question mark. And I do think that sort of 589 00:29:23,360 --> 00:29:27,080 Speaker 1: exposes the ideological motivation here, which again I mean I 590 00:29:27,080 --> 00:29:29,760 Speaker 1: shouldn't be surprised to anyone. Elon Musk is one of 591 00:29:29,760 --> 00:29:32,680 Speaker 1: the largest contributors to Donald Trump's campaign. As far as 592 00:29:32,720 --> 00:29:36,400 Speaker 1: we know, he appears to run x explicitly as a 593 00:29:36,440 --> 00:29:39,320 Speaker 1: platform to try to favor Donald Trump. Whether that's working 594 00:29:39,400 --> 00:29:43,920 Speaker 1: for him or not is another question. But the very 595 00:29:43,960 --> 00:29:49,880 Speaker 1: different approach to those two stories, to me, kind of 596 00:29:49,920 --> 00:29:54,200 Speaker 1: gives up the game of the ideological motivations behind this, 597 00:29:54,840 --> 00:29:57,280 Speaker 1: behind this banning. And Lee has also noted, which I 598 00:29:57,280 --> 00:29:59,840 Speaker 1: think is important. Note as well, you also didn't publish 599 00:29:59,840 --> 00:30:03,040 Speaker 1: those details on Twitter. You provided a link to your 600 00:30:03,080 --> 00:30:06,920 Speaker 1: substack where those details were available, and that's also a 601 00:30:06,960 --> 00:30:10,080 Speaker 1: different approach than has been taken in the past. In 602 00:30:10,120 --> 00:30:12,320 Speaker 1: the past, the standard has been okay, if these public 603 00:30:12,320 --> 00:30:15,680 Speaker 1: details of these private details are published on Twitter, that 604 00:30:15,720 --> 00:30:18,520 Speaker 1: could get you banned. But if you're linking to something 605 00:30:18,640 --> 00:30:22,240 Speaker 1: that links to something that has those details, as far 606 00:30:22,280 --> 00:30:24,520 Speaker 1: as I know, that has never passed muster in terms 607 00:30:24,600 --> 00:30:26,440 Speaker 1: of causing an account suspension. 608 00:30:26,840 --> 00:30:30,520 Speaker 3: Yeah, the parallels with the Hunter Biden laptop case are 609 00:30:30,520 --> 00:30:34,440 Speaker 3: so overwhelming. I saw a number of conservatives, including Nick 610 00:30:34,520 --> 00:30:37,440 Speaker 3: Fuentes of all people, defending me and saying, look, I 611 00:30:37,440 --> 00:30:40,920 Speaker 3: don't like this communist guy or whatever, but this is wrong. 612 00:30:41,120 --> 00:30:44,040 Speaker 3: And I was stunned because these are like never in 613 00:30:44,080 --> 00:30:50,320 Speaker 3: my you know, most insane like eating too much pizza. 614 00:30:50,320 --> 00:30:53,520 Speaker 3: If we're going to bed induced nightmares. Would I have 615 00:30:53,640 --> 00:30:56,120 Speaker 3: imagined that these types of people would be defending me. 616 00:30:56,160 --> 00:30:58,400 Speaker 3: But I mean, honestly, credit to them for actually having 617 00:30:58,760 --> 00:31:02,240 Speaker 3: some measure principle on some specific issue. Because they're on 618 00:31:02,240 --> 00:31:06,040 Speaker 3: this issue, they're right and and and so I think 619 00:31:06,080 --> 00:31:08,560 Speaker 3: that really speaks to it. And I don't know, well, 620 00:31:08,600 --> 00:31:10,640 Speaker 3: I mean, what can you say? It's just so absurd, right, 621 00:31:10,720 --> 00:31:12,240 Speaker 3: I mean, it's like a meme at this point, like 622 00:31:12,520 --> 00:31:15,600 Speaker 3: oh yeah, quote unquote Elon Musk, free speech warrior. But 623 00:31:15,640 --> 00:31:20,239 Speaker 3: it's like, I can't really think of a more kind 624 00:31:20,280 --> 00:31:23,960 Speaker 3: of vivid rebuttal of that of his of his self sould, 625 00:31:24,200 --> 00:31:27,040 Speaker 3: what do you call himself? An absolute an absolutist on speech? 626 00:31:27,560 --> 00:31:31,160 Speaker 3: Then then the thing that Republicans like him are most 627 00:31:31,440 --> 00:31:34,840 Speaker 3: activated by than and doing the doing basically the exact 628 00:31:34,840 --> 00:31:35,280 Speaker 3: same thing. 629 00:31:35,840 --> 00:31:40,080 Speaker 1: Yeah, last question for you, Ken is about you personally. 630 00:31:40,160 --> 00:31:44,320 Speaker 1: You know, Elon Musk is very powerful individual, very wealthy 631 00:31:44,320 --> 00:31:49,240 Speaker 1: individual as a big microphone megaphone in terms of running 632 00:31:49,280 --> 00:31:54,400 Speaker 1: this platform. Uh, he also has a very devoted following, 633 00:31:55,080 --> 00:31:58,320 Speaker 1: so you know he's been expressing a lot of concern 634 00:31:58,480 --> 00:31:59,800 Speaker 1: about threat spacing. 635 00:32:00,080 --> 00:32:02,280 Speaker 2: JdE Vance and potentially Donald Trump. 636 00:32:02,560 --> 00:32:07,120 Speaker 1: You knows as this resulted a larger number or an 637 00:32:07,160 --> 00:32:10,960 Speaker 1: increased level of direct threats to you the way that 638 00:32:11,000 --> 00:32:14,400 Speaker 1: you've been you know, described as your actions, described as evil, 639 00:32:14,440 --> 00:32:14,920 Speaker 1: et cetera. 640 00:32:15,560 --> 00:32:19,080 Speaker 3: Absolutely, and I'm not remotely worried about it because they're 641 00:32:19,240 --> 00:32:21,400 Speaker 3: very noisy elon fans. I've gone through this type of 642 00:32:21,440 --> 00:32:23,760 Speaker 3: a new cycle before, it's never resulted anything. I don't 643 00:32:23,760 --> 00:32:26,240 Speaker 3: expect to result in anything here. And that's another point 644 00:32:26,240 --> 00:32:28,120 Speaker 3: I want to make. I've always been consistent on this. 645 00:32:28,160 --> 00:32:30,560 Speaker 3: When people post the same information that I included in 646 00:32:30,640 --> 00:32:34,280 Speaker 3: that dossier about me, I don't love it, but I've 647 00:32:34,280 --> 00:32:37,120 Speaker 3: never once reported them. I've never complained about it. You 648 00:32:37,120 --> 00:32:39,720 Speaker 3: can go through my comments. I've never said, hey, this 649 00:32:39,880 --> 00:32:42,840 Speaker 3: is like this person should be ejected from whatever the 650 00:32:42,840 --> 00:32:45,320 Speaker 3: platform is, because I don't believe that that's true. I 651 00:32:45,320 --> 00:32:48,360 Speaker 3: don't like it. I think it's unpleasant, say it's rude even, 652 00:32:48,440 --> 00:32:51,320 Speaker 3: but to say that's a threat, I mean, it's just 653 00:32:51,360 --> 00:32:53,960 Speaker 3: so evocative of Again, this is a national security brain 654 00:32:54,400 --> 00:32:57,240 Speaker 3: where you're looking at threat matrixes and who's going to 655 00:32:57,320 --> 00:32:58,800 Speaker 3: come and attack us and all these kind of things, 656 00:32:58,800 --> 00:33:00,160 Speaker 3: and I just I don't think that's a help the 657 00:33:00,200 --> 00:33:02,880 Speaker 3: place for society and I think there's a creep where 658 00:33:03,160 --> 00:33:05,640 Speaker 3: people's concept of what constitutes a threat. Look at the 659 00:33:05,680 --> 00:33:08,600 Speaker 3: word doxing, for example, that has come to encompass so 660 00:33:08,640 --> 00:33:11,800 Speaker 3: many things beyond what it initially meant, which it had 661 00:33:11,800 --> 00:33:14,320 Speaker 3: a specific meaning initially, and now you see people throw 662 00:33:14,360 --> 00:33:16,880 Speaker 3: that word around to describe anything. That's what Elon is 663 00:33:16,880 --> 00:33:19,600 Speaker 3: playing into when he says, oh, you're doxing my jet 664 00:33:19,680 --> 00:33:22,040 Speaker 3: or whatever, and it's like, where is the limit? This 665 00:33:22,120 --> 00:33:24,080 Speaker 3: is going to keep good? You know what I mean? 666 00:33:25,040 --> 00:33:30,120 Speaker 3: Public individuals are going to keep exploiting people's understandable empathy 667 00:33:30,200 --> 00:33:32,880 Speaker 3: for these things, not realizing that they exist in a 668 00:33:32,960 --> 00:33:36,360 Speaker 3: very different world than an ordinary private person does. I mean, 669 00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:39,880 Speaker 3: they have private security, they don't live at the houses 670 00:33:39,920 --> 00:33:42,280 Speaker 3: that they have listed or whatever. It's like completely different 671 00:33:42,320 --> 00:33:44,800 Speaker 3: situation and I feel like they're exploiting it, and so 672 00:33:45,120 --> 00:33:46,720 Speaker 3: I needed to do a story on that. Really, it's 673 00:33:46,760 --> 00:33:53,480 Speaker 3: like the kind of sprawling counter threat ideology and how 674 00:33:53,480 --> 00:33:55,840 Speaker 3: it's encompassing more and more things and it results in 675 00:33:55,960 --> 00:33:58,280 Speaker 3: less speech. And that's the thing I'm most concerned about. 676 00:33:58,360 --> 00:34:02,160 Speaker 3: It's just this attitude and will shift on what is 677 00:34:02,200 --> 00:34:03,040 Speaker 3: acceptable speech. 678 00:34:03,600 --> 00:34:05,719 Speaker 1: Well, one thing I will say, ken is, you know 679 00:34:05,800 --> 00:34:08,440 Speaker 1: people may or may not disagree with the way you 680 00:34:08,440 --> 00:34:10,239 Speaker 1: handle this, the decisions you made, et cetera, but I 681 00:34:10,280 --> 00:34:13,399 Speaker 1: don't think anyone could disagree that you've been principled when 682 00:34:13,440 --> 00:34:17,040 Speaker 1: each of these cases has come up. So Ken, tell 683 00:34:17,080 --> 00:34:20,080 Speaker 1: people where they can find you on substacks, since you, 684 00:34:20,239 --> 00:34:22,839 Speaker 1: at least for now are not on Twitter, if they 685 00:34:22,840 --> 00:34:23,839 Speaker 1: want to support your work. 686 00:34:24,040 --> 00:34:26,120 Speaker 3: My subseec is Kenklippenstein dot com. 687 00:34:26,360 --> 00:34:28,319 Speaker 1: All right, Ken, thank you for your time this morning. 688 00:34:28,320 --> 00:34:29,080 Speaker 1: It's great to see you. 689 00:34:29,120 --> 00:34:30,040 Speaker 3: Good talking to you, Crystal.