So you're a libertarian and you don't believe the propaganda about government awesomeness you were subjected to in fourth grade.
You want real history and economics.
Well, learn in your car from professors you can trust with Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom.
And if you join through the Liberty Classroom link at scotthorton.org, we'll make a donation to support the Scott Horton Show.
Liberty Classroom, the history and economics they didn't teach you.
Hey y'all, Scott Horton here for wallstreetwindow.com.
Mike Swanson knows his stuff.
He made a killing running his own hedge fund and always gets out of the stock market before the government-generated bubbles pop, which is, by the way, what he's doing right now, selling all his stocks and betting on gold and commodities.
Sign up at wallstreetwindow.com and get real-time updates from Mike on all his market moves.
It's hard to know how to protect your savings and earn a good return in an economy like this.
Mike Swanson can help.
Follow along on paper and see for yourself, wallstreetwindow.com.
All right, you guys, I'm Scott Horton.
This is my show, The Scott Horton Show.
Check out all the archives at scotthorton.org.
I got more than 4,000 interviews now, going back to 2003 for you there.
And follow me on Twitter, at scotthortonshow.
All right, introducing Trevor Tim.
He writes for The Guardian, and he is the Executive Director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation at pressfreedomfoundation.org.
No, you fixed that, right?
That's the old one?
I did.
It's now freedom.press.
Freedom.press.
Oh, I like that.
Freedom.press.
I need to memorize that for a second here.
Yeah.
And yeah, he's a lawyer, and he's a great writer, and he's all about protecting your civil liberties from the government, trying to always take them away.
So welcome back to the show.
How are you doing, Trevor?
Great.
Thanks for having me back.
Very happy to have you here.
And I like this article.
That's why I ran it on antiwar.com, and that's why I invited you on the show today.
The Washington Post is wrong.
And I know you're saying, yeah, but what could the subject possibly be?
I mean, we're talking about the Washington Post here.
But no, the headline goes on.
Edward Snowden should be pardoned.
Well, here, here, but we got to discuss why.
Let me start off with some, I think, stupid and ridiculous red herrings, Trevor, but they're quite common.
What about the idea that Edward Snowden, the NSA whistleblower, is really not a whistleblower, but is a traitor who leaked a bunch of military and other high-level secrets to the Chinese and the Russians, and then he just brought in Gellman and Greenwald as diplomatic cover, basically.
What do you say?
Yeah.
I mean, there's like five or six faults within that two or three sentence paragraph here.
So I guess we can start from the top.
Number one, he didn't leak any military secrets.
The government claims that he took 1.5 million documents, which is totally, totally false.
They are using that number for everything that he touched as a system administrator throughout his career.
And the real number is orders of magnitude lower than that.
What he did expose is, of course, the NSA's mass surveillance program on Americans and spying on our allies and a global mass surveillance system, unlike anything the world's ever seen.
And the government has been using these just blatantly false arguments to try to discredit him, including a House Intelligence Committee report, which was found to contain multiple lies that were easily checked, or that easily could have been checked.
And the House Intelligence Committee was basically raked over the cold for completely lying about what Edward Stone did when he worked for the NSA.
So when you hear all of these criticisms of Stone, you really have to take them with a giant grain of salt.
And the answers to all of the criticisms are very easy to find.
I'm sure there's more of them, and I'm happy to go over them as they come along.
All right, now, so yeah, let's zero in a little bit here.
He went to Hong Kong, and apparently he thought that was a good idea.
Certainly from a public relations standpoint, it was not.
He did say something, I remember at the time back in 2013, that said, well, you know, in Hong Kong, they have a strong tradition of freedom of the press, and I was hoping that maybe they would give me asylum and protect me there.
But yeah, PR, you know, they still got red on their Chinese flag over there.
And I know Hong Kong is a special issue, but not in public relations terms when it comes to smearing the guy.
And you know what, Trevor, I gotta say, man, I remember vaguely, but I'm pretty sure I remember that he did leak a little bit of something about spying on Chinese universities or something.
I forget if to Greenwald or the Post or directly, oh, it was to a Hong Kong paper, right?
And then even Greenwald said, well, he was maybe trying to ingratiate himself with his hosts a little bit.
What do you think?
Is that border on no longer whistleblowing?
Now he's, you know, basically, in a sense, using these secrets as currency, right?
Well, you know, he didn't give any secrets to the Hong Kong Post.
He talked to them in an interview and at that, you know, around that time, he had already handed off all of the secrets to Greenwald and to Gelman and to Laura Foytris.
And when he tried to escape Hong Kong, and he was traveling to South America, he was stopped at the Moscow airport because the U.S. cut off his passport.
Well, wait, wait, go back a sec.
The stories about spying on Chinese universities, etc.
He didn't actually give them any documents to back that up at all.
That was simply based on an interview, right?
That was just an interview.
I mean, that's an important point.
I mean, he's telling them a secret, but he's not proving it by actually giving them a document there.
Right.
And he was, you know, he was generally talking about the fact that the U.S. government often doesn't just spy on military installations in other countries, that it's, you know, running a much more mass surveillance somewhere.
They are vacuuming up information on all sorts of citizens who really have little or nothing to do with the Chinese government or any government.
And so his whole concern this whole time is not that, you know, the NSA conducts surveillance on militaries or on terrorists, but that they conduct surveillance on everybody else as well.
And so, you know, you can argue about whether he should have talked to the Chinese paper or not.
But, you know, the...
It's not as big a deal to me, I got to say.
I mean, really, it's not a big deal to me at all.
But even in the scheme of things, it's much less a big deal when you fill in the point that he didn't give them any documents the way he gave documents to The Post and The Guardian here.
He just told them a thing.
Right, absolutely not.
Okay, but now let me ask you this, because I actually got an argument and lost on a point here recently.
By the way, no whistleblowers ever leak to the Christian Science Monitor or else Dan Murphy will call the cops on you.
So other newspapers, you can get those leaks.
But I was arguing and he said, no, man, and I think he was right.
I double checked and he was right.
He got me on the point that Obama had canceled Snowden's passport before he got on the plane in Hong Kong.
And it's a criticism that, you know what?
Believe me, you know, Trevor, like I said, this is all hot air, but I like shooting it down anyway.
I sympathize with the guy 100%.
But the argument is, hey, he should have not gone on a plane to Russia, knowing that he'd had his passport stripped.
And that, you know, why didn't he get on a plane going east and go to South America directly there?
Instead, he had to go to Russia first to get to South America.
And that let, and believe me, I blame Obama, but that let Obama, for pretty smart PR reasons, I think, strand him in Russia, which makes him look horrible, right?
I mean, I think it was certainly a kind of cynical attempt by the Obama administration to purposely strand him there.
But the idea that his passport was canceled before he got on the plane is ridiculous.
I mean, you can't get on a plane without a passport.
And, you know, even U.S. government officials admit that his passport was canceled after he got on the plane.
There's rumor that somehow that is actually not the case.
I'm not sure where that rumor got started.
But it's been debunked at, you know, dozens of news outlets.
And it's pretty common knowledge now that his passport was canceled.
I guess I did find it somewhere.
And I thought that, I thought that his point, that Murphy's point was confirmed there.
When I saw that, I guess the idea was that he had, well, some kind of letter of transit from the Chinese, if not a passport at that point, where they let him get on anyway, or, you know, that kind of thing.
So that's an important point then.
It was not until he was at least in the air, even in Russia, that he had his passport taken away then.
Yeah, absolutely not.
And think about how ironic that is.
All the right wingers and all the Obama haters, they still pin all of this on Snowden instead of making.
Trevor, what a great criticism of Obama.
Obama left Snowden, the man with a million secrets in his brain, never mind if he brought a thumb drive or not, left him stranded in Russia.
Why is that not a major point against Obama?
Only because they rather use it on Snowden than on Obama, who actually did the stranding.
Exactly.
That's the key that I don't think anybody really understands, is that it really goes to show you how much Snowden's leaks probably didn't damage national security, despite the kind of screaming from the rooftops that these Obama administration officials make, because they apparently would rather have him stranded in Russia, which at this point seems to be a major geopolitical foe of the Obama administration.
And they're so worried that he's going to give over secrets to them, which he hasn't.
But they claim that they're worried about that.
And yet they are willing to risk all of those secrets going to Russia just to be able to say that Snowden is there and use that as an excuse to drive down his approval rating.
So it really goes to show that there was really nothing in the Snowden archives, or at least the secrets that he gave to the journalists, that was really damaging to national security.
And it's, once again, a complete exaggeration when they talk about damage.
All right.
So now, all the nonsense aside, because I think he did a great job of defending the guy, I hope I did a good job of pretending to accuse him there, because there's just this avalanche of propaganda trying to discredit the guy.
It must be a lot like what it was like to live through the demonization of the great American hero Daniel Ellsberg, who I know is on the board of directors of your press freedom group there, Trevor.
But now, so let's just get to the fact.
Here's a guy who, just like in the story, just like in his own 12-minute initial interview with Glenn Greenwald that was released back in 2013, he did this because the government and the courts later found that this was correct.
They agreed with Snowden.
The government was violating the constitutional law that allows them to exist in the first place, which forbids them from spying on you or me without a warrant, etc.
And he did this for whistleblower reasons the same as any other whistleblower, all this hype notwithstanding.
So now, let's get into the nitty-gritty of the dirt and what it was that he really did leak to Glenn Greenwald.
Man, I remember, Trevor, and you and I maybe talked about this right at the time, but I remember talking to my wife as soon as the first FISA court general warrant for every Verizon customer's records was leaked and published in The Guardian.
And I says to the wife, oh my god, because we've never seen one of those, who is giving this stuff to Glenn Greenwald?
Holy crap, DEF CON 1, red alert, eyes wide open, what's next?
This is history.
This is huge.
And it was apparent from that very first leak that this guy, boy, was he blowing the whistle all right.
So what did he teach us?
Well, that first FISA court story remains the most explosive story of the Snowden revelations, though there are many, many others that cause a huge stir and are indicative of what the NSA does to violate millions and billions of people's privacy a day.
But the fact that the NSA was collecting every single phone call record in the United States of hundreds of millions of innocent Americans.
So that's like who you call, who calls you, how long, what time of day, and sometimes the location.
It's being stored in a giant database.
The NSA can essentially go in at their whim to spy on people.
And this was not known.
The government kept this secret for six or seven years.
And there wasn't even really a law that said that they could do this.
They basically took the Patriot Act and totally reinterpreted it and morphed the words and warped to the meeting.
And all of a sudden, they were doing this in complete secrecy.
And so what I did was just told the American public.
And clearly, the American public had a big problem with it, given the poll numbers that showed that 60 or almost 70 percent of people were against it.
And, you know, the courts found that that program was actually illegal.
And the only way that they found that program was legal was because he came forward.
But there's so many other stories that came out that were really important.
You know, there was a story about how the NSA was collecting location data of Americans at one point and collecting cell phone location data of billions of people around the world.
There was the PRISM program where Google and Facebook and all the tech companies were collaborating with the government.
There was a story about, even though the tech companies were collaborating with the government, that the NSA was going behind their backs and essentially hacking into them overseas and siphoning off even more data.
So the stories, you know, it's funny to think about now, but, you know, three years ago, there was just an avalanche of information that we had never known about and that a lot of people had big problems with.
And none of this would have happened without Edward Snowden.
Yeah.
All right.
Now, geez, if I remember right from a few years ago, this organization that you used to work for with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, right?
Yeah.
At EFF, here's what you do, everybody.
You just type in NSA and EFF.
And what happens is they have a page called NSA Primary Sources.
And at least as far as I know, and I've done a lot of research on this as best I can, that is the single best repository of all the Snowden documents that have been released and of each and every story from all around the world and all the different papers that, you know, like Greenwald would partner with these different papers to write stories in Brazil or wherever.
And that's all of them.
That's everything that has been published out of the Snowden leak so far.
All you need to search is EFF NSA.
And that Primary Sources page, you could just spend all Saturday reading through that and trying to get your head around it.
And, you know, I want to go back to what you said about the location data.
As I remember, maybe falsely, as I think I remember, five years worth they keep of location data of all of us with a cell phone.
And I wonder, Trevor, if there if it's even possible for me to be hyperbolic enough about, you know, explaining, you know, trying to describe what that really means when it comes to their power of surveillance over all of our lives.
That means that they know every room I've been in and everyone else who's ever been in it.
They know every car I've ridden in and who else was in the car with me at the time and where we went.
And this is the perfect kind of data for, you know, government, basically conspiracy theory programs, right?
Algorithms and computer software that is made to guess what these relationships mean when really they have no idea.
It's not human knowledge at all.
It's just data that says I'm linked to this person and I'm linked to that person.
And, you know, God knows what that means, you know, the day they come for me and plug it all into the threat matrix or whatever it is.
There's no human knowledge here, just an avalanche of data that can be used and twisted, that can be interpreted so wrongly, even if they're trying to get it right.
And this is the kind of data they have on all of us.
Who even knows how this, you know, we talk about parallel construction where they pass on some of what they know to the DEA and they pretend that they found out a different way.
What if they just really broke out and started sharing all this NSA data with all the regular police?
You know, they say we all commit three felonies a day.
They could prosecute us all for three felonies a day.
They got everything on us.
Yeah, I mean, the location data, this is something that, you know, I'm sure some people know about, but certainly not everybody.
The fact that your cell phone is emitting a beacon 24 hours a day, which the phone companies and potentially some government could have access to, which tells you, which tells them the precise location where you go to work, where you go to school, where your home is, what you do after work, whether you are going to a bar, whether you are going to a church, whether you're going to any sort of sensitive location, they would have that information.
And, you know, the location aspect of the NSA was really fascinating at the time, because at first, you know, with the FISA court order, it didn't say anything about location, just who you called, who called you, what time of day and for how long.
But questions kept being asked about are they taking location as well, because it's the same type of order that they could use to collect that.
And, you know, they hemmed and hawed and they tried to be misleading.
They wouldn't outright deny it.
And then, of course, a couple months later, we found out, actually, yes, they did.
At one point, they were, quote unquote, testing, collecting the location data of Americans and that.
And then we also know that they were collecting all location data of hundreds of millions of people in all these other countries.
So, you know, when you think about it, you have a cell phone in your pocket that does amazing things, but it also is essentially a tracking device.
And if the government is allowed to just vacuum up that information, if they wanted to, they could tell you exactly what you were doing 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Hey, Al Scott Horton here for WallStreetWindow.com.
Mike Swanson knows his stuff.
He made a killing running his own hedge fund and always gets out of the stock market before the government generated bubbles pop, which is, by the way, what he's doing right now, selling all his stocks and betting on gold and commodities.
Sign up at WallStreetWindow.com and get real-time updates from Mike on all his market moves.
It's hard to know how to protect your savings and earn a good return in an economy like this.
Mike Swanson can help.
Follow along on paper and see for yourself.
WallStreetWindow.com.
Hey, Al Scott Horton here.
It's always safe to say that one should keep at least some of your savings in precious metals as a hedge against inflation.
And if this economy ever does heat back up and the banks start expanding credit, rising prices could make metals a very profitable bet.
Since 1977, Roberts and Roberts Brokerage, Inc. has been helping people buy and sell gold, silver, platinum, and palladium, and they do it well.
They're fast, reliable, and trusted for more than 35 years.
And they take Bitcoin.
Call Roberts and Roberts at 1-800-874-9760 or stop by rrbi.co.
And for years back in history, you don't know more about you than you know about you, really.
And here's the thing.
We already know from Gareth Porter's Gellhorn Award-winning work for Truthout.
We know from Jeremy Scahill and his co-collaborators there at The Intercept, and they even put out a book about it.
The great leak that they got from another Snowden, we don't know who, an anonymous whistleblower that leaked all these documents about the drone program, which verifies everything that Gareth was already telling us about Afghanistan, for example.
This is how Stanley McChrystal targets you for death, is who else was your cell phone near, he thinks.
And that's how he decides whether to bomb you with a drone or not, or whether to send the Delta Force to shoot you or not, if you're an Afghan.
But this is the exact same.
And of course, Jesus, I don't have all my footnotes in front of me, but I was just reading the great quote of Stanley McChrystal not long ago saying, oh yeah, you know, on these night raids, I mean, if we're even 50% accurate in the people that we're going after, we consider that a great success.
And that's the kind of the lengths that they will go based on the thinness of this kind of data posing as actual knowledge and a reason to really kill somebody.
You know, as we think that this guy's phone called this guy, and then it was in the same room with this guy, and then it called this other guy, and that's a death warrant.
Right, exactly.
The fact that they are using this type of information to make decisions literally about life and death for people in Middle Eastern countries, which obviously can lead to all sorts of mistakes, and we've seen it lead to all sorts of mistakes, is really terrifying.
And these types of decisions are only going to get worse as the technology for the government gets more and more sophisticated, and it's going to be the American people or just the world citizens who lose out.
And so, you know, I hope that people will understand that the only reason we know about this stuff is because of Edward Snowden, and that this pardon campaign is really important to kind of starting the first step in recognizing that this is not the society we want to live in.
And so I would just urge people to go to pardonsnowden.org and sign up for this petition and tell President Obama that in his last few months at office, he should definitely consider pardoning him.
Yeah, and that's so important.
And you know what, there's plenty of hundreds of thousands of millions of people in this society who agree with you and me on this subject, and, you know, not just the NSA, but about the heroism of Edward Snowden.
And so, you know, everybody really should, if they can, help participate in making this viral and getting it around.
You know, it is, it's been a couple of years, people have somewhat forgotten, he's been smeared a lot in the meantime.
And, but if people just, you know, get a little bit interested, I don't know whether it could ever really convince Obama to go against the national security state on this one.
But it still would make a hell of a good statement on the part of the American people that we side with him, who, you know, he really did sacrifice his own freedom and his own future, his own fortune, for that matter, as a Booz Allen Hamilton contractor, in order to bring us this information.
And, you know, that ain't nothing.
He absolutely, and he's facing, tell us what kind of punishment he's facing, if they ever grab him, and assuming they don't rendition him to Egypt to be tortured to death, Trevor, and they give him a trial in Virginia, would he ever see the light of day again?
Well, you know, I think that's the real issue.
And that's why a pardon in this case is so important is because, you know, first of all, he's facing decades or life in jail.
But second of all, he's facing that because of the Espionage Act, which the Obama administration has used more times in history than any other administration in history on leakers and whistleblowers, rather than on spies, which is what it's supposed to be used for.
And because it was written in World War One, just to go after spies, it means that the way it is written, that Edward Snowden wouldn't even be able to tell, if he came back here and decided, you know, I want to go on trial and I want to tell a jury my story and see what they think and let them decide.
He actually couldn't even do that.
His motive, like the fact that he wanted to inform the American public all of the benefits of his leak, all the evidence that it didn't damage national security, that would actually all be ruled inadmissible by the judge, and the jury would never hear that information.
And so he is really left without a defense.
And so, you know, as soon as he shows up for trial, it's pretty much automatic that he will be found guilty.
And because the government will just back on charge after charge, he'll end up with decades or life in prison for something that millions and millions of people think was a heroic act, and which the government was found to be engaged in illegal activities, and which they changed their behavior.
So it's just crazy to me that this system still exists, where we would punish somebody like that, but not just punish them like that, not even give them an avenue to make their own defense.
So, you know, obviously the pardon chance is still long shot with President Obama, but he is looking towards his legacy right now, you know, in the last few months.
And, you know, he himself has said to activists many, many times that, you know, sometimes he doesn't have the right position and that if enough people push him, he will get there.
So while the chances are low, I don't think they're zero.
And so the more support we can get, the better the shot we have.
Yeah.
All right.
And listen, you know, I just think this one is important.
I know there are a million different X-key scores and this, that, the other thing.
And again, I'd encourage everybody to go to just Google or any other search engine if you prefer, but search somehow for EFF NSA and you can read up on all of this stuff.
But I wanted to focus on one where, you know, when most of these were coming out, they would end up getting, you know, the mop-up exercise treatment in the New York Times the next day or a couple of days later that, well, okay, the Guardian ran a story that says that they're spying on your Facebook or whatever it is.
But here's one that was huge, that ran in the Guardian.
It was a Greenwald and I don't know if he had a co-author on this one or not, but it was a Greenwald bit in the Guardian based on documents that backed it up that said that they were literally, tell me if I got this right, Trevor, that they were literally giving the entire Daily Hall to the Israelis, every bit of it, the National Security Agency.
Yeah.
You know, it's amazing when you think back how many stories there actually were that there's so many in a bombshell that would have been bombshells in any other time, but because there were so many stories one after another that we often forget about it.
But yes, this was one in which the NSA was essentially giving its raw intelligence data to the Israelis.
Everything that they have on us, on the American people, they're sharing with a foreign government.
Right.
They weren't even redacting the names or the identities of any of the Americans in a document.
And, you know, again, this story kind of came in between two other giant stories.
So a lot of people don't remember it, but it was really disturbing to a lot of people that they're handing this information over to a foreign government.
And, you know, there still haven't been consequences from that.
Yeah, absolutely amazing.
And yeah, everybody else just looked away.
Nobody wants to talk about that, but that one was just huge.
And you know what?
You know, I have a problem with the occupation, this and that, but if you put any other government there, I mean, obviously all the cooperation with the UK is just as bad or worse, but you put any other country's name in there, it's just as bad.
It's just unthinkable that the American government is illegally spying on the American people, law abiding citizens and all of that, and then sharing it with foreign governments, any foreign governments under any circumstances.
It's just crazy.
Sorry to be all hyperbolic and all that, but I just, this is my personality disorder.
I can't get desensitized.
I just, I'm not surprised, but Trevor, I'm shocked.
I tell you, I'm shocked.
Yeah, I know.
You know, the other thing about the NSA revelations is that a lot of people suspected that this was going on or that there was whistleblowers who came forward that said that this was going on, but there was no actual document.
And that because there was no actual document, that kind of got swept aside and kind of taken with a grain of salt or ignored by a large majority of the public.
And it wasn't really until we saw the documents in black and white that it became so shocking to the American public and that it became this national news story.
And, you know, it's really a lesson in how, you know, whistleblowers can be really effective if they come forward to the press, especially in the national security realm, where really nobody's going to believe you unless there's documented proof.
And thankfully, we now have that with Edward Snowden.
Yep.
All right.
Well, listen, man, thank you again very much for coming on the show and for sticking up for the great American hero, Ed Snowden here.
I appreciate it.
Well, thank you very much.
Always a pleasure.
All right, y'all.
That is the great Trevor Tim.
He wants you to go to PardonSnowden.org.
PardonSnowden.org.
And that's to help push Obama, a White House petition to push Obama to pardon Edward Snowden.
Hell, we still got a few months to get this conversation going.
He could even pardon him in December or even January, you know, if it comes down to it.
Bill Clinton can pardon Mark Rich.
Then Barack Obama can sure as hell pardon Edward Snowden.
That's PardonSnowden.org.
And then, of course, also keep up with Trevor and all his writings at The Guardian and at the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
That's Freedom.
Press.
Thanks, y'all.
That's The Scott Horton Show.
Check out the archives at ScottHorton.org.
Help support at ScottHorton.org.
Donate and follow me on Twitter at Scott Horton Show.
Hey, all Scott here.
On average, how much do you think these interviews are worth to you?
Of course, I've never charged for my archives in a dozen years of doing this, and I'm not about to start.
But at Patreon.com slash Scott Horton Show, you can name your own price to help support and make sure there's still new interviews to give away.
So, what do you think?
Two bits?
A buck and a half?
They're usually about 80 interviews per month, I guess, so take that into account.
You can also cap the amount you'd be willing to spend in case things get out of hand around here.
That's Patreon.com slash Scott Horton Show.
And thanks, y'all.
Hey, all.
Scott here.
The thing is, I need you guys to help me to get these download numbers up.
So, do me a favor and sign up for the podcast feeds of this show.
You can choose the whole show or just the interviews at iTunes and Stitcher.
All the buttons you need are at the top of the right margin at ScottHorton.org.
The more subscribers I have, the more iTunes and Stitcher will help promote the show to new listeners.
If you're a hardcore fan, brand new or from way back, please leave them customer ratings and reviews, too.
Trying to get these wars ended.
All right, y'all.
Scott Horton here, and I got a great deal for you.
Anyone who helps support this show with a $50 donation or more gets a copy of the brand new Rothbard book, Murray N. Rothbard book of long lost essays from 1967 and 68.
It's entitled Never a Dull Moment.
A Libertarian Looks at the 60s.
Murray N. Rothbard, really Mr. Libertarian himself on Vietnam, conscription, civil rights, LBJ and Nixon and all kinds of great stuff from back during those times.
Never a Dull Moment, and it's an exclusive.
It's not available on Amazon yet.
It's an exclusive, so far at least, for listeners of this show.
So, be the first to get it.
Help support this show at the same time.
Just go to ScottHorton.org slash donate.
And again, anyone who sends $50 on this way, along with a mailing address, and I will get this book right to you.
Thanks.
