what were you up to when you were 6 years old? playing with toys? painting, drawing? learning about the periodic table? declan lopez is, a kindergartner with an iq of 137. that's high. her parents say they realized how smart she is when she started to speak mandarin at 18 months old. now she's been accepted into the intern international society for people with high iqs. she told cnn she knows the atomic mass of tennessine is 294. now we know, too.

declan lopez, i see you. if you know someone i should see, tell me. i'm victor blackwell. i'll see you back here next saturday. smerconishsh is up rigight now. what's a father to do? i'm michael smerconish in philadelphia. joe biden might soon face a decision about whether to prevent his own son from going to prison. it's a determination that will be made against the backdrop of the 2024 presidential campaign, one more intangible in an already unpredictable election cycle. hunter biden could face up to 17 years if convicted for the nine tax charges for which he was indicted on thursday. he pleaded not guilty. according to data from the internal revenue service, nearly 90% of all tax cases they refer to the department of justice for prosecution, they end with a conviction or a guilty plea. and around two-thirds of those cases resulted in prison time, with an average sentence of 14

months. this in addition to the 25 years he could face for the three federal gun charges for which he was indicted in delaware back in september. the allegation there is that hunter violated measures meant to preclude drug users from having guns when he bought and kept and firearm for more than a week in 2018. the most recent charges focus on hunter's non payment of at least $1.4 million in taxes between 2016 and 2019. the six miss demeanors happened when he was deep in the tloes of addiction. the taxes have since been paid. it's all quite a change from the plea agreement he was prepared to strike until a judge in delaware questioned it this past summer. hunter was expected to receive two years probation after pleading guilty to misdemeanor tax charges and would have avoided prosecution on the gun charge had he stayed out of trouble. now he faces the real prospect

of being sent to prison. the speedy trial act requires it happens within 90 days. as americans are preparing to vote, there could be a biden and a trump being tried in federal criminal court. of course, one is a candidate and the other just a son. but, still, any son's legal peril would impact his father's psyche and in this case even more so. hunter and joe have a unique bond born of tragedy. in 1972 when hunter was 2 years old, he survived a terrible automobile accident that killed his mother and 13-year-old sister. his older brother, beau, also survived, and would later follow his father's political path, ultimately being elected the attorney general of delaware. beau succumbed to cancer in 2015. meanwhile, hunter's battle with addiction demons has been documented, including in his recent indictment. the linchpin of the current indictment consists of admissions that hunter made in

his memoir titled "beautiful things". the feds say in 2018 hunter claimed a tax deduction for $389,000 in business travel when he had none. they point to his memoir about how he was spending his time, mainly that he was smoking crack 20 hours a day, smoking every 15 minutes seven days a week. as he wrote, his time was not spent on business, but rather, after arriving in california in april, he spent the next four or five months surrounded by and paying for an entourage of, quote, thieves and junkies, petty dealers, over-the-hill strippers, con artists, who then invited their friends and associates. they latched on to me and didn't let go, all with my approval. i never slept. there was no clock. day bled into night and night into day. hunter biden is one of millions who fight addiction. some of whom face criminal prosecution for their resulting behavior. but his case is different.

his father possesses the constitutionally granted power to pardon anyone for any federal crime, including his son. spokesperson karine jean-pierre said biden will not pardon hunter. could that be so easily discounted? not if joe thinks that hunter is being treated more harshly because of his name, the boomerang effect of being offered a sweetheart deal, arguably because of his name. my hunch is that joe biden would do anything for his son, including a pardon, and that his desire to steer him from a life of addiction was why he dropped n guard and allowed hunter to trade on the family name and accompany him on government aircraft while doing business with foreign entities. the idea of pardoning hunter will at least be given serious consideration. maybe this added weight also causes a re-evaluation of the president's re-election, where his poll numbers are grim and no

change in policy or any piece of legislation can stave off his chief opponent, father time. joining me now is a staff writer at "the atlantic," the offer of the recent biography, the last politician inside joe biden's white house and the struggle for america's future. franklin, thank you for being here. most fathers and sons are close. but what's particularly special about this relationship? >> as you say, it's shrouded in all sorts of grief, but also in all sorts of guilt. hunter was not the son that joe biden had tapped to be his successor, the golden child in the relationship. that was beau, and i think hunter was aware of that fact. and i think that biden is aware of hunter being aware of that fact. biden consistently has really intervened in his son's life in order to try to prevent him from

falling even deeper into that rabbit hole of addiction, which of course is an incredibly difficult thing to prevent. biden has played an active role as a grandfather and surrogate father to biden's children. that relationship, as you say, it is deep, it is special, it's covered in scar tissue, and it's one of the few areas where president biden struggles to think strategically, because it's impossible to think strategically about your own son. >> hunter biden appeared on a podcast that was just released. i want you and everyone else to listen and then i'll ask you to react. play it. >> they are trying to -- in their most illegitimate way but rational way, they're trying to destroy a presidency.

so it's not about me. their most base way, what they're trying to do is they're trying to kill me, knowing that it will be a pain greater than my father could be able to handle. >> franklin, he says they're trying to kill me. how is this going to play out in the context of 2024, and react to what you just heard. >> well, i think that -- this is a way in which hunter's interests and joe biden's interests are not totally aligned. i think hunter is fighting for his reputation here, where his father is fighting to save the republic from the threat of authoritarianism. but when i listen to what he's saying, i also have to agree that there is some truth in it. i think that hunter biden's crimes are so petty and should hardly be placed on a continuum with all the accusations being levelled against donald trump, and even donald trump's own family. and republicans have struggled

for so long to really define joe biden, and hunter biden is basically the best hook that they have to create some sort of extremely negative image of him. and it's actually been incredibly effective, i think, despite the fact that most people did not anticipate it to be effective, because biden had done an effective job of swatting away all those accusations in 2020. but you look at the polling numbers and it's pretty clear that beyond the fox news base, there is a sense that there is -- that biden is corrupt, that biden's son has done something corrupt, and in an election that should be turning on questions of democracy and corruption, i think it would be crystal clear in terms of the comparison, this is one of the few things that muddies that up. >> thank you for the analysis. we appreciate you. >> yeah, thank you. what are your thoughts? hit me up on social media. i'll read some during the course

of the program. from the world of youtube, the best that could happen for dems would be for biden to pardon hunter, then announce that he will not seek re-election. i think what perpetuates the idea that president biden gives such consideration was the statement that he made behind closed doors at a fundraiser this week in boston where he said but for trump being in the race, he probably would not be running. and at a different time said that 50 other democrats could also beat donald trump. my point, one more enormous intangible to add to the list for 2024. ahead, since entering world war ii, 82 years ago this week, america has become the self-appointed policeman of the world. could that stance be plus, this plane flew over cambridge on the first night of hanukkah, tweaking harvard's president for how she answered a congressional committee's questions about campus policy and threats of jewish genocide. she and the other presidents of m.i.t. and penn all in the hot

seat for not condemning it and saying it depends on the context. were they wrong in how they described their university policies, or just tone-deaf? what should they have said? i want to know what you think. go to my website at smerconish.com and answer today's poll question. does context matter when determining whether calling for the genocide of any group is bullying or harassment? by the way, while you're there, why not subscribe for the free daily newsletter. you'll get exclusive editorial cartoons from the legends, like this from rob rogers.

question, is america's self-appointed role as global cop making us more or less safe? the united states technically not at war with any nation, but that doesn't mean our defense is dormant. in the weeks following hamas' october 7th attack on israel, there have been nearly daily attacks on u.s. and coalition forces by iranian-backed groups. in just the past month, an american destroyer shot down multiple drones in the vicinity

in the red sea and responded to distress calls from a civilian commercial vessel that was fired upon by a ballistic missile. u.s. forces killed at least five iran-backed malitia members in a drone strike after the u.s. identified an imminent attack likely to be launched by malitia forceness iraq. an official told cnn since october 7, there have been 82 attacks by iran-backed proxy groups on u.s. and coalition forceness iraq and syria. since world war ii, america has taken on the role of trying to keep peace worldwide as u.s. military bases have pro are aro the world. u.s. military counterterrorism has a footprint in 78 countries. "usa today," which first published this data, said nearly a quarter century after the u.s. laurched its response to 9/11, the pentagon continues to pursue

military actions in the middle east and many more parts of the world than americans may realize. joining me is the person who compiled the data, co-director and senior researcher at the cost of war project at brown university's institute, for which she wrote the paper under the biden administration. does the expansion of our footprint make us more or less safe? >> thank you so much for asking that question. it's just the one that should be asked with this data. and, you know, my answer is no, there are more militant groups than there were when we started the so-called war on terror in 2001, there are more recruits to those groups, there's a ton of blowback to all of this military action around the world, and we're seeing in iraq and syria right now, just as you pointed

out, that the u.s. presence in these places, in the name of counterterrorism, actually makes u.s. troops -- it makes it more likely that they engage in aggressive actions abroad. >> isn't there a bit of chicken and egg to all of this? i shared your research with admiral james stavridis, former commander of nato, and he said to me, be aware of the lesson, post world war i, we went the way of isolationism, and arguably that's what gave rise to world war ii. >> yeah, i think every context is different, but what we've done is gone so far in the direction of being the world's cop, and, you know, there is a militarized status quo in this country. the u.s. feels like it needs to do something abroad through military force primarily, we've

gone extremely far in the direction of using the military as the primary tool of u.s. foreign policy, and arguably that's not keeping americans or anyone else in the world any safer. my other research has shown that in the so-called war on terror, the kind of ripple effects, the ways that these wars have caused indirect death, economic crisis and hunger and the collapse of health care infrastructure, that's caused 4.5 million deaths, not to say all due to u.s. actions, but the reverberating effects of these post-9/11 wars. >> donald trump likes to say that he kept the united states out of war. you've analyzed the biden administration. 78 is the number that you come to. we've got a footprint of some kind in 78 of 195 nations.

what about trump? how does he compare to biden in this respect? >> yeah, so trump had relaxed a lot of the rules of engagement that allows the military to conduct drone strikes in places like syria and iraq and somalia, and biden has tightened those up and increased protections for civilians. but the overall footprint of counterterrorism between the two administrations looks remarkably similar. i came out with a version of this map during the trump administration, and it showed 85 countries total, and this shows 78 under the biden administration. now, this has some high intensity areas, so four to five countries where the u.s. has dropped drone strikes on militant targets, including afghanistan, iraq, somalia and syria. nine countries where u.s. forces have engaged in on-the-ground

combat against militants. then the bulk comes in this category of training and assistance in counterterrorism, so the u.s. trains and assists other countries' security forces in counterterrorism. that's happening in 73 countries. and that's really far from the kind of innocuous neighborly help that it sounds. a lot of times what's happening is that the u.s. is providing funding, weapons and training for regimes that are very far from democratic. they're using those tools to crack down on political opponents, and it's really creating and fueling a cycle of blowback in which those targeted groups are then joining militant movements. >> it's a provacative and healthy conversation. i would love to see this get on the presidential debate stage. thank you, doctor. appreciate your time. >> thanks so much for having me. what are you saying via social media? what do we have from the world

of x on this? they're great as a deterrent, as long as war doesn't break out. after that, it's good-bye, world. we showed the map. it's indisputable how the footprint has increased and increased. the question is, are we there to respond to something or creating something? i think a response of this is an al qaeda hot spot, let's quickly go and open a base there, is probably the wrong way to go. that's my two cents. still to come, shoplifting, the five-finger discount, and other organized retail crime, costs american retailers more than $69 billion annually. is part of why it's so rampant, is companies for a variety of safety and liability reasons, encourage employees to just let it happen? and after the presidents of penn, m.i.t. and harvard

wouldn't condemn hate speech against jews, they have faced criticism. were there explanations actually consistent with the first amendment? that's what i'm trying to get to with today's poll question at smerconish.com. vote on this. does context matter when determining whether calling for the genocide of any group is bullying or harassment?

the power goes out, and we still have wifi to do our homework. and that's a good thing? great in my book. who are you? no power? no problem. introducing storm-ready wifi. now you can stay reliably connected through power outages with unlimited cellular data and up to 4 hours of battery back-up. plus, now through december 31st,

eligible xfinity rewards members can get 25% off a storm ready wifi device. i'm free to explore. i'm free to learn. i'm free to forge my own path. contra costa college is free for full-time students, which makes you free to explore all the incredible opportunities unleashed by higher learning. start your future and apply today at contracosta.edu/free what should they have said? following testimony at this week's congressional hearing about a lack of pushback against anti-semitism on their campuses, harvard's claudine gay, m.i.t.'s

sally kornbluth have been under fire for the way they answered questions posed by elise stefanik. their responses sparked widespread condemnation and calls for resignations from donors, trustees, lawmakers and others. more than 70 members of congress from both parties have signed a letter to the three schools demanding they remove their presidents in light of their testimony. the white house condemned the university presidents' responses saying, quote, any statements that advocate for the systemic murder of jews are dangerous and revolting. in boston, a group claiming to be jewish students paid for a plane to fly overhead with a palestinian flag and a banner that read harvard hates jews. harvard's president told the university newspaper, i am sorry, words matter. as the week wore on, it was magill who became the poster child. a prominent penn alum withdrew a $100 million donation, a truck

circled the campus with billboards calling for her to be fired. the university board of trustees will meet via phone at 5:00 p.m. tomorrow to discuss magill and a statement she's said to be working on. here is an excerpt from magill's exchange with gop representative stefanik. >> at penn does calling for the genocide of jews violate penn's rules or code of conduct, yes or no? >> if the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment, yes. >> i am asking specifically calling for the genocide of jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment? >> if it is directed and severe and pervasive, it is harassment. >> so the answer is yes? >> it is a context-dependent decision. >> the other presidents also fell back on the need for context to decide. so what do these codes of

conduct referred to by stefanik say exactly, and do they apply to this specific problem? the one from the university of pennsylvania contains the following wording under the rights of student citizenship. the right to freedom of thought and expression, but also the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, or status as a disabled veteran. and penn's responsibilities of student citizenship includes the following, to refrain from conduct toward other students that fringes on the rights of citizen. the content of student speech or expression is not by itself a basis for disciplinary action. student speech may be subject to discipline when it violates applicable rules or laws, university regulations or

policies. after her testimony on tuesday, penn president magill released a video on wednesday seeking to clarify her statements from the hearing. >> i was focused on our university's longstanding policies aligned with the u.s. constitution, which say that speech alone is not punishable. i was not focused on, but i should have been, the irrefutable fact that a call for genocide of jewish people is a call for some of the most terrible violence human beings can perpetrate. >> look, hamas was barbaric on 10/7, israel and the world will be a safer place without hamas. a college campus is no place for the promotion of anti-semitism, much less the outright call for genocide. i hope i've made all of that abundantly clear.

nevertheless, the speech issues embodied in this debate are not always black and white. while the first amendment does not necessarily apply to a university environment, when viewed in a first amendment context, what the presidents said was actually correct. i want to know what you think. go vote at smerconish.com on today's poll question, does context matter when determining whether calling for the genocide of any group is bullying or harassment? i'm joined by the director of constitutional studies for the manhattan institute. his substack blog is called shapiro's gavel. he recently wrote this piece for the free press, where free speech ends and law breaking begins. professor, thank you for being here. the presidents were tone-deaf, they were horrible in their presentation, but in a first amendment context were they necessarily wrong?

>> well, it's true that the first amendment protects offensive speech, hate speech, the most vile racial, calling for genocide. but on a university campus there are rules against harassment and time, place and manner restrictions, you can't disrupt speakers or classes or block entrances to buildings, all of which has happened on our campuses. the reason why these university presidents couldn't say all of that and say that we enforce our rules strictly, but we don't punish speech, is because they haven't been enforcing these rules. that's the problem. literally the bottom two schools for free speech as ranked by the foundation for individual rights and expression, which is a gold standard. >> okay, so what should the response have been? if i you had been there, elise

stefanik asked the same question, i would have begun any response by condemning hamas, condemning anti-semitism, condemning any calls for genocide, and then i think i would have gone into the more legal aspects. what would you have said? >> that's correct. i would have said this speech is abhorrent and goes against our values, while the first amendment protects hate speech, including this kind of speech, when it's directed at home or when demonstrations are in front of jewish centers for student life, what have you, that's a problem with harassment. when it interferes with other students' ability to get the education. so we're going to be investigating this strongly, but i want to make clear speech alone is not the problem. it's when that speech becomes intimidation, harassment, vandalism and violating our rules against disrupting our educational mission.

>> i am not excusing their poor performance. i'm criticizing it. but i look at this with somewhat of a trained eye, professor, and i say they're not dopes. they prepared, they read in. what explains how they were all reading from the same hymnal and got it so terribly wrong in terms of appearing tone-deaf? have you thought about that? >> they were too prepared. they were lawyered up, they had advisers, pr and what have you. their statements were clearly coordinated. nothing wrong with that. you want to be on the same page when you're all representing elite institutions. but this was not a legal deposition. this is a congressional hearing that was instantly going to go viral, and they should have known that. so you respond a little less legalistically. there was no moral clarity or

leadership. they they ultimately pleased nobody. they're not dopes, but they used bad judgment in how they approached the hearing. >> quickly, i'm limited on time. from your writings, i know that you distinguish correctly between speech and conduct. talk about that very briefly, if you can. >> well, assault, vandalism, menacing, stalking, harassment, these are all not protected by the first amendment. urinating on a jewish center has happened recently at some other school. even if it's expressive, it's not protected. as well as other regulations, disruption and all these different things. so even as a constitutional la lawer and advocate, you can't answer these by invoking the first amendment. >> thank you for your time. >> thank you. i want to know what you think. go to my website at smerconish.com. answer today's poll question.

now you've been briefed, now you can go vote. does context matter when determining whether calling for the genocide of any group is bullying or harassment? a lot of social media reaction to today's program. i appreciate that, including this from the world of youtube. what do you got? free speech on college campuses must be protected, but, holy cow, you have to call out genocide. sure you do, mary. i totally agree. imagine someone who regards abortion as murder and, consequently, shows up outside a planned parenthood facility and says genocide is taking place in there. we need to do something about the genocide that is taking place inside those walls. i mean, that's a matter of speech. hopefully it doesn't become a matter of conduct, where now they're in the face of someone and trying to thwart someone else's rights. i said it clearly in the intro, okay, to this part of the program, which is that these are not black and white matters. they get presented that way, and

elise stefanik got exactly what she was looking for, like three times over, a hat trick of sound bites. but these are complicated issues and no one has really said that this week. ahead, this is so tragic. at macy's here in philadelphia, guards saw a man attempting to steal hats. they took back the merchandise. the guy shows up 15 minutes later, like 10:00 on monday morning, and he stabs two guards who were unarmed. he kills one of them. does this incident illustrate why the retail industry tends to allow most shoplifting to happen without interference? or do they need to crack down on it? please make sure you're signing up for the daily newsletter when you're casting your votes on the poll question. you'll get some real winning editorial cartoon work.

are there any guardrails left to seriously combat retail crime? here in philadelphia this week, a macy's store security guard was stabbed to death by a suspected shoplifter after he confronted him. the alleged shoplifter was arrested, charged with murder and aggravated assault. that specific macy's department store has had 250 retail theft instances known this year. who knows how many they got away with. in sacramento county the sheriff's office announced they made nearly 300 arrests in one week, all related to retail crime after the county sheriff criticized the retail giant target for its shoplifting policy. he released a statement that read in part, our property crimes detectives and sergeant were contacted numerous times by

target to help them with shoplifters. at the briefing we were told by their head of regional security that we could not contact suspects inside the store, we could not handcuff suspects inside the store, and if we arrested someone, they wanted us to process them outside behind the store, we were told they didn't want to create a scene inside the store and have people film it and put it on social media. and target isn't the only retail brand with policies that discourage its employees from confronting shoplifters. retailers like best buy, lowe's, cvs, lululemon, walgreens, they prohibit their employees from engaging with suspected shoplifters out of an abundance of caution. but even if these shoplifters are confronted by employees, are they even prosecuted? in 2018, philadelphia's district attorney's office began instructing its prosecutors to seek less jail time for shoplifters and treat their crimes as summary offenses, unless the stolen items were worth more than $500. in new york city shoplifters can

avoid prosecution through the second chance diversion program and work with city officials to address the underlying problems that led them to shoplift. the nypd says over the past five years, shoplifting complaints nearly doubled, peaking at 64,000 last year according to police data. only about 34% resulted in arrests compared to 60% in 2017. the retail industry leaders association found organized retail crime costs american retailers over $69 billion per year, leading to the loss of thousands of jobs due to store closures and reduced hours. of course, many factors like the store's shoplifting policy and willingness to involve law enforcement make it challenging to gather enough data to compile an accurate depiction of arrests made in retail crime. joining me is the president of retail industry leaders association, brian dodge, which represents more than 100 retail brands. thank you for being here. what's the industry norm, what is a retail employee supposed to

do if they see theft taking place? >> thanks for having me, michael. this is a very troubling and growing problem. the policies of most retailers are for the bulk of employees, they are discouraged and forbidden from engaging directly with shoplifters in the store and there's a really good reason for that. there is no merchandise in the store more valuable than the safety and well-being of the employees and the guests in the store. many retailers also have other elements of their workforce that are focused on security, some of them are enabled to engage, oftentimes retailers will engage outside security guards to support in these efforts. so it varies, but the bulk of employees are not trained as law enforcement, are not enabled to engage directly with shoplifters. >> is the problem growing to the proportion that i think it is based on media reports? i want to beware of the summer

of the shark, a summer in 2001 where it seemed like everybody who got in the ocean was being bitten. then a year later we looked at the data and we realized that shark attacks had gone down. what's the real deal? is this growing exponentially? >> it's glowing rapidly and has been for the last five to seven years. it's driven by two factors. the first is the growth of online marketplaces like amazon and facebook where thieves can find access to unsuspecting buyers to sell stolen goods. the second is the under-prosecution that has enabled the thieves to operate with a sense they're not going to be arrested and likely not going to be prosecuted. >> i worry that we're all, i think, familiar with food deserts, areas often in urban america where the big stores that we would all know, supermarket chains, they avoid. it's hard for people to go and find decent food that's pressure.

i worry there are going to be retail deserts created because a lot of folks are going to say we're not going to build a store in location x, y and z. we'll just rely on people who sit at their computers. not everybody can sit at their computer and buy goods. >> sadly, we've seen retailers forced to make that decision, the crime issues have become so acute in certain areas that stores simply can't remain open. we've all walked through stores and seen product locked up. it's further evidence the only way to keep product in the store for legitimate buyers is to put it behind lock and key and make that experience more complex. the scale of the issue is growing, we grow that the resources required to investigate these crimes are considerable. that's why retailers are partnering with law enforcement, to get better data on our side, to work with them in order to identify the highest impact offenders out there and get them off the streets. these individuals are involved in retail crime and often involved in many other crimes

and we believe working with law enforcement, we can get them off the streets. >> i get it. there's an easier marketplace now to sell stolen goods, but prosecutors, it sounds to me, are dropping the ball by not throwing the book at some of these individuals. someone needs to be made an example of. my two cents. thank you, brian. i appreciate you being here. >> thanks for having me. social media comments, what do we have? from the world of x, formerly known as twitter, without a doubt, when you announce that you won't prosecute under $900, guess what happens? failed das, failed blue cities. it doesn't seem like rocket science. if i were a shoplifter, i would probably be looking at the tag and knowing the value of the merchandise with an eye toward what would be the punishment if i were to be prosecuted. and how many people are going to see a story like the one i led with and say, you know what, i'm not going to go into the downtown area of any given city and shop. i'll just sit back and do it on

amazon. that's not a good thing, no disrespect to amazon. you want people out and about and socializing with one another. still to come, more of your best and worst social media comments and the final result of the poll question from smerconish.com. cast your ballot right now. sign up for the newsletter when you're there. does context matter when determining whether calling for the genocide of any group is bullying or harassment? by the way, if you sign up for the newsletter, you're going to get the work of great editorial cartoonists. i think this is my favorite of the week. check this out. it's hysterical.

okay, there's the results. so far, today's poll question. wow. i never liked rounded numbers. does context matter when determining whether calling for the genocide of any group that is bullying, or harassment? 70%, more than 25,000, say no. here are some of the social media reaction coming in during the course of the program, which i don't see in advance. that's some bad witness prep there, says sue ann inglewood. yeah, i mean are you kidding me? these three college presidents, as i said to professor shapiro, they're not fools. they're not dopes. they spent the time, they got, in they got ready, they weren't well prepared and that is not to excuse them. oh, my god, if that question comes to you, what do you do? it's so obvious. congresswoman, i would like to begin by condemning hamas. for what hamas did on 10/7, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

number two, i want to condemn anti-semitism in all forms. yadda, yadda, yadda. number three, i want to condemn about the talk of genocide against any particular group, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. and then i say, even though the first amendment doesn't literally apply to our conduct on this campus, we are nevertheless guided by the first amendment. and the first amendment necessitates that oftentimes ugly speech is nevertheless protected. and so my job, as a university president, is to balance the interests of all concerned, while respecting even the ugly speaker. something like that. and instead, there is like oh, my, it was egg headed. it was terrible. it was terrible. i ate up all my time with that. but it is important. because i want to get that off my chest. subscribe to the newsletter. thank you for watching. see you next week.

first time i connected with kim, she told me that her husband had passed. and that he took care of all of the internet connected devices in the home. i told her, “i'm here to take care of you.” connecting with kim... made me reconnect with my mom. it's very important to keep loved ones close. we know that creating memories with loved ones brings so much joy to your life. a family trip to the team usa training facility. i don't know how to thank you. i'm here to thank you. i'm free to grow. i'm free to learn. i'm free to make the next big thing. contra costa college is free for full-time students, which makes you free to explore all the incredible opportunities unleashed by higher learning.