September 29, 2025 • 15 mins
When Donald Trump took power, he promised retribution against his political opponents.
Now, he’s delivering - and he’s using the justice department to do it, with the US Attorney launching a two-count indictment against former FBI Director James Comey.
And it seems like that’s just the beginning.
The justice department has also been directed to investigate the Open Society Foundations, a group funded by the billionaire George Soros.
Today, former Human Rights Watch director and federal prosecutor Kenneth Roth on how Trump is eroding checks on presidential power, and the chilling effect it could have.
If you enjoy 7am, the best way you can support us is by making a contribution at 7ampodcast.com.au/support.
Socials: Stay in touch with us on Instagram
Guest: Former Human Rights Watch director Kenneth Roth
Photo: AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
When Donald Trump took power, he promised retribution against his
political opponents. Now he's delivering, and he's using the Justice
Department to do it, with the US Attorney launching a
two count indictment against former FBI director James Come last week.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
And it seems like that's just the beginning, not a.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
Less But I think there'll be others. I mean they're corrupt.
These were corrupt, radical up democrat.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
The Justice Department has also been directed to investigate the
Open Society Foundations, a group funded by the billionaire George Soros.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
I'm Ruby Jones, and you're listening to.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Seven AM today former Human Rights Watch director and federal
prosecutor Kenneth Roth on how Trump is eroding checks on
presidential power and the chilling effect it could have. It's Tuesday,
September thirty. So kenn Of, thank you so much for
(01:04):
speaking with me today. To begin with, you have known
George Soros for decades.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Can you tell me a bit about him and the
work that you've done with him.
Speaker 4 (01:12):
Well, I met him, I mean literally more than three
decades ago, when Human Rights Watch was a tiny organization.
This was early in his philanthropy and he was really
just exploring how we could make a difference. And you know,
we all know that his defense of human rights was
a huge part of his philanthropy. These were the earliest
days and he was just figuring it out. He grew
(01:34):
up as a young Jewish boy in Hungary under the Nazis,
and essentially his father saved the family. His father was
able to kind of maneuver get false documentation and ultimately
get the family out. So Sorrows grew up with a
deep appreciation of the evil the governments could do. But
(01:55):
you know, George Soros is known foremost for his financee
and seeing of small human rights pro democracy organizations. More broadly,
civil society. He really got started while the Soviet Union
still dominated Eastern Europe, and then with the fall of
the Soviet Union, he helped actively promote civil society in
(02:17):
the post Soviet countries, but then more broadly around the world.
And his idea was that you really needed to build
democracy from the bottom up. So he invested in education,
in journalism in various areas that would build a vibrant
civil society, and he felt that that was the best
foundation in which democracy could clourish.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
And late last week, the New York Times reported that
one of Trump's senior Justice Department officials has ordered an
investigation into the foundation that Soros started, so Open Society Foundations,
what are they saying about why they are doing that?
Speaker 4 (02:54):
Well? This was sparked by the assassination of Charlie Kirk,
which was very truma for people across the United States,
but particularly a lot of Trump's followers, and they were
quick to blame this on progressive groups that they say
promoted violence.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
These are professional agitators. These are bad people, and they've
paid a lot of money by rich people, some of
whom we know. I'm sure I know.
Speaker 4 (03:21):
So you know. Trump had named this group antifa, which
is a group that doesn't even exist. It's an anti
fascist name. But he very quickly identified Sorows and the
Open Society Foundations as a supposed promoter of political violence
antifas well.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
Soros is the name certainly that I keep hearing.
Speaker 5 (03:42):
I don't know, but Soros is the.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
Name that I hear.
Speaker 4 (03:45):
I hear a lot of different names.
Speaker 3 (03:46):
I hear names of some pretty rich people that are
radical love people.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
Trump's Justice Department is citing something called the Capital Research Center,
which seems to be some right wing group that is
put together this lengthy report looking at Soros grantees, and
it is filled with tangentious MacCarthy I had language making
these facile claims of political violence or support for terrorism,
(04:13):
which then in turn Sorrow's supposedly funded. Now this is crazy.
This is like the opposite of a Soro stands where
he's always promoted peaceful debate. You know, I've known the
guy for more than three decades. I've never seen a
hint of him being pro violence in any way. His
funding doesn't go in that direction. But Soros has always
been a bogeyman for the far right.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
And one of the examples that was given as to
why Open Society Foundations needs to be investigated was this group,
Al Hack, a group that the Foundation funds.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
Can you tell me a bit about them?
Speaker 4 (04:48):
Yes, I mean Al Hak is a group that I
have worked with literally for decades. It is the leading
Palestinian human rights group. It's based in Ramala in the
Occupied West Bank, and it is among the world's top
human rights organizations in terms of the solidity of its methodology.
It does very accurate, detailed investigations in difficult circumstances because
(05:11):
the Israeli government is doing everything it can to block
these kinds of investigations, but all Hak has field researchers,
both in the occupied West Bank and in Gaza, who
record Israeli abuse. Now, in twenty twenty one, the Israeli
government actually tarred Al Hac and five other Palestinian simple
society groups as supposed terrorists. Ironically, they didn't do anything
(05:34):
with it. They say you're a terrorist, but Al Hawk
still operates today, so they didn't entirely mean it. They
just used it to try to delegitimize the organization. And
Trump is now seized on that to say, aha, you know,
George Soros funded Al Haak. Al Haak is a terrorist group,
therefore George Soros must promote political violence. I mean, it's
that kind of false logic that is behind the nothingness
(05:56):
in these threats against sorrows. And I think because the
values that he promotes are antithetical to what an autocrat wants.
You know, autocrat wants to have a monopoly. And what's
understood is the truth. That's certainly Trump, who surrounds himself
with sycophans, who doesn't like anybody to criticize him, and
(06:18):
that's the opposite of George Soros. And so if you're
going to go after somebody who really represents the kind
of vibrant, free debate that terrifies an autocrat, you go
after George Soros.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
Coming up, how Donald Trump went after James Comy. Trump
is currently targeting several perceived enemies. Last week there was
the former FBI director James Comey, who was indicted on
(06:53):
Trump's directions. So tell me a bit about how Trump
is doing this.
Speaker 4 (06:58):
Well, me, prosecution is interesting because it just breaks all
the rules. And I see in this as a former
federal prosecutor myself. I spent four and a half years
in New York and also Washington as a prosecutor before
I went to Human Rights Watch. And prosecutors know that
they are supposed to follow the facts, follow the laws.
(07:19):
They're supposed to be independent of the president. And it's
just not done that the president would order the prosecution
of this or that person. That breaches every tradition of
an independent prosecutoral authority that exists in the United States.
But Trump has now, in the case of Komy, pressed
for prosecution of him for a statement he made five
(07:41):
years ago in testifying before Congress. It was such an
ambiguous statement, It was so unclear that it was even false,
which is what they're alleging, that the professional prosecutors refuse
to bring the charges.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
They are sick, radical left people and they can't get
away with it. They told me to me was one
of the people. He wasn't the biggest, but he's a
dirty cop. He's always been a dirty cop. Everybody do it.
Speaker 4 (08:07):
And so Trump put in one of his former lawyers
who had never handled a criminal case in her life,
and you know, within just a handful of days of
the statute limitations ending, she convinced a grandjury to bring
perjury charges against Kmy.
Speaker 5 (08:25):
My family and I have known for years that there
are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we
couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not
live on our knees, and you shouldn't either.
Speaker 4 (08:38):
So this is, you know, just an utter flouting of
the basic norms of justice. But it shows that Trump
is allowing his personal mendettas to proceed before everything else.
Because Comy was, you know, a man he hates. Because
Comy looked into the original allegations that the Russians manipulated
and helped to secure Trump's first electoral win for presidency.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
So just how much is what we're seeing now a
departure from what we have in the past and should
expect in democracies where there is supposed to be independence
between politicians and the legal system.
Speaker 4 (09:12):
Well, I should say, I mean, the American system is
a bit different. Prosecutors do report to the Attorney General,
who is a cabinet official who is appointed by the president,
and so as a legal matter, the president does have
the authority to order prosecutors to do things. It's just
not done. You know, never before have presidents exercised this
(09:34):
technical legal authority. They've always abided by the norms that
insist on on restraint and allowing prosecutors to do their job.
I mean, when I was a prosecutor, I never ever
got an order from above. It was understood that I
would just look at the facts, I would look at
the law, I would make independent judgments about what I
thought was the right thing to do, and that's how
(09:55):
prosecutors operate. Suddenly Trump is breaking those rules and the
White House deciding who gets prosecuted and who not, Which
is you know, incredibly dangerous because you know, Trump is
a very vindictive man, and he could just go after
anybody for anything. But you know, what I'm seeing right
now is a chilling effect. You know, for example, we're
(10:16):
seeing this around the International Criminal Court, which Trump has
imposed sanctions on because it had the audacity to charge
Israeli Prime Minister in Natanyahu and former Defense Minister Gland
for the war prime of starving Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
And because of these sanctions, a number of human rightscrips
(10:36):
are now worried. You know, what happens if we provide
investigative assistance to the court, What if we give them
our report about what Israel has done? You know, might
this get US prosecutor might this get us sanctions? So
I think that, you know, it's really that chilling effect
that is the principal consequence. Man. Right now, we haven't
yet seen you know, actual prosecutions. It's more threats of prosecutions.
(10:57):
But as we've seen the James Company, the traditional restraint
that presidents have shown not to meddle in prosecutor early matters,
it's just not there with Trump. So we have to
expect the worst. You know, He's just not going to
abide by any tradition. And if he has the legal
authority to order somebody to order a prosecutor to pursue
some enemy, he's going to do it.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
How worried are you about what this all says about
whether US is heading Well, what worries me is.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
That Trump is really implementing the autocrat's handbook. All the
autocrats do the same thing, which is to say, they
try to undercut the checks and balances on their executive power.
And you know, Trump has done this already by you know,
attacking judges, by attacking members of Congress. He's gotten a
number of media organizations to pay you know, multimillion dollar
(11:48):
fines to him and to cut deals. A number of universities,
you know, Columbia University, for example, has has cut a
deal costing them, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars
and subjecting them to ongoing over site by the government.
He's gone after law firms, and a number of the
law firms have been forced to cut deals otherwise they would,
you know, lose access to federal premises and the ability
(12:09):
to represent their clients. And so, having gone through you
know a number of these classic checks on the executive
he's now turning to civil side. But you know, for
everybody who capitulates, there are others who fight back. So
the good news is that, you know, unlike say, the
law firms in the United States, some of which you know,
broke ranks, had tried to cut deals with Trump, the
(12:32):
Progressive Foundations have banded together. They put out a statement
about a week ago saying, you know, we're not going
to subject or so, We're not going to submit to
Trump's divide and conquer strategy. We're going to mount a
common defense and if he comes after any of us,
we're all going to come to the assistance. And you know,
the other I guess good news is that he makes mistakes.
You know, he surrounds himself by singafanns, they don't question him.
(12:55):
He overreaches periodically, and so this is not the best
conceived plan, but it nonetheless is an autocratic path along
which Trump is traveling. I hope he gets stopped before
he gets to the end. I think he will. But
this is going to be about.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Well, can I thank you so much for your time,
thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
Also in the news today, Optus is investigating another failure
of its Triple zero system, the second in ten days.
The company said nine calls to Triple zero failed between
three am and twelve twenty pm on Sunday near Wollongong
and the New South Wales South Coast. All callers who
attempted to reach the emergency number are reportedly okay. Federal
(13:50):
Government Services Minister Katie Gallagher says the failure is disappointing,
while consumer groups have renewed calls for the government to
appoint an independent expert to monitor the system. To find
out more about the government's role in this listen to
our episode Labour's guilt in the Optus failure. It's in
our feed now and the Federal government will pay an
American private prisons operator one hundred and fifty seven million
(14:12):
dollars a year to run Australia's offshore Processing center in Naru,
after granting a two year extension to the company. MTC
Australia is a subsidiary of US based Management and Training Corporation,
which runs hundreds of for profit prisons in the US
and UK. With one hundred and five people being held
on Naru. Australian taxpayers will now pay one point five
(14:34):
million dollars.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Per detainee per year.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
MTC has been subject to several civil suits in the
US relating to security failures and gross negligence.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am. See you tomorrow
When Donald Trump took power, he promised retribution against his
political opponents. Now he's delivering, and he's using the Justice
Department to do it, with the US Attorney launching a
two count indictment against former FBI director James Come last week.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
And it seems like that's just the beginning, not a.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
Less But I think there'll be others. I mean they're corrupt.
These were corrupt, radical up democrat.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
The Justice Department has also been directed to investigate the
Open Society Foundations, a group funded by the billionaire George Soros.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
I'm Ruby Jones, and you're listening to.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Seven AM today former Human Rights Watch director and federal
prosecutor Kenneth Roth on how Trump is eroding checks on
presidential power and the chilling effect it could have. It's Tuesday,
September thirty. So kenn Of, thank you so much for
(01:04):
speaking with me today. To begin with, you have known
George Soros for decades.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Can you tell me a bit about him and the
work that you've done with him.
Speaker 4 (01:12):
Well, I met him, I mean literally more than three
decades ago, when Human Rights Watch was a tiny organization.
This was early in his philanthropy and he was really
just exploring how we could make a difference. And you know,
we all know that his defense of human rights was
a huge part of his philanthropy. These were the earliest
days and he was just figuring it out. He grew
(01:34):
up as a young Jewish boy in Hungary under the Nazis,
and essentially his father saved the family. His father was
able to kind of maneuver get false documentation and ultimately
get the family out. So Sorrows grew up with a
deep appreciation of the evil the governments could do. But
(01:55):
you know, George Soros is known foremost for his financee
and seeing of small human rights pro democracy organizations. More broadly,
civil society. He really got started while the Soviet Union
still dominated Eastern Europe, and then with the fall of
the Soviet Union, he helped actively promote civil society in
(02:17):
the post Soviet countries, but then more broadly around the world.
And his idea was that you really needed to build
democracy from the bottom up. So he invested in education,
in journalism in various areas that would build a vibrant
civil society, and he felt that that was the best
foundation in which democracy could clourish.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
And late last week, the New York Times reported that
one of Trump's senior Justice Department officials has ordered an
investigation into the foundation that Soros started, so Open Society Foundations,
what are they saying about why they are doing that?
Speaker 4 (02:54):
Well? This was sparked by the assassination of Charlie Kirk,
which was very truma for people across the United States,
but particularly a lot of Trump's followers, and they were
quick to blame this on progressive groups that they say
promoted violence.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
These are professional agitators. These are bad people, and they've
paid a lot of money by rich people, some of
whom we know. I'm sure I know.
Speaker 4 (03:21):
So you know. Trump had named this group antifa, which
is a group that doesn't even exist. It's an anti
fascist name. But he very quickly identified Sorows and the
Open Society Foundations as a supposed promoter of political violence
antifas well.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
Soros is the name certainly that I keep hearing.
Speaker 5 (03:42):
I don't know, but Soros is the.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
Name that I hear.
Speaker 4 (03:45):
I hear a lot of different names.
Speaker 3 (03:46):
I hear names of some pretty rich people that are
radical love people.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
Trump's Justice Department is citing something called the Capital Research Center,
which seems to be some right wing group that is
put together this lengthy report looking at Soros grantees, and
it is filled with tangentious MacCarthy I had language making
these facile claims of political violence or support for terrorism,
(04:13):
which then in turn Sorrow's supposedly funded. Now this is crazy.
This is like the opposite of a Soro stands where
he's always promoted peaceful debate. You know, I've known the
guy for more than three decades. I've never seen a
hint of him being pro violence in any way. His
funding doesn't go in that direction. But Soros has always
been a bogeyman for the far right.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
And one of the examples that was given as to
why Open Society Foundations needs to be investigated was this group,
Al Hack, a group that the Foundation funds.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
Can you tell me a bit about them?
Speaker 4 (04:48):
Yes, I mean Al Hak is a group that I
have worked with literally for decades. It is the leading
Palestinian human rights group. It's based in Ramala in the
Occupied West Bank, and it is among the world's top
human rights organizations in terms of the solidity of its methodology.
It does very accurate, detailed investigations in difficult circumstances because
(05:11):
the Israeli government is doing everything it can to block
these kinds of investigations, but all Hak has field researchers,
both in the occupied West Bank and in Gaza, who
record Israeli abuse. Now, in twenty twenty one, the Israeli
government actually tarred Al Hac and five other Palestinian simple
society groups as supposed terrorists. Ironically, they didn't do anything
(05:34):
with it. They say you're a terrorist, but Al Hawk
still operates today, so they didn't entirely mean it. They
just used it to try to delegitimize the organization. And
Trump is now seized on that to say, aha, you know,
George Soros funded Al Haak. Al Haak is a terrorist group,
therefore George Soros must promote political violence. I mean, it's
that kind of false logic that is behind the nothingness
(05:56):
in these threats against sorrows. And I think because the
values that he promotes are antithetical to what an autocrat wants.
You know, autocrat wants to have a monopoly. And what's
understood is the truth. That's certainly Trump, who surrounds himself
with sycophans, who doesn't like anybody to criticize him, and
(06:18):
that's the opposite of George Soros. And so if you're
going to go after somebody who really represents the kind
of vibrant, free debate that terrifies an autocrat, you go
after George Soros.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
Coming up, how Donald Trump went after James Comy. Trump
is currently targeting several perceived enemies. Last week there was
the former FBI director James Comey, who was indicted on
(06:53):
Trump's directions. So tell me a bit about how Trump
is doing this.
Speaker 4 (06:58):
Well, me, prosecution is interesting because it just breaks all
the rules. And I see in this as a former
federal prosecutor myself. I spent four and a half years
in New York and also Washington as a prosecutor before
I went to Human Rights Watch. And prosecutors know that
they are supposed to follow the facts, follow the laws.
(07:19):
They're supposed to be independent of the president. And it's
just not done that the president would order the prosecution
of this or that person. That breaches every tradition of
an independent prosecutoral authority that exists in the United States.
But Trump has now, in the case of Komy, pressed
for prosecution of him for a statement he made five
(07:41):
years ago in testifying before Congress. It was such an
ambiguous statement, It was so unclear that it was even false,
which is what they're alleging, that the professional prosecutors refuse
to bring the charges.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
They are sick, radical left people and they can't get
away with it. They told me to me was one
of the people. He wasn't the biggest, but he's a
dirty cop. He's always been a dirty cop. Everybody do it.
Speaker 4 (08:07):
And so Trump put in one of his former lawyers
who had never handled a criminal case in her life,
and you know, within just a handful of days of
the statute limitations ending, she convinced a grandjury to bring
perjury charges against Kmy.
Speaker 5 (08:25):
My family and I have known for years that there
are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we
couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not
live on our knees, and you shouldn't either.
Speaker 4 (08:38):
So this is, you know, just an utter flouting of
the basic norms of justice. But it shows that Trump
is allowing his personal mendettas to proceed before everything else.
Because Comy was, you know, a man he hates. Because
Comy looked into the original allegations that the Russians manipulated
and helped to secure Trump's first electoral win for presidency.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
So just how much is what we're seeing now a
departure from what we have in the past and should
expect in democracies where there is supposed to be independence
between politicians and the legal system.
Speaker 4 (09:12):
Well, I should say, I mean, the American system is
a bit different. Prosecutors do report to the Attorney General,
who is a cabinet official who is appointed by the president,
and so as a legal matter, the president does have
the authority to order prosecutors to do things. It's just
not done. You know, never before have presidents exercised this
(09:34):
technical legal authority. They've always abided by the norms that
insist on on restraint and allowing prosecutors to do their job.
I mean, when I was a prosecutor, I never ever
got an order from above. It was understood that I
would just look at the facts, I would look at
the law, I would make independent judgments about what I
thought was the right thing to do, and that's how
(09:55):
prosecutors operate. Suddenly Trump is breaking those rules and the
White House deciding who gets prosecuted and who not, Which
is you know, incredibly dangerous because you know, Trump is
a very vindictive man, and he could just go after
anybody for anything. But you know, what I'm seeing right
now is a chilling effect. You know, for example, we're
(10:16):
seeing this around the International Criminal Court, which Trump has
imposed sanctions on because it had the audacity to charge
Israeli Prime Minister in Natanyahu and former Defense Minister Gland
for the war prime of starving Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
And because of these sanctions, a number of human rightscrips
(10:36):
are now worried. You know, what happens if we provide
investigative assistance to the court, What if we give them
our report about what Israel has done? You know, might
this get US prosecutor might this get us sanctions? So
I think that, you know, it's really that chilling effect
that is the principal consequence. Man. Right now, we haven't
yet seen you know, actual prosecutions. It's more threats of prosecutions.
(10:57):
But as we've seen the James Company, the traditional restraint
that presidents have shown not to meddle in prosecutor early matters,
it's just not there with Trump. So we have to
expect the worst. You know, He's just not going to
abide by any tradition. And if he has the legal
authority to order somebody to order a prosecutor to pursue
some enemy, he's going to do it.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
How worried are you about what this all says about
whether US is heading Well, what worries me is.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
That Trump is really implementing the autocrat's handbook. All the
autocrats do the same thing, which is to say, they
try to undercut the checks and balances on their executive power.
And you know, Trump has done this already by you know,
attacking judges, by attacking members of Congress. He's gotten a
number of media organizations to pay you know, multimillion dollar
(11:48):
fines to him and to cut deals. A number of universities,
you know, Columbia University, for example, has has cut a
deal costing them, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars
and subjecting them to ongoing over site by the government.
He's gone after law firms, and a number of the
law firms have been forced to cut deals otherwise they would,
you know, lose access to federal premises and the ability
(12:09):
to represent their clients. And so, having gone through you
know a number of these classic checks on the executive
he's now turning to civil side. But you know, for
everybody who capitulates, there are others who fight back. So
the good news is that, you know, unlike say, the
law firms in the United States, some of which you know,
broke ranks, had tried to cut deals with Trump, the
(12:32):
Progressive Foundations have banded together. They put out a statement
about a week ago saying, you know, we're not going
to subject or so, We're not going to submit to
Trump's divide and conquer strategy. We're going to mount a
common defense and if he comes after any of us,
we're all going to come to the assistance. And you know,
the other I guess good news is that he makes mistakes.
You know, he surrounds himself by singafanns, they don't question him.
(12:55):
He overreaches periodically, and so this is not the best
conceived plan, but it nonetheless is an autocratic path along
which Trump is traveling. I hope he gets stopped before
he gets to the end. I think he will. But
this is going to be about.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Well, can I thank you so much for your time,
thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
Also in the news today, Optus is investigating another failure
of its Triple zero system, the second in ten days.
The company said nine calls to Triple zero failed between
three am and twelve twenty pm on Sunday near Wollongong
and the New South Wales South Coast. All callers who
attempted to reach the emergency number are reportedly okay. Federal
(13:50):
Government Services Minister Katie Gallagher says the failure is disappointing,
while consumer groups have renewed calls for the government to
appoint an independent expert to monitor the system. To find
out more about the government's role in this listen to
our episode Labour's guilt in the Optus failure. It's in
our feed now and the Federal government will pay an
American private prisons operator one hundred and fifty seven million
(14:12):
dollars a year to run Australia's offshore Processing center in Naru,
after granting a two year extension to the company. MTC
Australia is a subsidiary of US based Management and Training Corporation,
which runs hundreds of for profit prisons in the US
and UK. With one hundred and five people being held
on Naru. Australian taxpayers will now pay one point five
(14:34):
million dollars.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
Per detainee per year.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
MTC has been subject to several civil suits in the
US relating to security failures and gross negligence.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am. See you tomorrow
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.