♪ ♪ so, that's it for us on "the weekend" this sunday morning. we will see you back here next saturday at 8:00 a.m. eastern. and follow us on social media @the weekend msnbc. we are also now on blue sky, blue sky, so please give us a follow there as well. and there is our manvel shi. he will contain you after this, good, interesting coverage that you just had a cupful of for two hours. >> you did. and i was very honored to be a part of the.

i think the viewers can tell that we have got a great relationship and friendship. to be on your show was fun. thank you. you have come on my show whenever we asked. let's make that a regular thing. you had me with that cat playing with the toy and clawing your eyes out because that's how it went in the first trump term with corporate leaders, right. they all went through that cycle. and a lot of them told me off the record afterwards, we don't have the time to do this the way he does. we actually have to run our businesses, our employees and our shareholders would like us to run our businesses. so getting involved in that dance with donald trump can be very complicated. thanks. you have a fantastic day. >> you got it, my friend. thank you. >> and "velshi" starts now. ♪♪ ♪♪ good morning. sunday, december 1st. 50 days until donald trump's inauguration and he has sent his

clearest signal that he aims to upend the country's federal law enforcement agencies and the rule of law self. last night trump announced on truth social he intends to replace the current fbi director, christopher wray, with one of trump's own staunch evidential lies, this man, kash patel. a firebrand figure and a favorite among trump's most hard-core supporters. replacing the fbi director who is limit today a ten-year term is unusual in itself. it's something you know trump has done before. early in his presidency, he fired this man, the fbi he director james comey, who was leading an investigation at the time regarding possible ties between trump's campaign, some of his aides and russia. wray was appointed to succeed comey as fbi director. now it appears that wray won't be able to serve out his ten-year term, an outcome he has been preparing for since trump

won the election according to reporting by nbc news. now, this is just the latest episode that demonstrates how district trustful, paranoid and frustrated has been of the law enforcement arm of the federal government since he first entered office. >> in 2016, i declared i am your voice. today i add, i am your warrior, i am your justice, and for those who have been wronged and betrayed, i am your retribution. i am your retribution. i will fire the unelected bureaucrats and shadow forces who have weaponized our justice system like it has never been weaponized before. sick. these are sick people. >> now, trump has been in search of people loyal to him to lead these department and shield him from future investigations. as he reiterated on the campaign trail, he also wants revenge. and in order to do that he needs

someone to help him build the legal apparatus, and he might have found that person in patel if patel can be confirmed by the senate. patel has been one of the most controversial figures in trump's orbit for years. he has promoted the baseless claims that trump won the 2020 election as well as other conspiracy theories about the so-called deep state controlling the government. patel worked as a public defender and federal prosecutor. the previously held several administration post touring trump's first term in office. this isn't the first time trump proposed putting kash patel in a top position at the fbi. four years ago he floated the idea of making patel deputy fbi director, but then attorney general bill barr vehemently objected to that. barr later wrote in his memoir he told mark meadows he would only allow that to happen, quote, over my dead body, end quote. barr added, quote, patel had no experience to qualify him to

serve at the highest level of the world's preeminent law enforcement agency, end quote. trump tried to install patel as deputy cia director back then, but that attempt was also met with fierce opposition by then-cia director gene ina hasp. patel has been a critic of the law enforcement agencies, including the department he is now tapped to lead. in his memoir titled government gangsters he wrote about cleaning house in the justice department and fbi, including getting rid of those in leadership positions. he also openly threatened to prosecute members of those agencies and other civil servants across the federal government, and during an interview with steve bannon last year he vowed to go after the media and the free press. >> we will go out and find the conspirators not just in government but in the media, yes. we are going to come after the people in the media who lied

about american citizens, who helped joe biden rig presidential elections. we will come after you whether it's criminally or civilly, we will figure that out. we are putting you all on notice. >> whether criminally or civilly. we know we are coming after you. we have to figure out how to do it. the promise to clean house and go after trump's perceived political points will royal the agency, could divert time and attention and deplete the fbi of resources and manpower it needs to actually investigate serious crimes and threats to the country. it brings into sharp relief the tang of not just a breakdown of the rule of law in this new trump term, but a weapon zbrags of federal law enforcement apparatus against donald trump's perceived political enemies. for more on this i'm joined by joyce vance, former united states attorney for the northern district of alabama, an msnbc con director and columnist and co-host of the sisters-in-law podcast.

also lisa rubin, former litigator and msnbc legal correspondent. good morning to both of you. thank you for being with us. lisa, only two previous fbi directors have been dismissed from their post by a president in the past. bill clinton fired william sessions in 1993 for allegedly misusing fbi funds for personal purposes, and then of course trump fired james comey back in 2017. now appears, chris wray will be fired or forced into retirement as well. talk to me about what that alone, this idea of not letting fib directors finish out their term in independence does to the institution and to the justice system. >> well, i am so glad that you focused on that because so many of us are focused on the abnormality of the people trump announced he would like to nominate we forget that the process he is trying to implement here is itself abnormal, atypical and violative

of rule of law. the statute that gives the fbi directors ten-year terms was passed in the 1970s for two reasons. one, reaction to watergate, two, to sort of the influence that j. edgar hoover exerted over the agency. that's an understatement for the three plus decades he held the fbi. there was a belief no fbi director should be above the law, but at the same time no fbi director should also be subject to the whims of any one president and his partisan objectives. that's why fbi directors got ten-year term as you mentioned. since then, only two have been dismissed. one by this very president. that's the fire of jim comey, which itself at the time was a norm shattering. now we are focused on kash patel. there is a good reason for us to question his nomination and whether or not he will uphold the standards of the fbi and the

rule of law. but the very idea that chris wray show be fired before the expiration of his ten-year term solely because he did things that donald trump found embarrassing or angering is itself something we should question and say to ourselves, this is not normal. irrespective of who the person is, he would want to replace chris wray. >> i concern myself less with the concept of loyalty because we have always seen presidents appoint people who are loyal to them. the question is qualification and mission. and i want to discuss the mission because patel and trump have latched on to the ideas of retribution, revenge, of cleaning house, of the deep state that they feel is rooted, they really made the fbi central to their, the justice department more broadly, and then the government and its agencies more broadly than that. the problem here is when you get

focused on things like that in the fbi and this has been a problem in the past, you can have your -- you can take your eye off the ball. we don't know what at ball is. there are serious threats in this country and national security threats to our country that are not about the staffing of the fbi. they are actually about real things. theres a concern in many government departments but in the fbi a guy like kash patel is there, the focus is it going to be on retribution and trump's perceived enemies. >> so, i think you have gone right to the heart of the matter because this is clearly about revenge prosecutions. if you are donald trump and you are committed to a series of revenge prosecutions, well, you need someone like kash patel, a loyalist, running the fbi for you. you know, he is sort of the perfect storm of inexperience and total loyalty to donald trump. he is vulnerable to the whims of a strong man like donald trump because that's exactly what we

will have. donald trump metling ddling at i t there is real work that gets done at the fbi day in and day out. the membership and women of the fbi are the men and women who protect american society. every once in a while we will see a case where the fbi will preemptively take down a foreign terror operation and we'll all for about five minutes say, thank goodness the fbi is doing its job. taking its eye off of that ball is something that is critically dangerous and patel is poorly situated to maintain that focus. so there are real world implications, not just with foreign and domestic terror, but also for violent crime, for drug traffic, for civil rights, for the here priority areas where the fbi typically works its hardest. every special agent in charge at an fbi agency across the country is obligated to meet with the director and the deputy director weekly, sometimes more frequently, to talk about the work that they are doing.

if kash patel is directing that work, it's very likely we will begin to see slippage in the fbi's mission. >> lisa, patel did something that is something is typical if you would like to be in trump's orbit or cabinet, he has got an agenda and puts it out there and trump sort of likes it. he publicly threatened to go after and prosecute specific groups of people, federal officials, civil servants and the media, journalists. talk to me go this because you did mention j he had guard hoover and we had the church committee. we have been through this before and americans decided institutionally and as a population we don't wish the fbi and the justice department to be some sort of super structure that makes rules. we would like them to investigate and enforce rules that we all agree on and that our courts have validated. this is not what kash patel is suggesting. >> no, it's not what kash patel is suggesting. and when kash patel talks about

the thaems of retribution, he is not only doing it on donald trump's behalf, but he is also talking about himself. we forget that kash patel has testified before two grand juries in each of the two trump federal investigations and in one them he was forced to testify under a court order because originally he had taken the fifth amendment. that's in the classified documents investigation surrounding the events at mar-a-lago. he only testified after a court found he would have what's called use immunity, the government would not be able to use his own testimony against him. that happened in november of 2022. kash patel has lived under the watchful eye of the fbi and convinced himself that that was done wrongfully to him. he knows exactly who to blame. it's as you said, not only the so-called deep staters, people that he thinks include bill barr and gina haspel, folks that we would not necessarily say are idealogically aligned with some

of kash patel's other opponents. but the threat of prosecuting the media, as you noted, doesn't know what statute he would prosecute the media under, whether the penalties would be civil or criminal. the threat itself is the point, to scare people like the three of us having this conversation right now and to prevent us from having this conversation and sharing it with the american people, that may be worth more to kash patel as the head of the fbi than any prosecution or investigation that actually comes to fruition should he be confirmed. >> yeah, and joyce, you know, people like tim schneider and ruth and anne bengal bomb make that point, sometimes you don't have to do the work, the threat is enough. i ask you this. none of us are surprised it that kash patel got some appointment. i was surprised it's an appointment that requires senate advice and consent. do you believe the senate will be comfortable with kash patel?

>> you know, donald trump continues to push the senate to see just how far he can go, how many times he will be able to get them to bend the knee, right. when you throw up a number of nominees who are marginally qualified at best and carry serious baggage, credible allegations of sexual assault, for instance, it's really a testing mechanism to see what it will take to break the united states senate. now, look, historically, the senate has perhaps opposed one or two of a president's nominees, perhaps even forcing them to withdraw before they come to a vote, but broadly they give the president the deference he is entitled to in assembling his candidacy and his leadership team. here, you know, this looks really different, and it's hard to know what the senators will do. so many of the republican senators have lined up with trump, but now we are in the final term. trump cannot be re-elected. he with will not head the party

in 2028. some of these senators might still have enough of a sense of conscious left, conscience left to stand up and reject these nominees. we see early rumblings about that. but january and these votes are a long way off and trump has way of assembling people behind them and forcing them to toe the line. i think this is an early sign that we will get about precisely what we are in for, right? will the senate cave in, do trump's bidding with these nominees who each of them knows this their heart they must vote against if they are to do their constitutional duty. whether or not they will do that duty remains to be seen. >> we will give everybody remindsers about j. edgar hoover and the church committee and mccarthyism. we are not looking to go back to that. thank you por your analysis. joyce vance, former united states attorney and msnbc con director and columnist, lisa runen abmsnbc legal

correspondent. coming up, timothy schneider tells us not to obey in advance when an anti-democratic leader like donald trump's power. tom nichols has additional advice. don't exhaust yourself in advance either. how to resist getting pulled in by trump's strategically sown chaos. and australia moved to ban social media for kids under 16 this week, open up a conversation about the dangers of big tech and whether they could be solved without remaking an entire business model built on consumer surveillance and algorithms that promote outrage. .

♪ limu emu & doug ♪ woah, limu! we're in a parade. everyone customize and save hundreds on car insurance with liberty mutual. customize and sa— (balloon doug pops & deflates) and then i wake up. and you have this dream every night? yeah, every night! hmm... i see. (limu squawks) only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ drop everything and get some magic of your own only pay for what you need. during the xfinity black friday sale. xfinity internet customers, our best deals of the year are back! switch to xfinity mobile and get your choice of a free 5g phone, plus your next unlimited line free for a year. get amazing savings and connect to wifi speeds up to a gig on the go with xfinity mobile. fly don't walk to get our best deals of the year. connect to the world of wicked this holiday,

in theaters now. ♪♪ turning to israel's war in gaza. according to the gaza health ministry 47 people were killed in the last 24 hours, more than 100 people oned from israeli attacks. three of those dead were workers affiliated with the humanitarian group world central kitchen

after an israeli airstrike on one of their vehicles. now, the israeli military says one of the three world central kitchen workers killed in the strike took part in the october 7th attacks. world central kitchen said they have no knowledge of that. however, they have said that they are temporarily pausing operations in gaza. for more on this, nbc news international correspondent hala gorani hala is in jerusalem. what more to we know about the situation involving world central kitchen? >> reporter: well, we have been following this carefully since yesterday. we understand it was a drone attack on a vehicle. the idf claims it was unmarked. it killed three world central kitchen staffers. their bodies were taken to nassar hospital in khan yunis in the southern part of the strip. doctors and hospital spernle emptied the contents of the car. when you look at the video, again a reminder that

journalists, international journalists are not allowed in gaza. we are relying a lot on our crews on the ground. we could see log books from employees, smashed smartphones as well, and i.d. cards. this strike also killed, we understand, two farmers on the ground as well. you see here on your screen the aftermath of that attack. three of the world central kitchen workers that were killed, among them, as you mentioned, a man that the idf claims directly took part in the october 7th attack, though the organization, world central kitchen, says it has no knowledge of any connection. what's important is that the work that wck was doing in gaza is paused at a time when the u.n. and other international organizations are warning that famine is a reality in many parts of the gaza strip because of how little aid is going in, ali.

>> is there -- what's the -- getting a deal with -- between israel and hamas. there has been indication from donald trump he would like it that concluded including a hostage deal. given the deal made between israel and hezbollah, some argue there is less urgency to settle the gaza matter. >> reporter: well, it's a good question. what we are seeing is that there is a bit of movement. there is a delegation, a hamas delegation in cairo right now, we understand. also, an islamic jihad representation in cairo and the u.s. is promising it's going to use the momentum that it gained through that deal between israel and hezbollah to get things going, once more to got to get some movement involving qatar, egypt and turkey, that they perhaps could facilitate. hamas operatives from the political bureau are now based in turkey. so turkey has a hand to play

here potentially. now, we've all seen the reports that president-elect trump it does not want an active war zone in the middle east on his watch, and perhaps he would be in that case putting pressure on benjamin netanyahu to get a deal done. so we're seeing a little bit of, you know, a little bit more movement. there is no real expectation that a deal is around the corner, however, because israel will insist that it maintain a military presence in gaza and hamas has said from the beginning that that is a deal breaker, ali. >> hala, thank you. hala gorani in jerusalem. we will be back with you in a bit to check on what's happening in syria where rebels have taken control of most of aleppo, one of that country's largest cities. coming up, standing up to the chaos of a new trump era. the only way to hold trump accountable is by refusing to be exhausted by his baiting and trolling. olling —okay. okay.

♪♪ open. ♪♪ ♪♪ over 600,000 usps employees working in sync to ensure everything sent on its holiday ride ends with a moment of joy. ♪♪ the united states postal service.

["the glory of love" plays] giving. [♪ you've got to give a little ♪] [♪ take a little ♪] giving without expecting something in return. ♪ giving that's possible through the power of dell ai with intel. so those who receive can find the joy of giving back. ♪ [♪ that's the glory of love. ♪]

♪♪ few weeks ago on the first weekend after the election we talked on this show about the path forward for folks who are worried about vulnerable friends or neighbors about our democracy holding up against another trump presidency. we talked about the hard and often heartbreaking work of being politically engaged and staying politically engaged. we talked about all the lessons from history tell us not to give up. telling us that defeat paves the way for triumph later, that defeat doesn't mean the fight's over. it just means that our work's not done. i want to revisit that conversation this weekend because as donald trump's new administration has been taking shape these past few weeks as he has been naming cabinet picks that range from the relatively normal to the grossly unqualified, to those who stated views and plans represent a genuine danger to americans'

health, safety and national security. it's one thing to gather up and prepare for work ahead of us in the aftermath of an election where some of the values we thought we hold in common lost, but it's another thing to face that work when the job is taking shape in front of us, when we can start to see how long and difficult this is going to be. "the atlantic's" tom nichols reminds us holding trump accountable is not a sprint, it's a marathon, requires pacing and patience and discipline because trump and his team will continue to use chaos as a strategy to distract from the work that they are actually doing to design a government structure that is specifically meant to skrund undermine accountability. he writes the president trump and his team have baited and trolled their opponents while throwing red meat to the maga faithful. we have seen this before as i warned in the past april,

stunning his opponents with more outrageous than they can handle is a classic trump tactic. professor timothy snyder of yale university wrote the way to resist is to not obey in advance. that is changing our behavior in ways we think might conform to the demands of the new ruling group. that's good advice. i might add a corollary here. people should not panic and exhaust themselves in advance either, end quote. joining me is the aforementioned tom nichols. author of our own worst enemy, the assault from within on modern democracy. tom, thank you for this. i have been sort of thinking about ways to think about this and to say it, communicate to people that it is really normal and easy to get exhausted in advance. trump is, i remember now from

those days we covered him as president, exhausting, and knows that trick works, particularly with the media. >> yeah, and, i mean, he firehoses his opponents with a lot of, you know, crazy talk and threats and kind of odd statements. he calls it doing the weave. i call it, you know, simply not being, you know, very competent at stringing thoughts together. but he understands that if he piles enough things together we all throw our hands up and say, you know, what can do you? what do you do about the guy? he is exhausting. i think one of the things that he is doing now is a lot more nefarious. he is not just trying to wear people out with a lot of nutty rhetoric. he is building a couderay of people around him that will refuse to hold him accountable,

let him do whatever he wants, that will create the infrastructure of an authoritarian structure in the executive pp branch. he is increasing the weirdness. he led in boxing, you know, the -- you start with that scrab and you wait for the haymaker. he started with marco rubio. people said, okay, i guess that's not so bad. lee zeldin, loyal exist. that pete hegseth, tulsi gabbard, he is rolling these out so fast that people are, you know, can't make enough arguments in a short enough time and finally gets to matt gaetz, which is, you know, like throwing a flash-bang grenade into a dark room. and now with kash patel, which was always lurking out there. anybody who is a trump watcher knew, you know, we were getting all these nutty nominations and then saying, oh, where is that kash patel nom to nation?

that one is coming. and here it is. >> you published a piece about kash patel last night. you say it speaks volumes about the real second term agenda and you note that the timing of this is related to what we are talking about. quote, trump releasing names of the nominees for the cabinet in waves. began with conventional choices, unloaded one bombshell after another perhaps to paralyze opposition in the senate over to overwhelm the public's limited political attention span. he may have held off announcing patel until he had enough exhaustion with his other nominations. ka kash patel -- i think he is not a distraction. i think this is one of the dangerous ones we need to be paying attention to. >> right. and the setup to get to kash patel was matt gaetz and other nominations. i mean, he made -- one thing -- he may not care about people

like gaetz. one thing i think trump's been trying to do, is he tries to create this aura of inevitability. i am just announcing things and they just happen because i can will this into existence. and gaetz proved that's not true. already we are having conversations about, well, who is going to be the sacrifice to keep out patel because he has got to get some of the -- he doesn't have to get these. if the united states senate really cares about its constitutional duty and cares about democracy and, you know, even to say that these republican senators, if you care at all about the future of the republican party, the conservative movement, it's only going to take four of you to stop the most dangerous nominations. hegseth, gabbard, patel. and of course rfk, who is a different kind of danger. but again trump's counting on people saying, oh, you know, i guess if we have to pick one of

them, maybe we should try to -- you know, don't have to pick. this is -- if you keep sprinting, you are going to wear yourself out. this is a process. just say one time after another, no, this is not appropriate, no, this is dangerous. >> which is the constitutional right and responsibility for the senate. this is not a stretch. this is not a favor anybody is doing for anybody. this is what you are elected to do. you continue to write remarkably enlightening things. tom nichols, staff writer at "the atlantic," his book, the assault from within. coming up, australia proved banned social media for anyone under 16 but as doubts dominate the conversation, whether kids can be protected from big tech without radical changes to the industry's reliance on algorithms built to promote outrage and spread misinformation. misinformation

(♪♪) imagine checking your own heart with medical precision from anywhere. introducing kardiamobile 6l, the fda-cleared ekg that provides six-times more heart data than any smartwatch. and it detects three of the most common arrhythmias in just 30 seconds, including atrial fibrillation, bradycardia and tachycardia. check your heart with the most advanced personal ekg outside the hospital. our $99 cyber monday deal is here now,

our lowest price of the year. have you compared your medicare plan recently? with ehealth, you can compare medicare plans side by side for free. so we invited people to give ehealth a try and discover how easy it can be to find your medicare match. this is pretty amazing. i can go on a vacation with this money. i have quite a few prescriptions. that's why people call us. we're going to compare plans, and i'm gonna try to get you as much bang for your buck as possible. that's great. this one here covers all your prescriptions, your doctors as well. oh, wonderful. i have a hard time with this. that's okay, that's what i'm here for. based on our conversation today, i would highly recommend this plan. you're so helpful. you know, you don't know. i'm excited for you, sir. again, my name is sham. and if you have any other questions, give me a ring. thank you very much. oh, my god, that was super easy. uhhh! see how your medicare plan stacks up with the big changes for 2025. just call this number or get started at ehealth.com. compare plans that cover your doctor's prescriptions,

pharmacy and budget, and compare plans from the nation's top insurance companies. they pay us to help you. how much do you think you'll be able to save using ehealth? at least $300 a month. would you say you found your medicare match? yes i did. what sham did she explain to me exactly what i needed to know? well, i have a surprise for you. sham, come on out. oh my goodness. it's a pleasure to meet you today, sir. what does it feel like to be face to face? you helped me out quite a bit. call to meet your advisor. they're paid the same. no matter which medicare advantage plan you choose. ask them about ehealth, live advice or get started on your own at ehealth.com. either way, it's always a free service. see if you could get more for less with ehealth, like these folks did. the savings are unbelievable. i could see the costs side by side. ehealth is wonderful. $1,200 savings in my pocket. i was really pleasantly surprised with that. (♪♪) (♪♪)

ehealth. your medicare matchmaker. ♪♪ this week lawmakers in australia passed a sweeping ban on social media for kids under the age of 16. it's now one of the world's toughest measures aimed at protecting young people from potential dangers online and while it's got broad public support both in australia and

around the world, critics say this is going to be very difficult to enforce. nbc's janis mackey frayer has more. >> reporter: this ban is a world first, but it isn't clear exactly how it will work or if it can work to safeguard kids and teams from the harmful aspects of social media. it puts the onus on platforms like tiktok, facebook, snapchat, instagram, x to figure out how to implement the age restriction. they have a year to do it. then risk facing huge fines if they are found to be allowing underage killed to hold accounts. there is mixed feelings among young people who say, look, this is the digital age we are living in and social media is a part of it. and they see it as losing their right to self-expression. critics say the law was rushed, that it raises privacy concerns, and that it does nothing to actually clean up the platforms and could push kids to pursue darker online spaces. but the law has wide support

among parents in australia who are looking for something to protect kids and teens from being exposed to streams of content that are unfiltered and infinite. to change the norms, they say, around social media usage so that it doesn't have to be the defining feature of growing up. countries around the world are watching this very closely, and some are considering similar bans. in the u.s., more states are looking at how to limit exposure. australia's government admits the ban is not perfect and kids are going to find work arounds. the message, they say, is to the social media companies to do better. >> that's nbc's janis mackey frayer. after the break, whether this step in australia can be important as a starting point towards regulating social media or what we can learn from it here in the united states. why it is, in fact, so hard to tackle the harms that are caused by big tech unless we consider rolling back a business model that's built on algorithms and surveillance. joining me in a few moments

marry anne frank t experts in civil rights, free speech and technology. he has been warning about big tech's dangerous business model. tech's dangerous business model. why use 10 buckets of water when you can use 1 fire extinguisher. and to fight heartburn, why take 10 antacids throughout the day when you can take 1 prilosec. for easier heartburn relief, one beats ten. prilosec otc. one pill. 24 hours. zero heartburn.

you got better things to do than clean out clogged gutters. call leaffilter today and never clean out clogged gutters again. leaffilter's technology keeps debris out of your gutters for good. guaranteed. schedule your free gutter inspection now and save up to 35% with leaffilter's black friday deals.

♪♪ joining me mary anne franks, professor of technology and civil rights law at the george washington law school, author of fearless speech, breaking free from the first amendment. and co-former advisor to mark zuckerberg, author of sfwluk, waking up to the facebook catastrophe. thank you for being with us. roger, as janis was saying in that piece, there is broad agreement that australia's new law banning social media for kids under 16 is going to be hard to enforce and there may be problems that ensue from trying to enforce it, more harms than we were thinking about.

but she points out that this is a demonstration of political will where there has been almost none, you know, in terms of regulating big tech. tell me your take on this move. >> so, the real problem that we have here is that the status quo is intolerable. we have a situation now where teens, but also adults, are being put through emotional stress that humans are not designed to be able to withstand. all off this in service of a business model which is adversarial with the people who use it. and the lack of regulation, the lack of rules for big tech has caused it to turn that essentially asbestos but with better pr and a bigger checkbook. and that is a situation i think we in america have allowed to happen, and it's harming the entire world. australia is saying, you know what? this is the first step. i mean, in reality, i'd like to

see them ban the entire business model. this is just not working. and we have to find a different way to do this. >> mary ann, i think you argued in favor of there being some form of regulation and restriction on what's going on, particularly as it relates to the harms to children, to young girls in particular. you do warn that this blanket ban might cause some other problems for young people. tell me what you mean by that. >> right, and i think that roger is correct about how we are in a bad state when it comes to children's access to and addiction to social media and not just children, it's adults, too. what i worry about is fact that this ban is relying really heavily on age verification. and we just don't have methods to really show age verification that are accurate without also causing all kinds of unintended consequences, more data

collection, more information gathering, more kinds of inferences about human behavior. we don't want to give these companies more excuses to do that kind of -- engage if those kinds of practices. but i am more worried in some ways about how this ban also says, you know, we are not going after messaging, we are not going after just a general online access. so you are doing this really kind of strangely selective ban, and i worry that for the kinds of things that many young people are exposed to, things like sexual exploitation and abuse and grooming, it's already hard enough for those minors to come forward and say i'm trapped in this cycle with somebody trying to harm me. if we say you are also engaged in something illegal or weren't supposed to be accessing these platforms at all, i worry it's one more disincentive for kids to get help before it's too late. >> roger, let's talk about, you know, you have some hope particularly in the current administration that they were doing things particularly from

trade and policy perspective to try to improve the question. it's very clear that the incoming administration, the united states is influenced by very different forces, including the fact that elon musk is now central to our government. but you saw mark zuckerberg going to bend the knee, if you will, with this incoming administration. what's your hope of what is it -- what can realistically be done in the coming years as this problem worsens in the face of an administration that does not wish to regulate it at all? >> so, ali, i think that the best strategy is the one that lena kahn has been employing in her case against instagram, which basically says thou shalt not monetize the data of minors, shall not collect it. it's a blanket prohibition of the behavior you dislike. i'm totally with mary ann that the challenges of age verification of a problem.

i ban the business model for everybody because i don't want to get into the age verification discussion. our problem is lack of political will. i think the incoming administration, our problems will be way more than little of political will. so i don't know realistically what's going to happen in the united states. i do think that antitrust will move forward. it's not clear to me how much of the problem antitrust can take care of, but i want to see around the rest of the world people engaging in this conversation, recognizing the flaws of the australian law, but recognizing just as importantly how intolerable the status quo is and how important it is to challenge these companies, which are pretending that they are immune from any kind of regulation in any jurisdiction, which strikes me as just a terrible idea. >> i want to pick up on something you both said. roger just said it, have the world understand how intolerable this is, we have a business model that's causing us to process things in a way that perhaps our human brains, certainly mine, is not equipped

to process the velocity and nonsense that comes across on social media. but that -- how it does that lead -- you have just written a book about fearless speech. how does that bump up against people who say you can't regulate these business models because that's free speech? >> raw, i think we have a tendency, when i say we, pretty much everyone has a tendency to overreact to any kind of regulation of the internet or technology as being a violation of free speech. i try to unpack why that's the case, it that we have very, i think, dysfunctional views of what free speech actually is. we seem to think that if we can't post something on social media, we have some sort of limited access, that means we have been sort of constitutionally or fundamentally harmed. it tends to make us forget that's what the industry wants us to believe, that the industry wants you to believe that nothing real happens unless you do it online. and that of course isn't true.

the conversations that we have face to fis, the conversations that we have in classrooms, the conversations we have in public spaces are really important and vital, and we have been kind of led, i think, by the industry to think, no, come here, give us all of your thoughts here, express yourselves here because this is the new public scare, when as roger has written about, and others, that's not what the corporations who own these spaces are interested in. they are not interested in democracy or expression or art. they are really interested in you expressing yourself so they can monetize it and sell it. we need to have a kind of reorientation around how important speech is, but that that is not meant to be determinative how important social media is. we need to make a distinction. >> you do very well in your book. thank you to both of you for being with us. an important conversation that apparently we will have to have lots more over the coming weeks,

months, years. mary anne franks, the author of fearless speech, breaking free from the first amendment. longer, co-founder of elevation partners, former advisor of mark zuckerberg, author of zucked. another hour of "velshi" starts after a quick break. we'll be right back. s the cleang power of liquid. can it one up whatever they're doing? for sure. seriously? one up the power of liquid, one up the toughest stains. any further questions? uh uh! one up the power of liquid with tide pods ultra oxi. philip: when your kid is hurting and there's nothing you can do about it, that's the worst feeling in the world. kristen: i don't think anybody ever expects to hear that their child has cancer. it's always one of those things that happens to somebody else, but it's definitely feels like your soul is sucked out of your body when they tell you that it's your baby.

and you would do anything to get them to the best place that they can be for their treatment. and i knew with everything in my soul that that was saint jude and that we here. announcer: join the battle to save lives by supporting saint jude children's research hospital. please call or go online right now and become a saint jude partner in hope for only $19 a month. hunter: my name is hunter. i'm at saint jude because i had osteosarcoma. osteosarcoma is a special cancer that's in the bone. so they had to amputate my leg. [music playing] you're looking at a hero ♪ it takes a fighter ♪ kristen: good catch! (singing) you're looking at a hero in the fight kristen: my hero. philip: here at st. jude you don't ever have to worry about how much treatment costs.

you never get a bill ever for any of it. announcer: when you call or go online with your credit or debit card, you will receive this saint jude t-shirt you can wear to show your support to help saint jude save the lives of these children. kristen: without the donors. saint jude wouldn't be here. hunter: thank you so much. you have saved so many kids. announcer: let's cure childhood cancer together. ♪♪ sounds like you need to vaporize that cold. dayquil vapocool? it's dayquil plus a rush of vicks vapors. ♪ vapocooooool ♪ woah. dayquil vapocool. the vaporizing daytime, coughing, aching, stuffy head, power through your day, medicine.

your business needs a network it can count on... power through your day, even during the unexpected. power's out! -power's out! power's out! comcast business has got you covered, with wifi backup to help keep you up and running. wifi's up. let's power on! let's power on! -let's power on! it's from the company with 99.9% network reliability. let's power on! power on with the leader in connectivity. get wifi backup for your business, or get started with comcast business internet. and for a limited time, get an $800 holiday bonus. call today. ♪♪

good morning to you. it's sunday, december 1st. the president-elect has sent his clearest signal he's going to up-end the law enforcement agencies and the rule of law itself. last night trump announced on truth social he plans to replace the current fbi director, christopher wray, with one of trump's staunchest allies, kash patel. replacing the fbi director, who's limited to serving a single ten-year term is an unusual move in itself, buttist something trump has done before, you'll recall, early in his first presidency. trump fired fbi director james comey, who is leading an investigation at the time regarding possible ties between trump's campaign, some of his aides and russia. wray was then appointed to succeed comey as fbi director and now wray won't