John Oliver on Signal leak: ‘Deeply unserious people doing deeply stupid things'

John Oliver ripped Donald Trump's White House for the ongoing scandal of Signalgate, in which high-level administration officials used the messaging app for military strikes in Yemen, accidentally including the Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg in the chat.
'The White House tried to do damage control all this week, from playing semantic games of whether they were technically war plans to hinting Goldberg somehow got himself onto the chat, something undercut by literally showing Michael Waltz, the US national security adviser, adding Goldberg in,' the Last Week Tonight host explained on Sunday evening. 'And by the way, all of this was in the run up to airstrikes that are estimated to have killed up to 46 civilians on one day, which should be a scandal in and of itself.
'And it's grotesque to see the glib response in the chat afterward,' he added, noting that one official responded to the news of a collapsed building – and civilian death – with a fist emoji, American flag emoji and fire emoji.
'And look, those clearly aren't the right emojis to send after a bombing because the right emojis are no emojis,' Oliver said.
'This is something of a motif for this administration: deeply unserious people doing deeply stupid things with massively serious consequence,' he added.
Oliver encouraged others to 'push back hard' against the administration's behavior, translating the sentiment into 'the language that they seem to prefer' – the middle finger emoji, peach, heart and American flag. Or as Oliver put it: 'Go fuck yourselves, assholes. Love, America.'
In his main segment, Oliver looked into the history and use of Taser stun guns by US law enforcement. The weapon is as ubiquitous in cop shows as in real life – they are now carried by an estimated 400,000 American patrol officers. 'Which is obviously great news for the company that makes them,' said Oliver. That would be Axon, which has a market cap of over $40bn.
Axon representatives describe the weapon as 'about as non-violent as you can get', which Oliver disputed. 'I'm not sure I would describe getting shocked with 50,000 volts is as non-violent as you can get,' he said. 'It certainly doesn't sound that relaxing. There's a reason people unwind by taking a bath with lit candles or a book instead of with a toaster.'
'The reality of Tasers just isn't that simple,' he explained. There have been multiple instances of people dying after being tased; according to a 2017 investigations, at least 1,000 people died after police used Tasers on them.
But the company has worked to obscure that fact by avoiding regulation. The Taser was first invented in the 1970s using gunpowder. When the Smith brothers bought the tech in the early 1990s, they changed the prototype to use compressed nitrogen instead, thus avoiding firearm regulations. By the end of 2003, more than 4,300 police agencies were using Tasers, with plenty of positive news coverage.
The company rebranded as Axon in the early 2000s and began selling police bodycams, as well, becoming what Oliver called 'the TMZ of state-sanctioned violence'.
Oliver broke down two of the company's main claims: that Tasers are effective and safe. Though Axon says the Taser is effective at subduing a suspect about 90% of the time, some studies found its effectiveness rate as low as 55%, though the company complained that the study did not take into account instances when a suspect was subdued after an officer merely displayed or threatened to use a Taser. 'And at that point, that's not really about their device, is it?' said Oliver. 'You could presumably get that result with a gun, a flamethrower or a magic fucking wand.'
'Also when we talk about Tasers being effective – at what, exactly?' he continued. 'Because it's often a Taser being used instead of a more lethal option like a gun, and more a Taser being used instead of a less lethal option like talking to someone.'
That could make the difference between life and death, as hundreds of people have died after being tased by law enforcement. The company has attributed those deaths to a condition called 'excited delirium' unrelated to the weapon. And because Tasers are 'virtually unregulated' by any agency, 'what that means is, you basically have to take the company's word for it,' said Oliver.
Even some police officers have decried the company's line that Tasers are safe. After a 16-year-old in Warren, Michigan, died from the use of a Taser, one officer blamed Axon for not accurately marketing the risks: 'You swore that this was a statistically normal thing, that these people were not dying at any more of an unusual rate than they would have absent the Taser, you know?'
'I get why he's upset,' said Oliver. 'Axon told him the Taser was basically harmless, and the truth is it's just not. It's like finding out that a Nerf gun was used to assassinate JFK. I don't care if Nerf says that was a statistical anomaly, I'm not handling it the same way anymore!'
As for what to do about Tasers, 'it's complicated,' said Oliver. 'I don't hate that there's at least a theoretical alternative to guns, and I guess I'd much rather police tase people than shoot them, although my ultimate preference would be for them to do neither of those and be much more aware of the actual risks involved.'
He encouraged regulatory agencies to track stun gun usage more than we already do, and noted that certain states have banned 'excited delirium' as a permissible cause of death. In sum, 'we shouldn't keep using Tasers like they're magic wands, because they're not,' Oliver concluded, 'or pretending deaths that occur after they're used don't happen, because they do.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Independent

2 hours ago

• The Independent

Sunken Bayesian superyacht lifted out of the water off Sicily as salvage operate completes

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.

NBC News

8 hours ago

• NBC News

How a high heel entrepreneur is handling tariffs before the other shoe drops

Checkbook Chronicles Haley Pavone testified to Congress that tariffs are crushing small-business owners' American dream. June 21, 2025, 5:07 AM EDT By Kayla Steinberg Haley Pavone thought this was going to be the biggest and best year yet for her footwear company. Based in Southern California, she had big dreams for Pashion Footwear, the online business she started as a 20-year-old college junior that sells high heels that convert into flats. Instead, she found herself imploring lawmakers for help as tariffs threaten to cripple her company. 'We went from duty-free status to paying actually 190% on average overnight,' Pavone told NBC News. In the months since President Donald Trump took office, the trade war has swung wildly back and forth. Tariff rates have, at times, changed suddenly and dramatically as U.S. officials seek deals with other countries. It has ensnared business owners like Pavone in a battle they didn't choose, as they struggle to plan for a future they can't clearly see. 'It has been chaos to say the least,' she said. 'It feels like small businesses are either being intentionally attacked or being completely forgotten. And I don't know which one is worse.' Business breakdown Pashion Footwear was born out of Pavone's own struggles with high heels. She loved wearing them but hated the inevitable pain that came with being hours on her feet. So in 2016, she founded Pashion. 'It's the biggest love-hate relationship in women's closets,' she said. 'And we're trying to change that.' Pavone's company has grown to employ 12 and has patents in the United States, China and the European Union. for its sole-support technology. And last year, Pashion made $9 million in gross revenue, up 88% from 2023. Pavone attributes much of that success to social media. She and the company have more than 2 million followers combined across TikTok and Instagram, with posts showing an array of heels transforming into flats with a quick twist and press. Tariff troubles For Pavone's small business, it has never been easy: between Trump's first trade war with China and then the pandemic — plus the ensuing supply chain crisis and recession. Pavone said this year she had expected her business to grow 150%, planned to hire several employees and was looking into wholesale. But then Trump eliminated the 'de minimis' exemption, which allowed items from China valued at $800 or less to come into the U.S. duty-free. The change took effect May 2. 'We went from making about 19-20% per shoe after all of our operating expenses to actually losing about $40 per shoe,' Pavone said. The Walnut Knit Booties that used to make the company $43.70 per pair, she said, turned into a $41.16 loss. After the U.S. and China agreed to a 90-day tariff pause, Pashion was left with tariffs of 36% to 75% on each product. The company has paid more than $50,000 in tariffs to U.S. Customs and Border Protection since the May 2 change. The company's shoes are manufactured in China, and Pavone said they can't be made elsewhere — though it's not for lack of trying. 'I've tried talking to manufacturers in Vietnam, Brazil, India and even one very small factory I was able to find in the U.S.,' she said. 'All of them have unanimously said that China is the only supply chain currently that can do what we need at scale.' And Pashion was hit hard by another rule change. Earlier this year, it qualified for and signed a $5 million loan from the Small Business Administration. Pavone planned to use that money to buy Pashion out of predatory debt it took on to survive the pandemic, invest in hiring and buy more inventory. But the Trump administration changed the qualifications to receive the funding, now requiring all shareholders to be U.S. citizens — and Pavone said her company raised 1.7% of its funding from international investors. The loan was pulled. 'We feel completely ignored, and we also feel completely out of control,' she said. 'It basically feels like we're just waiting for the other shoe to drop every second of the day.' Taking action The changes and uncertainty have dashed Pavone's big dreams for the year. She said she slashed inventory orders from $1 million for the fall and $1.5 million for the holidays to around $300,000 each, wanting to keep her budget open to assume tariff liability. 'This went from being a growth year to a year where we're really just trying to make ends meet and stay afloat,' she said. To handle the increased costs, the company added a tariff tax averaging $15 to $25 per product when U.S. customers check out. Demand from U.S. consumers has since dropped around 30%, Pavone said. 'There's plenty of customers where even though they understand what we're doing, they're now priced out of what they can pay, so they can't buy,' she said. She shared her frustrations on TikTok, breaking down for her followers exactly how tariffs are affecting the business. And at a hearing in May, Pavone explained to lawmakers just how painful the changes have been. 'Every day that these trade policies continue, it means the death of more American dreams,' she told lawmakers. 'This is not a short-term pain. This is the destruction of livelihoods, both for entrepreneurs and those they employ.' Pavone hopes her testimony could help lawmakers push for relief. 'No matter what happens, I at least know that I've fought as hard as anyone possibly could,' she said. Kayla Steinberg Kayla Steinberg is a producer at NBC News covering business and the economy.

Spectator

11 hours ago

• Spectator

Why is China rushing to grow its nuclear arsenal?

China is growing its nuclear arsenal at a faster pace than any other country on the planet, according to new figures from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). It estimates that Beijing now has more than 600 nuclear warheads and is adding about 100 per year to its stockpile. That means that by 2035, it will have more than 1,500 warheads, still only a third of the arsenal of each of Russia and the US, but nevertheless an enormous increase and a marked shift away from its proclaimed policy of 'minimum deterrence'. To facilitate this expanding arsenal, China is building fields of new missile silos in its western desert regions. The Federation of American Scientists, which identified the silos via satellite imagery, has described them as 'the most significant expansion of the Chinese nuclear arsenal ever.' China is engaged in one of the largest military build-ups ever seen during peacetime The Pentagon believes China is planning to quadruple its nuclear weapons stockpile by 2030, and its fears have been further heightened by People's Liberation Army (PLA) tests of nuclear-capable hypersonic weapons designed to evade America's nuclear defences. One test involved the launch of a rocket into space, which circled the globe before releasing into orbit a highly manoeuvrable hypersonic glider. The nuclear-capable glider – which has been likened to a weaponised space shuttle – had the ability to surf along the earth's atmosphere before powering down to its target at up to five times the speed of sound (hence the hypersonic). Hypersonic weapons are far more difficult to detect and destroy than traditional ballistic missiles. This week, China's foreign ministry spokesperson insisted: 'China has always adhered to the nuclear strategy of self-defence, always maintained its nuclear forces at the minimum level required for national security, and has not participated in the arms race.' This claim is almost as hackneyed as that of China's 'peaceful rise', but understanding China's evolving military doctrine is especially challenging because Beijing 'is refusing to take part in nuclear arms control talks. China last year suspended talks over arms control and nuclear proliferation with the US ostensibly because of American arms sales to Taiwan. However, Beijing has always been a reluctant participant. It is engaged in one of the largest military build-ups ever seen during peacetime, yet there are none of the protocols and little of the depth of mutual knowledge about capabilities and intentions that existed and provided a level of stability during the last Cold War with the Soviet Union. Western strategists believe that one aim of the rapid nuclear build-up is to deter America from coming to the defence of Taiwan, which China claims as its own, and which it has repeatedly threatened to invade. The thinly disguised message to Washington is that America is deluding itself if it thinks a conflict over Taiwan could be contained to the immediate area and not endanger the American homeland. Trying to make sense of China's military doctrine is made all the more challenging by an ongoing purge at the top of the PLA and a heightened level of intrigue surrounding both the army and the Chinese Communist party (CCP). Earlier this year, General He Weidong, the number-two officer in the PLA and a member of the CCP's 24-strong politburo, was removed from his post. This followed the disappearance of Miao Hua, a navy admiral and one of six members (along with He) of the party's powerful central military commission, which is chaired by President Xi Jinping. Miao was also head of the PLA's political works department – charged with ensuring CCP control over the military. The PLA is a party organisation, and in the military pecking order, Miao was regarded as more powerful even than defence minister Dong Jun. Rumours have also swirled that Dong himself has been under investigation. He appears to have survived, at least for now, but if deposed, he would be the third successive defence minister to face corruption charges. China's rocket force, the most secretive and sensitive branch of China's military responsible for overseeing in part all those shiny new nukes, has also been the target of an extensive purge. Those targeted included the two heads of the force. Among others purged have been a navy commander responsible for the South China Sea and several others responsible for procuring equipment – long a notoriously corrupt part of the military. When Xi came to power in 2012, he pledged to clean up the PLA, which ran a business empire so big that preparing for war often appeared to be a secondary concern. In spite (or possibly because of) Xi's efforts, the graft only seems to have got worse – though it should be noted that 'corruption' is frequently used as a catch-all and a pretext for the removal of those considered insufficiently loyal to the leader. Because many of those now being targeted include Xi's hand-picked officials, it will inevitably be seen as an indictment of his abilities and judgement. This week's figures from SIPRI certainly confirm the worrying extent of China's nuclear ambitions. For the country's top brass charged with wielding these fearsome weapons, however, navigating the corridors of power at the pinnacle of Xi Jinping's capricious CCP is proving considerably more dangerous than the battlefield.