Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 3: But enough with that, let's get to the show.
Speaker 4: All right, Good morning, wealthy counterpoints. Very little bit of
Speaker 4: housekeeping because most of you have figured this transition out
Speaker 4: by now. If you haven't, the email support at locals
Speaker 4: dot com is actually like, there are real people on
Speaker 4: the other side of it who are tasked with answering
Speaker 4: your questions.
Speaker 3: Yes, they will answer them.
Speaker 4: Yeah, Like, it's not just a black hole that you're
Speaker 4: going to send your complaints into, So be polite because
Speaker 4: it is going to go to a real person support.
Speaker 5: At locals dot com. If you've had any issues, make
Speaker 5: sure to connect your email, check your inbox. Obviously we're
Speaker 5: doing the transition this week, but if you had any issues,
Speaker 5: there are real people on the end of support at
Speaker 5: locals dot com and we're working right now. On Spotify connectivity,
Speaker 5: but that problem should be fixed soon. I appreciate you
Speaker 5: guys all hanging in there with us during this little
Speaker 5: transition period. But we're super excited and everything has been
Speaker 5: going well with Breaking Points this week because Ryan's been
Speaker 5: around with the Magic Tide Grow show. But welcome to Counterpoints.
Speaker 5: On that note, we have a great show. We actually
Speaker 5: have Gabriel Shipton coming in here and just a bit
Speaker 5: Julian Assange's brother because we're going to talk about the
Speaker 5: big updates in the Assage case. We're going to start
Speaker 5: today with elections around the country. It's obviously an election year,
Speaker 5: which means primary results continue to trickle in on Tuesdays,
Speaker 5: some really interesting ones. Last night, we'll have updates from Israel.
Speaker 5: The Associated Press saga that played out yesterday with AP cameras.
Speaker 6: Bill Maher was on the view for some reason.
Speaker 3: And that's great. We're going to talk about that.
Speaker 6: Yeah, love that for him, love that for them.
Speaker 5: A really interesting poll on generational differences on some really
Speaker 5: key things from gen Z and the Baby. We're going
Speaker 5: to dive into all of that. We're going to talk
Speaker 5: about scar Joe, the Scarlett Johansson, Open Ai debacle basically,
Speaker 5: and then we'll close with Gabriel, who we're excited to
Speaker 5: have in studio, and.
Speaker 4: I'll tell my story of partying with Scarlett Johansson back
Speaker 4: when I worked at the Huffington Post and used to
Speaker 4: be cool.
Speaker 5: I didn't want to bring it up because I didn't
Speaker 5: know how off the record it was. But stay tuned
Speaker 5: for this because it actually is a good story. All right,
Speaker 5: But let's start with elections. A one up on the
Speaker 5: screen in Kentucky's fourth congressional district last night.
Speaker 6: Thomas Massey.
Speaker 5: Let's just call him a friend of the show, because
Speaker 5: I feel like there aren't many Republican congressmen that we
Speaker 5: can say that about.
Speaker 6: But here at the Breaking.
Speaker 3: Points universe from his universe and said he wants to
Speaker 3: come on the show. Said, of course, come on.
Speaker 5: Good We admire Thomas Massey's If we admire Thomas Massey
Speaker 5: for one particular thing, it's his courage and standing up
Speaker 5: against political correctness, frankly, even when it's inconvenient for a Republican.
Speaker 5: So there was some to do made about Thomas Massey
Speaker 5: in his re election bid. He cleaned up last night
Speaker 5: about seventy six percent of the vote. You can see
Speaker 5: that on the screen here from the New York Times
Speaker 5: as of right now with ninety five percent of the votes.
Speaker 6: And rent I looked it up.
Speaker 5: He got sixty five percent of the vote back in
Speaker 5: twenty twenty two, so he actually did better better this
Speaker 5: go around, despite as you've reported, APAC targeting members of Congress,
Speaker 5: including him, because he's pushed back on some of the
Speaker 5: very broad language and bills that have been sort of
Speaker 5: symbolic bills, ones that you know, people on both sides
Speaker 5: have said are important symbolic bills on both sides of
Speaker 5: these bills, but about Israel and anti Zionism versus anti Semitism.
Speaker 5: And Massy's been one of the few Republican voices of reason.
Speaker 4: And you can tell how much they must hate Thomas
Speaker 4: Massey if they're willing to spend money to support a
Speaker 4: Scotch Irish guy ThEC Guinness down there. It was probably
Speaker 4: pretty hard to find a candidate in Kentucky who's not.
Speaker 6: Scotchi, right, Yeah, that would be a real challenge.
Speaker 4: Yeah, But so yeah, Thomas Massey with standing nowhere near
Speaker 4: the amount of a pack money that they're spending against
Speaker 4: squad members and squad aligned members. But you know, well
Speaker 4: into the six figures, like, yeah, nothing nothing to sneeze.
Speaker 6: At a lower Republican primary, right, and you.
Speaker 3: Know one extraordinarily convincingly.
Speaker 4: So that should that should send a message in kind
Speaker 4: of Trump districts that you know, a couple hundred thousand
Speaker 4: dollars or million dollars of a PAC money is not
Speaker 4: going to knock you off.
Speaker 5: Take us up to Portlandia, Bryan, Really, to a very
Speaker 5: could be a port sketch this election.
Speaker 4: A couple of million dollars can knock you off in Portland, Yes,
Speaker 4: all right, so we can put put this element up.
Speaker 4: So we've been following this for the last couple of weeks,
Speaker 4: and the climax here, Maxine Dexter, the APAC backed candidate
Speaker 4: in Portland's race, ends ended up beating Soushila Jaya Paul
Speaker 4: and Eddie Morales in kind of a three way race
Speaker 4: in a fairly convincing fashion. They're still counting the votes's
Speaker 4: mail in ballots, but the last I checked was over
Speaker 4: fifty percent, almost beating Giapaul by two to one. Giapaul
Speaker 4: was considered, if you're just checking in on this race now,
Speaker 4: to be the front runner in this race a month ago,
Speaker 4: and then a month ago, millions of dollars of dark
Speaker 4: money started being spent through two superpacks, one called three
Speaker 4: fourteen Action Fund, which says it's a pro science superpack,
Speaker 4: and the other one called Americans for Responsive Government or
Speaker 4: Voters for a Responsive Government, which a brand new super
Speaker 4: pac never existed before it was launched on April first,
Speaker 4: which meant that it doesn't didn't have to disclose its
Speaker 4: donors until May twentieth, it started spending. Collectively, they spent
Speaker 4: millions of dollars against Giapaul and for Dexter. In the
Speaker 4: entire time, Dexter was saying she had absolutely no idea
Speaker 4: where this money could possibly be coming from. And I've
Speaker 4: talked to people close to her, talk to people inside
Speaker 4: three fourteen, they all say everybody knew where.
Speaker 3: This money was coming from. It was APAC.
Speaker 4: We then know that from FEC records that she herself,
Speaker 4: I've got one hundred one thousand dollars from APACK donors,
Speaker 4: but yesterday on I guess no. Two days ago, on
Speaker 4: May twentieth, the day before the election was held, American
Speaker 4: Voters for Responsive Government was finally required to file with
Speaker 4: the FEC and this was when we expected that we
Speaker 4: would learn about their donors. And if you can put
Speaker 4: up this element here here it is they filed an
Speaker 4: FEC report. Emily, take a look at that. Look, oh,
Speaker 4: you never seen anything like that.
Speaker 5: No, just zero's I've never seen anything like When you
Speaker 5: tweated that, I was like.
Speaker 3: Cash on hands, zero this, you know, zero zero zero zero.
Speaker 4: And so what they're what they're clearly saying there is
Speaker 4: that whoever we got this money from would be too
Speaker 4: toxic even with one day before the race to disclose publicly.
Speaker 6: Now explain to people, well, how they get away with that?
Speaker 4: Yeah, So what they're basically going to do is they're
Speaker 4: going to file an amended return with the FEC, which
Speaker 4: will disclose who their donors are and say, whoops, you know,
Speaker 4: who could have seen how did this happens? We turned
Speaker 4: in the wrong paper, this this one was onto the couch.
Speaker 3: This is our fault.
Speaker 4: FEC will then find them and they will then peel
Speaker 4: off from their stack of bills and the FVC the
Speaker 4: money and even you know, probably throw a little tip
Speaker 4: at the regulator while they're at it, because they can,
Speaker 4: because who cares.
Speaker 6: It's not criminal, right, it's.
Speaker 3: Not falsifying business records, yes.
Speaker 6: Well, and for campaign related purposes.
Speaker 4: Can you write now, if there's a porn star involved somewhere,
Speaker 4: then then maybe the New York Attorney General will find
Speaker 4: a way to have some some type of jurisdiction over that.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Uh so Yeah, basically they're just going to pay the.
Speaker 4: Fine and not tell you, you know, where the money
Speaker 4: came from until after the election.
Speaker 5: I don't think you can even just be clear enough
Speaker 5: about what you've reported here over the last couple of
Speaker 5: weeks when you have.
Speaker 6: You have somebody who is this was a really close race.
Speaker 5: It was like tightly packed even you know, I'm reading
Speaker 5: organ media and from organ public broadcasts. You know, like
Speaker 5: the policy differences were not you know, obvious between any.
Speaker 3: Of these progressive Democrats, Right, Dexter.
Speaker 6: Announced later than everyone else. Uh.
Speaker 5: It just is crazy how the money swept in. It
Speaker 5: doesn't always happen this way, but when it does, it's
Speaker 5: so obvious, it's so clear exactly what happened.
Speaker 6: Uh, and that's what happened here.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 4: And what APAC discovered in a couple of other races
Speaker 4: Summer Leaves in particular, was that because a pack is
Speaker 4: primarily funded not exclusively but primarily funded by Republicans who
Speaker 4: also give money to Republicans Trump McCarthy whoever, that it's
Speaker 4: not necessarily the pro Israel money that hurts them in
Speaker 4: the Democratic primary among kind of normy Democratic voters, although
Speaker 4: I think it is in place like Portland right now
Speaker 4: that is a problem given what Israel is doing in Gaza.
Speaker 4: But in general, what Summer Elite hit her opponent for
Speaker 4: was not taking pro Israel money, with not taking a
Speaker 4: pac money, but was for.
Speaker 3: Taking Mega money.
Speaker 4: Yeah, because it fits into the hyper polarized kind of
Speaker 4: partisan nature, because it's a democratic primary, Like the people
Speaker 4: voting in Democratic primaries are hardcore Democrats.
Speaker 5: I was gonna say, speaking of which, this is a
Speaker 5: really deep blue district. So if you're wondering why this
Speaker 5: particular primary is a big deal, it's because that's basically
Speaker 5: who's won the general election. This is the race to
Speaker 5: replace Earl blumen Hour in that district.
Speaker 4: So you could imagine that if it were reversed and
Speaker 4: let's say George Soros and a bunch of other like
Speaker 4: let's say Harvey Weinstein's not in jail and they are
Speaker 4: supporting a super pack, that is then playing in Republican primaries,
Speaker 4: spending millions of dollars against one Republican to pick up
Speaker 4: another one. Yeah, you would imagine the other Republican be like,
Speaker 4: this is just a bunch of Democrat money.
Speaker 3: Yeah, absolutely, Hollywood money.
Speaker 5: Yeah, absolutely, Yes, it's crazy, It's absolutely crazy. And on
Speaker 5: that note, let's move over to California's twentieth district.
Speaker 6: That's Kevin McCarthy's was an interesting one.
Speaker 5: Yes, while we're doing congressional districts, our last stop on
Speaker 5: this tour of American elections last night would be a
Speaker 5: California's twentieth district, where there's a huge spending advantage to
Speaker 5: Vince Fong, who was kind of handpicked.
Speaker 6: By Kevin McCarthy.
Speaker 5: People refer to him as Kevin McCarthy protege to take
Speaker 5: that seat in California's Central Valley.
Speaker 6: It's a pretty interesting, heavily agricultural.
Speaker 3: District, Bakersfield, Bakersfield rusty.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, that's right.
Speaker 5: And so he won handily sixty percent of the vote.
Speaker 5: He was endorsed by Donald Trump. People say there's really
Speaker 5: no daylight between Kevin McCarthy and him on most main issues.
Speaker 6: But what's interesting is his opponent.
Speaker 5: I think he's a sheriff and also a long time
Speaker 5: fixture in the area. He interestingly enough, was endorsed by
Speaker 5: Trump like figures, so Rick Gronell who served in the
Speaker 5: Trump administration. But Fong had McCarthy's backing. He had all
Speaker 5: the money and he had Trump's backing. So that's where
Speaker 5: that ended up in California Central Valley in the twentieth I.
Speaker 4: Would think in that district, if you've got McCarthy and
Speaker 4: Trump else not going to push you over the time.
Speaker 6: It's not going to be Rick Garnell.
Speaker 5: But all this is say, yeah, it's not like he
Speaker 5: was some crazy, you know, fringe figure.
Speaker 6: He did bring other.
Speaker 3: You got over thirty percent, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 5: Yeah, which is impressive enough for a primary. But Ryan,
Speaker 5: we've got to get back to Portland. We've got to
Speaker 5: get back to Portland because that DA race.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so the other key race in Portland, and because
Speaker 4: it's a Democratic primary. This is basically it pitted the
Speaker 4: incumbent progressive district attorney named Mike Schmidt, not to be
Speaker 4: confused with the Hall of Fame Third Basement for the
Speaker 4: Philadelphia Phillies.
Speaker 5: Well, do you know that it's always sunny in Philadelphia
Speaker 5: a bit about Mike Schmidt.
Speaker 3: I don't think I've seen that.
Speaker 6: You don't know who Mike Schmidt is, You'll have to
Speaker 6: watch it.
Speaker 4: Oh, I think I have seen this. Mike Schmidt was
Speaker 4: my when I was a kid, was an absolute hero,
Speaker 4: like worshiped, absolutely worshiped Mike Schmidt. So it's very hard
Speaker 4: for me to see what happened to this other Mike
Speaker 4: Schmidt out in Portland, Oregon.
Speaker 3: We might have just ruined it for you.
Speaker 4: So basically, he was challenged from the right by another
Speaker 4: prosecutor who was a Republican right up until Trump was elected,
Speaker 4: and he switched parties and became a Democrat because you know,
Speaker 4: I guess a never Trump type Republican, but it's tough
Speaker 4: on crime prosecutor. And he ran his race against Measure
Speaker 4: one ten, which was the that was the measure that
Speaker 4: decriminalized drugs and said, you know, treatment over incarceration in
Speaker 4: Moltnoma County and which a lot of people in Maltnoma
Speaker 4: County blame for not actually moving people into treatment and
Speaker 4: instead just kind of creating kind of open air drug
Speaker 4: markets and drug dens.
Speaker 3: Basically all over Portland. People were also very.
Speaker 4: Upset at policing, the police just not responding anymore.
Speaker 3: Police strikes.
Speaker 4: Plus you know, the protests continuing to this day, like
Speaker 4: the George Floyd protests basically in Portland have never stopped.
Speaker 3: You got a hardcore group of people out there that are.
Speaker 4: Like just their pastime is like smashing up the Bank
Speaker 4: of America. And at some point people like, okay.
Speaker 3: We'll get it.
Speaker 4: We'll get it with the Bank of America. And so
Speaker 4: this guy Vazquez ran against if we can put this
Speaker 4: next element element up here, this was Jon and Martin
Speaker 4: kind of uh, foreshadowing this this race.
Speaker 3: He went out to do a.
Speaker 4: Little fly into Portland and you know, correctly called that
Speaker 4: the wind the political wins in Portland are blowing to
Speaker 4: the right. Yes, and there was some backlash brewing here.
Speaker 6: Those are the center, I guess maybe.
Speaker 3: Well to the right of where they are. Yeah, they're
Speaker 3: certainly not going to the right yet in Portland. Uh.
Speaker 3: And so it looks like Mike Schmidt is going to lose.
Speaker 4: Like, yes, I don't know if it's been absolutely called yet,
Speaker 4: but it's basically over down.
Speaker 6: By fourteen thousand votes as of early this morning.
Speaker 4: It's going to be very tough for him to make
Speaker 4: that up, and he gave a sort of concession last night.
Speaker 3: Let's roll a little bit of Schmid's explanation for why
Speaker 3: he thinks he lost this race.
Speaker 8: Well, I think, you know, I talked to a lot
Speaker 8: of voters, and I've heard a lot of frustration about
Speaker 8: long nine to one one wait times, about police officers
Speaker 8: not showing up, about when they see a case dismissed
Speaker 8: for lack of a public defense attorney. And I think
Speaker 8: if you're a community member, you just see things not working.
Speaker 8: And so I think, you know, that's probably what we've
Speaker 8: seen so far in the early results, and we'll still
Speaker 8: see more to come out, but we've seen so far
Speaker 8: in the early results is probably a manifestation of that frustration. Well,
Speaker 8: I think what we saw was a rollout of Measure
Speaker 8: one ten that didn't really hit the mark.
Speaker 9: You know.
Speaker 8: I think when people voted, myself included, we wanted treatment
Speaker 8: to be there and available to people.
Speaker 9: That's why we wanted to do that.
Speaker 8: And obviously, at the same time, a pandemic hit our
Speaker 8: community in fentanyl on our streets, and the treatment wasn't there,
Speaker 8: and so I think people lost patients with that type
Speaker 8: of approach.
Speaker 9: But you know, I'm hopeful that we stay with our.
Speaker 8: Focus on helping people who are addicted get treat I
Speaker 8: think that's the key and that's how we're actually going
Speaker 8: to make progress on this fight.
Speaker 9: You know, there's so many things that I look back
Speaker 9: and proud of.
Speaker 8: Rebuilding the office, you know, bringing up the staffing. I'm
Speaker 8: very proud of that, helping rebuild the infrastructure, but also
Speaker 8: a lot of the disparity work with the Justice Integrity Unit.
Speaker 8: We've doubled, more than doubled the number of wrongful convictions
Speaker 8: found in Waltmamont County. We've corrected those. You know, We're
Speaker 8: helping people get their records expunched so they can get jobs,
Speaker 8: they can get into housing, they can go to their
Speaker 8: kids basketball practice, you know, and those are the folks
Speaker 8: who have earned those expungements so the records can be clear.
Speaker 9: So I'm very proud of a lot of the work
Speaker 9: that we've done with the as office.
Speaker 4: So this ties into the Giapaul race in the sense
Speaker 4: that Giapaul was herself. She retired, resigned from the Moltnoma
Speaker 4: County Commission in order to run for Congress, and when
Speaker 4: the Apac back super PACs came in. The thing that
Speaker 4: they attacked her for was being on the Moltnomah County
Speaker 4: Board and not solving the homelessness crisis. The homelessness crisis
Speaker 4: was a proxy for everything else going on in Portland,
Speaker 4: And what we learned in Summer les Race, for instance,
Speaker 4: is not only was she able to hammer her opponent
Speaker 4: for taking MAGA money, she was just utterly squeaky clean.
Speaker 4: There was nothing that they could hit her on, like
Speaker 4: no stray comment that it could even be taken out
Speaker 4: of context. They just had to basically use old racist
Speaker 4: tropes to try to go after her like they had nothing.
Speaker 4: And so all the money in the world has a
Speaker 4: harder time breaking through if you don't have anything to
Speaker 4: cling onto. And with Giapaul, they basically tied the entire
Speaker 4: County Commission around her, and they said.
Speaker 3: You don't like the ads were basically you don't like.
Speaker 4: That the County Commission didn't fix homelessness, don't reward Giapaul
Speaker 4: with an elevation to Congress. And if people really loved
Speaker 4: what the County Commission was doing, dads wouldn't have worked
Speaker 4: quite as well as they did, even though they were
Speaker 4: filled with lies and saying like they literally said that
Speaker 4: she was abusing puppies and yeah cats.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was crazy over the top.
Speaker 6: Step so really Christy Nome behavior.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but it fit exactly, but it fit into a
Speaker 4: feeling of among Portlanders that that things.
Speaker 3: Were not going well after the passage of this measure
Speaker 3: one ten.
Speaker 5: And speaking of that connection, Blumenauer himself even criticized it
Speaker 5: as malpractice. That's quoted in the implementation of the referendum,
Speaker 5: and the Jonathan Martin piece ties this into the big
Speaker 5: national story, which is you've had Kim Fox didn't run
Speaker 5: again in the Chicago area, would there have been all
Speaker 5: kinds of issues with crime since the pandemic and drugs
Speaker 5: and you know, just typical from what a lot of
Speaker 5: big cities, even right here, have dealt with in different ways,
Speaker 5: especially since twenty twenty and obviously for a long time,
Speaker 5: but especially acute in the years after the pandemic and
Speaker 5: the pandemic itself. Jonathan Martin so mentioned George Gascone, who's
Speaker 5: facing a challenge in November. Chesatboudine obviously was recalled. The
Speaker 5: other person I would mention in all of this is
Speaker 5: London Breed. The mayor of San Francisco who did a
Speaker 5: similar see saw to what you're seeing in some places
Speaker 5: in Portland, where it's like we can run on this
Speaker 5: experiment with this and then when the public is unhappy
Speaker 5: with the results, you have to sometimes.
Speaker 6: Take an out London. Breed definitely took the.
Speaker 4: L Where I disagree with Jonathan on that is that
Speaker 4: and also Breed was the right wing candidate in that
Speaker 4: runoff in San Francisco. And so anything that she's a Democrat, yes,
Speaker 4: all are all Democrats out there unless they're green. So
Speaker 4: anything that she did, it was only because she was
Speaker 4: pressured to do it, and then she backed off the
Speaker 4: very second she could. When she had a chance to
Speaker 4: appoint people to the as supervisors, she appointed like the
Speaker 4: literally the spokesperson for the cops.
Speaker 3: Like that's who she put on the on.
Speaker 4: The board of supervisors when she had an opportunity. If
Speaker 4: you look at Dallas, Houston, you look at you look
Speaker 4: at a ton of other even small town DA races,
Speaker 4: they're doing really well.
Speaker 3: Chase A. Boudin is like the outlier which and they were.
Speaker 4: Trying to this is the San Francisco and they were
Speaker 4: trying to they were trying to yank him out of
Speaker 4: office before he was even sworn in, and spent millions
Speaker 4: to do it, and things have not gotten better, Like
Speaker 4: they're like all Chase his fault well and Karen Bath
Speaker 4: so much yeah Ca and so a bunch of progressive
Speaker 4: das have hung on. I think there's I wouldn't over
Speaker 4: read too much about what's going on in Portland. Portland,
Speaker 4: I don't think anybody would disagree is a unique city.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean I agree with that.
Speaker 7: Uh.
Speaker 4: And what what what defenders of the policy will say
Speaker 4: is that and this sounds like, you know, true communism
Speaker 4: has never been tried. Was that they didn't actually ever
Speaker 4: implement a policy. They talked about implementing a policy, and
Speaker 4: they passed half the laws, but then the Moltnoma County
Speaker 4: Commission and they deserve blame for this, This is not cope,
Speaker 4: just devolved into infighting and left money unspent, uh and
Speaker 4: engage in these little petty turf wars and so never
Speaker 4: actually came up with a coherent policy of what does
Speaker 4: the post George Floyd and post drug policy reform world
Speaker 4: look like? Instead, they just kind of ended what they
Speaker 4: had been doing before, combined with a police strike and
Speaker 4: then didn't put anything in its place, and people are like,
Speaker 4: you know what, We'll just go back to.
Speaker 3: The old thing. At least that was it. At least
Speaker 3: that was least that was something. And we're going to
Speaker 3: this on our Counterpoints.
Speaker 4: Friday is going to be drug policy debate, focusing mostly
Speaker 4: on marijuana rescheduling. Yeah, so we can talk about this
Speaker 4: more later and on that show. So I'm sure Kevin Sabat,
Speaker 4: who's going to be who's going to be our anti
Speaker 4: guy in this debate, is going to be extraordinarily excited
Speaker 4: about Mike Schmid losing.
Speaker 5: Final thought, just on this block would be going back
Speaker 5: to the point you made on London Breed, which is
Speaker 5: there was and I think your book even speaks to this,
Speaker 5: there was an enthusiasm about the public's response to some
Speaker 5: progressive fantasy bucket list items that started to surge at
Speaker 5: a different time, and then after the pandemic, the political
Speaker 5: winds have blown in another direction, and you've seen certain
Speaker 5: Democrats respond to that in different ways. And I feel
Speaker 5: like that's this election season, we'll have some stuff that
Speaker 5: kind of shows us how different parts of the country
Speaker 5: are dealing.
Speaker 4: With that excellent plug for the book, Oh you want
Speaker 4: for that? And meanwhile, crime is way down around the country,
Speaker 4: like the kind of what depends on the pandemic crime
Speaker 4: surge that we saw seeing that come down.
Speaker 5: It depends on where, it depends on what kind of crime.
Speaker 5: But yes, it's not the media coverage is not exactly
Speaker 5: the true story and that shouldn't surprise anybody.
Speaker 3: Yes, indeed, all.
Speaker 5: Right, well we can actually go ahead and put this
Speaker 5: first headline from CNN up on the screen. It just says,
Speaker 5: Israel reverses on seizure of AP camera feed after intense backlash,
Speaker 5: and you know that pretty much sums it up, just
Speaker 5: reading from the lead of the CNN story. In a
Speaker 5: sharp reversal, Israel said Tuesday it would return camera and
Speaker 5: broadcast equipment it had ceased from the Associated Press in
Speaker 5: the southern Israeli city of How do I say that
Speaker 5: DA on Tuesday, after the action prompted swift backlash from
Speaker 5: US officials and press groups. Swift backlash might be an understatement.
Speaker 5: What did you make actually of how the US responded.
Speaker 4: When they seized Their pretext for seizing the AP camera
Speaker 4: was that Al Jazeera, which they have banned from operating
Speaker 4: in the occupied territories or in Israel has a subscription
Speaker 4: to the AP, as do most news organizations, and therefore
Speaker 4: that the AP is just the same as Al Jazeera
Speaker 4: and needs to be you know, rolled up just like them.
Speaker 3: The White House, you know, expressed its concern, and it
Speaker 3: was a.
Speaker 4: Rare case of the White House expressing concern. Love Kenny
Speaker 4: clips every time he makes fun of the White House for.
Speaker 5: Expressing Ken Clippstein substacker, Ken Clippenstein, you can subscribe actually
Speaker 5: to kind of.
Speaker 3: kN Clippenstein dot com.
Speaker 4: So if you're just listening on the podcast, it's a
Speaker 4: Barack revw tweet, says breaking. White House Press Secretary Karine
Speaker 4: Jean Pierre told reporters that the Biden administration is concerned
Speaker 4: by reports that the Israeli government confiscated equipment of the AP.
Speaker 3: She said journalists need to have the right and the
Speaker 3: ability to do their job, which Kennett's breaking. The White
Speaker 3: House is concerned.
Speaker 4: But not only was the White House concerned, reporters throughout
Speaker 4: Israel were concerned, and across the world were concerned. And
Speaker 4: so it was a rare moment where Israel basically acknowledged
Speaker 4: an overstep.
Speaker 3: Yeah, like, okay, are bad?
Speaker 4: So they returned, They returned the equipment backing down a tiny.
Speaker 5: Bit I was read actually the statement from the Israeli
Speaker 5: Communications Minister who said he has ordered the equipment be
Speaker 5: returned to the AP News agency because the Israeli Ministry
Speaker 5: of Defense requested to re examine the matter of broadcasts
Speaker 5: from sensitive locations and their effect on the.
Speaker 6: Risk of our forces.
Speaker 5: So when Israel is saying they're obviously the implicit reason
Speaker 5: for seizing the AP cameras is that this is putting
Speaker 5: your journalism, is putting the military at risk.
Speaker 6: And actually there absolutely.
Speaker 5: Are times when that's a real concern that journalists have
Speaker 5: to grapple with and that governments have to grapple with.
Speaker 5: But the rapid reversal here and saying from the statement,
Speaker 5: just well, we've decided to reconsider the entire matter of
Speaker 5: our approach, right because it felt like it was a
Speaker 5: bit of a kind of fabricated rationale post hoc once
Speaker 5: they were coming under fire for because for cracking down
Speaker 5: the AP because it.
Speaker 4: Has a relationship with Al Jazeera, which is that's what
Speaker 4: AP does. They sell their feed, their wire service, the
Speaker 4: wire service like that, there's an association of the press
Speaker 4: and Aljazier is part of the press, whether Israel likes
Speaker 4: it or not. They have already banned basically any West
Speaker 4: journalists from getting into Gaza. What they're what they would
Speaker 4: be claiming now is that getting anywhere near Gaza is
Speaker 4: also something that they're not going to allow. But it
Speaker 4: seems they did at least a backtrack on this. Yeah quickly, Yeah,
Speaker 4: speaking of press, uh, press freedoms, we can talk about
Speaker 4: this real quickly. At least seven Palestinians were killed in
Speaker 4: a raid in Janine recently. Janine has been the subject
Speaker 4: of intense IDF raids for years now.
Speaker 3: Uh. And it was actually where shrin Abu Wakla was killed.
Speaker 4: Yes, but obviously before October seventh. Palestinian media is saying
Speaker 4: that a fifty year old surgeon named doctor use Jabarin
Speaker 4: was was killed killed on his way to work, as
Speaker 4: was a child who was riding his bicycle. There are
Speaker 4: a lot of videos that you can find on social
Speaker 4: media just absolutely indiscriminated shooting from IDF forces. IDF says
Speaker 4: it is going to investigate itself to see if any
Speaker 4: of this indiscriminate shooting did did kill people that they
Speaker 4: allegedly did not intend to kill.
Speaker 5: We'll see now on the other side of this talking
Speaker 5: about humanitarian concerns and potential famine.
Speaker 6: And food shortages.
Speaker 5: Let's put this element from Haratz up on the screen
Speaker 5: that begins with the quote spill it onto the road,
Speaker 5: and the headline proceeds to say, how right wing Israeli
Speaker 5: activists are organizing to block AID trucks to Gaza.
Speaker 6: This is an.
Speaker 5: Investigation and overview of some of the organized efforts to
Speaker 5: block some of these AID trucks. The next element hears
Speaker 5: from the Guardian. It suggests their reporting suggests that Israeli
Speaker 5: soldiers and police are tipping off some of those groups.
Speaker 5: So again, like the organization here, I think is important.
Speaker 5: The coordination, right, I think is important because some people
Speaker 5: may say, well, this is just sort of organic gatherings
Speaker 5: of you know, people who are still raging from the raging,
Speaker 5: you know, happenings on October seventh, the tragedy, the killings,
Speaker 5: the slaughter on October seventh. But I think it's important
Speaker 5: here also to mention that this is an organized effort
Speaker 5: when it comes to the AID trucks. Absolutely, and that's
Speaker 5: what the Guardian reporting suggests. And I think kind of
Speaker 5: confirms from the perspective of how is really law enforcement's
Speaker 5: handling it.
Speaker 4: Yeah, all the way to the top. We can put
Speaker 4: up this next element from it. Timir ben Gavier, national
Speaker 4: security minister, who was like raging. He said, quote, why
Speaker 4: are my cops here? Because you've seen what you've seen,
Speaker 4: And basically what he's saying is why on earth are
Speaker 4: Israeli authorities defending the AID convoys that are going to
Speaker 4: Gaza from these protesters, Like he wants to support the
Speaker 4: protesters rather than the AID convoys.
Speaker 3: What you're seeing here.
Speaker 4: Is the same thing that happened with the AP camera.
Speaker 4: The world opinion is just so overwhelmingly against this idea
Speaker 4: that you're going to allow and organize with right wing
Speaker 4: protesters to block flower and other aid from getting into Gaza,
Speaker 4: that there has been some suppression of that internally. One
Speaker 4: of the lead organizations this happened last week, one of
Speaker 4: the lead organizations that was organizing these protests announced that
Speaker 4: it was going to pause them. It's not a good
Speaker 4: time to do these Now. There's still some obviously people
Speaker 4: who are still continuing to do it, but the kind
Speaker 4: of viral videos of them smashing flower bags and destroying
Speaker 4: things right after Biden just had a temper tantrum in
Speaker 4: the United States about how breaking a window at Colombia
Speaker 4: is property violence and like the greatest crime that you
Speaker 4: could possibly imagine. You got all this property violence over
Speaker 4: against the AID going in. And so this also coming
Speaker 4: at the same time as the icc arrest warrants being
Speaker 4: applied for and the ICJ moving forward with its accusation
Speaker 4: against the against the State of Israel that it is starving,
Speaker 4: deliberately starving this population.
Speaker 6: That's absolutely critical.
Speaker 5: By the way, the Guardian report that we had up
Speaker 5: on the screen about whether it's really police are tipping
Speaker 5: off some of the activists who are blocking the AID trucks,
Speaker 5: not merely protesting the AID trucks, but actively trying to
Speaker 5: block the AID trucks. That goes to whether this is
Speaker 5: a deliberate effort on behalf of the government itself as
Speaker 5: opposed to again, just some protests that they're working to contain,
Speaker 5: just some activists that they're working to contain. That's critical
Speaker 5: to the question that the ic C is considering. And
Speaker 5: I think Ryan that's probably why we're seeing more about
Speaker 5: it in the media right now, because this has become
Speaker 5: a football in both sides of that battle. And I
Speaker 5: mean it's a tough thing for them to get around
Speaker 5: when you have Benavier to the point that you just
Speaker 5: made the quotes from Van Kavie, you have the statements
Speaker 5: and the way that he's approached all of this, and
Speaker 5: other people as well.
Speaker 6: I think that's why.
Speaker 5: This is becoming such a I mean, it's obvious, you
Speaker 5: don't even need my speculation. That's why this is becoming
Speaker 5: such a major conversation about how this is actually happening,
Speaker 5: what organization is behind this, what coordination is behind this.
Speaker 5: That's critical to the ICC proving that there's something deliberate
Speaker 5: happening on behalf of the Israeli government.
Speaker 4: And since you know, glimmers of hope are so few
Speaker 4: in this, we should mention that a very cool organization
Speaker 4: in Israel called Standing Together, which is it's kind of
Speaker 4: a coexistence organization with both Jewish Israelis and Palestinians as
Speaker 4: members of it, as kind of co leaders of it.
Speaker 4: They've been now going down to these protests and standing
Speaker 4: together against the protesters and kind of defending the trucks
Speaker 4: that are trying to get in. Most of what they
Speaker 4: do nowadays is basically criminal under Israeli law. And so
Speaker 4: we'll see what the reaction is to.
Speaker 3: This organization being willing to stand up for these trucks.
Speaker 4: Meanwhile, from what I'm hearing from people on the ground
Speaker 4: at the crossings, the number of trucks getting through yesterday
Speaker 4: and the day before is dangerously close to approaching like
Speaker 4: single digits, like Israel had been bragging about, say two hundred,
Speaker 4: you know, getting in a day where the UN was saying, no.
Speaker 3: You need a thousand or more on a daily basis.
Speaker 4: Getting down into double digits or single digits is bringing
Speaker 4: it to a place where distribution is stopping, like the
Speaker 4: UN announced, like a lot of AID distributions just stopped.
Speaker 4: Cupboards are bare, running out of fuel, can't because fuel
Speaker 4: is obviously essential for distributing the aid. You don't have fuel,
Speaker 4: you can't distribute the aid. And so all of this
Speaker 4: is happening in the context of real things on the ground,
Speaker 4: and the real things on the ground are Aid getting
Speaker 4: choked to a point of almost zero.
Speaker 3: The RAFA is still not open.
Speaker 4: You've got you know, Egypt refusing on its side to
Speaker 4: cooperate with Israel, Israel refusing to allow anything but fuel
Speaker 4: but Egypt not letting anything in and then everything having
Speaker 4: to go through Carara Shalom, but just an absolute trickle
Speaker 4: getting through there.
Speaker 5: And they're not wrong that those the difficulties of having
Speaker 5: you know, a de facto Hamas government in these places
Speaker 5: makes it difficult in a war zone. That's not going
Speaker 5: to be a non issue anywhere that there's aid being
Speaker 5: distributed in.
Speaker 6: A war zone.
Speaker 5: But to you know, say that we are providing adequate
Speaker 5: aid is different than saying no, we're just outright starving everyone.
Speaker 5: And Israel is saying, you know, despite all of these challenges,
Speaker 5: there is no starvation, there is no famine. We are
Speaker 5: providing adequate aid. They're not a party to the ICC. Obviously,
Speaker 5: this is that's another issue entirely. But they are saying
Speaker 5: one thing, and that's you.
Speaker 3: Know, the reality on the ground is different.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And I think everyone understands that there are real challenges.
Speaker 5: Even in the best case scenario, there are real challenges here.
Speaker 5: But the difference between what's being publicly said and what's
Speaker 5: actually happening, I think is what's being sussed out in
Speaker 5: some of this reporting. Speaking of Rafa Ryan, we put
Speaker 5: this next element up on the screen. This is a
Speaker 5: tweet from Just Foreign Policy. This is kind of it was.
Speaker 5: I don't want to say buried, but it was in
Speaker 5: a David Ignacious report in the Washington Post. Biden no
Speaker 5: longer opposing Israel's plan for final assault on Rafa's have
Speaker 5: Just Foreign Policy phrased it, but it was in this
Speaker 5: David Ignacious column. He writes, Israeli leaders have reached a
Speaker 5: consensus about a final assault hamasa's four remaining battalions in Rafa,
Speaker 5: instead of the heavy attack with two divisions that Israel
Speaker 5: contemplated several weeks ago. Government and military leaders foresee a
Speaker 5: more limited assault that US officials think will result.
Speaker 6: In fewer civilian casualties.
Speaker 5: And for that reason, Biden won't oppose sort of a
Speaker 5: barred lead.
Speaker 6: I don't know, right, No.
Speaker 5: Biden won't oppose this quote limited assault, even though he
Speaker 5: was opposed to the Rafa incursion. Here and you get
Speaker 5: this very friendly to the national security state. David agnantius
Speaker 5: a report saying well, Biden won't approach won't oppose a
Speaker 5: quote more limited assault. The White House would never put
Speaker 5: on a statement to that.
Speaker 6: Effect, but I guess they will leak it through David.
Speaker 3: Ignacious rights ignacious. D is the kind of the CIA. Yes,
Speaker 3: like that's that's the go to source for.
Speaker 6: Them, briefed the CIA in fact.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: And so for anybody who believed the Biden insistence over
Speaker 4: the months that Rafa was a red line, it just
Speaker 4: makes a mockery of that naivete because here he's saying, oh,
Speaker 4: you know what, actually the way you're doing it, that's okay.
Speaker 4: There's four battalions. Just we thought it was going to be,
Speaker 4: you know, much worse than this, But this, this seems fine. Meanwhile,
Speaker 4: the reports from the ground are often absolute bloodbath, in
Speaker 4: rough plus eight hundred thousand people so far migrating elsewhere
Speaker 4: in Gaza to places that have no sanitation, no hygiene,
Speaker 4: no water. The entire condition was Israel had to have
Speaker 4: some plan where they.
Speaker 3: Were going to move people. They didn't come up with
Speaker 3: a plan.
Speaker 4: Their plan basically was we're going to make it so
Speaker 4: violent when we invade that they're either going to die
Speaker 4: or they're going to just find somewhere to run to elsewhere.
Speaker 4: And Biden responds to that by saying, eh, okay, this
Speaker 4: is fine.
Speaker 5: So let's put this next element up. This is from
Speaker 5: Prem Thacker, who was responding to Anthony Blincoln's testimony in
Speaker 5: from Congress yesterday. So he said he's happy to work
Speaker 5: with Congress unquote inappropriate response. This is Blincoln to the
Speaker 5: ICC prosecutor issuing warrants to Israeli leaders. Now prem then
Speaker 5: quote tweeted that original tweet and said, minutes later Senators Graham, Cardon, Bloomenthalsh, Shaheen, Fetterman,
Speaker 5: Rish brit Thune. So that's a bipartisan coalition declare they'll
Speaker 5: work in quote a bipartisan manner to strenuously object to
Speaker 5: the ICC's actions against our ally Israel and take appropriate
Speaker 5: steps to help Israel and protect Americans from ICC action.
Speaker 5: Ren That just brings us back to basically why these
Speaker 5: conversations and the reporting from the Guardian that we mentioned
Speaker 5: earlier is critical because the US now has this huge
Speaker 5: issue on its hands when it comes to the ICC,
Speaker 5: When it comes to the US's funding of what's happening
Speaker 5: in Israel, the US is sort of sanctioning of what
Speaker 5: the Israeli military does.
Speaker 6: To the extent that that happens.
Speaker 5: The central question of deliberate aid blocking, deliberate activism against
Speaker 5: aid blocking, that question becomes key in even what the
Speaker 5: US response to all of this is how far the
Speaker 5: US goes to defend what's happening. This bipartisan coalition obviously
Speaker 5: was eager to jump on them, and one.
Speaker 4: Thing I forgot to put in the rundown, but I
Speaker 4: think it's worth mentioning before we move on to what
Speaker 4: we got Bill Maher, And.
Speaker 6: We got Bill Maher coming right.
Speaker 3: Don't worry, we'll get to Bill on Monday.
Speaker 4: At the State Department, I asked about this, this deal
Speaker 4: that Hamas had agreed to, and asked the State Department
Speaker 4: what role did director William Burns play CIA director William
Speaker 4: Burn's play in this role, because there's reporting that he
Speaker 4: signed off on the thing. And Miller's answer was kind
Speaker 4: of interesting because it was like, there's been some good
Speaker 4: reporting on this, some not, but he didn't. He didn't
Speaker 4: just say no, Burns did not sign off on that.
Speaker 3: It was. There was a much kind of a more
Speaker 3: open ended answer.
Speaker 4: And then there was this fascinating report in CNN yesterday
Speaker 4: which I'm not sure if you saw it, that said
Speaker 4: that an Egyptian intelligence officer. So take all this with
Speaker 4: a grain of salt, but it's interesting that it's being
Speaker 4: reported and it might also be true.
Speaker 3: An Egyptian intelligence.
Speaker 4: Officer tweaked the proposal after the US cut through Egypt.
Speaker 4: Israel had all agreed to it before sending it to
Speaker 4: Hamas last week last week, and then Hamas agreed to
Speaker 4: the one that they had been delivered. So what we
Speaker 4: were being told was that Hamas changed it yes and
Speaker 4: then agreed to it and was and it was trying
Speaker 4: to get one over on everybody and fake agreeing to
Speaker 4: a ceasefire. But what we're now being told is that
Speaker 4: they agreed to the exact deal that they were offered
Speaker 4: and were told that the Israelis were supportive of because
Speaker 4: the tweaks were minor. An Egyptian so one of the
Speaker 4: quotes in the article, Hamas was telling their people, we
Speaker 4: will have a deal in place tomorrow. In other words,
Speaker 4: that this was not a gimmick, like Hamas was not
Speaker 4: just playing pr and expecting a rough invasion, like they
Speaker 4: thought that they had agreed to the deal. They even
Speaker 4: named the intern who made the changes. He's not an intern,
Speaker 4: but this is how CNN reports it. The three sources
Speaker 4: familiar with the matter told CNN that a senior Egyptian
Speaker 4: intelligence official named Ahmed Abdel Kalak was responsible for making
Speaker 4: the changes. Abdel Khalik is a senior deputy to the
Speaker 4: Egyptian intelligence chief of Bass Kamel, who has been Burns's
Speaker 4: counterpart in leading Egypt's mediation in the ceasefire talks. One
Speaker 4: source familiar with the negotiation said Kalik told the Israelis
Speaker 4: one thing and Hamas another.
Speaker 3: More of Hamas's.
Speaker 4: Demands were inserted into the original framework that Israel had
Speaker 4: tacitly agreed to in order to secure Hamas's approval, the
Speaker 4: source said. So, one source is saying that Israel actually
Speaker 4: did agree to most of this, but the other mediators
Speaker 4: were not.
Speaker 3: Informed, nor critically were the Israelis.
Speaker 4: So giant mess and it's like they're trying to say
Speaker 4: it was this guy Kalik who tweaked the thing at
Speaker 4: the last minute, which, like I said, there's something happened here,
Speaker 4: and the fact that it's leaking out to CNN here
Speaker 4: suggests that there's some clean up going on on the
Speaker 4: part of the West and that it does appear from
Speaker 4: this reporting that Hamas was earnestly agreeing to a piece deal.
Speaker 6: It's pretty interesting that's in CNN.
Speaker 4: Yeah, Jeremy Diamonds, one of the reporters there. He's a
Speaker 4: very very strong reporter. He's done some really good work
Speaker 4: out of there. So because like you know, CNN contains multitudes,
Speaker 4: to put it generously, that's one win.
Speaker 3: And Jeremy Diamond's done a lot of very good reporting.
Speaker 5: So, Ryan, I just wanted to say before we move on,
Speaker 5: that was maybe we were approaching peek, Ryan Gram when
Speaker 5: you said, I forgot to put it in the rundown,
Speaker 5: but you know, it reminded me.
Speaker 6: I was tying in the State.
Speaker 5: Department this week about the CIA director. But you know,
Speaker 5: I'm glad you remembered it because it was quite relevant.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well it becomes extra relevant when the CNN report
Speaker 4: came out later, So it was only It's like, whatever,
Speaker 4: it's an interesting answer, but I'm not sure what's going
Speaker 4: on here, But then when you pair it with this
Speaker 4: the CNN clip, I mean, the CNN report, it's kind
Speaker 4: of interesting.
Speaker 5: Let's move on to Bill Maher's appearance on The View,
Speaker 5: where he talked about in fact, the conflict in the
Speaker 5: Middle East and how it has royaled American college campuses.
Speaker 5: If you're wondering, why do I need to hear what
Speaker 5: Bill Maher said on the View, I understand, but it's
Speaker 5: pretty it's a pretty interesting fiery exchange that I think
Speaker 5: that leaves a lot to be discussed. So with that setup,
Speaker 5: please enjoy Bill Maher getting into a little bit of
Speaker 5: a fight with Sunny Austin Little Left on left violence
Speaker 5: here over quote wokeness on the View.
Speaker 10: Well, I had a different question, but it struck me
Speaker 10: that in the first segment you used the term woke,
Speaker 10: and you said that woke is what was sort of
Speaker 10: ruining everything.
Speaker 6: And I know that you're no.
Speaker 7: I didn't say ruining everything. I said that's why Trump
Speaker 7: could get reelected.
Speaker 6: That's why Trump could get reelected.
Speaker 10: So I just the term woke has been, in my view,
Speaker 10: co opted by the right and weaponized and bastardized. And
Speaker 10: so I was surprised to hear you use the term
Speaker 10: because historically, as you know, because I think you're quite brilliant,
Speaker 10: that woke is a word used by the black community
Speaker 10: to note that we must be aware of social injustices.
Speaker 10: But why is that a bad thing?
Speaker 7: It's not a bad thing, and originally that was absolutely
Speaker 7: a great thing, alert to injustice. Who's not for that?
Speaker 7: But words do migrate. Now, I'll use any term you want,
Speaker 7: because maybe that is a word that's triggering, and so
Speaker 7: we let's not use that word. I know I want
Speaker 7: to call it the super far left, but don't tell
Speaker 7: me the left had right we.
Speaker 9: Talked out the left then, okay, but but.
Speaker 7: We've talked about that. I mean, I think we agree
Speaker 7: about the danger of the super far right, and you know,
Speaker 7: I can't say it enough. I think they're the bigger threat.
Speaker 7: But don't tell me that the left hasn't changed. I mean,
Speaker 7: I'm old enough to remember when it was the conservatives
Speaker 7: who hated the Jews. Okay, that was a joke. Well
Speaker 7: maybe it is, but it's true. I mean, you know,
Speaker 7: if I had any doubt that I was right about
Speaker 7: the change that's happened in the left, watching people protest
Speaker 7: for a terrorist organization like Hamas that straightened me up
Speaker 7: pretty quick. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I wanted to ask you about that because I think
Speaker 1: you're almost a free speech absolutist. You believe totally in
Speaker 1: the right to say what you believe. But I think
Speaker 1: a lot of us were disturbed to see terrorist flags
Speaker 1: being waved on American college campuses and seeing this a
Speaker 1: generation that may some I think genuinely care about the
Speaker 1: play of the Palestinians.
Speaker 6: I think most Americans do.
Speaker 1: But some who seem to be embracing a terrorist organization
Speaker 1: over the nation of Israel.
Speaker 6: What do you make at this moment?
Speaker 1: What do you think it's a result of how do
Speaker 1: we fix it?
Speaker 6: Well?
Speaker 7: I mean it's just astounding to me that they can't
Speaker 7: tell the good guys from the bad guys. I mean
Speaker 7: just the morally. I mean, let me tell you, if
Speaker 7: you're for Hamas, just live in gossip for a day.
Speaker 7: And I'm not talking about while the war is on.
Speaker 7: I mean before the war, trust me, you would go
Speaker 7: running and screaming and begging to live and tell of
Speaker 7: ev a place that has your values. I mean, women
Speaker 7: have no I mean it's the show watched by a
Speaker 7: lot of women. Women have no rights in this place
Speaker 7: and a lot of majority Muslim countries around the world.
Speaker 7: I mean, there is no equal rights as far as speech, dress,
Speaker 7: opportunities for education, reproductive rights, freedom from sexual violence, freedom
Speaker 7: from sexual harassment, that too. But you throw around the
Speaker 7: term apartheid. There is a gender apartheid in a lot
Speaker 7: of the world where women are second class citizens at best,
Speaker 7: are you.
Speaker 10: At all concerned about the innocent civilians that have been
Speaker 10: collectively punished and murdered, largely children and women. And are
Speaker 10: you at all concerned about the fact that the International
Speaker 10: Criminal Court just today issued a subpoena for BBTA.
Speaker 7: Well, that's ridiculous, But it's a war. It's a war
Speaker 7: because it's a war and they were attacked and they're
Speaker 7: defending themselves.
Speaker 3: Okay, Well, where to start there?
Speaker 5: I will say, exceptionally substantive discussion for the view, and
Speaker 5: I mean that in the literal sense. Exception is an
Speaker 5: exception to how those conversations normally go.
Speaker 4: But we could start with his claim that if you
Speaker 4: lived in Gaza before October seventh, you would go running
Speaker 4: and screaming to say, let me out of here, and
Speaker 4: I want to go live in Tel Avivah. Isn't that
Speaker 4: what everybody in Gaza was doing? I mean, like that
Speaker 4: so strips all of the context out of the situation. Yes,
Speaker 4: it forgets the fact that nobody in Gaza could leave. Yeah,
Speaker 4: and no it's not. No, they weren't trapped in Gaza
Speaker 4: because of Hamas. Like he's like, if you lived in Gaza,
Speaker 4: you'd want to leave, Okay, so to a lot of
Speaker 4: people and go to go visit their families in the
Speaker 4: West Bank, to visit their families elsewhere in the world,
Speaker 4: to get medical appointments, to do business, but they are
Speaker 4: not allowed to leave by Israel.
Speaker 3: Like that.
Speaker 4: That is kind of irrelevant detail. But this is this
Speaker 4: whole question when he's saying good guys and bad guys.
Speaker 5: But that's where this becomes a cycle, because he would say,
Speaker 5: you know, in part of course, yes, they are being
Speaker 5: stopped from that by Hamas, because Hamas is the defecto
Speaker 5: government and there's.
Speaker 3: This like what about before Hamas?
Speaker 6: And that's what I was just going.
Speaker 5: To say that that conversation, I think it loses it's
Speaker 5: worth when you're trying to have a broad discussion with
Speaker 5: no context for why there is extremism in Hamah in Hamas,
Speaker 5: of course in Hamas, but in Gaza and among so
Speaker 5: many people. And that's a reaction obviously to years and
Speaker 5: years of conflict that has put people in living conditions
Speaker 5: that you wouldn't wish on your own family. And so
Speaker 5: when you aren't talking about that, it's obviously an issue.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and Bill Maher is just flat out islamophobic, and
Speaker 4: I wonder at this point if you would even like
Speaker 4: quibble with that claim, and you're seeing an expression of
Speaker 4: it there.
Speaker 3: But even in.
Speaker 4: Bill Maher's on Bill Maher's own terms, the Palestinian resistance,
Speaker 4: the Palestinian political structure, you know, back in the fifties, sixties, seventies, eighties,
Speaker 4: nineties up into the two thousands was much more secular.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's changed.
Speaker 4: Until yeah, until this kind of militant, armed resistance element
Speaker 4: grew up because the Palestinian people believed that the Oslo
Speaker 4: Accords and the negotiating process with Lacud in power insisting
Speaker 4: that there would be no two states ever was a
Speaker 4: dead end and you needed a more militant direction to
Speaker 4: change the equation, like as talked about in that debate
Speaker 4: with with Destiny and Omar, anytime that peace was on
Speaker 4: the horizon, support for Hamas would plummet. Any anytime that
Speaker 4: that that was taken off the table, support for Hamas
Speaker 4: would rise. And so if Bill Maher actually, you know,
Speaker 4: wants to strip Hamas and these longest elements, uh, that's
Speaker 4: that it kind of course through it. The way to
Speaker 4: do it would be supporting actual peace efforts, not by
Speaker 4: just tightening the occupation, and then and then and then
Speaker 4: complaining that about the resistance to the occupation.
Speaker 5: And this is probably the rub for me and I
Speaker 5: think some people on the right, not a lot of people,
Speaker 5: not a lot of other people on the right. But
Speaker 5: that conversation about militant extreme Islamism, I think is an
Speaker 5: important one. We probably I don't know if we've ever
Speaker 5: even talked about that, but we probably disagree on some
Speaker 5: points of it. But I also probably share some of
Speaker 5: Bill Maher's concerns in that respect. But if you were
Speaker 5: doubling down on the current strategy to quell extreme militant Islamism,
Speaker 5: if that's your strategy at this point, is to double
Speaker 5: down on the strategy that has failed for decades and
Speaker 5: in fact, arguably, even by their own argument, has exacerbated
Speaker 5: the conditions. You're not making anybody safer at this point.
Speaker 5: It's just clearly not working. You know, it doesn't excuse violence,
Speaker 5: you know that. I'm sure there are some people that
Speaker 5: will make that argument, but just it doesn't. It does
Speaker 5: help explain it, right, It does help explain why nothing
Speaker 5: is changing.
Speaker 4: Right, And also Ben Gavie and the rest of them
Speaker 4: when it comes when it comes to women's rights and
Speaker 4: women's place in society. That entire, growing, massive faction of
Speaker 4: Israeli society is not far from Amas and the other
Speaker 4: is loamist when it comes to kind of the religious fundamentalism.
Speaker 4: Bill Maher has this blind spot when it comes to that.
Speaker 5: I mean, I'd rather live in Israel any day as
Speaker 5: a woman than.
Speaker 4: For now, like on the current trajectory. See let's check
Speaker 4: in again in twenty years. You know that there are
Speaker 4: intense forces within Israel's political space that are trying to
Speaker 4: make sure that that's not the case in ten, twenty
Speaker 4: thirty years.
Speaker 5: It's the conversations about this are so hamstrung by the aperture, you.
Speaker 6: Know, like just not being able to zoom out.
Speaker 5: I agree, I think not being able to zoom out
Speaker 5: and honestly a praise what's happening in the from the
Speaker 5: thirty thousand foot view is a really, really one of
Speaker 5: the biggest challenges I think we've had, like in the
Speaker 5: media since October seventh. And I also think you're just
Speaker 5: people have turned a blind eye, like sort of willfully
Speaker 5: ignored a lot of the long term problems here because
Speaker 5: they've been told over and over again by American intelligence
Speaker 5: and you know, the Pentagon that there's one thing happening,
Speaker 5: and you know they trusted that for a long time
Speaker 5: and don't have as much trust in that anymore. Actually,
Speaker 5: that's what we're about to talk about, honestly in the
Speaker 5: polling block.
Speaker 3: Yeah, let's move to that in a second. I can't
Speaker 3: find the essay.
Speaker 4: Now, there's a really good essay that was that I
Speaker 4: read recently making the case that basically there are two
Speaker 4: Israels right now. There's the calling one Juday in Samaria
Speaker 4: and the other Israel. One one a kind of secular
Speaker 4: but ethno obviously at no religious, but more the Tel
Speaker 4: Aviv high tech like cosmopolitan uh. And the other the
Speaker 4: kind of fundamentalist Orthodox element that is increasingly powerful within
Speaker 4: the net Yahoo coalition.
Speaker 3: And that and.
Speaker 4: That those two Israels basically can't can't coexist.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 4: And and they're locked in a in a death struggle
Speaker 4: with each other.
Speaker 5: And I think a lot of that poured into the
Speaker 5: streets when the judicial reform, which I think we actually
Speaker 5: disagreed on at the time, but when that was uh,
Speaker 5: you saw that It's it's kind of a culture clash.
Speaker 5: I mean, it absolutely is a culture clash. And so
Speaker 5: it's obviously going to be a huge whatever happens militarily,
Speaker 5: this is a huge front and center, like maybe the
Speaker 5: biggest political thing happening in Israel right now is increasingly
Speaker 5: that divide