Speaker 1: I'm Josh Hammer and this is the Josh Hammer Show.
Speaker 1: Hope you had a great weekend, and welcome back to
Speaker 1: what is surely going to be yet another chaotic news week,
Speaker 1: Because if there's any other option in these days, is
Speaker 1: if there is any alternative to adjust a totally helter
Speaker 1: skelter news cycle, and if item on repeat on any
Speaker 1: given day ending and why certainly Monday, January twelfth, this
Speaker 1: is no exception to that. The big story that we
Speaker 1: are tracking, and there are numerous of them, We're s
Speaker 1: certainly still paying attention to the fallout of the fatal
Speaker 1: shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis last week. When it
Speaker 1: comes to these anti ice uprisings now that are happening
Speaker 1: not just any twin cities, but out in the nexus
Speaker 1: and ground zero of the Antifa movement that is Portland, Oregon.
Speaker 1: Perhaps come into a city near you, we shall see.
Speaker 1: We're keeping our eyes on that and other stories. But
Speaker 1: the number one story today is all of the protests,
Speaker 1: all of the uprisings, all of the general uproar over
Speaker 1: in Iran to wit. To be clear, this is among
Speaker 1: the most serious uprisings by the Iranian people since this
Speaker 1: horrific theocratic Islamist regime came into power four and a
Speaker 1: half plus decades ago. It is at least at least
Speaker 1: the biggest uprising since two thousand and nine, the so
Speaker 1: called Green Revolution. The thing about the Iranian people is
Speaker 1: there's there's so much to say about it, but this
Speaker 1: terrible regime in Iran, and they are the number of
Speaker 1: the world's number one state sponsor of terrorism, which you've
Speaker 1: probably heard many times, and it happens to be true.
Speaker 1: They sponsored terrorist oranizations all throughout the world, not just
Speaker 1: in the Middle East when it comes to Hasbolah, the
Speaker 1: Huthis and all these various other Shiites and times even
Speaker 1: Sunni islam proxies. They also fund jihad all across the world.
Speaker 1: Iran was behind the bombing in Buenos Aires and the
Speaker 1: mid nineteen nineties at the Jewish enter that killed nearly
Speaker 1: one hundred people. They tried to pull up the Saudi
Speaker 1: ambassador to the United States and Washington, d C. In
Speaker 1: twenty twelve. They are behind one hundreds and hundred of
Speaker 1: US armed service members debts via ied roadside bombs back
Speaker 1: during the Iran or the Iraq counter insurgency. So it
Speaker 1: is a horrific, horrific regime. But one of the things
Speaker 1: that has always let off the page, being one of
Speaker 1: the most important details here when it comes to the
Speaker 1: debates and controversy over the Iranian future, is that this
Speaker 1: regime is a terrible, terrible fit for the Iranian people. Iran,
Speaker 1: prior to the Islamist takeover in nineteen seventy nine was
Speaker 1: a generally secular state. Now it is the spiritual home
Speaker 1: of Shiite Islam, which is a minority sect of Islam
Speaker 1: when you look at global Islam, Sunni Islam being spiritually
Speaker 1: based there in Saudi Arabia. But Iran prior to nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy nine was not exactly a Jeffersonian democracy, was not
Speaker 1: exactly a Montescovian tripartite separation of powers. You know, federalist papers,
Speaker 1: James Madison Federals fifty one, ambition must be made to
Speaker 1: counter emission. No, no, no, no, I mean, that's not what
Speaker 1: was happening. It was very much pretty authoritarian and pretty
Speaker 1: jack Boots like, but it was still generally Western Ish
Speaker 1: aligned at the time. The pre Islamist Iranian Shah government
Speaker 1: had generally sound relations with Israel, with the United States
Speaker 1: and with large parts of the West. So in the
Speaker 1: past four and a half decades, every swapten you have
Speaker 1: an uprising, whether it's whether it's over economic conditions, that's
Speaker 1: actually what sparks this current uprising. Sometimes you have an
Speaker 1: uprising when it comes to the insane Islamist dress code,
Speaker 1: in other words, the he job in the burka. That's
Speaker 1: what we saw a few years ago in the summer
Speaker 1: turned into autumn of twenty twenty two, where there were
Speaker 1: national protests and lots of women burning their he job,
Speaker 1: burning their burkas, some of them and up being tragically
Speaker 1: incarcerated and indeed outright executed by the regime for the
Speaker 1: defiance of the Islamist dress code. It seemingly is a
Speaker 1: different thing all the time. And when you listen to
Speaker 1: the chants of the running people, the number one thing
Speaker 1: that you hear throughout all these videos, all these images,
Speaker 1: you hear a lot of them say, care about us,
Speaker 1: care about your people, the Iranian people, Stop spending money
Speaker 1: on all these terrorist proxies overseas. Stop shipping money to
Speaker 1: Hesbala or Tobashar al san Syria back before he was
Speaker 1: dethroned by al Shara. In the current Sunni government there
Speaker 1: in Damascus, focus on the Iranian people. There's a tremendous
Speaker 1: water shortage in Iran. It's been a massive drought. The
Speaker 1: currency is inflating to the point where it is now
Speaker 1: approaching near hyperinflation levels. Oil petroleum, which is the number
Speaker 1: one industry there, or at least in theory it should be,
Speaker 1: is being heavily sanctioned due to all of their support
Speaker 1: for terrorism. The Iranian people deserve better than this government,
Speaker 1: and fundamentally is in the United States of America's interest
Speaker 1: that this regime go the way of the Dodo Bird.
Speaker 1: As we've explained many times that that does not mean
Speaker 1: that it is the role of the United States to
Speaker 1: send in the hundred first Airborne and in Team America
Speaker 1: world police style start to liberate Tehran, to liberate all
Speaker 1: of Iran in the name of the Rainbow flag or
Speaker 1: Globo Homo or any of these other things, or frankly
Speaker 1: even deliberated in the name of Jeffersonian Madisonian democracy. No,
Speaker 1: that's not our role, but is absolutely our role. It
Speaker 1: is absolutely our role to support the Iranian people. Now,
Speaker 1: President Trump, very very interestingly, just this past weekend started
Speaker 1: to admit that his previous announced red line when it
Speaker 1: comes to the Iranian regime cracking down and indeed annihilating
Speaker 1: and just massacring dissidents, he started to renounce to this
Speaker 1: read his red line either it's getting really close to
Speaker 1: being crossed or has actually been crossed. Now, the numbers
Speaker 1: are very very difficult to get a firm, reliable estmen
Speaker 1: of because last week is what Iran does when they
Speaker 1: start cracking down and shooting people. They turned off all
Speaker 1: the phone lines, They turned off all the internet in
Speaker 1: the entire country. So very very difficult to start to
Speaker 1: get reliable numbers. We know from a US based group
Speaker 1: called the Human Rights Activists in Iran, they estimate that
Speaker 1: at least four hundred ninety six protesters have been killed.
Speaker 1: I've seen some images of mass body bags outside the
Speaker 1: hospitals there. At least one Eyewinness reporter was able to
Speaker 1: get through an anonymous source. Again, you can't give your name
Speaker 1: or else you will be executed, so that when she
Speaker 1: had to go to the hospital because of her injuries
Speaker 1: there that said, you just saw piles and piles and
Speaker 1: piles of dead bodies, body bags. The estimates that I've
Speaker 1: seen so the unofficial ones that I've seen some others
Speaker 1: report as well, including Mike Duran of the Hudson Institute,
Speaker 1: who was very well versed in will source in these matters.
Speaker 1: The estimate that that I've been getting is upwards potentially
Speaker 1: two thousand upwards are potentially two thousand running distance will
Speaker 1: been slaughtered. Thus far, at least forty eight Iranian security
Speaker 1: ier GC or regime jack boots. They have been killed
Speaker 1: as well, at at least ten six hundred people have
Speaker 1: been arrested. It's just chaos. It's absolute chaos. Iran International
Speaker 1: which is an international TV organization that essentially tried to
Speaker 1: speak on behalf of the Iranian diaspora of those who
Speaker 1: oppose this terrible Islamist regime. Roan International reporting that despite
Speaker 1: the blackout inside of Roan, it can confirm that just
Speaker 1: last night that just on Sunday evening, Iranians in more
Speaker 1: than twenty provinces went to the streets. This is all
Speaker 1: in response to the calls to action from the exiled
Speaker 1: Crown Prince. So prior to the Islamist theocracy taking over
Speaker 1: for nineteen seventy nine, it was ruled by the shot
Speaker 1: and it is the exiled Crown Prince raised a Palafi
Speaker 1: who has been living in Maryland in the United States
Speaker 1: for most of his adult life. There he has really
Speaker 1: been egging on a lot of this from Afar, calling
Speaker 1: for Iranians to take to the streets. The most important
Speaker 1: thing that you must understand about this is the following
Speaker 1: when the Iranian people go to the streets. And I've
Speaker 1: seen estimates that a million to two million different Iranians
Speaker 1: have taken to the streets over the course of these
Speaker 1: past now two and a half veering on three weeks.
Speaker 1: They are a million to two million Iranians, many of
Speaker 1: whom have actually engaged in firefights with the Iranian security forces. Folks,
Speaker 1: not to put too fine a point on it, but
Speaker 1: the men who signed the Declaration Independence in seventeen seventy six,
Speaker 1: I'm not comparing a run to the United States in anyway.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying that the men back then when they
Speaker 1: signed that declaration, they knew that they were putting it
Speaker 1: all on the line. They offered their lives, their fortune,
Speaker 1: and their sacred honor to use the precise verbiage of
Speaker 1: Jefferson's declaration in seventeen seventy six, they knew that if
Speaker 1: the Red Coats, if King George the Third, then if
Speaker 1: they were to find them, they would be dead. Bringing
Speaker 1: out the gallows, they will be dead. That's the exact
Speaker 1: same situation for the Iranan people. They are putting it
Speaker 1: all in the line, all in the line. So there's
Speaker 1: been a lot of folks on the hard isolationists left
Speaker 1: and right who've been trying to say this is all
Speaker 1: WHI in dupisteria. It's a neocn syop. It's a masad
Speaker 1: Zionas syop, to which I say, screw you, screw you
Speaker 1: and the horse that you came in on the runing.
Speaker 1: People are literally risking their lives to try to end
Speaker 1: this cancer that is afflicted not just the Middle East
Speaker 1: but the entire world for four and a half decades.
Speaker 1: And you have the hutzpa to call this a syop.
Speaker 1: What is wrong with you?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: What exactly? Again, American voment looks like there. Well, Donald
Speaker 1: Trump did issue something of a red line, and he's
Speaker 1: starting to acknowledge here that this red line might have
Speaker 1: been crossed. Again, I'm not saying I personally would not
Speaker 1: have advised him to actually make the red line threat.
Speaker 1: By the way, in my aview stationmships should be carried
Speaker 1: out more secretly, clandestinely. But he did offer something of
Speaker 1: a red line for what it's worth there. So in
Speaker 1: any event, here was Donald Tromp on Air Force One
Speaker 1: over the weekend speaking on situation in Iran.
Speaker 2: This seemed to be some people killed that aren't supposed
Speaker 2: to be kill. These are violent, if you call them leaders,
Speaker 2: I don't know if their leaders are just they ruled
Speaker 2: through violence. But we're looking at it very seriously. The
Speaker 2: military is looking at it, and we're looking at some
Speaker 2: very strong options. We'll make a determination. But some of
Speaker 2: the protesters were killed through the stampeding. I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: there's so many of them, and so we're shot. Are
Speaker 2: we getting a full report? I'm getting an hourly report,
Speaker 2: and we're going to make a determination.
Speaker 1: So Trump was indeed briefed on possible military options over
Speaker 1: the weekend. Apparently he is being briefed again tomorrow. That
Speaker 1: will be Tuesday the thirteenth. Again. Iran International who reported
Speaker 1: earlier that these uprightings are happening at least twenty proncs
Speaker 1: throughout the country. They also are the ones who are
Speaker 1: corroborating the more than two thousand people indeed have been
Speaker 1: killed amidst the crackdown. Mike Duran of Hudson Institute, the
Speaker 1: think tanker, who is very well sourced from a running
Speaker 1: distance there. I mentioned him earlier. He was tweeting over
Speaker 1: the weekend. He said that telegram channels are circulating horrific
Speaker 1: videos from Iran showing rows of bodies and makeshift and
Speaker 1: more facilities. Again, folks, this is a slaughter. It is
Speaker 1: an absolute slaughter. What's happening in Ron. I would not
Speaker 1: recommend that Donald Trump make the red line threat, but
Speaker 1: he did. He said numerous times that if the regime
Speaker 1: starts massacring as people, then the United States will get involved.
Speaker 1: I hate to say, if that's exactly what's happening, something's
Speaker 1: going to have to happen. This is why you should
Speaker 1: be cautious about making redline threats, because when you do
Speaker 1: it and then they actually call your bluff, you can't
Speaker 1: let them bluff. You have to act. What exactly that
Speaker 1: looks like in practice? Well, we will have some thoughts
Speaker 1: for you on the other side of this commercial break.
Speaker 1: Josh Hammer hosting here the Josh Hammer Show on Salem
Speaker 1: News Channel. On Newsweek's YouTube page. You neverwhere that you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts. Hope you had a great weekend, folks. Again,
Speaker 1: there's so much to get to in the news. On
Speaker 1: the other side of this break, we'll talk about possible
Speaker 1: options for Donald Trump in Iran and lots of other
Speaker 1: stories to get to. I'm Josh or Stable us of
Speaker 1: the break. We'll be right back. Welcome back. So if
Speaker 1: you believe any sense of the numbers that we're getting here,
Speaker 1: it seems that Donald Trump does have to act again.
Speaker 1: We can have the date over whether or not it's
Speaker 1: good to issue redline threats in the first place. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty skeptical of them for this very reason. But if
Speaker 1: they call your bluff, you gotta act. So what does
Speaker 1: that look like? At a bare minimum, At a bare minimum,
Speaker 1: some serious cyber attacks seem to be a very good idea.
Speaker 1: As our guest Rich Goldberg was talking about this past week,
Speaker 1: tried to get at the Iranian Central Bank think about
Speaker 1: the stucksnet virus. This virus to make some of the
Speaker 1: Iran and nuclear reactors basically have a mini meltown of sorts.
Speaker 1: It was largely viewed as being done by Israel. During
Speaker 1: the aubamministration about fifteen years ago, give her a take.
Speaker 1: And also at this point, again, since you've offered the
Speaker 1: redline already, you probably ought to strongly consider additional military
Speaker 1: action as well, whether it's against Iran's and nuclear facilities,
Speaker 1: against their ballistic missile programs. There at this point, if
Speaker 1: the Ayatola can be reliably found, and that's very difficult
Speaker 1: to use and done, but if you can get a
Speaker 1: clean shot of the Ayatola come iny while the regime
Speaker 1: is on the brink like this, you probably take that shot.
Speaker 1: At this point. That's not something that I say lightly. Again,
Speaker 1: when it comes to toppling a regime, whether it's from
Speaker 1: the Iranian people or potentially with assistance from Donald Trump
Speaker 1: given his red line, you never know what's going to
Speaker 1: happen next. This is why America has a very sordid
Speaker 1: history when it comes to regime change, including in the
Speaker 1: Middle East, but Iranie it really is in many ways
Speaker 1: fundamentally different. Given this infamous mismatch between the Islamist regime
Speaker 1: and the historically more Western minded Iranian people. It's an
Speaker 1: America's interest that this horrific, horrific regime fall, and at
Speaker 1: this point, Donald Trump's I'm sorry to be the bearer
Speaker 1: of bad news. His hands to an extent definitely are tied.
Speaker 1: We'll see exactly what it looks like, but definitely we're
Speaker 1: paying attention to this on an hour by hour basis.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump will be briefed tomorrow again on the latest
Speaker 1: in case he has not already acted by them. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: any Semitism tragically continues just to be a genuine scourge,
Speaker 1: a genuine scourge all across the American political spectrum, in
Speaker 1: all across American life. There were a couple of events
Speaker 1: over the past few days that we probably ought to discuss.
Speaker 1: The first episode happened in Queens, in Queens, New York,
Speaker 1: the home borough of President Donald J. Trump, And this
Speaker 1: happens this past Thursday evening. Now, the notion that there
Speaker 1: was going to be a protest outside of a yeshiva,
Speaker 1: which is a religious Jewish education in Queens. The notion
Speaker 1: that there's going to be a protest outside this synagogue
Speaker 1: yeshiva was actually telegraphed. It was known very well in
Speaker 1: advance that there was going to be this horrific protest
Speaker 1: from a lot of rabid Hama supporting freaks. And sure enough,
Speaker 1: that's actually exactly what happened. A group called Palestinian Assembly
Speaker 1: for Liberation organized this rally outside Young Israel, which is
Speaker 1: a fairly prominent Orthodox synagogue. They're in the Borough of Creems,
Speaker 1: and these so called protesters gathered and among other things
Speaker 1: that they started chanting, they said, we support Hamas here,
Speaker 1: we support Tamas here. Hmm. Maybe, just maybe, if you
Speaker 1: are going to a synagogue where there are Jews and
Speaker 1: you are trying to prevent their entrance into the house
Speaker 1: of worship in clear defiance of the Face Act, the
Speaker 1: Clinton era statute from nine ninety four that criminalized at
Speaker 1: a federal level, efforts to do exactly that the bidodminstruation
Speaker 1: weaponize a statue to prosecute pro life grannies praying outside
Speaker 1: abortion clinics. What it actually meant, the Face Acts was
Speaker 1: to prevent this. We saw a very similar thing, by
Speaker 1: the way, in Los Angeles in the summer of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four, where he had quote unquote Palastinian protesters aka
Speaker 1: pro g Ghati kafia clad freaks preventing Jews from going
Speaker 1: into house worship. Literally, why the Face Act was written.
Speaker 1: So they're here in Queens this this past Thursday and
Speaker 1: Zormamdanni took about twenty four hours to respond and then
Speaker 1: finally finally press for comby Plitigo on Frea f Nune says, yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: that was the word wrong choice. I saw some headline
Speaker 1: that New York City Jewish leaders are now concerned by Zormandanni.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, now that the guy who literally couldn't condemn
Speaker 1: globalizing defodiph for his life. Now you're concerned, Really, what
Speaker 1: is wrong with you?
Speaker 2: You know?
Speaker 1: I did an event in New York, speaking of New
Speaker 1: York a couple of years ago, with Michael moynihan, a
Speaker 1: very funny libertarian of the Fifth Column podcast, and a
Speaker 1: not particularly funny woman by the name of Katherine Rample.
Speaker 1: Katherine Rampole is kind of the worst stereotype of what
Speaker 1: a liberal Jewish political commentator might might think like and
Speaker 1: what she how she might approach the world. So Kathy
Speaker 1: Rample was on ms now, the rebranded MSNBC, and had
Speaker 1: a very on point, steritable comments. Here was Kathy Rample
Speaker 1: on ms now.
Speaker 3: We don't know what the motive is, we should say,
Speaker 3: I mean, I know what it looks like certainly, and
Speaker 3: as a Jewish person myself, you know, I can use
Speaker 3: my imagination for what might have gone on here. I
Speaker 3: think one of the scariest things is that, like if
Speaker 3: this was a hate crime, as it certainly looks to be,
Speaker 3: we don't necessarily know which side the hate crime came from.
Speaker 3: Which is a new thing. Right, you know, we're as
Speaker 3: Jews you're used to in this country fielding some hatred
Speaker 3: from the far right, but we're seeing some of it
Speaker 3: from the far left as well, and it can feel
Speaker 3: very lonely, like you don't really have a lot of
Speaker 3: allies who who care about keeping you safe. So it's upsetting.
Speaker 1: Okay, So rample there. And I'm as now talking about
Speaker 1: the other of two terrible antisemitic incidents that's happened in
Speaker 1: the Nine States in recent days. I actually just learned
Speaker 1: about this other one on a Sunday apparently in the early,
Speaker 1: very early pre dawn hours on Saturday morning aka Shabat
Speaker 1: the Jewish Sabbath in Jackson, Mississippi, the capitol and largest
Speaker 1: city in Mississippi in the Magnolia States, the largest synagogue
Speaker 1: of the entire state, Beth Israel, which has which has
Speaker 1: a bit of a history actually of these sort of things.
Speaker 1: In fact, in nineteen sixty seven, the synagogue was also
Speaker 1: torched in an act of arson by the ku Klux Klan,
Speaker 1: given the rabbi's outspoken support of civil rights at the time.
Speaker 1: So yet again there was there was a horrific arsen
Speaker 1: attack in Jack's, Mississippi at the largest synagogue in the
Speaker 1: entire state. Many holy books, tourist scrolls, so the Jews
Speaker 1: Holy Book, the Torah, the Bible, many of them tragically burned,
Speaker 1: although interestingly, there was one tourist scroll that actually survived
Speaker 1: the Holocaust, that was actually in a glass safe that
Speaker 1: managed to survive unscathed. Make of that what you will,
Speaker 1: but multiple, multiple terrible acts of anti Semitism happening in
Speaker 1: the United States over over the past few days. Now,
Speaker 1: Zoria and Mam Donnie, Zora and Mamdanni for what it's worth,
Speaker 1: as I mentioned, kind of sort of condemned what happened
Speaker 1: in Queen's own backyard. Took it too him a very
Speaker 1: long time to do. So lets let's go ahead and
Speaker 1: watch this. This here was Zormam Donnie. This could be brought
Speaker 1: to us courtesy of art.
Speaker 2: What do you think of those protests? What do you
Speaker 2: think of those protesters that said we support hamas here
Speaker 2: in Queen.
Speaker 1: I think that that language is wrong. I think that
Speaker 1: language has no place in New York City. Okay, so
Speaker 1: again your words mean nothing, mister mayor like literally nothing.
Speaker 1: Like dude literally spent half of his first day as
Speaker 1: mayor on New Year's Day, after getting sworn in, you know,
Speaker 1: after that whole bone chilling or wheeling in the frigidity
Speaker 1: of individualism and the warmth of collectivism, after that horrific speech,
Speaker 1: he signed his slew of executive orders, multiple of them
Speaker 1: literally multiple targeted at the Jewish community when it comes
Speaker 1: to trying to strip additional anti antisemitism protections there. So
Speaker 1: I mean, Zormam, Donnie, you can you can take your
Speaker 1: faux concern. You can shove it where the sun don't shine,
Speaker 1: because you are full of some of the largest crap
Speaker 1: in this entire Western hemisphere. But it actually was not
Speaker 1: just Zoram, Memdannie. Interestingly, over the weekend, it's not lost
Speaker 1: many of us that tons of prominent Democrats Tiss James, Alexandroo,
Speaker 1: Cosio Cortez, Chuck Schumer, Kathy Hockel, Kristen gillibrand Ma'm donnie.
Speaker 1: As I mentioned there, centator Jackie Roseen and many others
Speaker 1: had deeply clearly coordinated messaging when it comes to condemning
Speaker 1: the Hamas so called protests in Queens. Alexandro Cosio Chords has,
Speaker 1: for instance, the girl who literally in her first year
Speaker 1: as Congress back in twenty nineteen, had the hutzba to
Speaker 1: compare ice detention centers to concentration camps. Yeah, that girl,
Speaker 1: the girl who has literally no selftwares whatsoever when it
Speaker 1: comes to Jewish related issues. She said this quote. Hey,
Speaker 1: so marching into a predominantly Jewish neighborhood and leading with
Speaker 1: a chance saying we support Hamas is a disgusting ninety
Speaker 1: sement to do. Pretty basic. So what is this? I mean,
Speaker 1: what are the Democrats doing here? Again? This is so
Speaker 1: clearly coronated Tiss James Hamasa terrorist organization. We do not
Speaker 1: support terrorists, Chuck Schumer. Let's be clear, Hamas terrorist organization
Speaker 1: committed to the destruction of Jews. Blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: Obviously that's correct, But what is the motive? What are
Speaker 1: Democrats getting out here? Why are they now only now
Speaker 1: season on what happens at the Queen's synagogue this past
Speaker 1: week in New York City. What is the goal? Well,
Speaker 1: I think I have a pretty idea of what they're getting
Speaker 1: out here. I'll explain on the other side of this break.
Speaker 1: I'm Josh Hammer. Stay with us, we'll be right back.
Speaker 1: Welcome back. So before the break, you're talking about this
Speaker 1: clearly coronated messaging by prominent elected Democrats of the weekend
Speaker 1: where they're all condemning, condemning to the nines, condemning as
Speaker 1: loud as you can possibly shout these horrific pro hamas
Speaker 1: protesters trying to disrupt Jews in violation of the Face
Speaker 1: Act potentially of ninet ninety four of actually entering a
Speaker 1: house of warship. By the way, the event was apparently
Speaker 1: not even a religious event. It was an event about
Speaker 1: possibly buying real estate in Israel. I'm pretty sure that
Speaker 1: you're allowed to buy real estate in foreign countries if
Speaker 1: you're an American there, And in fact, Tucker Carlson might
Speaker 1: know a thing or two about that, given the fact
Speaker 1: that fairly recently at the Doha Forum he told the
Speaker 1: amer Qatar that he was going to try to buy
Speaker 1: some property in Doha, Qatar. Why, asked Tucker, Because I'm
Speaker 1: an American and that's my right. Okay, so it's your right,
Speaker 1: but it's not the Jews rights by property as well.
Speaker 1: I mean to get that out of here. It's also stupid.
Speaker 1: But why are the Democrats doing this? Why are they
Speaker 1: now all coronating on their secret slack channels or their
Speaker 1: secret WhatsApp bat's chats, whatever it is there. Why are
Speaker 1: they coordinating? To me, the answer is obvious. They smell blood.
Speaker 1: They smell blood because they look. They look at the
Speaker 1: other side. They look at the right, and they see
Speaker 1: that the right is trying to fight off a lot
Speaker 1: of demons at this time. They see that Tucker Carlson
Speaker 1: and Megan Kelly had a grand yucket Up podcast conversation
Speaker 1: this past week where they lavished praise upon Holocaust denying
Speaker 1: freak self emitted fan of Hitler and Stall and Nick Fuents.
Speaker 1: Maybe they saw that Tuger Carls himself, unfortunately, was actually
Speaker 1: at the White House this past Friday. I don't know
Speaker 1: who invited him, but he was at that lunch with
Speaker 1: Donald Trump and the various American oil executives, the CEOs,
Speaker 1: big dogs about energy and oil extraction in Venezuela, and in
Speaker 1: a post Maduro world. So the left, which has never
Speaker 1: ever exert a single muscle trying to condemn jew hatred,
Speaker 1: trying to rein in their anti Western civilization, pro Islamist
Speaker 1: shock troop grassroots. They've done nothing. Now they're pouncing on
Speaker 1: this because they see an opportunity. They smell blood. They're
Speaker 1: trying to get donor money. But that donor money is
Speaker 1: from Jews or from file Semitic Christians, Christian Zionist, etc.
Speaker 1: They want their donor money. It's a midterm yar and
Speaker 1: Democrats want the house back, want the center back. That's
Speaker 1: all this is about. But if I'm right, and I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure i am, then that really should raise some
Speaker 1: obvious questions. Namely, if you are not condemning the rots
Speaker 1: on the right, and you're on the right, then what
Speaker 1: exactly are you doing? Holding morality aside for a second there,
Speaker 1: holding morality and basic human deity aside. This is what
Speaker 1: you are a betting. You are a betting Democrats making
Speaker 1: a cynical, wholly and persuasive and deeply cynical attempt to
Speaker 1: try to get voters and get donors back to their side,
Speaker 1: the very voters and donors who maybe maybe maybe might
Speaker 1: have been inclined to continue their right word step. I
Speaker 1: mean Kathin Rample, who were playing before the break on
Speaker 1: MS NOW talking about how apparently she's just just waking
Speaker 1: up to left through any semintism. Where have you been?
Speaker 1: Where have you been? Are you kidding me? This really
Speaker 1: starting ernest under Barack Obama. It totally went to the
Speaker 1: next level during the by administration, in the post October seven,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three world in particular, But a lot of
Speaker 1: this starts with Barack Obama, the first leftist ideolog the
Speaker 1: first intellectual left wing creature of the American Academy, a
Speaker 1: post Frankfurt School, post cultural Marxism takeover of the Academy presidents.
Speaker 1: It really started back then during the Obama minstration. The
Speaker 1: left has been losing the plot on this for a
Speaker 1: very very, very long time. Don't give them any ability,
Speaker 1: even if it's a wholy unpersuasive one, to try to
Speaker 1: claim the moral high ground. Don't allow it to happen, Folks.
Speaker 1: You have to police your own side. We don't enjoy it,
Speaker 1: but we have to do it because only when the
Speaker 1: right is not flirting with Nazis and Nazi of betters
Speaker 1: only when they are all shunted aside, can this be
Speaker 1: a politically viable movement? You know, in many ways, much
Speaker 1: of this so called wolk right stuff, I don't particularly
Speaker 1: love that name, but it's really the label that stuck.
Speaker 1: So it is what it is. A lot of this
Speaker 1: so called wolk right stuff, as a friend put to
Speaker 1: me recently, is really the rights version of defund the police.
Speaker 1: You might think it's edgy, you might think it's scratches,
Speaker 1: a transgressive itch. You might feel cool about yourself texting
Speaker 1: your group chats. Oh the JQ if you don't know,
Speaker 1: the JQ is good for you. That's short for the
Speaker 1: Jewish question, a phrase that was very popular in Nazierra.
Speaker 1: A journey. I might ed you and I think it's
Speaker 1: cool to be doing this stuff is political poison for
Speaker 1: the American people. And congratuate freakinglations. You have now allowed
Speaker 1: Alexandro Kasio Cortes, Chuck Schumer tiss, James Kathy Hokeel, and
Speaker 1: the rest of the Democrat clambrigate to putatively purportedly condemned Hamas.
Speaker 1: And you're gonna have some people that might scamper back
Speaker 1: to their side because apparently they think incorrectly, but they
Speaker 1: still think that maybe, just maybe the Dems the side
Speaker 1: that is actually capable of condemning any Semitism. Again, it's
Speaker 1: not true, it's absolutely not true. But why in the
Speaker 1: world would you let them play that game? It just
Speaker 1: makes no sense whatsoever. By the way, in related news,
Speaker 1: some large media waves happening just this past week as
Speaker 1: well when it comes to US Israel relations related to
Speaker 1: what we were just talking about. There so an interview
Speaker 1: that came out with The Economist, the well known British
Speaker 1: economic and political journal. It came out just this past Friday.
Speaker 1: Prim Miss Natanyahu said that during his recent trip to
Speaker 1: marrow Lago to meet with President Donald Trump, the topic
Speaker 1: of US foreign aid to Israel came up in conversation,
Speaker 1: and apparently in this interview with the Economist, Nattinnahu said
Speaker 1: that during his trip to mar Lago and Netziaho apparently
Speaker 1: told Trump that Israel quote very deeply appreciates the military
Speaker 1: aid that America has given over the years, but we've
Speaker 1: come of age, meaning Israel's come of age, and we've
Speaker 1: developed incredible capacity and their economy which will reach certainly
Speaker 1: certainly within a decade, will reach about a trillion dollars.
Speaker 1: It's not a huge economy, it's not a small economy.
Speaker 1: So I want to taper off military aid within the
Speaker 1: next ten years. So Natiyaho apparently announcing formally. He's hinted
Speaker 1: this many times, but apparently this is his first formal
Speaker 1: announcement that he contends to wean Israel off American foreign aid,
Speaker 1: to which I just clap my hands and say, bravo.
Speaker 1: I've only been calling for this month for my entire
Speaker 1: adult lifetime. I've been saying this for well over a
Speaker 1: decade since I first started forming political opinions. When it
Speaker 1: comes to foreign affairs, it should be fairly obvious. It
Speaker 1: should be fairly obvious that although it is a short
Speaker 1: term boost, a short term boost for both for both countries.
Speaker 1: By the way, you know this, This three to four
Speaker 1: billion dollars an hour nual aid of the US gust Israelis,
Speaker 1: by the way, is a total drop in the bucket
Speaker 1: of the budget. It's a total nothing burger in the budget.
Speaker 1: Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid, but
Speaker 1: foreign a in general is a very small amount of
Speaker 1: the budget. But it should be pretty obvious that it
Speaker 1: ends up being a long term detriment for both countries.
Speaker 1: It's a short term boost for sure, the short term
Speaker 1: boost for the United States because that money virtually ends
Speaker 1: up all coming back to the United States. The money
Speaker 1: comes with strings attached and comes up coming back being
Speaker 1: spent primarily on defense contractors, adding jobstca there. And then
Speaker 1: for Israel, it's obviously a boost because they get the money,
Speaker 1: they have weapons that are there. But in the long
Speaker 1: term it's harmful to both sides. It's harmful to the
Speaker 1: United States for two reasons. One because it ends up
Speaker 1: being something of an act of cronyism, of crony capitalism,
Speaker 1: to use a somewhat outmoded but nonetheless is still descriptive term.
Speaker 1: It's crony capitalism where you then have tax payer dollars
Speaker 1: essentially padding the bottom line of defense contractors like Boeing
Speaker 1: and North of Grumming. And it it's also it's also
Speaker 1: just another expense, foreign aid, another expense. Is it a
Speaker 1: huge part of the budget, No, but it's definitely part
Speaker 1: of the budget For Israel, the long term costs comes
Speaker 1: slightly more subtly, at the very cost of their own independence.
Speaker 1: At the very cost you might argue of Zionism itself,
Speaker 1: just the simple notion that the Jews should be sovereign
Speaker 1: in their ancestral homeland. For every hostile president like Joe
Speaker 1: Biden that you empower to try to say, oh, you
Speaker 1: can't do this, or else I'm going to take the
Speaker 1: aid away, you are undermining your own independence. If you
Speaker 1: are a true nationalist, and I am a nationalist, I
Speaker 1: believe in a world of independent nation states. I hate globalism,
Speaker 1: hate it. If you're a nationalist, you should be deeply,
Speaker 1: deeply skeptical of all foreign aid arrangements, certainly including but
Speaker 1: not limited to US IS relate. I'm not saying cut
Speaker 1: it off overnight. But what I am saying is that
Speaker 1: this is a very very very good thing. The nets
Speaker 1: Yahoo is starting to come around to. I look forward
Speaker 1: to seeing some more in the way of details as
Speaker 1: to exactly what he means by this and how it's
Speaker 1: actually gonna be imprinted. I don't have all the answers there.
Speaker 1: Hopefully we get more on that soon, but big, big
Speaker 1: news for now. Stay with us with the break, folks,
Speaker 1: I'm Josh Hammer. We'll be right back. Welcome back. As
Speaker 1: were saying before the break, foreign eight is not a
Speaker 1: huge part of the federal budget in general. Look, there
Speaker 1: are a lot of folks who obsess over the question
Speaker 1: of foreign eight. Many of them are obsessed with Jews.
Speaker 1: Some of them just are not. Foreign aid in general
Speaker 1: is a tidy part of the federal budget. And it's
Speaker 1: true that Israel is the large recipient, Egypt is the
Speaker 1: second largest. I happen to be skeptic for what it's
Speaker 1: worth of all of it, for numerous reasons. One is
Speaker 1: again just just basic reasons of fiscal solvency. This country
Speaker 1: runs in trillion dollar deficits these days, seemingly year in
Speaker 1: year out. That's not good. It is deeply immoral to
Speaker 1: try to enslave future generations, our children generation, in our
Speaker 1: children's children generation, to try to enslave them to the
Speaker 1: soft slavery and soft tyranny of indebtedness. It's immoral. It's
Speaker 1: deeply wrong. Also, when you start having these gargantuan deficits
Speaker 1: every year, mere interest rates on the debt will start
Speaker 1: to become one of, if not the single largest line
Speaker 1: item of the federal budget. It just doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 1: So again, cutting foreign ad is not going to solve
Speaker 1: our fiscal woes, right, it's only going to have to
Speaker 1: happen when it comes to social security and medicare. We
Speaker 1: discussed a little bit with uvoll Levin that just this
Speaker 1: past week here on the show. These entilent programs are
Speaker 1: the things that are making America go bankrupt and unless
Speaker 1: than until those two things are solved, unfortunately, America is
Speaker 1: looking at a pretty serious fiscal cliff, probably within the
Speaker 1: next six to ten years. But foreign aid, while a
Speaker 1: small portion of it, doesn't help, I mean should we
Speaker 1: certainly should still be trying to ferret out and to
Speaker 1: root out waste fraud abuse wherever we have it. And
Speaker 1: the notion of waste and abuse gets to the other
Speaker 1: issue with foreign aid. The other issue is that where
Speaker 1: you look at where this goes, Israel's not really a
Speaker 1: great example because they are a functioning democracy, but a
Speaker 1: lot of the other countries where American foreign aid goes
Speaker 1: I mean the kleptocracy. I mean, take a random country
Speaker 1: in Africa or Asia or whatever. Do you think that
Speaker 1: your hard earned taxpayer dollars in foreign aate to that
Speaker 1: country is actually going to help the poor people of
Speaker 1: that country. You're actually going to help provide clothing and
Speaker 1: food and shelter for the folks in Sub Saharan Africa,
Speaker 1: for instance. Maybe you are to an extent, I mean,
Speaker 1: surely there are some instances where US foreign aid does
Speaker 1: end up finding its intented recipients. Maybe there are sometimes
Speaker 1: even in the Russi of Ukraine war, this terrible war
Speaker 1: the past few years. MAYI there are sometimes where that
Speaker 1: foreign aid is indeed going to find its way to
Speaker 1: a family that has lost a young man who served
Speaker 1: as country and was gonne down by a Russian plane.
Speaker 1: Maybe it's going to provide shelter for elderly people, Holocaust survivors, whatever. Maybe,
Speaker 1: but it's more often than not going to end up
Speaker 1: in the hands of well connected government bureaucrats. It will
Speaker 1: end up in the coffers of individuals organizations where it
Speaker 1: does not belong. Foreign eight is not a particularly good
Speaker 1: idea in the first place, in theory. In theory, it
Speaker 1: could be an interesting tool of very soft diplomacy. Emphasis
Speaker 1: is on theory because in practice it does end up
Speaker 1: being of dubious efficacy at best and profoundly count productive
Speaker 1: at worse. So I have at a long time skeptic
Speaker 1: of foreign aid. On the specific question of USA to Israel,
Speaker 1: which is basically basically the entire reason that the organization
Speaker 1: A pack exists to get this massive a package every year.
Speaker 1: I have been shouting into the ABYSS for again for
Speaker 1: over a decade, saying, not a great idea, frankly for
Speaker 1: either country. Can we find a way to wind this down.
Speaker 1: In fact, in my book Over my Shoulder, Israel and Civilization,
Speaker 1: I called for exactly this, for this bilateral aid arrangement
Speaker 1: to be bound down. The problem has been twofold. The
Speaker 1: problem has been American defense contractors. There's reason. There's a reason,
Speaker 1: for instance, that politicians like Lindsey Graham have historically been
Speaker 1: among the largest boosters of this annual aid package because
Speaker 1: his state, South Carolina is home to massive, massive defense
Speaker 1: contract or infrastructure. So that's been the one hindrance. The
Speaker 1: other hindrance has been on the Israeli side, and they're
Speaker 1: feeling like they just can't do it, They just can't
Speaker 1: separate from the teat of their outlly and be independent.
Speaker 1: But they really ought to, They really ought to, and
Speaker 1: defense contractors frankly don't need any more taxpayer largest so
Speaker 1: very so frankly, when it comes to the four and
Speaker 1: a conversation, and we will certainly continue to keep tabs
Speaker 1: on it as we learn more over the next few weeks,
Speaker 1: next few months, and so forth. One final story that
Speaker 1: I did want touch on before the end of today's show.
Speaker 1: So just yesterday we learned that the Chairman of the
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve, Chairman Jerome Palell aka Jerry Pal as he
Speaker 1: is typically known Jerry Pal, saying that the DOJ under
Speaker 1: turning General Pam Bondi, has served the Federal Reserve with
Speaker 1: subpoenas and has apparently threatened it with a criminal indictment.
Speaker 1: This was over Chairman Pal's testimony this past summer. So
Speaker 1: this great big ballroom in the eastern of the White
Speaker 1: House is not the only major renovation, only major act
Speaker 1: of construction happening near the National Mall in Washington State.
Speaker 1: The Federal Reserve, which very prominently sits there right on
Speaker 1: the National Mall as well. The Federal Reserve is having huge,
Speaker 1: huge renovations to their building as well. I actually was
Speaker 1: just in DC about a month ago for the White
Speaker 1: House Honka Party, and I saw some of as myself firsthand,
Speaker 1: just walking around the town with my wife, and apparently
Speaker 1: the allegation here The subpoenas relate to Cheerum Powell's testimony
Speaker 1: this in June this past June before the Senate Banking Committee,
Speaker 1: where Cheerum Palell said regarding the Fed's two and a
Speaker 1: half billion dollar renovation of two office buildings that he
Speaker 1: basically criticized this as excessive. So apparently now they're potentially
Speaker 1: indicting him. I don't, to be honest if you do
Speaker 1: exactly know exactly what this would look like when it
Speaker 1: comes to in Diamond there. I presume that it would
Speaker 1: be perjury or something close to perjury. But you know, frankly,
Speaker 1: I mean, maybe not the best use of the administration's capacities.
Speaker 1: At this time. I saw Center Roger Marshall of Kansas
Speaker 1: alerts they saying something very similar. Again, if he purge himself,
Speaker 1: that's then he purn himself. I mean, I happened to
Speaker 1: think perjury is terrible. I think that Jim Comey all
Speaker 1: but as surely persua himself. In twenty twenty one, within
Speaker 1: the five year statute limitations, we'll see if that Comy
Speaker 1: indictment can possibly be resuscraated after a judge threw it out.
Speaker 1: The dj is currently appealing that dismissal. We'll keep tabs
Speaker 1: in very close for you here on the Josh Hammer Show.
Speaker 1: When it comes to Jerry Pale again, if he purged himself,
Speaker 1: she prosecuted. If not, then they should be prosecuted. But
Speaker 1: the relevant point to me is more about the response.
Speaker 1: I care less about the actual indictment than the response,
Speaker 1: which is very talent. In response, Jerry Palell immediately went
Speaker 1: full Federal Reserve independence. He said, quote, the threat of
Speaker 1: criminal charge a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest
Speaker 1: rates based on our best assessment of what will serve
Speaker 1: the public, rather than following the preferences of the president.
Speaker 1: He's getting here at this point that the FED is independent.
Speaker 1: How many times we heard this? The FED is independent.
Speaker 1: It's an independent central bank. It's not part of the
Speaker 1: executive branch, it's not part of Congress. And I saw
Speaker 1: some other Republican elected officials. I saw Tom Tillis of
Speaker 1: North Carolina, who's about as useless a member of the
Speaker 1: Republican Caucus and the Senate as it gets. Tom Tillis
Speaker 1: echoing the exact same talking points. The independent in central
Speaker 1: bank there, this threatens the independence. Till Us actually went
Speaker 1: way further than Roger Marshall. Till Us apparently said that
Speaker 1: he is actually now going to hold up all of
Speaker 1: his own votes for Donald Trump's Federal Reserve Board of Governors,
Speaker 1: apparently unless until this subpoena, this indictment whatever it is,
Speaker 1: of Jerry Palell is dropped, which is totally ludicrous, folks.
Speaker 1: The relevant point is this, there's no such thing as
Speaker 1: an independent agency. Ah, it means you want to pull
Speaker 1: my hair out? How many times must be remind all
Speaker 1: of the would be armchair constitutional scholars of this most
Speaker 1: rudimentary point. Now there is a case pendem from the
Speaker 1: Spreme Court right now, Trump versus Slaughter. It's not about
Speaker 1: the FED. It's about the FTC, the Felt Trade Commission.
Speaker 1: By the constitutionality or lack thereof, of a so called
Speaker 1: independent agency will that applied to the FED when they
Speaker 1: rule on it. It's expected that the Slaughter case is
Speaker 1: going to probably rule against independ agencies as it should,
Speaker 1: as it definitely should. The ES Central Bank historically has
Speaker 1: been viewed as something of an exception to the rule.
Speaker 1: ES central banks historically are given greater leeway for historical reason.
Speaker 1: They'll go back to the bank the United say's blah
Speaker 1: blah blah. I don't care. I do not care, folks.
Speaker 1: When it comes to structural constitutionalism, the following truism holds
Speaker 1: the test of time. You're in an article on the Congress,
Speaker 1: you're in article to the Executive Branch, or you're in
Speaker 1: article three to the Judiciary. There's no fourth option. Door one,
Speaker 1: door two, door three, no door. Where's the FED? I
Speaker 1: don't know. It probably should be hard of the executive
Speaker 1: branch of the Congress, though, So enough of this garbage
Speaker 1: independent Federal Reserve talking point. I hate it. It means
Speaker 1: you want to pull my hero out. It's constitutional illiteracy.
Speaker 1: One oh one is an indictment justified. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm not on the case. What I do know is
Speaker 1: that the independent FED rebuke is garbage, and it should
Speaker 1: stay garbage and should be dismissed easily by the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court in the Slaughter case. Hope you enjoyed, say show.
Speaker 1: We'll be right back tomorrow. I'm Josh Hammer. Have a
Speaker 1: good evening. The Josh Hamber Show is a member of
Speaker 1: the Trust Project