to level the playing field for countries looking to keep multinational businesses at home. we're going to tell you the reaction. and the wildfires are ravaging the west, leaving death and destruction in its wake. but what if the source of the spark is a familiar company and it's not their 1st time it tosh a sweet looks into p g n d and why their equipment is under question yet again. i'm scotty, now huge, and you're watching new beaut hughes right here on our to america. let's get started. ah . the white house is making the closing of the guantanamo bay a priority in the 1st year. and while there is no public timeline, the 1st attack need to be transferred. abdul, the chief this year is scheduled to be moved to morocco. a federal review board determined it back in 2016. that is attention was actually no longer necessary to protect against ongoing national security threats. but will this but this will

bring the remaining total at $39.00 with 10 eligible for transfer at guantanamo bay . now the remaining 17 are eligible for a periodic review board. can have been involved in the military commission process and to have been convicted. so does this mean the us is done with their involvement on the warranty there? while to help break it down. we welcome andy worthington and thanks for joining us . either. hi, scott. i'm doing good. now you are the investigative journalist and you were the author pantano files, the stories of the $774.00 to chinese americans, illegal prison, you know about the issue you've been there, full disclosure. so of i, so i have to ask you, when you're looking at what the spite administration is doing, do you believe that they will actually be successful in their goal of shutting down to get mo, at the pro, as it is handled in the present state. i very much hope so really. there are

22 things about the prison at the moment. i mean there are 39 men still held. so we've got the 12 men who've been through go on trial, are going to be on trial, and they need to have some venue. so to about whether the trial can take place. if the prisoners to be close, the obvious thing is to move them to federal courts on the us mainland. the rest of the man who is still held are old men who have never been charged or tried with any crimes. i'm them and i think we've never reached the stage where everyone has run out of patience with the notion that the united states can help people indefinitely without charge or trial. after nearly 20 years, it is quite astonishing to have the united states, which claims to follow the rule of law holding people. so we've got 10 of these men who are already released and dividing that ministration needs to look very closely whether it has any ability to charge any of the other men that is holding. these

are the men who are generally known as forever prisoners. the reason and i think that if they can't find any way of charging the man and you know, surely if they had any reason they would have done it by now, then they also need to be released. and really with these 2 groups of people, it looks on paper, at least to be quite easy to reach the point where the person will be close with the if that works out that way. in reality. well, let's look at why the base is actually founded for mind. we're about to hit the 20th anniversary of september 11th. and obviously the deadly terrorist attack that happened here in the united states. that's what actually justified at the time president bush opening, get the most that they could put whatever. so whatever the enemy combatants are, they think they came across over there over here and keeping them separate for america. us is now pulling troops out of africa in a sand which was justified after $911.00. we're now looking like possibly might be in iraq. so what role could this base service say?

it's time i agree and you say, but what else could this base possibly serve or the time just to completely pull out completely off the that side of cuba? well, it's definitely time to stop it because to be honest, it should never have existed in the 1st place. if the united states wanted to hold prisoners that have been captured on the battlefield, then he could have done that with a prisoner of war camp, which could have been established in mechanics than it did need to be. but had it been in guantanamo ship, it conforms to the jimmy conventions, and it never did. the other side of the story is that the united states was capturing people accused of involvement in terrorism after 911. and yes, it was refusing to put them on trial in federal courts. and as we've seen over the trials at one time on, the military commissions have been an abject failure. yet they've hardly reached any, any conclusions, any convictions and the ones they have. some of those have been overturned on appeal and we still waiting for the 911 trial to go ahead over time. so the federal

codes were always the better routes. and if you actually wanted to prosecute people or alleged involvement in terrorism, hundreds and hundreds of cases have been successfully prosecuted the whole time the grand panama has been open. and yet we have the site here and found the most clearly. that didn't work either. it should have been federal court trial. they should have been prisoner of war camps when china was an aberration in terms of the law. and in terms of the way that the united states is always dealt with people at the price of their liberty. well, but the question is, suppose the terraces which they were charged with, which let's talk about this. if these, if they are transferred back to morocco, what happens? do you actually believe due process and if they are terrorist who have the intent of killing people, do you believe that they will go be given that same rights that you're asking for them to be given here in the us will happen to morocco that they will stand a fair court and morocco? are we possibly going to see them just release like we've seen pass prisoners

released. what are you talking about? the one man who's just been released to morocco because i mean, he was unanimously approved for release from the prison as not posing a threat to the united states national security. i mean, really for, for another country, do we actually sit there actually going to be given this fair due process that you were expecting to happen in the us as well? no, i don't think that there's any question or anything. the men who, who allegedly committed serious crimes of terrorism, they are going to be prosecuted one way or another. now either the by not administration limps on with the managed emission system at one time. or they moved into the federal court system. but you know, the point i'm making really is that over 2 thirds of the men who are held at guantanamo have not been charged with a crime where sadness, the lines on the us. i agree, they should've been given due process. and in their time, great conversation, we had obviously one that's going to continue. hopefully this just means there's

more peace and less terrorist in the world today. thanks for joining. thank you very much. the 35 joint strike fighter has been a problem to the u. s. military in some form, since its creation. now currently the jet which has been marked as the money put in the sky as 232 planes in the air force. them 15 percent are grounded currently without their engines, which is actually pretty important. if you want the heaviest of all the fighter jets to actually get up in the air. so they sticker price of a $100000000.00 per plane. there is a debate going on about whether or not it should be more effective to just replace the f $35.00 with a new fighter, which could actually be cheaper and lighter. so discuss the future, the $35.00. it's role in the u. s. military moving forward, we bring and david swanson, executive director of world beyond war. i have to ask you, this is a very, very intimidating bird, very technologically advanced at the time that it was created. do you think that there's actually more of

a future for the 35 than just being very expensive lawn art? well, i think as long as the u. s. congress and white house are doing the bidding of lockheed martin both as customers and as dealers. imposing this monstrosity on other governments around the world. the answer will be yes and it won't matter whether the thing is a failure on its own terms. of course, i don't want it to time go out. it doesn't have engines. i'm glad i can't fly. i'm glad it's a disaster because the thing, if it worked, it's supposed to be on offensive, not a defensive, insane, still potentially nuclear war starter and the new russian plane and the other planes made in the u. s. and in other countries that are in the same line, same thing. these are things we shouldn't want to work, but the f 35 is the star is the standout that not working well. and it didn't seem to bring that bridge right to all of the other planes that are going right. i

didn't come to my right. obviously russia today introduce the category. i think it's called the, the check me fighter. and that's another. all of these are right. every country, korea, china, everybody has a bird. you don't want them to work, but at the same time, if everybody else has one, isn't important to have at least your own version of it for your own defense or is that a weakness within the u. s. military system, if are burned down while everybody else seems to be getting theirs up in the air pretty well. absolutely not. there is no credible threat out there not to the u. s. or to most other countries that invest ridiculous amounts of money in militarism, although none of them remotely approached the united states or russia is that $7.00 or 8 percent of u. s. military spending. china is under 15 percent of what the us and its allies and weapons customers spend on militarism. there is no serious threat out there. the u. s. would be safer without having spent the past 20 years investing in this

corrupt catastrophe that other nations are now duplicating and building. and potentially they are going to have work better than the u. s. version. and then you're right on that when other military, when other countries go in and obviously like you said, other countries have looked at buying are birds that are using them, are they actually buying the military equipment themselves? or more importantly, are they buying the support of the people who sold them buying in this case, america support in any sort of operation they do because they're using our equipment. yeah. when you talk about the cost, the initial cost of buying these things is minimal in comparison to the cost of flying them, fueling them, maintaining them training people to use them upgrading them, fixing them, you know, repairing the broken computers, replacing the, the non working engines and so forth, on top of which they don't replace, they do a worse job than older airplanes. they were meant to replace at everything at

bombing at b, still at finding other airplanes that so called ground support their failures on their own terms. on top of being the most expensive, the crashing the most polluting the most, making the most noise, damaging children's brains with how much noise they make their disaster all the way around. which is why there is such a great symbol of, of the us military industrial complex. and i said, i, i, that's something we preach against as often as possible on the show to show, obviously. but there is a reason why countries do have a military. so what would be your reason knowing what you do, knowing your background on this? what is your reason when other countries do have plains that work, that are meant to be just as much of an offensive as, as this pain? it, how should the us react? are you saying that we shouldn't have anything to defend it just in case of future it better not to have them keep them grounded, but hey, we have them if needed. what would be your approach to it? they serve no defensive purpose just by being in

a department that was renamed defense in 1947. they are force attacks on the other country. the reason that canada made by $88.00 of these monsters, despite massive protests around canada, is because it does the bidding of the us government, which does the bidding of lockheed martin where the united states to spend less each year each year on its military rather than more even the tiniest bit you would see a reversed arms race around the world. when the united states bends more than just about every other country, including all its allies and weapons, customers put together and then exclaims, we must defend ourselves from the chinese or increasing their military spending. well, when the united states decreases its military spending, so has, and so will china? well, and i understand that you actually think that the u. s. backed off that other countries like china, turkey, russia, per se, the middle east, that they would actually reduce their numbers as well. the united states could

radically reduce military spending and military weapons build up around the world simply by ceasing to sell weapons. is the overwhelmingly the number one weapons dealer and the state department serves to pressure other countries to buy these weapons. what passes for enemies, the countries that the united states refuses to cooperate with because they need these, the enemies for propaganda purposes. the russians, china, iran, and so forth, are not actually any wrecked, and you would see them scaled back, their militarism. so i'm all like russia already are in some ways scaling back their militarism if the united states would as well. and you know, this was something that people hoped for in moving from the trump administration to a new u. s. government and thus far were getting just the opposite. more of the same great conversation. really want to continue this down the road. thank you so much for

joining us. well, more taxes on global companies benefit the us workers? well, we're going to talk shop with the financial expert after the break the, the me ah ah, i use

you know, even sort of new era, an era of confusion about deflation is giving way to a new era about the confusion of inflation the war drug started as a way to come back, a great problem, what's the, why? it's part of the attitude of the nation, not just of north dakota, and it got to be something that you could get elected. this time, the fight against drugs took a tragic, told us that andrew was competing short form. this is way too dangerous for him to be doing. clearly they put him in harm's way. a rural college student does interest get shot in the head and found in a river like something else had to be happening with

the the, the fact that 50 percent has been proposed by the vitamin tre should help try and prevent companies from shopping from the lowest tax rates to operate a move which has seemed to be the most sweeping tax, a form of the global tax system and over century they should make multinational corporations pan appropriate share of tax wherever they chose to operate. but well, that's really a level playing field top us answer we bring in debbie floyd c o d o b financial services. thanks for joining. thanks for having me. ok, so you've seen this, we've looked at on the surface. it looks like a great idea. obviously, level the field, i, surprisingly, $130.00 nations have agreed to this. so wish countries does this going to hurt and who would actually benefit the most? well, whoever doesn't sign up for it is,

is going to be the winner because companies are gonna gravitate towards repairing the lowest taxes when you. so if you're a big multinational, multi international company, amazon, google, whoever, aren't you going to want to go where you pay the least in taxes. so companies and countries alike are going to have some decisions to make. not everybody has signed on board, ireland hasn't signed on. they have got one of the low as taxes in europe, and they want to stay that way. a lot of the caribbean islands are a safe haven for corporate companies wanting to not pay as much in tax. do you want to pay more in tax? do you want the company you work for to pay more in taxes? that's less for you. and as there been any sort of analysis like ok either all or nothing, if everybody doesn't sign all of this and it's not going to because i think you're right. i think if only some of the countries implement that it just gave a really big advantage to those that are holding out that are already probably the biggest violators are taking of already in existence. well, yeah. and you,

you don't want a level playing field, right. i mean, this is a business, not everybody wins, right? so we're going to a more socialistic society where everybody gets the same pay every well doesn't cost the same to live everywhere. what does that going to do to american workers or russian workers or wherever workers, you know, if everyone gets paid the same, then more people pay taxes, the corporate taxes aren't going to go as far. so if they're spending more money on taxes, which they're going to do, then they're gonna have less money to put an infrastructure less for their employees, less for benefits, and they're going to move their locations or operation to these countries that don't have a high tech space that's going to be a loser for us. and that's, that's kind of one of the concerns that out in the bottom is ration realize, you know, taxes are big especially corporations. but so as cheap labor and resources, as you mentioned because it's amazing. the ones that the lowest tax is also have low labor, low, low infrastructure because guess what? they don't really have is the standards that we said here in america. so do you

think this is really going to d tore companies for moving their operations when they have these other qualities, even if they say ok, fine, we'll embrace that. we'll do the 15 percent, but we still are going to make our money up there. we're still gonna be very attractive because we don't hold our companies to the same workers standards that maybe the united states and other countries do. we know who's going to lose is us the workers. you know, the workers are the ones that are going to be left behind or us as a consumer. things are going to cost more. if you're going to charge a company just a mom and pop company with taxes, just think about it on a regular family. if you have to pay more in taxes, you have less to spend on other things. big these big national companies and international companies are no different. they're going to have less. so what about the stock market? how this going to do when it comes to profits and profit shares and stock prices. this is going to be a problem all across the board for all income levels, the workers and the people that invest in stocks. ok, so it makes no sense. so why is it being proposed? why is this being championed by this administration?

who are they trying to make happy with this? the whole world we, we have become in the united states, why we want to be like everybody else and everything needs to be level. a lot of, of our younger generation believes that everybody should be the same. well, you can just drive through neighborhoods the, do you all want the same cars, you know, the people with the money and the people without the money. they have made choices and what they do and how they're educated and where they work and how they work. how long they work. so if everybody is going to play the same, then it's going to be a socialistic society. government is going to take care of everything and i think that's what they ultimately want. capitalism is threatened, of course, and i kind of grew up in an america where, you know, not everybody won a prize at soccer. right. and we've kind of condition the younger generations to believe that it's ok. everybody tried and that's what really matters. that's not what really matters is not how business works well, what works better and better. what would be a better approach. this approach,

which we obviously talked about doesn't work, is you're never going to get the same sort of standards and quality for employee rights. in other countries or actually motivating by giving the rewards to businesses to stay in america, not punish. you can punish them if they go out, but more importantly, reward them for staying here. why? if we never seen those kind of plans, even in a president trump, we did not see as many of those they took regulations away, but we didn't share reward for those companies to stay here. well, i think he tried to not reward them but, but bring them back. a lot of companies had moved a lot of their money overseas. and so he enabled by lowering corporate taxes for a lot of those companies to bring back workers, bring back jobs to america. and i think he did that. but what this is going to do is if you tax are companies more than fine, don't pay the taxes if they have to. but what else are you going to? what's the benefit to them? so they're gonna have to move that down a few levels, right? so if they are more money is spent on taxes and they have less to spend on wages.

just like if you raise the minimum wage here in the united states. so then pizza hut, now they're paying their, their, their person $20.00 an hour to deliver pizza. great. well that just means me and you have to buy more expensive pizza and we're not going to buy more expensive piece if we can't afford it. we're going to make it ourselves so those people are going to lose their jobs. so raising the minimum wage, forcing taxes, not letting competition. * thrive is going to do more harm our economy, i believe, than it really is going to help it. well, is it unrealistic? all so, and i think about why change phases and putting up his shuttle and to the space. i think of some of the big corporations that over the last year and a half of credit, they made a lot of money. well, everybody seemed to be hurting. they were the ones that did not have to really take a government loan. probably some of them did, you know when you get them, they operate in various different countries. do we really think that there's actually going to be an accountability factor that somehow they're going to end up paying more taxes in whatever country that they choose to locate in when

considering their probably some of the biggest donors do these politicians that are making these roles well, that's just it. so if you take all of jeff phases money, so what is that going to accomplish? you're going to lose a big company. you're going to lose. a lot of employees are going to lose their jobs. and how are they going to hold him accountable in other countries? if he just provide services there? well, he'll just pull out, he just won't work in those countries. for those countries, what did they gain? they actually lost revenue. they, they lost products, they lost services that their country needs. so i don't believe this is going to help globally at all. i think it's going to hurt us well, and i want to talk about this argument that here in the u. s. the businesses possibly that they already under pay their employees and value more profit for the executives ever growth? is that capitalism right? there? it is capitalism, but it's the owners of the company. so if a board of trustees operates a company, they vote on what everybody gets. if you don't like to work for the wages of that

company, go work somewhere else. as a mom and pop business, i own my own business. if my employees don't want to work for my wage, they couldn't go work somewhere else. but i have to make a living. and when i make money, i buy cars. i've, i've got 2 kids. i'm putting through college. i'm spending my money, i'm not saving it all for me. i'm not going on glamorous trips right now. i'm putting my kids through college. so i'm spending what i make if i don't make it that my kids don't go to college then right. what happens to them, debbie? i think it's a trickle down effect. it is definitely a trickle down effecting and good luck to kids with college of paying attrition bill that i know to say great chatting with you. i'm chatting with you too. thanks so much. well, it's been a rough while, like wildfire season no relief in sight while firefighters are working to battle blazes throughout the western us. pacific gas electric has filed documents, emitting their power lines, may have been the cause behind. yet another fire large correspond natasha suite has more on the relentless fires, sweeping the country. pacific gas and electric base here in california is admitted

they may have cars yet another fire. p junior has been in the hot seat for many years for causing many pleases, including the safety, deadliest wildfire firefighters are working to contain the dixie fire. the active blades hovers in northern california and on the southern oregon border. so far as bern, over 30000 acres and it's 15 percent contained a lot of smoke and there's a lot of emergency vehicles that are traversing that. that road in order to get to areas in which bel, just in abundance of caution, would be better to close the road and hand protect the citizens in that area. the boys is just northwest of the town paradise, california, and survivors of that horrific fire that killed 85 people watched as the blaze burned. but these 2 fires also have something else in common. pacific gas and electric, known as p. jeannie are poorly responsible for both p g. any reported, a worker was responding to a circuit outage at 7 am. on july 13th, they were blown fuses in a conductor on top of a pole, a tree leaning on

a conductor, and a fire at the base of the tree, according to new documents on the company's website as a result of challenging terrain and road work resulting in a bridge closure the employ couldn't reach the pole with the bone fuse until 4 40 pm that day. the utility worker called his supervisor, who then called my 11, and the dixie fire is just one of at least 80 different wildfires in the west and wildfire in southern oregon. the bootleg fire has torched an area larger than new york city and destroyed 20 houses. sheriffs came up and he was keeping in contact with over the day. and at that time $4530.00 to get out. you will survive. so you know, to stay, you'll die, he'll die deep into the curly. we're lucky to escape in time with her cats, the flames reportedly crept within 5 feet of their house, the heat melting their trailer and storage units. now, according to the national inter agency fire center, more than 1000000 acres has been burned from these active fires in the west,

across 13 different states, reporting for new to choose and suite archie. and that's all the time we have today . thanks for watching. the the eastern half of the united states, we're going to have billions, if not trillions of periodical cicada is interacting with tens of millions of human beings in their backyard. oh my god. obviously some of the cicadas do not have very high tolerance for alcohol because they are already passing out are 6 minutes a 400 i mean that's very satisfying. and

the the the.

ready ready july class person i often saw with the blue book truly i don't want the the more you need to he's going to contribute the usually so which and practice and what gone. yeah. because really new, from the moment that she's in the go when you need to bring it up on the not a monumental charges on the look on the

a grave systemic figure. germany phases, criticism for not doing more to prevent last week. slotting tries or even want, previous warning, will make 200 lives lost and the damages caused will amount to 1000000000 demand and it's starting to one the, the world's richest man. jeff pays off successfully complete for 10 minutes space like in a private company is broken off a 1000 petition for him not to return to buy in your pocket. i major league named friendship president.