It Could Happen Here Weekly 244

Summary

It Could Happen Here Weekly 244 (Aug 8, 2026)

Podcast: It Could Happen Here
Host: Cool Zone Media, iHeartPodcasts
Key Contributors: Robert Evans, Garrison Davis, Mia Wong, James Stout

---

Overview

This week’s extra-long compilation episode dives deep into active labor struggles in gender-affirming care, an exclusive interview on Western Sahara, a sweeping investigation into the rise of retail surveillance and the ICE-policing pipeline, and an extended news digest covering wildfires in Washington, US political shakeups, the munitions production crisis, and some grim trends in American gambling and economic policy. Each segment is enriched with original interviews and on-the-ground reporting, pulling together local stories and global trends tied together by the show’s signature collapse-aware leftist analysis.

---

Segment 1: Union Organizing in Gender-Affirming Care

Main Interview: Mia Wong with Lake and Andy from Gender Affirming Care Workers Alliance
Start: [02:37]

Key Discussion Points

• Parallel Secret Union Campaigns:

  • Two independent union movements arose at Real U Electrolysis (Lakewood and Vancouver locations) without knowing about each other due to intense OPSEC (operational security).
  • When the Vancouver walkout became public, Lakewood organizers paused and reassessed to avoid being prematurely exposed and fired.
  • Quote—Lake:
    "[Our] number one priority during our Lakewood campaign was secrecy. We absolutely knew how hostile management was." [04:11]

• Worker Grievances and Toxic Workplace:

  • Constant firings, targeted/unequal discipline, job insecurity, unsafe patient care due to insufficient training, exploitative student-loan "indenture" contracts targeting trans employees.
  • Quote—Andy:
    "Felt like there was no position you could be in where ... your job was safe... one day you would be disappeared for whatever reason." [09:04]

• The “Indenture” Student Loan Trap:

  • Workers signed predatory four-year employment agreements paired to in-house/certification training, with debts over $19K and non-competes attached.
  • Quote—Mia Wong:
    "It's an indentured servitude agreement..." [20:13]

• Bosses Weaponize Vulnerability:

  • Real U bosses explicitly recruited trans workers with the claim that marginal kindness would earn their loyalty; many workers started homeless or near homeless.
  • Quote—Lake:
    "When I came to Real U, I was homeless. Before being employed with them." [21:32]

• Organizing Process:

  • Multiple union “start points.”
  • Outside organizing advice arrived via patients who were themselves connected to labor (IWW).
  • Bosses tried to pit the two locations against each other and maintain ignorance among workers.

• Direct Action Escalation:

  • After paychecks repeatedly bounced, workers delivered demands via a “march on the boss” and staged walkouts, sick outs, and a “good work strike” (completing care, but withholding employer billing).
  • Quote—Nick:
    “Boss is once again the best organizer.” [28:40]
    "We wanted the ability to react... with flexibility, which is what the IWW was offering... direct action." [34:49]

• The Collapse and Aftermath:

  • Real U abruptly declared bankruptcy, closing in a week with little worker/patient warning.
  • Workers called a strike for the final week to avoid working for free and focused on mutual aid, patient placement, and laying groundwork for a future co-op.
  • Quote—Nick:
    "If we worked that last week, whether we'd get paid was up in the air ... so instead, we decided to strike. We spent the last week ... on the picket line telling patients what was actually happening." [55:03]
  • Focus now on developing a workers’ co-op and mutual support for patients cut off from care.
  • Quote—Lake:
    "What's devastating ... is [Real U] was one of the few places that actually took insurances. Not many electrolysis clinics do, so it can be very difficult for people to find and afford care." [59:43]

Notable Quotes

• “To unionize isn’t just about contracts. It’s about dignity and having the power to react. We found community there.” – Nick [57:25]
• “The way that exploitation by the bosses works is they’ll exploit you and pay you less because you care about the work and people you’re helping.” – Mia [55:53]

Takeaway

The story is a microcosm of late-capitalist exploitation in trans and care work, showing both the hard limits of employee resistance under precarity, and the possibility for real solidarity—patient, worker, and organizer alliances forming even as the system collapses.

---

Segment 2: Western Sahara: Colonization, Resistance, and American Complicity

Host: Zaina El Kurd; Guest: Mohamed Salem Murad (Sahrawi Voice)
Start: [69:13]

Key Discussion Points

• UN Legitimizes Moroccan Occupation:

  • New UN resolution, under heavy US and EU influence, shifted from demanding self-determination to prioritizing Morocco’s “autonomy plan,” sidelining the Sahrawi right to independence.

• Morocco’s “Bargain” & Israel Ties:

  • US recognized Moroccan sovereignty in exchange for normalization with Israel (Abraham Accords).
  • Morocco’s regional role as “watchdog” for Western interests detailed; occupation compared to other colonial crimes.

• On-Going Resistance and Leadership:

  • Polisario Front seen as legitimate liberation movement, but internal critique of leadership’s generational gap and need to adapt tactics.
  • Quote—Murad:
    "If we wanted autonomy, we would have been better off with Spain. Why would we accept it 50 years later from a corrupt monarch and occupier?"

• Life in Occupied Western Sahara:

  • Media blackout, disproportionate repression, jailing, and economic ostracism of Sahrawis, outnumbered by Moroccan settlers 3:1.
  • Even activism by one family member jeopardizes the entire extended family's well-being.

• Call to US Listeners:

  • "Americans don’t have the luxury to not care ... your politician and your silence are costing us ... The bare minimum is demanding your government stop supporting Morocco militarily and politically." [90:26]

• Resource:

  • Listeners encouraged to follow Sahrawi Voices and pressure their elected representatives.

---

Segment 3: Retail Surveillance, ICE, and the Politicization of “Organized Retail Crime”

Host/Reporter: Kevin Foster
Parts one and two begin at [94:12] and [144:10]

Key Discussion Points

• Rise of Retail Surveillance and Data Sharing:

  • Drones, AI, facial recognition, corporate watchlists are becoming standard in retail "loss prevention."
  • Stores like Safeway and chains in the Bay Area use secret watchlists, sharing data with police (and soon, ICE).
  • Quote—Kevin: “Retailers will justify this invasion ... to protect their capital and employees. Still, I wouldn’t blame you for worrying about where that data is going.”

• Lobby-Made Moral Panic:

  • “Organized retail crime” (ORC) used as pretext for new draconian laws, led by National Retail Federation (NRF), often inflating stats.
  • Multi-million dollar lobbying for the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act (CORCA)—which could give ICE access to all retail surveillance data.

• Data Misuse and Lawmaking:

  • NRF inflated ORC’s impact (claiming half of retail shrink was crime when it’s ~5%).
  • Bills like CORCA go through:
    • Allow ICE to access retailer data if “operationally necessary.”
    • Establish a “retail crime center” inside DHS, run by ICE, connecting police and private companies.

• Racist, Carceral Impact:

  • New state/federal laws (including Prop 36 in CA) dramatically increase felony enhancements, target poor/POC, use surveillance; enforcement increases racial disparities without impacting actual crime rates.
  • Example: a man in PA was arrested over a 43-cent underpayment due to “three strikes.”
  • Quote—James Stout: “Every single law is backed up by violence... Every time we make a new law, we're giving a new power to the state.” [141:21]
  • Direct connection to the Lake and Riley Act: ICE required to detain any non-citizen arrested for theft, assault, etc.—not convicted.
  • Harms not just immigrants: once in ICE custody, due process evaporates, victims receive no restitution, whole families are sundered.

• Eyewitness Case Studies:

  • Home Depot and grocery stores as ICE hunting grounds, impacts on day laborers and immigrant shoppers. Mutual aid groups respond with solidarity (delivering groceries, fielding defense tents).

• Tragic Outcome:

  • Most tragic illustration: the killing of Cohen Wiley (a one-year-old killed by police during a shoplifting stop in MS), and other fatal vigilantism justified by retail theft “panic.”

Notable Quotes

• “Lobbyists for the bill have a common refrain—organized retail crime is not a victimless crime. I think the same goes for their lobbying.” [111:51]
• “Surveillance capitalism isn’t going to draw the line at immigrants” [143:33]

Takeaway

A manufactured panic about shoplifting has justified a wave of militarized and racialized enforcement, pushing the US closer to a dystopian police-and-surveillance consensus, with ICE poised to be the chief beneficiary.

---

Segment 4: Executive Disorder – Week in News

Hosts: Garrison Davis, Robert Evans, Mia Wong, James Stout
Start: [144:07]

Key Stories and Timestamps

Wildfires in Spokane and Indigenous Lands ([144:40]–[158:47])

• Rapid, under-warned evacuations impact tens of thousands; huge structural loss and community trauma.
• Firefighting resource disparities hit tribal lands especially hard; mutual aid organizations become lifelines.
• James Stout: “Healing doesn’t come from punishment... it comes from helping someone.” [158:47]

US Political Roundup

• Reflecting Pool “Vandalism” and Trump ([159:47])
  U.S. drops charges after evidence reveals vandalism was actually contractor error. Trump fumes.

• Ohio House Rep Max Miller Child Abuse Scandal ([163:08]) – Trump: “Let the families figure that out.”

• Michigan Democratic Senate Primary: Abdul El-Sayed’s Victory ([164:25])

  • Outspent 11:1 by APAC and establishment (total $70M vs. $6M), still clinches win.
  • Platform: Medicare for All, repeal of Trump Medicaid cuts, supreme court reform, abolish ICE, arms embargo on Israel.
  • Attacked with Islamophobia, accused by rival of being a “communist Trojan horse”; Republican opponent launches AI satirical ads.
  • Stevens, the defeated, said “We got the campaign finance zoomies.” [166:58]
  • Broader context: Detroit now fully represented in Congress by DSA candidates; losses for Cori Bush and other leftists in MO/KC.

• Libertarians Boo Ramaswamy in Ohio Gubernatorial Race ([181:48])
  Heckled over failure to address housing, Israel, data centers, et al.
  Ramaswamy: “Why be a whiner and complain about these things when you could just win?”

• Gambling on Wildfires and Disaster Events ([193:17])
  New prediction markets allow people to bet on wildfire location and impact—drawing condemnation and warnings this could incentivize arson. Wildfire markets like “WYLDFYRE” debut.

  • Quote—Robert Evans: “People are going to burn down their own neighborhoods to get rich.” [195:28]

• Munitions Crisis ([186:14])
  The much-touted US munitions surge (critical for ongoing wars) is shown to be mostly fake: billions spent, new plants never turn out a single shell.

  • Key: US running out of both offensive and defensive missiles, including Patriot/Thaad systems and Tomahawks—“at least 65% of our patriot interceptors have been used [in Iran];” impossible to replenish at current rates.

• Federal Reserve in Crisis: Chairman Warsh’s “Regime Change” ([199:11])

  • Warsh’s refusal to give “forward guidance” triggers bond market selloff and new doubts about Fed’s credibility.
  • Fed’s reputation collapse may force a rate hike just to assure markets the “adults” are still in charge—despite all evidence.
  • Warsh’s baffling decision to support the yen by selling euros instead of dollars shocks economists.
  • Meta-Point: The U.S. central bank appears to be largely paralyzed by political risk (sept. meeting likely canceled to avoid raising rates before midterm elections, out of fear of being fired by Trump).

• Tariffs and Legal Dead Ends ([208:45])
  25 states sue Trump admin over forced-labor tariffs, but legal challenge already time-delayed by lag; similar tariffs against Canada yet to be addressed.

  • Quote—Mia: “Amazing political system we’ve set up here.” [210:20]

Notable Quotes

• “We did not cause a 150-foot cut in the center of the pool.” – Robert Evans [162:53]
• “If you look at what’s left of the American economy, gambling is the only growth industry outside of data centers.” – Robert Evans [199:01]
• “I used to have a lot more libertarian-y views on gambling. Now I’m firmly in favor of harsh state intervention in basically all forms of digital gambling.” – Nick Turturro [198:28]

---

Resources and Mutual Aid

• Spokane Wildfire Relief:
  • SpokaneTribalNetwork.org
  • Spokane Complex Wildfire Response Fund (links in episode description)
• Gender Affirming Care Workers Alliance:
  • GoFundMe for displaced workers
  • Electrologists/patients can connect for placement assistance
  • Seeking co-op organizing and resource-sharing expertise
• Western Sahara Solidarity:
  • Sahrawi Voice (resource for learning & amplifying Sahrawi narratives, links in show notes)

---

Final Thoughts / Synthesized Takeaway

This week’s episode weaves together diverse threads of social collapse, resistance, and adaptation: labor struggles navigating direct boss repression, the weaponization of surveillance in the service of both capital and state violence, centuries-old colonial conflict too often erased by “official” channels, and a US polity increasingly ruled by opaque financial, defense, and gambling games. While the established order bends toward self-preservation and profit, the show spotlights communities forging alternative solidarities—trans care workers, indigenous mutual aid, direct action organizers—each swinging back, building pockets of possibility for a better future.

---

Transcript

[Nick Turturro]

This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human a T shirt and jeans, Mac and cheese, oceans and sunsets. Some things in life are an obvious match like RIAS and Schwab Advisor Services, the number one choice for independent advisors looking for a custodian who can help them go further. With all the wealth, services, technology and support in RIA firm needs, the difference is so obvious. It's Schwabius. Find your match and learn why custody is just the beginning. @schwabius.com I'm Nick Turturro.

You probably know me from NYPD Blue,

[Mia Wong]

the Longest Yard or Spike Lee's Blackkklansman.

[Nick Turturro]

And on my new podcast, Delivering Happiness with Nick Turturro, I deliver pizza to a new guest. I've shared a slice with everyone from Seth Rollins.

[Robert Evans]

What are you doing?

[Andy]

My belt.

[Mia Wong]

To Bill Burr. I don't think I've ever met somebody so exactly out of their mind as I am.

[Nick Turturro]

And now we even have more great guests coming up, including the John Turturro

[Mia Wong]

it's called Happiness, Delivering Happiness and many, many more.

[Nick Turturro]

Open your free iHeartradio app search delivering

[Andy]

Happiness with Nick Turturro and listen now.

[Nick Turturro]

I'm Nancy Glass, host of the Burden of Guilt Season three podcast. This is a story about a horrendous situation that destroyed two families. It's a scorched earth war that shows just how far someone will go to get what they want.

[Mia Wong]

Cindy said.

[James]

I had to choose between the truth

[Robert Evans]

and my family, and I had to choose the truth.

[Nick Turturro]

Listen to season three of Burden of Guilt on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. Sleep Number's new collections are designed to adapt to the changing nature of your life and your sleep needs. Whether it's the personalized comfort of the Comfort Mode mattress, the targeted pressure relief of the Comfort Next mattress, or the climate collection that actively cools or warms to help you fall asleep and stay asleep.

[Mia Wong]

And now get early access to our biggest sale of the year, save 25% on the new Comfort Next Lux for a limited time only at a Sleep number store or sleepnumber.com

[Kevin Foster]

call Zone Media.

[Robert Evans]

Hey everybody, Robert Evans here and I wanted to let you know this is a compilation episode. So every episode of the week that just happened is here in one convenient and with somewhat less ads package for you to listen to in a long stretch if you want. If you've been listening to the episodes every day this week, there's gonna be nothing new here for you. But you can make your own decisions.

[Mia Wong]

Welcome to It Could Happen Here, a podcast about things falling apart and putting it back together again and occasionally discovering that there is in fact a second union. I am your host, Mia Wong. Now, a little while back, I did an interview with a group of electrolysis workers who were working for a company called Real U Electrolysis. And we talked about, you know, their unionization efforts and the kind of horror show that was going on there. Now, what I didn't mention at the time was that in the process of talking to those workers and that union, I learned that there was in fact a second union that had been organized kind of unrelated to the first union at the other location. And that is who we are talking to today to get an update on what has been going on in general with the entire situation and also talk about their union and a thing that you will kind of commonly experience randomly unionizing places, which is that sometimes there is another organizing effort at another one of the locations of the same place that you were organizing and you don't know about it because everyone's keeping it secret. So, yeah. To talk about this, I'm joined by Lake and Andy from Gender Affirming Care Workers Alliance. Yeah, both of you two, welcome to the show.

[Nick Turturro]

Hi. Thank you for having us. Thank you.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, I'm very excited to talk to you both. And I guess before we get into the initial organizing, just what was it like finding out that the other shop was also unionizing?

[Nick Turturro]

Oh, my God, it was terrifying. So, like, our number one priority during our Lakewood campaign was secrecy. We absolutely knew how hostile management was towards any kind of improvement of workplace conditions. So going from almost spy vs spy level of OPSEC to figuring out that Vancouver was also unionizing and was doing a walkout, Like, I think that was when we learned.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, God.

[Nick Turturro]

Was when the day that they kind of imploded. And we were terrified. Like, we did not think there would be any way out of that for Lakewood. Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. That's a rough way to find out when. Yeah. The other union is like, oh, God. Okay, we have to do. We have to do a walkout and we have to go on strike because they're firing us.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah. I mean, it was certainly understandable. I wouldn't say we knew why the walkout was happening. When we found out that the walkout happened and that a strike was starting, our campaign kind of came to a halt. Like, realizing there was another campaign happening made us had to, like, reconsider what we were doing. Like, we had our own grievances and we were really Just in the process of getting people on board, we had maybe a core group of five, but we had 13 or up to 13 in the end. But we had like 10 to 12 electrologists because that number was constantly changing. We had to stop and reassess.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, that makes sense.

[Nick Turturro]

And obviously we wanted solidarity with Vancouver. We wanted to do whatever we could to support them, but we also didn't want to lose our jobs.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

One of the first things we decided at Lakewood is that we weren't going to ask anyone to lose their job in order to unionize. We weren't going to put anyone in a position where they would then become unstable. Almost every single worker at Lakewood, like, desperately needed this job.

[Lake]

Yeah. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Without it, we would risk homelessness or other things.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So we kind of got stuck. I mean, it was. It was a tough situation to be in. Knowing that we would have been on their side and with more information and more planning, we would have probably joined them. But we weren't there yet.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

And this is, I guess, partially also, like, you know, one of the things that's difficult about doing campaigns is that sometimes, like, sometimes campaigns move at the speed that the workers are organizing at, and then sometimes they move at the speed of like, oh, my God, the boss is firing everyone. We just have to go now.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

And that's. Yeah, that's always one of the issues is like, as much as you want to be setting the tempo, sometimes you're responding to, like, what management is doing and that can get very rough very quickly.

[Nick Turturro]

Absolutely. I think Vancouver did great with their circumstances. Like you said, it, management set the pace and they had to respond. At Lakewood, we were really trying to do the opposite. We wanted to put us. Put ourselves in a position where we were taking an action and management was responding. And in the end, we did. We paused when Vancouver went on strike. We tried to assess how best we could help them without just also imploding Lakewood. Part of what we realized is that management had not realized any campaign was happening at Lakewood because they were going to use us as no votes in the election.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

They wanted us to be considered one bargaining unit because they thought that we would say no and that union would lose the election.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So our spy versus spy shit was successful.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

We were doing well.

[Mia Wong]

Management deceived.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, perfectly.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. So do you want to rewind the clock a bit and talk about sort of how organizing efforts started? It was not connected to the other campaign at all.

[Lake]

It wasn't.

[Nick Turturro]

But I think we were Dealing with a lot of similar issues.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

In our first, like, year, as we got onboarded and saw how things were versus the position that was promised to us and sold to us.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Everyone kind of started catching on to things and started, like, building a list of grievances. There were concerns about the lack of training and patient safety. There were concerns about the lack of time to do our job. You know, working during breaks, working during our lunches. There was really unclear and inconsistent disciplinary actions being taken left and right.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Like, one person would be told they could do something, another person would do that and get written up for it.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It felt targeted. At some point, Lake would realize that there was no position you could be in where you're. Where your job was safe.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

You could be management. You could be the owner's absolute favorite electrologist. You could be the best at your job. You could keep your head down and do absolutely nothing. And one day you would be disappeared for whatever reason if. If you got one.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It was like a span of like two or three months where we lost maybe five employees. And everyone heard a different reason if. If one was given.

[Mia Wong]

Hmm. Which is a pretty clear sign that something is. Is going wrong.

[Nick Turturro]

Exactly.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Lake]

And I think I was the second employee to be disappeared at the location.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus Christ. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

There were two employees where we were told they resigned. And everyone very, very much knew that these are employees that wouldn't have resigned. These were employees that were ready to start careers and build their life around Real you. We all believed in Real U's mission, but yeah, eventually we just realized it. It didn't matter.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

There was no job stability for anyone. And that was a really big issue because that's what all of us came to this job for. We were hoping for long term careers that paid us livable wages.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And also were safe for us to be ourselves in. There's not a lot of jobs where trans women get to be trans women.

[Lake]

Yep. Yep.

[Nick Turturro]

And like, this was a job that almost celebrated it.

[Lake]

And I know for me personally, I was really excited for the opportunity to be able to help the community.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah. I come from Florida, born and raised, unfortunately, where transitioning for a long time was kind of a pipe dream. Like, it was not a realistic goal of mine until moving to Washington. And now I get to take, or I used to get to take part in people's transition every day for my job.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. I don't know. And that's, I think, like, one of the kind of cruelest parts of all of this. And, like, what management has done is just like ripping that away from both you and from the community.

[Nick Turturro]

Absolutely. And it didn't have to be that way.

[Mia Wong]

No, it really didn't. Yeah. And I guess speaking of the cruelty of management. Yeah, Andy, I guess. Do you want to talk about when you said getting disappeared, what was going on with that?

[Lake]

So I had brought a lot of the grievances that I was seeing and had towards the owners of the company, Ana and Leah, alongside the manager of the clinic at the time. And anytime anything wrong with the business was brought up, hostilities just grew and they kept growing. The more and more that we said, hey, you know, there's issues with the training, there's issues with the amount of time that people have to do your jobs. And it was honestly a really hostile environment created by Anna. And before I had gotten disappeared, I was in my educational program for electrolysis. I was in the process of completing that before my termination. And I had brought up some of my concerns because as I was learning more and more about electrolysis, I. I realized that so many of the things we had been taught were just wrong.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Lake]

And because Ana and Leah didn't want to address it and didn't want that information being out there, I was put in the position where I either had to sign a non disclosure to forgive my student loan debt or I could choose to just be fired and then assume the debt.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus. I mean, they just literally forced you out of the company, Correct?

[Nick Turturro]

It was an involuntary resignation.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. That is, that is only voluntary and like the strict Hobbesian sense where like Hobbes considers that if someone has a gun at your head and tells you to do something and you do it, you still voluntarily made the decision. And I don't know about you, I don't hold to the Strip Thompson interpretation of voluntary.

[Nick Turturro]

I don't think I agree with that.

[Mia Wong]

I think that if you are coerced into a decision, it's not voluntary. I don't know.

[Tom Stokesbury]

Like,

[Andy]

oh God.

[Mia Wong]

Obviously I think the other part of this that's just really grotesque is what you were talking about in terms of just the education being wrong. Because this is something that's really common in trans healthcare where like there should. Yeah, there is just a bunch of stuff the medical professionals are being taught that was developed from something someone figured out kind of in the 80s and has never been updated in the course of like the last 25 years of the development of science. And then just also the development of there being more and more trans people who have been, you know, just like Experiencing treatment. And it's frustrating, I think, because you really rarely ever get a scenario where there are trans people who actually are in a position sufficient enough in any kind of medical institution to even, like, get to talk about it. And the fact that their response was to just, like, disappear you and, like, force you out of the company is really bleak.

[Lake]

Yeah. And on that note, I would say most of the employees received about two weeks training before working on patients.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, boy.

[Lake]

That and the educational program that I went through was four months. So if you kind of compare the timelines there of how we were trained in the job versus the education that I got, it just wasn't enough. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Not only was it not enough, but anyone who voiced that it wasn't enough put their job at risk.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, there's more than one Lakewood worker that went to management saying, hey, I don't feel well, trained enough, I don't feel informed enough. And they were met with, well, more than one situation in which they were, like, directly asked, like, do you feel comfortable working on patients? Do you think you're capable of this job? With the implication or the direct, like, verbal statement being, if you don't, maybe you should find somewhere else to work.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But all of us signed up for this job with the agreement, like, we signed these loan agreements with the idea that we'd be going to this in depth training. Like, the owners themselves, during my interview process at least talked up SAP masters constantly. Like, this is the place to go to learn about how to provide electrolysis for transgender clients specifically.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And then I worked there for 16 months and never saw any training after my first few weeks. Like. Yeah, I think the entire 16 months there. After my first month, my sessions were only observed three times.

[Andy]

Jesus.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Only three times. And I have not. I was not an electrolysis provider before this. This was my entry into it. Their training was the only training I got.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And the only reason my sessions started being shadowed at all is because providers themselves started asking for, like, auditing sessions.

[Lake]

There is an instance that I would like to bring up. I was overseeing the training of new hire, and during this training period, I had a patient on my books who had requested to never be on my books again, which totally fine, totally valid. But the fact that they were put on my books after requesting not to see me again was an issue.

[Nick Turturro]

It's not totally fine or totally valid for us to do that.

[Lake]

That's not fine on management's part. And so as I am training this new hire and we're going into this session, the patient wasn't comfortable with me being there in the room to provide training to the new hire. So I had to leave the new hire alone with that patient.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus.

[Lake]

Because they weren't comfortable with me being there.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. That is just absolutely unacceptable way for any of this to be running, especially with a delicate healthcare thing that can cause injury to people.

[Lake]

Exactly.

[Mia Wong]

If we can back up for a second, can you explain a little bit for people who didn't listen to the first episode or people who don't remember about the absolutely wild, I guess, nominally student loan indenture program thing? That's a key component of this whole story.

[James]

So.

[Nick Turturro]

So just about every worker until like some of the most recent workers got a job at Real U Electrolysis with the understanding that we would be hired and trained and receive pay while being trained by Real you, but that at some point they would send us to ZAP Masters in Centralia for an electrolysis training program and to get us licensed via Oregon State. Washington doesn't have electrolysis licensure requirements. You could buy a machine and start providing. You shouldn't, but you could.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So the idea was that they would pay for our ZAP Masters training, they would pay for our machine, they would pay us while we were learning this job and starting with them. And they total all of that at around $19,500 plus interest. So 19 to 21,000 is the number that gets thrown around. Yeah, they would pay for that and forgive it if we agreed to work for them for four years after they license us. So this four year timer doesn't even start until we're finished with school and get our license in Oregon.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It included a clause where not only do we have to work for them for four years, but we can't work for other electrolysis clinics, which these kinds

[Lake]

of employment agreements are literally called trap agreements.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Lake]

If that kind of clues you into anything.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, yeah. It's like it's an indentured servitude agreement. Like, that's like, oh God, listen.

[Nick Turturro]

Hindsight is 20 20.

[Andy]

Jesus Christ. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

A lot of us had the foresight to know it wasn't a good situation, but we were coming from worse situation.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. I think a way to think about this also is just that like, you know, there's two parts of this that are predatory. One is the recruitment that is designed, you know, based on, I mean, just lying to people about how this is going to go. And then there's the secondary part. That's the exploitativeness of the agreement. Itself. And I don't know, I think we have this very, very annoying tendency to look at being in an inherently exploitative situation to something as, you know, something that, like, through neoliberal personal choice, you could just avoid being in. In these situations entirely. And that's just, like, not true.

[Nick Turturro]

No. Unfortunately, if you have a regular job, you are being exploited.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. Yeah. And you know the fact that, like, going back at the sort of, like, Hobbesian consent thing, it's like, well, okay, like, is anyone actually, like, you know, operating freely in a set of conditions where.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Like, if you don't take the job, your alternative is that you don't have food and you, you know, you can't pay your rent and you don't. And you don't have a home anymore.

[Nick Turturro]

Exactly.

[Lake]

I mean, when I came to real you, I was homeless.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Lake]

Before being employed with them.

[Nick Turturro]

You are not the only one. I think many of us were.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

And that's something that I think is also really bleak about. The way that this was structured, which was like, one of the things that talked about in the last episode was that Anna Lantry, like, very specifically said that she was targeting trans people because you could just, like, treat them a little bit nicely and they would do anything for you. And. Yeah. It's like, you know, this is a deliberate targeting of a population that has an unemployment rate that is, what, like, four and a half times the general unemployment rate in the US that is at all times and at all places operating in, like, Great Depression levels of unemployment and that. Yeah. You know, whose, like, homelessness rates and, like, rate of having been homeless is, like, orders of magnitude higher for the general population. And I don't know, it's extremely bleak that, you know, the opportunity to both, like, help your community and also make a just absolutely seismic, like, class increase from, like, being homeless and struggling to feed yourself to, like, having stable employment is ultimately kind of this, like, debt peonship trap.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah. I mean, you put it pretty clearly.

[Mia Wong]

Capitalism sucks, like, bad economic system. Good Lord. Oh, agreed.

[James]

God.

[Mia Wong]

So speaking of capitalism, we should probably throw to ads, and then when we come back, we could talk more about resisting capitalism, which is to say how. How the organizing got going and what's been happening since.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, sounds good.

[Lake]

Sounds good.

[Mia Wong]

And we are back. Yeah. So let's get into a little bit more of, like, how the organizing process started and how it sort of went.

[Nick Turturro]

I think Andy might be a good one to start with this, because unbeknownst to everyone, there were three different starts to our Union efforts, Andy, before you got got.

[Lake]

Yeah, I was looking into the possibility of trying to start a union at the shop. I was reaching out to different union organizations and I was also looking at what government agencies that I could be reaching out to about some of the things that we were experiencing at our workplace.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, so that would have been around November of last year.

[Lake]

Yeah, that was around November.

[Nick Turturro]

And then Andy disappeared. There was a string of firings. And I would say our efforts started again around January of this year. Kind of just started with one of our workers chatting with their patients. The trans community is also pretty involved in organizing mutual aid unions. So, like, when you're shooting the shit with your patient and they hear, like, a workplace ripe for organizing.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

They tell you, wait, that is the.

[Mia Wong]

That is. That is maybe the sweetest thing I've ever heard.

[Nick Turturro]

Like, oh, it was pretty good. Trans people are so good. This wouldn't have happened.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, trans people. Truly, truly amazing.

[Nick Turturro]

So, yeah, we had a patient who was an IWW member who told us, look, you gotta start. You gotta get in contact with the GMB and start learning how to organize. So we did.

[Lake]

That's amazing.

[Mia Wong]

Okay. It's not quite salting because you is someone who is a patient and not like an employee, but it's like. It's kind of like an accidental salting. Oh, my God.

[Nick Turturro]

None of this would have happened without our patients. They've been supportive the entire way. When things in Vancouver started happening, we all started having patients asking or tell us that, look, I don't want to put you in an awkward position, but if y' all started unionizing, that'd be dope.

[Andy]

Yeah,

[Nick Turturro]

it was really nice getting a support. It sucked that we couldn't talk to them about it because like we said, we were kind of doing spy versus spy level of. We didn't want management to know. So our patients didn't know until kind of the last month.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Which sucked. I mean, these people that we've been seeing weekly or more often, for months, weeks, up to a year, it sucked. Not getting to tell them what was going on, knowing that they cared.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

And it's this really stark example of, like, what community actually is versus what it's sold to us as. We're like, yeah, you have this thing where, you know, you have genuine community with the patients that you're treating in a way that's staggeringly, unbelievably rare in any kind of trans healthcare field. And, you know, and from that community, you get, hey, you get, hey, you should organize and like, you know, people trying to help do the organizing. And then, you know, you have this sort of like the corporate version of community, which is the bosses running a terror campaign and like disappearing your trans co workers.

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It's pretty stark contrast.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Honestly, part of why it went on for so long is every red flag that management had, there were at least one, if not two green flags between your coworkers and your clientele that made up for it.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But going back to organizing January, we got in contact with the Tacoma GMB for the iww. GMB is general membership branch. So it's essentially just the local IWW to us. And we had a organizing rep who would do kind of like monthly calls with us at first, just telling us how to organize, what conversations to have and how to get people interested. The AEIOU conversation. Agitate, educate, inoculate, organize. Push one of those.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, yeah, you got it.

[Nick Turturro]

Because none of us had any organizing experience, so we had all of this energy to write our conditions, but we didn't know how to do it. So we started having conversations with the IWW and just slowly started building up our group of trustworthy workers that we knew wanted this. It wasn't hard. Most of us lean left, if not radical. So finding union sympathies was not difficult. Finding the grievances was even easier. I mean, these things are pretty clear in the workplace.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. Boss is once again the best organizer.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, exactly. What really did it for us is when paychecks started bouncing.

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

And just. I just still. Sorry, I'm going to hold on this for a second of like.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

What do you mean the paychecks are bouncing? What the fuck? Like, Jesus Christ.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah. That's about how we felt. Like at the end of March, they swapped us from direct deposit over to paper paychecks. Our first one was in April, and there was at Lakewood, only one person who had it bounced. I think Vancouver also had some issues, but like we said, there was no communication between the branches, so we didn't know what they were dealing with.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And management kind of did their best to keep the locations separate. Like, Lakewood was told things about Vancouver to kind of view them negatively. And the same with Vancouver.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Which again, is this real sort of image of like what the world ruled by bosses is. Which is like. Yeah. They're deliberately trying to isolate people from their community and deliberately trying to separate people and instill sort of like fear and hatred against each other. And then you get put in this position where it's like, it becomes difficult to actually, like, do the kind of, like, community building and the kind of, like, solidarity and organizing that you want to, because everyone also has to, like, hide from this boss surveillance state.

[Nick Turturro]

I feel pretty bad. Like, all the way up until we heard about Vancouver's walkout, I kind of referenced Vancouver as, like, the Vancouver cult because it sounded like everyone was really happy and fine with how things were going. And, yeah, Ana and Leah were just doing what they want in Vancouver, and everyone's fine with it and everyone's happy with it, and it was okay over there. So, I mean, that was part of why we didn't contact them initially. We didn't know who it was safe to.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Lakewood had our own experiences of, like, talking to a worker we thought was on our side, and they immediately turned around and go talk to management.

[Mia Wong]

Oof.

[Tom Stokesbury]

Yeah.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So, yeah, communication just wasn't there between us and Vancouver. So when checks started bouncing, the total number was always unclear.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

The first paycheck, it was just one. That second paycheck in April, it was already a few more people.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus Christ.

[Nick Turturro]

So when they told the first worker, they had no idea why that check bounced, and then the next paycheck, more checks bounced. It was like, immediately. Obviously, they were being.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Untruthful, dishonest, like.

Like what?

[Mia Wong]

One paycheck bouncing is already unacceptable. Like, the correct paycheck, second bounce is zero. But it's like the moment there's more than one, suddenly it's like that it becomes a lot less likely that it's like they fucked up, and more likely that like. Like something deliberately, like malicious and messed up is happening here.

[Nick Turturro]

Exactly. Each paycheck, the frequency kind of just went up. Like, how many people had their paychecks bounce? And the way that it was handled was just rewriting them. Like it was your responsibility to figure out it had bounced, go to management and ask them to fix it. Them fixing it was either reissuing you a check or asking you to try cashing it again.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, my God.

[Nick Turturro]

There was one paycheck where after it had bounced, for me and my partner, they did just tell us to try every day because they couldn't tell us when they would have the funds to pay us because some money comes in and out every single day. It was a pretty wild situation to be put in.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, like, Jesus Christ. Like, just like, absolute nightmare. Oh, my God.

[Nick Turturro]

So when checks started bouncing, kind of clarified what we could organize around first. Yeah, I mean, if you're not getting paid, you don't have a job to unionize.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, that's, that's, that, that's like the most like nothing to lose in a world to win situation you could possibly imagine.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Exactly.

[Mia Wong]

Like, we're getting paid. We're, we're doing real work for fake money. Like, come on.

[Nick Turturro]

Right. So we kind of settled on that as like our first grievance and demand to organize around is, were demanding guaranteed pay, which isn't even, like, it shouldn't be a demand. It's their legal responsibility so much.

[Mia Wong]

It's like, yes, you, you must form a union in order to have the right to be paid, which I, I, I've been saying this, this kind of joke about what it's like being trans for a while. Where it's like to, to be a trans person in America is to like aspire to the status of a mere proletariat where you only get regular exploitation instead of like the even, honestly, even worse shit you get here. It's like, yeah, we had to form a union so they would like, pay us.

[Nick Turturro]

It's like, God, like, oh, we just wanted real jobs.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. Like, oh my God.

[Nick Turturro]

Going back to when we started talking to the IWW in those first, like, initial union ish meetings, it was still just very few of us and we hadn't put words to it yet, but we kind of realized that we weren't super interested in going the route of the NLRB with a election for a union and then collective bargaining for a contract. We had contracts. We know how real you write its contracts. We weren't interested in another one. We wanted the ability to react to changes in the workplace with flexibility, which is what the IWW was offering. They focus on like, solidarity unionism that doesn't use the NLRB, but instead uses worker power via direct action to get management to the table and to meet your demands. Because a lot of this was rushed. We didn't get a chance to really get the terminology and our options.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But one of the terms they used was involuntary recognition.

[Mia Wong]

That's fun.

[Nick Turturro]

We were running underground until we were ready to go public, but we were fine with being a public union. We just didn't need the NLRB's backing. Yeah, we had the worker power in the workplace and we were going to do direct action to get what we wanted. So yeah, I think the word we were using was involuntary recognition.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, like, I love that. That's great.

[Nick Turturro]

Right?

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So going back to March and April, knowing that we weren't interested in contracts and that we were going to Go. The route of direct action. We just had to choose a demand to start with. The balancing paychecks was a pretty easy one. So we started having meetings and talking about what kind of direct action we could do and what kind of escalations we could have. If we were organizing around the demand for guaranteed pay and that demand, essentially we were asking them to resume direct deposit or deliver our next check in the form of guaranteed funds. Like cash money orders, cashier's check, something that won't bounce.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

We wanted our money on the day it was due.

[Mia Wong]

Like, I was like. I want to say this too, that, like, there's, like, a theory version of this in Capital where Marx talks about how, like, labor is the only commodity that you pay for at the end and not at the beginning when you purchase it. Where, like, every other commodity, you have to, like, pay for it before you get it. Whereas with. With labor, you pay for it after. But, like, if you tried this with any other commodity other than labor, this is a crime, right?

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, it's a crime for labor, too.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, it is a crime for labor. But it's like. But it's also like. Like, if.

[Andy]

If you.

[Mia Wong]

If you do this at a grocery store, like, you will be arrested.

[Nick Turturro]

Yes.

[Mia Wong]

And when. When a corporation does it, it's like, okay, if you want the law to help you for doing, again, the same thing. Guns to take you away at a grocery store. Right. You have to form a fucking union and organize. And. I don't know. I hate this system. It's. It's so unbelievably exploitative. And it's so clear in these sort of moments like. Like, who is designed to protect and who it's not designed to protect. Where, like, the punishment for the same. Literally the same crime is, like, one of you gets you arrested and the other one gets. Gets you, like a union campaign.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah.

[Lake]

There's also something that I'd like to mention.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Lake]

For those who managed to go through the ZAP Master program, one of the things that was supposed to happen was that those employees, during their education were supposed to receive stipends to cover their living expenses.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Lake]

During their schooling, many of whom, which were either not working at the time or working at reduced hours. And some of them saw stipends or partial stipends, and some of them, from what I understand, received nothing at all.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus.

[Lake]

But were still working at those reduced hours, trying to support themselves while also going to school.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Which is, again, also a. I guess, like, it's a form of wage theft. And also, B, it's a thing where like. Like, the difference between the bosses making slightly less money that year and a bunch of workers who are, like, mostly trans and in really horrifying, like, economic conditions. Not having that money is the difference between someone, like, maybe buying. I don't even want to say buying a slightly less, like, fancy car, because it's not even that much money for them. It's like, I don't know, like, they have one day where they don't go to, like, an unbelievably expensive restaurant versus, like, can I feed myself at night?

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah. They get one less personal massage.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

We might end up homeless.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah. That was part of the situation that was starting to really weigh on me near the end, is because part of what I had signed up for was agreeing to work part time and do schooling part time. And it was supposed to be, like, anywhere from five to six days a week with the two, which was going to be a bit much for me. But at some point, they decided they wanted all their workers doing school full time so that they could get through it quicker. But they didn't adjust the stipend they were offering. So you were expected to stretch the same amount of money over time where you weren't getting any income at all.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And that money was $4,500, which is not enough for the, like, three months of rent and food and gas. No gas, because it's in Centralia.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So, yeah. Like, I had had multiple conversations with them about it, and they would not give me a clear answer on whether we would be able to continue working or if we wouldn't get to work or what we would do about our income situation.

[Lake]

And that's the situation that I ended up in was for the last two months of my schooling, I had to float myself on very little income because I had only received enough to really cover the first two months of the school.

[Nick Turturro]

And schooling took, like, six to nine months if you were part time. Oh, my God.

[Lake]

If you were part time, it took six to nine months.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Lake]

Yeah. And four months if you were full time, which I was going full time.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. And then also like this. The second thing with that, too, is, like, it's not only are you, like, spending time doing training for this job unpaid, like, that's also taking in time where you can't work another job to get more income.

[Nick Turturro]

Well, if you wanted to work at another job, you had to get their approval.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus Christ. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

They made it pretty clear they wanted you committed to real you. And nothing Else.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. It's cult tactics. And then also the classic wonderful capitalist double freedom where you have freedom from the ability to eat and then the freedom to sell yourself.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

God.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, I could always choose to go homeless and hungry.

[Mia Wong]

Yes. The law in this magnificent equality bans both the rich and the poor from sleeping under a bridge.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah. So we chose our demand and we came up with our plan. We had our actions settled and we had a plan for if management responded. If they didn't, if they escalated, we had our options and we felt secure going in at that point. Like when we first started our actions, we only actually had five workers participating. More that were sympathetic, but all that felt that they weren't in a position to do direct action and lose their job. We saw Vancouver lose their jobs. When they took action, we knew it was a very real possibility.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But we started, I believe on June 29, we delivered our demand for guaranteed pay to our manager. The IWW calls it a march on the boss.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It was like less than five minutes total. The five workers presented our demand. We gave two testimonials. We for like how it's been impacting us directly. And then we left. We sent a follow up email to the owners of the company because we had handed it to the manager and we're waiting for their response. We put it out there and we just had to wait.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

The next day the manager caught one of our workers on her own to respond, essentially telling us they could not afford to pay us any other way that they were paying us. They could cut us paper checks on each payday and that was it. That wasn't one of the options we gave them.

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

I just can't get over the like. Yeah, sorry. The only way I could afford to keep running my business is if I'm allowed to not pay you. And that that's things you have to

[Nick Turturro]

accept is if I'm allowed to hand out checks that can't be cashed.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So when they told us no, we looked at our plan and we took our next action. We submitted a bunch of LNI claims for our checks that had been NSF or insufficient funds. LNI claim labor and Industries is kind of like the protective body body for workers in Washington. For each check that we had received that bounced, we had a right to file a worker's rights complaint. The problem with those complaints is that they're not anonymous. Your employer gets told when one is filed, who filed it and why they filed it. Unfortunately, that wasn't an option until we were all doing it together unless we wanted to lose our jobs one by one.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So when they told us no, we started by submitting our LNI claims. It all happened so quick and it was one action after another that it kind of blurs together. So I think we submitted our LNI claims. When we gave them our demand on the 29th, we gave them a deadline for our Next payday. So July 3rd is when we were due to get paid again. And we said, by then you have to agree that you're going to give us guaranteed pay or deliver guaranteed funds.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

The next day they had told us no. And on Friday, they delivered paychecks like any other payday.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

They didn't really acknowledge what we had asked. They didn't acknowledge that they weren't meeting our demand. They did not tell us there were any issues with these checks or that they might bounce or that there weren't the funds. They at no point asked anyone to delay cashing their checks because they didn't have the funds. Like, that was part of the issue is, like, sometimes businesses run into financial issues and you have to deal with it. The way to deal with it is not by giving out bad checks and not telling your workers.

[Mia Wong]

For people who haven't, like, thought of this before, there are, like, actual consequences for attempting to. To cash a check that doesn't cash.

[Nick Turturro]

Absolutely.

[Mia Wong]

Like, that gets taken out on you. The person who's attempting to cash the check, like, as well as the. The people upstream who are doing the

[Nick Turturro]

bad checks, like, we actually managed to avoid that at Lakewood for the most part, because once checks started bouncing, we were scared of that happening.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So we started cashing them at Chase, which is who real you banks with. You don't have to have an account with Chase to go get your check cash with them. You just have to pay a $10 fee and have forms of identification. So the people who went to Chase and had their checks bounced there, it never hit their account.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. That's good.

[Nick Turturro]

There were never any fees or any negative marks on our accounts for the people who couldn't do that. Yeah, there were. Yeah, there were NSF fees. At least one Lakewood employee now has had their account completely shut down for 90 days while it's investigated for fraud.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. Which is horrific because it's like, okay, the people who are committing the fraud are the bosses, but now you don't have a fucking bank account for 90 days, which is just a nightmare.

[Nick Turturro]

Part of our hope had been that by cashing them at Chase, Chase would flag the account because like their account was with Chase and they were consistently issuing these checks that they couldn't afford to cash and we were consistently cashing them at Chase, who had to acknowledge there weren't the funds there. Yeah, unfortunately, they told us a couple of times that there was just nothing they could do on their end.

[Mia Wong]

Love, capitalist class solidarity. Great stuff.

[Nick Turturro]

So we did our demand, we did our LNI claims, and then they delivered our paychecks as if nothing had happened.

[Tom Stokesbury]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So over that weekend, we finalized our plan to stage walkouts starting on Monday from 12 to 1. Workers would leave real you to go to the local Chase and attempt to cash their checks. And we did that until each worker got paid. It normally took like 15, 20 minutes. And then we spent the rest of the hour, you know, doing our direct action, not returning to work.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But when it was one o', clock, we returned to work. We were ready to see our patients. We all messaged our clients the night before if they were affected and if we had the time, we offered them replacement sessions.

[Tom Stokesbury]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

We did our best to follow the rules as much as we could while breaking them. We were trying to send a message to management. We weren't trying to disrupt patient care.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Every step of the way, we were doing our best to disrupt actual patient care to the least amount possible.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So that went on for three days. On Monday, none of the checks cleared. On Tuesday we got six of them and on Wednesday we got the last one. I did forget to say that was when we picked up two more workers. There were a couple workers who weren't comfortable prior to then taking part in direct action that were ready and did join the walkout with us. Management ignored the walkouts. We got absolutely no response.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, boy.

[Nick Turturro]

We sent email updates each day. You know, like this many checks cleared, this many didn't. We're going to keep going at any point. If they had just told us, yes, we'll give you guaranteed pay next payday, we would have stopped. Yeah, they didn't.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So we got paid on Wednesday. A few days went by when we still weren't hearing from them. So we escalated again. I think after that we did a sick out. So there was a day where everyone called in sick and most of the workers weren't in the office.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Which is pretty noticeable, especially when management doesn't come into the office and all that's left is your newbies.

[Mia Wong]

Yep, yep, yep, yep.

[Nick Turturro]

We did that again. Still no response. We sent another follow up email being like, you continue to not Meet our demands, we're going to continue to take action. At any point, we will call a ceasefire. If you come to the table and either meet our demand or tell us why you can't tell us what your plan is to do to meet it in the future. And they still didn't. So we moved on to what's called the good work strike. Every provider that was taking part, we showed up, we did our jobs, we treated our patients, we cleaned our rooms. We just didn't sign our notes because that meant that management wasn't able to bill for them. Because if we weren't getting paid, neither should they.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, it's a version of the bus strikes where, like, you just run the buses but then don't charge anyone.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, exactly. That was exactly the line of thinking. There was another group of nurses in a hospital that stopped charting so that patients couldn't be billed, but they kept performing the work.

[Mia Wong]

That rocks.

[Nick Turturro]

And that's exactly where I got the idea from.

[Mia Wong]

Hell yeah. Hell yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

We had patients that we wanted to take care of.

[James]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But we didn't want to give real you money when they weren't meeting their obligations.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, that rocks.

[Nick Turturro]

That went on for a few days and then on our day off we got a bunch of information on that. Thursday, it was revealed that management had been told real you was going bankrupt and would be closing probably the 24th.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, boy.

[Nick Turturro]

So they learned that Thursday and we didn't know what they would tell us if anything.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And payday was Friday, so they were either going to meet or demand or not need it again.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And so that plus the information we got on Thursday, we decided to do another stick out so that we could reassess. We wanted to see what they were actually going to do. We wanted to see if the business was going to be open.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Because there's just red flag after red flag. Some of us are expecting them to close up and run away at any point.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, they opened on Friday. Checks were delivered. Two of us received fake ones.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, yeah.

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Let's talk about the fake checks for a second. What the fuck? I can't get over this.

[Robert Evans]

What?

[Lake]

What?

[Nick Turturro]

Listen, we like to joke that whatever you think the worst option is real you will choose a worse one.

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So at least two employees. We're certain. More. We're just not sure who exactly and how many. But we were given checks that were kind of handwritten. Like the only things printed on them were like the color that check paper is and one of the lines on the back where you endorse it. Everything else was hand drawn from, like, who it was made out to, how much it was, the lines those were written on.

[Mia Wong]

I just can't.

[Nick Turturro]

Like, it sent alarm bells ringing pretty quickly.

[Mia Wong]

That's not even Monopoly money because Monopoly money is printed.

[Nick Turturro]

This is like, yeah, no, it was like a crafts project.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

It's like they've invented a form of payment. Like fakers and company store money. Like it's unbelievable.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, we got those and we were pretty suspicious, but we took them to chase anyways. And the teller was like, look, I can't, I can't even cache this to tell you that it's bounced because there's no way for me to verify it's real. The security markings that are supposed to be on the back are not there.

[Mia Wong]

It's like, sorry, the poor fake fellow is just like, yeah, sorry. I, like, can't cash like, like, just like child's drawings of money. This is not an extensible form of payment.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus Christ.

[Lake]

Oh no.

[Nick Turturro]

They unfortunately couldn't really tell us what to do about it.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So we had to reach out to our management and ownership to be like, hey, we could not cash our checks, we need real ones issued.

[Mia Wong]

Uh huh.

[Nick Turturro]

Let us know how you're doing that. Also on Friday, we were out of work. We were waiting for news and I think that's when they sent out the email about the business closing. At like 1:56 workers got an email to their company. Email which meant most of us could not access it because we don't access work emails from home. That's when they sent it out. And like 30 minutes later they sent out a patient announcement.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus Christ.

[Nick Turturro]

And that's how most of us learned.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

We learned as patients first that real you was closing in one week.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Which is just horrifying stuff.

[Nick Turturro]

That was when it really hit me. Yeah. When I opened my patient portal and read the announcement, I felt like I was seeing it, like all my patients were reading it.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And like I was losing access to needed care out of nowhere.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It was heartbreaking. It was devastating. Like there's no words to describe how I felt for all of my patients.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Some of them knew it was coming, most of them didn't. A lot of them didn't get last sessions. I mean, when we got the notice, we as a union realized that if we worked that last week, whether or not we'd get paid was up in the air.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean if they chose not to pay us, we would have to go through bankruptcy Court and get in line to get paid.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So instead we decided to strike. We spent the last week that real you was open on the picket line telling patients what was actually happening. We weren't boycotting. We weren't asking anyone not to go in and have their last sessions. We were encouraging that any of the providers that were left, anyone who had sessions, we wanted them to get them before they couldn't.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But we also didn't want to provide free labor.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And it wasn't an easy decision. I mean, it's one that the group had to talk about and go back and forth on. I mean, none of us thought that our last sessions were going to be our last sessions. We all wanted to see our patients one more time. We didn't want our patients last session to be their last session.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But we also didn't want to be exploited even further.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, we made it clear what we were willing to do and we followed through.

[Mia Wong]

I mean, I think it's really like the most pure example of just the dilemma that healthcare work and also like nonprofit work and anything where you're taking care of people, it's. You're put in this dilemma where, like, the way that exploitation by the bosses works is like, they're going to exploit you and pay you less because of your care for the work that you're doing and the people that you're helping. And this is like the most pure, like. Yeah. The choice you've been given by your bosses is to probably work for free to help your community and make these people a little bit more money before they fuck off or go on strike and have to deal with, you know, like, have to try to get your patients treatment somehow.

[Nick Turturro]

Exactly.

[Mia Wong]

It's horrifying.

[Nick Turturro]

It's an impossible choice.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It sucked.

[Tom Stokesbury]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

None of us wanted it to go that way. It didn't have to be that way. It didn't.

[Lake]

And I think it's really unfortunate because multiple steps along the way, they could have scaled back operations to focus on fixing the internal issues with the business.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It's not like they didn't have people telling them what was happening. It's just they chose to stick their head in the sand like an ostrich and keep going.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

And you know, and ultimately, like, you're the people who are paying the price for their mistakes and, you know, their greed and arrogance and malice.

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

But we survived. And I know that a lot of my fellow workers agree with me that this was an experience we would rather have than not have. Yeah, we found a lot of solidarity and community and I mean we've built relationships that are going to last past this. We're hoping to move on and work together again in something better.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, yeah. And my understanding is that the long term goal is to try to set up a co op to be able to do this without sort of the exploitation of the bosses.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean. Yeah, that is the ideal. I think every union dream would be a worker cooperative or somewhere where they have some form of either ownership or say in the process. Yeah, we would love to create something where our patients and our workers are working in tandem together to create the care that they deserve. Yeah, like you mentioned earlier, there's just such a lack of like standards of care for trans gender affirming care. We don't talk to each other enough, we don't value the patient experience enough. We figured out a lot of things in the 80s and didn't bother doing more research. Yeah, we want to do that. We want to fill that hole and we have a lot of workers that are very committed to that, that are very excited by that opportunity. It's a long term goal. In the short term we are hoping to get more people educated like we were promised and back to providing. We're hoping to find new placements for our patients that have like urgent care needs. Like people who have surgeries that are coming up. Yeah, we're working on a database of like local electrolysis clinics. Who has availability, who treats what areas and who takes what insurances. So if we have patients that are looking for new places, they can reach out and we can point them somewhere. But we're always looking for more resources too. We're in our information gathering phase. We're trying to resource compile, just get everything we can for our workers so that we can take those next steps.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, absolutely.

[Lake]

And what's devastating about this all is relu was one of the few places that actually took insurances. Not many electrolysis clinics do. So it can be very difficult for people to find and afford care.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, absolutely. And that's, I don't know, like. Yeah, that's like another one of the like heart wrenching things about this is like all of the patients whose medical care was ripped away by this and the fact that it's y' all trying to figure out how to help them and not the bosses is like such an indication of which side people are fundamentally on.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean how they handled the closure is a pretty clear sign of that too.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

If you cared about your patients finding new places before their services were disrupted, you would have given them more than one week notice.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, you require two weeks notice from workers before they leave.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I think our patients deserve better.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, they absolutely do. And you also deserve better.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, yeah. We have better, We've made better. We're gonna create better. But would have been nice to have what we thought we were getting.

[Lake]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Speaking of that is, are there ways for listeners to reach out and help?

[Nick Turturro]

So right now we have a link tree. It's a little bit bare bones because this happens so much sooner than it was supposed to.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

There is a GoFundMe that is for worker stability. Not all of us are gonna qualify for unemployment, and it's gonna be a while before we can find new jobs. Cause, yeah, electrolysis clinics and being transgender just. It's a tough combination.

[Mia Wong]

Yep.

[Nick Turturro]

But we also have an email for anyone to reach out to if they have questions for, like, if our patients are trying to contact us or if they need somewhere new to go.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

If we have any electrologists in the community that have openings, we would love to know. So we can send people to you.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, absolutely.

[Nick Turturro]

If anyone who has knowledge, starting cooperatives. That's also a resource we are really interested in. We want to do this right.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

And we want to talk to the people that have experience doing it.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Do you have anything else that. That you want to make sure people know?

[Lake]

So there are a couple different electrology associations that clinics can align themselves with. One of the ones that I'm thinking of is called the American Electrology association, or Electrolysis, and they have a code of ethics and standards that they require the businesses that are partnered with them to adhere to. It's an association that you have to pay a subscription fee to, but in turn, you get resources for your business and are able to have somewhere to reach out to when you have questions about the ethics in your business or how things are being run. I think something really important to note is that Real you was not partnered with any of them. And there are electrology conventions that will happen that a whole bunch of different electrologists, surgeons, you know, from different places will get together to discuss the health care that they're providing. And it's from my understanding that really, you did not have the best reputation in these circles.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, the truth is, near the end, Real you was having to form their own education program. They were forming their own school because their connection with Zap Master and with the rest of the electrologist community was just so poor, like, they couldn't maintain it.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Lake]

But for the patients, finding a clinic that is associated with one of those associations provides them an extra level of protection, especially since Washington state is not licensed for electrolysis.

[Nick Turturro]

That is a really, really good point. If you are a patient and you've heard what was going on behind the scenes at real you and you're concerned about continuing your care, one of the ways to protect yourself against the practices that you want to avoid is by finding a clinic that's associated with one of these professional institutions.

[Lake]

Correct.

[Nick Turturro]

Somewhere that has standards you have to meet. Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. And I think that's a good place to end with, you know, the twin promises of workers being able to do their jobs and care for the communities and communities being able to get the care that they need. How yet this system simply delivers neither of them. The only way out of it is to fight for a better one.

[Nick Turturro]

We're swinging. I can say that.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, our group is full of fighters. I'm hopeful.

[Lake]

I am too. And every step of the way, every action I have taken has been from a love for my patients and the work that I do and intend to continue doing.

[Mia Wong]

Hell yeah.

[Lake]

Absolutely.

[Nick Turturro]

I'm pretty excited to close this chapter and start the new one where we can only go up.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Hell yeah.

[Andy]

Hell yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Thank you two both so much for coming on the show.

[Nick Turturro]

Thank you for having us. Hopefully this was exciting as part one.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah.

[Lake]

Thank you so much.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, I'm happy to. And hopefully we get to talk to y' all again when, like the co op starts. Should be lovely.

[Nick Turturro]

Absolutely. Part three will be about our successful co op beginnings.

[Mia Wong]

Hell yeah. Hell yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Looking forward to it.

[Mia Wong]

Hell yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Sleep Number's new collections are designed to adapt to the changing nature of your life and your sleep needs. Whether it's the personalized comfort of the comfort mode mattress, the targeted pressure relief of the Comfort Next mattress, or the climate collection that actively cools or warms to help you fall asleep and stay asleep.

[Mia Wong]

And now get early access to our biggest sale of the year. Save 25% on the new comfort Next luxe for a limited time only at a sleep number store or sleepnumber.com.

[Nick Turturro]

well, it's that time again. Backpacks, first day of school outfits, and the low key anxiety of am I even doing this right? Good Mom's bad choices is diving into the back to school season the way only we know how. Unfiltered, funny, and full of the moments other shows won't touch. From surviving morning drop offs to the guilt of missing the first bake sale. Iri told me that she next season she wants to join a club team that's by your house. So I was like, so you want me to pick you up from school? I'll take her by my house, but then I have to take her there, and then I have to drive back. And then some days I'm here and I have to go pick you up at school and then bring you the.

[Lake]

I was just like, hell no.

[Nick Turturro]

This is the space where moms trade their highlight reel for the real real. Whether you're a new mom, a veteran mom, or just trying to make it to pick up on time, this season of Good Moms Bad Choices is for you. Listen to Good Mom's Bad Choices from the Black Effect podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Bill, why is my eye twitching? Does this mean I'm in perimenopause? Maybe I have adult adhd. I need to look this up.

[Robert Evans]

Where's my phone?

[Mia Wong]

Julianna, your phone is hot to the touch. I think it's asking you for a break.

[James]

You know what?

[Nick Turturro]

Maybe I should just ask ChatGPT.

[Mia Wong]

Or maybe we can ask an actual human.

[Nick Turturro]

Yes, like a couple sex therapist.

[Mia Wong]

Whoa, that escalated quickly.

[Nick Turturro]

But okay, because I have questions.

[Mia Wong]

We have questions.

[Nick Turturro]

And I bet everyone has questions like, is it normal to sleep in separate bedrooms?

[Robert Evans]

We do that.

[Nick Turturro]

How about this one?

[Mia Wong]

Is bribing your kids bad parenting or just negotiating?

[Nick Turturro]

Oh, and I still do need to know, why was my poop green that one time?

[Mia Wong]

Hypothetically.

[Kevin Foster]

Right.

[Mia Wong]

Okay, well, instead of letting the Internet guess, we've got actual people answering these

[Nick Turturro]

exact questions and laughing with us has got to be better than spending three hours down a rabbit hole online.

[Mia Wong]

Listen to Bill and Juliana, the podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or

[James]

wherever you listen to your podcasts.

[Mia Wong]

Evening buys remorse.

[Nick Turturro]

Buy a new car.

[Mia Wong]

I'll be moving in. Let's get started.

[Kevin Foster]

Sorry, I think there's been a mistake. I bought it from Carvana.

[Robert Evans]

You what?

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah, great price. I even have seven days to love

[Nick Turturro]

it or return it.

[James]

So there's no.

[Kevin Foster]

No, no buyer's remorse.

[Nick Turturro]

More like buyers rejoice.

[Mia Wong]

I guess I'll let myself out. Congratulations. I mean it.

[Nick Turturro]

Buyers rejoice. Buy your car today on Carvana. Limitations and exclusions may apply. See our seven day return [e-mail].

[Kevin Foster]

Hello, everyone, and welcome to It Could Happen Here. My name is Zaina El Kurd, and I'm a researcher and analyst of Arab and Palestinian politics. Today I Want to talk about Western Sahara and the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara. I'm taking this opportunity because Morocco is in the news specifically for the World Cup. But it's always a good opportunity when Morocco is in the news to bring up this issue and to talk about the ongoing occupation of this territory. Now Western Sahara, for those who are unfamiliar, is often called Africa's last colony. It's been contested between the Sahrawi indigenous people and the Moroccan government since Spain withdrew from the territory in 1975. Now Morocco took over most of the territory and fought a war with the Polisaria Front, which is a liberation movement that represents the Sahrawi people, backed by other neighbors of Morocco, including Algeria. And it fought a 16 year war for independence before there was a 1991 ceasefire. Now this ceasefire collapsed in 2020 and there was a UN promised referendum on self determination. That never happened. So today Morocco controls roughly 80% of the territory and there's still hundreds of thousands of Sahrawi refugees that remain in refugee camps in Algeria. The United States accepted and recognized Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara in exchange for Morocco signing a peace agreement with Israel. So that happened with the Abraham Accords. Now recently, through U S led diplomacy, there was a 2025 UN Security Council resolution that pushed for Moroccan autonomy rather than Sahrawi independence as the basis for resolving this conflict. So to talk more about this issue, I thought it would be a good opportunity to get the perspective of a Sahrawi person and someone who is very embedded in the issue and has lived experience. So I spoke today with Mohamed Salem Murad, who is the co founder of Sahrawi Voice. This is a collective of citizen journalists and filmmakers based in the Western Sahara refugee camps in southwest Algeria. And this collective basically is a way to provide a platform for Sahrawis to share their challenges, experiences and hopes with an international audience while equipping Sahrawi youth with the knowledge and tools to advocate effectively for their cause. So I spoke to Mohammed Salem today to get a Sahrawi perspective on things. Now there might be some listeners that don't agree with everything that was mentioned and that's fine. The point of this kind of interview is a type of data. How do people see this issue from this perspective? So without further ado, here is my interview with Mohamed Salem Mohammed. Thank you so much for joining us.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Thank you for the invitation.

[Kevin Foster]

So I'm going to ask a few questions about recent Sahrawi politics and events, starting with the UN resolution that happened in October, resolution 2797, which basically for the first time made Morocco's autonomy the explicit basis for negotiations while kind of ignoring self determination for the Sahrawi people. A lot of our listeners have never heard of this resolution, but people have called it the biggest shift in the conflict in decades. So can you tell us from a Sahrawi perspective what it means that the un, an international body that once promised Sahrawi self determination and referendum starts treating the occupiers plan as the starting point.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

So the resolution itself is after they exhausted all the other pressure means the us, the European Union and sort of their own individual country pressure and unconditional support to the Morocco. The UN was the last resort and they want to have a stamp of legality on it. And that's why the instrument uses the UN to. And, and the reality in the talk now, because we don't have a negotiation yet. We have talks that have been sponsored and actually administrated and by the U.S. the UN now is sidelined. And the reason is because the international law is clear and the repeated resolution before death, all of them they have called and demanded that the final statutes of the territory should be decided through a referendum. And sometimes the referendum was muted, but always there has to provide for the self determination for the Sahra people. And even like playing with self determination for listeners and the referendum in itself, it's a huge concession from the Sahra side. What in a. In a just world, in ideal world, Morocco would be called to withdraw from Western Sahara, paying a reparation for the Sahra. And those are the steps for a just solution for the Sahrawi past. But the Sahrawi were willing to go to the extra mile and they made the concessions, they accepted the referendum, which is by the way will until a huge number of the settlers will be taken apart in that referendum and would not be just the Sahrawi. But even with that, Morocco is still not sure that they will even win the support of their own settlers that they brought with them. So they had to ask the US for the help. And of course the US is doing this as a reward for Morocco for being a sub servant state and the watching dog of the European Union for being willing also to go public with their relationship with the Zionist so state of Israel. Because for us we have been seeing this for a long time. Morocco always had those relationships. It was the price of recognizing the Moroccanity of Western Sahara was the price to go public with those relationship. And that's what they did eventually. Morocco is selling themselves to the doubles to get support and recognition for their occupation of Western Sahara. They are accepting the Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. They are sending their money to finals, the peace board committee that Trump made. They are sending their troops, they are willing to send them even to fight resistance in Gaza. And they are doing everything. They are building chemicals, drone chemicals, factories, Israeli chemicals, factories in Morocco. Everything that people couldn't even imagine. Now it's a reality. And the price is to win APAC and Israel's support and their backing turning the occupation into a theta company. And not just that, but to even use the UN in the international law and also international body to impose the occupation of the Sahara. But for us, we know that slavery and many other stuff were legal. So even if they were to outlaw the self determination, outlaw our demand for free and independent state still would not make any difference to us. We are determined to fight for what's ours. And as a Sahrawiye ex Saharawi leader who passed away told Bush, because this is not the first time, maybe this is public, but this is not the first time. US tried to do this during George W. Bush first term when the twin tower were hit and us wanted to just like rush to solve or to just finish all other conflicts everywhere. They wanted to resolve the occupation of Western Sahara and asking the Sahra to accept the autonomy plan of Morocco and people. And that's it. And he said like when the Sahra leader was pressed to accept that, he said we will not accept it. You know, you are so powerful that you can dictate to people how to live, but you are not powerful enough to dictate to people how to die. So it's the same for us. Nothing changed. Morocco has enjoyed the support for a long time from the majority of the country and especially those like called first world country and free world. All that bs. They have always the support but on the ground nothing changed. Of course made our independence difficult, but would never make it impossible.

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah. The rights of indigenous people are not determined by international law.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Yeah. Yeah. And Morocco is asking for support and want to legalize their occupation first from Western Saharan. They are asking the wrong people and they are waiting the support from the wrong people. And yeah their teacher and their biggest sponsor are France with all its colonism atrocity in all African American other places. And, and the US right was a country that was built on genocide of indigenous people. So they are, they are, they're, they

[Kevin Foster]

are in the right company.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Yes, yes, exactly. That's what we, yeah. Sahara. We say like if someone gives you advice, you have to look at their house and if they are abiding by the advice they are giving you or not. So, yeah, the Morocco chose the right masters and the right sponsors to continue its occupation and graduate from the occupancy university.

[Kevin Foster]

So for our listeners, I want to also kind of specify that this February, after the UN resolution, the US Convenes secret talks in Madrid between Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania and the Bellisario, overseen by Trump's Africa adviser. Yeah, now it's being negotiated behind closed doors. How are ordinary Sahrawis, especially in the camps, what is their relationship right now to these negotiations and to the Polisario leadership?

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Yeah, so that's the talk I refer to, because negotiation has to start after you establish a framework for what to negotiate. And until now that hasn't happened. So they are more accurately should be described as talk, you know, early stages of talk and meetings instead of negotiation. Because negotiation then when you have a framework for the things that you want to achieve and the demands of two parties. And in this case, we haven't even seen one photo of the two negotiating parties. And that's very obvious because it shows just how different and how, how far from each other. And the US came with the misconception that they think they just like can rush this into solution and be done with it. And when they saw resistance from the, from the Sahrawiya negotiation team and also for the record, also Algeria hesitant to accept the imposing of all those solutions in the Sahraw, they started to reconsider. And we have many statements from Mossad Bolus, the advisor for North Africa and Middle east or North Africa, where he's saying this seems to be more difficult than what we early imagined and starts to reconsider his positions. As to your question, the Sahra in general, the vast majority of the Sahara consider the Polisario to be a liberation movement and their representative. And even if they don't have a post or work in a certain, they consider themselves to be a Polisario member. That doesn't mean we agree with all Policario or we don't have a different opinion about how things should be managed and how the Sahara cause should be administrated and how to deal with many things. There is a huge and age gap between the first generation of Polisario that the vast majority of those are the members now and who are at the top of the leadership are people who started the Polisario. So we're talking about people who have been in the leadership position for 50 years. So of course there is an obvious need for them to step down and be replaced by younger generations, by people who have the ability, both the physical and the mental and right judgment of the time and of the means that should be employed to accelerate the liberation of Western Sahara. We see them, but the negotiation, as you said, it's happening behind the closed door. There are no press conferences. We are dependent on the statement from there and there to try to build a bigger picture of what's happening. But the biggest takeaway and the conclusion from the three rounds that took place so far were two in Washington and one in Madrid. There's nothing major is happening except the fact that the US Is starting to think that it's more difficult and it's going to take more time than what they initially imagined. So that's the biggest, I think, there. And the Morocco, the autonomy plan, they had it in three pages paper, that was their proposal for a solution. And France and US Asked them for more extended version where they have to outline details, and they haven't showed or produced anything yet. So that's, I think they're closest ally and supporter and colonizer as France is working closely with them to develop that proposal.

[Kevin Foster]

I see.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

For the Sahra, that doesn't change a lot because, you know, if we wanted autonomy, we would have been better off with Spain. And why would we like, say no to Spain only to accept it 50 years later to a corrupt monarch and who's a servant and a puppet to the Zionist? And France, our occupier, is enjoying their support. So nothing new under the sun.

[Kevin Foster]

I mean, it's funny that you mentioned that the United States and the Africa advisor is starting to recognize it's not as easy. I mean, you know, very surprising that the Trump administration advisors thought it was going to be easier than it is, but obviously not.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Yeah.

[Kevin Foster]

I wanted to ask a question also about kind of daily life right now for Sahrawis. You know, it's been 50 years after the Madrid accords. You still have Sahrawis under Moroccan control in the territory. And then there's, of course, the refugee camps in Algeria. Now that the diplomatic horizon seems to be narrowing, what's life like for people who are fighting for Sahrawi independence? So, like human rights defenders, the women, the students, you know, I know they face a lot of repression in Moroccan territory, but maybe you can describe to the listeners. Yeah. What the conditions are like.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Yeah, I know it's probably not something we intended to do, but it's not Moroccan territory. It's Western Sahara territory occupied by Morocco.

[Kevin Foster]

My mistake. Yes, yes, of course, yes.

[Tom Stokesbury]

Yeah.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

So the situation there is difficult. The territory, there is a media blockade that's imposed on the territory. So no international observer or journalists are allowed to access the territory and to see the situation on the ground. The people there are. Morocco is using both the stick and the carrots. So trying to buy their illusions to the occupation, try to reward those who are willing to give up their political rights and giving them housing, putting them on social welfare projects and those kinds of. It's not a lot, but enough to survive on. And on the other hand has jail and repression and job cutting people from their job and making their life as miserable as possible. To the point either they renounce their activism or leave the territory. And in some cases they are sentenced to life in prison, which has happened to many Sahrawi activists. We have a group called group that have been in jail since 2010. And yeah, some of them are serving 30 years, some of them 20, some of them life sentence and a few of them were released recently. So the situation is very difficult and very deplorable. And what makes it even difficult that the Sahrawi there in the occupied territory are outnumbered. So there are three Moroccan settlers to each Sahrawi. Those are very conservative estimates. It could be more so anything that's civil disobedience, strategy or tactics would be dimiday unsuccessful and would not produce any results. So it's very difficult situation. But nonetheless there are still Sahara who are standing background or still despite all the repression and all the economic warfare that Morocco is waging against them, and even social ostracization to try to even threaten people around you. So if you are an activist, even your father, your people around you, they will be laid from their job just as a repercussions for your activism. So they can punish you if you don't care about your own self, like they punish you through the people, your inner circle and your people close to you. So it's very difficult. And on the other hand, also the infrastructure there are not as fancy as Morocco tried to claim. There aren't a single university. And Morocco is building more of jails. And even the president of Sahrawi they sentence them. And when they serving their sentence, they put them far away to punish their families, to make them pay a lot of money and travel inside Morocco to be able to visit their loved ones instead of having them close by, at least in the occupied Western Sahara. So the situation is very difficult. But those who are choosing to stand their ground are a reader of history and they are aware of the price that has to be paid in order to obtain our freedom and our independence. And the darker it gets, we know that closer that there will be another mourning that's coming behind that. So we have been here way longer before a Trump administration and his advisor, and we will be here. So it's the Morocco. I think that they think this is their golden opportunities and that they can use everything, including the international law and international institution and body like the UN to impose their occupation in Western Sahara. But again, they are misguided. At the end of the day, they would have to sit at the table

[Kevin Foster]

and try to find, I think from a Palestinian perspective, like the genocide in Gaza has clarified that the international system is not functioning. So, you know, they're trying to use the international system. Countries like Morocco are trying to use the international system for legitimizing control. But the international system itself needs to be restructured. And I do also want to apologize. I meant Moroccan control of the territory. So I sincerely apologize for that.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Yes, yes, I forgot. I know I'm not.

[Kevin Foster]

I also wanted to ask because we, I mean, we have listeners everywhere, but especially for listeners in the United States. You know, our government here is driving this process. What would you want listeners in the United States to take away from this conversation or to do?

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

To be honest, I have been to the States one time and I have met many Americans and I am a reader of their media and I follow their, their famous podcasts and TV channels and Twitter, you know, discussion. And it's very obvious that American, they don't care about what's going on outside America. They care about the prices of oil, of house prices and their rents and the college fees. And it's okay. I think it's okay to a degree when your country is not involved in maintaining and supporting and that your own taxes are used to maintain and support and finance genocide and other military occupation, other words, then you have the luxury of ignoring what's outside. But when it's not, you can just like put your head in the ground and imagine I'm just going to care about what's happening here domestically and foreign policy. What's happening there is far away, therefore, I don't know. Yeah. So I would like them to inform themselves about Western Sahara, understand that they have to push their government and fortunately to the Western Sahara, at least we don't have a politician in United States who thinks that the occupation of Western Sahara will accelerate the arrival of the Messiah and that it's far away. It has nothing to do with the ideology, with the religion belief, with anything like that. And it would be easier supposedly and it would be less hesitant politician to take the right stand and the right position if enough people know that and they have a responsibility to learn and to understand and that their money and their politician and their foreign policy are taking tools on people past, present and the future in a very practical way. And they don't have the luxury to be ignorant or to have the apathy. They have to just not care about what's going on. They should care because their money, their political support and their country resources are used against many other people. And then anything happened, we have the Americans acting like we don't know what's happening. Why the rest of the world hates you. People hate you for the million of the things that your government and your silence has done and has caused everywhere else. So they have to learn they have a responsibility. They have to speak to their local politician and their representative in Congress and Senate and ask them to just to do the basic thing, to follow the international law and stop supporting Morocco militarily and politically and emboldening them to continue their occupation and prolonging their suffering of the Sahai people. That's the very bare minimum.

[Kevin Foster]

Well, thank you so much. On that note, I will link Sahrawi voice in the show. Notes. Yeah, I think that people can learn more about the work that your collective does and thank you for making the time.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Thank you for the invitation. It was an honor. Thank you.

[Kevin Foster]

Take care.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Take care.

[Andy]

Picture going to the grocery store a few years from now. You push your cart, grab your staples, scan and head out the door. Not much to it, but unlocking your car, you hear a faint buzzing sound. Looking around, you don't see anything yet. It gets louder. Then you look up. A drone shoots out toward the street where you spot a man running down the sidewalk with a full backpack. They both slip out of view behind some overgrown hedges. Then come the sirens. As you drive away, you see multiple cops on top of a man, one pulling objects out of his backpack, tag still dangling off a shoplifter. Welcome to It Could Happen Here. I'm Kevin Foster, an independent journalist and your host for this two part series on retail crime. I'm ICE and some deeply concerning policy making its way through Congress in this image of a shoplifter. It isn't really from the future. In late June of this year, police in Redmond, Washington used the drone to track down an alleged shoplifter who had left a store. If you live in a major city, you've probably already witnessed the bolstering of security in retail stores, the ungodly number of items locked up behind glass. Security guards flock cameras in the parking lot. This is an industry in its own right, commonly referred to as loss prevention, and it surged after the pandemic. The National Retail Federation, or NRF for short, who I'll be talking a lot about today, puts on a yearly conference known as NRF Protect, where they bring together all the loss prevention asset protection bigwigs to show off new tech and security strategies. Here's a clip of a senior product manager for Amazon at the 2026 event. Pardon the awful corporate background music.

[Nick Turturro]

I gotta say, the most unique thing that I saw in the expo hall was the robot. Seen it on TV and you know, this was the first time I saw it in person. I was like, whoa, this thing's actually real.

[Andy]

To paint you a picture, the video features retail lobbyists, tech giants and police investigators. They show off drones, cameras, people aiming guns, others shooting some type of paintballs at hanging targets, and of course, multiple robots, including one that looks like a mini tank called Romeo A, but spelled like roaming around. Don't worry though. This physical AI on patrol can only go 10 mph and it has a big LED smile across the front, if you haven't got the drift. NRF Protect is like a National Rifle association convention, but for people obsessed with supply chains and storefront scanners, while our little tank Romeo likely invokes the strongest image of a sci fi dystopia, it's probably the least of our worries. An October 2024 article in Loss Prevention magazine states that multiple top 10 retailers rely on facial recognition for loss prevention, many working with Face First, a company that provides AI facial recognition tech with the goal of preventing retail crime. In July of this year, Mission Local reported on grocery outlets in the Bay Area using facial recognition tech from the AI company Safer Worried about your privacy? Well, say First President says that your photo is immediately deleted if it doesn't match a watch list of shoplifters. However, stores can manually create their own watchlist and pool data with other retailers. Surely nothing could go wrong there. Even excluding AI, retail stores have become a massive surveillance black box. Your photo is taken as you go in and out. Video cameras are at checkout. They note the time you come in. They know what days you shop, what you're buying. They know who you are. Retailers will justify this invasion of our privacy through AI, robots and large scale data collection as necessary for marketing and to protect their capital and employees. Still, I wouldn't blame you for worrying about where that data is going. After all, if police investigators are already attending NRF conventions and the retailers are happy to work with them, why not other law enforcement? Why not ice? As it turns out, Congress is having similar thoughts. The House of Representatives just pushed a bill forward that could give ICE access to this massive surveillance dragnet, and there's a bipartisan effort in the Senate to include it in the National Defense Authorization Act. Why would they do this? To answer that question, we need to look at a recently hyped phenomenon known as organized retail crime. You may have heard the term organized retail crime in the past few years, probably on the news or from a politician hinting at a hidden crisis in our stores. A basic Google Trends report shows use of the term is up 200% in the past five years versus the five years before. Organized retail crime, sometimes referred to as just orc, is defined by the FBI as the large scale theft of retail merchandise with the intent to resell the stolen items for financial gain. If you've seen the movie I Love Boosters, that's a good satirical example, although the definition is actually quite vague, which can cause a lot of problems. The outlet Retail Dive says the definition is neither legal nor precise, contributing to uneven reporting on the part of store workers, loss prevention staff and police, which results in it often being lumped in with more banal forms of theft such as shoplifting. And this begs the is organized retail crime actually a thing? It is, but the threat to businesses, prices and even national security have largely been blown out of proportion. To get a sense of those proportions, here's Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley at a Senate hearing on organized retail theft. He's the chief sponsor of the bill I mentioned earlier, known as the Combating Organized Retail Crime act, or CORCA for short.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

The reality is, some of the worst

[Tom Stokesbury]

criminal organizations, including cartels, terrorists and human

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

traffickers, use this type of crime, funding their misdeeds or launder ill gotten proceeds.

[Andy]

Side note, after hearing how this guy talks, I had to look up how old he is. He's 92 years old. This old bat that was born in the Great Depression is probably being lobbied till his heart fails. And we're going to get into the issues with painting this all as a national security crisis later. But speaking of lobbying, the notoriety of organized retail crime is due in no small part to the National Retail Federation, the host of the aforementioned Loss Prevention Conference, and the largest retail lobbying group in the nation. The NRF has spent about $50 million on lobbying since just 2020, according to Open Secrets. And they've been the driving force behind the Combating Organized Retail Crime act, which passed the House of Representatives on May 12th with bipartisan support support including 144 Democrats. And it may well get lumped in with our defense spending this year. Corca has a slew of problems, but the general picture is a prosecution and police crackdown around this idea of organized crime in the retail theft world. Despite what the NRF would like you to believe, there doesn't appear to be an organized retail theft crisis in the US or really even a shoplifting crisis in general. With the exception of some large cities, particularly New York city, shoplifting in 2023 was actually lower than pre pandemic levels, according to the Council on criminal justice. In 2022, the council found retail shrink, the term for lost merchandise from theft or operational errors, was about 1.6%, the same as in 2019, according to the NRF's own data. Before we get too deep, I think it's worth noting measures of shrink are also somewhat imprecise, and a lot of the accessible data surrounding all of this comes directly from the retail lobby, who have an incentive to make problems look worse to justify security policing, price increases and cutting corners in inventory management. As you'll see, they have some credibility issues as well. You know who else may or may not have credibility issues? The products and services that support this podcast.

[Lake]

Foreign.

[Andy]

We're back In October of 2023, the NRF claimed to Congress that organized retail crime accounted for nearly half of the $94.5 billion in shrink in 2021. In reality, retail Dive found that organized theft accounted for about 5% of shrink, meaning the NRF was off by a literal order of magnitude. How did they arrive at such a conclusion? Well, they essentially just took some guy's word for it. Specifically Ben Dugan, the former president of the Coalition of Law Enforcement and Retail, a non profit whose website currently features a giant low resolution banner saying Vegas Baby, the nation's largest ORC investigative conference. An NRF spokesperson specifically said their 50% claim was an inference made by an analyst based on Dugan's congressional testimony, not actual statistics or data. The NRF retracted the claim about two months later, but the damage was already done. According to the Vera Institute, a non profit advocacy group and think tank focused on criminal justice reform, the NRF leveraged its inaccurate data point in a press release, testified to it in congressional hearings, and even spoke about it at a press conference with Senator Grassley. The figure, of course, stirred Panic across the country, fueled by viral social media videos showing high profile thefts and retail companies pushing the narrative that they are under attack. In some cases, retailers either closed or threatened to close stores. For example, in San Francisco in 2021, Walgreens blamed organized retail crime for the anticipated closure of five locations. The closures made it into the national spotlight, but in reality, the locations faced less than 2 reported shoplifting incidents per month on average, over the previous five years. Target had a similar story in New York, Seattle, and San Francisco, blaming retail theft for store closures when nearby locations actually had higher incidences of shoplifting. What actually happened to these stores? My best guess is the shift to online shopping during the pandemic drove down the sales of many brick and mortar locations. But rather than project something that could lower their stock valuation, retailers blamed it on organized theft. Many took up controversial practices such as locking up merchandise, which decreased sales and customer satisfaction. Even Walgreens chief Financial officer James Cahoe would later say they cried too much about shoplifting when the issue was really overblown. But even with a lack of evidence, the NRF and Senator Grassley refused to back down from their messaging and legislation. And in a lot of ways, it worked. Let me play you a clip of Gavin Newsom at a press conference in 2024 signing legislation intended to combat organized retail crime. Here he's surrounded by a number of elected officials, law enforcement leaders, and representatives of retail associations.

[Mia Wong]

The issue of organized retail theft, the issue of serial theft, the issue that is front and center in the consciousness

[Nick Turturro]

of so many Californians.

[Mia Wong]

You see it online, social media, you see it on the nightly news. This is the real deal. Grocers and the retailers understand that after

[Andy]

the NRF retracted its inflated claim nearly a year prior, organized retail crime was still making headlines and considered a very serious issue. Serious enough that Newsom included $374 million in his 2024 budget proposal to combat retail theft. And that bill, which he happened to sign atop a table covered in orange Home Depot buckets, It stiffened both enforcement and penalties for retail crime. It allowed for the aggregation of theft value from different shoplifting incidents, meaning the value of items can be added up to turn what would be minor charges into grand theft. It also allows police to arrest shoplifters solely based on a witness's sworn statement or video footage of a crime. Again, surely nothing could go wrong with that. But the crackdown didn't stop there. In the 2024 general election, California voters overwhelmingly approved Prop 36, which made key changes to how thefts are prosecuted. To Newsom's credit, he did not support the proposition. Prior to Prop 36, thefts of items worth less than $950 were considered misdemeanors. But now, if the individual has two or more past convictions for certain theft crimes, such as such as shoplifting, it could be considered a felony with a sentence of up to three years in jail or prison. San Diego's District Attorney Summer Steffen really hyped up Prop 36 as an advancement in fighting organized retail crime. She actually went on the NRF's podcast to talk about this. Yes, they have a podcast. It's called Retail Gets Real. It's bad, don't check it out. But here she is with the host having a little laugh about locking people up.

[Lake]

So we, we used to have people

[Nick Turturro]

with like 24 theft cases. They're all misdemeanors. Some thieves bring a calculator and they're just under $950, literally. It's madness, right?

[Robert Evans]

Is that a gun or a calculator?

[James]

I'm not sure.

[Robert Evans]

What.

[Andy]

Yeah, let's joke about mistaking someone for being armed in a store. It's not like that's ever gone poorly before. Anyways. What's missing from the analysis here is how these laws harm people who aren't necessarily the intended target. A particularly striking example of how this could really fuck someone's life up comes from Pennsylvania. In 2021, Joseph Sobolowski reportedly misunderstood a discount at an Exxon gas station and accidentally underpaid 43 cents for a bottle of Mountain Dew. Soboluski had two theft charges in the past 10 years, one for a tank of gas and another for a pair of shoes. After the Mountain Dew incident, state police arrested him on a felony charge because of a three strikes law in Pennsylvania, similar to what could happen with Prop 36, a judge ordered Soboluski be held on a $50,000 cash only bond, and he faced up to seven years in prison. Fortunately, his public defender successfully argued for his release after seven days, and prosecutors ultimately dismissed the charge. But it's easy to see how this could go wrong for another individual, particularly minorities who face disproportionate punishment in our legal system. This style of legislation intended to target retail crime spread like wildfire across the country. According to the text of the 2025 Combating Organized Retail Crime act, more than 30 state laws have been enacted since 2022 to address organized theft. Common theme, stricter penalties and policing. Here's how New York Governor Kathy Hochul put it in her 2024 State of

[Nick Turturro]

the State address Let's back our businesses. Back our businesses and the workers with

[Kevin Foster]

the full force of the law and punish those who think they can break the rules with impunity.

[Andy]

After all, policing and aggressive enforcement are the American way to deal with crime, rather than, I don't know, addressing the root causes, notably poverty and inequality. The pervasive tough on crime mentality doesn't have much evidence backing it up, but of course there is a wealth of research indicating flaws. For one, enforcement is heavily racialized, with black and brown people facing retail theft charges at significantly higher rates than whites. The very institute also highlights how increasing sentences as a deterrent doesn't actually work. A 2018 article from Pew Research says states can safely raise their value threshold for what counts as a felony theft without risking more crime. The 30 states that did so between 2000 and 2012 saw no meaningful increase in property crime or larceny rates. In South Carolina, Pew found that when they doubled the felony threshold from $1,000 to $2,000 in 2010, property crime continued to fall by 15% in the next three years. Pew also found that the value of stolen goods remained steady and when adjusted for inflation, the median value actually decreased. In essence, the state level push for these three strikes, shoplifting laws and the aggregation of theft value won't meaningfully decrease crime. Rather, it will result in more people, particularly minorities, being locked up for longer sentences than being saddled with felony convictions that hurt their ability to get a job and obtain housing, ultimately increasing the likelihood of committing crimes in the future. The nonprofit think tank Prison policy initiative estimates $27.7 billion in annual direct costs of incarceration on individuals and families across the U.S. families pay in on bail, legal fees, civil asset forfeiture, commissary for loved ones, and more often going straight to private prison operators. This also doesn't begin to factor in the impacts on children and local communities. The cost of incarceration on the state also needs to be factored in. The California Legislative Analyst Office estimates the annual cost of incarcerating one person in state prison at $127,788. With massive spending to bolster retail theft enforcement, this could create a compounding problem costing hundreds of millions. In July of 2025, DA Stephan wrote in congressional testimony supporting Corca that her office had prosecuted over 218 cases of organized retail in just two years. She says these cases involved theft losses of more than $2.6 million. Putting this into perspective, if even half of those prosecutions resulted in one year sentences in California state prisons. You're looking at an estimate of nearly $14 million in incarceration costs, over five times the reported theft value. But these thoughts don't really seem to cross the mind of people like DA Stephanie or our pals at the nrf.

[Robert Evans]

This is an argument that drives me crazy. You know, the idea that they're stealing because they can't afford the food to put on the table to feed their children.

[Nick Turturro]

This is their sole job is to rip off your business. That's their job. That's how they wake up in the morning. And so we didn't want them to wake up as comfortably as they did

[Mia Wong]

before with their calculator.

[Andy]

Yes, they paint this image of people almost getting off on doing crime rather than any number of more charitable explanations. At face value, it may just sound like typical high minded BS from an aggressive DA and lobbyist, but obviously when you think about the position of power someone like Stefan is in, it's pretty sickening. In another section of the NRF podcast episode, they discuss people switching from drug dealing to selling stolen merchandise because of lower penalties, generally glossing over the circumstances that might lead an individual into crime. Stefan even mentions the need to go after, quote, Frontline boosters, the people who are being hired to go into stores and steal who she admits are often homeless or poor. It's honestly maddening listening to this. So that's the last quote I'm going to bring from that. Anyways, here's some ads. So in the next episode we're going to dive into the specifics of the Corka bill and how ICE has become a key player. But for now, I want to end on a note that ties together some of the broader consequences of all this retail theft propaganda. Lobbyists for the bill have a common refrain, organized retail crime is not a victimless crime. I think the same goes for their lobbying. Corka hasn't even passed the Senate yet. There may already be some downstream tragedies because of the intensified rhetoric around retail crime. In recent years and months, there have been a number of high profile killings of individuals accused of shoplifting by both shop owners and police. In June of this year, police shot and killed Cohen Wiley, a one year old boy, while responding to a shoplifting call in Senatobia, Mississippi over allegedly stolen diapers. Police also shot his mother while her friend was driving their car. Authorities claim they tried to stop the vehicle, but the driver nearly hit an officer, a story we've unfortunately become far too familiar with at this point. Wiley's mother disputes that the diapers were even stolen in the first place and denies that her friend drove towards the officers. Obviously it didn't matter to the trigger happy cops on the scene who never should have pointed firearms at the vehicle in the first place. Other similar cases include the killing of Banko Brown, a black 24 year old trans organizer in San Francisco by a Walgreens security guard and the killing of black 14 year old Cyrus Carmack Belton by a shop owner in South Carolina. In Brown's case, San Francisco DA Brooke Jenkins, who ran on a tough on crime agenda, did not pursue charges against security guard Michael Earl Wayne Anthony, saying he acted in self defense based on video footage. The video shows Brown and Anthony fighting as Brown apparently tried to leave the Walgreens without paying. They grapple on the ground for a minute, then Anthony releases Brown but follows him to the door. Brown stops just outside the store, possibly talking back to the guard. Then the guard pulls his gun and shoots Brown as he turns to run. Brown was unarmed and in interviews following the shooting, Anthony repeatedly misgendered him for Carmack Belton, his killer. Shop owner Chike Rick Chao faced trial for murder but was found not guilty. The thing is, Carmack Belton never actually stole anything, not even the water bottles Chow wrongly accused him of. Prosecutors say Chow chased the teenager 130 yards outside the store before shooting him in the back. Prosecutors acknowledged that Carmack Belton had a pistol, but said that it fell on the ground in the chase. It seems, based on the reporting, that the only person who claims to have seen the pistol or had it pointed at him was Chao's son. I think all this just goes to show where we place property, even just a few water bottles, snacks or diapers relative to human life, especially those in black communities. There's a very clear irony that may reflect the types of enforcement we could see from Korka. Tough on crime for the marginalized, not for those pulling the trigger there's no easy way to determine whether political statements about retail crime have an effect on police or shop owners. But it's not hard to imagine how a constant bombardment of propaganda could embolden someone to take matters into their own hands. The retail companies are complicit in this. Somehow they've managed to turn a manufacturer's story into a national security crisis where states grant hundreds of millions of dollars to protect corporations. Retailers blame consumers when they fail to hit desired profits, then they raise prices. When that fails, they demonize the poor and rattle on about crime. Then they pilfer our general funds and team up with the police to crack down. It's never enough. Now they've sucked in the federal government and we could be on the verge of the next upgrade to ICE terrorists. But that'll have to wait for the next episode. We'll see you tomorrow. Welcome back to It Could Happen Here and our Retail Thunderdome. I'm Kevin Foster and today we're continuing our dive into organized retail crime. In the last episode, I went over the multi year propaganda campaign waged by the retail lobby to make organized retail crime into a national crisis requiring stricter policing and penalties and investment from all levels of government. I recommend listening to that episode before this one. But in short, huge swaths of politicians bought right in, spending hundreds of millions at the behest of retail giants. Despite a serious lack of evidence, I also touched on the advancements in surveillance at retail stores. Whether we see a rollout of AI powered robots in the coming years may not matter so much as many industry leaders are already implementing facial recognition technology and creating watch lists under the guise of loss prevention. And this surveillance dragnet is a key element in the rising concern around the Combating Organized Retail Crime act, or corca, which passed the House of Representatives in May with resounding bipartisan support. In all likelihood, CORCO will be signed into law. And today's episode is about why that is very bad and how it's going to impact the American public, notably immigrants. Let's get right into it. The Combating Organized Retail Crime act has remained in circulation for years, but to get it over the finish line, the retail lobby and supporters of the legislation ultimately found a new bogeyman, cargo theft. And this is how they've managed to turn a manufactured retail theft story into a national security problem that demands intervention by the Department of Homeland Security. In a nutshell, the cargo theft narrative has striking similarities to organized retail crime. The American Transportation Research Institute says there's between 1.8 billion and $6.5 billion in yearly losses because of cargo theft. But this includes indirect costs, a measure of costs across the entire supply chain in terms of the actual value of goods. Cargo net. A nationally coordinated database placed total cargo theft losses at 725 million across the US and Canada in 2025. Despite total physical losses being under a billion dollars, there have been more attempts to dramatically inflate the numbers. Phil Brink, the head of fraud media and education at Freightways, a trucking log news company, estimated the total losses could actually be closer to $60 billion because of underreporting of theft. No clear evidence is provided to back up this assertion, other than unnamed experts. If this sounds familiar, it's almost the exact same story as the National Retail Federation's fraudulent organized retail crime numbers, where they inflated their stats by an order of magnitude, mostly based on vibes. And while cargo theft did spike in 2023, a funny little side note is that AI integration into logistics might be a big part of the problem. Reporting in the news outlet the lever indicates that instead of modern day highway robberies, cargo theft is beginning to look more like people simply impersonating trucking companies than fooling faulty new AI logistics systems. And once they're cleared by the AI, they can essentially just pick up the cargo and roll off. So between retail crime and cargo theft, we're essentially operating under two manufactured crises. And yet, here's the language in the Combatting Organized Retail Crime Act. Organized theft groups impact the national security of the United States through financing transnational criminal activity and providing profit and proceeds supporting larger criminal goals of the criminal organizations. In other words, retail crime is now a national security threat and it demands the influence of Homeland Security and ice. Specifically, Corca calls for the establishment of a coordination center to combat organized retail and supply chain crime. The DHS Secretary will establish the center and it will be run by an individual chosen by the director of ice. Fantastic. In essence, this coordination center will be the hub for federal law enforcement activity and connections between the national and local level and the public and private sector. Obviously, ICE deepening its involvement in our day to day lives is something to be concerned about. But here's where it gets really crazy. The bill states, in general, subject to the approval of the director of the center, information that would otherwise be subject to the limitation on the disclosure of confidential information set forth in section 1905 of title 18, United States Code, may be shared if such disclosure is operationally necessary. Putting the legalese aside, what this means in practice is that ICE can access confidential and proprietary data from retailers. And because operationally necessary is an extremely broad, undefined term, ICE is essentially given full discretion over what data they can collect. If anyone questions them, they'll likely just say we need to play it safe. Because organized retail crime is a matter of national security that could finance drug and weapons trafficking harming Americans. So that retail surveillance dragnet I mentioned in part one, the AI facial recognition, the robots, the customer profiles they say can be leveraged to boost customer loyalty. ICE could potentially leverage that data in its immigration crackdown. Imagine a world where ICE knows who is going to which stores and when. No need for scanning license plates on the streets anymore. Now they can just look up your customer profile and head over to Walmart when you're doing your bi weekly grocery run. Given what we've seen in the past year and a half, ICE will likely try to leverage this heavily. They already have facial recognition technology like the Mobile Fortify app, which according to Vanderbilt University School of Law is connected to a database of over 200 million images. The ACLU of Wisconsin states that you may already be in this database as it's connected to other databases containing federal biometric systems, passport and visa records, and state driver's license photos. A depressing little side note, some of this may have been preventable. For example, in Oregon, the state police are being sued for sharing data with ice even though they and our Governor were warned by Congress members to close certain loopholes that gave ICE access to DMV records. Now, obviously grocery stores present a significant vulnerability to maintaining our privacy due to basic human needs. Nothing is clearly stopping ICE from running face scans out of retail stores and creating a new front for their anti immigrant crackdown. And there's already a blueprint for this. The ACLU published an article in January this year about wegmans using facial recognition and sharing data on persons of interest with law enforcement on a case by case basis. It's unclear how or if retail stores will challenge ICE's access in any way. As of now, many have been fully on board with the organized retail theft hype train. On the other hand, on May 11 this year, a coalition of 40 civil rights organizations, including the Immigrant Defenders Law center and the national association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, sent a letter to Congress urging the House not to pass Corka, highlighting how it would massively expand DHS's role and authority in domestic law enforcement. And the issues don't end there. They also pointed out how CORCA gives DHS influence over local and state law enforcement through the ability to expand certain grant requirements. In effect, this coalition sees a pathway for DHS to push jurisdictions toward more intrusive data collection and surveillance, especially if that jurisdiction is receiving federal grants. Additionally, the coalition noted how the sunset provision for the CORCA Coordination center quote, includes no requirement to dismantle data sharing systems, delete collected information, or reverse any entrenched surveillance practices. So these practices could very well be here to stay without some sort of intervention down the line. Good luck to us trying to get that. I think, as James put it in a conversation we had, it's like trying to convince a bunch of the hoa moms that we need to be softer on retail crime. It just doesn't really seem like it's going to happen. And unfortunately, this coalition letter largely fell on deaf ears, with only 59 Democrats and one Republican voting against Corka in the House. I've spoken with many people about this and there's often this question of like, do they know? And I'd argue it's their job to know. And this bill is pretty cut and dried power expansion for ice. It's kind of hard to tell how they wouldn't have seen this coming, especially with progressive groups warning them about it. And by now this coalition has grown to over 120 organizations urging the Senate not to pass Corka. In spite of this, in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley and Democratic Senator Dick Durbin have teamed up to add Corka as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization act for fiscal year 2027. This would essentially just mean entrenching this into our defense policy. And if that happens, which seems somewhat likely, I suspect it's curtains and Corka is going through. I highly doubt that the Democrats are going to hold the line on the NDAA for something they clearly either don't care about or don't seem to understand. But what they might care about are the products and services that support this podcast. And we're back and I'm imagining this is starting to sound pretty frightening, and it is to cool the temperature a bit, it's important to consider ICE's capacity for enforcement. They've had ways of accessing various surveillance tools for quite some time now. To some extent, they likely could have done some of this stuff with flock cameras or other automated license plate readers. But I think the threat in retail comes more from the pre existing infrastructure and the fact that this bill seems to give ICE sweeping access to confidential and proprietary information. Still, there are strategies for resisting this. I won't lie. Many of them are time intensive and require consistent community effort. But that's the world we're in. For example, in Hillsborough, Oregon, just west of Portland, local mutual aid groups began delivering groceries to immigrant families who were afraid to go outside in the middle of Operation Black Rose, which was the massive ICE surge last fall and winter. In Los Angeles. Last summer, similar groups set up community defense corners outside Home Depot parking lots in an attempt to protect day laborers from ICE raids. These usually manifested as just pop up tents with community members. Water and snacks certainly didn't stop everything, but I know one group in Pasadena that was allegedly the last Home Depot in LA to be raided, and they had a consistent community effort for months. In terms of shopping, avoiding loyalty programs may end up being necessary, as this is one of the ways that we hand over a lot of our data to stores, but shopping locally or at stores that collect less data will probably be the best bet. So Korka clearly has a number of ways that it could be abused by ice. But to get the full extent of what we're dealing with, I got in contact with Laura Conover, who is the district attorney in Pima County, Arizona, which contains Tucson and Borders, the Mexican state of sonora. Contrary to D.A. steffen featured in the first episode, Conover has actually been an outspoken opponent of Corka. In particular, she has tied Corka to the Lake and Riley act, saying Congress is just compounding mistakes it already made. The Lake and Riley act became law on January 29, 2025, passing Congress again with a substantial amount of bipartisan support greater than 60% in both chambers. It's a particularly abhorrent piece of legislation, as it requires DHS to detain certain non US Nationals who have been arrested for burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assault of a law enforcement officer, or any crime that results in death or serious bodily injury to another person. Notice how it says arrested, not charged, not convicted, but simply detained for one of the crimes listed, even if the individual didn't actually do anything wrong. The law also allows states to sue the federal government for alleged failures in immigration enforcement, meaning the federal government can effectively be held liable for a number of things, such as if an undocumented immigrant causes harm to state residents, including financial harm greater than $100. It's tough to say the extent to which this could be applied, but the through line between this and Korka is pretty clear. ICE could monitor retail locations for thefts and shoplifting through Korka. Then they're essentially liable if they don't seek to detain someone who has stolen more than a hundred dollars worth of merchandise. Conover has specific examples of the ways in which the Lake and Riley act is burdening local jurisdictions, destroying due process protections and ultimately how Korka will very likely make this worse. For example, it was Conover's job to prosecute the case of Jessica Corrales Duarte, who entered the US when she was two years old with her mother, who had fled domestic abuse in Mexico and obtained legal status through the Violence Against Women Act. Corrales Duarte became a DACA recipient and she's now 32 or 33. Based on the articles that I read and she has two children, but in the past year she was arrested and charged with shoplifting and theft, and her DACA status has been terminated. She allegedly stole up to $5,700 in perfume from an Ulta Beauty location over three days, which put her over the felony theft threshold, though this number is disputed by her defense. She had no prior criminal record, and Conover said based on a taped confession, she likely would have qualified for a program where she could pay restitution and get back on her feet. Then ICE came in. They detained Coralias Duarte as she was leaving her home for her waitressing job. The ensuing months were a disaster. ICE held her at the Eloi Detention center about an hour from Tucson and blocked her from attending many of the court dates for her shoplifting case, according to an article in the Tucson Spotlight. Here's DA Conover on the situation.

[Nick Turturro]

So for example, in our case, the result was just defendants disappearing into federal custody and before any normal process. So you've got a victim who's now totally out of luck for any kind of restoration, be that through probation or through restitution, which is important, you know, so victims rights are violated. The defendant obviously like gets no due process. You know, in our experience, they hardly had any contact with their attorney and their attorney was just rendered totally ineffective

[Andy]

in the local court.

[Nick Turturro]

So it confounds the entire normal criminal justice process.

[Andy]

It's like the opposite of collaboration. So not only are Corrales Duarte's rights violated on multiple levels, but it also actually hurts the property owner because they won't receive restitution if someone is deported. It's not clear whether Corrales Duarte was involved in some sort of organized retail theft operation. But I want to stress again that the people in such a situation who actually do the stealing, commonly referred to as boosters, are often poor, homeless or struggling in some way themselves. Many of you probably already know this, but undocumented people commit less crime overall than American citizens. An analysis by the National Institute of Justice using data from Texas between 2012 and 2018 found that undocumented immigrants had offending rates less than half of that of US born citizens. This is in spite of the fact that the US makes it much harder for undocumented people to obtain good paying jobs, which can drive people into poverty and therefore crime. And for all of this, Conover informed me that Corales Duarte appears to be in process for deportation away from her children. There are just more effective and humane ways to deal with this, like the diversion programs mentioned, which don't need to involve the federal government, but instead we're just giving more power to ice.

[Nick Turturro]

With Lake and Riley and with Corca, you're talking about such a street level local issue where we have local police and prosecutors whose entire purpose is to prosecute local crime and to just give some random federal agency authority over that

[Andy]

sweeping new authority of that just doesn't

[Nick Turturro]

make any sense operationally. Not to mention the particular agency is one in which there's bipartisan concern about how recklessly they're being managed.

[Andy]

On the note of recklessness, with the expansion of ICE's surveillance network comes greater concern over warrantless enforcement, constitutional violations and technological mistakes. The podcast Reveal reported a case of ICE scanning the face of a 23 year old US citizen purely on suspicion. And according to Innovation Law Lab, the same seems to have happened to a woman in Oregon where ICE used a Palantir developed platform called Elite, which without a warrant, essentially geofences an area and creates targets with a quote, immigration nexus. In this case, the mobile Fordify app returned two different incorrect names and images for the same woman. Still, ICE has told lawmakers it's a definitive measure of immigration status that effectively supersedes other evidence of citizenship, such as a birth certificate. The National Institute of Standards and Technology has also reported that facial recognition tech is less accurate on women than men, black people, and other individuals with darker skin. This all gets much worse when you're not in a controlled environment where you can get a well lit straight on shot of someone's face with no obstruction. Certainly something that isn't going to happen under the floodlights of a grocery store entryway. So again, I can't really say to what extent ICE will actually integrate all of these technologies or what capacity they'll have for enforcement, but it seems like the worst case scenario could be a warrantless surveillance frenzy where they couldn't care less if they're detaining the right people. I say the right people as in the individuals that they're actually targeting. And I don't actually believe there is a right person to be detained. It's all bullshit. But as Corca also calls for local and federal collaboration, cops could very easily worsen this problem and ICE can leverage the Lake and Riley act to ramp up deportations. It's not good, but anyways, here's some ad. And we're back. To round out this two parter, I'd like to connect some of the dots from the first episode to Korka. To do so, I've chatted with James about a concept known as moral turpitude. Moral turpitude is a vaguely defined concept and there's lots of nebulous legal language surrounding it. But in essence, it's a crime that is considered morally offensive and it's important to immigration law. Notably, included in this definition is larceny or theft. Any conviction for one of these crimes can render an immigrant either inadmissible or deportable. Here's some of the conversation that James and I had.

[James]

Inadmissibility could be important for someone who is inside the United States. Let's say they. They call it iwi, entered without inspection. That means coming into the United States, not through a port of entry.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

Let's say they went over the wall, under the wall, around the wall, through the river, through the desert, through the mountains.

[Robert Evans]

Right.

[James]

There are many ways that people could enter without inspection. They could then be found inadmissible long after entering the United States because they hadn't been admitted.

[Robert Evans]

Right.

[James]

They just came in. Just imagine, like, you want to go to Disneyland. It's prohibitively expensive, so you climb over the fence. You were not admitted to Disneyland.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[James]

Right. So if Disneyland found you, they would kick you out. The issue here, let's say if someone has been in the United States for a number of years, but they are undocumented, if they are found guilty of a crime, including moral turpitude, or convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, and the offence carries a maximum sentence of one year or more, and the person committed the offence within five years after the date of admission, they are then deportable. Now, if they eat weed, if they entered with that inspection, there are other reasons they could be deportable, right? Yeah, but say somebody has a visa, the same is true with inadmissibility. Right? So we recently had a Supreme Court ruling about admissibility with regards to permanent residence, which kind of brings them closer in line to visa holders. But admissibility doesn't just mean them giving you the visa. It could also, for example, impact you if you went somewhere else and returned to the United States. Right. So a crime involving moral turpitude could then render you inadmissible. So you could be detained or not admitted to the United States when you came back. It's also important, I guess, to note that some diversion programs, state diversion programs don't count as a conviction in terms of federal immigration law if a guilty plea is not entered. So if somebody who could previously have got into a diversion program ends up not in a diversion program, in addition to Corker.

[Robert Evans]

Right.

[James]

We have all these state sentencing enhancements that we see in California.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

If that person ends up with a conviction instead of being put in a diversion program without entering a plea, that is a night and day difference. In immigration terms, it's black and white. One is a conviction for what is probably a crime involving moral turpitude, because larceny is a crime involving moral turpitude. And I think that's what this generally falls under.

[Andy]

Right? Yeah.

[James]

Again, not a lawyer, but like, if that is the case, one of these sentencing enhancements at a state level results in somebody now having, for federal immigration terms, a conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. They are now inadmissible. And in a single conviction, as I said before, can make a non citizen deportable if it has a possible sentence of a year or more, which these sentencing enhancements make a lot more likely. Right?

[Lake]

Yeah.

[James]

And good luck, I guess, trying to find some way of getting that conviction overturned. Or like now you're fighting against all this lobbying that retailers are doing.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

And all this propaganda that has been put out there that is going to make it harder and harder for people to avoid those convictions in the first place and then to get them overturned.

[Andy]

Yeah. I don't want to get too doom and gloom about it, but do you worry that there's just a combination of factors here that could massively worsen things with the level.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah, yeah.

[James]

Like every time we make a new law, we're giving a new power to the state. Right. And every single law is backed up by violence. Doesn't matter if it's a parking ticket or murder.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

The state can lock you up, beat you up or shoot you up. That is the basis on which all laws rest.

[Andy]

Right?

[James]

Yeah. So you don't pay a parking ticket, then you don't go to court. Eventually someone's going to turn up at your door and it's going to be a person with a gun.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

That is the structure on which the state exists to use like the. The crass Weberian definition of the state, I guess. And this is a big one.

[Mia Wong]

Right.

[James]

We are handing a bunch of tools here to an entity which is tearing families apart, which is ripping children from parents, which is taking grandmothers away from their grandchildren. Right.

[Andy]

Yeah. I mean, what do you. Maybe this isn't for the episode, but like, what do you think people should do?

[James]

Yeah. Like the answer to this is the same as the answer to everything. It's stronger communities. Like, people steal things because they need to meet their material needs. I'm sure some People also enjoy stealing stuff, right? That's a thing that exists. But a vast majority of theft is happening because people are not meeting their material needs. We need to work out a way to meet each other's material needs. And like I was in Minneapolis in January, right? Yeah, very hard for me to be hungry in Minneapolis in January. Like I'm vegan, I'm annoying to feed, right? But people would constantly bring me fucking food and hot tea and like that's not the be all end all, but gets us a long way there. Like if your neighbors aren't hungry. And I guess to know if your neighbors are hungry, you have to know who your neighbors are, right? So like start by knocking on someone's door. You know, start by, hey, your truck's not working. Let's work it out. I bet I can find a YouTube video we can watch. And if you have a bunch of sockets, let's see if we can fix it.

[Andy]

So I know the ending of this is sort of bleak, but I just want to be honest with you about the possibilities. If ICE is to take Corka as far as they can. As Da Conover told me, you give them an inch and they take a mile, then this will get very bad. Surveillance capitalism isn't going to draw a line at immigrants, but that doesn't really matter either way. Clearly the Democratic party, given their votes support is not going to stop this. As James said, it's going to come down to community. So go find your co op grocery store, get to know your neighbors faces before ICE gets to know your face at the grocery store.

[Mia Wong]

Thanks for listening.

[Nick Turturro]

There were some strange looking people at the rnc. This is it could happen here. Executive Disorder, our weekly newscast covering what's happening in the White House, the crumbling world and what this means for you. I'm Garrison Davis. Today I'm joined by Robert Evans and Mia Wong with a special segment later on by James Stout who is on the ground in Spokane. This episode we're covering the week of July 29th to August 5th. And let's actually start with James reporting from the wildfires in Spokane.

[James]

Hi everyone, it's James. I'm in Washington state this week covering the fires here I will cover fire more in depth on my new show Natural Courses which you will soon be able to download wherever quality podcasts given away for free. But I want to catch everyone up on the fires here as I know a lot of folks prefer to consume their news this way and might otherwise not be aware of what's going on. So on the 1st of August, the National Weather Service in eastern Washington and in Idaho issued a PDS a particularly dangerous situation notice. Fires were already burning across much of the state and across much of the Pacific Northwest, including on the land of the Colville tribes and the Spokane Tribe. On Saturday, three fires struck near the north part of the city of Spokane. The PDS doubtless helped some folks repair. Other folks I'm sure will have missed it entirely. Very quickly people went from nothing to level three go now warnings. This was somewhat compounded by things like a large travel volleyball tournament happening in an area which got a level three go now warning. What that means, if you're not familiar, there are three levels of warnings when you are evacuated for a fire and the level three is the most severe one. That being like you have to leave your home right now. Several people have related to me and I want to caveat here that I'm not being critical of the response, which has actually been very good. I'm giving information because more people are going to find themselves in this situation in the future. And I think it's important that people understand that the level three warning that buzzed on people's phones and emergency alert came not very long before they saw fires and even structures on fire in their neighborhood.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

I think people sometimes think that like someone will come and tell you when it is your time to leave. That's not always going to be possible.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

And again, I'm not conveying that to say that the response here was poor. I'm conveying that to say that people need to understand this because we're all going to have to live with fire in the west because there has always been fire here. The climate is changing and we are pushing our homes further and further into the wildland urban interface. And that is where this fire began.

[Robert Evans]

Right.

[James]

On Saturday. This state was a tinderbox and it was these neighborhoods along the wildland urban interface that caught the brunt of these fast moving fires that found a plentiful source of fuel and were pushed along by the wind. Currently, about a third of the 200,000 people who live here in Spokane have been placed under evacuations orders. And the community's obviously feeling the weight of that along with the hundreds of people who lost their homes and all their possessions here. Notable points of the evacuations included buses evacuating people from old folks homes and a VA hospital was also evacuated by buses. And of course many people left their homes in their cars, with their possessions, their pets, their families, etc. And of course that resulted in very Slow moving traffic. Nonetheless, from what I heard this morning, seems everyone evacuated in time, at least to save themselves. I know many people will be dealing with tragedies, right? They've lost their homes, people will have lost pets, people will have lost things that are incredibly important to them.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

I spoke to people out on the Colville Tribes Reservation who were saying they had lost homes that their father, mother, grandparents built with their hands. Right. These intergenerational homes that are gone. That is absolutely tragic. I want to give an update that I got this morning from the public information officer of the IMT that's managing this fire. So we'll drop that in right now.

[Tom Stokesbury]

My name is Tom Stokesbury. I'm the lead public information officer for California Interagency incident management team 7. So right now there's three fires that make up the Spokane area fires. That's going to be the Fairview Fire, the Old Trails fire and the Autumn Lane fire. Currently all totaled in the acres is 10,540. But over the last 24 hours, our firefighters have made tremendous, tremendous progress in putting control lines in around the entire perimeter of all three fires. Now that doesn't mean the fire is contained or controlled. We just have those, those management and control lines there still have an active firefight, still have active flames in the interior. To the point on the Old Trails and Fairview Fire, we actually had a spot outside the line on each one of those that went to about an acre, acre and a half. But we had the resources in the right place and they were to pick those up at about one acre each. So that just kind of proves that there's still active heat hot spots in this interior. And that's why we have engines in all three of these fires still protecting the structures that have not been impacted yet. Because the, any kind of wind can throw embers. And right now the receptive fuels in this area, and by fuels, I mean the vegetation that is so dry, right. Your grass, your brush is very receptive. Receptive to those, those embers proof being is the two spot fighters. But we have 1300 firefighters here. We're expected to be over 2000 by the end of the week.

[James]

I also asked about the number of structures impacted and when people here can expect to return home. And here's what Tom said.

[Tom Stokesbury]

Right now we're well over 700 structures that have been impacted. We do have damage assessment personnel ordered and on en route. It's my understanding they'll be showing up today and we'll have them on the ground to tomorrow. So we're going to start to get a more accurate number of what those impacted structures look like, versus, you know, a total loss to just an impacted structure. And those structures include not only people's personal homes, but garages, outbuildings, sheds. But we're going to get a better accurate number on those over these next few days, trying to get these communities back to where we can get them repopulated. But in addition to that, there's a tremendous amount of hazmat in there. We're talking burn solar panels, panels, we're talking lpg, possible gas leaks, the building materials from homes that have been burned, the stuff that's inside those homes. There is a lot of hazmat. So we have to ensure the public is going to be safe before we repopulate and let them back in there. Because our ultimate goal is life first, then property. And that life is not just firefighters. It's the public safety.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[James]

While I was at the Firebase camp, I also ran into local community members and businesses who were helping out. People were constantly dropping off food and snacks and supplies. Here's one local business owner who explained his efforts to me.

[Mia Wong]

So my name is Tim Kadzi.

[Nick Turturro]

I'm with JK Boots. I'm one of the owners with my brother and dad.

[James]

I asked him what him and his company were doing to support the community.

[Mia Wong]

On Wednesday, August 5th, we're doing something called Homefront Day.

[Nick Turturro]

We're going to donate 100% of all

[Mia Wong]

the profits of that day to the

[Nick Turturro]

Spokane residents who lost their homes.

[Mia Wong]

So they could do that, they could participate.

[Nick Turturro]

Just go on our website and just

[Mia Wong]

do something, just get something, and that'll

[Tom Stokesbury]

go to those people.

[James]

The other things you can do is you can come here and you can

[Nick Turturro]

offer to drop off, you know, again, drinks, wipes, essentials.

You can look on Facebook, they've posted those things.

The other big thing is just there's other funds that are set up that

[Mia Wong]

have, like, meal trains. And because there's about 60,000 people that

[Robert Evans]

are still not able to go back

[James]

to their homes, what's happening in Spokane is tragic, and it is going to impact this community for years to come. It will take a very long time for rebuilding to happen and probably even longer for people to heal emotionally. I want to make sure that we do not overlook the several large ongoing fires are impacting the indigenous communities around the city, though, because as resources shift to the fires that burn the city, these communities will see fewer resources. And indeed, they already have. Some seen fewer resources. I spent the last couple of days Visiting the Colville tribes reservations, Spokane tribe reservations. Today I spoke to folks who had cut their own fire lines around their homes and communities who were prepared to fight the fire. And indigenous people here have lived with fire for thousands of years, right? They have a deep understanding of fire. And people there had decided to stay and to defend their communities even in areas that were impacted by Level three evacuations. Not everybody, right? Some people who were more vulnerable, some people who were not able to participate in that response or didn't feel safe doing so left, and other folks stayed. As resources continue to be diverted to fight these fires in Spokane and as news coverage will continue to center on the city, folks who lost their homes out in these tribal communities will also need help, and it might be harder for them to find it. Some of these people are still in their homes. Just today, I spoke to several people who are determined to do their hardest to save their homes and hoping that the wind doesn't pick up, they're cutting their own fire lines. In several cases, forestry and mining workers, as well as tribal community members who are on contract fire crews have been using their machinery and their skills to clear space and create better firebreaks around their communities. It's a really tragic and difficult situation, especially when combined with this reporting that I will link to. Of Red Cross volunteers making racist remarks at shelters that made indigenous folks feel unwelcome there. I don't think I need to repeat those, but I will link to the story if you'd like to read it. It is also, of course, amazing to see the strengths and resilience of communities coming together to take care of one another in these tragic situations. I particularly want to highlight the work of the River Warriors Society. I spent a day with them moving supplies from one reservation to another. I will include a link to the Spokane Tribal Network, which people can use if they'd like to donate to support that mutual aid work. They're really doing excellent work. They're getting people what they need. They're filling those gaps. They're moving more quickly than big organizations or big government things can. Even tribal governments will require paperwork. Whereas what they're doing is literally standing at gas stations using cards to pay for people's gas so they can get where they need to go, right? Getting people hotel rooms, getting people food, getting people the things they need to get through this and to begin healing. Today I help load hundreds of pounds of pet food and animal food into a trailer, for instance, so that people who need to feed their animals don't have to drive for hours away from their homes, right when the risk of fire is high and they want to stay home and do what they can to protect their homes. They're really doing excellent work and I would encourage you to support them if you have the resources. I will have more on this when I get home. Currently really tired. I smell like a campfire and I am in the bathroom of a motel because it is the only quiet place I could find. If you'd like to donate, I would suggest the Spokane Travel Network and I'll include the web address. It's spokantrablenetwork.org not hard to find. I will also include the Innovia foundation webpage for donation to folks in Spokane and their ongoing recovery. And yeah, I have more on this soon. Hey everyone, it's James again. Just a little pickup here that I wanted to add. Someone has been arrested for arson in connection with the Autumn Trails fire. I want to remind everyone that an arrest is not a conviction. There were three fires that impacted Spokane and that fire needs more than ignition, right? To spread in the way that it did here. It needs fuel, crucially, in this example. And that fuel was already there, right? That's why I wanted to highlight the PDS that was issued on the 1st of August. Now, I also want to address these conspiracy theories, right? The most common conspiracy theory seems to be that this was an attempt by big data center companies to clear a block of land in order to have a place where they could put a data center. I can tell you that I've spent the last two days driving hundreds of miles around eastern Washington. There is plenty of land where you could put a data center here without burning down a neighborhood. Data centers are bad. They are destroying so many beautiful places and so many wonderful things. It doesn't mean that they are comic book evil all the time. I think we need to inject a little rational thought here. We don't have any evidence that it was a data center. If we did, then people would be presenting it. But the data center hypothesis seems to rest on people want to build the data center near here, therefore burn down neighbourhoods. Or the relatively common and frequently recurrent 15 minute cities conspiracy theory, which suggests that rather than 15 minute cities being an aspirational goal for urban planning and a framework around which you consider permitting, building and potentially growing our cities. They are some kind of George Soros mandated diktat that is now being enforced by burning people's neighborhoods down in suburban areas. Again, no evidence to support that other than this wasn't a city that you know, the 15 minute city people consider to be a 15 minute city. I want to address these things because they come up every single time there's a fire. And I think we need and we're going to talk about this more in my show Natural Causes, which you can hear from the 17th of August, where I have a good podcast given away for free. There are going to be fires in this ecosystem forever. There have been fires since there have been plants to burn, lightning started fires before people ever did. But the people who have been here for tens of thousands of years have lived alongside fire for all that time. We can't entirely suppress fire and remove it from our landscape. This landscape needs fire and it evolved. Co evolved with fire. But there are ways that we can prevent fire from doing what happened today. But they require a lot of effort, they require a lot of resources and they require some rethinking of how we live alongside fire. That's something I'd like to approach later and in more detail. But I guess I just wanted to address these conspiracy theories because I see more and more of them also want to point out that there is no meaningful restitution that be extracted from one person if that person did start the fire. Healing doesn't come from punishing someone. It comes from helping someone. And in this situation, there are hundreds of families who lost their homes both on the Cobble Tribes Reservation, the Spokane Tribe reservation, and here in Spokane City. And I think the focus should be on how to help those people and how to help them heal, rather than blaming one person who may have started this fire, who may not.

[Andy]

Right.

[James]

We haven't got a conviction yet, but either way, I want people to remember that this is about a lot more than one person.

[Nick Turturro]

Thank you, James. In other news, on Monday, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking New York's ban on ICE agents wearing masks. New York State is suing to shut down Kalshi for operating as an unregulated sports betting platform that offers illegal underage gambling. The state is also seeking $36 billion in penalties. And this lawsuit comes after a district court ruled against Kalshee in their bid to protect itself from the enforcement of New York's gambling laws. Prior to this lawsuit from the state, Kalshee attempted to bribe Governor Kathy Hochul by offering 10 billion in tax revenue over five years. The governor responded. On X the Everything app, Kalshi can promise 100% of its revenue. You can't buy yourself an exemption from New York law if an illegal bookie offers the state a share of their profits. We'll still shut them down. In response to a lawsuit from Trump accusing Capital One of unlawfully closing his bank accounts for political reasons, Capital One has revealed in court filings that the Trump Organization bank accounts were closed in 2021 for, quote, unquote, anti money laundering reasons following, quote, months of analysis and careful review by the bank's money laundering team. A few months prior to the closure of Trump's accounts, Capital One had to pay a $390 million penalty to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network for not enforcing an effective anti money laundering program. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch's Senate confirmation hearing is coming up, but last week, President Trump said he would keep Blanche on as Acting Attorney General. If Blanche doesn't get confirmed and just try to nominate him again after the midterms. The U.S. attorney has dropped charges against three people who were accused of damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. The motion to dismiss the felony charge against the former Olympic athlete claims that it wasn't until after he was indicted that the Department of Interior gave evidence over to prosecutors that, quote, damage to the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool in July 2026 was the result of flawed installation by the contractor and the rush to complete the project prior to events associated with with America 250 celebration in the weeks surrounding Independence Day 2026. The motion also states, quote, is difficult to attribute the widespread damage to the Reflecting Pool to vandalism, unquote. Of course, Trump was not too happy about this. Turning to Truth Social to say I disagree 100% with Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, on the Reflecting pool. I don't know what she was thinking. To me, it was a pure case of vandalism in all caps. That includes the grass, which had a big 8647 emblazoned in giant letters on it.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, my God.

[Nick Turturro]

And many other elements of the surrounding area.

[James]

Oh, God, oh, God, oh, God.

[Nick Turturro]

There may have been some contractor difficulty, but the major damage was caused by vandals. President DJT The President later said that Pirro, quote, unquote, folded like an umbrella and, quote, frankly, I think she choked because the judge was really vicious, unquote. There was some speculation that he might fire the U.S. attorney. That has not happened as of yet, but who knows?

[Robert Evans]

You know, it's. It's the Trump administration. Things could have changed by the time we finish recording this. Yeah, there's like a 30% chance things will have changed by the time we finish recording this.

[Nick Turturro]

Obviously, it's good that these Charges were dropped. It was very clear that the damage to the reflecting pool was not done by vandals.

[Robert Evans]

No. And that fucking late middle aged former Olympian bending briefly down to touch the water did not cause 150 foot cut in the fucking.

[Nick Turturro]

In the center of the pool.

[Andy]

Absolutely not.

[Nick Turturro]

God. Ohio House Rep. Max Miller, who's accused of abuse and breaking his two year old daughter's collarbone, which we covered last week, posted a video this week addressing the allegations made by his ex wife saying, quote, if I had assaulted her, would she have offered to cook me dinner six days later, unquote. The next day Trump was questioned about Miller and said this.

[Mia Wong]

It's a very sad thing.

[Andy]

I know Max, he's, it's a good person.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean, I always thought he was

[Andy]

a very good person.

[Mia Wong]

And I'm going to let the families figure that out. You know those families, I know they're working on it.

[Andy]

It's a very sad thing, especially when

[Mia Wong]

you know somebody so well to be going through that when it's accusations and I'm going to let them figure that out.

[Nick Turturro]

On Tuesday it was announced the House Ethics Committee would open investigation after Miller himself requested a probe into the allegations. Let's go to an ad break and then return to talk about the primary elections in Michigan and Missouri.

[James]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Okay. We are back. This past Tuesday, left wing populist candidate Abdul El Said beat corporate backed and APAC backed candidate Haley Stevens in the Democratic Senate primary in Michigan in the week. Prior to the election, polling had showed El Said pulling way ahead by double digits. But come election night he won by just one point, 48.5% to Stevens, 47.5%. Very close race.

[James]

Great.

[Nick Turturro]

The more traditional progressive candidates, Mallory McMorrow who suspended her campaign months ago, got 4% of the vote, over 60,000 votes. El Said ended up winning by just 15,000 votes. But the fact that Tuesday wasn't a total blowout for El Said should not take away from the magnitude of this victory. Haley Stevens had nearly $70 million of outside spending helping her in this race, about half of which came from AIPAC. Al Said was outspent 11 to 1. For the past month, pro Stevens ads have completely dominated the airwaves.

[James]

Jesus.

[Robert Evans]

I didn't know it was that big a discrepancy in funding. That's crazy.

[Andy]

Brutal.

[Nick Turturro]

This is the most expensive Democratic Senate primary in history. AIPAC and dark money really rallied for Stevens, especially in this past month.

[Mohamed Salem Murad]

Whoops.

[Nick Turturro]

Some of those ads and mailers just completely blanketing Michigan falsely implied that Stevens was endorsed by Barack Obama, which some voters cited as their reason for supporting Stevens. Other ads tried to smear Abdul as a sexist podcast bro for comments critical of Michelle Obama and Gretchen Whitmer's politics. Stevens received the endorsement of Michigan's sitting governor, Gretchen Whitmer, as well as multiple Democratic establishment figures. Pelosi, Jim Clyburn, as well as the Michigan Democratic Party Black and Jewish caucuses. Israel and Palestine became a central issue in this race. In the last two debates, Abdul hit Stevens again and again over AIPAC and corporate funding. In the final debate, even the moderator questioned Stevens on whether her AIPAC funding would influence how she votes in Congress. Also in that last debate, Stevens lied on stage about taking money from utility companies. In an interview just a week before the election, Stevens addressed the attacks over dark money funding. Quote, it seems like we got the campaign finance zoomies.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus Christ.

[Nick Turturro]

We've got to be really honest here. Who's benefiting from this level of infighting? It's the Republicans who've already have all their dark money all lined up and ready to go, unquote. Let's take a listen to what those campaign finance zoomies can buy you in the Senate.

Israel comes to me in my dreams. I see Israel's future and I know

[Mia Wong]

that Israel will continue to exist for the Jewish people.

[Nick Turturro]

Just the zoomies. It's fine, everyone.

[Robert Evans]

It's the zoomies.

[Mia Wong]

God, Jesus Christ.

[Nick Turturro]

I will not, I will not stop playing that clip because it's one of the craziest things to have a then sitting congressperson say.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Now, Haley Stevens tried to attack Abdul for having a super PAC of his own, primarily funded by his father in law, who did donate $300,000 to the pack, which was the highest individual contribution, you know, $300,000 from his father in law versus $70 million of outside spending.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus Christ.

[Nick Turturro]

Not, not a very compelling argument, but that was, that was one of the main things that Stevens tried to hit Abdul on during the last two debates when he brought up the massive amount of APAC spending backing her campaign. Abdul has worked in public health since 2015, and for Senate, he ran on Medicare for all and abolishing medical debt, which he did for 300,000 residents of Wayne county in 2024 as director of the county health department. His platform also includes repealing Medicaid cuts from Trump's quote, unquote beautiful bill, codifying reproductive rights and protecting gender affirming care. His, quote unquote money out of politics plank includes getting rid of Citizens United to stop dark money pacts, ending partisan gerrymandering, supporting Supreme Court reform, getting rid of the filibuster, abolishing ICE and that, quote, ICE funds should be repurposed to build out the legal infrastructure of courts to create a clear pathway to citizenship for those who are stuck in limbo in our current system. Unquote. Abdul supports Ukraine and opposes, quote, the illegal and unjustifiable war in Iran. He also opposes, quote, direct blank check funding to foreign militaries including Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and others. And he supports an immediate arms embargo on Israel and rejects, quote, the false differentiation between offensive and defensive weapons, which is a reference to the Iron Dome. His money in your pocket platform includes an anti monopoly FTC trade agreements negotiated with unions, restoring funding to the nih, opposing private school vouchers, tying increases in the defense budget to an equal increase in education funding, taxing capital gains over a million dollars at the same rate as ordinary income, closing loopholes used by the ultra wealthy, raising the marginal tax rate on earnings over 1 million and a billionaire tax. He also supports a cost of living exemption on federal taxes up to $50,000 and closing the Social Security payroll tax cap for housing. His platform aims to streamline local regulations to make it easier to build while banning large corporations that speculate on housing stock from owning homes and supporting legislation to ban algorithmic rental price fixing software. ELSAID supports regulating AI companies, creating an independent technical agency with real enforcement power for AI, which he cites the FDA as an example, but having basically an FDA type organization to regulate and handle AI. He also is in support of federal zoning guidelines and legislation to protect communities from the consequences of data centers. In a primary debate, El Said that data center projects must meet the following terms quote all union labor no raising our utility rates, increasing our utility reliability, not touching our water and there's got to be a community benefits agreement that's negotiated in good faith with all the money put into escrow. Unquote. El Said is not a DSA candidate. He does not call himself a socialist, but he was endorsed by Bernie Sanders AOC and campaigned with Hasan Piker. He's also been backed by the uaw, National Nurses United, the Working Families Party, Jewish Voice for Peace, and if not now, a few days before the primary. But after polling indicated that Abdul would likely be the nominee, incumbent Republican Senator Mike Rogers released an AI generated ad depicting Abdul as a communist Trojan horse. Let's take a listen.

[Mia Wong]

They'll never see us coming. They really think we're just Democrats. God, Jesus Christ.

[Robert Evans]

Every AI ad I hear Jeff Goldblum's fucking voice say, you were so obsessed with whether or not you could, you didn't stop to think, you know, should we. Is this a good idea? Is this ad going to work?

[Nick Turturro]

So basically, this ad has a Trojan horse rolling into Michigan with a large banner reading Definitely not Communism. Inside the horse. Abdul is dressed as Odysseus from the Nolan movie, along with Bernie Sanders, AOC and Soran Mamdani. Text at the end reads, don't let Communism into Michigan. Mike Rogers for U.S. senate. I think Mike Rogers should keep releasing ads just like this, nothing else. I want him just to keep releasing these ads. I think that'll be great.

[James]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Rogers did release a statement after Abdul's victory. Quote, I spent years hunting terrorists and bringing Osama bin Laden to justice. Never in a million years did I think that I would be running against someone who believes America deserved 9, 11, unquote. Abdul has never said that, obviously.

[Mia Wong]

And I also think that this is a example of just the sheer level of racism that has defined this campaign. And we also saw versions of this with Mamdani. But, like, just the unhinged amount of Islamophobia that has been leveled against Said is really, really disturbing.

[Nick Turturro]

And it's going to get worse.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, it's going to get so much worse. Yeah. But it's. But it's also like, this is an example of Islamophobia from the Republicans, but the Democrats have been doing it, too, and it's extremely bleak, the extent to which this is just a thing you can do running a political campaign.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah.

[Robert Evans]

It's interesting because it isn't entirely, at least lately, to their benefit either. Like, it recently really screwed them over in another Michigan race. Right. Like Michigan's 8th district, the Republican primary between Thomas J. Smith, Amir Hassan, and Al Limo. Thomas Smith took ahead even though he had, like, suspended his campaign, like, more than a month ago. Amir Hasan had been endorsed by Trump and is not a Muslim, but has a name that kind of sounds like he would be like, to a racist.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah.

[Robert Evans]

And so, like, at least that's the suspicion as to why Hasan did not do better against someone who was not actively running.

[Kevin Foster]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Was not. Was not campaigning.

[Robert Evans]

A lot of anger on Truth Social by maga. People who thought that Trump had endorsed a Muslim.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah. It's just, I mean, like, the, the level of bigotry is off the chart. It's interesting that it doesn't seem to. Or at least in this case, it torpedoed a Republican but not a Democrat, which I do think is kind of Fun. But yeah, the overall trend is very much not fun.

[Nick Turturro]

On a similar sort of note, last week the Michigan State AG Dana Nestle announced at an ADL quote unquote anti Semitism roundtable that she would not be attending the Michigan Nominating Convention for their Democratic nominee over fears of being booed for working with Trump and Cash Patel's FBI to indict pro Palestine student protesters in June.

I'm not going to be attending the nominating invention for the Michigan Democratic Party in August and that is because I don't feel safe going. I feel like my presence is not going to be welcome. I don't want to get chased around, I don't want to get harassed, I don't want to get yelled and screamed at and I don't want to get booed off the stage irrespective of what I'm saying. And I believe that if I go, that is what will happen because it's been happening to me.

Get fucked up.

[Mia Wong]

Fuck yeah. Which, which good like you are, you are by definition a collaborator for having participated in this. That is like the, the absolute bare minimum of accountability that you should be facing is, is that you should be booed every single place you go to.

[Nick Turturro]

Her office has, has tried for years to go after pro Palestine protesters and has been forced to to drop charges because her office was specifically discriminatory. And she only got her way via teaming up with the Trump admin and Kash Patel's FBI to go after student protesters. This is something she's been trying to do for literal years and has been unable to because her, her office is too racist.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. And again also like student protesters were horribly brutalized by the police repeatedly as I think most people who listen to this remember to some extent. But yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Also in Michigan, the DSA endorsed Rashida Tlaib handily won her reelection in the District 12 primary with 74% of the vote. Also in Michigan, left wing populist and co founder of the Sunrise Movement, William Lawrence won the Democratic primary for House District 7 with about 56,000 votes. Two more kind of moderate candidates each got 35,000 votes. So there is a sort of moderate split here. Lawrence will now be facing the Republican incumbent Tom Barrett who won by just 4 points in 2024. There's 226,000 votes to 209,000 votes. So this could end up being a close race. Really depends on voter turnout.

[Andy]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Now Lawrence is a member of DSA but is not DSA endorsed, though he does have the endorsement of Sanders. El said Rashida Tlaib Ro Khanna, the Nurses Union Working Families Party and Track apac. Quick update here. Lawrence went on CNN Wednesday night to clarify that while he used to be a member of dsa, he let his membership lapse last month. In the weeks before the election, Lawrence was attacked by the Democratic establishment and the Congressional Black Caucus for being quote unquote racist because of a quote from a podcast conversation on black liberation and black anti war activism with an activist named Hurry Peterson Smith. I'll read the full quote here. That was clipped and spread around mainly by HuffPost, quote the extent to which the older generation of black political leadership are such a pillar, frankly, for establishment capitalist imperialist American power through their role as this kind of traditionalist establishment is pillar of the Democratic Party. It's a big problem. It's a big problem for left politics in this country and it gets us every single time. It really defangs the white left and puts us in impossible positions, really. Unquote William Lawrence told HuffPost, quote, I have tremendous respect for black community leaders who have been at the forefront of the fight for freedom for centuries. This was in the context of a wide ranging conversation with a guest on the show about racial dynamics in progressive politics. I regret how this specific point was expressed, unquote. And yes, absolutely, there is no reason to say the white left there specifically. This harms the entire left. There's really no reason to say that this is part of a larger conversation in this podcast he was having about racial dynamics in like left wing spaces. But I think that is a bad thing to say. Lawrence added to his statement online, quote, the way I made this point was clumsy and I regret my choice of words. I understand the potential impact when received out of context. The way the story is being reported does not reflect my beliefs. National elected leaders across race, ethnicity, age and gender have been supporters of unnecessary US wars. This poses a challenge to the anti war movement. Americans of all races and ages must work together to advance peace. Until we do, our resources will go to funding war and genocide abroad rather than investing in affordable housing and health care or closing the racial wealth gap, unquote. DSA candidate Donovan McKinney beat Democratic incumbent Sri Tanadar by almost 4%, about 4,000 votes in House District 13, another close race. It was looking like SRI might pull ahead earlier in the night, but Donovan did end up winning and will now likely become another DSA congressman. Tanadar was backed by aipac, Hakeem Jeffries, the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Center Left New Democrat Coalition. But it's not all wins in Michigan. Kyle Blomquist, another DSA candidate for Congress in Michigan House District 1 lost to moderate Kaylee Barr who will now face the Republican incumbent in the General and DSA endorsed Asia Farouki lost to pro Israel Democrat Jeffrey Moss for Haley Stevens House seat. So those are the two main losses for DSA last Tuesday, both US House seats in Michigan. Though I think it is interesting to note that Detroit is now the only major city in the country to be fully represented in the U.S. house by DSA candidates. And two DSA candidates for the Michigan state House also won their primaries. In Missouri, Cori Bush lost her comeback bid to incumbent Wesley Bell who was backed by AIPAC and was also really really outspent. And the Kansas City DSA endorsed candidate Harzell Gray lost his primary for House District 4 by just under 2000 votes. Very close race. So lots of wins, some losses. But even just El said winning is probably the biggest blow to AIPAC that we've seen yet. Like, like I said, this is the most expensive Democratic Senate primary in history. In a state with open primaries where tens of millions of dollars in ad spending can go really far in rural areas and with older low info voters, a left wing Muslim candidate overcoming both AIPAC and the Democratic establishment in a swing state is a massive victory. I have one final little election update for the gubernatorial race in Ohio.

[Mia Wong]

Oh God.

[Nick Turturro]

Because in late July, Republican nominee for governor Vivek Ramaswamy spoke or tried to speak at the Young Americans for Liberty National Convention, an annual Ron Paul esque convention for young libertarian conservatives at Xavier University in Cincinnati, Ohio. Ramaswamy's speaking block was for 30 minutes. He lasted 14 before being booed off stage. Let's take a listen.

[James]

Truth of the matter is, you know,

[Mia Wong]

no matter what happens in whichever direction

[Robert Evans]

we go, people, my generation have already made it.

[Tom Stokesbury]

We're going to be fine.

[Robert Evans]

It's going to be your generation.

[Mia Wong]

You're a political Cretan and you need

[Robert Evans]

to get the copy anywhere.

[Mia Wong]

Seems like it's going great.

[Nick Turturro]

So there are two cuts in that clip, but all that audio is from the last like two minutes of his speech. Ramaswamy was also booed as he first went onto stage.

[Robert Evans]

Great sign. Great sign.

[Nick Turturro]

And throughout the 14 minutes he was heckled over Israel, H1B visas, data centers, energy prices, and his comments about how the socialist government sees your home as a wealth asset. To which people in the crowd responded, we can't afford a home.

[Robert Evans]

Great. Also, isn't the whole premise of our economy that Your home is like a wealth asset, right?

[Nick Turturro]

Like, yeah, no, that's socialism, Robert.

[Robert Evans]

Doesn't everyone that owns a home see their home that way? Isn't that like how all of the US economy is predicated on.

[Mia Wong]

I cannot emphasize this enough literally, this distinction between, between your house as a wealth asset and your house and you living in it. This is chapter one of Capital.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah, that's a wild statement.

[James]

Literally.

[Nick Turturro]

Well, exactly. That is communism. Yeah, that is. I think, I think that that is exactly Ramaswamy's point. Throughout this 14 minute speech he tried to say that like the true divide in this country isn't, isn't Democrats versus Republicans, but winners versus whiners. So why would you be a whiner and complain about all these things when you could just win? And this actually mirrors one of Haley Stevens kind of late campaign tactics to refer to people to her left as being part of the quote unquote, complaining class. Any, like dsa, any kind of socialist person is part of the complaining class. Anyone talking about, you know, aipac, Israel, they're just complaining. Did not work out for Stevens as, as we know. And this might not work out for Ramaswamy either. Last month the Cook Political Report switched the Ohio gubernatorial race from Lean's Republican to toss up. And the latest New York Times Sienna poll from late July has the race in a tie.

All I have to add is that it's funny.

Yeah, it is funny.

And I picture him walking around the RNC like once a month. He looked like a sad little guy.

Not that little. His hair was very tall.

[Kevin Foster]

His hair was very tall. His veneers were, were very bright veneering

[Nick Turturro]

in the presidential race. You know, me and Robert were talking about how much, you know, Ramasani was trying to go after the sort of like, like groiper type of young, young conservative. Right? That, that was kind of what his like, affect, that's a lot of stuff he was talking about, seemed, seemed to be rooted in. And at this, you know, young conservative convention, he was like loudly rejected. Right. This is the type of person that he's like trying the most to appeal to in some ways or at least used to. This was also the case when he, when he was doing campaign events with Charlie Kirk, one of which I went to in Georgia before the presidential election. But he was, he was definitely trying to go after this sort of like young male Republican and like get, make sure you mobilize them to the polls. Like that could be the thing that tips over the race is like getting like young Republican males And at least for the gubernatorial race, his strategy of like, you know, it's up to you to fix everything. Actually, millennials are going to be fine. Don't complain too much might not actually help mobilize young voters in support of his campaign. So we will see how that goes come November. Let's pivot to ads and then return for some prediction market and tariff news. Two great tastes that go great together.

[Robert Evans]

Foreign. We're back. So I wanted to talk a little bit more about the munitions crisis. I've reported several times on the growing munitions crisis that the US Military faces not just, but largely as a result of our war of choice with Iran. Advanced munitions, though, like 155 millimeter artillery rounds, have been stretched past the point of sustainability for years now since the expansion of Russia's war with Ukraine. Ukraine. And so defense officials have spent much of the last four years scrambling to increase production of a number of different rounds. And there were a bunch of articles in like the spring, early summer of 2025 at the Trump Industry crowed over about how they'd finally met their goal of quadrupling production of 155 millimeter rounds. And a major part of this was the construction and opening in mid-2025 of a fully operated 155 millimeter artillery shell factory in Mesquite, Texas. The factory is named Union Technologies. So that's all what the administration reported last year. Right? I want to quote now from an article the Global Tactical Analysis center put out in February of 2026. The US military is facing a significant crisis as production of 155 millimeter artillery rounds at the Mesquite factory has severely lagged. This shortfall raises alarms not only for domestic military readiness, but also for ongoing foreign military sales that depend on timely delivery of munitions. Army Acquisition Czar Brent Ingraham expressed explicit dissatisfaction with the facility's performance during a recent congressional hearings, indicating that immediate investments are necessary to correct course and avoid further delays. The logistical and technical challenges at the Mesquite factory may involve outdated machinery or insufficient workforce levels to meet production quotas. Current estimates suggest a 25% lag in output compared to contractual obligations. And that sounds bad in and of itself. That's not accurate. The lag is a lot more than 25%.

[Mia Wong]

Oh boy.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah, yeah. The DOD office of the Inspector General went out to, like, look into what's going on with this plant and why isn't shell production up to where the administration said it would be? They spent several months investigating and put together A report that was published in mid July of 2026. Here's a summary from twz.com despite receiving close to $500 million from the U.S. army, funded through supplemental spending bills from fiscal years 2022 and 2023, General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems failed to a make single sub component needed to produce the badly needed shells. As of last March. Without the 30,000 additional projectile metal parts anticipated from Mesquite facility, the army will be unable to reach its monthly capacity goal of 100,155 millimeter artillery rounds. The report concluded. As of March 2026, officials have not developed a plan to produce the additional rounds that are supposed to be produced at the Mesquite factory. So this means that the US is producing somewhere between like a third and a half of the goal the Trump administration claimed they'd already reached. That's a little hard for me to tell. I've heard as low as like 36,000 and as high as like 70,000 shells a month that we're making, both of which are shorter than what we're supposed to be. And for an idea of how much of a problem this is, Ukraine, when things are at a fever pitch, can fire up to 8,000 shells per day, which means they're shooting enough over there to account for a year of US shell production in two weeks. And as a result of this discrepancy, the US has seen its stockpile of 155 millimeter shells reduced by 3.6 million rounds over the last several years.

[Mia Wong]

Jesus.

[Robert Evans]

So I was curious as to what had gone so wrong that these fuckers haven't been able to make a single solitary component. Not fucking one. And it turns out this happened because the whole plot to have this mesquite factory, you know, close the gap in production was based on a hope and a prayer. Specifically a hope that the very old machines in the factory would be able to produce modern quality weapons. The IG's report called this a high risk production line, which is not the kind of production line you want for artillery shells per an article and task and purpose. Rather than build new machines for the Mesquite plant, the IG said the army allowed General Dynamics to convert machines used from M107 shells. An older 155mm round that the M795, which we use now replaced the M795, can fire about 6km further than the M107, carrying a far more powerful explosive charge. But the decision to try the untested production program, the IG said proved fateful. Army officials believed the mesquite facility was a high risk, high reward opportunity. The IG said the service accepted risk associated with the contractor's plan to Purchase and adapt M107 metal part production equipment. But the new production lines were never able to produce acceptable M7 95 parts using the reworked equipment, and the army ordered the plant to stop work completely and stop spending money. In August 2025, just months after the Trump administration claimed we were up to 100,000 shells a month and that orders held through at least April of 2026. So we have no idea what's going to happen ultimately to this mesquite factory. But I should note here that our munitions woes go even deeper than a lack of howitzer fuel. Earlier this year, Reuters reporters Erin Bonko, Mike Stone and Jonathan Landley published an exclusive article titled US has used virtually all of its long range precision missiles during Iran War, sources say, citing three people familiar with the data. The article claims that the US has used virtually all of our army tactical missile systems and precision strike missiles. The army tactical missile systems are like the older missiles we were using. The precision strike missiles are the new ones. These are our main surface to surface his weapons. And it gets worse to continue with another quote from that Reuters piece, Military leaders have for weeks warned the President that stockpiles of defensive weapons, including Patriot interceptors, which are effective against ballistic missiles, were dwindling, said two of the sources. Last week, several media outlets reported Trump had decided not to launch another massive offensive inside Iran, in part because his military advisors had warned about the U.S. stockpile. A U.S. official disputed those accounts, saying Trump's chose not to move forward with another attack because of pressure from Gulf states. Now, based on the most up to date info we have, at least 65% of our patriot interceptors have been used since February and Thaad stockpiles are down by at least 38%. We've also used about half, if not more than half of our Tomahawk stockpile. None of these weapons can be replaced at rates that are even close to the rate we are burning them. And these are also the weapon systems that we would rely on most in the event of a conflict with Russia, China or any other major power. Which is why so many people in the defense industry are freaking out to the degree that Trump has had to pull back on some of his plans because they are telling him hey man, if we get into some serious shit and not this fuckery you're doing in the Gulf, we're screwed. Yeah, like we can't make more of these. So anyway, the reason I keep beating the drum on like the ammo shortage is because I'm certain that in history books in the future there are going to be pages written about this before whatever fucking disaster comes our way next. So that's cool. Keep your eye on that. The other thing you should keep your eye on is that we have now added a new kind of gambling market to our gambling on things that are not traditional gambling industry, which is I guess, the only growth industry in the country aside from data centers. There's now a bunch of different services that are letting people gamble specifically on wildfires and where they hit and how much damage they do.

[Mia Wong]

Oh, Jesus.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah. Yeah. And I want to quote from an article in Oregon Live. As Oregon surpassed its wildfire acreage record over the weekend with more than 2 million acres burned. Oregon lawmakers also raised a new wildfire concern Monday as prediction markets continue to allow people to place bets on wildfires saying it could lead to more human caused fires. In a letter to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates prediction markets, Senator Jeff Merkley led lawmakers from other wildfire stricken states and Senator Ron Wyden in urging the agency to crack down on wildfire related contracts. The group warned that the markets could create financial incentives for arson. And that's the big deal is that like, if you're letting people gamble on this shit, firefighters might be incentivized to fuck with stuff. Regular people could be incentivized to fuck with stuff. We've seen this happen already. Like I reported a couple months ago about that Israeli journalist who like posted a video of a missile failing to get intercepted and like hitting into some trees. And he started getting death threats because people were gambling on like whether or not it would be intercepted and his reporting was inconvenient to them. Shit's going to be happening like that with fires in addition to people trying to start them. If this is allowed to go right. Polymarket lets people bet on not just wildfires, but a variety of natural disasters. People can choose yes or no as to whether or not they think a Category 5 hurricane is going to hit the United States or like a volcano is going to erupt. It's just a really bleak thing. And there's one of the things that I read recently is there's a, there's even a new markets focus specifically on gambling, on California wildfires called wildfire W Y L D F Y R E. Jesus Christ. The company tagline is, you can't predict wildfire, but you can trade on it. And I want to quote from High country News and an investigation into this company. Currently, Wildfire users can only simulate trading, but according to the site, the ability to bet with real money is coming soon.

[Nick Turturro]

Oh, gosh.

[Robert Evans]

The platform purports to be the first prediction market of its kind, pricing county and city wildfire risk in real time. California burns every year and it's getting worse. The question is an if. It's when and where the site reads. Wildfire frames its platform as providing a public good. Wildfire turns collective intelligence into better wildfire forecasting. One trade at a time, the site reads.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Mia Wong]

Oh my God.

[Robert Evans]

But entities with a real need for wildfire forecasting, including federal and state firefighting agencies, say they aren't interested in prediction market data. The forest service does not use information from prediction markets for wildfire forecasts. I don't even need to go. It's useless. It's useless. And everyone's saying this is, is an idiot and a liar.

[Nick Turturro]

It's insane. This, this whole thing, it's like we can chart like the world's collective knowledge

[Robert Evans]

because money is, you know, speaks, speaks

[Nick Turturro]

more truthfully than just words. It's just complete, complete nonsense.

[Robert Evans]

No people are going to burn down their own neighborhoods, get rich. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

I mean if you look at like how much the prediction markets have been wrong about a sequence of like high profile elections just in the past year shows that this is not useful or reliable data. There is no, you know, hidden truth that prediction markets can, can, can find through the, the quote unquote wisdom of crowds. And like this, this specific thing on these wildfires is like a two pronged issue. One kind of evil right to just, you know, win money based on the deaths of, oh yeah. However many people in natural disasters, the

[Robert Evans]

destruction of their lives, their everything they've built the fear. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

So like, you know, like death markets is like one, one aspect. The other, you know, aspect is if, if someone has a lot of money riding on a certain wildfire hitting a certain location, then yeah, there is financial incentive to maybe cause a fire to hit a certain location or try to

[Robert Evans]

pay someone else to.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, there's like that aspect as well.

[Robert Evans]

It's evil for so many reasons.

[Nick Turturro]

Obviously should be illegal. Like it's insane.

[Robert Evans]

Lee should be hanging these people. I mean,

[Mia Wong]

I remember when arguing over whether the market is an information processor that like, like, as you're saying, like has like all of this collect collective intelligence from market signals that it's like the most efficient information processor versus arguing that it's a gambling den. Like, that used to be an academic debate and now it's just like, oh, no, we're doing this on fires. And it's just, God, every, every. Everything that was once metaphor is now literal. And all of the metaphors suck.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah, this is pretty fucked up. I, I know that this was a, this was a concern that was talked about with like, the LA fires last year or two years ago, because I know there was polymarket or Kalsheet betting on those and that, that created like a little mini news cycle of like, talking about this maybe being a problem. But, like, the scale in which this is, like, accelerated is crazy.

[Robert Evans]

Again, I used to do, like, sports gambling ads because I don't have a problem with gambling, like, ethically. Same way I don't have a problem with liquor and whatnot. And then it just became very clear before too much, oh, wait, no, this isn't your father's gambling. This isn't going to fucking. Like, things are well beyond heading to Vegas for like a weekend or playing cards online with your friends. This is turned into, like, everything. Like, this is the, the Omni culture. It's almost the only recreational activity a lot of Americans have anymore.

[Nick Turturro]

Yeah.

[Robert Evans]

I'm going to be honest, I didn't see that happening. That, that took me by surprise.

[Nick Turturro]

No. I mean, I used to have a lot more kind of libertarian y views on gambling.

[Robert Evans]

Sure.

[Nick Turturro]

And now I am firmly in favor of, like, harsh state intervention.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

Into basically all forms of digital gambling.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah. I think you should be able to, like, go to a casino and gamble, but I don't think you should be able to do it on your phone. Like, I, I've turned around on that.

[Mia Wong]

No. Yeah. And, you know, and you, you can, you can look at those. There's a whole bunch of data on, like, when, when sports gambling gets legalized in a state, like the bankruptcy rate increases, it's, it's a catastrophe.

[Robert Evans]

Yeah.

[Mia Wong]

You know, I mean, it's, it's, it's already devoured sports and it's now just devouring everything that's left of our society until something changes literally everything else. Yeah.

[Nick Turturro]

It's like, what if you copy that model for literally any event happening in the world anyway? Well, at least the economy at large is doing fine, right? Me.

[Mia Wong]

Oh. Oh, boy. Yeah. So let's, let's, let's check in with our dear friend. And by dear friend, I mean, I don't know if he's an enemy of the show yet.

[Nick Turturro]

But recurring character on the show.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, recurring character on the show. Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh, who had a press conference to address the fact that in the face of, you know, rising inflation, everyone was expecting there to be some kind of interest rate increase. And he didn't do one. And, well, I mean, the Federal Reserve Board didn't vote for one. And he had a press conference that was so disastrous it triggered a giant sell off of US Bonds, which is not good. I'm going to read this, this piece from John Cassidy who wrote an article in the New Yorker about it, because I think it captures the reactions to this quote. The sell off quote looks very much like a loss of confidence trade, one market analyst told the Financial Times. Another commenter, Dario Perkins, an economist at the research firm TS Lombard, compared Warsh's press conference to Donald Trump's announcement last year of his Liberation Day tariffs and to the disastrous UK Mini budget that cost trust her job as prime minister in 2022, describing them all as occasions, quote, where you suddenly realize global policymakers are totally out of their depth and don't know what they're doing. Even some ex Fed officials who tend to be more guarded in their public comments, voice concerns. In an interview with Bloomberg, James Bullard, a former president of the Federal Reserve bank of St. Louis, described Warsh's press conference as, quote, a little bit rocky. And the bond market's reaction is, quote, nerve wracking for a central banker.

[Robert Evans]

I don't know, it sounds fine to me.

[Nick Turturro]

Now, a little bit rocky might seem a little timid to you, but for these people, that's like an insane thing to say.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah. For a Federal Reserve banker, that is the equivalent of just nine alarm fire. I'm going to read this one last part of it. Loretta Mester, who headed the Cleveland fed from 2014 to 2024, told the Wall Street Journal, quote, I want to feel comfortable that the Fed knows what it is doing. I don't think it's sustainable what he's doing, terms of not saying anything. So this press conference went so badly that the current analysis from basically the day this happened until now, the analysis has been that actually, no, the Fed is going to be forced to raise interest rates just to make the markets take like Marsh as a guy running the central bank, seriously.

[Nick Turturro]

Oh God.

[Mia Wong]

Economist at bank of America labeled this a quote, central bank inflation credibility shock, a term I have never seen before. So, okay, what did Warsh actually say in this press conference that was this bad? Well, here, here's Jackson Ma at Fortune, quote, he has vowed, quote, regime change and quote at the Fed by rolling back so called forward guidance on where rates are headed and offered no such clues on Wednesday. Even talking around, no brainer questions on how to bring down inflation. So what does that actually mean? The Fed usually gives markets some indication of what they're going to do with interest rates at our next meeting to set interest rates. And you do this because you want to give people in the market an opportunity to plan around what the Fed is probably going to be doing. Warsh thinks this is a bad idea. That is very weird. I don't think anyone has agreed with him that not talking to like the markets about what you're, about what the Fed is going to do. I don't think anyone has agreed with him since at least like the 80s that, that the Fed should just make his decisions in secret and not tell anyone. But that's not even the weirdest part of this. The weirdest part is that he's not just refusing to explain what the Fed is going to do in the future, he is refusing to explain what the Fed is doing right now. And that is really, really weird. People just asked him point blank like, hey, why did you not raise interest rates? And she just would not give an answer. And that is the thing that has been making it seem like he has no idea what's going on. Now it's possible that this is pure incompetence. I think that's probably part of it. Like it being incompetence is kind of bolstered by the Fed's next move, which was to do basically a, I, I don't know if bailout's quite the right term, but basically to pump the bunch of money into the yen to maintain the value of Japan or to increase and maintain the value of Japan's currency. Now this is also a kind of cataclysmic thing. The US hasn't done this for Japan since I think literally it was the reverse Plaza Accords in, in the late 1980s as a way to like stave off the, the just complete ruin of the Asian markets during the Asian market collapse. So, so this in and of itself is remarkable. The Zos hasn't done this since almost every economy in Southeast Asia was imploding during, during the end of the 90s. But the, the weirdest part is that instead of doing this by just selling dollars, right, he did it by selling Euros, which is baffling. I have no idea why he did it. No one I've read seems to have any idea why he did this with Euros instead of dollars. Everyone is just extremely confused. So it's actually very funny because the thing I'm about to talk about next was brought up as the most important thing the Fed had done during his tenure, and then this happened a few days later. So everyone is just completely baffled by what he's doing. None of it makes any sense. And it's not only doesn't make any sense, it's actively undermining itself, because a lot of the things that he's doing, you know, this yen purchase is supposed to be about restoring confidence in the Japanese markets, but then the US Is doing some weird stuff, and now everyone's going, what on earth is going on? The last thing I want to talk about with the Fed specifically is because I think I kind of understand what he's doing, at least with the interest rates and why he's not talking about it. In order to get to this, we need to turn to some reporting from the New York Times, which reports that Warsh is trying to reduce the number of meetings that the Fed has to decide interest rates. This is also really weird. The number of meetings to decide interest rates hasn't changed since the 80s. So, okay, why. Why is he trying to eliminate. Why is he trying to eliminate these meetings? And when you put it all together, the reason why he doesn't want to say what the Fed is going to do in the future and he wants to have less meetings, is that there is a Fed meeting in September right before the midterms. And if he raises interest rates, which is exactly the opposite of what Donald Trump wants right before the midterms, this is one of John Cassidy's interpretations. If he does this, he could get fired by Trump. So he doesn't want to raise interest rates right before the midterms. So he's taking a stance of not saying anything to the media and then potentially even canceling this September meeting in order to not have to do this. So that's great. I think it's an argument as to whether the US Federal Reserve is the single most important institution for all of global capitalism. I don't know if you can win the argument that it's the single most important one, but it's one of the most important institutions, and it is apparently being run by a guy who is making economic decisions with the entire global economy based on him trying not to get fired. So this can only go great.

[Nick Turturro]

One of the silliest things about that, that purchase of yen, was the photos leaked from the meeting with the notepad.

[Mia Wong]

They like, oh, God.

[Nick Turturro]

To do Colon buy US$10 billion worth of yen.

[Robert Evans]

Remarkably similar to my shopping list the other day when I went to Albert's.

[Nick Turturro]

That's what concerns me is I feel like you should be able to remember

[Robert Evans]

to buy 10 billion yen.

[Nick Turturro]

10 billion US dollars worth of yen.

[Robert Evans]

Is there not a better method to make sure that happens in the US Government?

[Mia Wong]

I cannot emphasize this enough. The last time we did something like this with Japanese currency, it has an actual name. It's called the Reverse Plaza Accords. It was a transformational milestone moment in what the American economy was going to be because that was the moment the US Abandoned having a manufacturing economy. Like, that's the kind of decision that is being made here. And it's being written on a notepad.

[Nick Turturro]

Like it's just, just, just throw that thing on a notepad. I'll do that later this afternoon.

[Mia Wong]

I admit I thought Warsh, because Warsh had been like with. With the Federal Reserve bank before. I thought he was going to be like, slightly more competent than this. But this entire, this entire week has raised. Just raised what I think the odds are of the Federal Reserve completely screwing things up and blowing up the entire global economy significantly. Because if, if this is the kind of shit that you're doing, like a couple of months into being in office, we are in for a long eight years. Assuming, I guess he doesn't like purged by Trump.

[Nick Turturro]

Posting a picture of Jerome Powell hurts, like, just want him back.

[Mia Wong]

God. Oh, finally. I want to conclude on some tariff talk song.

[Nick Turturro]

Rocky Chasm.

[Andy]

Rocky Casbah.

[Nick Turturro]

Sorry we forgot to put the song in the last episode.

[Robert Evans]

They won't forgive me.

[Andy]

My bad.

[Mia Wong]

Yeah, we're doing. We're fixing it. We're fixing it. On Monday, half of the states in the union, that is 25 total states, sued the Trump administration over the regime's tariff policies. What is bleak here is that because of the speed that the courts move at and because of the speed that these attorney generals are moving at, these lawsuits are coming in an entire terror cycle behind. Yeah, so these lawsuits are over the administration session 301 tariffs, which were the forced labor, 10 to 12% tariffs on basically all U.S. imports that are supposed to be about forced labor. And as I mentioned before, this is an entire cycle of tariffs behind where the Trump administration actually is now, which is his even more illegal usage of Smoot Hawley tariffs against Canada. We are still awaiting the lawsuit about that one because they just haven't gotten there yet. So it's fun in real time to get to see the stuff I said last time I was talking about tariffs, about how Trump is just going to be able to keep using this tariff justification because it just takes time for stuff to get to the court. We're seeing that here. I mean, I guess the section 301 tariffs don't have a deadline, but who knows how long it's going to take to get rid of those ones. Or if you could see a scenario where those tariffs are irrelevant, as we saw with the tariffs that he imposed earlier this year that were nominally about like the US Having a balance of payments crisis where there were lawsuits about it, but the lawsuits don't matter because the authorization expired. We're probably we're going to see a similar thing like that where these tariffs are kind of irrelevant by the time this went to the courts. So amazing political system we've set up here.

[Nick Turturro]

Well, that does it for us today at It Could Happen here. James sent over two donation links for the Spokane Wildfires. Both should be at the top of the episode sources in the description. The first one is spokantribalnetwork.org the second link is too long to fully read, but it's for the Spokane Complex Wildfire Response Fund. I can't read out the whole URL, but it should be at the top of the sources in the description.

[Robert Evans]

We the News Reported we reported the news.

[Andy]

We reported the news.

[Robert Evans]

Hey, we'll be back Monday with more episodes every week from now until the heat death of the universe.

[Kevin Foster]

It Could Happen Here is a production

[Nick Turturro]

of Cool Zone Media.

[Kevin Foster]

For more podcasts from Cool Zone Media,

[Nick Turturro]

Visit our website coolzonemedia.com or check us

[Kevin Foster]

out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

[Nick Turturro]

You can now find sources for It

[Kevin Foster]

Could Happen here, listed directly in episode Descriptions.

[Nick Turturro]

Thanks for listening. This is an iHeart podcast.

[Kevin Foster]

Guaranteed Human.