5-10-25 The Weekend Hour 3: The EU Is Financing Russia’s War Against Ukraine. Why Are We Tolerating That?

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Goo night.

Speaker 2 (00:01):
Michael Brown joins me here the former FEMA director talk
show host Michael Brown.

Speaker 1 (00:04):
Brownie, No, Brownie, You're doing a heck of a job.
The Weekend with Michael Brown broadcasting life from Denver, Colorado.
It's the Weekend with Michael Brown. Gad you tuned in
to date. I really do appreciate it. If you want
to engage with the program, easiest way to do that
is to send me a text message. On your message
at the number is three three one zero three three

(00:24):
three one zero three, use a keyword Mike or Michael.
You can tell me anything or ask me anything. And
if you want to engage on social media, while you
can find me on X, Facebook, Instagram, all of them.
The place I'm probably the most active is on X
and my handle there is at Michael Brown USA at
Michael Brown USA. So go give me a follow. During

(00:48):
the weekday program this week, I forget. It's probably in
the context of talking about climate change or climate policies,
I said something to the effect out how transportation was
so important and that cars represented freedom, our freedom to

(01:11):
I can choose when I want to leave where I
want to go. To some degree, I can choose how
fast I want to get from point A to point B,
depending on the route I take, depending on whether I
might be willing to maybe exceed to speed limit a
little bit, and I can determine when I want to

(01:35):
leave and go back to wherever I came from. And
I went on and on them because I really do
believe that the invention of the automobile freed Americans and
then freed the world to travel, and that travel again,
you think about an airline. An airline is subject to

(01:57):
a schedule, right, So if I want to fly from
Denver to Los Angeles, I've got to pick a flight
that corresponds as close as possible to first the day
that I want to leave. Are the flights available, and
what time of day do I want to leave? And
are flights available they are convenient to when I want

(02:19):
to leave? And does that correspond to the time that
I need to arrive at Lax or John Wayne or
wherever I'm want to land. So airlines, while they give
me freedom of travel, are more limited now the airline
makes it more efficient. Maybe in terms of expense, I'd
have to go do a calculation. But if time is money,

(02:43):
the flight from let's say Denver International to LAX is
going to be more cost effective because it's going to
give me there faster than if I leave here and
jump in the cars trick driving to LA. The automobile
gives me flexibility. I'm talking about that. During the weekday program,

(03:03):
we do what are called talkbacks. And if you've ever
listened on the iHeart app, you know that there's a
little red microphone that you can touch and you can
leave a talkback. Well, we haven't incorporated that into this program,
but we may sometime in the future. But I got
a talk back from a listener. She happened to be
a friend of mine by the name M. Kathleen, and
she made a great point, and the point was our

(03:26):
not only are automobiles the you know, give us this
great freedom, but they're the great equalizer because anyone, assuming
of course, you're going to afford even a beat up car,
doesn't make any difference. As long as the car is
operable and you can get you from point A to

(03:47):
point B, does it really make any difference whether you're
driving a Bentley or you know, or a Mercedes Benz
or you're driving an old beat up car that you bought,
you got for five hundred dollars. I remember when I
was going to law school. I forget it was a
I don't remember the making model of the car. But
someone at where I was doing an internship, somebody at

(04:12):
City Hall had an old car. There was a little
sports car is like a Ford Pinto or something something
like that that they were willing to sell me for
five hundred bucks. And I bought it only because I
needed transportation. You know, my wife and I were young kids.
I needed a car that could reliably get me from
home to law school, which was about, oh probably you know,

(04:35):
a thirty minute drive away, and get me back and forth.
So for five hundred dollars, that allowed me to get
my legal education without having to pack up and you know,
the wife and at that time one kid too closer
to the law school. It was wonderful. I love that
little old car. Pile my law books in my notebooks

(04:56):
and everything, and boom, off we go. Well, Kathleen was right.
It's the great equalizer. It allows people, assuming again you
can afford even a cheap old car, to get a job,
go to work. Move you find that where you live

(05:17):
it's hard to find a job. Well, save up enough money,
get a cheap car, drive to a nearby state where
the job markets better. It's the great equalizer. And just
that one talk back made me start thinking about cars
and transportation. Rob Henderson is famous for coining the phrase

(05:44):
luxury beliefs. Think about that. What's a luxury belief? That's
an opinion that somebody has which they believe is unshakably
held regardless of any countervailing evidence, either because the display
of an opinion, that opinion confers status on the holder

(06:06):
of that opinion, or else because adherence to that opinion
is an article of faith among you know, some social
or professional group in which you need to be seen
to belong. Luxury beliefs. It's, you know, such beliefs are
probably closer to religious creeds than any you know, than

(06:29):
to any conventionally formed opinion. Consequently, any contradiction of a
luxury belief, of such accepted belief, any contradiction of that
in public, however smart, however intelligent, however actually correct, is
treated as heretical. It might be a social gaff at best,

(06:52):
or it could actually end your career. Luxury beliefs. Somebody
told me one time they had an idea to host
a conference where the speakers and the attendees had all
recently retired. Now, why would you do that? Well, when

(07:15):
you think about it, it's kind of brilliant because the
idea was pretty simple that the speakers, in particular the
speakers freed from any obligation whatsoever to repeat the usual
platitudes or to repeat the company line, or to talk
about whatever mantra that you know, the company had. You know,

(07:37):
you see all of these You see all these posters
in some companies about you know, how how to attain
excellence and excellence is wonderful, and you know or what
your mission statement is, We're gonna treat everybody as best
we can. We're gonna treat everybody's equals and blah blah
blah blah blah. That's a bunch of bull crap. I mean,
there's some truth to it, but it's there are platitudes. Well,

(07:59):
if you took a tiree and had them speak, you
would theoretically get them to say what was truly on
their minds rather than just repeating the company line. This
this person had the idea too, don't pay the speakers.

(08:20):
But and I find this kind of funny. Hold this
kind of conference on a cruise ship, which you know
is going to attract you know, anybody over the age
of sixty or sixty five and so all the but
the boomers are going to show up, and the boomers
are going to tell you what they really believe. Well,
you don't need to put me on a cruise ship.
I might be, okay, boomer, I might be a boomer,

(08:40):
but I'm really going to tell you what I really believe. Well,
there's a guy by the name of David Metz. David
mets has written a book called Travel Fast or Smart,
A Manifesto for an Intelligent Transport Policy. Go google it
it mets Travel Fast or Smart, a Manifesto for an

(09:03):
Intelligent Transport Policy. It's a pretty fabulous polemic written after
he had left his job as a chief scientist at
the Department Transportation. And it's really kind of a revelation
because what becomes clear is that in policy circles, Well,

(09:25):
let me just back up before the genesis or the
theory of the book. You know that in our society
this is really true in Denver, probably true where you
live too. Cars are anathema to the members of the

(09:45):
Church of the Climate activists because oh, they represent everything wrong, unless,
of course, happens to be an electric vehicle. Then all
you've done is you've moved your emissions from the tailpipe
to where the power spread us and suddenly you've reached
the holy grail? Have we really what about the truth

(10:07):
about cars? It's the Beacon with Michael Brown texts. Your question,
your comments to this number three three ones zvil three.
Use the keyword Mike or Michael. Hmm. What can we
learn from this book? That's next? Hey, welcome back to

(10:28):
the Weekend with Michael Brown. Glad to have you with me.
I appreciate you tuning in. Be sure and follow me
on x at Michael Brown USA. So back to Mets' book,
Travel Fast or Smart, a Manifesto for an Intelligent Transport Policy.
Now I've not read the book. I've only read different
reviews and summaries of the book. But it really is

(10:48):
a revelation, but not in the way that you think
it's a revelation, because what becomes clear in his book
is that he's clearly a member of the Church of
the Climate activists. Because it is it is impossible, and
particularly reading this book or the reviews of the book,
I should say you cannot express any opinion which is

(11:13):
pro car or in favor of road building. The only
approved vision of the future based on this book, which
I think is him speaking his truth, is taking getting
is getting people out of their cars and cramming them
into mass transit, which is obvious nonsense. I think the

(11:39):
trains and buses are fine for very specific journeys for
if you live and particularly in highly dense urban areas.
It's you know what when when you grow up in
a rural area like Idea, where you know, Oklahoma City

(12:03):
was two hundred and sixty some miles from my little
hometown and Denver was two hundred and sixty some miles
from my hometown, which is out It was out in
Olklamba Panhandle, where the local news didn't come from Oklahoma.
The local news came from Texas and Kansas. That's how
isolated a little rural town that it was. Well, mass

(12:28):
transit makes zero sense out there actually, and even in
places like Denver, which is highly spread out, makes very
little sense. But if your objective is to get people
out of cars and get them into mass transit, well
that becomes the preferred ideology. Not based on rationality, but

(12:50):
based on ideology, and it becomes absolute nonsense, because trains
and buses are fine, as I said, for very specific journeys,
but for the overwhelming number of journeys that you and Mike,
you and I make on a day to day basis,
the car is either irreplaceable or it's supreme. If it's raining,

(13:13):
if you got luggage, you got kids, think about that.
If you want to transport anything heavier than a suitcase,
if you want to travel at an unusual time or
anywhere remotely rural, the car or the van wins hands down. Now,
when I was on the East Coast, when I was
serving as the under secretary, I love the trains. If

(13:37):
I had to go to New York or Boston or
Philadelphia or Pittsburgh, well maybe not so much Pittsburgh, but
if I had to go anywhere in that kind of circle,
I jump on the ESLA, which is an Amtrak train.
Oh it's our I use air quotes here, it's our
high speed rail. But I just found it easier just
to be able to go to Union Station. My security
detail would just take me to Union Station in DC,

(14:00):
and if the train left at eleven o five am,
we could walk literally onto the train at eleven oh
four am and just work our way to our seats
and sit down, and then I could open my laptop
and do work as we made our high speed which
was always funny trip to New York or Boston wherever
we were going. So I love I love the train

(14:21):
in that regard. But if I want to make a
train trip from here to La no, not so much. So.
I like trains that recognize the limitation of trains. Now,
if I'm in Europe, oh, it's wonderful London to Paris
high speed rail, Yes, Or if you've ever been in Japan,

(14:44):
the Shinkins and trains, oh my gosh, that's truly high
speed rail. High speed rail mostly connects places where land
is already expensive, and high speed rail or mass transit
takes you from land that has already expended other land
that is already expensive. It is funeling people into areas

(15:07):
which are already comparatively rich. Roads, by contrast, are centrifugal.
They disperse people their money, adding value to the land
that was cheap beforehand. If you can capture the increased
value of newly accessible land, for instance, by selling planning permissions,
it becomes possible for government to build roads for free
while reducing the housing shortage by building roads. But go

(15:33):
back to the book, he explains that expenditures on transport
infrastructure is not based on land value. Instead, it's accounted
for by a fatuous model of time saving. This has
the unfortunate side effect of valuing the time of rich
people more highly than that of poorer people. Because when

(15:57):
my cap when my friend Kathleen talked about the Great Equalizer,
it reminded me of a message I received again on
the local program, because we were berating how badly our
mass transit in color rad It was called RTD, the
Regional Transportation District, and it sucks. It sucks big time.

(16:18):
I had a message from a listener who talked about
how she had to travel from the northern suburbs to
her job. That seemed to me to be somewhere in
in Denver, but I'm not quite sure where. But for
her to be able to do it and to do
it reliably, she was commuting in excess of two hours
one way, four hours a day. Now she couldn't afford

(16:41):
a car, so this was their only mode of transportation. Now,
what I wanted to do was start to go fund
me and get her one thousand dollars to go buy
a car so she could drive. But I'm not sure
that she had the money to be able to sustain
the operation of the car. But that makes my point
about Autumnalis being the great equalizer. If she could afford

(17:03):
the car, she could cut her commute time probably by
seventy five percent, and not only that, her valued tie
could be spent more productively, perhaps even on a second
job or doing something to take care of her children
or our household, whatever it might be. The point is,

(17:28):
I think if this country embarked on a large program
of road building, it would actually feed economic growth. Yet
we're being told daily that we've got to which is
happening in Denver all the time. Let's reduce a we
have a main road in Denver, Broadway Broadway. Let's reduce

(17:50):
that from you know, three lanes each direction to one
lane each direction and make the others bike lanes or
bus lanes make it more difficult for people to get
to work. We're doing it back ass word, cars indeed
are the great equalizer. It's the weekend of Michael Brown texts.
The keyword Michael Michael to three to three Wednesday ro three.
Be right back tonight. Michael Brown joins me here, the

(18:19):
former FEMA director of.

Speaker 3 (18:20):
Talk show host Michael Brown. Brownie, no, Brownie, You're doing
a heck of a job the Weekend with Michael Brown.

Speaker 1 (18:26):
So, speaking of cars, welcome back to the Weekend of
Michael Brown. Let's talk about fossil fuels for a minute.
A little arithmetic. The Center for Research on Energy and
Clean Air the CREA calculated that in the third year

(18:47):
of Russia's war against Ukraine, the European Union has actually
paid more money to Russia for oil and natural gas
for fossil fuels that it has given to Ukraine in
military aid. So what's the conclusion from that? That means

(19:10):
that europe is funding both sides of the war. You know,
we recently saw the effects of the European Union's push
for green new energy the blackouts in Spain and Portugal
when suddenly the demand for power outstripped that which solar
and wind could provide. So it caused a glitch in

(19:31):
the grid and suddenly got blackouts through Spain and Portugal,
proving that the absence of reliable baseline power from either
fossil fuels or nuclear reactors is a recipe for a disaster. Well,
then that led to calculations, well, where is Europe getting

(19:52):
the fossil fuels that they are using now that they
recognize that, Oh, we really can't rely on these green energies,
these clean energies. Oh, they're getting it from Russia despite
our sanctions. Now let me repeat that again. The EU
paid more money to Russia for fossil fuels than the

(20:14):
EU gave to Ukraine in aid. So they are indeed
funding both sides of the war. So whenever they talk
about solidarity, you tell them to screw off. Russell's the
home of the EU, the capital of the EU, has
indulged in fifteen rounds of sanctions. They got funnel ops

(20:35):
all the time with the Zelenski, and they engage in
rhetorical condemnations of Putin's aggression all the time. Yet beneath
all those that facade is a deeper, ugly inertia. The EU,
through its insatiable appetite for Russian energy, continues to send
Moscow millions of euros euros that are quickly transubstantiated into bullets, drones,

(20:59):
artillery sit because that's why Russia. That's how Russia is
funding the war. It's another thing to quietly hand him
the means of destruction while you're decrying his tyranny. Talk
about two faced. In the fiscal year twenty twenty four
to twenty twenty five, the EU imported about twenty one

(21:21):
point nine euro billion dollars worth of fossil fuels from Russia,
and those imports were not static. They expanded. Russian pipeline gas,
notably through turk Stream, grew about twenty one percent year
over year, told me about six point two billion euros.
Liquefied natural gas from Russia added another seven billion euros

(21:42):
to the Kremlin's coffers, with those volumes up about nine percent.
Even nations that are presumed to be stalwart in the
cause of Ukraine were some of the worst enablers. France
increased its Russian legy imports by forty six percent, the
Netherlands by eighty one percent. Now that's the cumulative impact

(22:05):
is not just material. There's a moral impact of that too.
By contrast, financial aid from EU to the Ukraine in
that same period to today put eighteen point seven billion euros.
Now that's not insignificant, but it's certainly less than the
sum paid to Russia for fossil fuels. In other words,

(22:26):
Europe gave the arsonist more money than they gave the
firefighters to put out the fire. So this supposed ethical
posture of the EU, it's declarations of their stalwart support
of democracy and liberty, it falls apart completely under the
weight of this economic complicity. Now, to be fair, to

(22:50):
be objective, Europe's dependency on Russian energy did not materialize
just out of thin air. It is the result of
decades of their policy misjudgments, of decades of appeasement, and
I would argue self inflicted strategic vulnerability. What matters now

(23:14):
is not how Europe arrived at this juncture, but that
it remains unwilling to get out of it. The report
from the CREA, the report from the Center for Research
on Energy and Clean Air, identifies not merely the existence

(23:35):
of trade, but the persistence of act even growing commerce
with Russia in sectors that are directly linked to Kremlin revenues.
Does anybody ever remember in Trump's first term when he
went to the United Nations and he was laughed at
for saying that the German delegation laughed at him when

(23:59):
he's said.

Speaker 3 (24:00):
This, Germany will become totally dependent on Russian energy if
it does not immediately change course. Here in the Western Hemisphere.
We are committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment

(24:21):
of expansionist foreign powers. It has been the formal policy
of our country since president.

Speaker 1 (24:29):
I love that SoundBite because and you can find it.
It's Bloomberg has a TikTok has it. It's probably on
YouTube too, But they cut away to the German delegation
and they're smiling and laughing and kind of mocking him
for even saying it. Uh, remember this one, not quite

(24:52):
as funny, but nonetheless as poignant.

Speaker 2 (24:55):
Well, I have to say, I think it's very said.
Why he makes a massive oil and gas deal with
Russia where you're supposed to be guarding against Russia, and
Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars
a year to Russia. So we're protecting Germany, We're protecting France,
we're protecting all of these countries. And then numerous of

(25:17):
the countries go out and make a pipeline deal with
Russia where they're paying billions of dollars into the coffers
of Russia. So we're supposed to protect you against Russia.
But they're paying billions of dollars to Russia. And I
think that's very appropriate. And the former Chancellor of Germany
is the head of the pipeline company that's applying the gas.

(25:39):
Is ultimately Germany will have almost seventy percent of their
country controlled by Russia with natural gas. So you tell
me is that appropriate. I mean, we might been complaining
about this from the time I got it. It should
have never been allowed to have happened. But Germany is
totally controlled by Russia because they were getting from six

(26:00):
extend the seventy percent of their energy from Russia and
a new pipeline. And you tell me if that's appropriate,
because I think it's not, and I think it's a
very bad thing for NATO, and I don't think it
should have happened.

Speaker 3 (26:12):
Now if you look at it.

Speaker 2 (26:14):
Germany is a captive of Russia because they suppled, they
got rid of their call lens, they got rid of
their nuclears, They're getting so much of the oil and
gas from Russians. I think it's something that NATO has
to look at. I think it's very inappropriate. You and
I agree that it's inappropriate.

Speaker 1 (26:31):
The NATO reps sitting at the table as Trump speaks
truth to them, they're stone cold faced, speechless. They don't
know what to say. Again, the cria's analysis shows that
the EU, along with all the other G seven partners,

(26:53):
has also indirectly sustained Russian revenues through the importation of
refine petroleum products, but this time from India and Turkey's
refineries that are using Russian crude oil. Those laundered imports
are valued about eighteen billion euros, of which half nine
billion euros came from Russian origin crude. So these refined

(27:18):
products that get rebranded as non Russian are the diplomatic
equivalent of a fig leaf. The substance remains the same
even if the labels change. It's money laundering, except its
oil and gas laundry. The Russian governments proved pretty adept
at exploiting those loopholes. They got the shadow tankers operating

(27:41):
in murky legland maritime gray zones. According to Again, to
the CIA, sixty one percent of Russia's seaborne oil export
were transported on those kinds of shadow tankers. Last year,
and that totaled eighty three billion euros and a significant
share of those ships passed through EU waters or engaged

(28:01):
in ship to ship transfers under the EU's nose, and
forty three percent of those transfers involve shadow fleet vessels.
So when an aggressor adapts faster than their opponents, it
gets the upper hand. So Russia's ability to adjust to
our sanctions is not simply a testament to its coming,
but a rebuke of the EU's inconsistency. And I would

(28:26):
argue this that it also shows the fallacy of this
idea that we're going to somehow transition to a zero
carbon future, that we can somehow get rid of fossil
fuels today and rely on wind and solar. The blackouts

(28:47):
proved that it can't, and now the revelation of these
figures shows that they know it too. So while they
preach and scream and yell at us about the Green
New Deal and clean renewable energy, those damn hypocrites are
over there actually financing the war between Russia and Ukraine

(29:12):
with their purchase of Russian LNG oil and natural gas.
You cannot consistently act in a way that presupposes two
mutually exclusive outcomes. You cannot both assist the victim and
empower the assailant. This posture by Europe is untenable, not

(29:35):
just because it's ineffective, but because it's incoherent. If Europe
truly supports Ukraine, then stop underwriting Russia. If you won't
or you can't, then your support is just theater, and
therein lies the most damning element. This is not a
war that Europe is merely watching. It's a war that

(29:59):
Europe is pro long actually prolonging. It's The Weekend with
Michael Brown. D sure and follow me on x It's
at Michael Brown USA, and I would ask you to
subscribe to the podcast on your podcast app. Search for
the Situation with Michael Brown. The Situation with Michael Brown.
Hit that subscribe button, leave a five star review while
you're there. That will get you not just the Saturday

(30:21):
with the Weekend program, but it will get you all
five days of the weekday program too. I'll be right back. Hey,
welcome back to the Weekend with Michael Brown. Glad to
have you with me. As always, I want to thank
everyone for tuning in, whether you listen live on your
local affiliate or the affiliate carries it later in the

(30:44):
day or tomorrow. I appreciate you listening or listening on
the podcast. However you listen, I appreciate you listening and
hope that if you like what we do on the weekend,
that you'll on your iHeart app or however you listen
to the program that you'll search for and find six
point thirty khow and listened to the weekday program from
six to ten mountain time Monday through Friday. But however

(31:05):
you listen, I appreciate the fact that you listen. So
the Daily Wire carried a story that was one day
last week. I forget what day it was, but the
headline in my note says, this foreign Aid official who
resisted Doege the Department of Governor Efficiency, Foreign eight official
who resisted Doge took secret payments after steering African money

(31:30):
to a friend. Well in that special. Now, Jamie Raskin,
who is a really stupid congressman, isn't the only swamp
creature with good reason to oppose Doge. Apparently this story
is too Matthau, Matthew, I'm not quite sure you pronounce

(31:53):
his name. Zowie. Who's the Chief Financial Officer of the
African Development Foundation. The CFO of the African Development Foundation,
which gets money from USAID, which gets money from us
refused to grant those access to its books and told

(32:14):
the White House that the agency would not acknowledge President
Donald Trump's appointeest chairman of its board. After a dramatic
showdown last month, Doze physically took over the building with
US marshals, but control of the agency is now the
subject of a lawsuit objecting to swooping in with DOSEE
staff demanding access to sensitive information systems, an objection that

(32:36):
reads differently in light of now there's a criminal probe.
For years, workers at the small USAID adjacent federal agency
focused on Africa have told oversight bodies about allegations of
self dealing, procurement violations, and mysterious offshore bank accounts, many

(32:57):
of them involving this. Matthew Zahou, the Chief Financial Officer
of the African Development Foundation, now suspicious grants to companies
in Africa often correspond with wire payments to the cfo's
bank account. And it's not just the CFO. The African

(33:18):
Development Foundation doesn't want anybody poking around because the agency
amounts to a gigantic crime scene, a gigantic money laundering
scheme by law. By law, the agency is only allowed
to give grants to Africa based groups, but it moved
money through African entities and then back to the United

(33:41):
States so they could pad the salaries of DC bureaucrats
and pay their friends, pay former employees, all according to
current employees. So we're being forced to by our government
to hand over our money to Africa based groups is

(34:02):
simply another example of another crime that needs to end,
and it needs to end now, even by d C standards,
which are well, that's a joke d C standards, but
even by d C standards, you know, hatred of American taxpayers,
of the core foundation of this country has been rife
at the African Development Foundation. From twenty twenty one until

(34:27):
just this past February, the agency was led by CEO
Travis Atkins, who came to it after he served a
short stint at USAID as a Biden appointee. Atkins' former assistant,
who is black, said in a sworn affidavit that quote
on at least three occasions, mister Atkins told me that

(34:48):
he wanted his entire team, including the General Council, to
consist only of black people. He wanted all of his
direct reports to be black. Oh, I don't know. Seems
kind of racist to me. But why do I know.
I'm just a dumb white guy. This assistant to mister
Atkins said that he would not hire whites and he

(35:12):
would not hire veterans. The story says that Atkins bragged,
he literally bragged about concealing concealing operations from the board, saying,
quote them white mother efforts. They don't need to know.
I don't think I should tell them s word. According
to this assistant, this federal behemoth developed by Democrats is

(35:35):
an abomination that's hostile to most Americans, not to be
flushed down the drain. Now, Trump will do what he can,
but this is a great example of where those just
doing amazing work and Congress isn't doing squat, not doing anything. So,

(35:57):
speaking of racism, Black lives Matter kind of a spent force,
its perniciousness having become beyond obvious in my opinion, Virtue
signaling liberals who donated to it no longer know what
to do with the excess money are a prized that
Stephanie Todd has his handout quote. Todd has chronic pain

(36:23):
from a myriad of physical disabilities and illnesses that make
it difficult to walk or work full time. Compounding his
health complications, Todd is also because I remember I said,
Stephanie Todd has his handout. Todd is also a transgender
woman living in Idaho who relies on Medicaid in a
state that banned public funds from covering gender affirming care.

(36:46):
It means that Todd asks on Blue Sky for donations
via venmo to cover his daily expenditures and to raise
money for his medical transition. Black Lives matter. Stop it,
just stop it. It's the weeking Michael Brown, thanks for
tuning in, Thanks for listening. Everybody, have a great weekend.
I'll see you next weekend.