Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

U.S. Senate Races To Watch; TMZ Publishes New Jane Doe Text Messages. Who Pushes For Transparency On Plague Lab Death. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired October 10, 2026 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:36]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: Isaias makes landfall as a Category 2 hurricane. Michael Smerconish in the Philly burbs. We begin with the latest on the post tropical storm as it drenches the Southeast. CNN learned from an Escambia County official there's so far one fatality in the Pensacola area.

Isaias brought with it fierce winds of 105 miles an hour. Some communities in the Panhandle will be waking up to flooded streets and no electricity. Residents in Florida already working to clear roads of fallen trees and debris as floodwaters begin to recede. All hurricane warnings have been lifted, but there are still high wind and flash flooding warnings and flood watches for parts of northern Alabama and Georgia. Joining me now from Montgomery, Alabama, is Ryan Young, CNN national correspondent.

Ryan, what's going on there?

RYAN YOUNG, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, good morning, Michael. So far what we've seen is the good news is the rain has moved through here and it moved through so quickly that it didn't really leave a lot of damage behind. But as we walk this area, we'll just show you this. This was a staging area for a lot of the power companies who were ready to respond.

Over 700,000 customers are without power right now between Florida and Alabama. So there was some real impact there.

You also talked about that death that was in Florida. So obviously a family mourning at this point. But the reality of this storm so far is it didn't have the large term impact that many people were scared of. And we've talked to emergency managers across two different states and they tell us what they're really concerned about right now is the fact that this weather system could hang over a northern part that wasn't thinking about the storm and that could have later impact. But as we've seen so far today, and even as folks we've talked to, if you look around here, not a lot of impact.

And there's a --

SMERCONISH: We lost him. Thank you. Ryan Young.

In a surprise move, the Trump administration has cut a deal with Russia on diesel exports in an attempt to lower prices. President Trump announced it on Friday after a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Whether it will reduce the price of diesel before Election Day, that remains to be seen. The deal was met with anger from Ukraine as the agreement will certainly aid Russia's economy.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called the move to allow Russia to export diesel a weak decision of strong partners. Going on to say, "This only fuels Putin and gives him the possibility to fight more." This is all happening less than a month before the end of the midterm voting. The political bet, that's plain, Americans paying 6.28 a gallon for diesel care more about the price than the provenance, maybe, but consider the wager President Trump hands Democrats a ready made ad, the president thanking Putin weeks before an election.

Voters have a long history of punishing incumbents over what they pay at the pump. But this will be a test of our principles and our resolve. The answer will reveal whether it really is the economy stupid or whether Americans are still willing to sacrifice something in the name of principle.

I'm asking today at smerconish.com the following poll question, should the U.S. buy Russian diesel if it lowers fuel prices? Here to discuss the outlook is Larry Sabato, political scientist and analyst, best- selling author, founder of the center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

Dr. Sabato, great to have you back. President Trump just announced this deal for diesel with Vladimir Putin. A test, I say, of whether voters value principles or their wallets. How do you think this plays?

LARRY SABATO, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR POLITICS, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: Wallets. That's a really -- I hope all your questions are that easy, Michael, because basically the wallet normally wins out. And while people have principles and I think most Americans are favoring Ukraine, not Russia, that is not going to affect their vote. What will affect their vote is whether they are playing -- paying substantially lower prices for diesel and gasoline and food as well.

And you know, I kind of doubt with a little more than three weeks remaining that this is going to have a tremendous impact. It may have a marginal impact. And let's remember, some of these key Senate races are in rural areas with farmers who are very unhappy, normally vote heavily Republican, have been very supportive of Trump and they're very unhappy with what's happening to their personal economies.

SMERCONISH: So let's talk about the map. In the 2024 presidential cycle we heard about seven swing states, here we are now in the midterm and with regard to the Senate, we're again hearing about seven states. It's a different seven than in the last cycle. We're talking Maine, we're talking Michigan, Kansas, Iowa, Ohio, Alaska, Texas. Your Crystal Ball now says that Republicans need more of the remaining toss up races than the Democrats do.

[09:05:27]

Would you go so far as to say that the Senate is now the Democrats to lose?

SABATO: As of today, yes. I think that is exactly what the situation is. But it's also important to say it's very close. And Michael, in the last several weeks of a campaign like this, when people actually are very focused on politics, much more so than in a regular midterm, an updraft or a downdraft, even a relatively minor one in a state, can affect a few thousand votes. And some of these contests will be determined by a few thousand votes.

SMERCONISH: I've taken or you've taken North Carolina and Georgia off the map. How come?

SABATO: Because they're not racist anymore. I mean, technically they are. And I don't think there'll be landslides necessarily 52 percent, 53 percent. But Governor Roy Cooper, former Governor Roy Cooper in North Carolina is almost universally acknowledged by both parties privately to be a winner and so is Senator Jon Ossoff, a Democrat of Georgia.

So you've got two Democrats there. One is a switch, which is North Carolina. Switches are always more important in these situations than holding. So those two are kind of off the board.

SMERCONISH: No matter what they say, Larry, the money doesn't lie and the travel schedule doesn't lie. I refer to the president and where he has spent his time and where he's scheduled to spend his time between now and the election, will you speak to that?

SABATO: Sure. Midterm elections always have lower turnouts in presidential. The question is how much lower? Well, that's not even the right question. The right question is which party's voters are showing up in the greatest numbers, which party's voters are more enthusiastic?

And once again, you know, and I've done this for a long time, there is no question that Democrats are much more enthused, they're much angrier, which is where a lot of the enthusiasm comes from. And they're going to be showing up, I think almost certainly at larger -- in larger proportions than Republicans are. So that is a key component of this. Again, not a presidential if you had everybody show up, maybe some of the results would be different. Certainly in places like Kansas, where you've got so many more Republicans than Democrats.

But it's a midterm election.

SMERCONISH: The president told us a few weeks ago he was going to show up in every one of those 35 contested House districts. But instead, this is the point I was making. He's concentrating his efforts in very ruby red zones.

SABATO: Yes, he's trying to energize the MAGA folks. Well, they mainly are energized. Most of them are going to vote. You know how they're going to vote. Though, there is a defection rate. And normally we don't see a defection rate over 5 percent, 6 percent, 7 percent among the hardcore MAGA people. Well, it's a bit larger. You're into double digits. It's low double digits.

Why is it in double digits? Well, they're unhappy about their fuel prices and their food prices. They're unhappy about that war in Iran when they were told there would be no more forever wars. Some of them are unhappy about the corruption. Although of the three factors I've just mentioned, I think it's the least important for MAGA.

But you put all that together and a few of them, they are going to vote Democratic. They're not going to show up and switch parties, but they are going to say, I'm busy. I'm really unhappy with the things as they're going. And if I vote next, I'm going to vote in 2028 for president.

SMERCONISH: Let me hit three Senate races quickly and get a gut check from Larry Sabato. I will start with Texas. For the last 30 years, you and I have heard Texas may really be in play this cycle. Might it be in play this cycle?

SABATO: Well, it actually is. I have to be honest. I've gotten a lot of those calls and e-mails and, and even nasty letters, you know, even from my governing board here, UVA, you know, depends on which -- whose ox is being gored at the time. But I would put it this way. If ever there has been a case when a Democrat might well win, other than maybe Beto O'Rourke against Ted Cruz a few cycles back, it would be this year.

And I would have to say, if we're judging by what's happened in the past in a whole bunch of states, not just Texas, when you have one candidate leading virtually all the surveys, the good ones and the bad ones, and in this case it's Talarico, the Democrat leading Ken Paxton, the Republican. You would bet on the person leading all the polls. But we all know Texas' history, and I've learned the hard way, and you have to, and most people have not to pay too much attention to the polls in Texas.

[09:10:21]

SMERCONISH: OK, number two of three, Maine. Again, they say, hey, Susan Collins is in trouble. She's not polling well. And normally it ends up with a Susan Collins victory. Your thoughts on Maine?

SABATO: Yes, I'm more skittish about Maine than I am about Texas, Michael. Because go back six years, the last time Susan Collins was on the ballot and Susan Collins was written off. She was written off because every single solid good poll taken in Maine showed her behind. Her polling average, she was minus 8 percent. That's well beyond the margin of error.

Guess what happened? She won by 8 percent. That's a swing of 16 percent. So pardon me, I'm not paying attention to polls in May.

Now, having said that, if ever there were a year when she's going to lose, it's this one. It's this one, because of Donald Trump. You know, she's voted against Trump on some key matters, but she's a Republican. Naturally, she votes with Trump most of the time. And Trump is extremely unpopular in Maine for a whole combination of reasons.

SMERCONISH: Larry, final race. To me, it's the marquee matchup, Michigan. El-Sayed and Rogers. How do you see that where we're three or so weeks out?

SABATO: If Haley Stevens, the Democratic congresswoman, had been nominated by the Democrats in their primary, this would not be a race. All respect to Mike Rogers, the Republican candidate, because he lost even when Donald Trump won Michigan in 2024. That's not a good sign. This time, Trump is very unpopular in Michigan as he is in the vast majority of states across the country. Well, she wasn't nominated.

And the much more controversial candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, was nominated.

This is going to surprise you. I went to Michigan. I wanted to see what was happening not long ago. And I have to tell you, I think he's going to be able to hold it together. If Mike Rogers couldn't beat --

SMERCONISH: Wow.

SABATO: -- a Democrat in a year when Donald Trump was winning Michigan, I don't think he's going to be able to beat a Democrat, even a really controversial one in this year when Trump is doing poorly there.

SMERCONISH: Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball live on CNN. We appreciate you. Thank you so much for your expertise.

SABATO: Thank you so much, Michael.

SMERCONISH: What are your thoughts at home? Hit me up on social media. You can find me in all the usual platforms and I'll respond to some during the course of the program.

Huh, What? A blue wave will lead to two years of impeachment efforts and the unwinding of the progress made in the denuclearization of Iran could end up being a deadly game of political football QB'd by the Dems.

There's a lot there to unpack. I will say that I don't expect there to be any progress on the Iran front, but you read some of those accounts, it seems like by their own accord, that the economic pressure that the administration is bringing to bear on Iran is paying dividends and is working. What I'm more concerned about is the moving of the B-1 bombers from that RAF base in the U.K.

Am I the only one asking that if drones could strike a UK base, why couldn't they do similarly in the United States? I get it. Big ocean. But if they smuggle in those drones, that's what worries me. And there hasn't been enough conversation about it in the past couple of days.

Up ahead, we've gotten some new detail in the alleged sexual assault case at Cornell after TMZ obtained a longer version of a new text message sent by Jane Doe. My next guest believes we may be overlooking some factors that contribute to cases like this. We'll have that conversation next.

[09:14:09]

Please make sure when you're voting on the poll question that you're signing up for my newsletter. You'll get the work of prized illustrators like Steve Breen.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: The Cornell case has generated enormous outrage with allegations of gang rape and questions about the university's handling of the investigation. Now a new report is adding another layer to the story. TMZ says it has obtained text messages allegedly exchanged two days after the reported assault in which the accuser expressed affection toward two of the accused men, described everyone as heavily intoxicated, and defended the encounter, saying, "I really like being with you and Matt, so anything anyone has to say about the gang bang is out of their jurisdiction." And after referencing that term, she says, "I don't think we should feel any shame for the part. Our body, our choice, ASF."

Our next guest has spent years working with students involved in campus sexual misconduct proceedings, representing both survivors and accused students. Hanna Stotland has worked with 363 students involved in these types of proceedings and has served as an expert witness 21 civil cases arising from them. She also previously advised one of the students accused in the Cornell case. She's written about the investigation and the broader questions it raises for Slate. Hanna Stotland joins me now.

Hanna, thank you so much for being here. So you've been a counselor to 363 students involved in campus sexual misconduct proceedings. What, if anything, is the common denominator that you see in these cases?

HANNA STOTLAND, SPECIALIZES IN EDUCATIONAL CRISIS MANAGEMENT: The common denominator is substance abuse, and certainly not solely by victims, but very much also substance abuse by the accused students. In general, people who are are sober do not end up in my practice. This is a very strong predictor of ending up in either bad sex or incidents of assault.

[09:20:26]

SMERCONISH: In other words, everybody's wasted is what you see?

STOTLAND: That's right. Typically in every direction. And out of my 363, I can count on my -- on one hand, the number of sexual misconduct proceedings that arose out of an encounter where both participants were sober.

SMERCONISH: The initial public perception of whatever it is that went on here was driven by the allegations in her civil complaint. And now, as you heard me say in the introduction, additional information is coming to light, including these text messages after the fact. What are you making of them?

STOTLAND: What I'm making of them is that it is reinforcing the need for -- those of us. We are the court of public opinion, but we, too, like a real court, can choose to say, boy, it looks like we don't have the whole story here. Literally every day we're getting these bombshell evidence drops where we get bits of Snapchats, bits of text conversations, greater portions of legal documents, like the complainant's statement to the police. And this really reinforces we don't have the whole story. And we can be and should be upset, angry, etcetera, about the fact that this entire situation happened without saying, well, we know the culpability of each individual defendant, whether we believe that they're completely innocent or should go to jail for 50 years.

At this point, we really don't know.

SMERCONISH: One part of the text exchange that TMZ just obtained that I showed on the screen earlier says, and this is the alleged victim who's speaking, "I really do love you and Matt, and I promise I won't get quiet and weird with you like I did last time." When I read that line, like I did last time, another potential new aspect of this? Was there a prior encounter?

STOTLAND: Well, it sure sounds like it. And it would be really nice to know the entire history. What did she say before and after that? A court might find that these are exculpatory statements, meaning ones that show that the defendant may or that particular defendant may not be criminally or civilly liable. But all of that context is going to matter.

But each of these evidence drops really muddies the water and reminds us how complicated and difficult it is for civil courts, criminal justice, and for Title IX proceedings within universities. They've all got a very difficult job sorting through all of this mess.

SMERCONISH: I'm glad that you referenced Title IX proceedings, because something else that we learned in the civil complaint that was filed by the woman in this case is that there were at least, or perhaps more than a dozen Title IX hearings, which doesn't comport with the perception held by some that it was all swept under the rug by Cornell. You have experience in these Title IX proceedings, what's your thought on that?

STOTLAND: My thought is this is a lot of process. Now, I want to recognize it is possible for a proceeding to be lengthy and also either biased in some direction or incompetent. But at a minimum, this wasn't simply expel them all and let God sort them out. Nor was it, let's protect Cornell by pretending that nothing bad happened here. There was at least some real effort and an investment of time and money by Cornell, and that we clearly know.

SMERCONISH: Hanna, going back to your common denominator, that in cases like this, more than 350 that you've been involved with, everybody's usually wasted. The defendant with whom she was having these text exchanges two days thereafter, I note from other reporting, he was supposed to have been one of the trained event monitors, meaning apparently it was his role to be one of those who stay sober, almost like a designated driver when people go out and then somebody has to drive the car to get everybody home. Does that technique work? I mean, you have experience in campuses all across the country, the process of saying, OK, these will be the sober ones. It doesn't sound like it worked in this case.

[09:25:17]

STOTLAND: No, it sure doesn't look like it did. And based on the way the system was set up, if you're going to have a system like that, the sober monitors can't be from the house they're overseeing, right? You need to assign people to parties where they don't have a direct interest in protecting the participants.

And just based on reporting I've seen from current Cornell students, it sounds like a lot of houses would just kind of fill out that form almost at random and just throw in a student. And that in the eyes of some Cornell students, this entire process wasn't taken seriously at all, which is unfortunate, but not surprising.

SMERCONISH: Hanna Stotland, thank you so much for your expertise. We appreciate it.

STOTLAND: Thank you for having me.

SMERCONISH: Let's see what you're saying via social media. You can find me in all the usual platforms and react during the course of the program. From Facebook, as long as universities turn a blind eye to drug use and underage drinking, stuff like this is going to keep happening. This is not victim shaming. Nothing makes assault OK.

But it does make it inevitable.

Don, that's exactly what Hanna was saying. She's looked at all these cases. She's been involved on both side of the aisle, she said, in more than 350 of them across the country. And she could count on one hand where there was sobriety. Take away the booze and in this case, the ketamine and whatever else may have been involved in this case, and I think we can all agree it never would have happened.

More social media reaction. What else has come in during the course of the program? From X, the timeline is so obvious now that additional info has come to light. She clearly changed her story when she was disinvited to the Halloween party and suddenly she was gang raped. Shame on the newspaper for not actually investigating anything.

I think that's a reflection of the Cornell son.

Yes, and all of those names are in the public domain. I still don't know what happened. I know this. I know something appalling, something horrific happened at that party, but not necessarily something that is criminally culpable. That's what I think I know.

I know that because of the peculiarities of New York's law relative to consent and the inconsistencies that are now coming forth from her story, which we didn't have the benefit of when only her civil complaint was in the public record, it's a complicated case. With a very high bar from a criminal standard, should there be any indictment and subsequent trial? We know that.

And I think we also know, or I'll just put my cards on the table that Letitia James, given what she said four days prior on Facebook about this case, is not the appropriate person to be looked at as a fair arbiter. That was not the right way to go. I don't think.

I want to remind you, go to my website at smerconish.com and answer today's poll question. Should the U.S. buy Russian diesel if it lowers fuel prices? Going to find out. Is it really the economy stupid or do people also maintain some principle?

And still to come, Russia. Speaking of Russia, Russia's secrecy after a mysterious plague lab death raises global alarm. Questions and concerns from the World Health Organization to the White House, what hasn't Russia told us yet?

Be sure you're registering for my free and worthy daily newsletter at smerconish.com when you're voting on the poll question. We've got lots of talented illustrators, including Eric Allie.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:33:35]

SMERCONISH: We're following the latest on Hurricane Isaias which has left one dead, according to an Escambia County official. Thousands are left without power as the category two hurricane plummeted the Florida Panhandle with winds up to 105 miles per hour.

Residents in Florida already working to clear roads of fallen trees and debris as floodwaters begin to recede. All hurricane warnings have been lifted, but there are still high winds and flash flooding warnings for parts of northern Alabama and Georgia. We'll be following more updates in the coming hours.

Here's additional social media reaction to today's program so far. You can find me on all the usual platforms. This comes from X.

The country better pray for a blue wave versus a narrow blue win in the House of Representatives. In a closely divided House, the Democratic Socialists of America will hold a veto over the Democratic Party.

Kyle, it seems like most folks think that the House is really not in play, that the House is a foregone conclusion. I don't want to preclude anybody from voting. There's still three weeks left on the -- on the clock, but I thought most instructive is what we heard from Dr. Larry Sabato and his crystal ball at the University of Virginia.

You've got seven states in play relative to the Senate, not the same seven that we heard so much about in the presidential cycle, but seven states that are in play relative to the Senate.

[09:35:00] And what I heard him say in the opening segment of the program is that it's the Democrats to lose, that Republicans are the ones who need now to win those toss up states because Democrats have the -- have the upper hand. And included in that list is Michigan. Included in that list is Maine. Included in that list is Texas. So, we'll find out soon enough.

More social media reaction to today's program. What do we have? Also from X.

You're living in a pipe dream if you think Dems will stay home. Dems are the ones who are enthusiastic to hold Trump and his corrupt administration accountable. In less than two years, he's lost the --

I didn't suggest that Dems are going to stay home. I mean, I -- the enthusiasm clearly is on the side of the Democratic Party and their candidates. Maybe you're reacting to me noting where the president has been traveling because it's not to the 35 districts that are in play. It's to very safe red areas, typically safe, maybe not in in this cycle, where they need to gin up additional support and enthusiasm for MAGA. So, that's the comment that I made.

No matter what they all say, in the end, pay attention to where the money is being spent and where, in this case, the president is traveling. And that's always the case in a presidential cycle. This is not one, but follow the candidates where they're spending their time in the remaining days and where's the concentration of the ad expenditures.

Don't forget to vote on today's poll question at Smerconish.com. Here it is. Should the U.S. buy Russian diesel if it lowers fuel prices? The president, of course, making that announcement yesterday.

Still to come, there may be a case of plague in Russia. And in a world where people travel across the globe in hours, how can you stop it from spreading if that's the case? Register for my newsletter at Smerconish.com when you vote on the poll question. You'll get the work of illustrators like Jack Ohman.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:41:18]

SMERCONISH: The plague may be the scariest phrase in the English language. For instance, the pandemic known as the Black Death is estimated to have killed between 30 and 60 percent of the entire population of Europe over an eight-year period in the 1300s. Medically speaking, it's caused by the bacterium yersinia pestis. If untreated, it has a high mortality rate, and right now it may have killed someone in Russia.

According to Russian sources, there's nothing to worry about. But if the plague isn't worth worrying about, then what is?

Here's what we know. Darya Shipilova, 28 years old, who worked at an anti-plague research institute in Siberia, died on October 2nd. According to a Russian health agency, she died of pneumonia of unknown origin. They did not link her death to pneumonic plague, that is a lung infection, one that can spread through the air, and also said that testing showed she had not died from pathogens related to her work at the institute.

Her death did, however, lead to Russian health authorities quarantining the institute's staff, as well as the hospital where she died, and others who were in contact with her. After testing, they claim there's no outbreak of dangerous pathogens. There are also rumors of a second death, or at least infection by the plague. But Russia denies this.

Meanwhile, the CDC says that it's working with other U.S. agencies to identify and assess travelers from this region in Russia. They note that only about 200 people from the area come to the U.S. annually. So far, the information given out by the tight lipped Russians have raised more questions than they've answered.

My guest, investigative journalist, national security writer, and 2016 Pulitzer Prize finalist, Annie Jacobsen, has her doubts about the official story. Just a few months ago, she published an amazingly prescient book on the subject called "Biological War: A Scenario."

Annie, welcome back. Your books are nonfiction. In them, you create scenarios that are based on fact and your reporting. And as I just pointed out, your most recent book published in August seems on point as to what we're hearing from Russia. Explain the parallels between your story and what we know.

ANNIE JACOBSEN, AUTHOR OF "BIOLOGICAL WAR: A SCENARIO": Thanks for having me, Michael. The parallels are remarkable. I wrote a nonfiction book about a Pentagon type scenario whereby pneumonic plague, that has been genetically modified, escapes after an accident at a high containment facility, a BSL-4 lab, in Siberia, Russia. And of course, just last week, news breaks out of Siberia, Russia, that there has been a worker at a containment facility, a BSL-3 facility, in Siberia, and that she has died of pneumonic plague.

SMERCONISH: I said in my intro that it's reported by the CDC only, only, I'm doing the air quote thing, 200 people come from that region to the United States per year. And I immediately, as I said those words, thought of your book which is a scenario where in six days, in six days, we go from lab leak to complete chaos globally. Now, it's been more than six days. In this instance, maybe we should feel good about that.

JACOBSEN: I think we should feel good about that. It's been about seven days since the story was -- or actually eight days since the story was reported. You know, and again, my scenario uses a genetically modified variant of pneumonic plague, which is based on science, on science that came to us from the Russian biological weapons engineers who defected to the United States at the very end of the Cold War.

[09:45:02] Now, what you're talking about in Russia, we have no way of knowing legitimately if it's being engineered. But the fact that the death happened is huge and should cause an alarm.

And people I've been talking to at the State Department intend to really push Russia on this when all states parties to that biological weapons convention treaty that outlaws biological weapons. Biological weapons are illegal. The intention of the State Department and others is to put pressure on Russia to say, tell us what happened. OK. If it really wasn't pneumonic plague, then how about sharing the pathogen sample so that we can look at it? And of course, Russia isn't doing that.

SMERCONISH: Does Russia have a vaccine for pneumonic plague, and do we?

JACOBSEN: They do have a plague vaccine. I write about this in the book. Its efficacy, we do not know about.

The United States does not have a plague vaccine. We did, interestingly, during the Vietnam War. But I interviewed a lot of the scientists who worked on that vaccine. And what happened was people -- or rather nonhuman primates were dying in testing, you know, from the vaccine. And so, that program in the United States is no longer in effect.

SMERCONISH: I hear Ronald Reagan saying from the grave, trust, but verify. Do we have any means apart from relying on what the Russians tell us or samples they may give us to know exactly what went on here?

Your book is an alphabet soup of government entities and agencies, most of which I'd never heard of, all based on fact, that kick in in a scenario like this. So, what means do we have to verify what they're telling us?

JACOBSEN: Great point, Michael. I mean, we don't -- the treaty has no verification protocols whatsoever and that is a major problem. On top of it, there are 3,600 of these labs around the world, not just in Russia, not just in the United States, 3,600. Many of them are in places where there are civil wars going on.

And so I would hope that this kind of a global news situation would draw people's attention to the fact that, A, it's time for a new treaty, and B, one that has enforceable mechanisms precisely like the situation you point out.

SMERCONISH: And a final point. There is a benign reason for Russia to be involved with plague in a lab, because plague exists. The question here is whether that lab served a dual function. Do I have it right?

JACOBSEN: Absolutely. And that is where the concept of the dual use facility comes into play. I mean, very simply at this anti-plague institute, because that's what it's called, they are allegedly working on vaccines against plague.

But dual use means you can use something to harm or to heal. You can use something to cure -- or rather you're developing something to cure or to kill. And that's all hidden inside of these BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs.

SMERCONISH: Annie Jacobsen, thank you so much for being here. We appreciate your expertise.

Checking in now on social media comment, I think, from the world of Facebook. Let's see.

Who even knows if antibiotics are effective, could be weaponized. Who knows what they are doing with it. I guess we'll find out, says Brian.

Annie's book, when it came out in August, really made an impact on me, as did her prior book, which was on "Nuclear War: A Scenario." Her books are nonfiction. They draw on fact and reporting and then paint scenarios.

And as you're reading them, you say to yourself, geez, could that really happen? And in this particular case, having just read the book two months ago, I'm watching what's playing out, and as I said, the parallels are scary.

You still have time to vote on today's poll question, eager to see which way this one goes. I am asking, should the U.S. buy Russian oil diesel, buy Russian diesel, if it lowers fuel prices? Yes or no?

I'm going to give you the result as it stands now, in just a moment. While you're there, sign up for the newsletter. It's free, it's worthy, and you get the work of editorial cartoonists like Rob Rogers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:53:54]

SMERCONISH: OK, here's the result -- wow, 40,072. Holy smokes. A lot of voting and a pretty decisive result. Should the U.S. buy Russian diesel if it lowers fuel prices?

Ninety-five percent say, no. Ninety-five percent say, you know, don't give up on Ukraine. Don't -- don't take a life raft, if there is one, from the likes of Vladimir Putin. And I'm sure that many of the 95 percent are saying, don't do it if it could help President Trump at the polls.

Here's another way that I look at this. Are you willing -- so you're willing to pay more for fuel to benefit Ukraine. I agree with that. Totally understand that. And you don't want to do -- you don't want to do a deal with the devil.

Another way of looking at it, you're willing to pay more to prevent -- I hope this is the way I can also interpret it. You're willing to suck it up and pay more to preclude Iran from having a nuke. If this is what it means, so that Iran doesn't get a nuke, we're willing to pay more at the pump.

[09:55:02] We hope for not too much longer. Interesting, 95 percent and more than 40,000 voted so far. Here's more social media reaction. What do we have?

At this point you're damned if you do and damned if you don't, so we may as well.

Ian, are you saying that relative to taking Putin's fuel? No effing way. More social media reaction. What do we have?

Can we have a poll on the most depressing segment of the show?

You think like this is all a Debbie Downer thing that we did today? What was the most depressing aspect? So, what did we do?

We just talked about the prospect of biological war. We talked about the Cornell case. We talked about Isaias. And with Larry Sabato, I talked about the midterm election.

I get where you're coming from. The Cornell case is totally depressing. The prospect of biological war is totally depressing. I don't know, is the midterm really a depressing thought? I kind of like this.

I'm out of time, gang. If you missed any of today's program, you can always listen anywhere you get your podcasts. We thank you for watching. We'll see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)