Can you guys let us know how much we will be covering show to show? For example, show one covered part one of quiet American and show two covered parts 2-4. Would be great to get a heads up beforehand on how deep we should go each show.
I'll just get in a quickie for now...but before anyone starts on how visionary and prescient Orwell was, it is known that he had regular reports from his political network telling him of on-the-ground occurrences in the Eastern European Communist countries of that era.
He took those reports and spun a story out of them. An excellent story. But he did not have the crystal ball that so many readers assume. He was noting the patterns of totalitarianism, which repeat whenever/wherever it appears. In Orwell's day, or in ours.
Yes, and he was also generally describing the bleak conditions of post-war Britain.
Oddly enough, those conditions parallel the future laid out for us by all those galaxy brains at the WEF. (Well, other than being happy, I suppose.)
Agree on the pattern of totalitarianism. Much of that came from history, as well, with regard to the crushing of dissent in both post revolutionary Russia & Nazi Germany. I did love his futuristic touches, as well, like the large screens in everyone's living spaces, that were always on. Now we have people voluntarily installing listening devices in their homes, or carrying them around with them 24/7, so they can just yell out questions at them. Orwell did not see that coming!
Orwell was a socialist/communist. He served the Comintern in Spain. He was a propagandist.
He lived the communist hell. He never seems to have been to the USSR, but he saw exactly what it was to live under communism.
1984 was NOT a "prediction of the future," it was a description of Soviet 1948--transferred to England to make it more relatable to his English-speaking audience.
Orwell fought on the "Republican" side (actually Anarchist/Communist) in the Spanish Civil War--1936-37. He was there with pretty much all the English-speaking communists who later rose to prominence.
Orwell fell in with a non-Stalinist Spanish group, and saw what communism was all about.
That experience was the source of 1984. Written in 1948, he told the story of Stalin's communist totalitarian dictatorship--as he had lived it, and knew it.
"The revolution Orwell encountered in Barcelona was unique in European history. It had been initiated, in response to the fascist putsch, by the large Spanish anarchist movement (the C.N.T. (Confederación Nacional de Trabajadores) / F.A.I. (Federación Anarquista Ibérica — C.N.T./F.A.I. posters), with the support of an independent and anti-Stalinist Marxist party, the P.O.U.M. (Partido Obrero de Unificación Marxista — P.O.U.M. recruiting poster), in whose militia both Orwell and Milton had enlisted. It was a revolution organized from the bottom up, with worker and peasant collectives taking direct control of the Catalonian economy. It was also a process independent of the Spanish Communist Party, occurring without direction or support from Moscow. A revolution in marked contrast to the Soviet model, it incurred the deep enmity of Stalin, who moreover at that time was pursuing foreign policy aims that had no place for such an event.
"In Spain, therefore, Orwell and Milton found themselves in the heat of both battle and a sharp political struggle on the left. Behind the Republican lines, a kind of civil war within the Civil War was taking place, one which pitted anarchist and Marxist revolutionaries against Stalinist elements-including agents of the Comintern and Soviet security forces-who sought to stifle precisely those forces of the Spanish left that were not controlled by Moscow. Stalin was determined to curb the power of the anarchists and to destroy the P.O.U.M., which was branded as ‘Trotskyist’. In this, he had an ally in the Spanish republican government, whose own powers had been challenged by the revolutionary movement unleashed in July 1936."
The part where they deconstruct the “75th Anniversary Introduction” is gold. The utter lack of self-awareness required for someone to write that introduction and for the publisher to include it is staggering. As Matt and Walter pointed out, we are getting to the point where people cannot comprehend what they read anymore.
To give that intro more credit than I'm sure it deserves, it's just possible that the author's bizarre mention of "love and community" was referring to Winston's love for Julia. But since their love was a rebellion against the "community," I have no idea what he was trying to say.
Also, there's a film version of 1984 with John Hurt and Richard Burton which is well worth seeing.
It's coming off like you don't want the subscribers to have read the book beforehand. Matt, you asked Walter last show on Friday "Is it ok to reveal the next book?". Why the secrecy? I thought this was a type of "book club" which is a fantastic idea. I just wish you would reveal what book you are covering more than 2 or 3 days before you start talking about it.
Yup, and to be honest, I wouldn't mind 2 or 3 weeks. I just shelled out 81 cents(!) on "1984" for my Kindle thinking I'd have a couple of weeks to read it. Now I wish I'd bought "Catch-22" instead, as it's a book I've never read.
I'm honestly a bit baffled by the conversation so far (15 minutes in). While I have no love for Ukraine (or its leader) and don't want to see this escalate, all the talk comparing this to something like Pearl Harbor? The US wasn't at war when we were surprise attacked by the Japanese. Unless I've missed something, Ukraine and Russia have been at war. For years. This sort of action should totally be expected.
Ukraine is the "rogue nation" in this matter?
Recent "peace talks" have been met with escalation by Russia the very day they started, and now Ukraine as well.
I wish the US wasn't a part of this in any way, and maybe this will finally get us out of it.
Russia invaded and declared war on Ukraine. Ukraine hits military assets (not civilian) inside Russia. What part of the word “War” does this not fall under? This is the reality, in all its ugliness and suffering, of declaring war on a sovereign country.
For myself the fear "trigger" in the conversation seemed to be who provided the necessary aid and planning to allow the strike? Europe or a hidden pro war cabal of tax dollar guzzling financiers--who if I choose to believe the paranoid--have been responsible for every war since WWI and the rise of the one world tyranny now in the process of stripping free citizens of the world of their wealth and liberty. Exactly what is Lindsey Graham doing abroad? Is he--as TCN is reporting--telling European leaders and the Ukraine to ignore President Trump's attempts at a peace settlement and push ahead with the conflict? The DNC has certainly proven willing to undermine the Presidency and the Republic in the past. A major Orwell lesson is tyranny using manufactured war to hold a people in thrall to "national security" as an excuse to strip civil liberties and steal the labor and resources that should be building the prosperous nation all people deserve. Is American infrastructure in collapse, social/political institutions captured/hollowed out and the greatest upward transfer of wealth in human history still underway?
After the immensity of the LIE represented by the DNC it is easy to understand a Trump White House over correction. But like yourself--ATW or otherwise--in the face of the problems our Republic is undergoing the logic of the current political narrative completely eludes me. It is as if We the People don't exist at all. At present--ATW/RACKET and N.S. Lyons/UPHEAVAL are the only voices making sense. And Greenwald of course. The B.S. is knee deep and rising. So far it isn't radioactive.
I've resisted the idea that you two shill for Russia, and I won't go there now, but in this episode more than any other, y'all sound as legit as the Moscow Pravda.
Just over a week ago, Putin tarps Kyiv with ballistics, targeting civilian structures, and we get no more than a peep from either of you about it. Now, Ukraine (acting w/o US support - a major gripe from both Taibbi and Kirn) hits strategic military targets of an adversary who 1) invaded their country and 2) Trump himself has said *DOES NOT WANT TO END THE WAR,* and all you both can do is clutch pearls and cast stones? Not a single "attaboy"? C'mon man.
Between wishing Ukraine had better targets to bomb and Taibbi claiming Ukraine deserves what it has coming - with all due respect, fuck off with that. How about this instead: increase global sanctions against Russia now and maybe we can actually hold these imperial bastards to account for shitting on the pillars of peace and international stability. Would that really be so bad guys? Damn!
Orwell had a conflicting personality. He remained a Socialist to the end. Why? Like so many others, his excuse was that it had just not been attempted properly yet.
Although they are all some version of totalitarianism! Much like the relationship between the leftwing WOKE and the rightwing radical Islamists -- they will cooperate with one another when it suits the interest of both (as in attacking a joint scapegoat). But once the field is clear of all scapegoats, they turn on one another.
Orwell remained a socialist until his dying day. In his preface to Animal Farm he wrote that "for the past ten years I have been convinced that the demolition of the Soviet myth was essential if we wanted a revival of the Socialist movement."
In 1947, Orwell wrote "every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism as I understand it."
I think I misunderstood your comment "explain how wrong he was" as a positive spin on socialism/communism.
I guess the point is that he was a deluded socialist, who saw exactly what "democratic socialism" became, when applied (Stalinist USSR--Big Brother, etc), yet still professed his faith in the sordid belief system.
That's not my point. Orwell seems like a very undeluded person.
As far as socialism being a "sordid belief system" -- seems like the following countries are doing well: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, as well as Germany, France, and Belgium.
FDR's New Deal had a lot of socialism in it. That was back when the United States was considered a middle class country.
I guess you consider child labor laws and the 8 hour work-day to be sordid as well?
Orwell was "undeluded" when he actually experienced socialism. He lived a nearly fully socialist life when he joined the communist/anarchist militia in the Spanish Civil War.
He lived through, for a very short time, the Stalin/KGB actual socialism. He saw his friends and colleagues swept off the streets and disappear into "Big Brother's" maw, where they were tortured, interrogated, forced to confess, mutilated, and slaughtered.
That experience birthed "1984."
He got out from under Big Brother as quickly as possible, fleeing the socialist utopia of "Republican" Spain, back to the UK.
But he still maintained that he was a socialist--he was just an "anti-Stalinist" socialist. You'd think that seeing the end result of a socialist system, as he did in Spain, would open his eyes to reality. Instead, he continued to support socialism. This is delusional.
He wasn't alone--many other Brits of his time and class were also socialists, and a good number worked for Big Brother--the KGB--against their own country and system.
None of the Scandinavian countries are good examples of socialism. They are outliers and unique. Their (previously) monolithic ethnic/culture populations, sharing values, traditions, attitudes are impossible to replicate. In addition, their systems are actually crony capitalism with communitarian/nationalistic flavors. They also have hereditary monarchies, which are anathema in actual socialist systems.
I will always keep my sub and can disagree with people I like, but boy the Ukraine commentary is a tough listen for me.
Comparing this attack to Pearl Harbor?! US was in isolationist mode with only marginal involvement in ww2, when it was surprise attacked by a nation it was not at war with. Ukraine was attacked and is in an active war. These two situations are nothing alike.
Matt expressing moral outrage for the poor Russian parents that may have heard drones overhead while they hit military targets, and not a fucking word for all the civilians killed in bombings of Ukrainian cities or the Ukrainians children kidnapped and taken to Russia.
If I understand the Walter / Taibbi war philosophy, it’s that nukes can and should be wielded like swords, and countries should not get to defend themselves when a psycho mob boss talks about using them for what feels like the millionth fucking time in my life.
It’s one thing to view this objectively and come to a conclusion that this type of engagement is too dangerous. I disagree but can understand. What I hear from these two though seems to be that Russia, who started an unprovoked war that has killed hundreds of thousands, would be morally right to start bombing other neighbors and perhaps even using a nuke because of this “provocation”. That take is so fucked up it’s hard for me to comprehend.
Just caught the recent budget hearing on CISA funding, and honestly, it was eye-opening—but maybe not in the way you’d hope. The discussion focused on its reauthorization, the importance of information sharing between private and public sectors, cybersecurity threats, and privacy protections. Not a single mention was made of CISA’s involvement in content moderation or censorship, with the witnesses unanimously agreeing that the privacy protections had been successful and did not require changes in the reauthorization.
It almost felt like everyone was on board with fully funding CISA now and sorting out the controversies later—like signing the check first and reading the fine print after.
I’m really curious what Matt thinks about the budgeting process here. Does he see any real chance of CISA losing the funding that’s been set aside for its censorship activities, or is this just another case of business as usual in Washington?
Of course it’s business as usual. The Trump administration is going to use the same tactics that the Biden administration did. He’s already proven that he’s worse on free speech. Matt won’t look into it unless it’s a democrat doing it.
Another great episode of the best podcast on the internet! So many interesting insights… Please let us know what follows 1984 so that we can get a head start.
Yes, I would like to have a separate recording just for your 1984 discussion, because there are many on the left who still are interested in at least the academic discussion of dystopias and this could stir the pot.
Donald Trump, May 27, 2025 - "What Vladimir Putin doesn’t realize is that if it weren’t for me, lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia, and I mean REALLY BAD. He’s playing with fire!"
June 1, 2025 - Ukraine strikes Russia's nuclear strategic bombers.
June 2, 2025 - CBS reports "administration sources told CBS News on Sunday that the White House was not aware it was coming."
This is the exact game they were playing under the Biden admin when Ukraine invaded the Kursk region. Biden and the White House denied knowing about the operation before.
I would have liked to hear some discussion, at all, about what it means if Trump did in fact know about this attack and is lying, as he is known to do.
Can you guys let us know how much we will be covering show to show? For example, show one covered part one of quiet American and show two covered parts 2-4. Would be great to get a heads up beforehand on how deep we should go each show.
Very much seconding this. Would be great to know how much homework we need to do be prepared for class :)
Why do we always have to quantify everything? That's not life or human nature. Walter injects the ephemeral.
I'll just get in a quickie for now...but before anyone starts on how visionary and prescient Orwell was, it is known that he had regular reports from his political network telling him of on-the-ground occurrences in the Eastern European Communist countries of that era.
He took those reports and spun a story out of them. An excellent story. But he did not have the crystal ball that so many readers assume. He was noting the patterns of totalitarianism, which repeat whenever/wherever it appears. In Orwell's day, or in ours.
Yes, and he was also generally describing the bleak conditions of post-war Britain.
Oddly enough, those conditions parallel the future laid out for us by all those galaxy brains at the WEF. (Well, other than being happy, I suppose.)
Agree on the pattern of totalitarianism. Much of that came from history, as well, with regard to the crushing of dissent in both post revolutionary Russia & Nazi Germany. I did love his futuristic touches, as well, like the large screens in everyone's living spaces, that were always on. Now we have people voluntarily installing listening devices in their homes, or carrying them around with them 24/7, so they can just yell out questions at them. Orwell did not see that coming!
I still find it hard to believe that people attach themselves to cellphones the way they do. That habit hit so quickly!
I am reminded that Jake Tapper tried to excuse the media's negligence on Biden by saying that they "lacked the language" to describe his condition.
Thanks A! News to me Appreciate.
Orwell was a socialist/communist. He served the Comintern in Spain. He was a propagandist.
He lived the communist hell. He never seems to have been to the USSR, but he saw exactly what it was to live under communism.
1984 was NOT a "prediction of the future," it was a description of Soviet 1948--transferred to England to make it more relatable to his English-speaking audience.
He worked at the BBC during the war. Maybe it was a picture of England in 1948.
Orwell fought on the "Republican" side (actually Anarchist/Communist) in the Spanish Civil War--1936-37. He was there with pretty much all the English-speaking communists who later rose to prominence.
Orwell fell in with a non-Stalinist Spanish group, and saw what communism was all about.
That experience was the source of 1984. Written in 1948, he told the story of Stalin's communist totalitarian dictatorship--as he had lived it, and knew it.
"The revolution Orwell encountered in Barcelona was unique in European history. It had been initiated, in response to the fascist putsch, by the large Spanish anarchist movement (the C.N.T. (Confederación Nacional de Trabajadores) / F.A.I. (Federación Anarquista Ibérica — C.N.T./F.A.I. posters), with the support of an independent and anti-Stalinist Marxist party, the P.O.U.M. (Partido Obrero de Unificación Marxista — P.O.U.M. recruiting poster), in whose militia both Orwell and Milton had enlisted. It was a revolution organized from the bottom up, with worker and peasant collectives taking direct control of the Catalonian economy. It was also a process independent of the Spanish Communist Party, occurring without direction or support from Moscow. A revolution in marked contrast to the Soviet model, it incurred the deep enmity of Stalin, who moreover at that time was pursuing foreign policy aims that had no place for such an event.
"In Spain, therefore, Orwell and Milton found themselves in the heat of both battle and a sharp political struggle on the left. Behind the Republican lines, a kind of civil war within the Civil War was taking place, one which pitted anarchist and Marxist revolutionaries against Stalinist elements-including agents of the Comintern and Soviet security forces-who sought to stifle precisely those forces of the Spanish left that were not controlled by Moscow. Stalin was determined to curb the power of the anarchists and to destroy the P.O.U.M., which was branded as ‘Trotskyist’. In this, he had an ally in the Spanish republican government, whose own powers had been challenged by the revolutionary movement unleashed in July 1936."
https://www.orwell.ru/a_life/Spanish_War/english/e_harry
The part where they deconstruct the “75th Anniversary Introduction” is gold. The utter lack of self-awareness required for someone to write that introduction and for the publisher to include it is staggering. As Matt and Walter pointed out, we are getting to the point where people cannot comprehend what they read anymore.
To give that intro more credit than I'm sure it deserves, it's just possible that the author's bizarre mention of "love and community" was referring to Winston's love for Julia. But since their love was a rebellion against the "community," I have no idea what he was trying to say.
Also, there's a film version of 1984 with John Hurt and Richard Burton which is well worth seeing.
Well, the publisher had to appear "Woke" and include member of that tribe in order to toe the line with that segment of the readership
It's coming off like you don't want the subscribers to have read the book beforehand. Matt, you asked Walter last show on Friday "Is it ok to reveal the next book?". Why the secrecy? I thought this was a type of "book club" which is a fantastic idea. I just wish you would reveal what book you are covering more than 2 or 3 days before you start talking about it.
Yup, and to be honest, I wouldn't mind 2 or 3 weeks. I just shelled out 81 cents(!) on "1984" for my Kindle thinking I'd have a couple of weeks to read it. Now I wish I'd bought "Catch-22" instead, as it's a book I've never read.
Yes, they have completely botched this.
I'm honestly a bit baffled by the conversation so far (15 minutes in). While I have no love for Ukraine (or its leader) and don't want to see this escalate, all the talk comparing this to something like Pearl Harbor? The US wasn't at war when we were surprise attacked by the Japanese. Unless I've missed something, Ukraine and Russia have been at war. For years. This sort of action should totally be expected.
Ukraine is the "rogue nation" in this matter?
Recent "peace talks" have been met with escalation by Russia the very day they started, and now Ukraine as well.
I wish the US wasn't a part of this in any way, and maybe this will finally get us out of it.
I love ATW but am confused by their take on this.
Russia invaded and declared war on Ukraine. Ukraine hits military assets (not civilian) inside Russia. What part of the word “War” does this not fall under? This is the reality, in all its ugliness and suffering, of declaring war on a sovereign country.
For myself the fear "trigger" in the conversation seemed to be who provided the necessary aid and planning to allow the strike? Europe or a hidden pro war cabal of tax dollar guzzling financiers--who if I choose to believe the paranoid--have been responsible for every war since WWI and the rise of the one world tyranny now in the process of stripping free citizens of the world of their wealth and liberty. Exactly what is Lindsey Graham doing abroad? Is he--as TCN is reporting--telling European leaders and the Ukraine to ignore President Trump's attempts at a peace settlement and push ahead with the conflict? The DNC has certainly proven willing to undermine the Presidency and the Republic in the past. A major Orwell lesson is tyranny using manufactured war to hold a people in thrall to "national security" as an excuse to strip civil liberties and steal the labor and resources that should be building the prosperous nation all people deserve. Is American infrastructure in collapse, social/political institutions captured/hollowed out and the greatest upward transfer of wealth in human history still underway?
After the immensity of the LIE represented by the DNC it is easy to understand a Trump White House over correction. But like yourself--ATW or otherwise--in the face of the problems our Republic is undergoing the logic of the current political narrative completely eludes me. It is as if We the People don't exist at all. At present--ATW/RACKET and N.S. Lyons/UPHEAVAL are the only voices making sense. And Greenwald of course. The B.S. is knee deep and rising. So far it isn't radioactive.
Omg I can’t with these guys … Ukraine is the rogue nation ?
Would be much appreciated to have longer that a week to get through the books!
Yes!
There is no way I can read this in a week -- and I'm retired.
I've resisted the idea that you two shill for Russia, and I won't go there now, but in this episode more than any other, y'all sound as legit as the Moscow Pravda.
Just over a week ago, Putin tarps Kyiv with ballistics, targeting civilian structures, and we get no more than a peep from either of you about it. Now, Ukraine (acting w/o US support - a major gripe from both Taibbi and Kirn) hits strategic military targets of an adversary who 1) invaded their country and 2) Trump himself has said *DOES NOT WANT TO END THE WAR,* and all you both can do is clutch pearls and cast stones? Not a single "attaboy"? C'mon man.
Between wishing Ukraine had better targets to bomb and Taibbi claiming Ukraine deserves what it has coming - with all due respect, fuck off with that. How about this instead: increase global sanctions against Russia now and maybe we can actually hold these imperial bastards to account for shitting on the pillars of peace and international stability. Would that really be so bad guys? Damn!
Orwell had a conflicting personality. He remained a Socialist to the end. Why? Like so many others, his excuse was that it had just not been attempted properly yet.
They all say that, don't they?
It was well known in the first half of the 20th century that the biggest acrimony was between the socialists and the communists!
Although they are all some version of totalitarianism! Much like the relationship between the leftwing WOKE and the rightwing radical Islamists -- they will cooperate with one another when it suits the interest of both (as in attacking a joint scapegoat). But once the field is clear of all scapegoats, they turn on one another.
If only you had been around back then, you could have explained to Orwell how wrong he was. lol
The evidence was all around Orwell, "back then." He lived it. He saw the horrors of socialist/communist rule.
What point are you trying to make?
Orwell remained a socialist until his dying day. In his preface to Animal Farm he wrote that "for the past ten years I have been convinced that the demolition of the Soviet myth was essential if we wanted a revival of the Socialist movement."
In 1947, Orwell wrote "every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism as I understand it."
Excellent summary of Orwell's attitude.
I think I misunderstood your comment "explain how wrong he was" as a positive spin on socialism/communism.
I guess the point is that he was a deluded socialist, who saw exactly what "democratic socialism" became, when applied (Stalinist USSR--Big Brother, etc), yet still professed his faith in the sordid belief system.
That's not my point. Orwell seems like a very undeluded person.
As far as socialism being a "sordid belief system" -- seems like the following countries are doing well: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, as well as Germany, France, and Belgium.
FDR's New Deal had a lot of socialism in it. That was back when the United States was considered a middle class country.
I guess you consider child labor laws and the 8 hour work-day to be sordid as well?
Orwell was "undeluded" when he actually experienced socialism. He lived a nearly fully socialist life when he joined the communist/anarchist militia in the Spanish Civil War.
He lived through, for a very short time, the Stalin/KGB actual socialism. He saw his friends and colleagues swept off the streets and disappear into "Big Brother's" maw, where they were tortured, interrogated, forced to confess, mutilated, and slaughtered.
That experience birthed "1984."
He got out from under Big Brother as quickly as possible, fleeing the socialist utopia of "Republican" Spain, back to the UK.
But he still maintained that he was a socialist--he was just an "anti-Stalinist" socialist. You'd think that seeing the end result of a socialist system, as he did in Spain, would open his eyes to reality. Instead, he continued to support socialism. This is delusional.
He wasn't alone--many other Brits of his time and class were also socialists, and a good number worked for Big Brother--the KGB--against their own country and system.
None of the Scandinavian countries are good examples of socialism. They are outliers and unique. Their (previously) monolithic ethnic/culture populations, sharing values, traditions, attitudes are impossible to replicate. In addition, their systems are actually crony capitalism with communitarian/nationalistic flavors. They also have hereditary monarchies, which are anathema in actual socialist systems.
I will always keep my sub and can disagree with people I like, but boy the Ukraine commentary is a tough listen for me.
Comparing this attack to Pearl Harbor?! US was in isolationist mode with only marginal involvement in ww2, when it was surprise attacked by a nation it was not at war with. Ukraine was attacked and is in an active war. These two situations are nothing alike.
Matt expressing moral outrage for the poor Russian parents that may have heard drones overhead while they hit military targets, and not a fucking word for all the civilians killed in bombings of Ukrainian cities or the Ukrainians children kidnapped and taken to Russia.
If I understand the Walter / Taibbi war philosophy, it’s that nukes can and should be wielded like swords, and countries should not get to defend themselves when a psycho mob boss talks about using them for what feels like the millionth fucking time in my life.
It’s one thing to view this objectively and come to a conclusion that this type of engagement is too dangerous. I disagree but can understand. What I hear from these two though seems to be that Russia, who started an unprovoked war that has killed hundreds of thousands, would be morally right to start bombing other neighbors and perhaps even using a nuke because of this “provocation”. That take is so fucked up it’s hard for me to comprehend.
Astounding eh?
Just caught the recent budget hearing on CISA funding, and honestly, it was eye-opening—but maybe not in the way you’d hope. The discussion focused on its reauthorization, the importance of information sharing between private and public sectors, cybersecurity threats, and privacy protections. Not a single mention was made of CISA’s involvement in content moderation or censorship, with the witnesses unanimously agreeing that the privacy protections had been successful and did not require changes in the reauthorization.
It almost felt like everyone was on board with fully funding CISA now and sorting out the controversies later—like signing the check first and reading the fine print after.
I’m really curious what Matt thinks about the budgeting process here. Does he see any real chance of CISA losing the funding that’s been set aside for its censorship activities, or is this just another case of business as usual in Washington?
Of course it’s business as usual. The Trump administration is going to use the same tactics that the Biden administration did. He’s already proven that he’s worse on free speech. Matt won’t look into it unless it’s a democrat doing it.
Sounds a lot like the whole "Pass the Big Beautiful Bill now (despite all the crap in it), & we'll iron out all the problems later. Trust us, bro!"
Let me try and help here gents…
Putin was offered obscenely favorable terms to end the conflict. Putin spit in the face of these offers(and Trump)
The gloves are off. The dogs let loose from the leash.
Now Vladimir comes to the table with the fresh taste of actual pain, which he has been inexplicably excused from since the outset.
DC has been extraordinarily patient and deferential. Russia has squandered that opportunity. It is no more.
Seems like exactly this^^^
I really loved the discussion of 1984. I reread it during the pandemic, as many of us have. So your observations fell on fertile ground. Thank you.
Another great episode of the best podcast on the internet! So many interesting insights… Please let us know what follows 1984 so that we can get a head start.
Great job! Your analysis is very unique. Glad you're back.
Would you please include the recording in your subscriber feed, so I don't have to go to YouTube.
Yes, I would like to have a separate recording just for your 1984 discussion, because there are many on the left who still are interested in at least the academic discussion of dystopias and this could stir the pot.
Donald Trump, May 27, 2025 - "What Vladimir Putin doesn’t realize is that if it weren’t for me, lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia, and I mean REALLY BAD. He’s playing with fire!"
June 1, 2025 - Ukraine strikes Russia's nuclear strategic bombers.
June 2, 2025 - CBS reports "administration sources told CBS News on Sunday that the White House was not aware it was coming."
This is the exact game they were playing under the Biden admin when Ukraine invaded the Kursk region. Biden and the White House denied knowing about the operation before.
I would have liked to hear some discussion, at all, about what it means if Trump did in fact know about this attack and is lying, as he is known to do.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.