Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, Michael, I just stopped at D on the will
Rogers Turnpike.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Artually, what a postcard?
Speaker 1 (00:06):
I have stamps in my wallet and I will mail
a postcard, probably from Missouri, because if I can stop
your ty longer on the UH side to mail a postcard,
I find a post office, I don't want to get
off the turnpike.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Are you going to mail it to us?
Speaker 2 (00:29):
You got mail us a postcard from the from the
crossover on the Turner Turnpike.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
This is directed at Dragon because obviously, uh you remember
twenty seven zero six Michael or Dragon Dragon? What great
friends you must be? Never sent a birthday or Christmas
card A p one gomer two seven zero six text business.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
This is great because you know what I do, what
I receive a birthday Wait wait wait wait wait.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Wait wait wait wait wait wait. This is why I'm
the talent, you're the producer. We'd like to know what
you do with birthday cards. What both of us do
with what the goobers do with birthday cards if they
receive it?
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (01:14):
Yes, we now find out that some people actually do
male things. And one of these text messages reminded me
of something that I did mail but it's now been
almost almost a year ago. And I'll tell you that
in a minute. But we'd like to know what you
do with your birthday cards, because Dragon and I.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
And don't lie to us. We do something that I
think you do too.
Speaker 4 (01:37):
Upper ninety of all guys, I think seventy more of
all women too. M Well they well, so some women
try to fake it, and you can read into that
whatever you want to know.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Missus Redbeard does the exact same thing I do.
Speaker 3 (01:54):
Does she? Okay, well, Tamra tries to fake it.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Now there's some because I've seen some in a desk drawer,
but she will set it up like on the kitchen
counter so that we can all see it for a
while and then it'll kind of mysteriously disappear.
Speaker 5 (02:10):
It's gone.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yeah, weird. Yeah, So what is the proper length of
time between opening the birthday cards? Say from your son,
one of your sons, or Lance might send you a
you know, even missus Redbeard might give you a birthday card.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
What's the time?
Speaker 2 (02:23):
What's the appropriate allowable time between opening and reading the
card and throwing in the trash?
Speaker 5 (02:33):
Then you open it, read it. I'm a slow reader,
Yeah you.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
Are, yeah, you're pretty slow.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
By the time opening and the trash can uh huh.
Speaker 5 (02:42):
Thirty to forty five seconds.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
And guys out there, if you if you say otherwise,
we think you're lying. And if you're lying, and if
you want to prove that you're not lying, then send
us a photograph.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Email it Michael.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Brown at iHeartMedia dot com or Dragon at iHeartMedia dot
com your photo of all of your birthday cards that
you have saved over the years.
Speaker 5 (03:03):
The very first.
Speaker 4 (03:04):
Text that came in and I don't want to call Yeah,
I'm gonna call you out zero two three eight Michael
read them and throw them.
Speaker 3 (03:10):
Away exactly It's exactly right, and it reminded me.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
I think the last thing I mailed was my my
mom loves and I don't. I don't understand it, but
because you know, I handle all her finances and everything,
she likes the little visa gift cards.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
I hate those things.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
Know there's always fees involved and everything, but she likes
those because she thinks that that's better than me sending.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Her like cash for her birthday.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
So instead of sending Mom like, here's two hundred and
fifty dollars to go spend on dinner or you know,
take your girlfriends out to breakfast, do whatever you want
to do. She likes the little gift cards, so I
have to go to King Soupers and buy those, and
I have to, you know, make sure put the receive
in and then send it off.
Speaker 3 (03:52):
And so I do.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
I do mail those, but I'm more of a fed
X ups guy.
Speaker 4 (03:58):
We also have a text that we're not supposed to
read on air. Oh, let me refresh and see. But
it is the exact same thing that all of us do.
And another text message comes in, read and toss.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
Let's see.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
We will tell you right now. Whatever you're asking us
about the NBC plug. We have no idea. I didn't
hear it. Dragon probably didn't hear it because we just
don't listen to that stuff going on. We have other
things to do.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
Well.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I don't see the one we're not supposed to read,
because obviously I was going to read it.
Speaker 3 (04:32):
It says it at the end, Oh, at the end,
at the end. I'm looking at the beginning, all right.
Speaker 5 (04:38):
I don't want family members to hear this.
Speaker 4 (04:45):
I don't see it. Oh, here it is here, it is.
I read the card. I'm the producer and you're the town.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
H we won't give your number out, but I read
the card and then and then I don't have it
read on air. See, we just on this program. We
just deal in reality. We live in the real world.
(05:15):
Oh yeah, be right.
Speaker 6 (05:16):
Back, Michael and Dragon Coober thirty three, thirty three. Here
just wanted to say, Hi. That's it, Hi, Hi, Hi.
Good to hear from you, always good to hear from you.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
So in the last segment you heard and you can
hear it or watch it at Michael says, go here
dot com. This stupid little video that Jason Crow and
Senator Kelly and Senator Slopkin a bunch of others made
about telling military personnel that you must disobey unlawful orders.
(05:53):
It's really something to make that claim and then not
provide any sort of examples of any unlawful orders, or
to claim that there are indeed a lot of unlawful
orders taking place and that you are failing in your
duty to not comply with those. Now again, I want
(06:17):
to play I want to play this again. I was
going to play you the SoundBite from Fox News yesterday.
Well you know what, I am going to do that
because if Jason Crowe trying to justify what happens is well,
just take a listen. Martha McCallum wants to know what
(06:39):
are you talking about.
Speaker 7 (06:41):
In essence, Eric Schmidt, that he released on acts.
Speaker 5 (06:46):
This is what he said at the end of the day.
Speaker 7 (06:47):
He's speaking about the members of Congress who did this video.
They're mad at the American people that the American people
shows Trump and now they're calling on the military and
intelligence community to intervene. Sounds a little quote subversive to
democricy ishs Senator Eric Schmidt. So let me give you
a moment to respond to that.
Speaker 5 (07:05):
Carsman.
Speaker 8 (07:06):
Yeah, I mean, that's so patently false and absurd.
Speaker 9 (07:08):
I don't even know how to respond to it.
Speaker 8 (07:10):
What we are doing is reminding people of their obligations
under federal law and under the u CMJ in no
different way than I did when I was an infantry
officer and an infantry lieutenant preparing my.
Speaker 9 (07:22):
Soldiers to be deployed. It is as simple as that.
Speaker 5 (07:26):
People.
Speaker 8 (07:26):
You know, that's unfortunate than politics. These days, people grab
something and twist it and contort it and lie it.
Speaker 7 (07:34):
You have grabed something and twisted it and contort it.
You have you know, you're you're talking to young members
of the American military, and you're not telling them specifically
what it is they should see as illegal.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
And they don't at all.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
And in fact, I would challenge Congressman Crow to really
explain to his constituents, for that matter, now the general
public at large, the Uniform Code of Military Justice and
exactly what it says about obeying orders, because he leaves
(08:11):
out I mean, when the words use the word nuance,
he makes such broad generalizations as to in my opinion,
he's being absolutely disingenuous in several ways. First by implying that, hey,
all of you out there in the military and in
the intel.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Communities, we're aware of there are unlawful.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Orders, and you have an obligation not to follow an
unlawful order, but we can't tell you what those unlawful
orders are. His Well, let me play this one.
Speaker 7 (08:46):
Here's some more of him, members prominent members of the
United States Congress, to tell young men and women of
the military that they should not abide by illegal orders
and to leave it so vague, and to talk about
comments that have been made in the past and what
they might lead to I think could potentially be very
confusing for young men and women who have committed to service,
(09:08):
which you honorably did, and I commend you for the
sacrifice that you made.
Speaker 5 (09:12):
Let me just show you this.
Speaker 9 (09:13):
This is Senator the Market. I'm going to respond.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Okay, listen to his response, and then we'll come back
and we'll walk through the Uniform Code of Military Justice,
because I think Jason Crow is just lying out his
teeth under that go ahead.
Speaker 9 (09:29):
Military service is tough. It's really tough.
Speaker 8 (09:32):
We send our men and women into very difficult, very
sometimes untenable situations. I know that I've been in those situations.
That's why moral clarity, that's why reminding people about what
the obligations are. That's why abiding by the law and
providing guidance and training.
Speaker 9 (09:48):
Them in advance is important.
Speaker 8 (09:49):
You can never wait until there's a problem to train
people and prepare them for that.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
Now you get it.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
What the implication here is is that the Pentagon is
utterly failing to help new members of the military. Whatever
branchurian doesn't mean difference to me. Whatever branch Urian that
we are failing to explain to you, teach you and
learn and discipline you to follow lawful commands, because that's
(10:18):
the real issue. Because there is, and I'll get into
detail about this in the minute, there is a strong
presumption we in fact the under the universe uniform called
a military justice, you operate from a presumption that is
very difficult to overcome, a presumption that all orders are lawful.
(10:39):
He doesn't want to address that because he's playing nothing
but politics with the military here, and I find it abhorrent.
Speaker 8 (10:45):
Well, it's really really important that we set the conditions
right now to make sure that people understand their constitutional obligations.
And we are only talking about unlawful orders versus lawful orders.
Speaker 9 (10:58):
That is the what in.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
And she's right, he has failed to outline what those are.
Speaker 10 (11:07):
Three three one zero three three three one zero three
three three one zero three.
Speaker 3 (11:15):
It's like being in a cult. Man. Hey, I had
a seizure the other day. I was very proud of it.
Speaker 10 (11:20):
I fell down with an epileptic seizure, bouncing around like
one of those little electric football guys on the little
electric football table. I'd like to know how to stop
that from coming into my life. Have a good day, guys.
Three three one zero three.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
We'd like to figure out way for coming into your life. Also,
Holy cow. And by the way, when's the last time
you saw one of those little electric football games like
that with a little vibrating players. So Jason Crow and
Mark tell me a bunch of the other yat who's
that are former military or intel members think that they
(12:01):
need to go out And what they're really doing is
they're trying to convince ignorant Americans, not you, ignorant Americans
that Donald Trump is And I guess for that matter,
the Secretary of War Pete Haigess is out just issuing
cart bunches all of these unlawful orders.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
He is not.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
But set that aside for a moment. Why would you
go out and make a claim and try to convince
all of these you know, all these newbies that, oh,
you you have the right to defy an unlawful order.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
It's not that easy.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
It's not that simple, and they know it, and that's
what pisses me off. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice,
a service member is criminally liable only for disobeying lawful orders.
There is both a legal duty to obey lawful orders
and a legal duty to refuse. I'm very specifically using
(13:10):
these words. There's a legal duty to refuse manifestly unlawful orders.
But an unlawful order itself is not defined in the
Uniform Code of Military Justice and instead has been developed
through the Manual for Courts Martial, Case Law, and obviously
(13:32):
the rules of Engagement. So the key provisions that I'm
talking about here articles ninety ninety one and ninety two
that are codified at If you want to look this up,
you can google the Uniform Code of Military Justice articles
ninety ninety one and ninety two, or you can go
to Title ten, section eight ninety through eight ninety two. Now,
(13:53):
each of those sections makes it punishable for the willful
disobedience or failure to obey a lawful command or order
from a superior and there's you know, commissioned officers blah.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
But none of those articles provide a statutory definition of
what is lawful.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
But both the.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Manual for Courts Martial and the appellate Decisions hold that
an order is presumed lawful. Let me just pause for
a moment. So for any order given, there is an
automatic presumption that the order is lawful. So in law,
(14:37):
if something is presumed to be X, but you think
it's why you have to overcome the ex presumption. So
it's you start down here with the baseline that every
order is lawful, and if you think it's unlawful, you
have to overcome that presumption that it is lawful.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
That's not an easy thing to do.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
It's like it's just like you are presumed innocent until
you are found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You walk
into that courtroom innocent, and it's only until a jury
unanimously decides that the state has proven every single element
of a crime, and they decided that you are guilty
(15:19):
of every single element of that crime, and so they
return a verdict of guilty. The same is true with
orders that are lawful versus unlawful. You start from the
point that the orders are lawful, and the appellate decisions
and for that matter of the Manual for Courts Martial,
hold that an order is presumed lawful and must have
(15:42):
a valid military purpose. It must be clear and specific,
and it cannot conflict with the Constitution, a statute, or
clearly applicable international law. An unlawful order is generally understood
as one that requires a criminal act or clearly emphasize
(16:03):
the word clearly violates constitutional limits, or it clearly violates
federal law, or it violates the law of armed conflict.
The only example I can think of there is is
like intentionally targeting civilians, or the torture of detainees, or
falsifying official records, or something that is clearly unlawful domestic
(16:25):
law enforcement or political use of troops. But I want
you to think about the presumption and the burden, because
with the presumption comes a burden. The presumption is the
order is lawful. Now what's the burden. All orders are
presumed lawful, and that presumption is very strong. So the
accused in this case, that would be the person that
(16:46):
these yahoo senators and congressmen are talking to that would
challenge an order.
Speaker 3 (16:53):
That person bears the burden of.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
Rebutting the lawfulness of an order by showing or proving
that the order was manifestly or patently unlawful. Now, because
of that presumption, a member who just you know, they
saw this stupid video, so they refuse an order. If
you do that, you've better be sure that it's unlawful,
(17:21):
because if if you can't overcome that presumption, you face
very real exposure under Articles nineteen ninety one and ninety two,
unless the unlawfulness of the order is so evident that
any reasonable service member should recognize it. And again the
example would be like a classic war crime of you know,
(17:43):
like shooting civilians on purpose.
Speaker 3 (17:46):
Those are kind of the textbooks examples.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
Now, the Department of Defense, the Department of War, their
guidance and their training doctrines.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
This is what they're trained by, trained under.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Now emphasize that personnel are obligated to obey only lawful orders,
but you must not comply with something that is manifestly unlawful.
If a service member executes a clearly unlawful order, for example,
you're told to go kill these civilians or these non combatants,
(18:21):
you can be crimly liable for the underlying offense, and
obedience to the order is not an automatic defense. Now,
let's think about convictions. Let's think about the elements of
lawful versus unlawful orders and the mental state of these
individuals that Jason Crowe is addressing in that stupid video.
(18:43):
For a conviction under Article ninety one or ninety two,
the government has to prove that the order was lawful,
that the accused knew that the order was lawful, had
a duty to obey, and then willfully willfully disobey the order. Now,
wilfully generally means intentional defiance. It doesn't mean you were
(19:06):
just negligent, or you forgot about it, or you weren't
thinking about it. It means that you have to willfully
disobey the order. So if the accused shows the order
was illegal or that the non compliance was not wilful,
in other words, a genuine inability to comply, I could
not do what you asked me to do because I
(19:26):
was I was tied up and handcuffed and buried six
feet under. Now that could defeat or mitigate the charge,
but that's going to be again dependent upon the circumstances,
and it's going to be very difficult to overcome that presumption.
There is and a few military lawyers out there want
(19:48):
to correct me. Girl, Dad, I'm thinking about you. I
don't think there is a single uniform Code of Military
Justice checklist for how to refuse, but there is some
legal guidance, some practice that outlines kind of a de
facto procedure. The service members should first seek clarification, including
(20:09):
how the order complies with the law or how the
order complies with the rules of engagement. Millards ask your
superior is this in compliance with the law? Is this
in compliance with the rules of engagement. You then have
to attempt to resolve through your chain of command. You've
(20:30):
got to document the circumstances, and you've got to promptly
seek a judge, advocate general, a military lawyer advice, or
report the incident to the Inspector general if the unlawfulness
appears clear. If a refusal leads to charges, the lawfulness
(20:52):
of the order and the reasonableness of the member's assessment
then get litigated in a court martial, with the purported
unlawful unlawful order argument raised as a defense or justification
to the offense that you're charged with under Articles ninety
(21:13):
ninety one or ninety two. Let me repeat that, if
you end up getting charged, the lawfulness of the order,
the reasonableness of the member's assessment of its lawfulness or
unlawfulness gets litigated in a court martial. If the unlawful
organ if the unlawful order is raised as a defense
(21:39):
or justification, you've got to overcome that presumption. So there's
not a neat statutory definition of unlawful order. There's not
a standalone procedure article that I know of titled you know,
non compliance with unlawful orders? Instead, do you see criminalizes
(22:01):
disobedience only of lawful orders and leaves unlawful orders to
be flashed out by the Manual for Courts Martial, the
Law of War doctorate, and of course the case law
that is built up.
Speaker 3 (22:15):
Around the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
In practice, if if you follow the advice of people
like Jason Crowe, you're going to have to make a
really high stakes judgment that is, obey a presumed lawful order,
or if the order is clearly illegal on its face,
(22:39):
then refuse, and then you better be prepared to justify
that decision under Articles nineteen ninety one and ninety two
with the unlawfulness of the order as your core defense.
It's pretty complicated, but let's get down to what these
y'awhos are claiming in this video. They're in essence claiming
(23:03):
that there are a lot of unlawful orders that are
being promulgated out there, and that you're being encouraged by
these yahoos to disobey them, and that disobeying of those
orders really comes with a high stakes peril.
Speaker 3 (23:22):
How is the trust at risk?
Speaker 2 (23:25):
I've got full confidence in the military, absolute full confidence
in them. So somehow Trump is pitting them against ordinary
citizens the military not talking about ice not how I'm
not even talking talking about guard that has not been deployed.
(23:45):
I'm talking about here, they're talking about service members are
being pitted against their own citizens. They're fellow citizens. You know,
I could in a sort of smartest comment here about, yeah,
you did take an oath? Are you guys up pull
your oath to adhere to the Constitution? I sorely doubt it.
The threats to the constitution are coming from here, from
(24:11):
the commander in chief, from your superiors, from the Secretary
of War. Why don't you tell us where they're coming from?
And better yet, wy don't you tell us what those
what those are? Tell us what unlawful orders are being given?
Because I don't think you.
Speaker 9 (24:31):
Can votes in the Caribbean. This president.
Speaker 3 (24:39):
Here, what he just said, So do you think those
are unlawful orders?
Speaker 9 (24:43):
Votes in the Caribbean? This president.
Speaker 7 (24:48):
In Iran? Did you have a problem with taking out
Iranian nuclear You've we've seen more confidence.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
I want you to listen closely to this statement, because
remember the issue here is disobeying unlawful orders. But the
typical liberal Jason Crowe shifts the argument on Fox News yesterday,
he goes from disobeying unlawful orders too.
Speaker 7 (25:13):
Onn did you have a problem with taking out Iranian nuclear.
Speaker 8 (25:16):
Are you seeing we've seen more conflict and more use
in the military in the first eleven months.
Speaker 9 (25:21):
Of this administration that we have in any administration.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
Okay, then tell me which of those operations were unlawful.
Come on, congressman, there's such a no at all, stand
up and tell you're you're you're on Fox News. It's
not like you're in a courtroom. Why don't you Why
don't you tell Ms McCallum exactly what the unlawful orders are?
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Oh no, no, no, no no.
Speaker 2 (25:43):
You're now going to shift to a political argument that
we're using the military too much. While we're using the
military more than that I can remember in my lifetime.
Speaker 8 (25:53):
What needs to happen is they need to come to
Congress and we needed to debate this, and for him
to say there's no new it.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
You want to go to Congress. I want you to
think about this for a moment. Let's take the strikes
on the Iranian nuclear sites.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
You want to.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
Take that surprise attack where the bombers took off in
like most of the bombers took off in one direction.
A couple of bombers took off in a different direction
as a diversionary tactic. And you want to go debate
the tactics of that bombing in the United States Congress.
Speaker 3 (26:27):
Huh, what kind of idiot are you? Those of a debate.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
By the way, we weren't declaring war. The president was
not there. He did not ask for a declaration of
war under the Constitution. And if you understand anything about
the War Powers Act, then you would understand, Congressman Crow,
that the president had the authority to do that in
that's his foreign policy. He did it in the best
(26:52):
interests of this country and in the best interests of
our ally, and he took out those nuclear sites. And
you want to debate it in Congress, you're some kind
of stupid.
Speaker 8 (27:01):
War That's exactly the problem, because only Congress can declare
a war.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
Yeah, you're right. If you don't like what's happening, are
you saying that you wanted to declare war on the
on the Iranians. Is that what you're saying, because none
others one that you want to declare war on the Iranians,
but we did want to take out their nuclear sites.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
There's two different things.
Speaker 8 (27:27):
Only Congress, according to our constitution, has the authority.
Speaker 9 (27:32):
How it works, curely you don't because you're saying.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
WHOA really, I think you've been off this one more
than you can chew you.
Speaker 9 (27:42):
That's not the war exists or it's not a problem.
Un I says. Congress is the one that has to
spec typically what your issue is.
Speaker 7 (27:48):
And so for members prominent members of the United States
Congress to tell young men and women of the military
that they should not abide by illegal orders and to
leave it so vague and to talk about comments that
have been made in the past and what they might
lead to, I think could potentially be very confusing for
young men and women who have committed to service, which
(28:11):
you honorably did, and I commend you for the sacrifice
that you made.
Speaker 5 (28:15):
Let me just show you this.
Speaker 8 (28:16):
This is Senator the market I'm going to respond to
that military service.
Speaker 7 (28:21):
Is tough, is recruitment rising, and.
Speaker 9 (28:28):
The military under the president.
Speaker 8 (28:30):
Here's an interesting fact for you Martha. Our men and
women actually are very smart, very incredible men women in
our military, and so well apparently I do.
Speaker 9 (28:41):
Them for the United States military, Well, you.
Speaker 8 (28:44):
Know, you don't think they can handle a reminder about
tedual law and the u CMJ.
Speaker 9 (28:49):
Is what I'm hearing in a reason you didn't give
us a reminder.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
You actually suggested that the military is being used against
its own citizens and that he's engaged in unlawful acts.
So tell us what.
Speaker 8 (29:05):
Are those survey showed that eight out of ten service
members deeply understand their obligation of lawful orders.
Speaker 2 (29:14):
Oh well, wait wait wait wait, wait, wait wait wait wait,
So if eighty percent of members deeply understand their obligation
to follow because remember there's a presumption that orders are.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
Lawful, he kind of got he kind of kinds the.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
Skirt around that by citing this this, this so called
survey that says.
Speaker 8 (29:35):
And a recent survey showed that eight out of ten
service members deeply understand their obligation of lawful orders.
Speaker 2 (29:42):
Okay, so if if eighty percent of them understand the
lawful orders, which means they understand that there's a presumption
that the orders are lawful, then what's what what's the
claim here, Congressman, is the claim that they don't understand
the uniform Code of mill sorry Justice, that they don't
understand their constitutional obligation? Or is it your claim that
(30:06):
some of the things that Trump is doing is unconstitutional?
Because if that's your claim, why don't you have the colonies?
You just come out and tell us that you know
why he won't, because all they're doing is trying to
make a political point.
Hey, Michael, I just stopped at D on the will
Rogers Turnpike.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Artually, what a postcard?
Speaker 1 (00:06):
I have stamps in my wallet and I will mail
a postcard, probably from Missouri, because if I can stop
your ty longer on the UH side to mail a postcard,
I find a post office, I don't want to get
off the turnpike.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Are you going to mail it to us?
Speaker 2 (00:29):
You got mail us a postcard from the from the
crossover on the Turner Turnpike.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
This is directed at Dragon because obviously, uh you remember
twenty seven zero six Michael or Dragon Dragon? What great
friends you must be? Never sent a birthday or Christmas
card A p one gomer two seven zero six text business.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
This is great because you know what I do, what
I receive a birthday Wait wait wait wait wait.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Wait wait wait wait wait wait. This is why I'm
the talent, you're the producer. We'd like to know what
you do with birthday cards. What both of us do
with what the goobers do with birthday cards if they
receive it?
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (01:14):
Yes, we now find out that some people actually do
male things. And one of these text messages reminded me
of something that I did mail but it's now been
almost almost a year ago. And I'll tell you that
in a minute. But we'd like to know what you
do with your birthday cards, because Dragon and I.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
And don't lie to us. We do something that I
think you do too.
Speaker 4 (01:37):
Upper ninety of all guys, I think seventy more of
all women too. M Well they well, so some women
try to fake it, and you can read into that
whatever you want to know.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Missus Redbeard does the exact same thing I do.
Speaker 3 (01:54):
Does she? Okay, well, Tamra tries to fake it.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Now there's some because I've seen some in a desk drawer,
but she will set it up like on the kitchen
counter so that we can all see it for a
while and then it'll kind of mysteriously disappear.
Speaker 5 (02:10):
It's gone.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yeah, weird. Yeah, So what is the proper length of
time between opening the birthday cards? Say from your son,
one of your sons, or Lance might send you a
you know, even missus Redbeard might give you a birthday card.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
What's the time?
Speaker 2 (02:23):
What's the appropriate allowable time between opening and reading the
card and throwing in the trash?
Speaker 5 (02:33):
Then you open it, read it. I'm a slow reader,
Yeah you.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
Are, yeah, you're pretty slow.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
By the time opening and the trash can uh huh.
Speaker 5 (02:42):
Thirty to forty five seconds.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
And guys out there, if you if you say otherwise,
we think you're lying. And if you're lying, and if
you want to prove that you're not lying, then send
us a photograph.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Email it Michael.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Brown at iHeartMedia dot com or Dragon at iHeartMedia dot
com your photo of all of your birthday cards that
you have saved over the years.
Speaker 5 (03:03):
The very first.
Speaker 4 (03:04):
Text that came in and I don't want to call Yeah,
I'm gonna call you out zero two three eight Michael
read them and throw them.
Speaker 3 (03:10):
Away exactly It's exactly right, and it reminded me.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
I think the last thing I mailed was my my
mom loves and I don't. I don't understand it, but
because you know, I handle all her finances and everything,
she likes the little visa gift cards.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
I hate those things.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
Know there's always fees involved and everything, but she likes
those because she thinks that that's better than me sending.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Her like cash for her birthday.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
So instead of sending Mom like, here's two hundred and
fifty dollars to go spend on dinner or you know,
take your girlfriends out to breakfast, do whatever you want
to do. She likes the little gift cards, so I
have to go to King Soupers and buy those, and
I have to, you know, make sure put the receive
in and then send it off.
Speaker 3 (03:52):
And so I do.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
I do mail those, but I'm more of a fed
X ups guy.
Speaker 4 (03:58):
We also have a text that we're not supposed to
read on air. Oh, let me refresh and see. But
it is the exact same thing that all of us do.
And another text message comes in, read and toss.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
Let's see.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
We will tell you right now. Whatever you're asking us
about the NBC plug. We have no idea. I didn't
hear it. Dragon probably didn't hear it because we just
don't listen to that stuff going on. We have other
things to do.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
Well.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I don't see the one we're not supposed to read,
because obviously I was going to read it.
Speaker 3 (04:32):
It says it at the end, Oh, at the end,
at the end. I'm looking at the beginning, all right.
Speaker 5 (04:38):
I don't want family members to hear this.
Speaker 4 (04:45):
I don't see it. Oh, here it is here, it is.
I read the card. I'm the producer and you're the town.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
H we won't give your number out, but I read
the card and then and then I don't have it
read on air. See, we just on this program. We
just deal in reality. We live in the real world.
(05:15):
Oh yeah, be right.
Speaker 6 (05:16):
Back, Michael and Dragon Coober thirty three, thirty three. Here
just wanted to say, Hi. That's it, Hi, Hi, Hi.
Good to hear from you, always good to hear from you.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
So in the last segment you heard and you can
hear it or watch it at Michael says, go here
dot com. This stupid little video that Jason Crow and
Senator Kelly and Senator Slopkin a bunch of others made
about telling military personnel that you must disobey unlawful orders.
(05:53):
It's really something to make that claim and then not
provide any sort of examples of any unlawful orders, or
to claim that there are indeed a lot of unlawful
orders taking place and that you are failing in your
duty to not comply with those. Now again, I want
(06:17):
to play I want to play this again. I was
going to play you the SoundBite from Fox News yesterday.
Well you know what, I am going to do that
because if Jason Crowe trying to justify what happens is well,
just take a listen. Martha McCallum wants to know what
(06:39):
are you talking about.
Speaker 7 (06:41):
In essence, Eric Schmidt, that he released on acts.
Speaker 5 (06:46):
This is what he said at the end of the day.
Speaker 7 (06:47):
He's speaking about the members of Congress who did this video.
They're mad at the American people that the American people
shows Trump and now they're calling on the military and
intelligence community to intervene. Sounds a little quote subversive to
democricy ishs Senator Eric Schmidt. So let me give you
a moment to respond to that.
Speaker 5 (07:05):
Carsman.
Speaker 8 (07:06):
Yeah, I mean, that's so patently false and absurd.
Speaker 9 (07:08):
I don't even know how to respond to it.
Speaker 8 (07:10):
What we are doing is reminding people of their obligations
under federal law and under the u CMJ in no
different way than I did when I was an infantry
officer and an infantry lieutenant preparing my.
Speaker 9 (07:22):
Soldiers to be deployed. It is as simple as that.
Speaker 5 (07:26):
People.
Speaker 8 (07:26):
You know, that's unfortunate than politics. These days, people grab
something and twist it and contort it and lie it.
Speaker 7 (07:34):
You have grabed something and twisted it and contort it.
You have you know, you're you're talking to young members
of the American military, and you're not telling them specifically
what it is they should see as illegal.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
And they don't at all.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
And in fact, I would challenge Congressman Crow to really
explain to his constituents, for that matter, now the general
public at large, the Uniform Code of Military Justice and
exactly what it says about obeying orders, because he leaves
(08:11):
out I mean, when the words use the word nuance,
he makes such broad generalizations as to in my opinion,
he's being absolutely disingenuous in several ways. First by implying that, hey,
all of you out there in the military and in
the intel.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Communities, we're aware of there are unlawful.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
Orders, and you have an obligation not to follow an
unlawful order, but we can't tell you what those unlawful
orders are. His Well, let me play this one.
Speaker 7 (08:46):
Here's some more of him, members prominent members of the
United States Congress, to tell young men and women of
the military that they should not abide by illegal orders
and to leave it so vague, and to talk about
comments that have been made in the past and what
they might lead to I think could potentially be very
confusing for young men and women who have committed to service,
(09:08):
which you honorably did, and I commend you for the
sacrifice that you made.
Speaker 5 (09:12):
Let me just show you this.
Speaker 9 (09:13):
This is Senator the Market. I'm going to respond.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Okay, listen to his response, and then we'll come back
and we'll walk through the Uniform Code of Military Justice,
because I think Jason Crow is just lying out his
teeth under that go ahead.
Speaker 9 (09:29):
Military service is tough. It's really tough.
Speaker 8 (09:32):
We send our men and women into very difficult, very
sometimes untenable situations. I know that I've been in those situations.
That's why moral clarity, that's why reminding people about what
the obligations are. That's why abiding by the law and
providing guidance and training.
Speaker 9 (09:48):
Them in advance is important.
Speaker 8 (09:49):
You can never wait until there's a problem to train
people and prepare them for that.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
Now you get it.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
What the implication here is is that the Pentagon is
utterly failing to help new members of the military. Whatever
branchurian doesn't mean difference to me. Whatever branch Urian that
we are failing to explain to you, teach you and
learn and discipline you to follow lawful commands, because that's
(10:18):
the real issue. Because there is, and I'll get into
detail about this in the minute, there is a strong
presumption we in fact the under the universe uniform called
a military justice, you operate from a presumption that is
very difficult to overcome, a presumption that all orders are lawful.
(10:39):
He doesn't want to address that because he's playing nothing
but politics with the military here, and I find it abhorrent.
Speaker 8 (10:45):
Well, it's really really important that we set the conditions
right now to make sure that people understand their constitutional obligations.
And we are only talking about unlawful orders versus lawful orders.
Speaker 9 (10:58):
That is the what in.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
And she's right, he has failed to outline what those are.
Speaker 10 (11:07):
Three three one zero three three three one zero three
three three one zero three.
Speaker 3 (11:15):
It's like being in a cult. Man. Hey, I had
a seizure the other day. I was very proud of it.
Speaker 10 (11:20):
I fell down with an epileptic seizure, bouncing around like
one of those little electric football guys on the little
electric football table. I'd like to know how to stop
that from coming into my life. Have a good day, guys.
Three three one zero three.
Speaker 2 (11:35):
We'd like to figure out way for coming into your life. Also,
Holy cow. And by the way, when's the last time
you saw one of those little electric football games like
that with a little vibrating players. So Jason Crow and
Mark tell me a bunch of the other yat who's
that are former military or intel members think that they
(12:01):
need to go out And what they're really doing is
they're trying to convince ignorant Americans, not you, ignorant Americans
that Donald Trump is And I guess for that matter,
the Secretary of War Pete Haigess is out just issuing
cart bunches all of these unlawful orders.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
He is not.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
But set that aside for a moment. Why would you
go out and make a claim and try to convince
all of these you know, all these newbies that, oh,
you you have the right to defy an unlawful order.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
It's not that easy.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
It's not that simple, and they know it, and that's
what pisses me off. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice,
a service member is criminally liable only for disobeying lawful orders.
There is both a legal duty to obey lawful orders
and a legal duty to refuse. I'm very specifically using
(13:10):
these words. There's a legal duty to refuse manifestly unlawful orders.
But an unlawful order itself is not defined in the
Uniform Code of Military Justice and instead has been developed
through the Manual for Courts Martial, Case Law, and obviously
(13:32):
the rules of Engagement. So the key provisions that I'm
talking about here articles ninety ninety one and ninety two
that are codified at If you want to look this up,
you can google the Uniform Code of Military Justice articles
ninety ninety one and ninety two, or you can go
to Title ten, section eight ninety through eight ninety two. Now,
(13:53):
each of those sections makes it punishable for the willful
disobedience or failure to obey a lawful command or order
from a superior and there's you know, commissioned officers blah.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
But none of those articles provide a statutory definition of
what is lawful.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
But both the.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Manual for Courts Martial and the appellate Decisions hold that
an order is presumed lawful. Let me just pause for
a moment. So for any order given, there is an
automatic presumption that the order is lawful. So in law,
(14:37):
if something is presumed to be X, but you think
it's why you have to overcome the ex presumption. So
it's you start down here with the baseline that every
order is lawful, and if you think it's unlawful, you
have to overcome that presumption that it is lawful.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
That's not an easy thing to do.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
It's like it's just like you are presumed innocent until
you are found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You walk
into that courtroom innocent, and it's only until a jury
unanimously decides that the state has proven every single element
of a crime, and they decided that you are guilty
(15:19):
of every single element of that crime, and so they
return a verdict of guilty. The same is true with
orders that are lawful versus unlawful. You start from the
point that the orders are lawful, and the appellate decisions
and for that matter of the Manual for Courts Martial,
hold that an order is presumed lawful and must have
(15:42):
a valid military purpose. It must be clear and specific,
and it cannot conflict with the Constitution, a statute, or
clearly applicable international law. An unlawful order is generally understood
as one that requires a criminal act or clearly emphasize
(16:03):
the word clearly violates constitutional limits, or it clearly violates
federal law, or it violates the law of armed conflict.
The only example I can think of there is is
like intentionally targeting civilians, or the torture of detainees, or
falsifying official records, or something that is clearly unlawful domestic
(16:25):
law enforcement or political use of troops. But I want
you to think about the presumption and the burden, because
with the presumption comes a burden. The presumption is the
order is lawful. Now what's the burden. All orders are
presumed lawful, and that presumption is very strong. So the
accused in this case, that would be the person that
(16:46):
these yahoo senators and congressmen are talking to that would
challenge an order.
Speaker 3 (16:53):
That person bears the burden of.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
Rebutting the lawfulness of an order by showing or proving
that the order was manifestly or patently unlawful. Now, because
of that presumption, a member who just you know, they
saw this stupid video, so they refuse an order. If
you do that, you've better be sure that it's unlawful,
(17:21):
because if if you can't overcome that presumption, you face
very real exposure under Articles nineteen ninety one and ninety two,
unless the unlawfulness of the order is so evident that
any reasonable service member should recognize it. And again the
example would be like a classic war crime of you know,
(17:43):
like shooting civilians on purpose.
Speaker 3 (17:46):
Those are kind of the textbooks examples.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
Now, the Department of Defense, the Department of War, their
guidance and their training doctrines.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
This is what they're trained by, trained under.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Now emphasize that personnel are obligated to obey only lawful orders,
but you must not comply with something that is manifestly unlawful.
If a service member executes a clearly unlawful order, for example,
you're told to go kill these civilians or these non combatants,
(18:21):
you can be crimly liable for the underlying offense, and
obedience to the order is not an automatic defense. Now,
let's think about convictions. Let's think about the elements of
lawful versus unlawful orders and the mental state of these
individuals that Jason Crowe is addressing in that stupid video.
(18:43):
For a conviction under Article ninety one or ninety two,
the government has to prove that the order was lawful,
that the accused knew that the order was lawful, had
a duty to obey, and then willfully willfully disobey the order. Now,
wilfully generally means intentional defiance. It doesn't mean you were
(19:06):
just negligent, or you forgot about it, or you weren't
thinking about it. It means that you have to willfully
disobey the order. So if the accused shows the order
was illegal or that the non compliance was not wilful,
in other words, a genuine inability to comply, I could
not do what you asked me to do because I
(19:26):
was I was tied up and handcuffed and buried six
feet under. Now that could defeat or mitigate the charge,
but that's going to be again dependent upon the circumstances,
and it's going to be very difficult to overcome that presumption.
There is and a few military lawyers out there want
(19:48):
to correct me. Girl, Dad, I'm thinking about you. I
don't think there is a single uniform Code of Military
Justice checklist for how to refuse, but there is some
legal guidance, some practice that outlines kind of a de
facto procedure. The service members should first seek clarification, including
(20:09):
how the order complies with the law or how the
order complies with the rules of engagement. Millards ask your
superior is this in compliance with the law? Is this
in compliance with the rules of engagement. You then have
to attempt to resolve through your chain of command. You've
(20:30):
got to document the circumstances, and you've got to promptly
seek a judge, advocate general, a military lawyer advice, or
report the incident to the Inspector general if the unlawfulness
appears clear. If a refusal leads to charges, the lawfulness
(20:52):
of the order and the reasonableness of the member's assessment
then get litigated in a court martial, with the purported
unlawful unlawful order argument raised as a defense or justification
to the offense that you're charged with under Articles ninety
(21:13):
ninety one or ninety two. Let me repeat that, if
you end up getting charged, the lawfulness of the order,
the reasonableness of the member's assessment of its lawfulness or
unlawfulness gets litigated in a court martial. If the unlawful
organ if the unlawful order is raised as a defense
(21:39):
or justification, you've got to overcome that presumption. So there's
not a neat statutory definition of unlawful order. There's not
a standalone procedure article that I know of titled you know,
non compliance with unlawful orders? Instead, do you see criminalizes
(22:01):
disobedience only of lawful orders and leaves unlawful orders to
be flashed out by the Manual for Courts Martial, the
Law of War doctorate, and of course the case law
that is built up.
Speaker 3 (22:15):
Around the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
In practice, if if you follow the advice of people
like Jason Crowe, you're going to have to make a
really high stakes judgment that is, obey a presumed lawful order,
or if the order is clearly illegal on its face,
(22:39):
then refuse, and then you better be prepared to justify
that decision under Articles nineteen ninety one and ninety two
with the unlawfulness of the order as your core defense.
It's pretty complicated, but let's get down to what these
y'awhos are claiming in this video. They're in essence claiming
(23:03):
that there are a lot of unlawful orders that are
being promulgated out there, and that you're being encouraged by
these yahoos to disobey them, and that disobeying of those
orders really comes with a high stakes peril.
Speaker 3 (23:22):
How is the trust at risk?
Speaker 2 (23:25):
I've got full confidence in the military, absolute full confidence
in them. So somehow Trump is pitting them against ordinary
citizens the military not talking about ice not how I'm
not even talking talking about guard that has not been deployed.
(23:45):
I'm talking about here, they're talking about service members are
being pitted against their own citizens. They're fellow citizens. You know,
I could in a sort of smartest comment here about, yeah,
you did take an oath? Are you guys up pull
your oath to adhere to the Constitution? I sorely doubt it.
The threats to the constitution are coming from here, from
(24:11):
the commander in chief, from your superiors, from the Secretary
of War. Why don't you tell us where they're coming from?
And better yet, wy don't you tell us what those
what those are? Tell us what unlawful orders are being given?
Because I don't think you.
Speaker 9 (24:31):
Can votes in the Caribbean. This president.
Speaker 3 (24:39):
Here, what he just said, So do you think those
are unlawful orders?
Speaker 9 (24:43):
Votes in the Caribbean? This president.
Speaker 7 (24:48):
In Iran? Did you have a problem with taking out
Iranian nuclear You've we've seen more confidence.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
I want you to listen closely to this statement, because
remember the issue here is disobeying unlawful orders. But the
typical liberal Jason Crowe shifts the argument on Fox News yesterday,
he goes from disobeying unlawful orders too.
Speaker 7 (25:13):
Onn did you have a problem with taking out Iranian nuclear.
Speaker 8 (25:16):
Are you seeing we've seen more conflict and more use
in the military in the first eleven months.
Speaker 9 (25:21):
Of this administration that we have in any administration.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
Okay, then tell me which of those operations were unlawful.
Come on, congressman, there's such a no at all, stand
up and tell you're you're you're on Fox News. It's
not like you're in a courtroom. Why don't you Why
don't you tell Ms McCallum exactly what the unlawful orders are?
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Oh no, no, no, no no.
Speaker 2 (25:43):
You're now going to shift to a political argument that
we're using the military too much. While we're using the
military more than that I can remember in my lifetime.
Speaker 8 (25:53):
What needs to happen is they need to come to
Congress and we needed to debate this, and for him
to say there's no new it.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
You want to go to Congress. I want you to
think about this for a moment. Let's take the strikes
on the Iranian nuclear sites.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
You want to.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
Take that surprise attack where the bombers took off in
like most of the bombers took off in one direction.
A couple of bombers took off in a different direction
as a diversionary tactic. And you want to go debate
the tactics of that bombing in the United States Congress.
Speaker 3 (26:27):
Huh, what kind of idiot are you? Those of a debate.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
By the way, we weren't declaring war. The president was
not there. He did not ask for a declaration of
war under the Constitution. And if you understand anything about
the War Powers Act, then you would understand, Congressman Crow,
that the president had the authority to do that in
that's his foreign policy. He did it in the best
(26:52):
interests of this country and in the best interests of
our ally, and he took out those nuclear sites. And
you want to debate it in Congress, you're some kind
of stupid.
Speaker 8 (27:01):
War That's exactly the problem, because only Congress can declare
a war.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
Yeah, you're right. If you don't like what's happening, are
you saying that you wanted to declare war on the
on the Iranians. Is that what you're saying, because none
others one that you want to declare war on the Iranians,
but we did want to take out their nuclear sites.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
There's two different things.
Speaker 8 (27:27):
Only Congress, according to our constitution, has the authority.
Speaker 9 (27:32):
How it works, curely you don't because you're saying.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
WHOA really, I think you've been off this one more
than you can chew you.
Speaker 9 (27:42):
That's not the war exists or it's not a problem.
Un I says. Congress is the one that has to
spec typically what your issue is.
Speaker 7 (27:48):
And so for members prominent members of the United States
Congress to tell young men and women of the military
that they should not abide by illegal orders and to
leave it so vague and to talk about comments that
have been made in the past and what they might
lead to, I think could potentially be very confusing for
young men and women who have committed to service, which
(28:11):
you honorably did, and I commend you for the sacrifice
that you made.
Speaker 5 (28:15):
Let me just show you this.
Speaker 8 (28:16):
This is Senator the market I'm going to respond to
that military service.
Speaker 7 (28:21):
Is tough, is recruitment rising, and.
Speaker 9 (28:28):
The military under the president.
Speaker 8 (28:30):
Here's an interesting fact for you Martha. Our men and
women actually are very smart, very incredible men women in
our military, and so well apparently I do.
Speaker 9 (28:41):
Them for the United States military, Well, you.
Speaker 8 (28:44):
Know, you don't think they can handle a reminder about
tedual law and the u CMJ.
Speaker 9 (28:49):
Is what I'm hearing in a reason you didn't give
us a reminder.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
You actually suggested that the military is being used against
its own citizens and that he's engaged in unlawful acts.
So tell us what.
Speaker 8 (29:05):
Are those survey showed that eight out of ten service
members deeply understand their obligation of lawful orders.
Speaker 2 (29:14):
Oh well, wait wait wait wait, wait, wait wait wait wait,
So if eighty percent of members deeply understand their obligation
to follow because remember there's a presumption that orders are.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
Lawful, he kind of got he kind of kinds the.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
Skirt around that by citing this this, this so called
survey that says.
Speaker 8 (29:35):
And a recent survey showed that eight out of ten
service members deeply understand their obligation of lawful orders.
Speaker 2 (29:42):
Okay, so if if eighty percent of them understand the
lawful orders, which means they understand that there's a presumption
that the orders are lawful, then what's what what's the
claim here, Congressman, is the claim that they don't understand
the uniform Code of mill sorry Justice, that they don't
understand their constitutional obligation? Or is it your claim that
(30:06):
some of the things that Trump is doing is unconstitutional?
Because if that's your claim, why don't you have the colonies?
You just come out and tell us that you know
why he won't, because all they're doing is trying to
make a political point.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
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.