August 2, 2024 • 24 mins
Gary starts off the second hour of the show with a GAS Breakdown of the recent Olympic boxing gender controversy. Governor Gavin Newsom has signed an extradition warrant that will look to transfer Harvey Weinstein from custody in New York to California.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Gary and Shannon and you're listening to KFI
AM six forty the Gary and Shannon Show on demand
on the iHeartRadio app. Chevron, the second largest oil company
in the United States, is leaving California, formalizing this long
expected breakup. The company has ties to California the date
back to the eighteen seventies. Chevron had about seven thousand
(00:25):
employees already in the Houston area, about two thousand at
the current headquarters in San Ramon, California, which is right
up near San Francisco.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
So they're going to be moving.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Everybody, it looks like to just about everybody to Houston.
Three years after the broadcast audience plummeted for the Summer
Games in Tokyo, they have rebounded dramatically. NBC says it
drew nearly thirty five million viewers for the Tuesday night coverage,
which included the women's gymnastics team finals. They said total
(00:55):
audience delivery number includes all of the NBC platforms, live
coverage on NBC, Peacock, et cetera, the Gold Zone coverage,
which is like the NFL Networks Red Zone. Speaking of
the Olympics, there's a lot that's going on regarding men
fighting women in boxing in the Olympics. We'll try to
get to the bottom of it. And oh my gosh,
(01:16):
it's a second Gary and Shannon show breakdown?
Speaker 2 (01:19):
Ready?
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Do you understand the worst that are coming out of
my mouth?
Speaker 2 (01:23):
What are you talking about? The news got you confused?
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Do you understand it's time for another breakdown with Gary
and Shannon?
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Explain it to me slowly.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
I'm very old, all right.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
In this case, there are two boxers in the women's competition,
Algeria's Imani Khalif and Taiwan's lynn U Ting. Both of
them have won. Lyn U Ting actually fought this morning
and won, and they're The Olympic Committee is forced to
(01:56):
answer questions about all of this because these two women
appear to be men. Now, it's not as easy as
just saying that, because there are some questions about who
they are, where they came from, etc. Mark Adams is
an Olympic Committee spokesman and asked for a pause in
(02:17):
the rhetoric that has exploded around this case, which these cases,
I should say, which is basically that the Olympic Committee
is allowing men to fight women.
Speaker 4 (02:25):
Athletes boxes are entirely eligible. They are women on their passport,
they have competed for many years, and I actually think
it's not helpful to start stigmatizing people who take part.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
In sport like this.
Speaker 4 (02:41):
But they are aided in Tokyo. I think we will
have responsibility, by the way to try to dial down
this and not turn it into some kind of witch hunt.
These are regular athletes who've competed for many years in boxing.
They're entirely eligible women on their passports, and that I
think is enough said for me.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Okay, Now this is the question arises because a different organization,
the International Boxing Association, disqualified these two because they were
subject to a separate and recognized test. They said they
(03:21):
did not go through testosterone examinations, but that they were
disqualified from international competition by the International Boxing Association. The
International Olympic Committee stopped recognizing the IBA, and now it's
the IOC that oversees the boxing competition at the Olympics.
The IOC has very specifically said neither of these athletes
(03:45):
is transgender, and that the IOC has defended its decision
to allow both of them to compete in this year's
Paris Games. The unknowns about this, though, include what kind
of a test did the International Boxing is Association do?
Was it a chromosomal test? Did they check and see
(04:06):
if these athletes have X Y chromosomes? Because that means, dude,
they don't. They're not telling us all. They're saying that
the IBA maintains both boxers were subjected to a separate
and recognized test, but it wasn't about testosterone examinations. They
(04:27):
were disqualified because of that whatever. The results of that
test were late in last year's World Championships and according
to a Russian news agency, and again, I mean, I
just did an hour on why we can't necessarily trust Russia,
but a Russian news agency said that the disqualification of
those two from the World Championships was because it was
(04:47):
proven that they have X Y chromosomes. According to the
International Olympic Committee, they say they have no knowledge of
what those tests were. They were cobbled together overnight during
the championships to change the results. The IOC is sticking
by this. The IOC says it measures the age and
gender of athletes based on their passport in addition to
(05:11):
the boxing regulations that they came together and put together
for the Olympics. Specifically, the medical guidelines for these Olympics
do not appear to include any sort of an examination
to determine whether a competitor fighting in a women's competition
would possess unfair biological advantages. The IOC apparently does not
do chromosomal testing. I don't know if they ever will,
(05:33):
I don't know if they need to. But Algeria's im
On Kif and taiwan Kehlief and Taiwan's Lyn Tu Yang
one of them. I think Algeria's boxer fights tomorrow, Taiwan's
fought today, and one handily this is not over because
there are questions about what the IOC should do going
(05:54):
forward when it comes to things like genetic testing or
chromosomal testing for this whole thing. The four or person
blockbuster prison swap carried out this week required the US
to regroup after the death of Alexi Navalney. I mentioned
that in the first hour where I went through some
of the details and broke down exactly some of the machinations.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
We used that word too much. Somebody called us out
on it.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
The details of exactly what happened in that prisoner swap
and the negotiations it took to get there depended on
the willingness of Germany to release from custody a Russian
hit man who just five years ago committed a cold
blooded killing in Berlin. It also forced Russia to part
with the Americans that it was holding that were so valuable,
including Evan Gershkevich, the Wall Street Journal reporter.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
They'd just been, as.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
The Associated Press puts it, they've been stockpiling American prisoners
for bait. In all of this, few Americans have high
confidence in the Secret Services ability to keep presidential candidates safe.
That's according to a new poll from the Associated Press,
about three in ten three in ten Americans say they're
(07:05):
extremely or very confident that the Secret Service can keep
a presidential candidate safe from violence before the election. Of course,
secret Service, tasked with protecting presidents for more than a century,
is under scrutiny because of somebody who was able to
get close to and shoot former President Trump at that
rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. There is a news conference that
(07:27):
we do expect to see at the top of the
hour from the Secret Service. Don't know exactly what it
is that they're going to talk about, but we know
that they're out there. The Dow Jones Industrial average right
now is down about eight hundred and fifty points. A
new recession fear has come in crept into all of this.
And we're actually going to be talking with Mick mulvaney. Yeah,
former White House Chief of Staff McK mulvaney was a
(07:50):
Congressman for a long time and had actually been in
the Office of Management and Budget in the White House.
So we'll talk with him coming up at the bottom
of the hour about what we can expect to see
for stocks going into a tumultuous ninety plus days before
the election. There's an issue that's come up. California Governor
(08:11):
Newsom has signed an extradition warrant to bring Harvey Weinstein
back to California. And there's a weird it's not weird.
There is a connection, a personal connection. The Gavin Newsom
has to Harvey Weinstein through his wife, the first partner,
Jennifer Siebel Newsom. Now Weinstein, of course, was convicted of
(08:31):
rape and criminal assault four years ago in New York.
It was sentenced to twenty three years in prison. Now
he's in medical detention right now because he's just an
absolute mess.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
He's a bag of disease.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
It sounds like, and he's got COVID, and he's got
double pneumonia, et cetera, and on top of everything else
that's gone wrong with this guy physically. But the conviction
from New York was overturned at the end of April
after an appellate court said that the trial judge made
the mistake of allowing three women to testify that Harvey
Weinstein had assaulted them, even though he wasn't being charged
(09:04):
with those crimes or crimes related to their testimony. So
he was convicted of the rape charges in LA in
twenty twenty two and sentenced to sixteen years in California prison.
There was about a ninety day window that opened to
sign an extradition warrant after the conviction was overturned in April,
(09:27):
so he did so. The governor did on June nineteenth.
Now again the connection is Gavin Newsom's wife testified in
that trial here in LA. She testified she accused him
of raping and sexually assaulting her in two thousand and five.
They did find him guilty those on three charges, but
(09:50):
not of the two charges related to the accusations that
came from Jennifer Cebel Newsom. She says, the entire process
been one of the hardest experiences of my life.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
The most important takeaways.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
We all have a role to play in healing this
culture in which violence against women is the norm. And
she said of Harvey Weinstein, what he did to me
was the worst. His assault was excruciatingly traumatic. And she
said for years he walked away unfettered, while I spent
years nursing my wounds. Is it a little weird that
her husband gets to sign the extradition warrant for I mean,
(10:25):
he has to because he's the governor.
Speaker 5 (10:27):
Or.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
It doesn't have to he gets to because he's the governor.
Maybe he's just a little poetic justice for him to
protect his wife.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
It just seems a little bit odd.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
Well, the Dow Jones Industrial Average down about eight hundred
plus points. It's down eight seventy six right now, the
S and P five hundred, the NASDAK also down two
three percent. It's not been a great day on Wall Street,
and that's on top of a down day from yesterday,
and we're probably seeing the worst August start that we've
seen on Wall Street for more than twenty years. To
(10:59):
help us kind of break down. Some of this is
Mick mulvaney, of course, former acting White House Chief of
Staff and also a former director of Office of Management
and a Budget currently an economic contributor to News Nation. Mick,
thanks for taking time for us today.
Speaker 5 (11:14):
Happy to be here, hey, interesting to be in the
markets always.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
Yeah, no, kitten.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
The part of this has to be this unemployment report
that came out this morning. Job creation was not as
great as we expected in July, and the unemployment rates
back up to four point three percent, which is still
a good number.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Why is it?
Speaker 1 (11:32):
Why does that have an impact on what's going on
on Wall Street?
Speaker 5 (11:36):
Well, a couple of different things, is always the case
with the stock market. There's five or six different things
to go into an answer to a question like that,
So a couple of different things. First of all, the
markets are only back down now to where they were
I think July tenth, so less than a month ago.
So yes, they're down dramatically in the last couple of days.
But it's not like this is a I think BS
and P might be in a correction, but this is
(11:57):
not a major meltdown taking us back six months or
years worth of wealth creation That jobs numbers got a
lot of attention. Folks have been wondering about whether or
not that has been waiting too long to cut rates,
that been worried about a recession. They watched the job
numbers very clearly is sort of a bell weather for
whether or not we're moving towards recession, and the job
(12:18):
numbers were down. Any number below two hundred thousand is
a bad number. Getting above two hundred thousand is a
good number. You can take the unemployment rate and ignore
it because the unemployment rate is a two factory equation
too variable equation. It sort of depends on the number
of people actually looking for work. The real number that
we look at is the number of jobs created every
(12:39):
single month, and if it's under two hundred thousand dollars,
that's just kind of a weaker economy. This is the
third month in a row with under two hundred thousand
after the revisions, and I think it's five out of
the last ten that have been below two hundred thousand.
So that's that week getting the slow week ending of
the job market that got the market's a little bit spooped,
and they gave back most of the games from July,
but that's about it.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
Did defend make a mistake? Did we wait too long
to cut rates?
Speaker 5 (13:03):
You know, in hindsight, it's always easy to say that.
What I've always wondered, as someone who you know, worked
for the government and would work very you know, watch
this very very closely, was why do we think the
Fed is so much smarter than everybody else? They've been
wrong more than they've been right anyway, So if it
have been wrong this time, it shouldn't surprise anybody. You
won't go to answer that question until six months or
(13:24):
a year from that. Markets bounce back tomorrow if inflation
comes under control because of the little slowdown that we've
had on the job market, that everybody's ob well, maybe
the Fed was right. It's always hard to say. But
clearly the markets are spooped by the possibility of a
recession given those job numbers, And that's where I think
it's driving.
Speaker 2 (13:42):
All this is there speaking of?
Speaker 1 (13:44):
Is there a mechanism whereby they can cut rates without
waiting for their regular meeting?
Speaker 5 (13:50):
Sure? But why? I mean you do that in emergencies?
The Dow losing a couple of percentage of points is
not an emergency, and emergency would be the likes of
which we have during during the global financial crisis, maybe
during COVID, where they would jump in and do something
out of sequence. But I would I would hardly think
(14:11):
that this rise. And keep in mind that the FED
supposedly says they don't care about markets, right, they don't
care about the equity markets, They care about the overall economy.
And yes, the markets can be an indicator of health
from the economy, but that's only one of several. So
the SED is not going to intervene in the economy
just because the Dow shared a couple of thousand points.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
We're talking with Mick mulvaney, economic contributor for News Nation.
Of course you remember him as acting White House Chief
of Staff, also Director of Office of Management and Budget,
currently a co chair of Active Strategic Consultants. So you
mentioned in terms of keeping an eye on when we
get these jobs reports, not necessarily, you know, putting all
of our attention on the unemployment rate itself to four
(14:53):
point three percent, but to look at the number of
jobs created, is there, in general a better indicator of
the strength the health of the economy than the Dow.
I mean, everybody refers to that because it's a quick snapshot.
Is there a better number that we should keep an
eye on.
Speaker 5 (15:10):
Oh? I think, I think. I think that the job
creation is just as good. I think that wage growth
is just as good. Is our wages keeping up with inflation.
That's a pretty good sign of whether or not the
economy is healthy if you actually feel like you have
more money this month than you had last month, even
when you take into consideration increase in prices. And we're
(15:31):
not there yet, but in those circumstances, generally people might
think the economy is doing fairly well. Why well, because
they have more money to spend, They spend more, they
buy more things, companies' earnings go up, et cetera, et cetera.
So there's no again, no easy answer to your question
of multi variable equation. But yeah, you watch the markets,
but you watch again five or six other things.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
As well, and volatility.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
I look at the next nine to ninety five days
before before the election, I can't imagine. Listen, we there's
no way that in April you could have predicted that
what has happened this summer happened this summer with craziness
on all accounts of the campaign. An assassination attempt, a
(16:17):
major candidate dropping out, getting out of the race. I
mean none of this was predictable. That obviously goes to
a certain amount of volatility that we might be able
to expect over the next ninety five days.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
What are you looking for in the next three months.
Speaker 5 (16:32):
If you had written this and submitted it to Hollywood
for an episode or a series of episodes of The
West Wing, you would have laughed out, yeah, you know,
we would ever predict any of it's happening. Look, look,
election season has always there's always got variables to We
always look at these sort of you know, September surprises,
October surprises, et cetera. And yes, this is what worries
me the most, and it's something that doesn't get nearly
(16:53):
enough discussion. In fact, you haven't said the word yet,
and neither have I. Which is for thirty five more
than thirty five trillion dollars in debt now, I think
we bart on just one hundred billion dollars this week.
That's a huge number. And what does it do to us.
It takes away our ability to respond to emergency situations
because ordinarily, when times are good, we spend least of
(17:14):
times are bad, the government spends more to try and
even things out, And nowadays all we do is spend
more all the time, and that eventually is going to
take away our ability to respond when you really need help.
You need, say, an injection of stimulus into the economy.
That's what worries me. It worries everybody. Which is that
black Swan event. Would you just wake up when morning
everybody decides, you know what the government knows thirty six
(17:34):
train dollars. I'm not lending them any more money at
three and a half or four or four or five percent.
That's what you're really worry about. But the day to
day stuff, you know, certainly an assassination of temp is
a big deal, there's no question. But I don't think
who Kamala Harris is going to pick for her vice
president is going to move the markets very much. Neither
(17:54):
did when when Donald Trump took JD Vance. So those
are the those are the ordinary vicissitudes of American politics
and marketing.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Yeah, well there's nothing ordinary about this year, that's for certain.
All Right, Hey, great stuff, I really appreciate it. I
am of a fan of yours, and I like your
down to earth knowledge. About all of this stuff.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
So thank you, thanks so much.
Speaker 5 (18:16):
Have a great weekend, you bet.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Mick mulvaney there again, political economic contributor to News Nation,
former White House Chief of Staff, former Director of the
Office of Management and Budget, know as what he.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
Was talking about.
Speaker 1 (18:25):
The Federal Trade Commission has announced it's going to investigate
why grocery prices are still high even as the costs
for retailers have gone down. Chair Linda Kahan from the
Federal Trade Commission says this is investigation will look into
major grocery chains and that those grocery chains would be
(18:47):
ordered to provide information on their costs and prices on
common products. She did this at a She made the
announcement yesterday at a public meeting with a Justice department
that's looking into pricing practices. The United States has officially
recognized Venezuela's opposition presidential candidate at Mundo Gonzalez as the
winner of Venezuela's disputed election. Secretary of State Tony Blinken
(19:12):
made the comments despite the claim by the authoritarian president
there Nicolas Maduro that the Venezuelan controlled electoral body won
the Sunday election. The government is of course run by Maduro,
the election body was chosen by Maduro, and all of that.
Speaker 2 (19:32):
Still under a questionable.
Speaker 1 (19:36):
Questionable look out of Venezuela determining who actually won that election.
The four point seven billion dollar verdict against the NFL
for colluding to raise prices for the Sunday ticket TV
package overturned last night by federal judge. He disqualified expert
testimony used by the jury to determine damages.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
That's the key.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
It's not that the NFL is necessarily off the hook,
but the judgment itself, the four point seven billion may
have been crazy. In fact, the two economic witnesses. According
to the judge, the plaintiff's two economic witnesses used flawed
methodology and their attempts to show that the league was
overcharging Sunday ticket customers. They were thrown out because they
were based on witness testimony which included comparisons to how
(20:20):
college games are broadcast, and then some speculation on substantiated
speculation on how the NFL might sell games individually if
it was to do so. Also just in out of DC.
We'll talk more about it at the top of the hour.
Kamala Harris has won the votes of enough Democratic Convention
delegates to become the party's presidential nominee. The DNC chair
(20:42):
Jamie Harrison, made the comments today in a video. So
she is now I think the term that they're using
on social media is the official presumptive Democratic nominee for president.
So I have a dog. Dever's got a dog, mon
has got a dog. We all have dogs. Everybody has dogs.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
We love dogs.
Speaker 2 (21:03):
Dogs are incredible.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
We don't deserve them, but we have them, and we
keep them as little, tiny slaves in our homes.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
Oh I deserve them. Why because I'm a great dog owner.
Speaker 1 (21:13):
Well, and also you are so in love with other
animals also, I am that, okay, But you choose dogs
to be the thing that you keep in your home.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
I do.
Speaker 3 (21:23):
I'm allergic to cats.
Speaker 2 (21:24):
Good, everyone should be.
Speaker 3 (21:27):
I did have a parakeet and a cockatial at once.
Speaker 1 (21:29):
Oh really, birds can get loud and messy. Yeah, very
messy in this case. A survey says thirty nine percent
of dog owners report their emotional health is improved by dogs.
Thirty nine percent. That's a lot. Twenty seven percent say
their mental health is improved, and twenty five percent say
(21:51):
their physical health is improved by having dogs. Obviously, it's
simple stuff. They can comfort us when we're sad, They
help us through stressful times. Our bodies absolutely dump oxytocin
when they stare in our eyes just longingly. Our bodies
(22:13):
react to that.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
For some reason.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
They said that this is like, this is my favorite
stat in the whole study. Though, some people reported improvements
because their dog listens to them when they need to vent.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Well, what choice, I exactly.
Speaker 1 (22:27):
The dog may be asleep, but you think the dog
is listening to you. The dog inspires them to take
better care of themselves a little more than a third
of people. The big deal is that it's also physical activity.
Eighty one percent of people who own dogs say they
are more active because of their dogs, and that another
(22:49):
forty nine percent say their dog is the sole reason
that they get up and move. Wow, get up off
the couch because the dog is chewing something it's not
supposed to or whatever, but a lot of them go
for eighty six percent say they take their dogs for
regular walks. I had a brother in law who when
they got a dog, he dropped all kinds of weight
because he was out taking that dog for walks on
(23:10):
a regular basis.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
Some of them just.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
Play games with their dogs running. Twenty nine percent of
people run with their dogs, and twenty five percent say
they hike with their dogs. I would absolutely run with
my dog if his legs weren't three quarters of an inch.
Speaker 3 (23:26):
You don't have a hiking running kind of dogs.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
I do not.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
I have a dog that would rather dig in a
badger hole than go on a five mile walk with me. Same,
which is fine because there's you know, there's there's games
that you can play with a with a you know,
a terrier like that that would be just as fun.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
He's working on that.
Speaker 3 (23:47):
Well, he's just a baby.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
He's just a baby. Like he's a chewer, but we
like to chew each other. He grabs my arm and
then I grab his paw and I chew on it.
Really well, he's got to learn. He's got to learn
that that's not okay, that's how you teach Well, how
else am I supposed to teach.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
Him with a clicker, with a no, with a scolding voice.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
I've never heard of your way before.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
You've never heard of biting them back.
Speaker 1 (24:10):
I mean, technically you're not supposed to bite them, but
if you yelp at them or make a loud noise
like another like an adult dog would do if a
puppy nipped it.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
And that too hard, but not retaliating the same way
by biting.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Well, we're all animals when we get down to it,
aren't we. Swamp Watch is coming up. Also, we are
expecting a news conference from the US Secret Service. We're
not quite sure exactly what they're going to detail, but
we'll see if we can dip into that.
Speaker 2 (24:37):
You've been listening to The Gary and Shannon Show.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
You can always hear us live on KFI AM six
forty nine am to one pm every Monday through Friday,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
This is Gary and Shannon and you're listening to KFI
AM six forty the Gary and Shannon Show on demand
on the iHeartRadio app. Chevron, the second largest oil company
in the United States, is leaving California, formalizing this long
expected breakup. The company has ties to California the date
back to the eighteen seventies. Chevron had about seven thousand
(00:25):
employees already in the Houston area, about two thousand at
the current headquarters in San Ramon, California, which is right
up near San Francisco.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
So they're going to be moving.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Everybody, it looks like to just about everybody to Houston.
Three years after the broadcast audience plummeted for the Summer
Games in Tokyo, they have rebounded dramatically. NBC says it
drew nearly thirty five million viewers for the Tuesday night coverage,
which included the women's gymnastics team finals. They said total
(00:55):
audience delivery number includes all of the NBC platforms, live
coverage on NBC, Peacock, et cetera, the Gold Zone coverage,
which is like the NFL Networks Red Zone. Speaking of
the Olympics, there's a lot that's going on regarding men
fighting women in boxing in the Olympics. We'll try to
get to the bottom of it. And oh my gosh,
(01:16):
it's a second Gary and Shannon show breakdown?
Speaker 2 (01:19):
Ready?
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Do you understand the worst that are coming out of
my mouth?
Speaker 2 (01:23):
What are you talking about? The news got you confused?
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Do you understand it's time for another breakdown with Gary
and Shannon?
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Explain it to me slowly.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
I'm very old, all right.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
In this case, there are two boxers in the women's competition,
Algeria's Imani Khalif and Taiwan's lynn U Ting. Both of
them have won. Lyn U Ting actually fought this morning
and won, and they're The Olympic Committee is forced to
(01:56):
answer questions about all of this because these two women
appear to be men. Now, it's not as easy as
just saying that, because there are some questions about who
they are, where they came from, etc. Mark Adams is
an Olympic Committee spokesman and asked for a pause in
(02:17):
the rhetoric that has exploded around this case, which these cases,
I should say, which is basically that the Olympic Committee
is allowing men to fight women.
Speaker 4 (02:25):
Athletes boxes are entirely eligible. They are women on their passport,
they have competed for many years, and I actually think
it's not helpful to start stigmatizing people who take part.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
In sport like this.
Speaker 4 (02:41):
But they are aided in Tokyo. I think we will
have responsibility, by the way to try to dial down
this and not turn it into some kind of witch hunt.
These are regular athletes who've competed for many years in boxing.
They're entirely eligible women on their passports, and that I
think is enough said for me.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Okay, Now this is the question arises because a different organization,
the International Boxing Association, disqualified these two because they were
subject to a separate and recognized test. They said they
(03:21):
did not go through testosterone examinations, but that they were
disqualified from international competition by the International Boxing Association. The
International Olympic Committee stopped recognizing the IBA, and now it's
the IOC that oversees the boxing competition at the Olympics.
The IOC has very specifically said neither of these athletes
(03:45):
is transgender, and that the IOC has defended its decision
to allow both of them to compete in this year's
Paris Games. The unknowns about this, though, include what kind
of a test did the International Boxing is Association do?
Was it a chromosomal test? Did they check and see
(04:06):
if these athletes have X Y chromosomes? Because that means, dude,
they don't. They're not telling us all. They're saying that
the IBA maintains both boxers were subjected to a separate
and recognized test, but it wasn't about testosterone examinations. They
(04:27):
were disqualified because of that whatever. The results of that
test were late in last year's World Championships and according
to a Russian news agency, and again, I mean, I
just did an hour on why we can't necessarily trust Russia,
but a Russian news agency said that the disqualification of
those two from the World Championships was because it was
(04:47):
proven that they have X Y chromosomes. According to the
International Olympic Committee, they say they have no knowledge of
what those tests were. They were cobbled together overnight during
the championships to change the results. The IOC is sticking
by this. The IOC says it measures the age and
gender of athletes based on their passport in addition to
(05:11):
the boxing regulations that they came together and put together
for the Olympics. Specifically, the medical guidelines for these Olympics
do not appear to include any sort of an examination
to determine whether a competitor fighting in a women's competition
would possess unfair biological advantages. The IOC apparently does not
do chromosomal testing. I don't know if they ever will,
(05:33):
I don't know if they need to. But Algeria's im
On Kif and taiwan Kehlief and Taiwan's Lyn Tu Yang
one of them. I think Algeria's boxer fights tomorrow, Taiwan's
fought today, and one handily this is not over because
there are questions about what the IOC should do going
(05:54):
forward when it comes to things like genetic testing or
chromosomal testing for this whole thing. The four or person
blockbuster prison swap carried out this week required the US
to regroup after the death of Alexi Navalney. I mentioned
that in the first hour where I went through some
of the details and broke down exactly some of the machinations.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
We used that word too much. Somebody called us out
on it.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
The details of exactly what happened in that prisoner swap
and the negotiations it took to get there depended on
the willingness of Germany to release from custody a Russian
hit man who just five years ago committed a cold
blooded killing in Berlin. It also forced Russia to part
with the Americans that it was holding that were so valuable,
including Evan Gershkevich, the Wall Street Journal reporter.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
They'd just been, as.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
The Associated Press puts it, they've been stockpiling American prisoners
for bait. In all of this, few Americans have high
confidence in the Secret Services ability to keep presidential candidates safe.
That's according to a new poll from the Associated Press,
about three in ten three in ten Americans say they're
(07:05):
extremely or very confident that the Secret Service can keep
a presidential candidate safe from violence before the election. Of course,
secret Service, tasked with protecting presidents for more than a century,
is under scrutiny because of somebody who was able to
get close to and shoot former President Trump at that
rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. There is a news conference that
(07:27):
we do expect to see at the top of the
hour from the Secret Service. Don't know exactly what it
is that they're going to talk about, but we know
that they're out there. The Dow Jones Industrial average right
now is down about eight hundred and fifty points. A
new recession fear has come in crept into all of this.
And we're actually going to be talking with Mick mulvaney. Yeah,
former White House Chief of Staff McK mulvaney was a
(07:50):
Congressman for a long time and had actually been in
the Office of Management and Budget in the White House.
So we'll talk with him coming up at the bottom
of the hour about what we can expect to see
for stocks going into a tumultuous ninety plus days before
the election. There's an issue that's come up. California Governor
(08:11):
Newsom has signed an extradition warrant to bring Harvey Weinstein
back to California. And there's a weird it's not weird.
There is a connection, a personal connection. The Gavin Newsom
has to Harvey Weinstein through his wife, the first partner,
Jennifer Siebel Newsom. Now Weinstein, of course, was convicted of
(08:31):
rape and criminal assault four years ago in New York.
It was sentenced to twenty three years in prison. Now
he's in medical detention right now because he's just an
absolute mess.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
He's a bag of disease.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
It sounds like, and he's got COVID, and he's got
double pneumonia, et cetera, and on top of everything else
that's gone wrong with this guy physically. But the conviction
from New York was overturned at the end of April
after an appellate court said that the trial judge made
the mistake of allowing three women to testify that Harvey
Weinstein had assaulted them, even though he wasn't being charged
(09:04):
with those crimes or crimes related to their testimony. So
he was convicted of the rape charges in LA in
twenty twenty two and sentenced to sixteen years in California prison.
There was about a ninety day window that opened to
sign an extradition warrant after the conviction was overturned in April,
(09:27):
so he did so. The governor did on June nineteenth.
Now again the connection is Gavin Newsom's wife testified in
that trial here in LA. She testified she accused him
of raping and sexually assaulting her in two thousand and five.
They did find him guilty those on three charges, but
(09:50):
not of the two charges related to the accusations that
came from Jennifer Cebel Newsom. She says, the entire process
been one of the hardest experiences of my life.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
The most important takeaways.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
We all have a role to play in healing this
culture in which violence against women is the norm. And
she said of Harvey Weinstein, what he did to me
was the worst. His assault was excruciatingly traumatic. And she
said for years he walked away unfettered, while I spent
years nursing my wounds. Is it a little weird that
her husband gets to sign the extradition warrant for I mean,
(10:25):
he has to because he's the governor.
Speaker 5 (10:27):
Or.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
It doesn't have to he gets to because he's the governor.
Maybe he's just a little poetic justice for him to
protect his wife.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
It just seems a little bit odd.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
Well, the Dow Jones Industrial Average down about eight hundred
plus points. It's down eight seventy six right now, the
S and P five hundred, the NASDAK also down two
three percent. It's not been a great day on Wall Street,
and that's on top of a down day from yesterday,
and we're probably seeing the worst August start that we've
seen on Wall Street for more than twenty years. To
(10:59):
help us kind of break down. Some of this is
Mick mulvaney, of course, former acting White House Chief of
Staff and also a former director of Office of Management
and a Budget currently an economic contributor to News Nation. Mick,
thanks for taking time for us today.
Speaker 5 (11:14):
Happy to be here, hey, interesting to be in the
markets always.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
Yeah, no, kitten.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
The part of this has to be this unemployment report
that came out this morning. Job creation was not as
great as we expected in July, and the unemployment rates
back up to four point three percent, which is still
a good number.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Why is it?
Speaker 1 (11:32):
Why does that have an impact on what's going on
on Wall Street?
Speaker 5 (11:36):
Well, a couple of different things, is always the case
with the stock market. There's five or six different things
to go into an answer to a question like that,
So a couple of different things. First of all, the
markets are only back down now to where they were
I think July tenth, so less than a month ago.
So yes, they're down dramatically in the last couple of days.
But it's not like this is a I think BS
and P might be in a correction, but this is
(11:57):
not a major meltdown taking us back six months or
years worth of wealth creation That jobs numbers got a
lot of attention. Folks have been wondering about whether or
not that has been waiting too long to cut rates,
that been worried about a recession. They watched the job
numbers very clearly is sort of a bell weather for
whether or not we're moving towards recession, and the job
(12:18):
numbers were down. Any number below two hundred thousand is
a bad number. Getting above two hundred thousand is a
good number. You can take the unemployment rate and ignore
it because the unemployment rate is a two factory equation
too variable equation. It sort of depends on the number
of people actually looking for work. The real number that
we look at is the number of jobs created every
(12:39):
single month, and if it's under two hundred thousand dollars,
that's just kind of a weaker economy. This is the
third month in a row with under two hundred thousand
after the revisions, and I think it's five out of
the last ten that have been below two hundred thousand.
So that's that week getting the slow week ending of
the job market that got the market's a little bit spooped,
and they gave back most of the games from July,
but that's about it.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
Did defend make a mistake? Did we wait too long
to cut rates?
Speaker 5 (13:03):
You know, in hindsight, it's always easy to say that.
What I've always wondered, as someone who you know, worked
for the government and would work very you know, watch
this very very closely, was why do we think the
Fed is so much smarter than everybody else? They've been
wrong more than they've been right anyway, So if it
have been wrong this time, it shouldn't surprise anybody. You
won't go to answer that question until six months or
(13:24):
a year from that. Markets bounce back tomorrow if inflation
comes under control because of the little slowdown that we've
had on the job market, that everybody's ob well, maybe
the Fed was right. It's always hard to say. But
clearly the markets are spooped by the possibility of a
recession given those job numbers, And that's where I think
it's driving.
Speaker 2 (13:42):
All this is there speaking of?
Speaker 1 (13:44):
Is there a mechanism whereby they can cut rates without
waiting for their regular meeting?
Speaker 5 (13:50):
Sure? But why? I mean you do that in emergencies?
The Dow losing a couple of percentage of points is
not an emergency, and emergency would be the likes of
which we have during during the global financial crisis, maybe
during COVID, where they would jump in and do something
out of sequence. But I would I would hardly think
(14:11):
that this rise. And keep in mind that the FED
supposedly says they don't care about markets, right, they don't
care about the equity markets, They care about the overall economy.
And yes, the markets can be an indicator of health
from the economy, but that's only one of several. So
the SED is not going to intervene in the economy
just because the Dow shared a couple of thousand points.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
We're talking with Mick mulvaney, economic contributor for News Nation.
Of course you remember him as acting White House Chief
of Staff, also Director of Office of Management and Budget,
currently a co chair of Active Strategic Consultants. So you
mentioned in terms of keeping an eye on when we
get these jobs reports, not necessarily, you know, putting all
of our attention on the unemployment rate itself to four
(14:53):
point three percent, but to look at the number of
jobs created, is there, in general a better indicator of
the strength the health of the economy than the Dow.
I mean, everybody refers to that because it's a quick snapshot.
Is there a better number that we should keep an
eye on.
Speaker 5 (15:10):
Oh? I think, I think. I think that the job
creation is just as good. I think that wage growth
is just as good. Is our wages keeping up with inflation.
That's a pretty good sign of whether or not the
economy is healthy if you actually feel like you have
more money this month than you had last month, even
when you take into consideration increase in prices. And we're
(15:31):
not there yet, but in those circumstances, generally people might
think the economy is doing fairly well. Why well, because
they have more money to spend, They spend more, they
buy more things, companies' earnings go up, et cetera, et cetera.
So there's no again, no easy answer to your question
of multi variable equation. But yeah, you watch the markets,
but you watch again five or six other things.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
As well, and volatility.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
I look at the next nine to ninety five days
before before the election, I can't imagine. Listen, we there's
no way that in April you could have predicted that
what has happened this summer happened this summer with craziness
on all accounts of the campaign. An assassination attempt, a
(16:17):
major candidate dropping out, getting out of the race. I
mean none of this was predictable. That obviously goes to
a certain amount of volatility that we might be able
to expect over the next ninety five days.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
What are you looking for in the next three months.
Speaker 5 (16:32):
If you had written this and submitted it to Hollywood
for an episode or a series of episodes of The
West Wing, you would have laughed out, yeah, you know,
we would ever predict any of it's happening. Look, look,
election season has always there's always got variables to We
always look at these sort of you know, September surprises,
October surprises, et cetera. And yes, this is what worries
me the most, and it's something that doesn't get nearly
(16:53):
enough discussion. In fact, you haven't said the word yet,
and neither have I. Which is for thirty five more
than thirty five trillion dollars in debt now, I think
we bart on just one hundred billion dollars this week.
That's a huge number. And what does it do to us.
It takes away our ability to respond to emergency situations
because ordinarily, when times are good, we spend least of
(17:14):
times are bad, the government spends more to try and
even things out, And nowadays all we do is spend
more all the time, and that eventually is going to
take away our ability to respond when you really need help.
You need, say, an injection of stimulus into the economy.
That's what worries me. It worries everybody. Which is that
black Swan event. Would you just wake up when morning
everybody decides, you know what the government knows thirty six
(17:34):
train dollars. I'm not lending them any more money at
three and a half or four or four or five percent.
That's what you're really worry about. But the day to
day stuff, you know, certainly an assassination of temp is
a big deal, there's no question. But I don't think
who Kamala Harris is going to pick for her vice
president is going to move the markets very much. Neither
(17:54):
did when when Donald Trump took JD Vance. So those
are the those are the ordinary vicissitudes of American politics
and marketing.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Yeah, well there's nothing ordinary about this year, that's for certain.
All Right, Hey, great stuff, I really appreciate it. I
am of a fan of yours, and I like your
down to earth knowledge. About all of this stuff.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
So thank you, thanks so much.
Speaker 5 (18:16):
Have a great weekend, you bet.
Speaker 1 (18:17):
Mick mulvaney there again, political economic contributor to News Nation,
former White House Chief of Staff, former Director of the
Office of Management and Budget, know as what he.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
Was talking about.
Speaker 1 (18:25):
The Federal Trade Commission has announced it's going to investigate
why grocery prices are still high even as the costs
for retailers have gone down. Chair Linda Kahan from the
Federal Trade Commission says this is investigation will look into
major grocery chains and that those grocery chains would be
(18:47):
ordered to provide information on their costs and prices on
common products. She did this at a She made the
announcement yesterday at a public meeting with a Justice department
that's looking into pricing practices. The United States has officially
recognized Venezuela's opposition presidential candidate at Mundo Gonzalez as the
winner of Venezuela's disputed election. Secretary of State Tony Blinken
(19:12):
made the comments despite the claim by the authoritarian president
there Nicolas Maduro that the Venezuelan controlled electoral body won
the Sunday election. The government is of course run by Maduro,
the election body was chosen by Maduro, and all of that.
Speaker 2 (19:32):
Still under a questionable.
Speaker 1 (19:36):
Questionable look out of Venezuela determining who actually won that election.
The four point seven billion dollar verdict against the NFL
for colluding to raise prices for the Sunday ticket TV
package overturned last night by federal judge. He disqualified expert
testimony used by the jury to determine damages.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
That's the key.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
It's not that the NFL is necessarily off the hook,
but the judgment itself, the four point seven billion may
have been crazy. In fact, the two economic witnesses. According
to the judge, the plaintiff's two economic witnesses used flawed
methodology and their attempts to show that the league was
overcharging Sunday ticket customers. They were thrown out because they
were based on witness testimony which included comparisons to how
(20:20):
college games are broadcast, and then some speculation on substantiated
speculation on how the NFL might sell games individually if
it was to do so. Also just in out of DC.
We'll talk more about it at the top of the hour.
Kamala Harris has won the votes of enough Democratic Convention
delegates to become the party's presidential nominee. The DNC chair
(20:42):
Jamie Harrison, made the comments today in a video. So
she is now I think the term that they're using
on social media is the official presumptive Democratic nominee for president.
So I have a dog. Dever's got a dog, mon
has got a dog. We all have dogs. Everybody has dogs.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
We love dogs.
Speaker 2 (21:03):
Dogs are incredible.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
We don't deserve them, but we have them, and we
keep them as little, tiny slaves in our homes.
Speaker 3 (21:09):
Oh I deserve them. Why because I'm a great dog owner.
Speaker 1 (21:13):
Well, and also you are so in love with other
animals also, I am that, okay, But you choose dogs
to be the thing that you keep in your home.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
I do.
Speaker 3 (21:23):
I'm allergic to cats.
Speaker 2 (21:24):
Good, everyone should be.
Speaker 3 (21:27):
I did have a parakeet and a cockatial at once.
Speaker 1 (21:29):
Oh really, birds can get loud and messy. Yeah, very
messy in this case. A survey says thirty nine percent
of dog owners report their emotional health is improved by dogs.
Thirty nine percent. That's a lot. Twenty seven percent say
their mental health is improved, and twenty five percent say
(21:51):
their physical health is improved by having dogs. Obviously, it's
simple stuff. They can comfort us when we're sad, They
help us through stressful times. Our bodies absolutely dump oxytocin
when they stare in our eyes just longingly. Our bodies
(22:13):
react to that.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
For some reason.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
They said that this is like, this is my favorite
stat in the whole study. Though, some people reported improvements
because their dog listens to them when they need to vent.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Well, what choice, I exactly.
Speaker 1 (22:27):
The dog may be asleep, but you think the dog
is listening to you. The dog inspires them to take
better care of themselves a little more than a third
of people. The big deal is that it's also physical activity.
Eighty one percent of people who own dogs say they
are more active because of their dogs, and that another
(22:49):
forty nine percent say their dog is the sole reason
that they get up and move. Wow, get up off
the couch because the dog is chewing something it's not
supposed to or whatever, but a lot of them go
for eighty six percent say they take their dogs for
regular walks. I had a brother in law who when
they got a dog, he dropped all kinds of weight
because he was out taking that dog for walks on
(23:10):
a regular basis.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
Some of them just.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
Play games with their dogs running. Twenty nine percent of
people run with their dogs, and twenty five percent say
they hike with their dogs. I would absolutely run with
my dog if his legs weren't three quarters of an inch.
Speaker 3 (23:26):
You don't have a hiking running kind of dogs.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
I do not.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
I have a dog that would rather dig in a
badger hole than go on a five mile walk with me. Same,
which is fine because there's you know, there's there's games
that you can play with a with a you know,
a terrier like that that would be just as fun.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
He's working on that.
Speaker 3 (23:47):
Well, he's just a baby.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
He's just a baby. Like he's a chewer, but we
like to chew each other. He grabs my arm and
then I grab his paw and I chew on it.
Really well, he's got to learn. He's got to learn
that that's not okay, that's how you teach Well, how
else am I supposed to teach.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
Him with a clicker, with a no, with a scolding voice.
Speaker 3 (24:05):
I've never heard of your way before.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
You've never heard of biting them back.
Speaker 1 (24:10):
I mean, technically you're not supposed to bite them, but
if you yelp at them or make a loud noise
like another like an adult dog would do if a
puppy nipped it.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
And that too hard, but not retaliating the same way
by biting.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Well, we're all animals when we get down to it,
aren't we. Swamp Watch is coming up. Also, we are
expecting a news conference from the US Secret Service. We're
not quite sure exactly what they're going to detail, but
we'll see if we can dip into that.
Speaker 2 (24:37):
You've been listening to The Gary and Shannon Show.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
You can always hear us live on KFI AM six
forty nine am to one pm every Monday through Friday,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
Gary and Shannon News
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.