Speaker 1: You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
Speaker 1: six forty.
Speaker 2: Thank you engaging voice Guy. Pleasure being with you.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about whether or not you are now living
Speaker 1: in a Fire's on his new maps have been released.
Speaker 1: It's coming up here after an update on the news
Speaker 1: with Amy King and about a quarter after first. The
Speaker 1: big news is that the Trump officials are facing some
Speaker 1: backlash and Democrats are jumping on it after it's revealed
Speaker 1: that the plans to attack the Hooti rebels in Yemen.
Speaker 2: We're being discussed via an unsecured chat app. KTLA had
Speaker 2: that story.
Speaker 3: Secret war plans revealed in a group chat involving the
Speaker 3: nation's top security officials and a journalist who is added
Speaker 3: to the conversation by mistake. Tonight, President Trump.
Speaker 1: Says, I still don't know how you get added by mistake.
Speaker 1: I'm having real difficulty understanding this. I mean, we've all
Speaker 1: butt dialed somebody, but we don't but add to a
Speaker 1: group chat. I have enough trouble trying to figure out
Speaker 1: how to add someone to a group chat. I can't
Speaker 1: imagine accidentally doing it.
Speaker 3: He knows nothing about the incident, and Secretary of Defense
Speaker 3: Pete Hegseth is denying the allegations.
Speaker 1: Well, the Trump administration confirms the text threat quote appears
Speaker 1: to be legitimate.
Speaker 2: Sandra Mitchell live in the KTLA News Center with details.
Speaker 4: Cendra, Yeah, the messages appear to be authentic. That is
Speaker 4: the word from the White House National Security Council spokesperson tonight. Now,
Speaker 4: if it is true, it would be a stunning breach
Speaker 4: of national security. Still, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is adamant.
Speaker 4: He says, nothing confidential.
Speaker 2: Was shared, all right, So what do we know? Officially?
Speaker 1: The reporter says, I was added to the chat. The
Speaker 1: Department of Defense says, yep, it's legit. Sec death. What
Speaker 1: does he say?
Speaker 4: As the US launched attacks on whot rebels in Yemen,
Speaker 4: A journalist says he knew exactly what was unfolding. He
Speaker 4: already told us this because he was mistakenly included in
Speaker 4: a group chat by Mike Walls, President Trump's National security advisor,
Speaker 4: with top officials sharing details of the war plan.
Speaker 5: He was texting war plans. He was texting attack plans,
Speaker 5: when targets were going to be targeted, how they were
Speaker 5: going to be targeted. Who was at the targets when
Speaker 5: the next sequence of attacks were happening.
Speaker 4: Appearing on CNN tonight, the editor of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg,
Speaker 4: detailed how he mistakenly was included in an encrypted messaging
Speaker 4: app with Vice President jd Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth,
Speaker 4: and fifteen other top officials talking about military strikes in Yemen.
Speaker 1: So they accidentally added a journalist, and it just happened
Speaker 1: to be accidentally one of the one of the top journalists.
Speaker 1: It wasn't like they got somebody from the Poughkeepsie Weekly.
Speaker 5: I didn't know what it was or or who it was.
Speaker 2: I thought it was a hoax.
Speaker 5: I thought somebody was trying to entrap me.
Speaker 4: It was not a hoax. Back on March fifteenth, two
Speaker 4: hours after Goldberg apparently got the tax the bombing began.
Speaker 6: Nobody was texting war plans.
Speaker 2: And that's all I have to say about that.
Speaker 4: With some Democrats now furious over the current security breach
Speaker 4: and calling for an immediate hearing on the matter, hag
Speaker 4: Seth denied the allegation and attacked Goldberg's credibility.
Speaker 6: They deceitful and highly discredited so called journalists who's made
Speaker 6: a profession of peddling hoax his time and time again.
Speaker 4: Christident Trump also criticizing the.
Speaker 2: But how does that change the situation? Listen to what
Speaker 2: HEGs has said.
Speaker 1: Now, remember it's been confirmed by the Department of Defense,
Speaker 1: if you're unfamiliar, The Secretary of Defense is over the
Speaker 1: Department of Defense. So his department confirms, yes, this was
Speaker 1: the check, Yes he was added to it. And then
Speaker 1: Hegxith's response is, well the journalist is I don't like him.
Speaker 6: They deceitful and highly discredited so called journalist who's made
Speaker 6: a profession of pedaling hoaxes time and time again.
Speaker 1: All right, even even taking what Hexith says and assuming
Speaker 1: that's true, why was a deceitful and discredited so called
Speaker 1: journalist who pedals hoaxes added to your war plans group chat?
Speaker 1: And well, those weren't war plans. I've seen the report.
Speaker 1: There's receipts, it's screenshots of the of the chat. It's
Speaker 1: not as though it's up for dispute. His own his
Speaker 1: own department said, yeah, that's legit. Yep, that was the chat.
Speaker 1: So what is Hexith saying here? Hexyth, a former television
Speaker 1: news guy, should know just because you yell at the
Speaker 1: messenger doesn't mean the messenger was wrong or that the
Speaker 1: message was errant. So this feels a lot like feels
Speaker 1: a lot like when my daughter's cat finds itself stuck
Speaker 1: in a paper bag and just starts freaking out. It
Speaker 1: doesn't know where the opening is. It just starts swatting
Speaker 1: at the inside of the paper bag. I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: out of here somehow. In other words, he's throwing haymakers
Speaker 1: and they're not really landing. He's just throwing haymakers. Because
Speaker 1: the narrative when you start talking with your coworkers, and
Speaker 1: you'll talk to some coworkers that are hard left, you'll
Speaker 1: talk to friends that might be far right, you'll talk
Speaker 1: to people that are in the middle, and you're discussing
Speaker 1: this and you're saying, I can't believe they did this.
Speaker 1: And someone's gonna say that journalist is trash. Pete Hegsith
Speaker 1: says he's discredited, he pedals hoaxes, and you go, where's
Speaker 1: the lie. Even if you don't like the journalist, even
Speaker 1: if this journalist was full of trash before.
Speaker 2: Even if this wasn't a journalist, if.
Speaker 1: They somehow accidentally added your plumber to the group chat,
Speaker 1: and the plumber took screenshots of the group chat. You
Speaker 1: can't come out and say this is a terrible plumber.
Speaker 1: My sink is still leaking after he was there. It
Speaker 1: doesn't change the content of the group chat, and it
Speaker 1: doesn't change the fact that their screenshots to show.
Speaker 2: Yep, he was in it.
Speaker 1: It also doesn't change the fact that the Department of
Speaker 1: Defense acknowledged Yep, it's legit. So while you continue swinging
Speaker 1: at the inside of that paper bag, you're not getting
Speaker 1: any closer to finding your way out.
Speaker 4: President Trump also criticizing The Atlantic and denied knowledge of
Speaker 4: the attacks and said the attack on the Hooties was successful, and.
Speaker 1: Again, attacking the Atlantic doesn't change the fact that there
Speaker 1: are receipts.
Speaker 7: I don't know anything about it. I'm not a big
Speaker 7: fan of The Atlantic. To me, it's a magazine that's
Speaker 7: going out of business. I think it's not much of
Speaker 7: a magazine. But I know nothing about it. The attack
Speaker 7: was very effective. I can tell you that I don't
Speaker 7: know anything about it.
Speaker 1: All Right, Again, we're attacking the Atlantic. We're saying they're
Speaker 1: a trash organization. We're saying that this journalist is terrible. If,
Speaker 1: in fact, The Atlantic is a bad news publication. If
Speaker 1: this journalist is so bad at his job and is
Speaker 1: discredited and is not someone anyone should listen to, why
Speaker 1: was he added to the group chat? Oh, but it
Speaker 1: was an accident. Why is he even in your contact list?
Speaker 1: How does he end up on the signal app with
Speaker 1: everybody else? The Vice President, the Secretary of Defense, the
Speaker 1: National Security Advisor, and random guy who we all hate.
Speaker 1: It's strange I have a group chat with a bunch
Speaker 1: of guys.
Speaker 2: We do. I'm gonna get geeky here for a minute.
Speaker 1: We do every year we do a trip to Las
Speaker 1: Vegas and we have this fantasy football draft and get together.
Speaker 1: We hang out at the pool, we go get some drinks,
Speaker 1: We talk about everybody's football teams and how bad they are,
Speaker 1: and then throughout the year we converse often about sports,
Speaker 1: sometimes about life, about my buddy's third marriage since since
Speaker 1: the league got together, and how he's a serial womanizer,
Speaker 1: another dude who's an absolute drunkard and continues to post
Speaker 1: pictures and we simultaneously try to counsel him and egg
Speaker 1: him on because we're dudes and that's what we do.
Speaker 1: We had a guy that left the group. He was mad,
Speaker 1: he was bitter at the rest of the group. Do
Speaker 1: you know what we all did? We deleted his contact
Speaker 1: info because we didn't like him anymore. How is it
Speaker 1: you have a guy that is discredited, you claim as
Speaker 1: a so called journalist, a hoax peddler, who works for
Speaker 1: a terrible news organization, one that's failing going down the tubes,
Speaker 1: won't be in business much longer, and yet he's still
Speaker 1: so readily available in your contact list that he could
Speaker 1: accidentally be added to the war chat? Is there anyone
Speaker 1: else being accidentally invited into these chats? Do we accidentally
Speaker 1: invite Elon Musk into our classified information chats? Are we
Speaker 1: accidentally inviting Vladimir Putin into our our chats? Who else
Speaker 1: is being accidentally invited into our unsecure classified information group texts?
Speaker 1: There are so many questions that this unforced error is
Speaker 1: going to be significantly detrimental. Someone is going to lose
Speaker 1: their job, you mark my word. Somebody's going to lose
Speaker 1: their job over this, And I'm going to guess that's
Speaker 1: the security advisor Waltz. Michael Waltz. I think he's probably
Speaker 1: gonna lose his job. Because he's the one that accidentally
Speaker 1: added the journalist to the unsecure group chat. And then
Speaker 1: of course the Democrats are going to hammer on after
Speaker 1: everything you talked about with Hillary Clinton's emails on an
Speaker 1: or on a private server, how could you let this
Speaker 1: happen on a chat service that we don't run. There
Speaker 1: are so many questions that are going to continue to
Speaker 1: be asked about this. Just mark my words on that,
Speaker 1: all right. Didn't want to talk fire for just a moment.
Speaker 1: You heard the Conway's promo that some of the firefighters
Speaker 1: are showing high levels of lead and mercury, the ones
Speaker 1: that fought the Eating and the Palisades fires, which makes
Speaker 1: you wonder how they got that.
Speaker 2: What's where did it come from? They were breathing into smoke.
Speaker 1: The smoke obviously had levels of lead and mercury in it,
Speaker 1: and it makes you wonder what contained it that burned
Speaker 1: and then what's the word a rated that I guess
Speaker 1: not aerrated, vaporized it and then put it into the smoke.
Speaker 1: But we are seeing calfires come out and they said
Speaker 1: fire risk is.
Speaker 2: Higher in far more areas than.
Speaker 1: What we have said in the past. KTLA was reporting
Speaker 1: on the new fire map.
Speaker 8: Well two minutes after wild fires ravage our region, cal
Speaker 8: Fire has released updated fire maps for southern California. This
Speaker 8: marks the first time they have been updated in more
Speaker 8: than a decade. The maps are compiled by the State
Speaker 8: Forestry and Fire Protection Department and designate three levels of
Speaker 8: fire hazards, moderate, high, and very high. This is based
Speaker 8: on variables like vegetation, terrain, and recent burn history. Updated
Speaker 8: maps for fifteen counties in central California were released two
Speaker 8: weeks ago, and more than one point two million acres
Speaker 8: were added into the hazard zones.
Speaker 1: All right, and a total of three and a half
Speaker 1: million acres statewide. Now here's where this gets interesting. According
Speaker 1: to Orange County Register, new fire hazard zones appear to
Speaker 1: leave out at least half of the neighborhoods that were
Speaker 1: burned during the Eton fire. So you have people that
Speaker 1: live in areas that were decimated by fire, and cal
Speaker 1: Fire has not added those neighborhoods to any sort of
Speaker 1: even moderate risk area. The State Forestry and Fire Protection
Speaker 1: Department compiled the maps. They indicate where the probability of
Speaker 1: the fire is the greatest over the next thirty to
Speaker 1: fifty years, and then with that you have to consider
Speaker 1: the different potential implications for rebuilding and some of the
Speaker 1: homes and businesses that are rebuilding are We're going to have.
Speaker 2: New building codes.
Speaker 1: Because of the new hazards that would extend the hazard map,
Speaker 1: extends some of the susceptible areas a little bit further.
Speaker 2: Into the communities.
Speaker 1: And again when you talk about the new building codes,
Speaker 1: I think there need to be some changes. Some changes
Speaker 1: have been entered into the new building codes, including some
Speaker 1: of the fire or what is it, the ember resistant vents,
Speaker 1: that sort of thing. You have to wonder about some
Speaker 1: of the building materials again talking back on the firefighters
Speaker 1: that inhaled lead and mercury.
Speaker 2: Will there be.
Speaker 1: Will there be codes that address materials that are being
Speaker 1: used to make sure that they don't have any of
Speaker 1: those happiness metals that are a part of those But
Speaker 1: I have to wonder how much this is going going
Speaker 1: to delay some of the rebuilding efforts, how much additional
Speaker 1: cost this may put on some of the additional building efforts.
Speaker 1: In Altadena, hazard maps released at least fourteen years ago,
Speaker 1: designated just three to six blocks along the northern edge
Speaker 1: of the neighborhoods is being a very high fire severity zone,
Speaker 1: and the previous map on I had a very small
Speaker 1: strip along the foothills in the bottom of the mountains.
Speaker 1: They've extended those a bit further, but as we know,
Speaker 1: the fire moved further into Altadena than even what these.
Speaker 2: Maps had projected in the past.
Speaker 1: If we were to equate this to a different natural threat.
Speaker 1: You know that when you buy a house, you have
Speaker 1: to determine whether or not it's in a flood zone.
Speaker 1: Some areas are high, you know, high flood risk areas.
Speaker 1: Others are not high flood risk areas. So imagine if
Speaker 1: you have a home that's in a moderate flood risk area,
Speaker 1: and and so you have to have certain codes, you
Speaker 1: have to have certain sealants along the foundation of your home,
Speaker 1: whatever that might be. And then all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: you have this massive flood that comes through and it
Speaker 1: decimates a home, and it creates all kinds of havoc
Speaker 1: and you have to be evacuated. And then they come
Speaker 1: out with a new flood risk map and they go, yeah,
Speaker 1: but this home that was just just deemed to be
Speaker 1: a flood loss that's not really in a dangerous area.
Speaker 1: Imagine if after Katrina evaluators went through New Orleans and
Speaker 1: they said, well, this whole ninth Ward that was underwater,
Speaker 1: that's not really a high risk area. We would say,
Speaker 1: we're still draining. How do you say it's not a
Speaker 1: high risk area. We're still draining the water from the flood.
Speaker 1: In the same way we're saying, how do you say
Speaker 1: this is not a high risk area. We're still shoveling ashes.
Speaker 1: How is this not high fire risk? I'm still sifting
Speaker 1: through the remains of what used to be my house,
Speaker 1: and you're telling me there isn't a high fire risk.
Speaker 2: There is a high fire risk. And so some people
Speaker 2: are saying swinging a miss.
Speaker 1: Things are continuing to move very rapidly in this fire
Speaker 1: hose of chaos that is the current administration. Whether it's
Speaker 1: bombings and Yemen, leaks about bombings in Yemen on unsecured chats,
Speaker 1: or its arguments with the court system.
Speaker 2: There's just so much happening.
Speaker 1: And the latest arguments with the court system go back
Speaker 1: to a judge and the judge says, nope, the block
Speaker 1: remains in place.
Speaker 9: This morning, another two hundred Venezuela nationals arrived in the
Speaker 9: capital of Caracas after being deported by the Trump administration. Today,
Speaker 9: three judges on an appeals panel in DC are set
Speaker 9: to hear the controversial case of three previous planeloads of
Speaker 9: Venezuela and migrants who were deported and they ended up
Speaker 9: in a notorious prison in Elsalvador. The Trump administration is
Speaker 9: now looking to reverse a federal judge's order trying to
Speaker 9: halt deportations. This morning, Judge James Bosburg ruled the Venezuelan
Speaker 9: migrants deserve to have a court hearing before their deportations
Speaker 9: to determine whether or not they belong to the violent
Speaker 9: gang trend de ragua. Mister President, do you think you
Speaker 9: have the authority the power to round up people, to
Speaker 9: port them, and then you're under no obligation to a
Speaker 9: court to show the evidence against them.
Speaker 7: Well, that's what the law says, and that's what our
Speaker 7: country needs the administration.
Speaker 1: So the slippery slope on this, of course, is that
Speaker 1: by simply declaring anyone a terrorists, you can deport them
Speaker 1: if there is no due process, if there is no
Speaker 1: recourse by the accused, then are we in fact a
Speaker 1: nation of laws?
Speaker 2: Do we have individual rights?
Speaker 1: If all it takes is an accusation by someone in
Speaker 1: authority to say you're a bad person. I can do
Speaker 1: whatever I want to you because I have the authority
Speaker 1: to do so. Do you have any rights? And I
Speaker 1: know what you're thinking to think, well, that'll never happen
Speaker 1: to me. And I get what you're saying, But at
Speaker 1: what point? At what point do we draw the line?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 1: What happens when you actually have to show evidence they well,
Speaker 1: they're not US citizen? Well don't we have to have
Speaker 1: due process where they could appeal the fact that you
Speaker 1: say they're not here legally. We already know that we are.
Speaker 1: We're detaining people who do have permanent residency simply because
Speaker 1: the administration says, well that person's a terrorists, we're going
Speaker 1: to revoke their visas. So is anybody safe is the
Speaker 1: big question? And a judge says you.
Speaker 9: Can't do it that way, went ahead with the deportations
Speaker 9: despite the judges ruling to turn the planes carrying them around.
Speaker 9: Boseburg warn there will be consequences if he decides his
Speaker 9: order was deliberately disobeyed. President Trump ramping up attacks on Boseburg,
Speaker 9: demanding heaping impeached or disbarred, and Trump's borders are defiant.
Speaker 1: We're going to keep targeting the worst of the worst,
Speaker 1: which we've been doing since day one in deporting from
Speaker 1: the United States through the various flaws on the books.
Speaker 2: They are targeting the worst of the worst. At least
Speaker 2: they tell us that these people are the worst of
Speaker 2: the worst. There's no evidence though. See, this is the issue.
Speaker 1: Because we also are getting stories of people like this
Speaker 1: couple in Orange County. If you didn't hear about this
Speaker 1: as a couple of Orange County, been here thirty five years,
Speaker 1: raised their kids, have been paying taxes, and they're deported.
Speaker 1: No criminal background, no criminal history by all accounts. Their
Speaker 1: only crime is the misdemeanor of not having documents in
Speaker 1: this country. They pay their taxes better than most Americans do.
Speaker 1: But they're being deported. Are they the worst of the worst?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: So you go, well, they broke the law, and you're
Speaker 1: absolutely right, they broke the law they did. Is that
Speaker 1: the priority? In other words, I heard I heard the
Speaker 1: promo that John Cobbolt has coming up for a show today,
Speaker 1: and he's right. If all of a sudden, HP designs
Speaker 1: they're going to start enforcing speeding and you've been speeding
Speaker 1: and they haven't pulled you over in the past, Well,
Speaker 1: today's the day that they enforce it. It's just the
Speaker 1: way it is. And he's one hundred percent correct on that.
Speaker 1: But let's let's dive a little bit deeper.
Speaker 2: Then.
Speaker 1: Suppose that you are driving with a group of cars
Speaker 1: and we know how this happens. You end up in clusters, right,
Speaker 1: or if this were racing with French and tight pants,
Speaker 1: we would call this the peloton. So let's say that
Speaker 1: you are in this peloton and you're you're going down
Speaker 1: the freeway and everybody's doing eighty and then somebody in
Speaker 1: a lifted f two fifty comes flying by you. Somehow
Speaker 1: I don't know who's flying on the on the freeways,
Speaker 1: but somehow they found a pocket and they.
Speaker 2: Go flying by you. So you're driving with a bunch
Speaker 2: of people.
Speaker 1: Let's say there's six seven of you that are going eighty,
Speaker 1: and this truck goes flying by, and you go, that
Speaker 1: car that truck is easily doing ninety or ninety five,
Speaker 1: and then you see Punch and John pull out and
Speaker 1: they hit their lights and you go, they're gonna get
Speaker 1: that sucker, but they don't. They pull you over and
Speaker 1: they give you a ticket, and you say, wait a minute, am.
Speaker 2: I the bigger threat?
Speaker 1: Because I just watched this guy on in F two
Speaker 1: fifty doing ninety five that just passed me? And I
Speaker 1: know you saw him because I saw him past you
Speaker 1: before you pulled out and then and then stop me.
Speaker 1: And the officer goes, yeah, but you broke the law.
Speaker 1: The officer is one hundred percent correct, You did break
Speaker 1: the law. Law you do deserve that ticket. Is that
Speaker 1: the priority that we want our law enforcement working on?
Speaker 1: Or do we want law enforcement working harder on the
Speaker 1: guy who is a bigger law breaker driving a vehicle
Speaker 1: that is much larger than yours, that.
Speaker 2: Can do far more damage.
Speaker 1: And where we also have to be careful is just
Speaker 1: because we know one guy is driving an F two
Speaker 1: fifty at ninety five miles an hour doesn't mean that
Speaker 1: everybody driving a pickup is violating the law. And this
Speaker 1: is where the judge says there has to be due process.
Speaker 1: If you say someone is a member of a gang
Speaker 1: that you've deemed a terrorist organization, doesn't that person have
Speaker 1: the right to show up and say no, I'm not
Speaker 1: And isn't the onus i'm the accuser to provide the
Speaker 1: evidence that, yes, that person is a threat to national security,
Speaker 1: in the same way that if you pull me over
Speaker 1: and I'm driving my pickup truck and you give me
Speaker 1: a ticket because I have a pickup truck. Therefore, or
Speaker 1: I must be somebody who speeds and creates havoc, don't
Speaker 1: I have the right to appeal that and say, show
Speaker 1: me the radar, show me the evidence that you caught
Speaker 1: me speeding. This is what's at issue, And instead what
Speaker 1: we hear is the judge is a bad person. I
Speaker 1: don't know that we're actually making things safer this way.
Speaker 1: Yesterday I was talking with you about this, twenty three
Speaker 1: and Me filing for bankruptcy.
Speaker 2: Maybe you remember the story ABC seven was reporting on
Speaker 2: aenetic testing company.
Speaker 10: Twenty three and Me has now filed for Chapter eleven
Speaker 10: bankruptcy protection. The firm, valued at fifty million dollars, is
Speaker 10: pushing for a buyout. So far, the board has rejected
Speaker 10: all offers, now saying a court supervised sale is the
Speaker 10: best path forward. Twenty three and Me will continue operations
Speaker 10: during this process. This, of course, comes just one day
Speaker 10: after California Attorney General Rob Bonte issued a consumer alert
Speaker 10: about the potential of this very thing happening, reminding customers
Speaker 10: consider invoking their rights to have twenty three and meters
Speaker 10: delete their data and destroy genetic samples.
Speaker 1: Yeah, destroy genetic samples means rinse, you're spitting down the sink,
Speaker 1: because what happens is you spit in the tube, you
Speaker 1: mail it to them, and then they keep it and
Speaker 1: they've got a big safe I'm not joking it. They
Speaker 1: have a big vault filled with little samples of spittle
Speaker 1: and they hang on to that stuff, and then they
Speaker 1: have the analysis comes out, and then that data is
Speaker 1: stored on their servers. And what happens is you can
Speaker 1: access the data, you can download that data, you can
Speaker 1: save your data. So while Rob Bonta says you should
Speaker 1: delete the data, exercise your right to delete the data.
Speaker 1: You can download your data so that you will still
Speaker 1: have access to it. But it does get a bit
Speaker 1: more complicated than that. And I talked about this yesterday
Speaker 1: and I said, I wonder what's gonna happen with all
Speaker 1: these you know what's gonna happen with the samples, what's
Speaker 1: gonna happen with the with the data? With everybody's portfolio
Speaker 1: of of of their information. Because twenty three and meters
Speaker 1: will like other genetic testing companies, you can use that information,
Speaker 1: and twenty three meters is the second largest beyond ancestry.
Speaker 1: You can use that information to evaluate some of your
Speaker 1: health risks. That's twenty three and meters. Big thing is
Speaker 1: that they do the genetic testing, so you can see
Speaker 1: do I have a higher risk of, say, breast cancer,
Speaker 1: do I have a higher risk of developing Alzheimer's, whatever
Speaker 1: it might be, and then you can use that accordingly
Speaker 1: so that you can plan your life out and then
Speaker 1: make sure your funeral plans are in place. You don't
Speaker 1: have to rely on your terrible children because they stopped
Speaker 1: loving you the minute that they moved out.
Speaker 2: So what happens with your info?
Speaker 1: Though, even if you download it, if you're someone that
Speaker 1: uses it for genetic testing, right, you've got it. If
Speaker 1: you're somebody that uses that for piecing together, say a
Speaker 1: family tree, you're going to lose the tree what you
Speaker 1: can do.
Speaker 2: You're going to lose the connections.
Speaker 1: You're gonna lose the details on it because as everyone
Speaker 1: is deleting their information from it, all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: it no longer connects on their database. So suppose that
Speaker 1: I'm going to use a simple eggs sample here. Suppose
Speaker 1: that it's you and your sibling and you've both spit
Speaker 1: in a tube and you mail it in, and then
Speaker 1: you've got a profile that says here's your profile, and
Speaker 1: you you say, am I matching with anyone else who's
Speaker 1: made their profile available for potential mask matching? And it says, actually,
Speaker 1: your your profile matches your siblings. So your your brother
Speaker 1: or your sister here it is.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: Imagine that your brother or your sister deletes their profile
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, it no longer matches you.
Speaker 2: See.
Speaker 1: So what some people are doing right now is they're
Speaker 1: taking screenshots of those matches because even if you if
Speaker 1: you download your profile, it is not showing any connections
Speaker 1: because your profile on your your computer, your cloud, whoever
Speaker 1: you say it, if it is not tied with theirs,
Speaker 1: then it doesn't it doesn't show that connection any longer.
Speaker 1: So some people are taking some screenshots ahead of time
Speaker 1: to say, oh, I want to make sure I don't
Speaker 1: lose my great great great great uncle and find out
Speaker 1: you know that they came over on a boat from Norway.
Speaker 1: So they're taking screenshots before a bunch of data gets deleted.
Speaker 1: You don't necessarily need to delete it quite yet. Bonta
Speaker 1: is warning you you could take you could take advantage
Speaker 1: of this.
Speaker 2: You should do it.
Speaker 1: If the sale goes through and you're concerned about where
Speaker 1: that data might go, you can delete it. You can
Speaker 1: take care of it right now if you want. You
Speaker 1: can take care of it in the future, but there
Speaker 1: are there are some questions and if they end up
Speaker 1: going dark, then you can delete it also. That'll be
Speaker 1: part of any bankruptcy filing, is to make sure that
Speaker 1: the eyes are dotted and the t's are crossed. Don't
Speaker 1: know if they're going to actually liquidate though, because the
Speaker 1: co founder, who owns forty nine percent of the stock,
Speaker 1: she's part of the group that keeps blocking the sale
Speaker 1: because she wants to buy it. Twenty three meters used
Speaker 1: to be worth, by the way, six billion dollars. Now
Speaker 1: it's only worth fifty million because they had a data
Speaker 1: breach in twenty twenty three and people freaked out, as
Speaker 1: well they should, because not only would you be losing
Speaker 1: your social security information and things like that, but all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, people are literally seeing what your DNA
Speaker 1: is made up of.
Speaker 2: You talk about identity theft.
Speaker 1: Chris Maryland for Bill Handle Today KFI am six forty.
Speaker 1: We live everywhere in the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2: You've been listening to the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 1: Catch my show Monday through Friday, six am to nine am,
Speaker 1: and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app