Chas Licciardello

Every year I go to the Melbourne Comedy Festival, and every year I see Andrew Portelli, and every year he is excellent, and every year he isn’t attracting anything like the crowds he should be. Quite frankly, it’s bullshit. So GO SEE HIM!!! comedyfestival.com.au/browse-shows/a…

@HelpRodger You know what, Prof? We are 100% on the same page here! Go team! 🙌

The role of these individuals should be clarified as advisory rather than authoritative. They advise or make recommendations which can be scrutinized, accepted, or rejected by elected officials. The constitutional authority remains with Congress, but this doesn't preclude consulting with experts or external advisors, which has been a practice in governance for centuries. While bureaucrats are indeed often highly qualified, they operate within a system that can be slow and bureaucratic. Experts from outside might offer fresh perspectives or solutions that bypass traditional red tape. Also, pointing out that many bureaucrats are unelected themselves, their roles are often appointed based on merit or political alignment, not democratic election.Historical examples can be cited where unelected advisors or commissions have significantly contributed to public policy or technological advancement (like the Manhattan Project or various advisory panels in government). These weren't democratically elected but were vital to national interests. The concern over unelected influence can be addressed by ensuring there's transparency in their operations and decisions. If these experts' work is open to public scrutiny, and their recommendations are debated in elected forums like Congress, then the democratic process isn't bypassed but enhanced by informed decision-making. Innovation and Progress: In fields like technology and space (particularly relevant if discussing Musk's ventures), rapid innovation often requires non-traditional approaches. The argument here is whether the democratic process, with its checks and balances, should sometimes adapt to allow for quicker, possibly more effective solutions in certain areas, without undermining the overall democratic structure. While the democratic principle of elected governance is fundamental, the integration of expert advice, particularly in complex or fast-evolving fields, can complement rather than contradict democratic processes, as long as there's accountability and clear boundaries of influence. Planet America.

@HelpRodger @elonmusk They could be the 40 smartest people on earth, but they’re still unelected. You think the bureaucrats they’re second-guessing don’t also contain brilliant, super-qualified individuals? Neither the bureaucrats nor DOGE have any constitutional authority. But Congress does.

Buddies doesn't adequately describe the team @elonmusk has put together. Let me tell you a little about them: - degrees from Stanford, UC Berkeley, & MIT - work experience at Google, Tesla, SpaceX, and OpenAI - Several hold patents in critical areas such as blockchain consensus mechanisms, AI-driven fraud detection, and scalable payment networks - Others pioneered open-source frameworks used by developers worldwide or built award-winning solutions in decentralized finance (DeFi) and robotics - One member decoded ancient texts using machine learning, earning recognition in top scientific journals - One designed a blockchain-based remittance system that transformed financial access in underserved regions - Their work has been celebrated at premier tech conferences, in academic publications, and through accolades like hackathon victories and fellowships reserved for visionary innovators Their youth is an asset: it brings fresh perspectives, fluency in emerging technologies, and the agility to iterate rapidly in a fast-evolving space. Far from being “unqualified,” their track records of solving complex problems, often ahead of industry curves, position them among the nation’s brightest minds—proof that capability is defined not by age, but by vision, execution, and impact.

@HelpRodger I agree with almost all of that, Prof. But what is DOGE other than another unelected bureaucracy? It should be the elected House and Senate making cuts, not random anonymous Musk-buddies. If DOGE put together a detailed list of potential cuts for Congress to act on,I’d love that!

If only planet America audience would get to listen to this video unedited by @chaslicc @JohnBarronUSA .

@Unblackened Australian companies follow Australian laws regardless of ownership. Also I’d need to see details, but on the surface the s230 reform sounds like a pretty clear cut infringement of the 1st Amendment. Private companies have the right to censor and can’t be punished for it.

This is magnificent - Trump is going to dismantle the Censorship Industrial Complex, sack everyone involved, modify section 230 to prevent Big Tech censorship and pass a Digital Bill of Rights. 🍾🍾🍾🍾🍾🍾🍾🍾 As someone that was censored by Facebook, with my entire account wiped, without them giving a single example of what they alleged was "misinformation" and without any right to appeal - THIS IS MUSIC TO MY EARS When you understand the implications, and how free speech was being subverted by faceless bureaucrats, and the dark totalitarian path we were headed - Trump’s victory has been a major turning point in world history. And yet Albanese wants to take Australia in the opposite direction. Just imagine what would happen if using Albanese’s new laws Australia tried to impose a fine upon X Corp for allowing free speech (legal in the USA, but illegal in Australia) and that fine was based upon 5% of X Corp‘s US turnover ? Do you think Trump would allow American companies to be financially damaged by anti-free speech tin-pot dictators like Albanese ? Albanese must abandoned his Misinformation & Disinformation Bill - they are now a threat to Australia’s economy and national security.

@mana_kailani Hard to predict so early in the week, Kailani. No shortage of material this week, that’s for sure!

Are we going to see this on #PlanetAmerica? What do you think @chaslicc & @JohnBarronUSA ?

@sam1pm Shit you may be right, sam! I can’t believe I didn’t see that! That’s as good a guess as any - you’ve convinced me!

@chaslicc, I just think Joe missed the word From. From his supporters.

@AG6LE We can agree to disagree. But I don’t think there was any possessive there. I do however think he was only referring to hinchcliffe.

.@chaslicc It is just a messy run-on sentence, but it is the hate that is the garbage, belonging to the supporters - the supporters' garbage. It is a plural possessive. @JohnBarronUSA Perhaps: "The grey tie is one of the researchers'." if John was lent it.

@JennyEjlak Yeah that’s fair. I did have a section that nailed their hypocrisy but I must admit we ran out of time and had to move on. That is my bad. I will definitely be going into that on PEP.

@ProjectLincoln @chaslicc @JohnBarronUSA can’t help noticing you spent several minutes on tonight’s episode dissecting Biden’s SINGLE use of the word “garbage” but neglected to mention Trump’s FREQUENT use of the term.

Take a shot every time Trump calls Americans who don't support him “garbage."

@HelpRodger Yup, I think we should ban all jokes. And appoint Mike Sperrazza to be our new Comedy Police. He can wear a Chief Wiggum costume.

Any comments @chaslicc @JohnBarronUSA? #planetamerica

@HelpRodger I don’t want to shatter your world, Prof. so I’ll try to be gentle. That was a cartoon. It was humorous, not an accurate representation of reality. I hope you were sitting down when you read this.

According to @chaslicc @JohnBarronUSA,this is Kamala improving. 😅 #planetamerica

@NorelleFeehan I literally 1 minute before that segment emphasised what is a genuine concern - Trump openly threatening protesters with military action. But you’re upset that I didn’t make a big deal out of him acting a bit odd in a rally? I think you and I have different priorities, Norelle!

Okay, sadly, another @abcnews program switched off. #planetamerica How sad to see @chaslicc has drunk the coolaid. Poor John Bannon looked a little pissed off as Chas ranting in defence of the orange dude #sad Chas. @ABCTV

@AndrewPHill8 Haha, I promise I will continue to see 3 hrs as the unofficial duration - which means I’ll probably keep going over but not by too much.

@chaslicc everytime you mention your lack of 3 hour restriction for your podcast it scares the crap out of me like you’re issuing a serious threat. I’ve listened to all your podcasts including the 5 hour episode that had to be split in two. Please don’t

@HelpRodger It’s obviously bullshit. I’m not going to waste show time on it unless it becomes funny, which it is not yet. But I might go through some of the blatant red flags on PEP.

@chaslicc @JohnBarronUSA

@hingehead 2/2: And I can believe starlink doesn’t meet top standards. But because of that decision the govt are paying potentially 80 times as much for fiber that won’t be connected for years. Seems sub-optimal to me. At least use starlink till the superior option exists to replace it!

Hi @chaslicc, your comment about the Feds cancelling starlink in North Carolina (made on Planet America) intrigured me - then I found this: msnbc.com/the-reidout/re… Did you know about it? - sorry I can't keep up and would like to have some sense of what is mis or dis.

@hingehead 1/2: i don’t blame you, hinge. There is soooo much bullshit out there! To be clear, I have serious doubts about the starlink cancelling being illegal. That seems way over the top to me. The question to me is about the wisdom of the decision. It’s actually a complicated question.

@AndrewPHill8 Haha! That’s exactly what I was going for! Thanks for the reasonable criticism, Andrew. I’m liking your work!

@chaslicc I also liked how you all caps-ed TRILLIONS, I could hear your Trump voice. 😂

@chaslicc on your most recent PEP episode you claimed tariffs are effectively a tax on the people, this is completely false. How is a tariff a tax on the people if the people buy the alternative product instead of the one with the tariff on it (the expected outcome of a tariff)?

@AndrewPHill8 Also your logic is fine for a targeted tariff on one product or one small set of products which can be avoided. But his tariffs are broadly applied to all imports. It’s impossible to avoid all imports. So yes people will be paying for it. A lot.

@Unblackened Honestly I don’t think you would think so. You probably made the right decision to stop watching. Not every show is for everyone. 👍

“13,000 CROSSED THE BORDER WITH MURDER CONVICTIONS”