August 2, 2024 • 22 mins
Behind the prisoner swap: spies, a killer, secret messages, and unseen diplomacy. Algerian boxer Imane Khelif’s Olympic win draws gender debate despite her passport ID’ing her as a woman. KFI investigative reporter Steve Gregory joins the show to speak on new bodycam footage from LAPD showing a different account of what initial reports were calling an officer punching a handcuffed suspect in Watts. Shade will make or break American cities.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You're list Saints KFI AM six forty. The Bill Handles
show on demand on the iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
F Okay, we do this.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Let's talk about what happened yesterday, and it was pretty exciting.
Paul Whalen Evan Gerskovich are returned to the United States.
Paul Whalen in prison for almost five years for espionage,
Evan Gerskovich in prison for.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
A year and a half as a spy.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
Working for the Wall Street Journal. And when was Russia
going to release these prisoners?
Speaker 2 (00:36):
So well, let me tell you what happened. June twenty five.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
A group of CIA officers sit across from their Russian counterparts.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
It was a secret meeting in a Middle.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Eastern capital, we don't know which one, and the Americans
floated yet another proposal, an exchange of two dozen prisoners
sitting in jails in Russia would be released. And you've
got the the United States and countries across Europe and
they would release prisoners. It was a big, big deal.
(01:08):
Up to this point, there was no deal. So now
negotiations go on between the United States and Russia over
a prisoner strap swap, and this has been going on
for a year. Keep in mind as Anthony Blinkoln was saying,
we've been working on this night and day he was.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
They were.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
And the families. You notice that the families of Whalen
and Gershkovich, they were not saying that the US government
was not doing what it should. They understood, I mean,
they went public.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
We want the release, etc.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
We don't want you to forget our relatives, our loved
ones names.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
So that happened for over a year.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
And as that was happening, they came close a couple
of times, and it fell apart over and over again
because one of two sides balked, either America or Russia.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
That June meeting changed every thing.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Because the Russians took the proposal that the United States
presented June twenty five, and a couple of days later,
the CIA director is on the phone with a Russian
spy chief and all of a sudden, the deal comes through.
And this was negotiated mainly by spies and through a
(02:23):
hand delivered messages back and forth, which never happened. This
was not official channels, this was back channel stuff.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
The deal also freed, and this.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Was the one that really was the kicker. There's a
Russian hit man Vadim Krasakoff. He's been in jail in
Germany since twenty nineteen. He murdered a Chechen former separatist
fighter in a park in Berlin, and it sort of
everybody knew. It was made public that Putin loved this guy.
(02:57):
He praised the killing as patriotism and has for years
insisted that Kresakoff be part of any.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Swap in Germany.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Said no, this guy murdered on behalf of Russia, murdered
someone in Berlin, on our sovereign territory. President Biden gets
personally involved. He had said publicly, I'm in this and
we're talking every day. And to give you an idea
of how involved Biden was is that the deal was struck,
(03:27):
finally struck two hours before he announced his removal of
himself as a candidate, before he decided he was going
to leave, or announced he was going to leave, So
the two were going simultaneously. This is a guy who
was dealing with him leaving himself leaving at the same
time negotiating, and the deal made it happen. Now American
(03:49):
authorities say, this is not Daytonte, this is not We
don't have any better relations with Russia. This is simply
our own country's interests and there interests.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
And here's the problem too, we're looking at it.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Putin, all he has to do. Anybody who goes to Russia,
he just arrests them. Any American, any German, just arrests them.
And now you've got a hostage and manufacture charges, espionage, spying,
and which.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
None of that is true.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
So in December of twenty twenty two, two years ago,
Slovenia had made two arrests a couple posing as Argentinian
emmigrats turned out to be Russian spies. And at the
same time, the United States was trying to secure the
release of Paul Wheeland and of course Gerskovich. And by
(04:42):
the way, Paul Wheeland was arrested four years ago in
espionage charges. Now with those two Russian spies in Slovenia,
and you've got the big hancho that Putin loves, sitting
in the United States or sitting in Germany.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Guess what it all came together.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Putin wanted this guy, and it turns out without him,
no deal was going to be struck. The United States,
putting it all together, convinced Germany let this guy go
in a prisoner swap. It all came together and this
was one complicated affair. And so the last, the last
(05:27):
piece was putin saying no deal with this guy. Germany
saying we're not going to release him because Paul Whelan
and Grushkovic are not German.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
You know, why would we.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Well, it all came together, and it all came together
in a way that well, it turned out pretty well
to say the least. By the way, this reminds me
of the Cuban of missile crisis. You know who put
that deal together, the stopping the deal that was made
between Khrushchoff and JFK to be basically.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Avert World War Three.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
It was Robert Kennedy. It was Robert Kennedy, and it
was back channel. There was nothing that was said publicly.
Quite often you have these deals when they call back channels.
Sometimes individuals are and I'm talking about non governmental individuals
are involved in negotiating this. In this case it was
(06:23):
spies and sometimes it's very low low level government employees
where publicly nothing is said. So families are happy and
one quick one have you When these two got off
the air. And by the way, there were twenty four
that were released back and forth across the board, and
that were a few other Americans. Did you notice what
(06:45):
kind of shape both Paul Wheeland, Whalen and Gershkovic were in.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
They looked to be in terrific shape.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
It looked like they were getting off an airplane and
they had not even been in prison.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
So that's also good news.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Okay, So yesterday or the day before, two boxers went
into the ring in Paris, Imane Calif that was from Algeria,
Angela Cadini from Italy, and their match lasted all of
forty six seconds and Karini just walked away after forty
(07:24):
six seconds, went to her corner.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
She was done.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
She didn't shake Alif's hand.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
The referee raises Khylif's hand, but Karini is crying in
the ring.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
After sinking to her knees. She was done, and afterwards.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
A few minutes she said she quit because of the
pain from those few opening punches from Calif. I felt
a severe pain in my nose, and with the maturity
of a boxer, she said, I said enough because.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
I didn't want to. I didn't want to.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
I couldn't finish the match. Now, what makes this particularly
interesting is who is Imani Khalif a female boxer? Maybe
we'll call her she because she identifies as a she.
But there's an issue here. Okay, Khalif was disqualified in
(08:22):
twenty twenty three the World Championships because she failed a
gender eligibility test too much testosterone.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
And now, boy.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
Has this been divisive in the Olympics.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
In this game she's going on to go against a
Hungarian and Khalif is now considered a world boxer. But
the organization that she is okay with or that she
is part of, had an issue with the IOC. IOC
throws them off and so it basically the issue here
(09:05):
is who is a woman?
Speaker 2 (09:06):
How far do you go in determining a woman?
Speaker 3 (09:10):
I don't know about Khalif. Does she have a schwantz?
Speaker 2 (09:14):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Can you be a she with a schwantz? There are
plenty of trands that still have them and have boobs
and basically have everything because of a sex change. And
it's just a thing. And I don't think there are
any less women. Now, it was pretty close. There was
just a little bit too much testosterone in the blood.
(09:39):
I mean, they should have known when Khalif was wearing
the boxing shorts and her scroat was hanging a couple
of inches below and you could barely see it. So
they had a pretty good idea of who she is.
But she failed that test. Neil, you're shaking your head.
But that's okay.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
It's a it's an issue of gravity. I just want
to point that out.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
But what is the I've seen pictures where people are
pointing out at some bulge in her pants. I've seen
all kinds of things. So what is the determined? Is
it the chromosomes?
Speaker 1 (10:13):
So yeah, it's no, it's I think it's a testosterone level.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
It's a progesterone versus testosterone. You be you hit a
certain limit. That seems to be it. Uh And I
don't know enough of the science here to do some
women have testosterone more than other women.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
And where is the line?
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Why I just go off the chromosomes?
Speaker 3 (10:39):
You got me?
Speaker 2 (10:40):
I mean, I don't know.
Speaker 5 (10:41):
You don't have to do with this.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
No, but you keep your but hold on, you keep
but you keep your chromosomes.
Speaker 3 (10:46):
Those don't change. And so okay, but hang on a minute.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Let me ask you someone who's fully trans Okay, who
has all of the body parts male body parts? If
you're going to a woman in this case, this is
the issue. Has all the body parts removed? Has the
appropriate level of progesterone and not testosterone.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Because that can be dealt with with drugs, and says
I am a woman? Is that a woman?
Speaker 3 (11:12):
And the chromosomes don't change?
Speaker 4 (11:14):
Okay, So theoretically, let's look at this way because I'm
I'm like you. I believe you know, in America we
should be celebrating people's freedom to be who they are
and identify who they are and all of those things.
I support all that across the board. However, physiologically, if
they're saying I need to transform, right because I'm in
(11:35):
the wrong body. There are certain things you can do,
the genitalia, all those things, but you're still in a
physiological body that may be male dominant.
Speaker 5 (11:48):
It's true.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
But again, where so what is But see, here's the question,
what is male dominant?
Speaker 3 (11:54):
Because you can't bone bone density you.
Speaker 1 (11:57):
Can do you can deal with that structure. You can
deal with that with drugs. Where bone density changes, where
muscle structure changes, Uh, you can deal with all that.
The line I believe is very difficult. So you have
a man who for example, has.
Speaker 2 (12:13):
Takes on all all the drugs, has breasts.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Does the Schwan's ectomy where that is removed?
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Uh?
Speaker 2 (12:22):
And where do you go? And that's the problem here.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
And you have someone who is particularly strong body mass,
I don't know. And by the way, what is where
is the line with body masks? There are look at
the swimmers, you know, they have gods, they have body
they have body masks, and you and I wouldn't dream
of being able to look look at seymone Biles with
(12:46):
her legs and how powerful and muscular her legs are.
Speaker 4 (12:50):
And there are biological women that could knock me on
my mask. That's easy because they're just athletes. But anyway,
there's some standard you'd think somewhere.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
And there is a standard testosterone versus progesterone levels in
the blood that seems to me.
Speaker 4 (13:06):
Then why are people complaining if they because it tests.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
Because a lot of people say that that is unfair.
And you come from being a male all of a sudden,
bone density changes, bone structure does not, So it's really
up in the air.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
So and by the way, I.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Think the story here is Angela Karini bailing out after
forty six seconds in the ring and just gives it up.
By the way, you've got Kleif who's going against a
Hungarian on Saturday, who says, I'm not scared.
Speaker 3 (13:43):
I don't care about press or social media.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
If she or he is a man, Khalif, I will,
I will go ahead and fight and it'll be a
bigger victory for me if I win, which is probably
true anyway.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
So there it is great story.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Forty six seconds someone bails out and starts crying in
the ring.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
That's an Olympic champ.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
And by the way, I don't know what was going
on through her head.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
Probably Khalif's fist, is my guess. All right, let's do it.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
And we had a couple of segments because running late
on this one Steve Gregory and Steve, who probably has
more connections to the police forces and law enforces.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Anybody I know.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
There is a video out there, Steve.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
That shows what would appear to be excessive police force.
I mean, clearly a police officer punches out a guy and.
Speaker 3 (14:40):
So boy proof positive.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
But there there's another side of that coin and Steve explained.
Speaker 6 (14:45):
Sure, So we're going back to July twenty eighth, the
evening of July twenty eighth in the southeast part of
Los Angeles, when officers walked up on a car that
was parked on the wrong side of the street, facing
the wrong way. The sedan was heavily tinted. All the
windows in windshield were heavily tinted, which is illegal in itself.
Now this is known gang territory. Officers are approaching and
(15:07):
I want to play this audio clip for you here
in a second. But from that traffic stop, officers were
seen trying to detain a very very large man, and
one of the officers, as you mentioned, punches the guy
in the chin. And that twenty second video clip went
viral and it shows what appears to be an officer
(15:31):
assaulting a guy while he's in handcuffs. But let's start
with this first clip of audio from the perspective of
the officer's body cam.
Speaker 4 (15:39):
Hey, roll the windows down.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
What was going on? You?
Speaker 5 (15:45):
Roll the windows down? Roll the windows down.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
You're parked in your double parked, so it was going
over your double park man, and you're sitting in.
Speaker 7 (15:53):
The Yeah, got a license on you a going over?
Speaker 3 (16:03):
I just told you, man, what's going on? I'm I'm
have an idea on you your double part.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
But what does that mean though there's a cut your
double park with the wrong way in the street.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
What does that mean?
Speaker 5 (16:16):
Why you license? I got everything? Why license for me?
Speaker 1 (16:21):
Man?
Speaker 5 (16:21):
I do?
Speaker 2 (16:22):
Why door U?
Speaker 5 (16:24):
Because you're ignoring me? I didn't ignore it. Do you
step on the car? Step on the car? That weird does.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
For?
Speaker 3 (16:34):
Had you down for weapons?
Speaker 5 (16:38):
Okay?
Speaker 6 (16:38):
So that is the beginning of this exchange. And this
is what's always missing from these twenty second video clips.
You never see the context. This is a thirty three
minute encounter. Part of the problem is that twenty second
video clip. Everyone is jumping to conclusions that this is
another case of police brutality. But what I played before
(16:58):
the break was a very small clip, a couple minutes
of audio from bodycam footage. It was released by the
LAPD a couple nights ago, and it shows of the
engagement with the driver. When officers first walked up to
this car at one hundred and thirty third and Gram,
they didn't even think the car was occupied because again
(17:19):
the windows and windshields were so heavily tinted they didn't
even know someone was inside the car. And then when
they realized there was a driver. That's when they engage.
And you heard the officer say, roll down your window,
you know, give us your ID, and you clearly hear
the driver refusing to comply. Now, at this point, the
driver does get out of the car, and because officers
(17:40):
already have intel that it's a gang area, known gang area,
the guy was not complying with awful commands and there
was a suspicious situation. He was parked on the wrong side,
facing the wrong direction. Officers want to pat him down.
This does not mean the man is under arrest, and
this is where a lot of confusion happens. He wasn't
necessary being arrested or booked, but he was being legally
(18:02):
detained so officers could safely determine whether or not it
was a safe situation. So in this next clip, this
is when it.
Speaker 5 (18:09):
Escalates worse for yourself.
Speaker 7 (18:18):
Everybody, just put your head, put your hands on your back,
your hand, you your back.
Speaker 6 (18:42):
Now when you hear him go oh, and they're all screaming.
That was the moment of impact when the guy swung
and hit the man in the chin.
Speaker 5 (18:48):
The officer hit the man in the chin.
Speaker 6 (18:50):
So when I started to look deeper into this, and
I started to call people I know at the department
and those that have knowledge of training and what their
officers are trained to do. It was characterized to me
that what you saw was a distraction strike. A distraction
strike is something that officers employ when someone is not
being cooperative. Now, the other misnomber that we find in
(19:13):
this is even the associated press local media were all
reporting that officers assaulted the man while he was handcuffed
and posed no threat. Well thirty three minutes of this
and you can see why officers were trying to get
the guy to comply. Now, according to the bodycam footage
that I witnessed and people that I spoke to, the
(19:33):
man's right hand was never ever in a handcuff.
Speaker 5 (19:37):
It was slightly to the back of his Do.
Speaker 1 (19:39):
You see a swing from the man at all? Does
he remove his hand from the back from his back?
Speaker 5 (19:46):
No, you do not.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Okay.
Speaker 6 (19:48):
But here's the danger part, and I learned this during
the Kelly Thomas trial. When you have an individual, especially
this guy, as big as he is and towers over
these two officers. He was so big they had to
put two sets of handcuffs together in order to fit
it around the back part of his body. Now, his
left hand was already in a handcuff, and then they
(20:09):
had to handcuff another pair to that, and they were
attempting to put his right hand in handcuffs. That becomes
a dangerous weapon. If that man decided to flail with
only one handcuff on his wrist, he could cause serious
damage and serious injury to somebody. So there's that that's
going through the officer's minds as well. So when you
see the distraction strike and you hear the audio that
I just played, if you listened closely, after the strike
(20:32):
in the chin, a couple seconds later, you hear the
clicking of the handcuffs. That's the right hand finally being handcuffed.
The distraction strike worked.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
Now, knowing as much as you do about police and procedure,
is there any argument that this incident would be out
of policy?
Speaker 6 (20:48):
Sure, and the argument could very well be in again,
talking to people at the command level in the department,
they're going to also explore the proportionality of the strike.
Was the strike proportionate to the threat at hand? Was
it proportionate to what the officers needed to do to
get the suspect under control. So proportionality will be a
(21:09):
big part of this.
Speaker 1 (21:09):
Say and how I want you to analyze, because you
do this better than most. Was it a light strike
or was it a really good punch or somewhere in between.
Speaker 5 (21:22):
I can only tell you this.
Speaker 6 (21:23):
I'm not an expert at this, I really am not,
and I'm not qualified to give you a definitive, but
I will tell you that it was explained to me
by those who train officers that if it was a
full punch, you would have seen the officer step back
and take a step forward. That is an aggressive punch.
In this case, the officer was still firmly rooted in
his stance when his arm just kind of went up
(21:43):
and hit the man in the chest, in the chin
rather and again, it was determined, or it was characterized
to me that it was nothing more than a distraction
strike to get the guy away from thinking about resisting,
and just enough so officers could get control of the suspect.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
All right, Steve, thank you, quick word, tomorrow is unsolved.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
And also you have studio six forty.
Speaker 5 (22:06):
That's right, and this Sunday is going to be a
good one.
Speaker 6 (22:08):
The officers are the officers, the students three college journalists
will be talking about the incident that we just discussed.
Also President Trump's appearance at the NABJ conference and social
media's role in the election.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Yeah, that's the new show that Steve hosts Sundays two
to four and it's Studio six forty.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Great idea too, about college.
Speaker 1 (22:29):
Students, journalism, students discussing the issues.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
Of the day.
Speaker 1 (22:32):
All right, and then of course Unsolved seven nine o'clock
on Saturday night.
Speaker 5 (22:37):
Thanks buddy.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
All right, take care Steve.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
This is KFI AM six forty live everywhere on the
iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
You've been listening to the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Catch my show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
You're list Saints KFI AM six forty. The Bill Handles
show on demand on the iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
F Okay, we do this.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Let's talk about what happened yesterday, and it was pretty exciting.
Paul Whalen Evan Gerskovich are returned to the United States.
Paul Whalen in prison for almost five years for espionage,
Evan Gerskovich in prison for.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
A year and a half as a spy.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
Working for the Wall Street Journal. And when was Russia
going to release these prisoners?
Speaker 2 (00:36):
So well, let me tell you what happened. June twenty five.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
A group of CIA officers sit across from their Russian counterparts.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
It was a secret meeting in a Middle.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Eastern capital, we don't know which one, and the Americans
floated yet another proposal, an exchange of two dozen prisoners
sitting in jails in Russia would be released. And you've
got the the United States and countries across Europe and
they would release prisoners. It was a big, big deal.
(01:08):
Up to this point, there was no deal. So now
negotiations go on between the United States and Russia over
a prisoner strap swap, and this has been going on
for a year. Keep in mind as Anthony Blinkoln was saying,
we've been working on this night and day he was.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
They were.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
And the families. You notice that the families of Whalen
and Gershkovich, they were not saying that the US government
was not doing what it should. They understood, I mean,
they went public.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
We want the release, etc.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
We don't want you to forget our relatives, our loved
ones names.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
So that happened for over a year.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
And as that was happening, they came close a couple
of times, and it fell apart over and over again
because one of two sides balked, either America or Russia.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
That June meeting changed every thing.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Because the Russians took the proposal that the United States
presented June twenty five, and a couple of days later,
the CIA director is on the phone with a Russian
spy chief and all of a sudden, the deal comes through.
And this was negotiated mainly by spies and through a
(02:23):
hand delivered messages back and forth, which never happened. This
was not official channels, this was back channel stuff.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
The deal also freed, and this.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Was the one that really was the kicker. There's a
Russian hit man Vadim Krasakoff. He's been in jail in
Germany since twenty nineteen. He murdered a Chechen former separatist
fighter in a park in Berlin, and it sort of
everybody knew. It was made public that Putin loved this guy.
(02:57):
He praised the killing as patriotism and has for years
insisted that Kresakoff be part of any.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Swap in Germany.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Said no, this guy murdered on behalf of Russia, murdered
someone in Berlin, on our sovereign territory. President Biden gets
personally involved. He had said publicly, I'm in this and
we're talking every day. And to give you an idea
of how involved Biden was is that the deal was struck,
(03:27):
finally struck two hours before he announced his removal of
himself as a candidate, before he decided he was going
to leave, or announced he was going to leave, So
the two were going simultaneously. This is a guy who
was dealing with him leaving himself leaving at the same
time negotiating, and the deal made it happen. Now American
(03:49):
authorities say, this is not Daytonte, this is not We
don't have any better relations with Russia. This is simply
our own country's interests and there interests.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
And here's the problem too, we're looking at it.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Putin, all he has to do. Anybody who goes to Russia,
he just arrests them. Any American, any German, just arrests them.
And now you've got a hostage and manufacture charges, espionage, spying,
and which.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
None of that is true.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
So in December of twenty twenty two, two years ago,
Slovenia had made two arrests a couple posing as Argentinian
emmigrats turned out to be Russian spies. And at the
same time, the United States was trying to secure the
release of Paul Wheeland and of course Gerskovich. And by
(04:42):
the way, Paul Wheeland was arrested four years ago in
espionage charges. Now with those two Russian spies in Slovenia,
and you've got the big hancho that Putin loves, sitting
in the United States or sitting in Germany.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Guess what it all came together.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Putin wanted this guy, and it turns out without him,
no deal was going to be struck. The United States,
putting it all together, convinced Germany let this guy go
in a prisoner swap. It all came together and this
was one complicated affair. And so the last, the last
(05:27):
piece was putin saying no deal with this guy. Germany
saying we're not going to release him because Paul Whelan
and Grushkovic are not German.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
You know, why would we.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Well, it all came together, and it all came together
in a way that well, it turned out pretty well
to say the least. By the way, this reminds me
of the Cuban of missile crisis. You know who put
that deal together, the stopping the deal that was made
between Khrushchoff and JFK to be basically.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Avert World War Three.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
It was Robert Kennedy. It was Robert Kennedy, and it
was back channel. There was nothing that was said publicly.
Quite often you have these deals when they call back channels.
Sometimes individuals are and I'm talking about non governmental individuals
are involved in negotiating this. In this case it was
(06:23):
spies and sometimes it's very low low level government employees
where publicly nothing is said. So families are happy and
one quick one have you When these two got off
the air. And by the way, there were twenty four
that were released back and forth across the board, and
that were a few other Americans. Did you notice what
(06:45):
kind of shape both Paul Wheeland, Whalen and Gershkovic were in.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
They looked to be in terrific shape.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
It looked like they were getting off an airplane and
they had not even been in prison.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
So that's also good news.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Okay, So yesterday or the day before, two boxers went
into the ring in Paris, Imane Calif that was from Algeria,
Angela Cadini from Italy, and their match lasted all of
forty six seconds and Karini just walked away after forty
(07:24):
six seconds, went to her corner.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
She was done.
Speaker 2 (07:28):
She didn't shake Alif's hand.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
The referee raises Khylif's hand, but Karini is crying in
the ring.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
After sinking to her knees. She was done, and afterwards.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
A few minutes she said she quit because of the
pain from those few opening punches from Calif. I felt
a severe pain in my nose, and with the maturity
of a boxer, she said, I said enough because.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
I didn't want to. I didn't want to.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
I couldn't finish the match. Now, what makes this particularly
interesting is who is Imani Khalif a female boxer? Maybe
we'll call her she because she identifies as a she.
But there's an issue here. Okay, Khalif was disqualified in
(08:22):
twenty twenty three the World Championships because she failed a
gender eligibility test too much testosterone.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
And now, boy.
Speaker 2 (08:37):
Has this been divisive in the Olympics.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
In this game she's going on to go against a
Hungarian and Khalif is now considered a world boxer. But
the organization that she is okay with or that she
is part of, had an issue with the IOC. IOC
throws them off and so it basically the issue here
(09:05):
is who is a woman?
Speaker 2 (09:06):
How far do you go in determining a woman?
Speaker 3 (09:10):
I don't know about Khalif. Does she have a schwantz?
Speaker 2 (09:14):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Can you be a she with a schwantz? There are
plenty of trands that still have them and have boobs
and basically have everything because of a sex change. And
it's just a thing. And I don't think there are
any less women. Now, it was pretty close. There was
just a little bit too much testosterone in the blood.
(09:39):
I mean, they should have known when Khalif was wearing
the boxing shorts and her scroat was hanging a couple
of inches below and you could barely see it. So
they had a pretty good idea of who she is.
But she failed that test. Neil, you're shaking your head.
But that's okay.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
It's a it's an issue of gravity. I just want
to point that out.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
But what is the I've seen pictures where people are
pointing out at some bulge in her pants. I've seen
all kinds of things. So what is the determined? Is
it the chromosomes?
Speaker 1 (10:13):
So yeah, it's no, it's I think it's a testosterone level.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
It's a progesterone versus testosterone. You be you hit a
certain limit. That seems to be it. Uh And I
don't know enough of the science here to do some
women have testosterone more than other women.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
And where is the line?
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Why I just go off the chromosomes?
Speaker 3 (10:39):
You got me?
Speaker 2 (10:40):
I mean, I don't know.
Speaker 5 (10:41):
You don't have to do with this.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
No, but you keep your but hold on, you keep
but you keep your chromosomes.
Speaker 3 (10:46):
Those don't change. And so okay, but hang on a minute.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Let me ask you someone who's fully trans Okay, who
has all of the body parts male body parts? If
you're going to a woman in this case, this is
the issue. Has all the body parts removed? Has the
appropriate level of progesterone and not testosterone.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Because that can be dealt with with drugs, and says
I am a woman? Is that a woman?
Speaker 3 (11:12):
And the chromosomes don't change?
Speaker 4 (11:14):
Okay, So theoretically, let's look at this way because I'm
I'm like you. I believe you know, in America we
should be celebrating people's freedom to be who they are
and identify who they are and all of those things.
I support all that across the board. However, physiologically, if
they're saying I need to transform, right because I'm in
(11:35):
the wrong body. There are certain things you can do,
the genitalia, all those things, but you're still in a
physiological body that may be male dominant.
Speaker 5 (11:48):
It's true.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
But again, where so what is But see, here's the question,
what is male dominant?
Speaker 3 (11:54):
Because you can't bone bone density you.
Speaker 1 (11:57):
Can do you can deal with that structure. You can
deal with that with drugs. Where bone density changes, where
muscle structure changes, Uh, you can deal with all that.
The line I believe is very difficult. So you have
a man who for example, has.
Speaker 2 (12:13):
Takes on all all the drugs, has breasts.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
Does the Schwan's ectomy where that is removed?
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Uh?
Speaker 2 (12:22):
And where do you go? And that's the problem here.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
And you have someone who is particularly strong body mass,
I don't know. And by the way, what is where
is the line with body masks? There are look at
the swimmers, you know, they have gods, they have body
they have body masks, and you and I wouldn't dream
of being able to look look at seymone Biles with
(12:46):
her legs and how powerful and muscular her legs are.
Speaker 4 (12:50):
And there are biological women that could knock me on
my mask. That's easy because they're just athletes. But anyway,
there's some standard you'd think somewhere.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
And there is a standard testosterone versus progesterone levels in
the blood that seems to me.
Speaker 4 (13:06):
Then why are people complaining if they because it tests.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
Because a lot of people say that that is unfair.
And you come from being a male all of a sudden,
bone density changes, bone structure does not, So it's really
up in the air.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
So and by the way, I.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Think the story here is Angela Karini bailing out after
forty six seconds in the ring and just gives it up.
By the way, you've got Kleif who's going against a
Hungarian on Saturday, who says, I'm not scared.
Speaker 3 (13:43):
I don't care about press or social media.
Speaker 1 (13:46):
If she or he is a man, Khalif, I will,
I will go ahead and fight and it'll be a
bigger victory for me if I win, which is probably
true anyway.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
So there it is great story.
Speaker 1 (13:59):
Forty six seconds someone bails out and starts crying in
the ring.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
That's an Olympic champ.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
And by the way, I don't know what was going
on through her head.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
Probably Khalif's fist, is my guess. All right, let's do it.
Speaker 1 (14:15):
And we had a couple of segments because running late
on this one Steve Gregory and Steve, who probably has
more connections to the police forces and law enforces.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Anybody I know.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
There is a video out there, Steve.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
That shows what would appear to be excessive police force.
I mean, clearly a police officer punches out a guy and.
Speaker 3 (14:40):
So boy proof positive.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
But there there's another side of that coin and Steve explained.
Speaker 6 (14:45):
Sure, So we're going back to July twenty eighth, the
evening of July twenty eighth in the southeast part of
Los Angeles, when officers walked up on a car that
was parked on the wrong side of the street, facing
the wrong way. The sedan was heavily tinted. All the
windows in windshield were heavily tinted, which is illegal in itself.
Now this is known gang territory. Officers are approaching and
(15:07):
I want to play this audio clip for you here
in a second. But from that traffic stop, officers were
seen trying to detain a very very large man, and
one of the officers, as you mentioned, punches the guy
in the chin. And that twenty second video clip went
viral and it shows what appears to be an officer
(15:31):
assaulting a guy while he's in handcuffs. But let's start
with this first clip of audio from the perspective of
the officer's body cam.
Speaker 4 (15:39):
Hey, roll the windows down.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
What was going on? You?
Speaker 5 (15:45):
Roll the windows down? Roll the windows down.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
You're parked in your double parked, so it was going
over your double park man, and you're sitting in.
Speaker 7 (15:53):
The Yeah, got a license on you a going over?
Speaker 3 (16:03):
I just told you, man, what's going on? I'm I'm
have an idea on you your double part.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
But what does that mean though there's a cut your
double park with the wrong way in the street.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
What does that mean?
Speaker 5 (16:16):
Why you license? I got everything? Why license for me?
Speaker 1 (16:21):
Man?
Speaker 5 (16:21):
I do?
Speaker 2 (16:22):
Why door U?
Speaker 5 (16:24):
Because you're ignoring me? I didn't ignore it. Do you
step on the car? Step on the car? That weird does.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
For?
Speaker 3 (16:34):
Had you down for weapons?
Speaker 5 (16:38):
Okay?
Speaker 6 (16:38):
So that is the beginning of this exchange. And this
is what's always missing from these twenty second video clips.
You never see the context. This is a thirty three
minute encounter. Part of the problem is that twenty second
video clip. Everyone is jumping to conclusions that this is
another case of police brutality. But what I played before
(16:58):
the break was a very small clip, a couple minutes
of audio from bodycam footage. It was released by the
LAPD a couple nights ago, and it shows of the
engagement with the driver. When officers first walked up to
this car at one hundred and thirty third and Gram,
they didn't even think the car was occupied because again
(17:19):
the windows and windshields were so heavily tinted they didn't
even know someone was inside the car. And then when
they realized there was a driver. That's when they engage.
And you heard the officer say, roll down your window,
you know, give us your ID, and you clearly hear
the driver refusing to comply. Now, at this point, the
driver does get out of the car, and because officers
(17:40):
already have intel that it's a gang area, known gang area,
the guy was not complying with awful commands and there
was a suspicious situation. He was parked on the wrong side,
facing the wrong direction. Officers want to pat him down.
This does not mean the man is under arrest, and
this is where a lot of confusion happens. He wasn't
necessary being arrested or booked, but he was being legally
(18:02):
detained so officers could safely determine whether or not it
was a safe situation. So in this next clip, this
is when it.
Speaker 5 (18:09):
Escalates worse for yourself.
Speaker 7 (18:18):
Everybody, just put your head, put your hands on your back,
your hand, you your back.
Speaker 6 (18:42):
Now when you hear him go oh, and they're all screaming.
That was the moment of impact when the guy swung
and hit the man in the chin.
Speaker 5 (18:48):
The officer hit the man in the chin.
Speaker 6 (18:50):
So when I started to look deeper into this, and
I started to call people I know at the department
and those that have knowledge of training and what their
officers are trained to do. It was characterized to me
that what you saw was a distraction strike. A distraction
strike is something that officers employ when someone is not
being cooperative. Now, the other misnomber that we find in
(19:13):
this is even the associated press local media were all
reporting that officers assaulted the man while he was handcuffed
and posed no threat. Well thirty three minutes of this
and you can see why officers were trying to get
the guy to comply. Now, according to the bodycam footage
that I witnessed and people that I spoke to, the
(19:33):
man's right hand was never ever in a handcuff.
Speaker 5 (19:37):
It was slightly to the back of his Do.
Speaker 1 (19:39):
You see a swing from the man at all? Does
he remove his hand from the back from his back?
Speaker 5 (19:46):
No, you do not.
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Okay.
Speaker 6 (19:48):
But here's the danger part, and I learned this during
the Kelly Thomas trial. When you have an individual, especially
this guy, as big as he is and towers over
these two officers. He was so big they had to
put two sets of handcuffs together in order to fit
it around the back part of his body. Now, his
left hand was already in a handcuff, and then they
(20:09):
had to handcuff another pair to that, and they were
attempting to put his right hand in handcuffs. That becomes
a dangerous weapon. If that man decided to flail with
only one handcuff on his wrist, he could cause serious
damage and serious injury to somebody. So there's that that's
going through the officer's minds as well. So when you
see the distraction strike and you hear the audio that
I just played, if you listened closely, after the strike
(20:32):
in the chin, a couple seconds later, you hear the
clicking of the handcuffs. That's the right hand finally being handcuffed.
The distraction strike worked.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
Now, knowing as much as you do about police and procedure,
is there any argument that this incident would be out
of policy?
Speaker 6 (20:48):
Sure, and the argument could very well be in again,
talking to people at the command level in the department,
they're going to also explore the proportionality of the strike.
Was the strike proportionate to the threat at hand? Was
it proportionate to what the officers needed to do to
get the suspect under control. So proportionality will be a
(21:09):
big part of this.
Speaker 1 (21:09):
Say and how I want you to analyze, because you
do this better than most. Was it a light strike
or was it a really good punch or somewhere in between.
Speaker 5 (21:22):
I can only tell you this.
Speaker 6 (21:23):
I'm not an expert at this, I really am not,
and I'm not qualified to give you a definitive, but
I will tell you that it was explained to me
by those who train officers that if it was a
full punch, you would have seen the officer step back
and take a step forward. That is an aggressive punch.
In this case, the officer was still firmly rooted in
his stance when his arm just kind of went up
(21:43):
and hit the man in the chest, in the chin
rather and again, it was determined, or it was characterized
to me that it was nothing more than a distraction
strike to get the guy away from thinking about resisting,
and just enough so officers could get control of the suspect.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
All right, Steve, thank you, quick word, tomorrow is unsolved.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
And also you have studio six forty.
Speaker 5 (22:06):
That's right, and this Sunday is going to be a
good one.
Speaker 6 (22:08):
The officers are the officers, the students three college journalists
will be talking about the incident that we just discussed.
Also President Trump's appearance at the NABJ conference and social
media's role in the election.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Yeah, that's the new show that Steve hosts Sundays two
to four and it's Studio six forty.
Speaker 3 (22:26):
Great idea too, about college.
Speaker 1 (22:29):
Students, journalism, students discussing the issues.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
Of the day.
Speaker 1 (22:32):
All right, and then of course Unsolved seven nine o'clock
on Saturday night.
Speaker 5 (22:37):
Thanks buddy.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
All right, take care Steve.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
This is KFI AM six forty live everywhere on the
iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
You've been listening to the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Catch my show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
The Bill Handel Show News
Popular Podcasts
1. Stuff You Missed in History Class
Join Holly and Tracy as they bring you the greatest and strangest Stuff You Missed In History Class in this podcast by iHeartRadio.
2. Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
3. Crime Junkie
If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people.