are part of the problem rather than part of the solution. and there is a huge level of unconscious bias. the thing with unconscious bias is it is actually no—one�*s fault. but once it has been pointed out or identified within yourself, you then need to make it right. it is education, it's awareness. queen elizabeth, though, was warm and welcoming. meghan recalled their first meeting at windsor castle and her first curtsy. i curtsied as though i was like. "pleasure to meet you, your majesty! " so, have these programmes changed anything? this morning, king charles was out and about on an official visit. buckingham palace is saying nothing publicly, though privately, officials are growing weary. i think there is a sort _ of sense of both disappointment and exasperation in the palace that the couple feel _
and is the billion dollars ultimately going to yield the best benefit for the market, for the customer, and ultimately for the end user, for the consumer, for the people in need, for the 95% of the world that are desperate to move themselves up the ladder in the world? or will the motivation of the market, the market that says, "if this works, i will get paid for it" — will that source the billion? and by the way, it's not... if i may interrupt, i mean, that sounds like, frankly, a billionaire mounting an extremely, er, persuasive defence of capitalism. but we live on a planet which is dominated by capitalism. and what we see is inequity of every different sort, across this planet. we see billions of people living with virtually nothing. we see a tiny, tiny few in the elite — like you, dave friedberg — living with unimaginable wealth. capitalism doesn't work. capitalism has its downside. have you read any of steven pinker�*s books? yeah, in fact, we've had him on the show.
existential threat, right, it started when we were roaming the savannah looking for food, and then, we realised we could engineer the earth and make food. and that was the dawn of agriculture. and every time humans have faced some sort of existential threat, and it has been many times in our history — and we always seem to think we are facing an existential threat, perhaps we're hard—wired evolutionarily to think that — our ingenuity always seems to prevail. some new invention or engineering, or discovery has enabled some revolution in abundance for humankind. and so, there are countless examples. well, i would counter that with the notion of the law of unintended consequences. yes, human history shows us so many different ways in which technologies have progressed human capacities. but if we think of the last great technological era of revolution, that is the, sort of, the steam engine, the combustion engine, the industrial revolution,
of relief, as you can imagine. i have cried, i have laughed, i have smiled. i have -- just everything. it's just a roller coaster of mostly good emotions. and yet also we recognize that paul whelan's family, david whelan, who i had the opportunity to speak with a few months ago, a really emotional, heartfelt conversation for the two of us, supporting each other and just recognizing that we are now connected. so it has been the highs and lows of that. but i would not be honest if i wasn't saying that my heart is overjoyed for bg, for cherelle, for her family, and for the 144, that's what we call the members of our union. >> i gotta say, if you look at this sort of the arc of the last couple years, wnba players got rid of republican senator in
either donald trump or his post presidency office in contempt, in which case they could face fines. but this sort of tells you how contentious things have been behind the scenes between the trump team and the justice department. >> fascinating. john dean and cnn legal analyst and former federal prosecutor jennifer rodgers. what's your reaction to this news that perhaps as many as four others beyond the former president are being looked and possibly referred to the select committee of the doj? >> i don't think it will influence the department. it will certainly influence the public, which in turn might influence the department. this really focuses on these people there will be more information normally from a criminal investigation will be revealed about why the committee feels these people have earned a referral. so i think it's an important move, and i would not be surprised if there is some more that get named. >> jennifer, how do you think the attorney general of the department of justice weighed these referrals? >> not really at all, anderson.
out a list of things they were looking for initially that led to the subpoena ultimately along with other documents, i have a belief that both things are true. i believe there is more out there that they do not know is missing, but i also believe there are very specific things that they have been looking for that have not shown up yet. i think it's actually both. i think they may believe, look, the universe of documents thet have not been returned to us is somewhat amorphous in as much as we don't know how deep this rabbit hole goes but i also think they're very clear about certain specific documents that have not been returned that nobody has accounted for and no one has yet to say, we don't know. the third thing i think has also played a role is donald trump himself has kind of told on himself in terms of the interviews he's given about this conversation. he at one point said if i take the documents wherever i take them, that suggests he may have taken them to other places besides mar-a-lago. he know he has properties all across the country. that stands to reason for someone who has this sort of
their own sort of counsels of decision making. that's the scary part of this, the elite themselves are structurally turning themselves into bubble boys. >> tucker: into what they say they hate. i wonder, i don't know the answer but could russian media be more controlled than american media is? maybe, but maybe not. >> yes, i mean, in 2020, obviously i was working at "the new york post." that confluence of corporate, big tech, deep state, blue check media, all working together, you saw that. in a way it was sort of more terrifying because there is no censor of power. hey, it's this one person, we can appeal through this recognized process, which is why, tucker, we still need to insist on section 230 reform. the reason twitter and facebook and youtube and all of these others get away with this is because of a law in the 1990s
six years later, she received a humanitarian award at the 65th academy awards for her work in the fight against aids. >> i accept this award in honor of all the men, women, and children with aids who are waging incredibly valiant battles for their lives. those to whom i have given my commitment. >> joining me now is kate anderson brouwer, author of the new book "elizabeth taylor, the grit and glamour of an icon." thank you so much for being here. and you know, because my formative years were in the 1980s, my junior high and high school years, i remember this era very well. the fear about hiv and aids, the sort of paranoia about the idea, could you get it just from touching someone, from hugging someone or sharing your milk carton with someone at school, even for kids, it was kind of terrifying and the president at
was like... _ curtsy. i curtsied as though i was like... "pleasure - curtsy. i curtsied as though i was like... "pleasure to i curtsy. i curtsied as though i l was like... "pleasure to meet you. — was like... "pleasure to meet you. your— was like... "pleasure to meet you, your majesty." was like... �*pleasure to meet you, your majesty."— you, your ma'esty.�* so, have these you, your majesty." so, have these programmes _ you, your majesty." so, have these programmes change i these programmes change anything? this morning, king charles was out and about on a official visit. buckingham palace is saying nothing publicly though privately officials are growing weary. i think there is a sort of sense of both disappointment and exasperation at the palace. the couple feel the need to keep going on about how miserable they were in their own existence. at the same time, the couple feel they need to keep telling the world why they left. . . . , . , left. i accept that they will be people _ left. i accept that they will be people around - left. i accept that they will be people around the i left. i accept that they willl be people around the world left. i accept that they will i be people around the world to fundamentally disagree with what — fundamentally disagree with what i — fundamentally disagree with what i have done and howl fundamentally disagree with what i have done and how i have done _ what i have done and how i have done it. — what i have done and how i have done it. but _ what i have done and how i have done it, but i knew that i had to do— done it, but i knew that i had to do everything i could to protect— to do everything i could to protect my family.- to do everything i could to protect my family. three more hours of harry _ protect my family. three more hours of harry and _ protect my family. three more hours of harry and meghan i hours of harry and meghan telling that truth will be released next week. especially after what _ released next week. especially after what happened _ released next week. especially after what happened to - released next week. especially after what happened to my i released next week. especially i after what happened to my mum.
elizabeth taylor that's kind of fascinating, she was a star in the era when stars were stars. there was no access to them on something like twitter where people could talk back to them in sort of the real world. they were sort of really just larger than life. and there was a small percentage of hollywood icons, the frank sinatras, jackie gleason, marilyn monroe who used that mega stardom to lean into what are modern woke causes. they leaned in on civil rights. there were a lot of things people did in that era. she did that too. this is some of her civil rights leaning in. she joined prominent civil rights activists for naacp's freedom tv spectacular. she contributed to the black panther legal defense fund. she placed a full-page ad in "the new york times" calling for gun legislation. talk about her use of mega stardom for causes that were not sort of usual conservative-ish