Egberto Off The Record

Fact-Based Political News & Opinion
  • 4.5 (8)
  • News Commentary
  • Updated Daily

Live versions of my Politics Done Right media/radio show. Included are “Egberto Off The Record” Substack lives with other Substackers. We also include some interviews from the media/radio show with politicians, activists, and engaged citizens. And of course, you get some of my Off-The-Record commentary. egberto.substack.com

  1. 2d ago

    LIVE! Trump-RFK CDC Crisis; Lewandowsky’s WA Run; Just 29,000 Jobs; USPS Puts Mailed Ballots at Risk

    Thank you Lynette, Donna Everett, EG, Sam, Eden, and many others for tuning into my live video! * Americans are dying because Trump and Kennedy are destroying the CDC * Washington State LD 39 Democratic Candidate Kathryn Lewandowsky on her run * US Added Just 29,000 Jobs, Wage Growth Hit New 5-Year Low Last Month as Trump Economy Teeters: “It’s a stalled economy—and working families are stuck in it,” said one economist. [More] * Tens of Thousands of Voters at ‘Risk of Disenfranchisement’ Thanks to Trump’s Postal Service: Analysis: “In every state, a day’s delay in delivery means that if mail voters wait until the last day or two before the election to mail their ballot... they could be disenfranchised.” [More] Real Time Chat Analysis The October 2 afternoon Politics Done Right chats combined strong community warmth with anger over corporate influence, economic insecurity, and political dishonesty. Participants largely supported the program’s progressive perspective, while several challenged its economic arguments or questioned its treatment of business investment. Substack emphasized fellowship and shared reactions; the Facebook/Restream feed featured more sustained disagreement, policy discussion, and urgent demands for action. Videocast-Politics-Done-Right-o… Economic accountability drove the sharpest exchanges. [Paul Fleming] highlighted downward job revisions to challenge Trump’s economic boasting. [Erik Hz] argued that presidents exercise limited control over the broader economy and raised earlier inflation and wage trends. [May Wood] pushed back against what she viewed as inconsistent standards: blaming Biden for economic conditions while emphasizing presidential limitations under Trump. The exchange revealed a dispute over both economic responsibility and the selective use of that responsibility in partisan arguments. Corporate subsidies and the quality of jobs generated substantial debate. [Erik Hz] cited projected employment associated with a SpaceX project, presenting job creation as a reason to recognize its benefits. [May Wood] countered that environmental consequences and the nature of the work matter alongside employment totals. [@debdenny7552] argued that corporations should pay taxes and improve the communities where they operate. On Substack, [John Cotter] and [Lynette] criticized corporate dependence on government support. The central progressive theme was clear: promised jobs do not eliminate the public’s right to demand accountability for public money. Healthcare and Kathryn Lewandowsky’s candidacy received supportive but limited direct discussion. [Lynette] explicitly wished Lewandowsky success in her race. [@Laketravisanyone] suggested paying cash for medical discounts and asked about the political character of communities served by Washington hospitals. Those comments introduced practical and partisan questions, but the supplied chat contains too little direct discussion to characterize broad audience agreement with the candidate’s full platform. Foreign-policy anxiety produced the most urgent appeals. [@e2247] posted claims about military deployments and possible renewed attacks on Iran, repeatedly asking the host to address them. The commenter expressed anger at Trump and dissatisfaction with Democratic opposition, calling for a large, sustained movement. Posts under [e2247] also warned against assuming that disillusioned Trump voters would automatically become Democratic voters. These contributions conveyed alarm, frustration, and a desire for collective action. The military details and predictions remain commenter assertions within this chat analysis, rather than independently verified findings. AI prompted both curiosity and distrust. [EG] praised the host’s questioning of AI, emphasized evidence, and called for guardrails and laws. [Do U Lie] dismissed the discussion and criticized the host’s relationship with AI before leaving. This contrast suggests that some participants welcome critical engagement with the technology, while others view its use skeptically. The brief dismissive exchange did not develop into a substantive debate. Community relationships helped sustain the discussion. [Lynette] repeatedly welcomed arrivals, exchanged jokes, encouraged participants, and closed with appreciation for the host, callers, and audience. [Vegan Cindy], [Jo], [Judy], and [SkyBlueEyes] contributed friendly exchanges. [EG] thanked the host for taking a call and described learning something new from the livestream. That warmth existed alongside intense political frustration; it gave participants a sense of belonging without eliminating disagreement. The overall sentiment was politically angry, socially supportive, and strongly concerned with accountability. Corporate power, perceived hypocrisy, and military escalation attracted the harshest criticism. Some comments moved into personal insults and unsupported accusations, which express emotional intensity but provide little analytical value. The clearest substantive demand was for institutions and elected officials to serve ordinary people—and for the public to remain organized enough to hold them accountable. This assessment reflects the supplied comments, not a representative survey of the entire audience. A handful of frequent contributors shaped much of the visible discussion; join notifications, automated messages, and apparent promotional spam do not indicate political sentiment. Real Time Chat Analysis This post has bonus content for paid subscribers. Upgrade to get full access. [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: Coffee Party ShowsPubDate: 2026-10-02T15:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., CDC, Public Health, Measles, Vaccine Policy, Kathryn Lewandowsky, Washington State, Legislative District 39, Healthcare Reform, Single-Payer Healthcare, Rural Hospitals, Affordable Housing, Electricity Rates, Working Families, September 2026 Jobs Report, Wage Growth, Economic Inequality, Workers’ Rights, USPS, Postal Delays, Mail-In Voting, Voting Rights, Voter Disenfranchisement, Democracy, 2026 Midterm Elections, Progressive Politics This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

  2. 2d ago

    LIVE! RFK CDC Crisis; Paxton Blames Trump; In-Person Voting; Iran War Costs; California's Billionaire Tax

    Thank you Gloria J. Maloney, Farmers AGAINST trump., Copaganda, Jane B In NC🌼, Ginger, and many others for tuning into my live video! * The CDC is in trouble as Kennedy and political hacks endanger our lives * Paxton blames president for his decline in the polls * Voters pivoting to in-person voting * How Much Is Trump’s Senseless Iran War Costing You Personally?: To be clear, this isn’t the cost of the weapons and soldiers fighting the war, which the Pentagon estimates to be around $44 billion. This is the higher cost you’re paying to fill up your gas tank and to buy products that cost more to move. [More] * ‘I Know Where I Want to Live’: Ex-Venture Capitalist Explains Why He’d Be Happy to Pay California Billionaire Tax: “I believe it’s a patriotic duty to pay taxes, and I do so with pride. Our tax system favors wealthy people, and the least we can do is pay up rather than try to avoid it.” [More] Real Time Chat Analysis The October 2 morning Politics Done Right chat combined community warmth with anger over concentrated wealth, distrust of political institutions, and a contentious debate about public health. The dominant tone among substantive comments leaned progressive and action-oriented, but participants disagreed sharply about government, regulation, and vaccines. Substack carried most of the sustained discussion; the section labeled Facebook contained fewer, shorter reactions. These observations describe the supplied comments, not the views of the entire listening audience. Economic justice generated agreement—and competing explanations. [Vegan Cindy] directly supported taxing the rich, while [Erik Hz] invoked collective ownership of production. [Karen 🐜📎] connected spending priorities to everyday life by describing a nearby school district’s transportation expenses. [Margaret Kane] criticized offshoring, pharmaceutical power, and the wealth companies accumulated through inexpensive overseas labor, while also arguing that regulation inhibits innovation. The exchange revealed shared frustration with corporate influence but substantial disagreement about how government should respond. Electoral frustration mixed with determination to organize. [Do U Lie] criticized an alleged omission of Talarico from Crockett’s endorsements and speculated about her motives. [Cheryl 🦅] joined the criticism of established Democratic leadership and emphasized turnout and accountability. Those comments expressed anger within the Democratic coalition; the chat itself did not establish the endorsement claim or the motives attributed to Crockett. [Do U Lie] also challenged the host’s judgment about AI, demonstrating that the audience included direct dissent alongside support. Public health produced the strongest confrontation. [Ms.Yuse] dismissed COVID with the term “scamdemic,” prompting [Cheryl 🦅] to reject the assertion and direct attention toward public-health evidence. [Margaret Kane] questioned pharmaceutical dominance, promoted natural-health alternatives, and shared the loss of a brother in July 2020. That disclosure introduced personal grief into an already heated exchange. [Cheryl 🦅] and [Karen 🐜📎] distinguished vaccination’s protective purpose from a cure, while [Cheryl 🦅] also shared information about antibiotic stewardship. The discussion showed how bereavement and distrust of commercial healthcare can intersect with unsupported health claims. Institutional distrust did not translate uniformly into disengagement. [Darlene] expressed frustration that lobbyists exercise more power than voters. [Cheryl 🦅] responded with a call to replace entrenched officeholders and hold their successors accountable. The same commenter shared a nonpartisan poll-monitor training resource, a measles tracker, and plans for a November discussion of Katherine Stewart’s Money, Lies, and God. [Ginger] asked how to join the book club. These exchanges turned concern into concrete opportunities for participation and learning. The smaller Facebook-labeled thread added economic and historical counterpoints. [Erik Hz] attributed higher fuel expenses to reduced California refining capacity. [@Laketravisanyone] introduced a Ukraine-spending figure and defended George H. W. Bush’s wartime service. Those assertions appeared without supporting evidence in the supplied chat. Although war costs and billionaire taxation appeared in audience responses, the comments did not develop a sustained discussion of the Iran cost estimate or the California tax proposal. Overall sentiment was frustrated, concerned, and mobilized, with a durable sense of belonging. Greetings from [Darlene], [Lynette], [learnercurious1], and others softened the confrontations, while [LBW] noted listening on the radio. [Cheryl 🦅] served as a particularly active peer organizer and source-sharing participant. The clearest audience need was for evidence that connects systemic criticism to practical action—protecting public health, challenging concentrated power, and making democratic participation effective. Real Time Chat Analysis This post has bonus content for paid subscribers. Upgrade to get full access. [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: KPFT ShowsPubDate: 2026-10-02T06:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, KPFT, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., CDC, Public Health, Vaccine Access, Donald Trump, Ken Paxton, James Talarico, Texas Senate Race, 2026 Midterms, In-Person Voting, Early Voting, Voting Rights, Harris County, Iran War, Gas Prices, Household Budgets, Cost of Living, ITEP, California Billionaire Tax, Proposition 40, John O’Farrell, Wealth Tax, Tax Fairness, Economic Justice, Progressive Politics This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

  3. 3d ago

    LIVE! AI Billionaires Pass Risk; Paxton Blames Trump for Poll Slide; Why Vote in Person?

    Thank you Farmers AGAINST trump., RLM, Leilani, Ginger, CicifromCincy, and many others for tuning into my live video! * AI Billionaires Want the Profits. Working People Get the Risk: AI billionaires claim the rewards while communities shoulder the risks. A progressive case for corporate accountability, public oversight, and protection from data center costs. * Paxton blames president for his decline in the polls * Voters pivoting to in person voting Real Time Chat Analysis The October 1, 2026, 3:00 PM CT Politics Done Right chats showed an engaged audience turning political frustration into organizing, mutual encouragement, and demands for accountability. The dominant sentiment combined anger toward concentrated wealth and Trump-aligned politics with determination to vote and help others participate. Substack functioned primarily as a supportive community conversation, while the Facebook-labeled Restream feed featured more links, policy disputes, and challenges to the program’s progressive perspective. * Voting and grassroots organizing provided the strongest shared focus. [Lori] described knocking on doors for Angie Nixon and planning another canvassing outing. Her report that most independents and unaffiliated voters she encountered leaned Democratic encouraged the group, although she explicitly noted that the neighborhood was not a MAGA stronghold. [SkyBlueEyes] described helping Eileen Laubacher’s campaign against Lauren Boebert, while [Vegan Cindy] discussed weekly bridge demonstrations and signs promoting participation. [Cheryl 🦅] reminded viewers to check their registration. In the Restream feed, [@patrickmagner3758] urged early voting, and [@charlenef.9055] emphasized voting early or by mail and refusing intimidation. The conversation supported participation through multiple methods; it did not establish a collective pivot away from mail voting. * AI discussion centered on corporate power, public costs, and distrust of billionaire mythology. [Leilani] raised concerns about water and the public investment behind private technology fortunes. [SkyBlueEyes] and [RLM] sharply rejected the idea that technology executives alone deserve credit for innovation. [@charlenef.9055] emphasized human inputs, flawed information, and shortcomings that emerge when companies release products to the public. [Paul Fleming] supplied posts alleging problems involving AI political spending, taxation, regulation, and financial conflicts. [@Laketravisanyone] challenged the discussion by asking whether it amounted to an AI scare and whether profits could finance research. The prevailing sentiment demanded accountability, with some disagreement over how to interpret corporate incentives and technological risk. * The farmer’s participation drew empathy and interest in rural political change. Comments surrounding [Farmers AGAINST trump.], who identified herself as Ann, prompted concern about farming conditions, family livelihoods, immigration enforcement, and rural discontent. [Lynette], [SkyBlueEyes], and [Leilani] offered encouragement and welcomed the possibility that neighbors might consider different political choices. [Farmers AGAINST trump.] also described anger among oil-field workers. These exchanges suggested an audience eager to connect progressive economic arguments with rural experiences. Because the attachment contains chat reactions rather than a complete call transcript, it does not establish every detail of the caller’s account. * The Restream discussion contained sharper political disagreement. [Erik Hz] introduced property-tax complaints, criticism of the Travis County district attorney, and challenges to Talarico’s political positioning and financial support, ending with the assertion that both parties lie. [@Laketravisanyone] mixed encouragement to vote with dismissive or challenging responses. Meanwhile, [@AgolfTwittler] criticized authoritarian politics and alleged connections between Paxton’s donors and policy positions; [@patrickmagner3758] criticized Texas MAGA leadership. [e2247] and [Paul Fleming] served as frequent information suppliers, while [May Wood] questioned the implications of shared stories. These posts reveal commenters’ concerns and viewpoints; their linked allegations are not independently verified by the chat itself. * Community warmth and humor sustained engagement. [Lynette] welcomed arrivals, celebrated volunteers, encouraged organizing, and promoted the next book-club selection. [SkyBlueEyes] explicitly described friendships formed without meeting in person. Jokes about AI preparing dinner, family updates, and concern for absent regulars softened an otherwise intense discussion. [Tom Czarnik] contributed an extended political song parody and later praised its delivery. [Leilani] celebrated poetry and creativity. These moments showed that the audience values fellowship and cultural expression alongside political analysis. Overall, the chats conveyed anger without resignation, anxiety accompanied by action, and strong affection for the program’s community. The clearest audience response favored practical organizing and a politics that puts working people ahead of wealthy interests. This is a qualitative assessment of participating commenters, not a representative measure of all viewers; frequent contributors shaped much of the visible conversation. Real Time Chat Analysis This post has bonus content for paid subscribers. Upgrade to get full access. [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: Coffee Party ShowsPubDate: 2026-10-01T15:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, AI billionaires, artificial intelligence, corporate accountability, public oversight, data centers, electricity costs, ratepayer protection, working families, economic justice, Ken Paxton, Donald Trump, James Talarico, Texas Senate race, Texas politics, 2026 midterm elections, in-person voting, early voting, voter registration, voting rights, democracy, progressive politics This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

  4. 3d ago

    LIVE! Houston & ICE With Neil Aquino; AI Cash Fight; Trump-Rubio Target Brazil as Lula Brings Job Gains

    Thank you Tamar Kranick, Gilda Johnson, Adam W., Kat, and many others for tuning into my live video! * Neil Aquino, Houston Democracy Project founder, visits to discuss local and national politics: He will discuss - Model cities grant update—not long—No Kings, Chris Brown at council saying he merits $127,000 job for 15 hours a week, guy shot by ICE in Austin charged. * ‘Stand With the People’: Progressive Caucus Leader Calls on All Democrats to Reject AI Billionaire Cash: Rep. Greg Casar said progressives’ effort to make a leading artificial intelligence super PAC “as toxic as AIPAC” is having an impact. [More] * This Trump-Rubio Regime Change Operation in Brazil Must Be Thwarted: Trump’s intervention in Brazilian elections undermines a basic and generally cherished right to self-determination, as well as the right to democracy itself. It is even clearly illegal under the Charter of the Organization of American States, to which the US is a signatory. [More] * Ahead of High-Stakes Election, Analysis Details Economic Gains of Brazil Under Lula: “The past almost four years have seen Brazil accomplish a great deal in terms of bringing people out of poverty, creating jobs, curbing hunger, and raising standards of living.” [More] Real Time Chat Analysis The October 1, 2026, 6:00 AM CT Politics Done Right broadcast on KPFT generated a discussion dominated by concern about ICE, protest rights, police accountability, and surveillance. Participants expressed anger toward institutions they viewed as intimidating residents and protecting powerful actors. That political frustration coexisted with warm greetings, humor, and personal encouragement. Neil Aquino’s local reporting prompted particularly strong engagement by connecting broader concerns about authoritarianism to specific community experiences. The supplied “Facebook Chat” section appears to contain a combined streaming feed: one participant explicitly mentioned watching on YouTube. The analysis therefore treats it as the second chat feed rather than attributing every entry to Facebook. * ICE and protest policing generated the strongest anger. [John Cotter] warned that authorities could use loitering provisions to arrest protesters and undermine First Amendment protections. [Karen 🐜📎] called for abolishing ICE and described the conduct under discussion as intimidation. [learnercurious1] contrasted immigration-enforcement spending with unmet needs for healthcare, welfare, and childcare. These comments reflected a shared concern that government increasingly directs resources toward coercion while neglecting human needs. * Surveillance became a central accountability issue. [John A] speculated that authorities used Flock cameras to identify the person discussed during the program, then called for the example to receive wider attention. [Tamar Kranick] argued that local authorities use the technology to hurt people rather than deliver justice. [Lynette] advocated regulating its use, while [John Cotter] said opposition to the cameras would shape his hypothetical council campaign. The comments showed substantial distrust of surveillance systems, although the chat itself did not establish whether Flock cameras played a role in the arrest. * The discussion of Misael Ramos’s arrest made the stakes concrete. [John Cotter] supplied details about the encounter and shared an interview with Ramos. [John A] thanked Neil for the council-meeting story. [Lynette] welcomed neighbors’ reported actions in filming the arrest and caring for the person’s dog. Participants valued community witnesses and mutual assistance as practical protections against potential official abuse. Their responses suggest that specific local stories made the program’s democracy discussion especially compelling. * The second feed contained more disagreement and sharper exchanges. [Erik Hz] challenged the program to apply comparable scrutiny to an alleged paid-intern arrangement under Turner. [@Laketravisanyone] repeatedly asked whether the person blocked traffic and emphasized opposition to violence and crime. [@GeneticAssassin] redirected attention toward shootings of civilians, January 6, and what the commenter viewed as selective enforcement. That exchange exposed a tension between judging protesters’ conduct and examining the proportionality and consistency of state power. [@GeneticAssassin] also posted sweeping psychological characterizations of Trump supporters; those statements express the commenter’s hostility and interpretation, not established clinical findings. * Community warmth remained strong despite the political intensity. [Lynette] greeted numerous participants, while [Vegan Cindy] and [learnercurious1] offered personal attention and encouragement. [John Cotter] contributed humor. [John A], who identified himself as John Anschutz, eventually reached Substack after [@JohnAnschutz] reported difficulty locating the live broadcast. That sequence highlights a small access problem within an otherwise engaged, connected audience. Overall sentiment: The substantive discussion leaned strongly progressive, with anger, alarm, and distrust directed toward immigration enforcement, surveillance, and perceived unequal accountability. Participants generally supported the program’s scrutiny of power, although several questioned its framing or sought additional context. Interpersonal sentiment remained welcoming and supportive. The supplied comments concentrated overwhelmingly on local policing and civil liberties; they offered little substantive reaction to the planned Brazil and AI campaign-finance topics. Automated notices, join notifications, and an apparent promotional spam message do not provide meaningful sentiment evidence. Within that scope, the chat showed an audience eager for concrete reporting, public documentation, and collective action to defend democratic rights. Real Time Chat Analysis This post has bonus content for paid subscribers. Upgrade to get full access. [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: KPFT ShowsPubDate: 2026-10-01T06:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, KPFT, Neil Aquino, Houston Democracy Project, Houston politics, Model Cities grant, No Kings, Chris Brown, Chris Hollins, John Whitmire, government accountability, ICE, Austin ICE shooting, Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, immigrant rights, Greg Casar, Congressional Progressive Caucus, artificial intelligence, AI regulation, AI billionaires, campaign finance, Leading the Future, Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, Brazil, Lula, Brazilian elections, national sovereignty, economic justice, poverty reduction, workers rights, democracy This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

  5. 4d ago

    LIVE! Billionaire Myth; Karl Rove Hits Paxton, Talarico Rises; Immigrants Cut Debt; Christian Nation Myth

    Thank you Elwyn Hudson, RLM, Cheryl 🦅, RuleofLawRules, EG, and many others for tuning into my live video! * No billionaire has earned their wealth: At some time Americans are going to have to drop their indoctrination and start voting their own interests with candidates and policies. * Blue Tsunami? Karl Rove Slams Paxton as Talarico Turns Up the Debate Pressure: Karl Rove unloads on Ken Paxton as Republicans fear a blue wave. Talarico demands a debate, and Democrats must turn GOP vulnerability into voter turnout. [More] * It turns out that without immigrants our debt and deficits would be much larger. [More] * Former evangelical points out the reality that America is not a Christian nation. [More] Real Time Chat Analysis September 30, 2026 | 3:00 PM CT Politics Done Right The chats reflected an engaged, predominantly progressive audience that combined anger over concentrated wealth and authoritarian politics with enthusiasm for collective action. Participants strongly supported the program’s economic critique and defense of church–state separation. Warm greetings, personal stories, humor, and concern for the host’s health gave the discussion a strong community atmosphere. Substack carried most of the sustained conversation; the section labeled Facebook contained shorter exchanges, several challenges, and additional policy concerns. Economic inequality generated strong agreement and substantive questions. [Chris Horton] advocated a wealth tax, defended the commons, and asked how land became private property. [EG] rejected the assumption that billionaire status proves merit and supported taxing concentrated wealth. [John Cotter] criticized the expansion of subscription payments and the conversion of everyday activities into profit centers. [Lynette] expressed exhaustion with the “grift economy,” while [Brittani] grounded the discussion in everyday hardship: enjoying life becomes difficult when work and sleep consume nearly all available time. The sentiment combined indignation with a desire to understand how ownership and economic rules distribute society’s rewards. The public-ownership discussion also produced pushback. [Lee Grant] questioned how a hole in the ground could belong to everyone, and [@carlcox6777] responded that it sat on public land. [Erik Hz] challenged the discussion with a remark about wanting everything free and later raised concerns about Harris County taxation and spending transparency. These comments introduced dissent without dominating the conversation. They also highlighted a useful explanatory task: connecting public ownership and public investment to accountability and shared benefits. Church–state separation drew especially enthusiastic responses. [Lynette] explicitly defended separation as a Christian and distinguished personal prayer from leading religious exercises as a teacher. [Elwyn Hudson] reported voting against a school-prayer measure and questioned why such a vote should be necessary. [LBW], correcting an earlier wording mistake, praised ethical behavior that does not depend on religious rewards or punishment. [Josie Esquivel] identified power as the underlying issue, while [Fat News Daily 📰] responded with emphatic approval. The thread expressed solidarity across belief systems and resistance to religious coercion. The audience welcomed Republican vulnerability but resisted rehabilitating Karl Rove. [LBW] enjoyed Talarico’s invitation to debate Paxton on Fox News and argued that Cornyn would have presented a stronger electoral challenge. However, [RLM] argued that Rove helped create the political conditions that enabled figures such as Paxton, with [Angie Decadencce✨️✨️✨️] signaling agreement. [Elwyn Hudson] suggested interviewing former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman about Rove. The prevailing response treated Rove’s criticism as politically useful while continuing to demand accountability for his own record. Electoral urgency coexisted with practical activism. [Renee] raised fears about whether winning Democrats would be seated—a concern expressed in the chat, not established by the transcript. [John Cotter] emphasized winning in 2026 and 2028, and [Lynette] stressed accountability after elections. [LBW] called for turnout and identified climate action, healthcare, and corruption accountability as essential priorities. [Jane B In NC🌼] described participating in Bridge Brigade and writing postcards, while [EG] discussed volunteers organizing expertise for human-rights work. These contributions showed participants translating anxiety into activity. AI prompted both interest and unease. [Chris Horton] supported public ownership because AI draws on public information. [Elwyn Hudson] alternated between optimism and concern about misuse, while [Bruce Pollard] described using AI to reinforce an explanation others had previously dismissed. [@paulflemingsr.5144] raised the financial demands of AI infrastructure. The discussion revealed interest in who controls AI and who benefits from it, alongside claims about its capabilities that would require separate examination. Concern for the host became a major emotional thread. [Lynette], [Brittani], [Fat News Daily 📰], [LBW], and [Evette Avery Herrod] encouraged more rest. Their persistence conveyed affection and concern about the sustainability of the work. Travel stories, music, friendly greetings, and plans to read Katherine Stewart’s Money, Lies, and God further reinforced the audience’s sense of belonging. Overall, the sentiment was supportive, economically frustrated, politically urgent, and community-minded. One isolated comment used violent rhetoric, but it did not characterize the broader discussion. Immigration generated less explicit written engagement than wealth, religion, and electoral accountability, so the transcript offers limited evidence of audience sentiment on that segment. These chats capture the views of participating commenters rather than the entire viewing audience. Real Time Chat Analysis This post has bonus content for paid subscribers. Upgrade to get full access. [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: Coffee Party ShowsPubDate: 2026-09-30T15:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, Billionaires, Unearned Wealth, Wealth Inequality, Economic Justice, Working Class, Labor Rights, Karl Rove, Ken Paxton, James Talarico, Texas Senate Race 2026, Texas Politics, Blue Wave, Midterm Elections, Political Accountability, Immigration, Immigrant Contributions, Federal Deficit, National Debt, Congressional Budget Office, Christian Nationalism, Religious Freedom, Separation of Church and State, Evangelical Christianity, Progressive Politics, Voter Turnout This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

  6. 4d ago

    LIVE! Klobuchar Busts Schmitt; Rove Rips Paxton, Talarico Pushes; Trump AI Deal & Taxpayer Ads Under Fire

    Thank you Jeanne Elbe, Marg KJ, Tamar Kranick, Campbell Welsh, Do U Lie, and many others for tuning into my live video! * Klobuchar Exposes Schmitt’s False Jack Smith Claim: Hawks, Hawkeyes and a GOP Smear: Sen. Schmitt tried to link Jack Smith to Fani Willis through an Atlanta basketball claim. Klobuchar checked the facts, exposed the flawed premise and demanded an apology. [More] * Blue Tsunami? Karl Rove Slams Paxton as Talarico Turns Up the Debate Pressure: Karl Rove unloads on Ken Paxton as Republicans fear a blue wave. Talarico demands a debate, and Democrats must turn GOP vulnerability into voter turnout. [More] * ‘As Dangerous As It Is Absurd’: Trump Ripped for ‘Self-Policing’ AI Industry Accord: “Self-regulation?” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren. “That’s a recipe for disaster.” [More] * Complaint Demands Broadcasters Stop Airing Trump’s Illegal Taxpayer-Funded Ads: “This administration’s repeated and flagrant violations of the law, including the Hatch Act, are an affront to taxpayers and our democracy.” [More] Real Time Chat Analysis The September 30 morning Politics Done Right chat combined strong concern about corporate and political accountability with a warm, supportive community atmosphere. Participants directed their sharpest criticism toward AI companies seeking to avoid responsibility and public officials making accusations without checking the facts. The dominant sentiment was politically frustrated but engaged, skeptical of concentrated power, and appreciative of the program and one another. * AI accountability generated the strongest substantive response. [Jeanne Elbe] argued that technology leaders want to shift responsibility to government. [Lynette] rejected allowing companies to escape accountability by blaming computers, while [Cheryl 🦅] accused powerful actors of shirking responsibility and emphasized enforcement. [learnercurious1] forcefully rejected the billionaires’ AI agreement. Together, these comments expressed distrust of voluntary corporate promises and support for consequences when companies cause harm. * Listeners favored political accountability and practical voting messages. [Lynette] questioned whether Rove would have supported Cornyn, suggesting skepticism about the limits of his break with Paxton. [Darlene] expressed distrust of Morning Joe but enthusiastically embraced the program’s “Vote your interest” message. [Cheryl 🦅] shared the organizing slogan “VOTE YOUR VALUES.” The exchange connected political analysis with language participants could use beyond the broadcast. * The hearing discussion prompted anger over careless accusations. In the portion corresponding to the Schmitt discussion, [Lynette] criticized a senator for failing to check his work, and [Cheryl 🦅] called for censure. [Karen 🐜📎] expressed agreement with the host. A suggestion from [Cheryl 🦅] that staff might have used AI remained speculation; the chat supplied no evidence for that explanation. * Community interaction and the book club strengthened engagement. [Lynette] repeatedly welcomed arrivals and helped sustain conversation across the broadcast. [Cheryl 🦅] promoted Katherine Stewart’s Money, Lies, and God, supplied purchasing links, and discussed a November gathering before Thanksgiving. [John A] reported ordering the book. Greetings, humor, and closing thanks showed that participants value the program as both a political discussion and an ongoing community. * A developing aviation story briefly redirected attention. [Do U Lie] posted alarming claims about a Dubai–Tel Aviv flight, prompting concern from [Karen 🐜📎] and responses from [Cheryl 🦅], who shared a news link. The discussion conveyed anxiety and urgency. The participants’ detailed claims and characterization of the incident should remain attributed to them; this chat analysis does not independently establish those claims. Platform comparison and sentiment: Substack carried most of the substantive discussion and nearly all the sustained social interaction. The Facebook-labeled feed was shorter and more question-driven. [@Laketravisanyone] asked about Texas diesel relief and AI doomsday messaging, then offered a speeding-and-littering analogy that appeared to question whether voluntary compliance works. [@lisablair8762], [@TheDeepStatePodcast], and [@reyesnunez3656] contributed friendly greetings. An apparent promotional spam message added no meaningful audience sentiment. The supplied comments showed little direct disagreement among participants. Criticism targeted political and corporate conduct, while interpersonal exchanges remained welcoming. The taxpayer-funded advertising topic drew little explicit discussion in this excerpt, so the record supports a clearer assessment of reactions to AI accountability and political fact-checking than to that segment. Overall, the conversation reflected shared frustration coupled with continued participation. Listeners welcomed firm challenges to powerful interests, exchanged usable political messages, and took concrete steps toward further discussion through the book club. The chat’s strongest signal was a demand for accountability supported by a durable sense of community. Real Time Chat Analysis This post has bonus content for paid subscribers. Upgrade to get full access. [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: KPFT ShowsPubDate: 2026-09-30T06:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, KPFT 90.1 FM, Egberto Willies, Amy Klobuchar, Eric Schmitt, Jack Smith, Fani Willis, Hawks Hawkeyes, Karl Rove, Ken Paxton, James Talarico, Texas Senate race 2026, blue wave, Fox News debate, Donald Trump, AI self regulation, AI accountability, Big Tech, Elizabeth Warren, taxpayer-funded Trump ads, Public Citizen, Hatch Act, political propaganda, progressive politics This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

  7. 5d ago

    LIVE! Klobuchar Busts Schmitt; Trump’s Iran War & AI Power; Bernie’s Billionaire Tax; Clean Energy Surges

    Thank you Matthew Braunginn, Elwyn Hudson, Gretchen Theodorakis, RLM, Cheryl 🦅, and many others for tuning into my live video! * Klobuchar Exposes Schmitt’s False Jack Smith Claim: Hawks, Hawkeyes and a GOP Smear: Sen. Schmitt tried to link Jack Smith to Fani Willis through an Atlanta basketball claim. Klobuchar checked the facts, exposed the flawed premise and demanded an apology. [More] * Jenna Flanagan We Decide Panel: Trump’s Iran War - AI Power Grab: Who Pays for Unaccountable Power?: Jenna Flanagan’s WBAI panel tackles Trump’s Iran strategy, OpenAI’s Australian government breach, and the danger of letting powerful corporations shape AI oversight. [More] * Bernie Sanders Going Back to California to Rally for Billionaire Tax Ballot Measure: The democratic socialist senator said he’s returning to the Golden State “to demand that billionaires finally pay their fair share and help elect strong progressives to Congress.” [More] * Despite Trump’s War on Clean Energy, Renewables Have Added 34 Times More Capacity Than Fossil Fuels and Nuclear: “Clearly, the White House has bet on the wrong horse.” [More] [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: Coffee Party ShowsPubDate: 2026-09-29T15:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, Amy Klobuchar, Eric Schmitt, Jack Smith, Fani Willis, Iowa Hawkeyes, Republican misinformation, GOP smear, Jenna Flanagan, WBAI, We Decide, Donald Trump, Iran war, diplomacy, artificial intelligence, OpenAI, Australia AI breach, AI accountability, regulatory capture, corporate power, Bernie Sanders, California, Proposition 40, billionaire tax, wealth inequality, tax the rich, healthcare, education, renewable energy, clean energy, solar power, wind power, battery storage, fossil fuels, oligarchy, progressive politics This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

  8. 5d ago

    LIVE! Who Pays? Trump’s Iran War, AI Power and Liability, Capitalism’s Fascism Crisis, and Fuel Rule Cuts

    Thank you Cheryl 🦅, EG, Marg KJ, Greg Owens, Gilda Johnson, and many others for tuning into my live video! * Jenna Flanagan We Decide Panel: Trump’s Iran War - AI Power Grab: Who Pays for Unaccountable Power?: Jenna Flanagan’s WBAI panel tackles Trump’s Iran strategy, OpenAI’s Australian government breach, and the danger of letting powerful corporations shape AI oversight. [More] * If the AI Executives Are Driving Drunk, We Should Nail Them for It: Remember, these industry leaders are doing what they do for money—and lots of it. They are choosing to endanger the property and lives of others for personal profit. If they mess up, they should be forced to pay a very high price. [More] * Western Capitalist Societies Have Rolled Out the Red Carpet for Fascism: Sadly, it seems that humanity never learns lessons from its dark past. [More] * Consumers Will Pay the Price’: Fury as Trump Pushes Through Rule Change to Make Vehicles Less Efficient, More Polluting: “Oil companies will get a windfall from gutting the fuel economy standards, but the rest of us are going to be handing over more of our hard-earned paychecks to fill up the tank,” said one environmental lawyer. [More] Real Time Chat Analysis The September 29 morning chat for Politics Done Right on KPFT 90.1 FM combined political alarm with a strong sense of community. Participants expressed anger about propaganda, concern about surveillance and corporate power, and frustration with money’s influence on elections. Their exchanges also showed affection, intellectual curiosity, and determination to participate politically. Substack carried nearly all the substantive discussion; the supplied Facebook chat contained greetings and automated messages. * Propaganda, division, and political intimidation drove significant concern. [EG] argued that fear-inducing buzzwords substitute for understanding and divide families. [Lynette] described this approach as “the boogeyman theory.” [Vegan Cindy] reported an alleged social-media statement endorsing violence against Democratic officials in New Hampshire, prompting shock from [Lynette] and concern about democratic deterioration from [LadyHistorian]. These exchanges conveyed anger and anxiety about the normalization of political hostility. The allegation remains a participant’s report, rather than an independently established finding of this analysis. * AI generated engagement and differences in emphasis. [EG] praised Jenna Flanagan’s question and introduced “manufactured exigency” and “anthropomorphism” as ways to understand the discussion. [LadyHistorian] emphasized reports of deceptive AI behavior and invoked science fiction as a warning. [Lynette] interpreted the host’s argument as locating responsibility in programming and permitted actions, while [Cheryl 🦅] recommended a Jaron Lanier interview for another perspective. Participants shared concern about AI, but differed over how to describe its behavior and explain its risks. The exchange remained exploratory rather than hostile. * Surveillance prompted the clearest demands for concrete safeguards. [John A] said a camera map omitted many cameras in the local area and mentioned an upcoming city council presentation about Flock cameras. [Margaret] called for public consent, narrow data-sharing rules, meaningful audits, and consequences for misuse. [Cheryl 🦅] shared a crowdsourced mapping resource and corrected its address, while [Lynette] questioned collecting data simply because collection is possible. The sentiment combined distrust with practical civic engagement: participants sought information and avenues for public oversight. * Religion, prejudice, and campaign advertising connected the discussion to democratic participation. [Cheryl 🦅] criticized religious zealotry in government, and [Vegan Cindy] called for removing money and religion from politics. [EG] challenged propaganda that erases positive aspects of Muslim communities. [Lynette] recalled a family member’s fear that John Kennedy’s Catholicism would place the country under papal control, illustrating how religious suspicion travels across generations. Meanwhile, [Karen 🐜📎] and [Vegan Cindy] compared political ads on Roku and questioned targeting and campaign spending. Their observations reflected frustration with manipulation and a desire to understand how political messaging reaches audiences. * Mutual care and voting reminders provided a hopeful counterweight. [Lynette] repeatedly welcomed arrivals and encouraged voting, while [Cheryl 🦅] urged participants to check registration and make a voting plan. [Vegan Cindy] asked about [Lynette]’s health and celebrated a reassuring update. These exchanges showed that the chat functions as a supportive community alongside its political discussion. In the Facebook section, [@lisablair8762] and [@jackiecampise9392] offered friendly greetings, but their brief messages provide insufficient evidence for broader political sentiment. Overall sentiment: The substantive conversation leaned strongly progressive, skeptical of concentrated power, and worried about democratic erosion. Participants directed their strongest negative emotions toward intimidation, prejudice, surveillance, and political manipulation—not toward one another. Warmth and practical action tempered that alarm. This qualitative assessment describes the supplied commenters; it does not establish the views of the entire listening audience. Real Time Chat Analysis This post has bonus content for paid subscribers. Upgrade to get full access. [WP-ROUTING]Site: PoliticsDoneRight.comCategory: KPFT ShowsPubDate: 2026-09-29T06:00:00Tags: Politics Done Right, KPFT, Jenna Flanagan, We Decide, WBAI, Trump Iran war, Iran, AI accountability, AI executive liability, OpenAI Australia breach, AI regulation, regulatory capture, corporate power, capitalism and fascism, authoritarianism, democracy, Trump fuel economy rollback, CAFE standards, gas prices, Big Oil, vehicle pollution, climate justice, Dean Baker, progressive politics This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit egberto.substack.com/subscribe

See All (772)

Ratings & Reviews

4.5
out of 5
8 Ratings

About

Live versions of my Politics Done Right media/radio show. Included are “Egberto Off The Record” Substack lives with other Substackers. We also include some interviews from the media/radio show with politicians, activists, and engaged citizens. And of course, you get some of my Off-The-Record commentary. egberto.substack.com

Information

  • Creator
    Fact-Based Political News & Opinion
  • Years Active
    2020 - 2026
  • Episodes
    772
  • Rating
    Explicit
  • Copyright
    © Egberto Willies
  • Show Website
    Egberto Off The Record