A new CA initiative which proposes tougher penalties on crime made the 2020 ballot – but how do residents and lawmakers feel about the stricter measures? We discuss. We also debate the possibility of federal regulations for driverless cars; review the latest movie releases on FilmWeek; and more.
What to make of Justice Dept. announcement of indictment of 12 Russian military officers for conspiring to interfere in 2016 election
The Justice Department announced charges Friday against 12 Russian intelligence officers for hacking offenses during the 2016 presidential election.
The indictments were announced Friday by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as part of the ongoing special counsel probe into potential coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia.The Russians are accused of hacking into the computer networks of the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, and then releasing stolen emails on the internet in the months before the election.
"The internet allows foreign adversaries to attack Americans in new and unexpected ways," Rosenstein said. "Free and fair elections are hard-fought and contentious and there will always be adversaries who work to exacerbate domestic differences and try to confuse, divide and conquer us."
Before Friday, 20 people and three companies had been charged in the Mueller investigation. That includes four former Trump campaign and White House aides and 13 Russians accused of participating in a hidden but powerful social media campaign to sway American public opinion in the 2016 election. Rosenstein, who said he had briefed President Donald Trump on the indictment, said there was no allegation that the hacking altered any vote count or that any Americans were knowingly in communication with any of the Russian officers.
With files from the Associated Press.
Guest:
Shane Harris, national security reporter for the Washington Post; he tweets
House to vote on doomed bill to abolish ICE. What would abolishing the agency actually look like?
Liberal Democrats have unveiled dead-on-arrival legislation aimed at abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
GOP leaders moved toward scheduling a vote on the measure in hopes of embarrassing and dividing Democrats. In turn, the Democrats who drafted the bill said that they will vote against it.
For liberal Democratic activists, the agency has become a symbol of President Donald Trump's aggressive enforcement of immigration laws, and abolishing it has morphed into a campaign rallying cry.
What does this mean as a political move for the Democrats? What do they hope to gain from the drafting of this legislation? And what would abolishing ICE look like, practically speaking?
With files from the Associated Press.
Guests:
Raul Reyes, immigration attorney, political analyst and contributor to a number of news outlets including CNN and NBCNews.com, where he writes on issues affecting the Latino community; he tweets
Luis Alvarado, Republican political consultant and analyst for CNN International and Telemundo; he’s a former campaign staffer for Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush and was the Los Angeles Regional Chairman for the 2008 McCain/Palin presidential campaign; he tweets
CA initiative to get tougher on crime and increase DNA collection lands 2020 ballot
While the “Keep California Safe” initiative failed to secure a spot on the 2018 November ballot, it did reach enough signatures for voters to see it in 2020.
Officially the “Reducing Crime and Keeping California Safe Act of 2018,” key changes to criminal penalties could include increasing misdemeanor thefts from between $250 to $950 to felonies, as well as expanding the list of crimes that would fall under the category of “violent felonies.”
If passed, the measure would also allow DNA collection for lower crimes such as drug and theft, which were previously excluded. DNA collection has especially gained more media attention after Sacramento investigators were able to track down the suspected “Golden State Killer” using public genealogical sites.
Leading the ballot measure is Assemblyman Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove) along with the group Crime Victims United of California.
But opponents say the measure doesn’t resonate with Californians, pointing to the passages of Prop 47 in 2014 and Prop 57 in 2016 as evidence for widespread support of progressive criminal justice reform.
So what do the outpour of signatures for 2020 mean? Are they a result of wanting to rollback on the recent overhaul of tougher criminal penalties due to unintended consequences? We hear from both sides of the argument.
Guests:
Jim Cooper, Democratic California State Assemblymember representing District 9, which includes Sacramento and San Joaquin County communities of Elk Grove, Lodi and Galt; he is a former captain at the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department where he worked on a number of sex trafficking cases; he tweets
Lenore Anderson, executive director of Californians for Safety and Justice and the co-author of Propositions 47 and 57; she tweets
Should driverless cars be exempt from state safety regulations?
As driverless car technology advances, one of the emerging questions is whether automakers should be beholden to a patchwork of local safety regulations which might inhibit the development of their tech.
The alternative would be a national regulatory framework that preempts state standards for design and performance of driverless cars, while establishing some rudimentary safety requirements. That’s what’s being pushed in the American Vision for Safer Transportation Through Advancement of Revolutionary Technologies, or the AV START Act. This senate bill is being stalled by a handful of senators, including Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California), who say they’re concerned with the overriding of state and local regulations and what that would mean for public safety.
Proponents of the bill say that it would help advance autonomous vehicles and ensure that the U.S. is at the forefront of this technology.
We debate the bill and its effects.
Guests:
Jack Gillis, executive director of the Consumer Federation of America, an advocacy organization of over 250 local, state and national consumer protection groups; he is the author of “The Car Book 2018” (Gillis Pub Group, 2018)
Marc Scribner, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian minded think-tank that focuses on regulatory issues
FilmWeek: ‘Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation,’ ‘Skyscraper,’ ‘Eighth Grade’ and more
Larry Mantle and KPCC film critics Claudia Puig, Wade Major and Charles Solomon review this weekend’s new movie releases.
"Skyscraper" in wide release
"Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation" in wide release
"Eighth Grade" at ArcLight Hollywood & The Landmark Theatre
Listen to The Frame's interview with filmmaker Bo Burnham here.
"Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far on Foot" at ArcLight Hollywood & The Landmark Theatre
"Siberia" at AMC Universal Citywalk
"Gauguin: Voyage to Tahiti" at Laemmle's Royal Theatre, Laemmle's Playhouse & Laemmle's Town Center
"Custody" at Laemmle's Monica Film Center & Laemmle's Playhouse
"Ryuichi Sakamoto: Coda" at Laemmle's Music Hall
"A Second Chance" at Arena Cinelounge Hollywood
"The Night Eats the World" at Laemmle's Music Hall
"Shock and Awe" at AMC Universal Citywalk, AMC Sunset, AMC Orange, AMC Rolling Hills & AMC Thousand Oaks
"Les Parents Terribles" at Laemmle's Royal Theatre
CRITICS' HITS
Claudia: "Eighth Grade" & "Custody"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8lFgF_IjPw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaSst0b_0i8
Wade: "A Second Chance" & "The Night Eats the World"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDQ7mX3SA80
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpFtHtdPgQY
Charles: "Ryuichi Sakamoto: Coda"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl-pKw5n0mI
MIXED FEELINGS
Claudia: "Skyscraper"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9QePUT-Yt8
Wade: "Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far on Foot"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BwxeOzSx8A
Charles: "Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku52zNnft8k
MISSES
Claudia: "Gauguin: Voyage to Tahiti"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygOpHblxj08&t=2s
Wade: "Shock and Awe"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVdHJuVydb4
Charles: "Siberia"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRHe5J63ClM
Guests:
Claudia Puig, film critic for KPCC and president of the Los Angeles Film Critics Association; she tweets
Wade Major, film critic for KPCC and CineGods.com
Charles Solomon, film critic for KPCC, Animation Scoop and Animation Magazine
$13 billion in spending, 82 original films, and no more online reviews: Forecasting Netflix’s future by the numbers
Netflix’s revolution will be televised.
From its beginnings as a DVD rental service, the company has now grown into a streaming giant. Yesterday, Netflix earned 112 Emmy nominations, ending HBO’s 17-year streak as the leading TV network. The company’s progress, however, doesn’t end there. Netflix plans to spend up to $13 billion on original programming this year and intends on releasing 82 original films. That puts Netflix’s allocated investment on films ahead of any other studio.
In fact, Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos said the company aims to release more original movies than Disney, Warner Bros., and Universal Pictures put together. With a long-term budget for movies and TV shows totaling $17 billion, a future dominated by Netflix seems likely. As Netflix adds more original content, they’ll also be removing customer reviews starting August of this year.
With Netflix’s growing library, will consumers be more inclined to stay home? And what does that mean for the future of television and movies? We discuss what lies ahead with KPCC critics Wade Major, Claudia Puig and Charles Solomon.
Guests:
Claudia Puig, film critic for KPCC and president of the Los Angeles Film Critics Association; she tweets
Wade Major, film critic for KPCC and CineGods.com
Charles Solomon, film critic for KPCC, Animation Scoop and Animation Magazine