2/16/26: Massie Rips Trump On Epstein, Rubio Colonialism Speech, Pentagon Preps For Iran War

25:08Because, you know, in the same way that Epstein got his sweetheart deal back in the early 2000s, you still wanted to look the other way and make sure that him and Ghislaine and all of the powerful people that they were in league with that they got off scot-free. So it is horrifying and it's such an extraordinarily disturbing glimpse into the way that global power actually operates. How money, power, sex, horror, how this all intermingles together and creates an entire system that is extraordinarily powerful and I'm quite sure continues to be. The fact that Epstein is gone doesn't mean that the Epstein class is gone.

25:50Doesn't mean that things are not operating in exactly the same way, which is part of why there's been such an effort, such an unbelievable effort to cover all of this up that spans not just this administration, although this one is certainly the most brazen, but that spans, you know, whatever party is in power because they all benefit from the way things operate presently. That's right. All right, let's get a treat to Parsi. Welcome to the A building. I'm Hans Charles. I'm Menelik Lumumba. It's 1969. Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. have both been assassinated. And Black America was at a breaking point.

26:24Rioting and protests broke out on an unprecedented scale. In Atlanta, Georgia, at Martin's alma mater, Morehouse College, the students had their own protest. It featured two prominent figures in Black history, Martin Luther King Sr. and a young student, Samuel L. Jackson. To be in what we really thought was a revolution. I mean, people were dying. 1968, the murder of Dr. King, which traumatized everyone. The FBI had a role in the murder of a Black Panther leader in Chicago. This story is about protest. It echoes in today's world far more than it should. And it will blow your mind. Listen to The A-Building on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

27:39shapes us and what gives us hope. We get honest about the big stuff. Identity when you don't recognize yourself anymore. Loss that changes you. Purpose when success isn't enough. Peace when your mind won't slow down. Faith when it's complicated. Some guests have answers. Most are still figuring it out. If you've ever felt like there has to be more to the story, this show is for you. Listen to If You Can Hear Me on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

28:32Not your guru. And back then, I lied to my parents. I lied to police. I lied to everybody. There were years right where I could not say your name. I've decided to go back to my hometown in Northern California, interview my friends, family, talk to police, journalists, whomever I can to try to find out what actually happened. Isn't it a little bit weird that they obsess over hippies in the woods and not the obvious boyfriend? They have had this case for 30 years. I'll teach you sons of bitches to come around here and my wife. Boom, boom. This is The Red Weather. Listen to The Red Weather on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

29:15All right, guys, so we have a whole range of issues with regard to foreign affairs, everything from Iran to Cuba, but most notably the Munich Security Conference. And Dr. Trita Parsi is going to join us now to break down some pretty remarkable speeches that were given there. Just back himself from Munich and still recovering from the flight and the time change and all of that. Welcome. Great to see you. Good to see you, sir. Good to see you. Thank you for having me. Yeah, of course. So most noteworthy speech that occurred there was Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who explicitly called for a return to colonialism and sharing the spoils of that colonialism with European allies.

29:51Let's go ahead and take a listen to a little bit of that. We cannot continue to allow those who blatantly and openly threaten our citizens and endanger our global stability to shield themselves behind abstractions of international law which they themselves routinely violate. This is the path that President Trump and the United States has embarked upon. It is the path we ask you here in Europe to join us on. It is a path we have walked together before and hope to walk together again. For five centuries before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding. Its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe.

30:40But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, it was contracting. Europe was in ruins. Half of it lived behind an iron curtain and the rest looked like it would soon follow. The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world and drape the red hammer and sickle across vast swaths of the map in the years to come. Against that backdrop, then, as now, many came to believe that the West's age of dominance had come to an end and that our future was destined to be a faint and feeble echo of our past.

31:28But together, our predecessors recognized that decline was a choice, and it was a choice they refused to make. You can see there at the end him getting a standing ovation, apparently, from many of the Europeans in the room. Dr. Parsi, what did you make of his remarks? Well, there's a couple of things. One is just to look at the remarks themselves and then also the European reaction. Here you have a secretary of state that is decrying the end of the Cold War. He's decrying the fact that the West is no longer expansionist, decrying the collapse of Western, not American. empires, decrying decolonization, and the end of Western empires, and gets a standing ovation for that.

32:20I mean, there's so much to unpack here, because at the end of the day, you could see that the Europeans, by standing up and giving a standing ovation for this, are willing to accept any basis for a partnership with the United States, as long as they're allowed to continue to live in the illusion that they matter to the United States. It didn't matter that the values that he was putting forward here are values that vast majority of Europe already has abandoned decades ago. But Rubio was going back to this era of empire, imperialism, colonization as something positive, and he got a standing ovation for that.

32:58Yeah, I mean, putting those together, Dr. Parsi, it seems to me that they abandon it internally. But we've talked here before, Or if you look at the European stance on, let's say, Iran, they're very quick to say not the legitimate government. It has no legitimacy on Venezuela. They de facto supported the United. Their only complaint is there wasn't a full on regime change. They fully believe in no colonialism or expansion on their continent. But outside of their continent, they seem fine with it. So is this just a reconciling of their own hypocrisy? What do you think? So I think some of these things that you mentioned obviously are true, but they're more recent developments.

33:32this vast abandonment of international law, for instance. Not to say that Europe always has been perfect or anything like that, but this is a more recent development. The whole tone at the UNO conference this time was more regime change than I've ever seen before. And I think, again, these are some new developments. Not to say that there hasn't been a root for it or that it's been always perfectly different before. But remember, 2003, the Europeans went out of their way to stop the regime change war in Iraq, and they paid a very high price for it. Back then, Germany, France took the lead, and they had all of Europe, with the exception of some Eastern states and the UK on their side, fighting against that war because of its illegality, because of its neo-colonial character, and because it was regime change.

34:19That is not what we're seeing right now. So in many ways, Europe has already changed, but this is still taking them a much more explicit step in the direction that it should embrace its colonial past. It should embrace its pursuit of empire. And I have to tell you, as much as the Europeans are increasingly saying, look, we can't stand up for international law. We just have to do whatever it wants to say. The idea that there would be an embrace of empire is still a step that I don't think most Europeans have been willing to take so far. It was very, I mean, it was very disturbing to me, But it was also, I thought, extraordinary the way it almost seemed he was rebuking the lessons that were learned from World War II.

35:02I mean, World War II, one of the things that's taken from this is, you know, when you have an expansionist power like Germany, for example, this is a disaster for humanity. It's a problem for a variety of nations. We need to put these institutions in place. And by the way, I feel like this gets lost from the Trump administration. We set up those institutions to benefit us. It has been a tremendous benefit to the United States of America. And then we run around acting like we're the victims of these institutions that we ourselves set up. But I thought the almost rebuke of the learnings of World War II was something that was pretty stunning to me.

35:39Well, if you want to drive matters in the direction of a great power competition, this is what you have to do, right? You have to rebuke these lessons because these lessons were there to make sure that we didn't have another great power competition in the world. And on the point about these institutions, I totally agree with you. I think I've said it on the show before. Not only did the United States play a critical role in establishing these institutions, flawed in many cases, obviously in need of significant reform, particularly the UN. Pushing it back towards more focus on peace and security, I think, would be a good thing.

36:12It has strong support internationally to go in that direction. But it was a very useful institution to the United States in the past. But here's the more important point. If we are going towards a multipolar world, and Rubio is the one who said it exactly a year ago, then not only is the world multipolar, unipolarity is an aberration, he said, which kind of contradicts what he said in the Munich speech. But if that is the case, that means that the United States no longer has the power to constrain its rivals, such as Russia, China, future countries, in the same manner that it did before. It still has the interest of constraining them, but it doesn't have the same power any longer.

36:51So there's a delta now between its interest and its power. What alternative instruments do you have to be able to fill that delta? Well, the obvious answer is international law, international law, these institutions who have served exactly that purpose for all other countries throughout this period and will increasingly play that role for a United States that no longer have the unipolar leverage and benefit that it did in the past. Yeah. I mean, one of the things that's interesting, Dr. Parsi, is we can parse a lot of what's happening here. And let's say that we are moving in a shift to multipolarity, which I would argue makes international law or the fiction of it kind of less useful in and of itself.

37:31However, within that same framework, as you and I are thinking, generally, I think both aligned as restrainers. How does this idea conflict generally with, let's say, any coherent vision of restraint that was originally supposed to be a part of the second Trump administration? To me, it seems to have been a complete leap away from restraint. Restraint at the core was that we have to have a more narrow definition of U.S. interests. Instead of thinking that we have to defend everything outside in the world, instead of thinking that we have to think about alliances or the free world as the thing we have to protect, we go back to our national interest and narrow definition of it.

38:13Not because we're against alliances, not because we're against the free world, but because those type of conceptions led the United States to constantly enter into war. And if we have that type of a definition in which we believe that every corner of the world is part of a US vital interest, and we will be at war somewhere all the time. And that is the history of the last 20 or plus years. Here, you have a massive expansion of the US interest, because he's not only talking about an alliance system, he's not only talking about the free world, now he's talking about Western civilization as the core of what the United States needs to defend.

38:51And without even being able to define exactly what is it? I mean, is Latin America a part of Western civilization, or is it part of the global South, as many people in Latin America would define themselves? Is Russia? I mean, it's such an ambiguous term. And to have that as the basis of what you have to defend is the opposite direction of restraint, in my estimation. There was a part in the speech that I found to be interesting coming from Marco Rubio, who has centered a lot of his politics around, you know, being son of Cuban immigrants and, you know, wanting to overturn that regime. And we'll ask you more specifically about that in a moment, but where he explicitly frames himself as the direct descendants of Spaniards.

39:36So as the, you know, the colonizers versus the colonized. And I thought that was, I thought that was an interesting moment as well, and an interesting choice to put in this speech where, like you said, they're trying to claim all of Western civilization, talking about this shared Christian heritage and the Scots-Irish and all of these sorts of things? Well, I mean, it was noteworthy because there's no mention of anyone else contributing to the United States. Now, of course, in his defense, he's saying this to an European audience, trying to console them and reassure them that the United States still is there, which again, I think is contradictory in many different ways because the message was supposed to be, you have to understand, you have to stand on your own legs.

40:21What Rubio gave with this type of reassurance is another bite at the illusionary apple for the Europeans to think that there still is an ability for them to rely on the United States without actually taking full responsibility. Despite the fact that he keeps on saying Europe has to step up, et cetera, et cetera, the way this whole thing landed in Munich was that this was the opposite of VAMS. And as a result, they can go back to the old illusion that they lived in, in which they can just rely on the United States. Right. And I think that is the part that grates me more than anything, is that if anything, what's ironic about this administration is if you were to ask the Europeans, they would say this is the most anti-European U.S.

41:01administration in decades. That was one of the most pro-Europe speeches I've ever seen. It was a direct contravention of a lot of the restrainer philosophy that goes back to the original pivot to Asia, where it's this acknowledgement that Europe is increasingly an irrelevant power base, that there's a rising GDP in Asia, that the U.S. is an Asian power with significant interests. China is our main geopolitical rival. Most of our interests of our economic trading partners and all that lie outside of the continent. It's really only blood and shared history that seems to combine us together. Rubio's declaration was basically we will fight for that shared interest, so-called Western civilization, which again, we don't even really agree between us and Europe on what that even seems to mean.

41:47So the confusion of this centered more than anything, whereas it made it so that for me, the Trump doctrine, if there is such a thing, basically doesn't exist. This speech is the mirror image of the J.D. Vance speech from one year ago in Munich. It is actually the mirror image of a similar speech given in the exact same conference. Maybe you were present at the Elbridge Colby speech, which specifically talked about, yes, shared interests in history and all that is great, but we need to actually operate on real hard power and on what our mutual interests, like economic interests, may be. So it just seems to be either a freelancing, but regardless, it's very important for what the vision of foreign policy under this administration is going to look like.

42:27I agree with most of what you said there, Sagar, and I don't think it is freelancing. I think this is an effort by a former neocon to essentially try to co-opt much of the restrainers within the administration by appealing to some of their conservative values, which tend to lend themselves to this idea of this civilizational discourse. and as a result, make sure that he gets a neoconservative at its root policy in the clothes of something that is supposed to sound to certain conservatives as restraint. I mean, keep in mind, he talked about the Western century. A colleague of mine pointed out that this is the exact same language of the neocons in the 1990s when they talked about the new American century.

43:18So to me, it sounded that this was a very clever, and I have to say, you know, though I strongly disagree with a lot of elements in that speech, it was a brilliant speech for his purposes. Yeah, it's using the language of Christian nationalism to, you know, advance the agenda that Marco Rubio has. And that's a good place to shift to part of what that agenda is. Let's go ahead and put B2 up on the screen. We've been tracking here the ongoing U.S.-triggered crisis in Cuba, which is becoming quite dire. This is a dispatch from The Guardian. They say no fuel, no tourists, no cash. This was the week the Cuban crisis got real.

43:58And talk about just how incredibly difficult things have been made there by U.S. policy. Can you just describe to us what the latest is there and what our goals are? I think it's very important here to make the connection to Gaza. The United States has had an embargo on Cuba for decades. Even when the Obama administration had the opening with Cuba, they did not touch the embargo because the embargo goes through Congress and Obama essentially chose not to do that. He only lifted executive orders. Never in that embargo did we pursue this degree of closure of the island so that they can't even get food, medicine and fuel.

44:45But guess who else just did this two years ago and is still doing it? This is what the Israelis did to Gaza. This is the excessive form of collective punishment that the Israelis pursued and continue to pursue in Gaza, which they normalized through their action. And now it is being adopted by the Trump administration against the Cuban people. And this is very important to understand, but so much about what was happening in Gaza was about exactly the destruction of these norms of the use of force and international law, these things that we have built up since Second World War to make sure that civilians are protected in conflict.

45:25We may not be able to end conflict altogether, but we're giving rights to civilians so that they are protected. Those are now being destroyed, first in Gaza, and now we see its replication in Cuba. Welcome to the A-Building. I'm Hans Charles. I'm Menelik Lumumba. It's 1969. Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. have both been assassinated, and Black America was at a breaking point. Rioting and protests broke out on an unprecedented scale. In Atlanta, Georgia, at Martin's alma mater, Morehouse College, the students had their own protest. It featured two prominent figures in Black history, Martin Luther King Sr.

46:04and a young student Samuel L. Jackson. To be in what we really thought was a revolution. I mean, people were dying. 1968, the murder of Dr. King, which traumatized everyone. The FBI had a role in the murder of a Black Panther leader in Chicago. This story is about protest. It echoes in today's world far more than it should. And it will blow your mind. Listen to The A Building on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

46:41What do you do when the headlines don't explain what's happening inside of you? I'm Ben Higgins, and if you can hear me, it's where culture meets the soul, a place for real conversation. Each episode, I sit down with people from all walks of life, celebrities, thinkers, and everyday folks, And we go deeper than the polished story. We talk about what drives us, what shapes us, and what gives us hope. We get honest about the big stuff. Identity when you don't recognize yourself anymore. Loss that changes you. Purpose when success isn't enough. Peace when your mind won't slow down. Faith when it's complicated.

47:19Some guests have answers. Most are still figuring it out. If you've ever felt like there has to be more to the story, this show is for you. Listen to If You Can Hear Me on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

47:57Not your guru. And back then, I lied to my parents, I lied to police, I lied to everybody. There were years right where I could not say your name. I've decided to go back to my hometown in Northern California, interview my friends, family, talk to police, journalists, whomever I can, to try to find out what actually happened. Isn't it a little bit weird that they obsess over hippies in the woods and not the obvious boyfriend? They have had this case for 30 years. I'll teach you sons of bitches to come around here and my wife. Boom, boom. This is The Red Weather. Listen to The Red Weather on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

48:40Let's move on to Iran, Dr. Parsi. While we have you, there's some major, major developments here. Let's put C1 up here on the screen. President Trump apparently told Prime Minister Netanyahu, this is according to CBS News, he would support an Israeli strike on Iran's ballistic missile program. This was back in December, not necessarily indicative of the latest meeting that just happened between Prime Minister Netanyahu and between President Trump. What do you make, let's say, both of the news itself and of the timing of the leak for when it's coming out right now? Clearly, something happened on December 29th of last year when Netanyahu, almost six months to the day, came back to the US and said, hey, let's have another war with Iran.

49:25But what we saw immediately after that was not that the Israelis would take the lead, but rather that the US would take the lead. In fact, take a look at Netanyahu's profile on this issue. Since then, up until just a couple of days ago, he was staying completely quiet. He was letting Trump take the lead. He was avoiding an impression that Israel is the country pushing the US into war because Trump essentially took full ownership of the war and was in the lead of doing an attack. So I don't think that is actually what was being said. I mean, it may have been that it was said, but it was not part of the final decision.

50:05The final decision was that the United States would take the lead. The reason why I think this is now being leaked, incidentally, by CBS, and you can draw your own conclusions about that, is because of an effort to sabotage the talks that are taking place and the next round that will take place tomorrow in Geneva. The Iranians have made it absolutely clear there's not going to be any restrictions or at least limitations on the size of their missile program. This is the only deterrence they have left against Israel. For them to dismantle their missile program means that they would be completely defenseless against Israel and Israel has shown its ability or its willingness to attack any country that is defensiveness against it.

50:44So for them to leak this at this point seems to be more of an effort to try to sabotage those talks because of the fear that Trump ultimately will agree to this. I mean, first of all, let's keep in mind, Trump didn't even talk about missiles until December 29th. Right. So this is not an old American red line. This is a very new red line that is no more than five weeks old, and he may be putting it to rest. And this is something then that I think certain elements of trying to sabotage. There was some also significant reporting from Reuters that we can put up on the screen. They say exclusive U.S.

51:18military preparing for potentially weeks-long Iran operations. U.S. military is preparing for the possibility of sustained weeks-long operations against Iran if Trump orders an attack, two U.S. officials told Reuters. The disclosure by the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity raises the stakes for the diplomacy underway, They say they go on to discuss the buildup and the region and the preparations for what they expect would be a longer protracted, more protracted conflict than what we saw in the previous bombings of Iran. What do you make of this development? Because one of the things that we have been hearing is that perhaps the reason for the delay is just further preparation so that it can be a more widespread or more large scale military action.

52:05Well, this leak may have had the intent of putting pressure on the Iranians by saying that, you know, the U.S. is ready for a longer war. But it may also have had the opposite intent. It may have had the intent of putting pressure on the administration itself, recognizing, which I think many people in the Pentagon recognize, that Trump ultimately does not want to have a long war. He likes quick, glorious successes. And if he gets dragged into something that is longer, what he tends to do is that he cuts them short and he withdraws, which I think is the right thing to do when you're into something that is not working.

52:40But that's not something the Pentagon likes. The Pentagon doesn't like to be sent off into a military confrontation and then be pulled back without having succeeding, particularly if it's only after a couple of weeks. So I think this is also a bit of a warning of essentially saying, don't put us into something that you're not intending to finish. And this will not be finished quickly, and it will not be finished easily, and it will probably drag on much more than weeks, probably months. So I think, again, part of the reason why this hasn't happened yet is not that he just didn't have the resources there to pursue it.

53:14Even with those resources, we have like a third of the Navy in the Persian Gulf now or in the Arabian Sea. Even with those resources, this is going to take a very long time. And by the way, keep in mind that a couple of weeks is also exactly what they said about Iraq, and it ended up being a decade. Yes, yes. Very, very important point. We have Prime Minister Netanyahu now laying out conditions. You know, before we even play that, Dr. Parsi, everything about this is giving me the exact same, you know, deja vu of the Iran nuclear deal in 2015. And then a lot of people forget the 2009 crisis with Iran as well, where Netanyahu is working the press, openly trying to push the U.S.

53:53into war, intimating that, well, if you don't do it, I'm going to do it, trying to box in using the Republican Party. So I do want to set the stage. This is a well-established playbook here from Prime Minister Netanyahu. Before we, now, let's actually take a listen to what he says are acceptable conditions, according to him. Let's take a listen. I said that if a deal is to be reached, it should have several components, several components that we believe are important not only for the security of Israel, but for the security of the world, the United States, the region, the world. The first is that all enriched material has to leave Iran.

54:32The second is that there shall be no enrichment capability. Not stopping the enrichment process, but dismantle the equipment and the infrastructure that allows you to enrich in the first place. And the third is to deal also with the questions of ballistic missiles. There's an empty CER limitation of 300 kilometers. and Iran is supposed to adhere to it. Of course it doesn't. As the Rising Line operation by itself manifested, everybody knows that. And the fourth is stop the – dismantle the axis of terror that Iran has built. It's been smashed, but it's still there. It's trying to recover, as Iran itself is trying to do.

55:24And the last thing is – remember Ronald Reagan's dictum vis -à-vis the Soviet Union? trust but verify distrust distrust and always verify so there has to be real uh inspections uh substantive inspections uh no lead time inspections but effective inspections for all of the above what do you make of that well as you pointed out this is exactly what we've seen in the past whenever there is any chance of a deal he goes out and he puts out impossible conditions in order to signal clearly that he will attack the deal if it is made that meets short of these conditions, which it obviously will. These are impossible conditions to reach.

56:10These are poison pills that he puts in there in order to sabotage diplomacy. Now, here's where, from my standpoint, is a positive. For about a month, he kept a very low profile. Things were going his way. There was no need for him to be out there saying these things. Then things changed. He came back to Washington, D.C. He apparently did not have a good deal, a good meeting with Trump. And now he's out there giving this commentary again, which I think should be interpreted as a sign that he's nervous, that he's not in the room, and that he's trying to influence it from the outside. Whereas before, just a couple of weeks ago, he felt confident enough that he did not feel the need to influence it from the outside.

56:49That does not mean that chances for a deal necessarily are great or that things will work out. But it does mean, I think, that the type of control that Netanyahu felt that he had up until a week ago is no longer there. And he's back into his old playbook of trying to stop sabotaging this from the outside. Yes. And finally, we wanted to underscore a bit of the bipartisan nature of some of this approach here vis-a-vis Iran. We had some comments from Nancy Pelosi backing up Besant's desire to cause economic suffering among the Iranian people. Let's go ahead and take a listen to that. Is there a way to sort of bring about the regime falling without using American force, I guess, is the question there?

57:30Well, use economic forces. Use economic forces. There are ways that cripple their economy. And some of that has been in the works. It does feel very tenuous, though, of the regime there, more than it has in a long time. I agree with you. I agree with you. But again, it's not about a threat from war. it's hopefully, it's more about just make their economy, weaken their economy, and that weakens the support they do have, because they do have support in the rural areas and the more conservative imams and all the rest of that. But we have to make them feel the pain as well. Have to make them feel the pain as well.

58:08I mean, it reminds of the comments that you just made tying Gaza to Cuba. I think there's a tie in here as well, not that sanctions on Iran or anything new. Now, you have to remember during the Obama years, it was called crippling sanctions. Hillary Clinton constantly used the language of crippling their economy. I wrote on Twitter, this was not a slip of the tongue. This is not her accidentally saying that, the quiet part out loud. This was always the intent, to get to a state in which you destroy the economy. And as a result, you get people to rise up to overthrow the government. But to do so, you have to make their lives as miserable as possible so that they have no choice but to go out in the streets and risk their lives.

58:50But the playbook has been to never admit it, constantly say that the medicine shortage is not because of sanctions, it's because of the regime's incompetence and corruption. And without a doubt, there's a tremendous amount of incompetence and corruption in the Iranian government, for sure. But these type of shortages do not occur by themselves. They do occur as a result of the sanctions. The latest research has made it very, very clear that the sanctions is the triggering thing that really causes the degree to which the economy is collapsing. But you don't admit it until the very end when you think a regime change is about to happen, because at that point, you want to take credit for it.

59:29But up until that point, you go and you gaslit and you say, well, sanctions have nothing to do with this. Sanctions have nothing to do with the fact that medicine cannot get in. Sanctions have nothing to do with the fact that the currency is collapsing, that the economy is collapsing. But once it does, then you take credit for it because you say that you achieved this. Well said, sir. Well, thank you so much for joining us for so much of your time. We appreciate your dispatch from Munich. Thank you, sir.

1:00:06Over the last couple years, didn't we learn that the folding chair was invented by black people because of what happened in Alabama? This Black History Month, the podcast Selective Ignorance with Mandy B unpacks black history and culture with comedy, clarity and conversations that shake the status quo. The Crown Act in New York was signed in July of 2019, and that is a bill that was passed to prohibit discrimination based on hairstyles associated with race. To hear this and more, listen to Selective Ignorance with Mandy B from the Black Effect Podcast Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

1:00:411969, Malcolm and Martin are gone. America is in crisis. And at Morehouse College, the students make their move. These students, including a young Samuel L. Jackson, locked up the members of the Board of Trustees, including Martin Luther King Sr. It's the true story of protest and rebellion in Black American history that you'll never forget. I'm Hans Charles. I'm Menelik Lumumba. Listen to The A-Building on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. You can scroll the headlines all day and still feel empty. I'm Ben Higgins, and If You Can Hear Me is where culture meets the soul.

1:01:17honest conversations about identity loss purpose peace faith and everything in between celebrities thinkers everyday people some have answers most are still figuring it out and if you've ever felt like there has to be more to the story this show is for you listen to if you can hear me on the iheart radio app apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts this is an iheart podcast guaranteed human