democracynow--2020-10-01--Kingdom of Silence: 2 Years After Khashoggi Murder, New Film Explores Deadly U.S.-Saudi Alliance

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Nermeen Shaikh .
Friday marks the two-year anniversary of the brutal assassination of the exiled Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul , Turkey .
In a story that shocked the world , Khashoggi entered the consulate October 2nd , 2018 , for marriage documents , his fiancée waiting outside .
He was never seen again .
It was later revealed that Khashoggi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington Post columnist , was murdered and dismembered by a team of Saudi agents at the direct order of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman .
Two years later , the prince has not been held accountable , remains a close ally of the U.S. government .
Last month , a Saudi court issued prison sentences of between seven and 20 years for the eight defendants in Khashoggi ’ s murder , but the trial and verdict did not address who ordered the killing .
Agnès Callamard , the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of justice.
” We turn now to a new Showtime documentary about the assassination .
It tracks not only the brutal murder of Khashoggi and the rise of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman , but also the decades-long alliance between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia .
It ’ s called the Kingdom of Silence .
This is the film ’ s trailer .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s the trailer for Kingdom of Silence .
The new documentary airs on Showtime tomorrow — that ’ s Friday — the two-year anniversary of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more , we ’ re joined in New York by the film ’ s director , Rick Rowley , Oscar-nominated , Emmy-winning filmmaker and independent journalist with Midnight Productions .
And in Austin , Texas , Lawrence Wright is with us , a Pulitzer Prize-winning author , screenwriter , playwright , staff writer for The New Yorker magazine , featured in the film .
He ’ s also the executive producer , and friend of Jamal Khashoggi .
We welcome you both to Democracy Now !
Rick Rowley , let ’ s begin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time you were in studio , you were just starting this documentary .
The significance of what happened on this week , two years ago , when The Washington Post correspondent walked into that Saudi Consulate in Istanbul ?
Talk about what you learned and what the world now knows happened next .
RICK ROWLEY : Thank you , Amy .
It ’ s great to be back here .
I mean , I think really what drew me into this story is the fact that Jamal was one of our own .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the regime that he criticized .
And , you know , when one of our colleagues is killed , it falls on all of us as journalists to try to do what we can to rescue their story from the forces that would impose silence on it .
So , you know , in a very short period of time , we learned a lot about the murder .
I mean , we began this project kind of as a murder mystery , right ?
And so , we did the things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sort of investigation .
We met with multiple national intelligence agencies .
We reviewed classified intel .
We tracked down insiders who had never spoken before , and found new details about the killing .
But very quickly , it became clear that there were far more important and interesting questions here at stake , not just did the crown prince and the Saudi royal family order his execution — we know that he did .
There ’ s a consensus among global intelligence agencies that that ’ s what happened , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you know , everything from the planes that were used to the electronic communications to recorded — transcripts of recorded conversations inside the consulate , that make it clear that that ’ s what happened .
So , not just did that happen , but why ; not just how this gruesome killing was carried out — we know that now in granular detail — but who was this man , Jamal , who the kingdom would risk so much to silence .
And so , those deeper questions propelled us then on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multiple continents and 20 months of production , to really find out that question .
And Jamal ’ s life really turned into an epic story .
I mean , he was — Jamal was more than just a journalistic witness .
He was a participant in some of the events that — most important events of our time , events that continue to structure the way that we live the world today .
And he played all these kind of amazing roles .
And his story is kind of this story of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roadmap to this toxic relationship between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia that has sown violence and chaos around the region for decades .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : Lawrence Wright , as Rick said , Jamal Khashoggi was a participant in some of the key events that continue to shape the way the world is today , starting with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan , his coverage of that war and of the resistance , including , of course , the role played by Osama bin Laden , whom he met and whose cause at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did the U.S .
They shared an interest then : the defeat of the Soviets .
One of the people interviewed in the film , Marwan Bishara of Al Jazeera , also says that throughout the history of U.S.-Saudi relations , Jamal was there at the crossroads either reporting , explaining or spinning .
Could you give an account of his role in documenting the relationship between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia , and how he eventually came to dissent from the Saudi royal family , how that happened and when ?
LAWRENCE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man , Jamal actually studied in America , so he was used to — you know , he spoke English .
He knew his way around the West .
But then he was also in the Muslim Brothers , as was bin Laden , which was a forbidden organization in Saudi Arabia .
Then he became a reporter , when the jihad against the Soviets took place .
And when I say he became a reporter , you have to understand , Amy , how unusual that is in Saudi Arabia .
Actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of journalism is rarely done .
And there are lots of things you ’ re not allowed to speak about .
But he became an actual war correspondent , going to Afghanistan and interviewing people and sending in dispatches .
And it was there that he and bin Laden became close , not just as friends , but there was a relationship , a professional one , in — you know , Jamal was chronicling the jihad .
And in the process of writing about bin Laden , he was enlarging this young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in some respects , you know , Jamal fashioned the myth that surrounded Osama bin Laden .
And that would link them together for the rest of their lives .
AMY GOODMAN : Lawrence Wright , let ’ s go to the Kingdom of Silence , featuring Jamal Khashoggi in his own words about Afghanistan .
AMY GOODMAN : The words of Jamal Khashoggi himself , murdered two years ago on Friday .
Lawrence Wright , take us from his relationship with Osama bin Laden , what happened in Afghanistan — and this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ correspondent — and why the current regime saw him as so threatening when he turned against them , given his knowledge of what that Saudi relationship was with Osama right through to bin Salman ’ s rise , which is synonymous with the genocide in Yemen .
LAWRENCE WRIGHT : Yeah , Amy , when bin Laden and Jamal returned to Saudi Arabia , they were different men .
Bin Laden was famous .
I think of him as being like Saudi Arabia ’ s first celebrity , because that ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bin Laden came home in Saudi Arabia .
There was the royal family , and there ’ s everybody else .
And , you know , the royal family owns all the newspapers .
They own almost all of the satellite channels in the Arab world .
They control the narrative .
And then , you know , Jamal comes , and he ’ s gotten a voice .
He ’ s become a well-established journalist , which itself is exceptional in that country .
And he set out to expand the zone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arabia .
Now , I worked in the Saudi press for a while , and I learned that there are three things you can ’ t talk about : You can ’ t talk about the government , you can ’ t talk about the royal family , and you can ’ t talk about religion .
So it takes a lot off your plate .
But Jamal was willing to speak , and he was not — he was not afraid .
That was the thing that really stood out to me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worried about what they might say .
They were worried about the consequences even then .
Jamal understood what the parameters were , but he was willing to work inside them and try to enlarge that space .
And that ’ s , really , eventually what killed him .
He had gotten too big for his britches , as far as the royal family was concerned .
They began to cut back on his ability to publish .
And even when they shut down his Twitter , he realized that it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was no room for his voice .
And so he came to America , and he started writing for The Washington Post .
Now , you can not imagine what a big deal that was in Saudi Arabia .
He is working for one of the most important newspapers in the world , inside the capital , where all the lawmakers get up every morning and read that newspaper .
What a powerful platform that was !
It was unheard of in Saudi Arabia .
It was a countervailing force that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SHAIKH : Well , Lawrence Wright , if we could just talk a little bit about when Khashoggi separated , when his interests separated , he stopped supporting the royal family ?
It ’ s not just that he initially backed the jihadis fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan , but he also supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq , which could not have been fought without Saudi support .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : But then , when the Arab Spring began , he was surprised by the uprisings across the Arab world .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uprisings , his distancing from the royal family .
LAWRENCE WRIGHT : You ’ re totally right .
I mean , in 2003 , I visited Jamal in Asir , in southern part of the country .
And he had been made editor of a newspaper there .
And he was the only Saudi I met who was in favor of the war .
And I said , “ Why ?
Why do you support it ?
” And he said , “ Because we need a push .
You know , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And the only force that was great enough , in his opinion , that could change the Arab world was the United States .
So he thought that this would be a push towards democracy .
And , of course , it turned out so catastrophically .
And then , he came to — you know , at that point , he was really under death threat .
And it was Prince Turki who rescued him and took him to be his spokesperson in London , and then in Washington , where he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period of dutiful service on the part of Jamal for the royal family .
But then , along came the Arab Spring .
And this was transformative for Jamal .
He suddenly saw that there was a popular movement in the Arab world and that people felt as he did , that there should be a larger space for ordinary people to express themselves and to have fulfilled lives .
And he was very enthusiastic about it .
And , you know , even at the end of his life , Amy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a diaspora of the people that were involved in the Arab Spring , many of them in the U.S. , and Jamal was going around rallying them , trying to put them back together again as a movement .
And so , I think that that was really the moment that his life totally changed .
AMY GOODMAN : We ’ re going to go to break , then come back to this discussion .
We ’ re talking to the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Lawrence Wright , who was a friend of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rick Rowley , who just did Kingdom of Silence .
He just won , along with Jacquie Soohen , the Emmy last week for investigative journalism for their documentary on the killing of Laquan McDonald , a young African American teen , by Chicago police .
Stay with us .
AMY GOODMAN : “ Blue Monk ” by Thelonious Monk .
This is Democracy Now !
The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Nermeen Shaikh .
Friday marks the second anniversary of the murder of the exiled Saudi journalist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Istanbul , Turkey .
We ’ re talking to Rick Rowley , director of a new documentary , out tomorrow , about Khashoggi called Kingdom of Silence , and with Lawrence Wright , Khashoggi ’ s friend .
He ’ s author and Pulitzer Prize winner .
I want to go to another clip from Kingdom of Silence .
This looks at the day The Washington Post published Khashoggi ’ s first op-ed , headlined “ Saudi Arabia wasn ’ t always this repressive .
Now it ’ s unbearable.
” It was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are the words of Jamal Khashoggi , that are read by someone else .
That was the piece he had in The Washington Post .
Rick Rowley , talk about what would then happen and about bin Salman coming to the United States , not just hailed by the president , but hailed by business leaders , proudly getting the red carpet all over this country , and what this meant , how dangerous this was for the man who was now turned against the leadership .
RICK ROWLEY : Yeah .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ throughout his life , saw his heroes , heroes who he had championed in the press , who he had helped create the stories and the myths around — he saw them turn into villains before his eyes and commit crimes that he felt himself to be implicated in , you know , from September 11th and Osama bin Laden to the murder of the Arab Spring .
And he was wounded by those crimes that he saw , and transformed by them .
And his story is a story of continual transformation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is — he watches the princes he spent his life serving murder the hope of the Arab Spring in the streets of Cairo and elsewhere .
Then the rupture begins between him and the Saudi regime , and he becomes a critic and then is forced into exile .
And he ends up a martyr .
But when Jamal comes to the States and he begins publishing in The Washington Post , he ’ s one of the only dissenting voices in the U.S. that is critical at all of the new regime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , depends on the United States .
The United States has been Saudi ’ s security guarantor for — you know , since the beginning , and has time and again defended it .
So they recognize the importance and the value of American public opinion , and they invest incredibly heavily in it .
Saudi Arabia dumps billions of dollars into Hollywood .
They ’ re linchpin investors in Silicon Valley , aside from all the money they spend inside the Beltway , bankrolling almost all of the think tanks that cover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most of America ’ s elite universities that have Middle Eastern studies departments .
So , today , if you turn on cable news and you see an expert talking about Saudi Arabia , the odds are very high that they have — part of their salary is paid for by the kingdom itself .
So , when MBS came to power , he came on this sort of victory lap through the United States , where he met everyone , you know , from Bill Gates to The Rock to Oprah , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cultural and political figure in Washington , New York , L.A. or Silicon Valley or Seattle .
And there was this unanimous [ inaudible ] , in spite of the fact that at the same time he was doing this , he had dragged the U.S. into this — what the U.N. calls the greatest humanitarian catastrophe of our time , this massive war crime that is the Saudi and American attack on Yemen .
So , Jamal is the lone voice in Washington , D.C. , speaking out against this or criticizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new regime .
And that made him incredibly dangerous to Saudi Arabia .
That is compounded by the fact that Jamal knew so much .
He was an insider , the ultimate insider , not just someone who has the ear of powerful people inside the royal court , but someone who was working closely with Saudi intelligence and was at this nexus of , like , the CIA in Saudi Arabia and Islamists not just in Afghanistan , but , in the decades afterwards , throughout the region .
So , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the royal family and to the U.S.-Saudi relationship .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : And , Lawrence Wright , we have 30 seconds .
MBS , Mohammed bin Salman , was hailed as a reformer in the U.S. when he came and met all of these important people across every industry .
You , yourself , believed he was a reformer .
What made you change your mind ?
LAWRENCE WRIGHT : My last conversation with Jamal , I was asking him about that .
And the thing that Jamal told me is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no room for anyone else ’ s voice .
And , you know , like the women who wanted to drive , he ’ s granted them driving , but he ’ s locked up the women that proposed it , and tortured them .
So , the message that ’ s gone out from those actions is , “ I ’ ll do the deciding here .
Nobody else has a voice in this kingdom except for me.
” AMY GOODMAN : And at the end , after Jamal Khashoggi was murdered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , when the CIA director said it was clearly from orders from the top , President Trump ’ s response was “ America first.
” He was not going to change his support of the Saudi regime .
I want to thank Rick Rowley , director of Kingdom of Silence , and Lawrence Wright .
We will do a post-show with Lawrence Wright on his book .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
Friday marks the two-year anniversary of the brutal assassination of the exiled Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. In a story that shocked the world, Khashoggi entered the consulate October 2nd, 2018, for marriage documents, his fiancée waiting outside. He was never seen again. It was later revealed that Khashoggi, a Saudi insider turned critic and Washington Post columnist, was murdered and dismembered by a team of Saudi agents at the direct order of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Two years later, the prince has not been held accountable, remains a close ally of the U.S. government. Last month, a Saudi court issued prison sentences of between seven and 20 years for the eight defendants in Khashoggi’s murder, but the trial and verdict did not address who ordered the killing. Agnès Callamard, the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, called it “a parody of justice.”
We turn now to a new Showtime documentary about the assassination. It tracks not only the brutal murder of Khashoggi and the rise of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, but also the decades-long alliance between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. It’s called the Kingdom of Silence. This is the film’s trailer.
MOHAMED SOLTAN: This man was a noble man, courageous man, very serious about the evolution that he was making.
MAGGIE MITCHELL SALEM: He was threatened and intimidated all the time.
UNIDENTIFIED: The Saudi monarchy operates like a mafia. And you don’t cross the godfather.
JOHN BRENNAN: There is no way that that horrific act was carried out without the blessing from the very top of the Saudi government. Just no way.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We’ve become very good friends over a fairly short period of time.
BEN RHODES: Mohammed bin Salman was feted in Washington. Every aspect of American power rolled out the red carpet for this guy. Jamal Khashoggi was one of the only dissenting voices.
MOHAMED SOLTAN: To speak freely, he knew what the stakes were.
UNIDENTIFIED: Jamal was publishing articles that were critical of the Saudi regime.
MARWAN BISHARA: That could not be tolerated.
LAWRENCE WRIGHT: To what extent was the Saudi government entangled with al-Qaeda? Is there a person in the world that knows more than Jamal Khashoggi? He had made a huge sacrifice. His children are being held hostage.
MAGGIE MITCHELL SALEM: “You are in a war, and you can’t give up. You can’t disappear.” Those are the last words I said to him.
NAWAF OBAID: The moral of the story is that there is no moral. I mean, what is the morality of this?
AMY GOODMAN: That’s the trailer for Kingdom of Silence. The new documentary airs on Showtime tomorrow — that’s Friday — the two-year anniversary of the death of Jamal Khashoggi.
For more, we’re joined in New York by the film’s director, Rick Rowley, Oscar-nominated, Emmy-winning filmmaker and independent journalist with Midnight Productions. And in Austin, Texas, Lawrence Wright is with us, a Pulitzer Prize-winning author, screenwriter, playwright, staff writer for The New Yorker magazine, featured in the film. He’s also the executive producer, and friend of Jamal Khashoggi.
We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Rick Rowley, let’s begin with you. I remember the last time you were in studio, you were just starting this documentary. The significance of what happened on this week, two years ago, when The Washington Post correspondent walked into that Saudi Consulate in Istanbul? Talk about what you learned and what the world now knows happened next.
RICK ROWLEY: Thank you, Amy. It’s great to be back here.
I mean, I think really what drew me into this story is the fact that Jamal was one of our own. Jamal was a journalist who was murdered by the regime that he criticized. And, you know, when one of our colleagues is killed, it falls on all of us as journalists to try to do what we can to rescue their story from the forces that would impose silence on it.
So, you know, in a very short period of time, we learned a lot about the murder. I mean, we began this project kind of as a murder mystery, right? And so, we did the things that you do when you begin that sort of investigation. We met with multiple national intelligence agencies. We reviewed classified intel. We tracked down insiders who had never spoken before, and found new details about the killing.
But very quickly, it became clear that there were far more important and interesting questions here at stake, not just did the crown prince and the Saudi royal family order his execution — we know that he did. There’s a consensus among global intelligence agencies that that’s what happened, and there’s an overwhelming evidence, you know, everything from the planes that were used to the electronic communications to recorded — transcripts of recorded conversations inside the consulate, that make it clear that that’s what happened. So, not just did that happen, but why; not just how this gruesome killing was carried out — we know that now in granular detail — but who was this man, Jamal, who the kingdom would risk so much to silence.
And so, those deeper questions propelled us then on a much longer journey, that spans multiple continents and 20 months of production, to really find out that question. And Jamal’s life really turned into an epic story. I mean, he was — Jamal was more than just a journalistic witness. He was a participant in some of the events that — most important events of our time, events that continue to structure the way that we live the world today. And he played all these kind of amazing roles. And his story is kind of this story of transformation and redemption, but also a roadmap to this toxic relationship between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia that has sown violence and chaos around the region for decades.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Lawrence Wright, as Rick said, Jamal Khashoggi was a participant in some of the key events that continue to shape the way the world is today, starting with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, his coverage of that war and of the resistance, including, of course, the role played by Osama bin Laden, whom he met and whose cause at the time he believed in, as did the U.S. They shared an interest then: the defeat of the Soviets. One of the people interviewed in the film, Marwan Bishara of Al Jazeera, also says that throughout the history of U.S.-Saudi relations, Jamal was there at the crossroads either reporting, explaining or spinning. Could you give an account of his role in documenting the relationship between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, and how he eventually came to dissent from the Saudi royal family, how that happened and when?
LAWRENCE WRIGHT: Well, as a young man, Jamal actually studied in America, so he was used to — you know, he spoke English. He knew his way around the West. But then he was also in the Muslim Brothers, as was bin Laden, which was a forbidden organization in Saudi Arabia.
Then he became a reporter, when the jihad against the Soviets took place. And when I say he became a reporter, you have to understand, Amy, how unusual that is in Saudi Arabia. Actually going out and carrying out the task of journalism is rarely done. And there are lots of things you’re not allowed to speak about. But he became an actual war correspondent, going to Afghanistan and interviewing people and sending in dispatches.
And it was there that he and bin Laden became close, not just as friends, but there was a relationship, a professional one, in — you know, Jamal was chronicling the jihad. And in the process of writing about bin Laden, he was enlarging this young man’s image. So, in some respects, you know, Jamal fashioned the myth that surrounded Osama bin Laden. And that would link them together for the rest of their lives.
AMY GOODMAN: Lawrence Wright, let’s go to the Kingdom of Silence, featuring Jamal Khashoggi in his own words about Afghanistan.
JAMAL KHASHOGGI: Afghanistan was the major Islamic cause in Saudi Arabia in the ’80s. Americans did not want to appear as if they are in direct war with the Soviet Union. So, we and Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were doing a cover-up on the operation, which was an open secret. Everybody knew about it, this Saudi-American-Pakistani campaign to drive the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan. I do not deny that I had sympathy toward the Afghan cause, because I myself come out from Islamic circles. And I still believe it was a just cause. And Saudi Arabia should be appreciated for that. And it was a big story, which kind of made my name in the field of journalism.
AMY GOODMAN: The words of Jamal Khashoggi himself, murdered two years ago on Friday. Lawrence Wright, take us from his relationship with Osama bin Laden, what happened in Afghanistan — and this is where he rose as a war correspondent — and why the current regime saw him as so threatening when he turned against them, given his knowledge of what that Saudi relationship was with Osama right through to bin Salman’s rise, which is synonymous with the genocide in Yemen.
LAWRENCE WRIGHT: Yeah, Amy, when bin Laden and Jamal returned to Saudi Arabia, they were different men. Bin Laden was famous. I think of him as being like Saudi Arabia’s first celebrity, because that’s a category that didn’t exist until bin Laden came home in Saudi Arabia. There was the royal family, and there’s everybody else. And, you know, the royal family owns all the newspapers. They own almost all of the satellite channels in the Arab world. They control the narrative.
And then, you know, Jamal comes, and he’s gotten a voice. He’s become a well-established journalist, which itself is exceptional in that country. And he set out to expand the zone of what you could say in Saudi Arabia. Now, I worked in the Saudi press for a while, and I learned that there are three things you can’t talk about: You can’t talk about the government, you can’t talk about the royal family, and you can’t talk about religion. So it takes a lot off your plate. But Jamal was willing to speak, and he was not — he was not afraid. That was the thing that really stood out to me about Jamal, because people were so worried about what they might say. They were worried about the consequences even then. Jamal understood what the parameters were, but he was willing to work inside them and try to enlarge that space.
And that’s, really, eventually what killed him. He had gotten too big for his britches, as far as the royal family was concerned. They began to cut back on his ability to publish. And even when they shut down his Twitter, he realized that it was over for him in Saudi Arabia and there was no room for his voice. And so he came to America, and he started writing for The Washington Post. Now, you cannot imagine what a big deal that was in Saudi Arabia. He is working for one of the most important newspapers in the world, inside the capital, where all the lawmakers get up every morning and read that newspaper. What a powerful platform that was! It was unheard of in Saudi Arabia. It was a countervailing force that they simply couldn’t tolerate.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Lawrence Wright, if we could just talk a little bit about when Khashoggi separated, when his interests separated, he stopped supporting the royal family? It’s not just that he initially backed the jihadis fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, but he also supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which could not have been fought without Saudi support.
LAWRENCE WRIGHT: Right.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: But then, when the Arab Spring began, he was surprised by the uprisings across the Arab world. And it had something to do with those uprisings, his distancing from the royal family.
LAWRENCE WRIGHT: You’re totally right. I mean, in 2003, I visited Jamal in Asir, in southern part of the country. And he had been made editor of a newspaper there. And he was the only Saudi I met who was in favor of the war. And I said, “Why? Why do you support it?” And he said, “Because we need a push. You know, we are so paralyzed in this country.” And the only force that was great enough, in his opinion, that could change the Arab world was the United States. So he thought that this would be a push towards democracy. And, of course, it turned out so catastrophically.
And then, he came to — you know, at that point, he was really under death threat. And it was Prince Turki who rescued him and took him to be his spokesperson in London, and then in Washington, where he served as ambassador. That was a period of dutiful service on the part of Jamal for the royal family.
But then, along came the Arab Spring. And this was transformative for Jamal. He suddenly saw that there was a popular movement in the Arab world and that people felt as he did, that there should be a larger space for ordinary people to express themselves and to have fulfilled lives. And he was very enthusiastic about it. And, you know, even at the end of his life, Amy, he was going around — there’s a diaspora of the people that were involved in the Arab Spring, many of them in the U.S., and Jamal was going around rallying them, trying to put them back together again as a movement. And so, I think that that was really the moment that his life totally changed.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to go to break, then come back to this discussion. We’re talking to the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Lawrence Wright, who was a friend of Jamal Khashoggi, and the Emmy-winning filmmaker Rick Rowley, who just did Kingdom of Silence. He just won, along with Jacquie Soohen, the Emmy last week for investigative journalism for their documentary on the killing of Laquan McDonald, a young African American teen, by Chicago police. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: “Blue Monk” by Thelonious Monk. This is Democracy Now! The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh. Friday marks the second anniversary of the murder of the exiled Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. We’re talking to Rick Rowley, director of a new documentary, out tomorrow, about Khashoggi called Kingdom of Silence, and with Lawrence Wright, Khashoggi’s friend. He’s author and Pulitzer Prize winner. I want to go to another clip from Kingdom of Silence. This looks at the day The Washington Post published Khashoggi’s first op-ed, headlined “Saudi Arabia wasn’t always this repressive. Now it’s unbearable.” It was September 2017.
MOHAMED SOLTAN: Fall of 2017, Jamal was in self-imposed exile. We met, and he gave me the biggest bear hug. It was really, really warm. And then he started crying. He said, “I left my country, I left my family behind for freedom. Just to be free. And no one knows what that feels like more than you.” I learned later that his first Washington Post article was published that hour.
JAMAL KHASHOGGI: [read by Nasser Faris] “Saudi Arabia wasn’t always this oppressive,” by Jamal Khashoggi. “We spend endless hours on the phone trying to understand this wave of arrests … are we going to be the core of a Saudi diaspora? … Al-Hayat, canceled my column. The government banned me from Twitter … I spent six months silent, reflecting on the … stark choices before me. [Y]ears ago when several friends were arrested[,] I said nothing. … I have made a different choice now. I have left my home, my family and my job, and I am raising my voice.
AMY GOODMAN: Those are the words of Jamal Khashoggi, that are read by someone else. That was the piece he had in The Washington Post. Rick Rowley, talk about what would then happen and about bin Salman coming to the United States, not just hailed by the president, but hailed by business leaders, proudly getting the red carpet all over this country, and what this meant, how dangerous this was for the man who was now turned against the leadership.
RICK ROWLEY: Yeah. So, Jamal is a man who, throughout his life, saw his heroes, heroes who he had championed in the press, who he had helped create the stories and the myths around — he saw them turn into villains before his eyes and commit crimes that he felt himself to be implicated in, you know, from September 11th and Osama bin Laden to the murder of the Arab Spring. And he was wounded by those crimes that he saw, and transformed by them. And his story is a story of continual transformation. So, after the Arab Spring is — he watches the princes he spent his life serving murder the hope of the Arab Spring in the streets of Cairo and elsewhere. Then the rupture begins between him and the Saudi regime, and he becomes a critic and then is forced into exile. And he ends up a martyr.
But when Jamal comes to the States and he begins publishing in The Washington Post, he’s one of the only dissenting voices in the U.S. that is critical at all of the new regime. Saudi Arabia, in many ways, depends on the United States. The United States has been Saudi’s security guarantor for — you know, since the beginning, and has time and again defended it. So they recognize the importance and the value of American public opinion, and they invest incredibly heavily in it. Saudi Arabia dumps billions of dollars into Hollywood. They’re linchpin investors in Silicon Valley, aside from all the money they spend inside the Beltway, bankrolling almost all of the think tanks that cover the Middle East, endowing chairs at most of America’s elite universities that have Middle Eastern studies departments. So, today, if you turn on cable news and you see an expert talking about Saudi Arabia, the odds are very high that they have — part of their salary is paid for by the kingdom itself.
So, when MBS came to power, he came on this sort of victory lap through the United States, where he met everyone, you know, from Bill Gates to The Rock to Oprah, you know, I mean, every cultural and political figure in Washington, New York, L.A. or Silicon Valley or Seattle. And there was this unanimous [inaudible], in spite of the fact that at the same time he was doing this, he had dragged the U.S. into this — what the U.N. calls the greatest humanitarian catastrophe of our time, this massive war crime that is the Saudi and American attack on Yemen.
So, Jamal is the lone voice in Washington, D.C., speaking out against this or criticizing, even in gentle ways, this new regime. And that made him incredibly dangerous to Saudi Arabia. That is compounded by the fact that Jamal knew so much. He was an insider, the ultimate insider, not just someone who has the ear of powerful people inside the royal court, but someone who was working closely with Saudi intelligence and was at this nexus of, like, the CIA in Saudi Arabia and Islamists not just in Afghanistan, but, in the decades afterwards, throughout the region. So, he knew things that would be incredibly damaging to the royal family and to the U.S.-Saudi relationship.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Lawrence Wright, we have 30 seconds. MBS, Mohammed bin Salman, was hailed as a reformer in the U.S. when he came and met all of these important people across every industry. You, yourself, believed he was a reformer. What made you change your mind?
LAWRENCE WRIGHT: My last conversation with Jamal, I was asking him about that. And the thing that Jamal told me is that, you know, there’s no room for anyone else’s voice. And, you know, like the women who wanted to drive, he’s granted them driving, but he’s locked up the women that proposed it, and tortured them. So, the message that’s gone out from those actions is, “I’ll do the deciding here. Nobody else has a voice in this kingdom except for me.”
AMY GOODMAN: And at the end, after Jamal Khashoggi was murdered and President Trump was asked about this, when the CIA director said it was clearly from orders from the top, President Trump’s response was “America first.” He was not going to change his support of the Saudi regime. I want to thank Rick Rowley, director of Kingdom of Silence, and Lawrence Wright. We will do a post-show with Lawrence Wright on his book.


democracynow--2020-10-01--Pandemic of Repression: Modi Government Crushes Dissent While Ignoring India's 6 Million COVID Cases

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : The global death toll from COVID-19 topped 1 million this week , and the World Health Organization warned the actual toll is likely much higher .
More than half the deaths occurred in just four countries : the United States , Brazil , India and Mexico .
On Monday , India topped 6 million cases with more than 80,000 new coronavirus cases reported in just 24 hours .
India now has the second-highest number of COVID-19 cases in the world , behind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s official death toll is rapidly approaching 100,000 .
India ’ s lead pandemic agency said Tuesday an antibody study suggests more than 60 million people in the country have already been infected with the coronavirus , 10 times the official count but still a small fraction of its population of 1.3 billion .
This comes amidst protests in several parts of India .
Demonstrations erupted Wednesday after a 19-year-old gang-rape victim who died was cremated against her family ’ s wishes .
The victim was from the Dalit community , one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the accused men were all members of a privileged caste .
Last week , farmers blocked highways and railway tracks to oppose agricultural reforms they say will leave them at the mercy of corporate agribusinesses .
This week , Amnesty International announced it ’ s forced to shutter operations and lay off all staff , after the Indian government froze its bank accounts after the group published two critical reports about the country ’ s human rights violations .
Amnesty staff say there ’ s a , quote , “ incessant witch-hunt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minister Narendra Modi ’ s Hindu nationalist government .
This is David Griffiths , director of the Office of the Secretary General at Amnesty International .
AMY GOODMAN : For more , we go to Mumbai , India , where we ’ re joined by Rana Ayyub , an Indian journalist who ’ s a global opinions writer for The Washington Post .
Her book is titled Gujarat Files : Anatomy of a Cover Up .
She has just recovered from COVID .
She was hospitalized for the coronavirus .
Rana , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and what ’ s happening in India today as India becomes only the second nation in the world , after our country , the United States , to surpass 6 million infections ?
RANA AYYUB : Well , Amy , great to be back on the show .
Well , I mean , I recovered .
I recovered very well .
But then again , one must understand that I am a privileged upper middle class in India , also a public voice , so I had to put a tweet just saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bed , and I was provided one .
But that ’ s not true of the rest of India , which is 80 % of the Indian population , which still does not have access to beds and access to the basic medical facilities .
That somebody like me had to actually put out a tweet when my oxygen levels dipped a bit , that I wasn ’ t getting any hospital bed , I mean , I shudder to think : What does a less privileged in India do at a time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 6 million cases .
You know , the lockdown has been lifted .
There is massive unemployment .
The farmers are on strike .
But it doesn ’ t feel like India is even talking about the pandemic , is even talking about COVID-19 , because the only thing that India is doing right now , as opposed to confronting and battling this pandemic , is to fight its human rights activists , dissenters , incarcerate them .
There is the injustice that is happening in this country .
I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by and large , are even concerned about what ’ s happening .
When I go on the field as a reporter — I mean , right after I tested negative and I went on the field , I asked people what does it feel about , you know , the fact that we have 6 million cases .
They ’ re not bothered , because there ’ s no money to buy food .
There is massive unemployment .
People are worried about their next meal .
They ’ re not worried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about , because , like I said in my last interview to you , the social distancing is a privilege that most Indians can not afford .
People are , at this point of time — I ’ ve been also doing relief work , besides the journalism that I do , and I have seen the poverty from close quarter .
There are people surviving on one meal in two days .
So , more than the fear of the pandemic , people in this country are fearing more the massive unemployment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looking at — you know , they are going without food , and they are looking at poverty and looking at unemployment .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : Rana Ayyub , it ’ s not just — as you ’ ve said , it ’ s not just that most Indians don ’ t have access to health facilities .
It ’ s also the case , as you ’ ve pointed out , that the impact of the lockdown and what ’ s happened in the wake of this pandemic has been devastating for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closure of schools — NERMEEN SHAIKH : — has heavily impacted children in India , together with the closure of early childhood development centers , where millions of children used to go and get access to at least minimal amounts of food — NERMEEN SHAIKH : — immunizations , clothes , etc .
These centers are still closed .
Now , there are reports , increasing reports , of millions of poor children across the country who have been forced to work in conditions almost the equivalent of slave labor , often getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an hour for doing extremely dangerous work , from rolling cigarettes to scavenging garbage .
Meanwhile , Mukesh Ambani , the billionaire and the richest person in the country , has reportedly made $ 12 million an hour since March .
RANA AYYUB : Yeah , yeah .
The poor are getting poorer .
The rich , the rich billionaires , whether it is Jeff Bezos or whether it is Mukesh Ambani , I mean , they have — you know , the government has been very kind to them .
In its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quarter of 2020 , I think Mukesh Ambani , like you said , showed a massive surge in his income .
It has been able to raise about 1.5 lakh crores from strategic investors like Facebook and Google , by selling 33 % stake in — across all the platforms .
And this is happening while farmers in India are out protesting , protesting against three new acts which have been passed by the Indian Parliament under Narendra Modi without taking the note of the opposition members .
Now , these laws are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and wholly unconstitutional , with a petition — with various petitions stating that the acts are anti-farmer , anti-agriculturalist , and brought at a time when the country is literally grappling with a pandemic .
And this law has been brought with the sole intention to benefit big corporates like the Ambanis and the Adanis , who have been at the receiving end of the Indian government ’ s largesse .
And these acts will pave way for the cartelization and the commercialization of agricultural producers .
And if they ’ re allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ruin India , while the corporates in India will continue to gain .
No wonder the likes of Mukesh Ambani will keep gaining every hour throughout the pandemic , and the farmers , who are right now , as we talk — are protesting bare feet in the national capital without having their meals for days at a stretch .
While I ’ m talking , the Indian government has arrested Rahul Gandhi , the leader of the opposition , for protesting against the gang rape of a Dalit girl .
So , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time I speak on television , I talk about the world ’ s largest democracy .
I don ’ t even know if I call it a democracy anymore .
We saw what happened the last one week .
Amnesty has been forced to shut down in India , because Amnesty has literally been an eyesore for the Indian government for speaking about human rights in India , for speaking about the poverty that we speak about .
Now , this is a government that wants us to praise Mukesh Ambani NGO and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is why organizations like Amnesty India have been forced to shut following a lockdown .
It is the same Amnesty India which gave a damning report on the anti-Muslim carnage in February , when the pandemic had just about started maintaining a stronghold in India , when Trump was visiting India .
He was visiting Narendra Modi .
They both had a press conference in New Delhi , while , miles away , Muslims were being slaughtered , after members of the ruling party gave threatening , provocative speeches .
Amnesty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how the government was complicit in the attack on Muslims .
And that ’ s what has been happening in India .
In India , everything except the pandemic is being taken care of .
Dissenters are being taken care of .
Human rights activists are being incarcerated .
Our actors , the cinematic icons of India , who have stood by dissenters , who have stood by students , are being fixed .
They are being fixed in false cases of smoking marijuana .
I mean , that ’ s what the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Our news media has prostrated before those in power .
It is not asking the questions that you and Nermeen are asking to me right now .
I wish that was the case that I could go on an Indian news channel and these questions were asked to me .
But at this point of time , Indian news channels are only repeating the lies that are being said by the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi .
We are in a mess right now , Amy .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : So , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the complicity of the news media , and in particular the broadcast news media , with the Modi government ?
It ’ s been extremely — it ’ s been striking , especially this last weekend as these farmers ’ protests erupted across the country .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : The broadcast media was exclusively focused on this drug scandal that you mentioned , which implicated the country ’ s top — one of the top actresses , Deepika Padukone .
And there were scenes of , you know , journalists ’ cars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every move .
And this was happening not only in the midst of the farmers ’ protests , but also in the wake of these rapes , a series of rapes , not just of the Dalit woman who died yesterday .
And today another victim of gang rape , another Dalit woman , has died .
In August , there were several reports of extraordinarily brutal violence against women , rapes of women and girls , the youngest among them a 3-year-old .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : So , could you talk about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the Modi government ; the violence against women , especially in Uttar Pradesh ; and the extraordinary focus in the media on these celebrity — which many say are trumped-up — scandals , and against Deepika Padukone , who in fact is one of the only actresses who appeared at JNU , at Jawaharlal Nehru University , in Delhi earlier this year in solidarity with student protesters , some of whom have now been arrested ?
RANA AYYUB : Yeah .
I mean , last year — I mean , I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came up with a report that India is the most unsafe place for women .
And instead of debating this , because we have seen — we saw the Nirbhaya case , that almost led to the UP , the Congress government , you know , being routed out of power .
So , the nationalist news anchors of India , instead of discussing the state of the safety of women , went on a rampage on how a Western organization was out to defame Indian culture and how there was — the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But what they refuse to see , that today , a Dalit woman , who was 19 years old — her name was Manisha Valmiki .
Her surname suggests that she came from a Dalit family .
She was in hospital for 12 days .
And today the director general of police where she was raped and killed said that it wasn ’ t even a rape .
The forensics says it wasn ’ t even a rape , which is why we are not surprised that she was burned , allegedly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where the family was not even allowed to be present .
And there was this mound of clothes , and there was — over which her body was placed when she was burned last night .
This is what India is doing to its daughters .
But , unfortunately , the Indian media is not asking the right questions .
You know , it was said during the emergency , when Indira Gandhi asked the media to bend , it crawled .
At this point of time , the media has not even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prostrating before Narendra Modi .
And it doesn ’ t feel — it feels like the Indian media is living in an alternate world .
Like , you talked about Deepika Padukone .
This stems from the suicide of a Bollywood actor , Sushant Singh Rajput .
And ever since his suicide , women have been — there ’ s been a witch hunt against women who surrounded him , the first being his girlfriend , who was accused of abetting his suicide by not being there for him and by taking him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medieval witch hunt of Rhea Chakraborty , followed by Deepika Padukone , who ’ s one of the biggest superstars in India , who had the guts and the spine to stand with the students ’ movement in February when it was opposing the Citizenship Amendment Bill .
Deepika did not say a word , but she went and stood in solidarity with the students .
Yesterday , when I was supposed to write my Washington Post column , I spoke to a couple of India ’ s biggest film directors .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Deepika Padukone — I mean , there ’ s a surveillance on her WhatsApp , and there is a word in which , allegedly , she has asked for weed .
And that ’ s what the government is using to nail her and to fix her .
And she ’ s not the only one .
Indian film director Anurag Kashyap , who has been very , very vocal against the government , there are two cases against him .
Multiple film stars that I spoke to for The Washington Post piece @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feeling claustrophobic , because Bollywood , as a medium , has the ability to sway the masses .
And the government knows that the mass media , whether — it has been able to control the Indian news television channels and the newspapers , but it also had to control the film industry , which is why it is now being labeled — the film industry in India is being labeled as a drug cartel to discredit and delegitimize it , so that those who have been criticizing the government fall in line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened with Deepika Padukone .
She ’ s a woman .
Of course , how dare a woman speak !
Which is why she ’ s being fixed in the case .
I mean , Indian celebrities , whether it ’ s Priyanka Chopra or all of our Indian celebrities , when George Floyd was killed in America , they were tweeting “ Black lives matter.
” A Dalit woman was gang-raped , brutally killed , her body burned last night .
Not a single celebrity is tweeting “ Dalit lives matter.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scared to talk .
They know that if they talk , they will be fixed .
They know that if they talk , Indian media will start a witch hunt against them .
I mean , there are images of Indian actors , like Rhea Chakraborty , with about 100 cameramen pouncing on her , and those images go on television channels .
You label them sluts .
You label them all sorts of names on your television channels .
I mean , I feel — some days I feel ashamed to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which has refused to ask the right questions .
And all of this , mind you , is happening through the farmers ’ protests , which is so important , which is at the heart of the problem in India right now .
NERMEEN SHAIKH : And , Rana Ayyub , we just have 30 seconds , but the latest news about a special court in India acquitting all the suspects involved , including high-ranking officials in Modi ’ s government — involved in the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violence unprecedented since India ’ s partition in ’ 47 ?
RANA AYYUB : Well , Nermeen , I was in Bombay when the carnage took place .
I was 9 .
And for somebody like me and for Muslims in India , when yesterday the court , a special CBI court , acquitted everyone who , on video , led a rally to demolish the Babri Masjid , that led to the carnage of a thousand Muslims , and despite the video — there are people who are saying on video , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we did it , ” the court ’ s saying , “ No , you are acquitted.
” I mean , it ’ s — we have the first time in the history of the world that the accused are saying “ We did it , ” and the courts are saying , “ No , you stand acquitted.
” And that speaks volumes of where Muslims and Dalits in India stand right now , where the criminal justice system in India stands right now , where we are as a democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I keep saying , that the world should now turn its attention to India , because what ’ s happening in America , you see a mirror image of that happening in India .
It ’ s about time that — AMY GOODMAN : And I wanted to end with that , Rana , that mirror image .
You ’ re also an astute observer of the United States .
Do you see the Hindu nationalism of Modi , the parallels with the white supremacy that President Trump refuses to condemn , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I think Trump and Modi are mirror images of each other .
When Trump came to India , and when he had this massive rally with Narendra Modi , they were speaking the same language .
When Mr. Trump spoke about Islamic terrorism , the entire crowd in Mr. Modi ’ s rally was jubilant .
Mr. Trump refuses to condemn white supremacy .
He refuses to talk about racism .
Mr. Modi believes that there ’ s no such thing as Islamophobia in India .
Mr. Modi has not spoken a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dalit woman in India .
Mr. Modi has enabled the attack on Muslims in India .
I think this is a mirror image .
And you also see the masses who support Modi and Trump .
These are people who feel victimized in their own country despite being a majority .
So , both Trump and Modi are playing to the victimhood of this majority community , you know , which believes that it has a first right to all the resources in their country , which is why I think India and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the world should know that if the world ’ s largest democracy goes down under , ripples will be felt by the world , which is why it ’ s time for the world to concentrate on India .
AMY GOODMAN : Rana Ayyub , I want to thank you for being with us , Indian journalist who ’ s a global opinions writer for The Washington Post , author of the book Gujarat Files : Anatomy of a Cover Up .
And we ’ re very thankful that you , at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though India is number two , behind the United States , in the world for COVID infections .
When we come back , tomorrow marks two years since Washington Post correspondent Jamal Khashoggi was murdered inside the Saudi Consulate in Turkey .
Stay with us .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: The global death toll from COVID-19 topped 1 million this week, and the World Health Organization warned the actual toll is likely much higher. More than half the deaths occurred in just four countries: the United States, Brazil, India and Mexico. On Monday, India topped 6 million cases with more than 80,000 new coronavirus cases reported in just 24 hours. India now has the second-highest number of COVID-19 cases in the world, behind only the United States. India’s official death toll is rapidly approaching 100,000. India’s lead pandemic agency said Tuesday an antibody study suggests more than 60 million people in the country have already been infected with the coronavirus, 10 times the official count but still a small fraction of its population of 1.3 billion.
This comes amidst protests in several parts of India. Demonstrations erupted Wednesday after a 19-year-old gang-rape victim who died was cremated against her family’s wishes. The victim was from the Dalit community, one of the so-called lower castes. Her brother said the accused men were all members of a privileged caste.
Last week, farmers blocked highways and railway tracks to oppose agricultural reforms they say will leave them at the mercy of corporate agribusinesses.
This week, Amnesty International announced it’s forced to shutter operations and lay off all staff, after the Indian government froze its bank accounts after the group published two critical reports about the country’s human rights violations. Amnesty staff say there’s a, quote, “incessant witch-hunt” of human rights groups by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist government. This is David Griffiths, director of the Office of the Secretary General at Amnesty International.
DAVID GRIFFITHS: They’re simply seeking to silence those who criticize them, those who call out human rights abuses in the country. We have seen a steadily intensifying series of attacks for several years. That is certain.
AMY GOODMAN: For more, we go to Mumbai, India, where we’re joined by Rana Ayyub, an Indian journalist who’s a global opinions writer for The Washington Post. Her book is titled Gujarat Files: Anatomy of a Cover Up. She has just recovered from COVID. She was hospitalized for the coronavirus.
Rana, if you can talk about your own situation and what’s happening in India today as India becomes only the second nation in the world, after our country, the United States, to surpass 6 million infections?
RANA AYYUB: Well, Amy, great to be back on the show.
Well, I mean, I recovered. I recovered very well. But then again, one must understand that I am a privileged upper middle class in India, also a public voice, so I had to put a tweet just saying that I was not getting a hospital bed, and I was provided one. But that’s not true of the rest of India, which is 80% of the Indian population, which still does not have access to beds and access to the basic medical facilities. That somebody like me had to actually put out a tweet when my oxygen levels dipped a bit, that I wasn’t getting any hospital bed, I mean, I shudder to think: What does a less privileged in India do at a time like this?
We have more than 6 million cases. You know, the lockdown has been lifted. There is massive unemployment. The farmers are on strike. But it doesn’t feel like India is even talking about the pandemic, is even talking about COVID-19, because the only thing that India is doing right now, as opposed to confronting and battling this pandemic, is to fight its human rights activists, dissenters, incarcerate them. There is the injustice that is happening in this country. I don’t think the Indian government or Indians, by and large, are even concerned about what’s happening.
When I go on the field as a reporter — I mean, right after I tested negative and I went on the field, I asked people what does it feel about, you know, the fact that we have 6 million cases. They’re not bothered, because there’s no money to buy food. There is massive unemployment. People are worried about their next meal. They’re not worried about social distancing, as we talk about, because, like I said in my last interview to you, the social distancing is a privilege that most Indians cannot afford. People are, at this point of time — I’ve been also doing relief work, besides the journalism that I do, and I have seen the poverty from close quarter. There are people surviving on one meal in two days. So, more than the fear of the pandemic, people in this country are fearing more the massive unemployment and the fact that they could be looking at — you know, they are going without food, and they are looking at poverty and looking at unemployment.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Rana Ayyub, it’s not just — as you’ve said, it’s not just that most Indians don’t have access to health facilities. It’s also the case, as you’ve pointed out, that the impact of the lockdown and what’s happened in the wake of this pandemic has been devastating for the poor. In particular, the closure of schools —
RANA AYYUB: Right.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: — has heavily impacted children in India, together with the closure of early childhood development centers, where millions of children used to go and get access to at least minimal amounts of food —
RANA AYYUB: Right.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: — immunizations, clothes, etc. These centers are still closed. Now, there are reports, increasing reports, of millions of poor children across the country who have been forced to work in conditions almost the equivalent of slave labor, often getting paid the equivalent of just several cents an hour for doing extremely dangerous work, from rolling cigarettes to scavenging garbage. Meanwhile, Mukesh Ambani, the billionaire and the richest person in the country, has reportedly made $12 million an hour since March.
RANA AYYUB: Yeah, yeah. The poor are getting poorer. The rich, the rich billionaires, whether it is Jeff Bezos or whether it is Mukesh Ambani, I mean, they have — you know, the government has been very kind to them. In its latest earnings report, for the second quarter of 2020, I think Mukesh Ambani, like you said, showed a massive surge in his income. It has been able to raise about 1.5 lakh crores from strategic investors like Facebook and Google, by selling 33% stake in — across all the platforms.
And this is happening while farmers in India are out protesting, protesting against three new acts which have been passed by the Indian Parliament under Narendra Modi without taking the note of the opposition members. Now, these laws are assailed on the grounds of being illegal and wholly unconstitutional, with a petition — with various petitions stating that the acts are anti-farmer, anti-agriculturalist, and brought at a time when the country is literally grappling with a pandemic. And this law has been brought with the sole intention to benefit big corporates like the Ambanis and the Adanis, who have been at the receiving end of the Indian government’s largesse. And these acts will pave way for the cartelization and the commercialization of agricultural producers. And if they’re allowed to stand, it is going to ruin India, while the corporates in India will continue to gain. No wonder the likes of Mukesh Ambani will keep gaining every hour throughout the pandemic, and the farmers, who are right now, as we talk — are protesting bare feet in the national capital without having their meals for days at a stretch. While I’m talking, the Indian government has arrested Rahul Gandhi, the leader of the opposition, for protesting against the gang rape of a Dalit girl.
So, this is — I mean, each time I speak on television, I talk about the world’s largest democracy. I don’t even know if I call it a democracy anymore. We saw what happened the last one week. Amnesty has been forced to shut down in India, because Amnesty has literally been an eyesore for the Indian government for speaking about human rights in India, for speaking about the poverty that we speak about. Now, this is a government that wants us to praise Mukesh Ambani NGO and not to talk about the farmers issue, which is why organizations like Amnesty India have been forced to shut following a lockdown.
It is the same Amnesty India which gave a damning report on the anti-Muslim carnage in February, when the pandemic had just about started maintaining a stronghold in India, when Trump was visiting India. He was visiting Narendra Modi. They both had a press conference in New Delhi, while, miles away, Muslims were being slaughtered, after members of the ruling party gave threatening, provocative speeches. Amnesty India actually put out a report saying how the government was complicit in the attack on Muslims.
And that’s what has been happening in India. In India, everything except the pandemic is being taken care of. Dissenters are being taken care of. Human rights activists are being incarcerated. Our actors, the cinematic icons of India, who have stood by dissenters, who have stood by students, are being fixed. They are being fixed in false cases of smoking marijuana. I mean, that’s what the government’s priority is right now.
Our news media has prostrated before those in power. It is not asking the questions that you and Nermeen are asking to me right now. I wish that was the case that I could go on an Indian news channel and these questions were asked to me. But at this point of time, Indian news channels are only repeating the lies that are being said by the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. We are in a mess right now, Amy.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: So, Rana, can you talk about that, the complicity of the news media, and in particular the broadcast news media, with the Modi government? It’s been extremely — it’s been striking, especially this last weekend as these farmers’ protests erupted across the country.
RANA AYYUB: Yeah.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: The broadcast media was exclusively focused on this drug scandal that you mentioned, which implicated the country’s top — one of the top actresses, Deepika Padukone. And there were scenes of, you know, journalists’ cars racing after her car, following her every move. And this was happening not only in the midst of the farmers’ protests, but also in the wake of these rapes, a series of rapes, not just of the Dalit woman who died yesterday. And today another victim of gang rape, another Dalit woman, has died. In August, there were several reports of extraordinarily brutal violence against women, rapes of women and girls, the youngest among them a 3-year-old.
RANA AYYUB: Yeah.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: So, could you talk about this, the complicity of the media with the Modi government; the violence against women, especially in Uttar Pradesh; and the extraordinary focus in the media on these celebrity — which many say are trumped-up — scandals, and against Deepika Padukone, who in fact is one of the only actresses who appeared at JNU, at Jawaharlal Nehru University, in Delhi earlier this year in solidarity with student protesters, some of whom have now been arrested?
RANA AYYUB: Yeah. I mean, last year — I mean, I think, two years ago, Reuters Foundation came up with a report that India is the most unsafe place for women. And instead of debating this, because we have seen — we saw the Nirbhaya case, that almost led to the UP, the Congress government, you know, being routed out of power. So, the nationalist news anchors of India, instead of discussing the state of the safety of women, went on a rampage on how a Western organization was out to defame Indian culture and how there was — the Indian activists were behind this report.
But what they refuse to see, that today, a Dalit woman, who was 19 years old — her name was Manisha Valmiki. Her surname suggests that she came from a Dalit family. She was in hospital for 12 days. And today the director general of police where she was raped and killed said that it wasn’t even a rape. The forensics says it wasn’t even a rape, which is why we are not surprised that she was burned, allegedly, cremated, overnight in Uttar Pradesh, where the family was not even allowed to be present. And there was this mound of clothes, and there was — over which her body was placed when she was burned last night. This is what India is doing to its daughters.
But, unfortunately, the Indian media is not asking the right questions. You know, it was said during the emergency, when Indira Gandhi asked the media to bend, it crawled. At this point of time, the media has not even been asked to crawl. It is prostrating before Narendra Modi. And it doesn’t feel — it feels like the Indian media is living in an alternate world.
Like, you talked about Deepika Padukone. This stems from the suicide of a Bollywood actor, Sushant Singh Rajput. And ever since his suicide, women have been — there’s been a witch hunt against women who surrounded him, the first being his girlfriend, who was accused of abetting his suicide by not being there for him and by taking him to a psychiatrist. There is a medieval witch hunt of Rhea Chakraborty, followed by Deepika Padukone, who’s one of the biggest superstars in India, who had the guts and the spine to stand with the students’ movement in February when it was opposing the Citizenship Amendment Bill. Deepika did not say a word, but she went and stood in solidarity with the students. Yesterday, when I was supposed to write my Washington Post column, I spoke to a couple of India’s biggest film directors. And they said what they are doing to Deepika Padukone — I mean, there’s a surveillance on her WhatsApp, and there is a word in which, allegedly, she has asked for weed. And that’s what the government is using to nail her and to fix her.
And she’s not the only one. Indian film director Anurag Kashyap, who has been very, very vocal against the government, there are two cases against him. Multiple film stars that I spoke to for The Washington Post piece believe — tell me that they are feeling claustrophobic, because Bollywood, as a medium, has the ability to sway the masses. And the government knows that the mass media, whether — it has been able to control the Indian news television channels and the newspapers, but it also had to control the film industry, which is why it is now being labeled — the film industry in India is being labeled as a drug cartel to discredit and delegitimize it, so that those who have been criticizing the government fall in line. That’s what’s happened with Deepika Padukone. She’s a woman. Of course, how dare a woman speak! Which is why she’s being fixed in the case.
I mean, Indian celebrities, whether it’s Priyanka Chopra or all of our Indian celebrities, when George Floyd was killed in America, they were tweeting “Black lives matter.” A Dalit woman was gang-raped, brutally killed, her body burned last night. Not a single celebrity is tweeting “Dalit lives matter.” That’s because they’re scared to talk. They know that if they talk, they will be fixed. They know that if they talk, Indian media will start a witch hunt against them. I mean, there are images of Indian actors, like Rhea Chakraborty, with about 100 cameramen pouncing on her, and those images go on television channels. You label them sluts. You label them all sorts of names on your television channels.
I mean, I feel — some days I feel ashamed to be a part of this news media, which has refused to ask the right questions. And all of this, mind you, is happening through the farmers’ protests, which is so important, which is at the heart of the problem in India right now.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Rana Ayyub, we just have 30 seconds, but the latest news about a special court in India acquitting all the suspects involved, including high-ranking officials in Modi’s government — involved in the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in 1992, which led to riots and violence unprecedented since India’s partition in ’47?
RANA AYYUB: Well, Nermeen, I was in Bombay when the carnage took place. I was 9. And for somebody like me and for Muslims in India, when yesterday the court, a special CBI court, acquitted everyone who, on video, led a rally to demolish the Babri Masjid, that led to the carnage of a thousand Muslims, and despite the video — there are people who are saying on video, on televisions, that, “Yes, we did it,” the court’s saying, “No, you are acquitted.” I mean, it’s — we have the first time in the history of the world that the accused are saying “We did it,” and the courts are saying, “No, you stand acquitted.” And that speaks volumes of where Muslims and Dalits in India stand right now, where the criminal justice system in India stands right now, where we are as a democracy. And I think that, like I keep saying, that the world should now turn its attention to India, because what’s happening in America, you see a mirror image of that happening in India. It’s about time that —
AMY GOODMAN: And I wanted to end with that, Rana, that mirror image. You’re also an astute observer of the United States. Do you see the Hindu nationalism of Modi, the parallels with the white supremacy that President Trump refuses to condemn, in fact advocates?
RANA AYYUB: Absolutely. I think Trump and Modi are mirror images of each other. When Trump came to India, and when he had this massive rally with Narendra Modi, they were speaking the same language. When Mr. Trump spoke about Islamic terrorism, the entire crowd in Mr. Modi’s rally was jubilant. Mr. Trump refuses to condemn white supremacy. He refuses to talk about racism. Mr. Modi believes that there’s no such thing as Islamophobia in India. Mr. Modi has not spoken a word about the gang rape of a Dalit woman in India. Mr. Modi has enabled the attack on Muslims in India. I think this is a mirror image.
And you also see the masses who support Modi and Trump. These are people who feel victimized in their own country despite being a majority. So, both Trump and Modi are playing to the victimhood of this majority community, you know, which believes that it has a first right to all the resources in their country, which is why I think India and America are in absolutely similar position. But the world should know that if the world’s largest democracy goes down under, ripples will be felt by the world, which is why it’s time for the world to concentrate on India.
AMY GOODMAN: Rana Ayyub, I want to thank you for being with us, Indian journalist who’s a global opinions writer for The Washington Post, author of the book Gujarat Files: Anatomy of a Cover Up. And we’re very thankful that you, at least yourself, have recovered from COVID, though India is number two, behind the United States, in the world for COVID infections.
When we come back, tomorrow marks two years since Washington Post correspondent Jamal Khashoggi was murdered inside the Saudi Consulate in Turkey. Stay with us.


democracynow--2020-10-01--Headlines for October  1, 2020

Headlines for October  1, 2020

Far-right groups are continuing to celebrate President Trump ’ s debate performance after he refused to disavow white supremacists and @ @ @ @ @ , the Proud Boys , to stand by .
The Proud Boys are now selling @ @ @ @ @ s words : “ stand back and stand by.
” Andrew Anglin , the founder @ @ @ @ @ Daily Stormer , wrote on Wednesday , “ I got shivers .
I still have @ @ @ @ @ the people to stand by .
As in : Get ready for war.
” On @ @ @ @ @ to shift his message .
President Donald Trump : “ I don ’ t know @ @ @ @ @ .
I mean , you ’ ll have to give me a definition , because @ @ @ @ @ know who they are .
I can only say they have to stand down , @ @ @ @ @ work.
” A moment later , Trump repeated his claim that it is anti-fascists who @ @ @ @ @ .
”

Far-right groups are continuing to celebrate President Trump’s debate performance after he refused to disavow white supremacists and urged one violent hate group, the Proud Boys, to stand by.
President Donald Trump: “What do you want to call them? Give me a name. Give me a name.”
Chris Wallace: “White supremacists and right-wing” —
Joe Biden: “White supremacists.”
President Donald Trump: “Go ahead. Who would you like me to condemn?”
Joe Biden: “Proud Boys.”
Chris Wallace: “White supremacists and right-wing militia.”
Joe Biden: “The Proud Boys.”
President Donald Trump: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by.”
The Proud Boys are now selling T-shirts with the president’s words: “stand back and stand by.” Andrew Anglin, the founder of the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, wrote on Wednesday, “I got shivers. I still have shivers. He is telling the people to stand by. As in: Get ready for war.” On Wednesday, President Trump attempted to shift his message.
President Donald Trump: “I don’t know who the Proud Boys are. I mean, you’ll have to give me a definition, because I really don’t know who they are. I can only say they have to stand down, let law enforcement do their work.”
A moment later, Trump repeated his claim that it is anti-fascists who are the “real problem.”


democracynow--2020-10-02--Election Season Upended: Trump's COVID Diagnosis Could Reshape Race, Debates & SCOTUS Fight

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : We ’ re also joined by John Nichols .
Naomi is speaking to us from British Columbia .
John Nichols is speaking to us from Wisconsin .
The front-page piece in The New York Times today , because when they put out their print edition , didn ’ t know about the latest announcement President Trump and the first lady have COVID , it ’ s ” COVID and Campaigns Collide in Battleground of Wisconsin.
” So , John , we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where , the Times writes , “ Three of the four metro areas in the United States with the most cases per capita were in northeast Wisconsin , and one hospital in Green Bay , the third-largest city in the state , was nearly full this week … Daily statewide deaths because of the coronavirus hit a record on Wednesday when officials reported that 26 people had succumbed to the virus.
” And it goes on from there .
That didn ’ t stop President Trump from going to Wisconsin , but what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the first lady getting sick , and now at least one staffer , if not more , testing positive for COVID-19 .
Your thoughts ?
JOHN NICHOLS : It has been a remarkable last 24 hours in Wisconsin .
While what has happened with the president is of course the lead news now , over the last 24 hours you had a circumstance in Wisconsin where the mayor of the city of La Crosse was pleading with the president and with the White House and with the campaign not to come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decided not to go there .
They announced , well , then they would go to another city , Janesville .
The officials in Janesville pleaded with the campaign not to come to Janesville .
And so , we had this remarkable playout in Wisconsin of a very serious uptick in coronavirus cases and in deaths , officials saying , “ Look , this is not the time to come and campaign , ” and yet , up until this diagnosis , full intent to try and come in .
So , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign and the president ’ s denial of the seriousness of these events , of having these events without masks , without social distancing , come in to clash with reality at this point .
I think it ’ s something every Wisconsinite is going to notice .
There ’ s no doubt of that .
AMY GOODMAN : Can you explain 25th Amendment and also this line of succession ?
If President Trump were too sick to function as president , it goes to Vice President Pence , then to the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chuck Grassley in the Senate .
The significance of this and what this means now ?
JOHN NICHOLS : Well , I think that it ’ s important to understand that the president and the people around him say that he is not experiencing symptoms at this point and that he will continue to govern .
What we do know is that if he is incapacitated — that is to say , if he is physically in a situation where it is determined that he can ’ t govern , or he determines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it moves to Mike Pence .
If Pence is incapacitated in some way , then it does move to Nancy Pelosi , and obviously to Grassley .
That ’ s the standard system .
And it has come to this before .
We have had circumstances in the past where presidents have been going into surgery , where President Reagan was shot , where the 25th Amendment came into play .
What I would emphasize , though , is I doubt very much that this president will want that to happen , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symptoms , I expect he will continue to try and govern .
What is significant , though , is the impact on campaigning is very , very significant , because if you follow the CDC protocols , President Trump can ’ t — just because of the diagnosis , shouldn ’ t go out for at least 10 days .
And Joe Biden also , as someone who has come into contact with someone who has now been diagnosed , also has to follow CDC protocols .
So , the whole campaign — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But remember — AMY GOODMAN : And they also — the Biden campaign put off a reporter on their plane to Michigan — we ’ ll see if he goes to Michigan — because he had been on Air Force One , where Hope Hicks was and the president was .
JOHN NICHOLS : Yeah .
So this becomes — it becomes a really kind of turbulent moment in the last month of the campaign .
You have the potential that as much as a third , even a half , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be redefined by the ability of the candidates to physically go out and campaign .
We are now in this era of virtual campaigning , and so that becomes a factor .
But one thing is , the president , particularly , has not wanted to do virtual campaigning .
He ’ s been very , very committed to these in-person events .
Biden has been much more inclined toward it .
The final thing that we have to keep conscious of is that we have a number of debates scheduled .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debates go forward in any kind of traditional model , although you could in fact start talking about the idea of virtual debates .
AMY GOODMAN : Which is very interesting , because next week is the vice-presidential debate , and Pence , while they ’ re saying he and Karen Pence have tested negative , has been in contact with COVID-positive people , like the president .
And so the question is : Should that be held , certainly , in person ?
Then you ’ ve got the next two debates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hearings , possibly — who knows if they will continue ?
— for the Supreme Court justice , Amy Coney Barrett , as she goes from one Republican senator ’ s office to another , with White House staffers , White House staffers going back and forth , who have been with President Trump numerous times .
What this could mean ?
And the oldest member of the Senate is the second in command of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate , and that ’ s Dianne Feinstein .
Will these hearings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coney Barrett ’ s own family , who didn ’ t wear masks when President Trump introduced her last week ?
NAOMI KLEIN : There ’ s been a huge amount of reckless endangerment , there ’ s no doubt .
And I think that if we were following the proper protocols , the Senate would not be able to meet , and therefore , the confirmation would not be able to happen .
You know , I think we should be thinking also of the working people who have been exposed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days — the drivers , the catering workers .
So many people , without their consent , have been exposed .
Just as in the country , think about the thousands of meat processing plant workers who were ordered to work under extremely unsafe conditions by this president , because he believed that bacon was an essential service .
So , so many people have been endangered by his policies .
AMY GOODMAN : We ’ re going to have to end it there , and of course we ’ ll continue to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporting that Chris Wallace notes members of the first family waved off the offer of masks from members of the Cleveland Clinic once they sat down in the hall to watch the debate .
That does it for the show .
Naomi Klein , as well as John Nichols .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re also joined by John Nichols. Naomi is speaking to us from British Columbia. John Nichols is speaking to us from Wisconsin. The front-page piece in The New York Times today, because when they put out their print edition, didn’t know about the latest announcement President Trump and the first lady have COVID, it’s ”COVID and Campaigns Collide in Battleground of Wisconsin.” So, John, we’re talking to you in Wisconsin, where, the Times writes, “Three of the four metro areas in the United States with the most cases per capita were in northeast Wisconsin, and one hospital in Green Bay, the third-largest city in the state, was nearly full this week … Daily statewide deaths because of the coronavirus hit a record on Wednesday when officials reported that 26 people had succumbed to the virus.” And it goes on from there. That didn’t stop President Trump from going to Wisconsin, but what did stop him is he, himself, and the first lady getting sick, and now at least one staffer, if not more, testing positive for COVID-19. Your thoughts?
JOHN NICHOLS: It has been a remarkable last 24 hours in Wisconsin. While what has happened with the president is of course the lead news now, over the last 24 hours you had a circumstance in Wisconsin where the mayor of the city of La Crosse was pleading with the president and with the White House and with the campaign not to come to La Crosse. The campaign finally decided not to go there. They announced, well, then they would go to another city, Janesville. The officials in Janesville pleaded with the campaign not to come to Janesville.
And so, we had this remarkable playout in Wisconsin of a very serious uptick in coronavirus cases and in deaths, officials saying, “Look, this is not the time to come and campaign,” and yet, up until this diagnosis, full intent to try and come in. So, we really have seen the intersection of the campaign and the president’s denial of the seriousness of these events, of having these events without masks, without social distancing, come in to clash with reality at this point. I think it’s something every Wisconsinite is going to notice. There’s no doubt of that.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain 25th Amendment and also this line of succession? If President Trump were too sick to function as president, it goes to Vice President Pence, then to the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, then to Chuck Grassley in the Senate. The significance of this and what this means now?
JOHN NICHOLS: Well, I think that it’s important to understand that the president and the people around him say that he is not experiencing symptoms at this point and that he will continue to govern.
What we do know is that if he is incapacitated — that is to say, if he is physically in a situation where it is determined that he can’t govern, or he determines he can’t do so — it moves to Mike Pence. If Pence is incapacitated in some way, then it does move to Nancy Pelosi, and obviously to Grassley. That’s the standard system.
And it has come to this before. We have had circumstances in the past where presidents have been going into surgery, where President Reagan was shot, where the 25th Amendment came into play.
What I would emphasize, though, is I doubt very much that this president will want that to happen, and so even if he does have minor symptoms, I expect he will continue to try and govern.
What is significant, though, is the impact on campaigning is very, very significant, because if you follow the CDC protocols, President Trump can’t — just because of the diagnosis, shouldn’t go out for at least 10 days. And Joe Biden also, as someone who has come into contact with someone who has now been diagnosed, also has to follow CDC protocols. So, the whole campaign —
AMY GOODMAN: He’s testing this morning.
JOHN NICHOLS: Yeah, he is. But remember —
AMY GOODMAN: And they also — the Biden campaign put off a reporter on their plane to Michigan — we’ll see if he goes to Michigan — because he had been on Air Force One, where Hope Hicks was and the president was.
JOHN NICHOLS: Yeah. So this becomes — it becomes a really kind of turbulent moment in the last month of the campaign. You have the potential that as much as a third, even a half, of the last month of the campaign may be redefined by the ability of the candidates to physically go out and campaign.
We are now in this era of virtual campaigning, and so that becomes a factor. But one thing is, the president, particularly, has not wanted to do virtual campaigning. He’s been very,very committed to these in-person events. Biden has been much more inclined toward it.
The final thing that we have to keep conscious of is that we have a number of debates scheduled. And it is hard to imagine how those debates go forward in any kind of traditional model, although you could in fact start talking about the idea of virtual debates.
AMY GOODMAN: Which is very interesting, because next week is the vice-presidential debate, and Pence, while they’re saying he and Karen Pence have tested negative, has been in contact with COVID-positive people, like the president. And so the question is: Should that be held, certainly, in person? Then you’ve got the next two debates.
Naomi Klein, then you have the hearings, possibly — who knows if they will continue? — for the Supreme Court justice, Amy Coney Barrett, as she goes from one Republican senator’s office to another, with White House staffers, White House staffers going back and forth, who have been with President Trump numerous times. What this could mean? And the oldest member of the Senate is the second in command of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate, and that’s Dianne Feinstein. Will these hearings be put off? What about Amy Coney Barrett’s own family, who didn’t wear masks when President Trump introduced her last week?
NAOMI KLEIN: There’s been a huge amount of reckless endangerment, there’s no doubt. And I think that if we were following the proper protocols, the Senate would not be able to meet, and therefore, the confirmation would not be able to happen.
You know, I think we should be thinking also of the working people who have been exposed by this administration recklessly in the past few days — the drivers, the catering workers. So many people, without their consent, have been exposed. Just as in the country, think about the thousands of meat processing plant workers who were ordered to work under extremely unsafe conditions by this president, because he believed that bacon was an essential service. So, so many people have been endangered by his policies.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to have to end it there, and of course we’ll continue to cover this story, the Miami Herald reporting that Chris Wallace notes members of the first family waved off the offer of masks from members of the Cleveland Clinic once they sat down in the hall to watch the debate. That does it for the show. Naomi Klein, as well as John Nichols. I’m Amy Goodman.