← UNBIASED Politics
UNBIASED Politics
UNBIASED Politics (1/9/25): LA Sees Mass Destruction. What Went Wrong? PLUS Trump Wants to Take Back Panama Canal, Buy Greenland, and Add Canada to the US; Laken Riley Act, HR7, and More.
00:41:32
Loading summary
Transcript3 lines
- [00:00]
A
This episode is brought to you by Cozy earth. Going into 2025, I have a few top New Year's resolutions, things that I just really want to be better with in the New year. And one of those things is sleep. And I'll tell you why. I have noticed such a difference in my work product on days where I'm well rested versus days I didn't get. You know, I didn't sleep well the night before. Overall, I just have more motivation to put out good episodes. My story selection's better, I research better, my work product is just overall better. And my number one tip to better sleep is the she that you sleep on. I didn't start investing in my sheets until recently and it's been an absolute game changer sleep wise. And I know it's not just me because I've heard from so many of you that you purchased Cozy Earth sheets using my code and you're just as in love as I am. If you want to get the same sheets I have, I have Cozy Earth's bamboo sheet set. They are so incredibly soft and breathable. Not only do they have this cooling effect, but I swear it's like they get softer with every wash. So so visit cozyearth.comunbiased and use my exclusive 40% off code unbiased. Cozy EarthBetting also has a 100 night sleep trial and a 10 year warranty, so you really can't go wrong again. Head to cozyearth.comunbiased and get 40% off with my code Unbiased. If you get a post purchase survey, say you heard about Cozy Earth from this podcast. A better year starts with better sleep. Wrap yourself in cozier. Welcome back to Unbiased, your favorite source of unbiased news and legal analysis. Welcome back to Unbiased. Today is Thursday, January 9th. Let's talk about some news. But first, I want to start this episode by sending love to everyone impacted by the fires in Los Angeles. By now, I'm sure we've all heard at least the general gist of what's going on, but thousands of people have have lost their homes, their businesses, their livelihoods, and many, many more have been forced to evacuate. There are currently five separate fires and it just absolutely breaks my heart to the firefighters and the other first responders who are quite literally putting their own lives at risk to save the livelihoods of others. Thank you. You truly are some of the bravest people on this planet and we are standing with you in gratitude and solidarity. I have a lot of listeners in the Los Angeles area. And there's a good chance that some of you were either directly impacted by this fire or have a loved one that was. And I just want to speak to you right now when I tell you that I am so sorry and I'm thinking of you. I know that there are no words that you know can make this situation better, but I hope it at least helps a little bit to know that you are in my thoughts. For those that are not aware of the details surrounding these fires, let's talk about it so this is going to be the first story of the day. As I said, there are currently five fires burning throughout Los Angeles. The Palisades Fire, the Eaton Fire, the Hearst Fire, the Lydia Fire and the Sunset Fire. Of the five, the Palisades Fire is the biggest and the most destructive in LA county history and it's also expected to be the costliest fire in U.S. history. The Palisades fire is 0% contained at this point. The only two fires that are somewhat contained are the Hearst fire which is currently about 10% contained, and the Lydia fire which is about 60% contained. Those are the two most northern fires. The other three so the Palisades Fire, the Sunset Fire and the Eaton fire are 0% contained at this point. The Palisades Fire has burned roughly 17,000 acres. The Sunset Fire, which is the smallest of the five, has burned roughly 43 acres and the Eaton Fire, which is the 6 second largest, has burned roughly 11,000 acres. Now there are a lot of factors that play into why these fires start and continue to grow at incredibly fast rates. First of all, dry weather, low humidity. Combine that with strong winds and you have a recipe for disaster. Yesterday wind gusts were reaching 80 miles per hour, though as of this morning winds have significantly died down. There is also a lot of brush in these areas and on one hand the brush has not been cleared in decades. But all also last year LA recorded the highest rainfall in a two year time span. What that means is that once all of that rain stopped and the dry conditions came about, there was even more vegetation for these fires to feed on. On top of all of this though, in addition to the weather related conditions, California and LA specifically have some other issues. The LA Fire Department received a budget cut of about $17.5 million in June, which is about a 2% decrease from the previous year's budget. And I know there's been some controversy on social media over whether the LAFD actually saw a budget cut or whether it actually saw a budget increase. So let's Go over the numbers. In June, LA's mayor signed the City of LA's budget for the 20242025 fiscal year. The LAFD total budget was 819,637,000. During the prior fiscal year, the LAFD total budget was 837,191,000. That means that the budget cut from the prior fiscal year to this fiscal year was about $17.5 million. The LA Department that saw a budget increase was the LAPD, not the LAFD. So just weeks ago, on December 17th, the LA Fire Chief sent a report to the city regarding the budget cut. And the report says in part, quote, the LAFD is facing unprecedented operational challenges due to the elimination of critical civilian positions and a $7 million reduction in overtime variable staffing hours. The reduction in V hours has severely limited the Department's capacity to prepare for, train for and respond to large scale emergencies, including wildfires, end quote. One unit that was particularly impacted was the Disaster Response Section which oversees the Department's heavy equipment used during disasters. And the report says, quote, V hours fund heavy equipment operators who make fire control lines around wildland fires, manage firefighting robotics, wildland fire road maintenance, post fire demolition services and other all hazard emergency services. Ultimately, loss of funding impairs the Department's ability to mitigate wildland fires and other hazards effectively, end quote. Now, despite that report, the LA Mayor, Karen Bass, has said that she is confident that the budget cuts did not have an impact on the LAFD's response to the wildfires this week. Another issue in California is the lack of adequate reservoirs. In 2014, California introduced Prop 1, which dedicated $2.7 billion for investments in water storage projects. The program was intended to either expand existing reservoirs, increase groundwater storage, or build surface storage facilities in seven different locations across California. Ten years later, not one of those projects has been completed while construction has begun in two locations. Completion of those first two projects is not scheduled until 2027 and 2028. The last of the projects is scheduled to finish in 2032. This to say that despite Prop 1 being introduced in 2014, the Water Storage projects have yet to come to fruition. Of the reservoirs that do exist, many were not adequately filled and firefighters ran out of water in the fire hydrants pretty early on. This actually started within the first day or day and a half of the Palisades fire. As of today, though, officials are saying that they have, quote, worked around some mitigations and that the water system is starting to stabilize, end quote. But Aside from the factors that led to this devastating destruction, there's another component that not many outside of California are thinking about, and that is the insurance of it all. So, according to the most recent data from the California Department of insurance, between 2020 and 2022 insurance companies declined to renew 2.8 million homeowner policies in the state. That includes 531,000 in LA County. Insurance companies in California have been refusing to write new policies in areas that they consider to be at high risk for wildfires. And with the rising threat, these companies are pulling back on offering coverage in many areas. In fact, in the area hit hardest by the fires, the Pacific Palisades State Farm just last year canceled 69% of its policies there. So to try to solve this problem, California set up a plan called the California Fair Plan, which was meant to be a last resort for California residents, but has seen demand skyrocket because of the lack of insurance or coverage from private insurers. To illustrate the demand, the Fair Plan's exposure for dwellings as of September was up 61% to $458 billion from just a year earlier and triple where it stood only four years ago. Its exposure for commercial policies has risen even faster, nearly doubling to 26.6 billion as of September, and up 464% in the last four years. The issue with fare policies, though, is that they have higher premiums than traditional private insurance and less coverage. So homeowners are either just simply going without fire insurance, whether by choice or because they were dropped by their insurer, or buying into this California Fair plan and often having to buy additional coverage, what's called wraparound coverage, at an even higher cost. Now, a couple of weeks ago, the California Department of Insurance announced new regulations to try to give California homeowners that are in high risk areas an alternative to California Fair. And the regulations essentially require that insurers must write policies in fire prone areas equal to at least 85% of their market share throughout the state. Also, insurance companies can now factor in the cost of reinsurance policies as part of their rate calculation. So reinsurance policies are policies that the insurance company policies that the insurance company will buy from other firms to spread their risk. California was the only state that did not allow the cost of reinsurance to be part of the rate calculations. So these new regulations change that. But what that means, of course, is higher rates. And given the fact that these new regulations were only announced a couple of weeks ago, the effects have not yet been seen by California residents. And all of this is not even mentioning that if you have homeowners insurance that covers fires and you lost your home insurance does not just replace your belongings and your home next week. As an attorney, I actually practiced in insurance defense. I know how these insurance companies work. Anyone who has ever filed a homeowner's claim with their insurance company can definitely understand this. The insurance companies do not make it easy. And when you take into account the fact that it's not just one house fire, right, you literally have neighbor, entire neighborhoods and an entire city that were burnt to the ground, it just makes the situation so much worse. So the entire situation is just, it's really not a good one. As far as the economic impact, an initial estimate from AccuWeather puts the total cost between 52 billion and 57 billion, which makes it the most expensive fire event in history. But those numbers are likely to go up even further once all of the damage is assessed. Now, one last note I'll make about what's going on in LA right now. There are unfortunately some bad actors out there that like to prey on the misfortunes of other people. And at least 20 people have been arrested for looting or similar crimes in evacuation zones. Criminals and thieves know that these people are not going to be home because they have been evacuated and they take advantage of of the situation. So to the people of la, I am thinking of you. I am so sorry for what you're going through and all I can say is that I, I hope the situation starts to improve immediately. There is no easy way to transition from that story, so let's just move along. Police say that the man behind the Tesla cybertruck explosion in Las Vegas on New year's day used ChatGPT to plan the attack. As many of you probably know, on Wednesday, January 1st, a Cybertruck exploded just outside outside the entrance of the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas. Shortly after the driver of that cybertruck fatally shot himself. The explosion injured several people standing nearby and the driver has since been identified as 37 year old Matthew Leibelberger. Leibelberger was an army veteran who served in Afghanistan and was in the elite special forces for 18 years. Most recently, Leibelberger was listed as a remote and autonomous systems manager for the army and was stationed in Germany, but was on leave in Colorado Springs when he left for Nevada sometime after Christmas. According to his wife, Lelsberger behavior changed after he returned from a tour in the Middle east suffering from a traumatic brain injury in 2019. And in the days leading up to the attack, it is reported that Leibelberger and his wife had gotten into an argument and he left their home the day after Christmas. On December 29, he reportedly got in touch with an old girlfriend. Out of the blue, he texted her, quote, I rented a cyber truck. It's the shit. I feel like Batman or Halo. Three days later is when he shot himself and set off the explosion outside of Trump International Hotel. The incident is still under investigation, but at this point, police are saying that Leibelberger used the AI platform, ChatGPT to plan the attack. Investigations into Leibelberger's ChatGPT searches indicate he was specifically looking for information on explosive targets, the speed at which certain rounds of ammunition would travel, and whether fireworks were legal in Arizona. Kevin McMahon McMahell, Sheriff of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, said at a news conference on Tuesday, quote, I think this is the first incident on US Soil or chatgpt is utilized to help an individual build a particular device. So absolutely it is a concerning moment for us. End quote. Authorities also said they discovered a six page document which they have not released publicly because some of that material may be classified information and they're currently working with the Department of Defense to make that determination. However, Sheriff McMahell did read some of the excerpts found on Leibelberger's phone, which read in part, quote, this was not a terrorist attack, it was a wake up call. Americans only pay attention to spectacles and violence. What better way to get my point across than a stunt with fireworks and explosives? Why did I personally do it now? I needed to cleanse my mind of the brothers I've lost and relieve myself of the burden of the lives I took. End quote. Let's take a quick break here. When we come back, we will get into a lot more. I am so excited to have Charlotte Tilbury as a sponsor of today's episode because so many of you have asked me for a makeup tutorial over the years and while that's not my typical content, now I can actually let you in on some of my favorites. So I use the Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Flawless Filter. It's one of her most popular products, but I use it as a base layer under my foundation and it gives my skin a really nice glowy look while also blurring and smoothing, which I'm all about. Another thing I love about it too is that it's skin care infused, which means it's super hydrating. Also, a lot of people ask what products I use on my lips. That would be Charlotte Tilbury's Lip Cheat Lip Liner in Shade Pillow Talk, but I actually outline my lips in the shade Mi Kiss, which is a little darker, and then fill them in with pillow talk. Charlotte Tilbury is performance you can trust. It's legendary for a reason. You can use code Connecticut podcast 15 for 15 off on Charlotte tilbury.com plus new account holders get free delivery. Again, that's code CT podcast 15 for 15 off on Charlotte Tilbury.com this ad is brought to you by Charlotte Tilbury USA customers only and valid until March 2, 2025. For full terms and conditions and exclusions, see the Charlotte Tilbury website. This episode is brought to you by Redfin. One of my favorite things to do, seriously, since I was like 8 years old, is look at homes and apart apartments that are for sale or for rent around the country. Just for fun. In fact, just last week I was looking at homes outside of Nashville, Tennessee and apartments in Austin, Texas. Why? Because it's fun and I just choose random locations. I love seeing what new apartment buildings look like, how they're being designed, what amenities they have nowadays, because these amenities are getting out of control. And then for houses, I personally love finding houses that have architectural character. A ton of bedrooms, a big yard, maybe even a hidden slide that takes you down to the basement. You know, all the things I have dreamed about having since I was a kid. The Redfin app makes it fun to search for homes and apartments in your neighborhood and beyond. And if you're not just daydreaming like me, but you find a place that you love, Redfin makes it easy to go see it in person. Just schedule a tour right from the app. Plus, if you're looking to sell, Redfin agents know how to get you the best price possible for your home. That's because they close twice as many deals as other agents, and with a listing fee as low as 1%. Redfin's fees are half of what others often charge, which means that you'll have more money to put towards your next home. Download the Redfin app to get started. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, has decided to follow in the footsteps of X and replace its platform fact checkers with a user based system known as Community notes. So in 2016, Meta launched its initial fact checking system, which worked by running information on its platforms through independent third party fact checkers. These fact checkers were certified through what's called the International Fact Checking Network, and in working with Meta, they were tasked with reviewing and rating the accuracy of stories and content. Each time a fact checker rated a piece of content as false, Meta would do three things to that content. One Meta would significantly reduce the content's distribution so that fewer people would see it 2 meta would notify people who previously shared that content that the information is false and 3 meta would apply a warning label to the content that links to the fact checker's article disproving the content's claims. What's interesting about this is that on one of Meta's older blog posts about how these third party fact checkers work, Meta wrote in bold font quote, we know this program is working and people find value in the warning screens we apply to content after a fact checking partner has rated it. We surveyed people who had seen these warning screens on platform and found that 74% of people thought they saw the right amount or were open to seeing more false information labels, with 63% of people thinking they were applied fairly, end quote. But Meta has now significantly changed its tune. So in a statement on Tuesday, Meta wrote quote, experts like everyone else have their own biases and perspectives. This showed up in the choices some made about what to fact check and how over time we ended up with too much content being fact checked that people would understand to be legitimate political speech and debate. Our system then attached real consequences in the form of intrusive labels and reduced distribution. A program intended to inform too often became a tool to censor, end quote. So in its effort to move away from its fact checking tool, Meta is implementing a few changes. Number one, it's switching to a Community Notes model like the one that X uses. So instead of using third party experts to fact check content, the Community Notes model has been designed to utilize input from Meta users with a range of perspectives to help prevent biased ratings. Meta itself won't write community notes or decide which ones show up. Instead, the notes will be written and rated by contributing users. And instead of overlaying full screen false information warnings, Meta will use a quote unquote less obtrusive label indicating that there's additional information available for those who want to see it. The next change announced by Meta is that it will be limiting the processes where content gets removed. So previously Meta used automated systems to take down content violating guidelines. But they have since found that up to 20% of the content was taken down by mistake, which Meta says contributes to censorship on the platform. Meta announced that they will now only use these automated systems for illegal and high severity violations like terrorism, child sexual exploitation, drugs, fraud and scams, but for less severe policy violations, another user must report an issue before Meta takes any action. Now, Meta didn't specify what less severe policy violations are, so we don't really know what that means. However, Meta did also write, quote, we're getting rid of a number of restrictions on topics like immigration, gender identity and gender that are the subject of frequent political discourse and debate. It's not right that things can be said on TV or the floor of Congress, but not on our platforms, end quote. And then the third and final change announced by Meta is how political content will be treated on the platform. Since 2021, Meta has worked to reduce the political content that people saw, but as Meta says, this was a pretty blunt approach. Meta writes, quote, we're going to start treating civic content from people and pages you follow on Facebook and presumably Instagram more like any other content in your feed. And we will start ranking and showing you that content based on explicit signals like liking a piece of content, and implicit signals like simply viewing the content that help us predict what's meaningful to people. We are also going to recommend more political content based on these personalized signals and are expanding the options people have to control how much of this content they see, end quote. Moving on earlier this week at Donald Trump's pre inauguration press conference, he made a few statements that prompted many of you to write in and ask that I provide some clarity. So let's clear up the three comments that have garnered the most virality. First, Trump said that he would rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. This prompted Mexico's president to then suggest renaming the United States Mexicana America. Obviously, that suggestion was a little more facetious than Trump's suggestion. But let's answer the question you've all been asking, which is can Trump change the name? The answer is that he can try, and so can you. Actually, any US Citizen, including Trump, obviously can propose a new name to the US Board on Geographic Names or the bgn, but you have to provide a compelling reason to change it. The BGN will then make a decision. Once tribal, county and local governments, as well as state geographic names authority and appropriate land management agencies have had the opportunity to provide recommendations of their own, the BGN will take into consideration two main criteria. So they'll look at widespread use of a different name and historical or cultural concerns. So is the new name already commonly used by the public, and is the original name inaccurate, or can it be viewed as derogatory or offensive? If the BGN ultimately recommends the change, then it's up to the Secretary of the Interior, not the president, to issue the final approval. The other option is Congress drafting a bill and getting it signed into law. In fact, after Trump's remarks, Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene said on a podcast that she was so fired up watching the press conference that she told her staff to immediately draft the legislation. Now, that's not to say that when and if the bill is drafted and introduced, it will pass. After all, it would still have to clear the Senate's 60 vote filibuster threshold. But who knows? Notably, if the name is ultimately changed, other countries would not have to recognize the change. It would only apply to the United States. The next comment that Trump made was about taking control of Greenland and the Panama Canal. He said we need both for economic security. So Greenland has been part of denmark for roughly 600 years, though it did achieve self rule status in 2009. Trump's comments about needing Greenland for national security likely stem from the fact that Greenland is home to a large US Military base and Greenland's location between Russia, Europe and the US Is advantageous for trade and defense purposes. Now. Trump also said he wanted to purchase Greenland during his first administration, but Greenland wasn't into it then. And still to this day, Greenland's prime minister says the island is not for sale. As far as the Panama Canal goes, Panama has had full control of the Panama Canal since 1999. President Jimmy Carter signed a treaty in 1977 which guaranteed that Panama would regain control of the Panama Canal after 1999, and at that point the US would cease to control the canal for the first time since 1903. Trump claims that this was one of the biggest mistakes that President Carter made and that we need to take it back since China now controls the canal. This is a claim that the Panama Canal Authority chief denies. Since Trump's remarks, Panama's president has continued to affirm that the canal is theirs. Now, assuming that the President of Panama was to reverse course and was willing to give up the control of the canal, returning control to the US Would likely require a new treaty. Now, when it came time for questioning, Trump was asked whether he could assure the world that he would not use military or economic coercion in reference to his comments about gaining control of the Panama Canal and Greenland, and Trump responded that he could not provide that assurance. The third remark prompting questions is Trump's comment about Canada becoming the 51st state. So at Tuesday's conference, Trump was asked if he was serious about making Canada the 51st state, and in another question, if he would be willing to use military force to obtain Canada. He assured reporters that he would not use military force but would consider economic force such as tariffs and importing less from Canada. He said the US doesn't really need Canadian imports anyway. Canadian leadership, though, has continuously stated that they are not interested in joining the United States and would work against it. Now, what's interesting here. So Politico did a little analysis about Canada becoming the 51st state state, and I wanted to share it with you. It's a little bit of a brain jog. What this analysis found is that one of the immediate political implications of Canada becoming part of the US Is that the Democrats would benefit significantly. That's because Canada is a much more liberal country than the U.S. but let's look at it a bit deeper. Canada would essentially be a massive blue state in the United States. That would add a couple of blue seats to the Senate, about a dozen blue seats to the House, and create a large Democratic advantage in the Electoral College. And Politico ran the following numbers. So in the Senate, each state always gets two seats. So that would be two blue states for Canada. That wouldn't really change things. It would just kind of shrink the current Republican majority by a little bit. The breakdown would be 53 Republicans and 49 Democrats. Currently, there are 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats in the House. That's where it gets a little interesting. If the house stayed at 435 seats, reapportionment would give Canada 45 seats. And what that means is 31 states would lose seats to Canada. California would lose six, Texas would lose four, Florida would lose three, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania and North Carolina would each lose two, and about a dozen other states would lose one seat. Now, because of redistricting, it's impossible to know which seats would flip red to blue or would just stay blue. And also, yes, most of Canada's seats would be blue, but not every single one of them. So we don't know exactly how adding Canada as the 51st state would modify the current congressional makeup. But it's certainly interesting to think about. As for the Electoral College, with Canada's hypothetical 47 electoral votes, assuming those votes would be Democrat, Democrats would go into an election with 253seats. Republicans would have 202, and there would be 85 up for grabs. The Democratic nominee would need just 18 electoral votes to get to 271, which 271 would be the new winning threshold. With Canada as part of the US that would require a minimum of just two battleground seats for Democrats, while Republicans would need to win at least five. Now, again, the odds of Canada actually joining the United states as the 51st state. It's not going to happen, but things like this just kind of get the brain going. All right, let's take our second break of the day. When we come back, we are going to talk about two highly requested stories out of Congress, plus some quick hitters. Today's episode is sponsored by Acorns. Acorns is a financial wellness app that makes it easy to start saving and investing for your future. You don't need to be an expert. Acorns will recommend a diversified portfolio that matches you and your money goals. You don't need to be rich. Acorns lets you start with the spare money you've got right now, even if all you've got is spare change. So a few years ago I found myself in a pretty tough spot financially. I had to quit my job as a lawyer. I started a company on my own and I got to a point where I depleted my entire savings account trying to get that company off the ground. After feeling what that felt like, I told myself I would never let myself feel that again. And I knew that one of the ways I could avoid that feeling was by investing my money. Something my dad has actually preached to me since I was a little girl. But at the time I didn't have much, so I wasn't sure I could even start investing. I always thought you had to have a big bank account to start, but to my surprise, I happily learned that wasn't the case. Sign up now and join the over 13 million all time customers who have already saved and invested over $22 billion with Acorns. Head to acorns.comunbiased or download the Acorns app to get started. Paid non client endorsement compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns tier 1 compensation provided investing involves risk. Acorns Advertisers LLC and SEC registered investment advisor few important disclosures@acorns.com unbiased dear old work platform.
- [31:37]
B
It's not you, it's us. Actually, it is you. Endless onboarding, constant IT bottlenecks. We've had enough. We need a platform that just gets us. And to be honest, we've met someone new. They're called Monday.com and it was love at first onboarding their beautiful dashbo the customizable workflows got us floating on a digital cloud nine so no hard feelings, but we're moving on. Monday.com, the first work platform you'll love to use.
- [32:06]
A
Moving on to some news out of Congress. The House passed the Lake and Riley act on Tuesday, which will now be voted on in the Senate. The Lake and Riley act is of course named after the 22 year old Georgia Nursing school student who was tragically murdered by a Venezuelan immigrant living in the country illegally. So let's talk a little bit about what this law says. First and foremost, the general gist is that it lays the groundwork for when the Attorney General is required to detain aliens. And just a quick note here. I'm using the word aliens because that is the word the bill uses. I know some people take issue with that word, but aliens is the word used throughout the entirety of the bill. And just so we're all on the same page, the federal definition of the word alien is an individual who does not have U.S. citizenship and is not a U.S. national. The reason that this bill focuses on detention of aliens is because Lake and Riley's murderer, Jose Ibarra, was previously charged with crimes in New York City and Athens, Georgia. Instead of detaining him, then Ibarra was released and was able to go ahead and kill Lake and Riley. So the whole purpose of this law is to say that when an alien commits certain crimes, they must be detained. Per the text of this bill, the Attorney General would be required to detain any alien who is inadmissible in the United States, either because they're present in the United States without being admitted or paroled, they failed to attend a removal proceeding, or because they lack the proper documentation and is charged with, arrested for, convicted of, admits having committed or admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of either burglary, theft, larceny or shoplifting. So it's not necessarily violent crimes. Again, the crimes listed are burglary, theft, larceny and shoplifting. The bill then says that the Secretary of Homeland Security shall issue a detainer for said alien and if that alien is not otherwise detained by federal, state or local officials, DHS shall effectively and expeditiously take custody of the alien. Furthermore, states are allowed to sue the Attorney General or Secretary of Homeland Security if they do not abide by these requirements and they either fail to detain said alien or after detainment make the decision to release. Those lawsuits are permissible so long as the failure to act results in some sort of harm to the state or its residents. So the bill passed the house on a 264 to 159 vote and as I stated, it will now head to the Senate, which will take up the issue tomorrow. Staying on the topic of Congress, a few of you wrote into Me wanting me to Discuss House Resolution 7, which is titled recognizing the importance to access to comprehensive, high quality life affirming medical care for women of all ages. At the outset, I want to highlight the fact that this is a resolution, this is not a bill. A simple resolution merely expresses the opinion of a chamber of Congress, in this case the House. Whereas a bill is a piece of legislation signed off on by the president and it's enacted as a law of this country, a simple resolution simply requires the simple majority of whatever chamber is introducing the resolution, whereas a bill requires the simple majority of both chambers of Congress plus the president's signature. Nonetheless, the resolution, if passed, would affirm the House of Representatives support for, quote, women nationwide to have access to comprehensive, convenient, compassionate, life affirming, high quality health care and recognizes the high standards established by Pro Women's Healthcare Centers consortium as standards worth implementing nationwide. End quote. So the next obvious question is what are Pro Women's healthcare centers, or PWHCs? PWHCs are part of the pro life movement and they take an approach to medical management for women which quote, counters the push for abortion. So these centers care for women in ways that do not include providing abortions. These centers provide women with clothing, food, housing, baby needs. They provide counseling services and perinatal hospice and infant loss support, abortion, healing well, woman exams like cervical, cervical cancer screenings, STD testings, mammograms, prenatal care, so pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, miscarriage support kits, abortion pill reversals, pap smears, things like that. They also provide postpartum checkups and fertility education as well as infertility consultation. So in short, PWHCs are centers that provide women medical care for just about everything except abortions. So again, to be clear, this resolution, if passed, would say that the House of Representatives supports pwhcs and recognizes that the standards of care established by pwhcs are standards worth implementing nationwide. But this is not a law. This does not apply to anyone in the US this does not create new standards for anyone in the U. S or any health facility in the US this simply expresses an opinion of the House of Representatives. And now let's finish with some quick hitters. President Jimmy Carter was honored today at a state funeral at Washington National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. carter was the 39th president who died on December 29 at 100 years old. President Biden delivered the eulogy, but President George W. Bush, President Obama and President Elect Trump were also in attendance, marking the first time all living presidents were in the same room since 2018. When they were all together for the funeral of President George H.W. bush. Meanwhile, yesterday, while President Carter was lying in state at the Capitol, a man carrying a machete and three other knives was arrested trying to enter the Capitol building. 44 year old Mel Horn of Washington, D.C. entered the north doors of the Capitol Visitor center, but was stopped at security when officers spotted the machete in his bag during his screening. Officers then located three other knives and he was arrested on multiple counts of carrying a dangerous weapon. Two of the 37 federal death row inmates whose sentences were commuted to life in prison without parole last month by President Biden have rejected clemency. Shannon Agofsky and Len Davis are refusing to sign their paperwork and requesting a federal court block the change to their sentences. They argue that accepting their commutations would remove the heightened scrutiny that death penalty appeals receive. In other words, if they stay on death row, their appeals will be looked at with a closer eye than they would be if they were serving life sentences and they are constitutionally entitled to that heightened scrutiny. Agofsky is on death row for murdering an Oklahoma bank president in 1989 before stealing $71,000 from the bank. He was originally sentenced to life in prison, but was later convicted of killing a fellow inmate by stomping him to death and was sentenced to death as a result. As for Davis, Davis was found guilty in 1994 for murdering Kim Groves, a woman who had filed a complaint against him as a police officer on allegations that he beat a teenager in her neighborhood. So for both of those individuals, it'll now be up to the court to determine whether they will remain on death row. New York's highest court rejected Trump's request to postpone tomorrow's sentencing date in the falsification of business records case. That means tomorrow's sentencing will go forward, but as we discussed, the judge will not sentence Trump to any jail time, probation or issue any fines. Instead, Trump will receive a sentence of unconditional discharge, which means the conviction will remain on his record, but he won't receive any punishment. Trump likely won't be present at tomorrow's hearing either, because the judge did say that he didn't have to be. And Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, is facing a lawsuit from his sister Ann, accusing him of repeatedly sexually abusing her when she was a minor. Now 31 years old, Ann Altman says the abuse started when she was three years old and that the abuse included her brother performing sex acts on her, including rape, sexual assault, molestation, sodomy and battery. Ann Altman has made similar claims on social media for years, but Sam Altman has denied these claims. In a statement posted to X, Sam wrote on behalf of himself, his mom and his two younger brothers. That statement details alleged mental health challenges that Annie suffers and that the Altman family has tried to support her in many ways over the years, including by getting her medical help, paying her bills, providing her with monthly financial support, helping her find employment opportunities, and offering to buy her a house through a trust. He says that despite this, Annie continues to demand more money and has made hurtful and entirely untrue claims about the entire family, but especially Sam. The family asks for compassion and understanding as they figure out how to navigate this situation. And finally, CNN is on trial this week after it was accused of defaming a Navy veteran involved in rescuing Afghans when the U. S withdrew in 2021. Zachary Young is blaming CNN for destroying his business when the network displayed his face on screen during a story that discussed a black market in smuggling out Afghans for high fees. At the time of the Taliban takeover, Young was in the business of helping organizations like Audible and Bloomberg get more than a dozen people out of Afghanistan. However, he says when CNN showed his picture as part of a CNN story that talked about a black market where Afghans were being charged $10,000 or more to get family members out of danger, it crippled his business. Young says that the segment implied some sort of criminality when he was doing nothing wrong and never took money from any Afghans. Instead, he would seek out sponsors and raise money to get Afghans out. CNN has defended its side by saying Young's case merely amounts to defamation by implication and that Young had never been accused of nefarious acts. That is what I have for you today. I know I didn't do rumor has it this week, but that's only because I opted to address the rumors within each story. So the most requested rumors this week had to do with Trump's comments about Panama, Greenland and Canada, and then also whether the LAFD did in fact see a budget cut or a budget increase this fiscal year. So I address both of those within the stories. Thank you for being here. As always. Have a great weekend and I will talk to you on Monday.