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: Good morning, welcome the counterpoints. How you doing, Emily, I'm great.
Speaker 5: You just got back from a big trip. Might be
Speaker 5: a little jot ugged.
Speaker 4: I'm feeling good now.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 7: I was in Doha for some reporting and for a conference.
Speaker 7: I'd never been to Doha before. Kind of exciting to
Speaker 7: see that there are some of the roads down by
Speaker 7: the sea that are basically paved with the marble that
Speaker 7: we would use for our You know, if you're rich
Speaker 7: here put in your kitchen. They're paving their roads. Whether
Speaker 7: they're doing well, doing well in Doha.
Speaker 3: Another level of ridge they are there are another But
Speaker 3: are they rich enough for ghost energy?
Speaker 4: I'm sure some of them are.
Speaker 7: It also puts the inequality that all wealth rests on,
Speaker 7: like right, in your face because you have all these
Speaker 7: guest workers everywhere and here here you talk to your
Speaker 7: uber drivers and you're kind of like, no, no normal
Speaker 7: people with normal families here in the US. Over there,
Speaker 7: it's like, oh, yeah, I haven't been back to Sri
Speaker 7: Lanka for two years to see my family, and I
Speaker 7: make like, you know, five hundred dollars a month and intend.
Speaker 4: It all back.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 7: It's absolutely like there are so many people across this
Speaker 7: world living just the most difficult lives, and those are
Speaker 7: the people lucky enough to get those jobs right, which
Speaker 7: is it's it's a reminder of just what an ugly
Speaker 7: world we've developed.
Speaker 3: And we will be talking about some drop site reporting.
Speaker 5: Actually later in the show, we're going to start with
Speaker 5: obviously breaking news as it relates to Tel Aviv. This
Speaker 5: is just breaking as we were after we had prepped
Speaker 5: most of the show, So we're going to.
Speaker 3: Get to that in a moment. Updates on Lemonon.
Speaker 5: There is a truly remarkable Rashieta to lead Block retreated
Speaker 5: to leave kind of versus CNN or versus the world,
Speaker 5: if you could say that. We're going to get to
Speaker 5: just after we do some updates from the conflict itself,
Speaker 5: Kamala Harris and the filibuster saga that started in like
Speaker 5: twenty twenty two. Actually probably, I'm sure she commented on
Speaker 5: it before, but Joe Manchin has now said he will
Speaker 5: not endorse Kamala Harris because she told the radio station
Speaker 5: yesterday she wants to get rid of that philibus.
Speaker 4: There goes West Virginia. She had such high hopes.
Speaker 5: All those West Virginia voters going to the polls and
Speaker 5: voting to preserve the Phillibus.
Speaker 7: Joe Manchin himself didn't run in West Virginia because he
Speaker 7: was going to get crushed, so I'm not sure what
Speaker 7: his endorsement would have meant. But anyway, Yeah, yes, Cris
Speaker 7: and Cinema also not happy. And then we'll be talking
Speaker 7: about this lawsuit that the Department of Justice filed against Visa,
Speaker 7: which is excellent and awesome. It actually comes after Trump
Speaker 7: was pigging backing off of Bernie Sanders again saying that
Speaker 7: he's going to cap interest rates at ten percent. Talk
Speaker 7: about you know why they filed this lawsuit and what
Speaker 7: it might mean if they actually succeed for prices and
Speaker 7: for people who use debit cards, which is basically all people.
Speaker 4: And then what do we got.
Speaker 3: Oh, Marcellus Williams.
Speaker 7: Williams, Yes, yes, there was an execution in Missouri of
Speaker 7: and I'll give him his real name, Khalifa ibn rayfer Daniels.
Speaker 7: He converted while while in prison. Executed last night. Despite
Speaker 7: the fact that the family asked for clemency, the victims family,
Speaker 7: the victim's family asked for clemency, there are significant doubts
Speaker 7: about his conviction. The jury only included one black member
Speaker 7: after the prosecutor later admitted striking people because of their
Speaker 7: race effectively, and the prosecutor's office that originally prosecuted him
Speaker 7: wanted him to get clemency instead.
Speaker 4: He's dead.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So we.
Speaker 5: Will break down all of the details and even talk
Speaker 5: about the larger trend because because I think just this
Speaker 5: month there's a host of executions that are scheduled to.
Speaker 7: Take place that is well a bunch of the next
Speaker 7: couple of weeks.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's the pace is pretty high in the next
Speaker 5: couple of weeks. So we'll talk about all of that.
Speaker 5: Let's start on another bleak topic, which is we're going
Speaker 5: to be beginning with Tel Aviv Ryan breaking news out
Speaker 5: of Tel Aviv, where Israel says they says that it
Speaker 5: intercepted a missile that was heading for Tel Aviv. Now
Speaker 5: what we're hearing is that apparently that was the story
Speaker 5: from Hesbela is that it was intended for a Masad headquarters.
Speaker 3: Is that right?
Speaker 7: Yeah, the Masad headquarters in the suburbs of Tel Aviv.
Speaker 7: Which if this were a newscast about an assault on
Speaker 7: Gaza or on Lebanon, the newscaster would immediately say that
Speaker 7: Israel is keeping its military and intelligence infrastructure in civilian
Speaker 7: areas to hide behind human shields.
Speaker 4: And when we.
Speaker 7: See the reverse, we see how clearly it is, how
Speaker 7: clear it is.
Speaker 4: That doesn't make it okay to bombs.
Speaker 7: For some reason, the American public is swayed by that
Speaker 7: argument when it comes to say Gaza or Lebanon or
Speaker 7: anywhere else. Say oh, well it was in a suburb.
Speaker 7: That's well, I guess that's a real shame that they
Speaker 7: had to level all those apartment buildings in that entire
Speaker 7: civilion area, or that hospital they found, oh, they found
Speaker 7: a couple of weapons.
Speaker 5: I was gonna say, people conflate those two things. The
Speaker 5: idea of as in this case, having the SOD headquarters
Speaker 5: in the suburbs, which is the same as the CIA
Speaker 5: for example, a lot of those intelligence agencies are out
Speaker 5: in the suburbs here, but then.
Speaker 4: Bomb costco here and if they're aim for the Pentagon.
Speaker 5: And no casualties reported so far in this case. But
Speaker 5: people will conflate having in a densely populated area like
Speaker 5: Gaza infrastructure that's near military infrastructure with people when they're
Speaker 5: literally hiding like bombs under children's beds.
Speaker 3: So two things are not the same.
Speaker 7: And another difference would be the actual firing of the
Speaker 7: missiles somehow, you know, Hamas or pij will fire missiles
Speaker 7: from very nearby like a school or a mosque or
Speaker 7: something else. But again that's related less to I think,
Speaker 7: you know, morality and more to just the massive asymmetry
Speaker 7: like Israel has the US sending you know, fighter jets
Speaker 7: and endless amounts of bombs and missiles and has the
Speaker 7: capacity to you know, to just launch from the air
Speaker 7: when when they go about building their infrastructure, they build
Speaker 7: their military infrastructure right into Tel Aviv.
Speaker 5: So again, no casualties reported so far in the situation.
Speaker 5: The death toll according to the Associated Press since Monday
Speaker 5: in Lebanon is five hundred and sixty four people. That's
Speaker 5: fifty children and ninety four women, according to Lebanese authorities.
Speaker 5: So there's been also attacks from Husbal and Northern Israel.
Speaker 3: A couple of people in.
Speaker 7: Labu's vo here of the this is very rude carnage.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well this is southern.
Speaker 3: Lebanon, okay.
Speaker 5: And there was reports of people getting hit by shrapnel
Speaker 5: and a kabbotz in northern Israel. What you're seeing on
Speaker 5: your screen right now, Ryan, this is southern Lebanon, utter destruction.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: And this is this is a man who was going
Speaker 7: back to try to get to his to his wife.
Speaker 7: Here's some other attacks that you're seeing across Lebanon. I
Speaker 7: think it's worth kind of setting up some of the
Speaker 7: contexts here for people who have been you know, focused
Speaker 7: you know, mostly on the Israel Gaza war and also
Speaker 7: the attack on the West Bank. So very very brief
Speaker 7: history of Hesbela like. They emerged as a result of
Speaker 7: the nineteen eighty two invasion of of Lebanon by Israel,
Speaker 7: and they formed into a guerrilla group to expel Israel
Speaker 7: and actually finally succeeded in doing so in two thousand
Speaker 7: and kind of became kind of heroes of resistance around
Speaker 7: the region as a result of it, and then began
Speaker 7: to embed themselves into the body politic of Lebanon, which
Speaker 7: is a very ailing and kind of psychotic body like
Speaker 7: it's just a complete it's a complete Lebanon as a
Speaker 7: state is a complete mess. In two thousand and six,
Speaker 7: they lost launched a little cross border raide and grabbed
Speaker 7: a couple of Israeli soldiers, and Israel then launched a
Speaker 7: massive all out bombing campaign and ground invasion into Lebanon,
Speaker 7: which turned out to be a failure, did not get
Speaker 7: the hostages back, and also withdrew, which again kind of
Speaker 7: raising the celebrity status in the region of Hesbola. But
Speaker 7: then in the twenty tens there was a Syrious civil
Speaker 7: war and Hesbula sided with Bashar Alsade. Now you can
Speaker 7: imagine why they would do that, because they are allies
Speaker 7: with Iran. Iran his allies with Syria, and so if
Speaker 7: Hesbel is a client of Iran and Iran's got business,
Speaker 7: Hesbel is going to carry out that business. But that
Speaker 7: meant that they were fighting with a lot of kind
Speaker 7: of stunny rebels in Syria. And killing a lot of Muslims,
Speaker 7: and that very much tarnished their reputation and led to
Speaker 7: a break between Hamas and Hesbela.
Speaker 4: Like they became adversaries. They were on the other side
Speaker 4: of this.
Speaker 7: Hamas was supportive of the uprising in Syria. But since then,
Speaker 7: right before a little bit before October seventh, Hamas and
Speaker 7: Hesbela had a Dayton and became allies again. And so
Speaker 7: right after October seventh, when when the rubber hit the
Speaker 7: road with the war between Israel and Hamas, hesbel immediately
Speaker 7: starts launching rockets, which sends sixty thousand roughly Israelis from
Speaker 7: the north scattering displaced back towards Tel Aviv and elsewhere.
Speaker 7: That is what is driving the political pressure to now
Speaker 7: go to war with Lebanon to try to get those
Speaker 7: sixty thousand people back into their homes who've been displaced
Speaker 7: for that long. Imagine how much pressure that puts on Israel.
Speaker 7: Sixty thousand people, gods is two million people into place,
Speaker 7: displaced for eleven months.
Speaker 4: And so.
Speaker 7: In the same way that the Huthis, we're facing domestic
Speaker 7: problems and regional problems. Because of the civil war, there
Speaker 7: were able to politically overcome those by challenging Israel. Hesbela
Speaker 7: too is able to overcome it's problems that it had
Speaker 7: in the region by challenging Israel. It's the oldest story
Speaker 7: in politics. You got problems at home, you find an
Speaker 7: adversary somewhere else that people hate more, and everybody rallies
Speaker 7: around the flag. And so it is in the kind
Speaker 7: of domestic political interests of all of these actors, whether
Speaker 7: it's the Huthis, Iraqi Shea militia's Hesbela, to challenge Israel,
Speaker 7: and because it makes them look like they're standing up
Speaker 7: for gods of which they are and what Nozrala has
Speaker 7: keeps staying Hezbla and the Huthies as well, we are
Speaker 7: not ending this until the war on Gaza ends.
Speaker 5: This was going to be my big question for you
Speaker 5: with all of that context, because the open, the massive
Speaker 5: open question is does this escalate? And that's been the
Speaker 5: fear since violence broke out on October seventh. I mean,
Speaker 5: where do you see this going with Where do you
Speaker 5: see this going in terms of how it can pour
Speaker 5: even more sort of.
Speaker 3: Gas on this fire.
Speaker 5: If it's good, if it's in the interest of Hesbola
Speaker 5: politically to escalate. Does Hesbela escalate? Are there external pressures?
Speaker 5: A lot of people would say they're so. The argument
Speaker 5: from like the neo conservative camp would be that Iran
Speaker 5: is orchestrating all of this their puppets or they're like
Speaker 5: sort of chest pieces in Iran's game versus the West.
Speaker 5: So it's not necessarily what Hesbola wants, it'll be what
Speaker 5: Iran wants is how do you respond to that?
Speaker 7: So I don't think it's in well one point on
Speaker 7: that Iran has major influence over hesbla US has major
Speaker 7: influence over Israel. Both Israel and Hasbel have their own
Speaker 7: agency as well, though from their kind of superpower.
Speaker 3: And their own political motivations.
Speaker 7: Runs on a superpower, bigger power and their own political motivations.
Speaker 7: But I don't think it's in their interest to escalate.
Speaker 7: I think it's it's in their interest to look like
Speaker 7: they're putting up a strong resistance and continuing to put
Speaker 7: pressure on Israel to end its genocidal campaign in gods like,
Speaker 7: I think that's what that's what works for them. They
Speaker 7: they think, and Iran and Hesbel have been very clear
Speaker 7: and kind of the signals that they've been sending and
Speaker 7: that their proxies and putting out that they believe Netna
Speaker 7: who wants a regional war to bail himself out, that
Speaker 7: Neta is kind of stuck in a cull to sack
Speaker 7: of his own making and wants to just flip the
Speaker 7: table and see what happens on the other side.
Speaker 4: Like it's not even.
Speaker 7: Necessarily a strategy, but it's a strategy to blow things
Speaker 7: up and live live to see another day. And both
Speaker 7: Iron and Hasbela think, if that is the thing that
Speaker 7: our adversary wants, let's do everything we can to avoid
Speaker 7: giving him that, which is exactly what I and some
Speaker 7: other people were saying right after October seventh, that it
Speaker 7: was like Hamas launched this attack very clearly as a
Speaker 7: provocation to bring about an overreaction that would then discredit
Speaker 7: you on the world stage, on the world stage and
Speaker 7: the art your economy, and and flip the table and
Speaker 7: just see what happens upset the status quo. So if
Speaker 7: you're Israel, be smart, don't give them that. But they
Speaker 7: couldn't help themselves. So there are some who think that
Speaker 7: has Blow has been so thoroughly degraded by the intelligence
Speaker 7: infiltration basically. So it's interesting how in Gaza Hamas has
Speaker 7: obviously been completely you know, shell act, but they but
Speaker 7: Israel had to do it by destroying the entire area
Speaker 7: and then.
Speaker 5: Lives to see another day as an organization exactly.
Speaker 7: But they have not been able to but they've but
Speaker 7: they've been able to inflict a lot more damage more
Speaker 7: quickly on Hesbela. I think some of that has to
Speaker 7: do with how because Gods is such a closed off society,
Speaker 7: like literally physically closed off, and Israel has much less intelligence.
Speaker 3: Let's actually penetration. Yeah, let's put these up on the screen.
Speaker 3: So this is a two.
Speaker 5: This is a map of where you can see the
Speaker 5: latest death toll. And look at the concentration there in
Speaker 5: southern Lebanon if you're listening to this, a massive cluster
Speaker 5: of dots in southern Lebanon on the border with northern Israel.
Speaker 5: We also have r And this is I think sort
Speaker 5: of along the lines.
Speaker 3: Of what you were just talking to.
Speaker 5: If we put a three up on the screen, this
Speaker 5: is a map explain what we're seeing here and how
Speaker 5: it relates to everything you just mentioned.
Speaker 7: Yeah, so this is this is this is a map
Speaker 7: that basically Israel putting out saying like it's in Hebrew everything,
Speaker 7: and I put it for the next one. I think
Speaker 7: we have the translation and a bit of a translation
Speaker 7: in the next one. Basically, what they're saying is that
Speaker 7: when I said earlier that Lebanon is a mess of
Speaker 7: a state. So this is Ama Chikhly, Israeli Minister of
Speaker 7: the Aspirin combating Andy sim minister in the government, saying basically,
Speaker 7: Israel isn't a Lebanon is not a real government in
Speaker 7: a real state. It was you know, drawn by colonialists, Sykes.
Speaker 7: He talks about Sykes p Co. It's like the amount
Speaker 7: of projection and like irony and it is overwhelming. But
Speaker 7: he says, this isn't a real state, these borders aren't real.
Speaker 7: And by having these Lebanese civilians down here by this
Speaker 7: green line, it makes it more difficult for you know,
Speaker 7: our people who.
Speaker 4: Live in villages up the north to live there safely.
Speaker 7: So basically what they're saying is we need to push
Speaker 7: these Lebanese folks way up higher. Not a country, and
Speaker 7: it's not a country anyway, so we can just redraw it.
Speaker 7: Like he says, you know, the country actually a country's
Speaker 7: borders ought to be drawn by natural boundaries and power
Speaker 7: power politics, which okay, I guess that is how it's
Speaker 7: always been done. We're just kind of used to it
Speaker 7: being stable over the last one hundred years or so. Yeah,
Speaker 7: they're what they're implying there is that they're going to
Speaker 7: you know, run a campaign about the cleansing and clear
Speaker 7: it out of people so that they can repopulate northern
Speaker 7: northern areas. I mean, that has been a long time
Speaker 7: goal what's called greater Israel. But they've been but they've
Speaker 7: been able to infiltrate Hesbola in a way that has
Speaker 7: allowed them to kill an enormous number of senior officials
Speaker 7: and middlemen. The pager attack, it sounds like it named
Speaker 7: something like fourteen or fifteen one hundred people.
Speaker 4: It's a fighting for us of about forty to fifty thousand.
Speaker 7: But it's communications had been disrupted by all of the assassinations.
Speaker 7: You know, they moved from cell phones over to pagers.
Speaker 7: Then the pagers start exploding, so you know, there's it's
Speaker 7: an open question about how much damage has been reached.
Speaker 7: And so there are some people who are saying that
Speaker 7: the lack of a huge response so far is strategic
Speaker 7: and that it is related to Iran and Hesbela not
Speaker 7: wanting to give Israel this all out war. There are
Speaker 7: others who are saying they've really received a massive blow
Speaker 7: and that they don't even have the capacity, and that
Speaker 7: its supporters are kind of covering up the fact that
Speaker 7: they've received this major blow by pointing to a strategic
Speaker 7: pause like hold me back, hold me back.
Speaker 5: And before we get to this new drop site report
Speaker 5: that is chilling, could you walk us through what Pro
Speaker 5: Publica found in the investigation about Gaza yesterday. This was
Speaker 5: released yesterday. I believe as well. This is a four.
Speaker 5: We can put this up on the screen.
Speaker 4: Yes, so interesting interesting piece here.
Speaker 7: So Pro public is investigation here Israel deliberately blocked humanitarian
Speaker 7: aid to Gaza, to government bodies, concluded Anthony Blincoln rejected them.
Speaker 7: So on the one hand, we reported here a time
Speaker 7: based on my aquackmed at Hugh Post and actually devx,
Speaker 7: which does some great reporting on usaid and it's like
Speaker 7: a trade public focuses on development around the world, had
Speaker 7: reported that of the three agencies within the State Department
Speaker 7: that were asked to sign off on whether or not
Speaker 7: Israel was restricting humanitarian aid.
Speaker 4: Two of them said that they.
Speaker 7: Were restricting the aid, that that was their assessment on
Speaker 7: the ground that Israel was blocking aid from getting in
Speaker 7: the legal consequences of that was under this provision called
Speaker 7: six to twenty. I we can't give military funding to
Speaker 7: a state actor that is, at the same time blocking
Speaker 7: our own umanitarian aid from getting to the people we're
Speaker 7: trying to send it to. Pretty reasonable law. Kind of
Speaker 7: funny that we even had to put that into law.
Speaker 7: It's so common sense, like we're not no, of course,
Speaker 7: we're not supporting somebody who's actively our adversary and attempting
Speaker 7: to get humanitarian aid.
Speaker 4: Turns out we would do that.
Speaker 7: So the State Department, we're blinking at least, had to
Speaker 7: figure out a way to affirm to Congress that this
Speaker 7: law was not being broken. And his problem was that
Speaker 7: his people inside the State Department were telling him that
Speaker 7: it was the law was being broken. And what pro
Speaker 7: public it does have that hadn't been reported before is
Speaker 7: this fascinating email exchange at the very end of its article.
Speaker 7: So if you read that piece, just scroll to the
Speaker 7: very end and just it's very strange. Like their last
Speaker 7: six paragraphs are like awesome. The rest of it is
Speaker 7: like we knew all this already, but go to the
Speaker 7: last six paragraphs and read those.
Speaker 4: But basically what happens is the top.
Speaker 7: State Department official who really is in charge of moving
Speaker 7: the money, moving American tax dollars to Israel so Israel
Speaker 7: can send them back to US for weapons, is telling
Speaker 7: the General Council of the State Department, we really need
Speaker 7: to move this money, like they've got Israel has bills
Speaker 7: to pay, which is also absurd. They're not paying their
Speaker 7: own bills. We're paying the bills. We're just moving it
Speaker 7: over there and me it back. Hope, we're not paying
Speaker 7: banking fees to visa the like they were like Western
Speaker 7: Union the entire time.
Speaker 5: That should be the next drop site investigation. That is
Speaker 5: a big question.
Speaker 7: Who are the banks that are just like siphoning fees
Speaker 7: as we send money to Israel and Israel sends them
Speaker 7: back to Rosalin right for the weapons. But so anyway,
Speaker 7: they're like, look there, they got bills to pay, we
Speaker 7: need to move this money over there.
Speaker 4: But the General.
Speaker 7: Hou's like, ooh, but we still don't have approval yet
Speaker 7: because there's still questions about whether they're blocking humanitarian aid.
Speaker 7: So there's this email chain and a top eureaucrat writes back,
Speaker 7: a woman named noyus I forget her first name. She
Speaker 7: writes back, it's our assessment that they are. In fact,
Speaker 7: I'm still blocking humanitarian aid. And so the GC is like,
Speaker 7: so are you saying that they're in violation of six
Speaker 7: twenty I right, and she say, yep, that is our
Speaker 7: that is our assessment. So it's like boom, okay, don
Speaker 7: you cannot send the money. Then they take it offline.
Speaker 7: As pro Public reports, the woman a couple of meetings
Speaker 7: with seeing your officials, and she decides that you know,
Speaker 7: what Israel really is doing not everything that we'd like
Speaker 7: them to do, but they're they're really trying, and they're
Speaker 7: making commitments.
Speaker 4: They're saying things.
Speaker 3: And it is true that like the situation is true.
Speaker 4: They said things, and it's true.
Speaker 3: The situation is difficult.
Speaker 5: It's true that there are legitimate problems with like getting
Speaker 5: the aid to the right people in a war zone.
Speaker 4: True.
Speaker 7: But as like USAID in its in its private report
Speaker 7: that has since surfaced, they have examples of aid workers
Speaker 7: who Israel gives permission to evacuate along a certain route
Speaker 7: that they then run into an Israeli checkpoint, gets stopped.
Speaker 7: They're like, we have been approved to move through here.
Speaker 7: They're like nope, sorry, go back. They go back. IDF
Speaker 7: opens fire on them and kills them. So the USA
Speaker 7: it is like, Okay, maybe there are some challenges here
Speaker 7: to what we're doing here, but what they're doing is
Speaker 7: what they're doing is malicious. And they didn't use the
Speaker 7: word genocidal, but what they're doing is far beyond what
Speaker 7: is necessary.
Speaker 3: And how do you read the blink in politics into.
Speaker 7: This that Blincoln was clearly always just going to sign
Speaker 7: off on this, and you know, you know.
Speaker 4: I guess.
Speaker 7: Fortunately for Blanken, a decent number of State Department officials
Speaker 7: have resigned in protest over over this policy. So now
Speaker 7: he doesn't have to worry about them either. He can
Speaker 7: just h The only the only time that humanitaranian had
Speaker 7: ticked up a little bit was after that World Central
Speaker 7: Kitchen massacre. Yeah, and Biden and Biden had to get
Speaker 7: on the phone with then Yahoo say like, you need
Speaker 7: to do better, And for several days things were better,
Speaker 7: and then they went and they went back to normal.
Speaker 5: Speaking of things being well, I shouldn't say normal, but
Speaker 5: the sad state of normal, at least in the last
Speaker 5: couple of years. Ryan, let's put a five up on
Speaker 5: the screen, and can you talk to us about this
Speaker 5: story on drops about a capture journalist.
Speaker 7: Yes, so you guys might remember here a couple of
Speaker 7: weeks ago we talked on this program about an article
Speaker 7: that Mujahad al Sadi was a really well respected journalist
Speaker 7: writing mostly in Arab right, who writes in Arabic translate.
Speaker 4: He reported the piece for us.
Speaker 7: We translated it into English so that an English language
Speaker 7: audience could benefit from his journalistic skills. You may remember that,
Speaker 7: you know, he was one of the handful of journalists
Speaker 7: who was chased by that bulldozer and fired at in
Speaker 7: Janine while the while they were doing their reporting. You
Speaker 7: actually put up the next element.
Speaker 4: This is his piece that he wrote for us.
Speaker 7: So it turns out that this piece was early in September,
Speaker 7: on September nineteenth, so two thirty am in the morning,
Speaker 7: idf burst burst into his home and they and according
Speaker 7: to his according to his brother, they start beating him
Speaker 7: with the butts of their sixteen's he's you know, he's barefoot.
Speaker 7: It's two thirty in the morning, his wife tries to
Speaker 7: get him his shoes while they're like dragging him out
Speaker 7: of there, and they start beating his wife.
Speaker 3: And you've all learned those from accounts from.
Speaker 7: The family, the accounts from the family and other people
Speaker 7: that were kind of familiar with with how this happened.
Speaker 4: He had, he has he has three young children.
Speaker 7: So then they we learned that they moved him to
Speaker 7: Jalama prison where they interrogated him before transferring him to Megido,
Speaker 7: which is utterly and people can google an M E.
Speaker 7: G I D d oh utterly notorious prison. At least
Speaker 7: four people held there have died since October seventh. It's
Speaker 7: it's it's known for torture and absolutely kind of grotesque
Speaker 7: and barbaric conditions. And we have asked the Idea for
Speaker 7: information about about him, and they have told us that
Speaker 7: they'll look into it. That's the that's the best that
Speaker 7: we've gotten so far. He's he was if if you recall,
Speaker 7: he was friends with shrin Abu Wakhla, the colleague of hers.
Speaker 7: Was was with her, like standing basically right next to
Speaker 7: her the day that she was shot and killed by
Speaker 7: the Idea of Engineine. He's been a journal he's like,
Speaker 7: he's a very well respected journalist in the region. Not
Speaker 7: not well, I was going to say, not the kind
Speaker 7: of person who would expect this to happen to if
Speaker 7: Israel was trying to do that thing where they're like, oh,
Speaker 7: actually this guy's Amas.
Speaker 4: Amas. He's very well respected journalist Enganeine.
Speaker 7: Who as we sit here, it's difficult to comprehend the
Speaker 7: conditions under which he's he's being held.
Speaker 5: And really, you've gotten nothing from the idea. The idea
Speaker 5: is just totally mom.
Speaker 4: Well, yeah, we'll get back to you.
Speaker 7: So we'll continue to continue to press on them. There
Speaker 7: are obviously a lot of organizations and supporters of his
Speaker 7: in the in the region who are also pressing for answers.
Speaker 7: But that's yeah, I wish I.
Speaker 3: Had more important story to follows.
Speaker 7: That I could report. We're actually we're gonna see what
Speaker 7: we can do. We're gonna we're launching a competition. If
Speaker 7: it's if it's out by the time this is up,
Speaker 7: I'll put it in the in the comment section of this.
Speaker 7: Maybe if you know, a couple hundred thousand people demand
Speaker 7: that he'd be released, it helps some pressure on that.
Speaker 5: I don't know the well yeah, I mean it's an
Speaker 5: important story to follow, especially you know, given how Israel
Speaker 5: uh sort of clings to the only democracy in the
Speaker 5: middle and.
Speaker 7: This comes after and right around the same time that
Speaker 7: they shut down Al Jazeera's Ramala, which Ramala is like
Speaker 7: that it's like the headquarters of the Palestinian authority, which
Speaker 7: is a subcontractor effectively of the idef of Israel.
Speaker 5: Quite a situation brewing in Michigan, Ryan with sort of
Speaker 5: Rashida Siali versus CNN versus the world. This has been
Speaker 5: an unfolding, wild series of events, unfortunate series of events
Speaker 5: really for CNN. But tell us how, Dana Nassel we
Speaker 5: can put this first element up on the screen factors
Speaker 5: into all of this in Michigan.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think you could write do an entire course
Speaker 7: on media bias and duplicity on this like five day
Speaker 7: affair as actually more than five days, and we can
Speaker 7: get into why. But yeah, So to start out, Dana
Speaker 7: Nassel is the is the Attorney General of Michigan, and
Speaker 7: so she tweeted on September twentieth, which kicked all of
Speaker 7: this off. Rashida's religion should not be used in a
Speaker 7: cartoon to imply that she's a terrorist. It's it's lamophobic
Speaker 7: and wrong, just as Rashida should not use my religion
Speaker 7: to imply I cannot perform my job fairly as attorney general.
Speaker 7: It's anti Semitic and wrong. Now I remember seeing this
Speaker 7: post and thinking, boy, that is terrible. I hope nobody
Speaker 7: would do such a thing. And also, what's going on
Speaker 7: with this cartoon? So if this was on this day,
Speaker 7: a Detroit News cartoonist had published a cartoon in National Review.
Speaker 7: So here's a tweet here from dearborn mayor in front
Speaker 7: of the show, abdulahamoud Uh posting the National Review cartoon.
Speaker 7: So if you're if you're watching, if you're listening to
Speaker 7: this only by audio, it's basically saying why is my
Speaker 7: you know she's why is her pager exploding? Basically saying,
Speaker 7: you know, suggesting that Rashida Talib is like a member
Speaker 7: of Hezbolad is being targeted by the IDF.
Speaker 1: So like.
Speaker 7: Clearly deeply islamophobic cartoon that in a different kind of
Speaker 7: world would have kickstarted a news cycle where you'd have
Speaker 7: the media pressing critics of Talib as whether or not
Speaker 7: they denounced this attack on her this kind of baseless
Speaker 7: attack that came out of nowhere.
Speaker 5: Instead, I mean, yeah, well, I'll just say I disagreed
Speaker 5: that it's bigger than in islamophobic because the argument from
Speaker 5: a lot of I mean, it does come from a
Speaker 5: lot of particularly from Jewish conservatives who say that she
Speaker 5: they have these like deep suspicions that I completely disagree
Speaker 5: with that Rasheta Talib actually does side with the militant
Speaker 5: aspects of Palestinian resistance. Thus it would make sense that
Speaker 5: a pager that's there. That is their line of thinking.
Speaker 5: And I don't think that is necessarily big.
Speaker 7: That is their line of thinking. But the reason that
Speaker 7: I think it is bigger than Islamo phobus is the
Speaker 7: reason that they think sometimes but not has a lot
Speaker 7: to do with her Palestinian identity. She and Marcy Capped,
Speaker 7: She and Betty mcollum like agree on most things when
Speaker 7: it comes to Israel Palestine policy. Betty McCollum, though it's
Speaker 7: a white lady, so people don't accuse her of being
Speaker 7: a terrorist.
Speaker 5: I mean, people accuse democrats of being like even white
Speaker 5: Democrats of being terrorists.
Speaker 3: Like it happens.
Speaker 5: That's because and I think it's really wrong, because it's
Speaker 5: this idea that if you are opposed to Israel's military action.
Speaker 7: We don't live in a world where we ever would
Speaker 7: get a condemnation of that cartoon.
Speaker 5: But I don't disagree with you though that like that.
Speaker 5: There are people who just connect the dots and say, oh, well,
Speaker 5: she's you know, vaguely Arab, so she must of course
Speaker 5: be hesbolah.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 5: No, I don't disagree that that is a thing. I
Speaker 5: just don't think it's necessarily figoted.
Speaker 7: So Meg Whitmer comes on it, thenn Gretchen Wimer, I'm sorry, Meg.
Speaker 4: Meg Whitman is the New Jersey one.
Speaker 5: Yeah, right, I thought you're thinking of Meg Whitman.
Speaker 4: Yes, scretch and big gretch.
Speaker 7: The governor of Michigan goes on Jake Jake Tapper's program,
Speaker 7: H and here's what he asked her about. Nessel responded
Speaker 7: by saying, quote, Rashida to Leave should not use my
Speaker 7: religion to imply I cannot perform my job fairly as
Speaker 7: attorney general.
Speaker 1: It's anti Semitic and wrong.
Speaker 4: Unquote.
Speaker 1: Do you think that to leave suggestion that So's offices
Speaker 1: biased was anti semitic?
Speaker 6: Listen, Jake, you know all I can say is that
Speaker 6: I know that our Jewish community is in pain, as
Speaker 6: is our Palestinian and Muslim and Arab communities in Michigan.
Speaker 6: I know that seeing the incredible tool that this war
Speaker 6: has taken on both communities has been really really challenging
Speaker 6: and difficult, and my heart breaks for so many But
Speaker 6: as governor, my job is to make sure that both
Speaker 6: these communities are protected and respected under the law in Michigan,
Speaker 6: and that's exactly what I'm going to stay focused on.
Speaker 1: But do you think Attorney General Nessl is not doing
Speaker 1: her job because Congressoman to Leeve is suggesting that she
Speaker 1: shouldn't be prosecuting these individuals that Nessl says broke the
Speaker 1: law and that she's only doing it because she's Jewish
Speaker 1: and the protesters are not. That's quite quite an accusation.
Speaker 1: Do you think it's true?
Speaker 6: Like I said, Jake, I'm not going to get in
Speaker 6: the middle of this argument that they're having. I can
Speaker 6: just say this, You know, we do want to make
Speaker 6: sure that students are safe on our campuses.
Speaker 7: So if you're watching that on CNN, you would assume
Speaker 7: that Rashida Talib said that Dana Nessel because she's Jewish
Speaker 7: is biased against Palestinians.
Speaker 4: That is what CNN reported she said.
Speaker 5: And it's because Dana Nessel said that just as Rashida
Speaker 5: should not use my religion to imply I cannot perform
Speaker 5: my job fairly as Attorney general. It's anti Semitic and wrong.
Speaker 5: So what the media is doing in this case is
Speaker 5: taking the word of a partisan actor, and we see
Speaker 5: it all the time. It's not new, but it is
Speaker 5: always worth noting that Jake Tapper picked up on exactly
Speaker 5: the point that Danasil made on.
Speaker 7: It exactly, and it turns out she didn't say that
Speaker 7: as Rashida. Tsleib did not say that, as would be
Speaker 7: evidenced by an actual reading of what she said in
Speaker 7: the original article in the Metro Times. But still, Gretchen
Speaker 7: Wittnmer Sorry, is under huge pressure, and so she puts
Speaker 7: out a statement gives to Jake Tapper, you can put
Speaker 7: this next element up on the screen. She says, the
Speaker 7: suggestion that Attorney General Nessa would make charging decisions based
Speaker 7: on her religion as opposed to the rule of law
Speaker 7: is anti Semitic. Attorney General Nessl has always conducted her
Speaker 7: work with integrity and followed the rule of law and
Speaker 7: must all use our platform voice to call out hayfel
Speaker 7: rhetoric and raiseist tropes. It's an interesting formulation there because
Speaker 7: the suggestion is anti Semitic.
Speaker 4: Okay, that suggestion is.
Speaker 7: She didn't actually make that suggestion anti Defamation League Jonathan
Speaker 7: green Blad, He jumps on it, it asserts that it happened,
Speaker 7: and then denounces it ironically doing if she wasn't a
Speaker 7: public figure, what would be defamation because he's saying something
Speaker 7: that is wrong and that would be checkable if he
Speaker 7: just bothered to read the entire article. Now here's what's fascinating.
Speaker 7: So we put up this next element here. The article
Speaker 7: that they're all talking about was published on September thirteenth.
Speaker 3: And Nessel responded on the twentieth.
Speaker 7: Nessel responded on the twentieth, the day she was attacked
Speaker 7: in that cartoon cynical instead of and she just brought
Speaker 7: it up out of a week later. And so what
Speaker 7: and we can get to this more in a second.
Speaker 7: What Rashida Talib said is that she has been too
Speaker 7: many protests in Detroit against police brutality, against racism, again,
Speaker 7: for climate change, climate justice, and on and on and
Speaker 7: nessl has never brought felony charges against any of those
Speaker 7: protesters yet is bringing them in this case. She then
Speaker 7: goes on to say we'll talk about this more later.
Speaker 7: That Nessel was under significant pressure from the University of
Speaker 7: Michigan regents and leadership, and that that created a biased
Speaker 7: approach to this, and.
Speaker 5: They got significant pushback from public public relations perspective, from
Speaker 5: an alumni perspective when those protests broke out, and they
Speaker 5: were obviously being responsive to that outcry in the media
Speaker 5: of the surge of anti Semitism at the University of Michigan,
Speaker 5: and some of their protests did get a little they
Speaker 5: got her.
Speaker 7: But Talive had tale was explicit about where the bias was.
Speaker 7: This pressure nothing to do with Jewishness. Dana Bash goes
Speaker 7: on cenn and after Jake Tapper, let's let's roll Danavash.
Speaker 8: Here and now to a sad reality, and that is
Speaker 8: anti Semitism is everywhere, and it comes from both ends
Speaker 8: of the political spectrum, but politicians sometimes sidestep calling it
Speaker 8: out when it comes from a member of their own party.
Speaker 8: We saw two examples on State of the Union yesterday,
Speaker 8: first with Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer when my co ancher,
Speaker 8: Jake Tapper, asked about a Democratic congresswoman's accusation that the
Speaker 8: state's Jewish attorney general was letting her religion influence her job.
Speaker 8: What does it tell you about the inability or unwillingness
Speaker 8: to do so when it comes from a prominent person.
Speaker 3: In your own part.
Speaker 6: Let you change your word.
Speaker 9: It's not anility, it's unwillingness. And it's because you're putting
Speaker 9: politics ahead of principle and morality. And that's what both
Speaker 9: of them did there. It's not very hard to say that.
Speaker 9: Rashida to Leib saying that Dana Nessel is pursuing charges
Speaker 9: because she's Jewish is an anti Semitic thing to say.
Speaker 7: It is, okay, yeah again, she didn't say that now
Speaker 7: because Twitter exists, there was a lot there was a
Speaker 7: lot of pushback from Ryan Grimm, from Yan Grim and
Speaker 7: other people. We're like, wait a minute, she pulling my
Speaker 7: hair out?
Speaker 4: What hair I have left? Like? She didn't say that, yeah,
Speaker 4: Like what are you talking about?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 7: So finally we do get a clarification from Dana Bash,
Speaker 7: but not really.
Speaker 4: Here's what Dana Bash.
Speaker 8: Clarified clarification on a story We brought you yesterday concerning
Speaker 8: Congresswoman Rashida to Leed's comments attacking a decision by Michigan
Speaker 8: Attorney General Dana Nessl to bring charges against pro Palestinian
Speaker 8: protesters at the University of Michigan. T Leave accused Nessl
Speaker 8: of quote biases. Here's to Leave's full quote to the
Speaker 8: Detroit Metro Times. It seems that the attorney general decided,
Speaker 8: if the issue was Palestine, she was going to treat
Speaker 8: it differently. That alone speaks volumes about possible biases within
Speaker 8: the agency she runs. Now, Talib did not reference Nessl's
Speaker 8: Jewish identity. Her office has not responded to our request
Speaker 8: for clarity. Her allies insists that's not what she meant,
Speaker 8: but Nessel still says she believes it is anti Semitic
Speaker 8: and repeat it on CNN yesterday. That quote clearly she's
Speaker 8: referencing my religion.
Speaker 7: So again, if she wants clarity, she could go read
Speaker 7: the entire article where she says the bias comes from
Speaker 7: pressure from.
Speaker 4: The University of Michigan.
Speaker 7: Yeah, that is the equivalent that you just saw of
Speaker 7: whenever somebody posts fake news on social media when they.
Speaker 4: Get called out.
Speaker 3: The follow up tweet.
Speaker 7: The follow up tweet is always yeah, but isn't it
Speaker 7: interesting that I believed it?
Speaker 4: Somebody it is?
Speaker 7: It is somebody said there's a saying in the Czech
Speaker 7: Republic that goes it's not true, but it might be.
Speaker 7: So that was That's basically the Dana Bash standard there.
Speaker 7: Jake Tapper also issued a bit of a clarification here.
Speaker 4: Let's roll Jake.
Speaker 1: Tapper, I should note that I misspoke yesterday when asking
Speaker 1: a follow up of Governor Whitmer, who I asked about this.
Speaker 1: I was trying to characterize your views of Talib's comments.
Speaker 1: What do you make of those today? Noting that Congressoman
Speaker 1: to Leave never explicitly said that your bias was because
Speaker 1: of your religion, and so it's unfair for you to
Speaker 1: make that allegation.
Speaker 4: It's kind of an interesting question.
Speaker 7: It's like, she never said it, so it's unfair for
Speaker 7: you to say that she said it.
Speaker 4: How do you respond to that.
Speaker 5: It's just it's the fact was too good for them
Speaker 5: to check out, because in a way it reminds me
Speaker 5: actually sounds like a hard pivot but of the Jesse
Speaker 5: Smalllleight story, because.
Speaker 4: It can we're just all ready to believe it well.
Speaker 5: Confirmed, it's confirmation by it, So one hundred percent is
Speaker 5: confirmation bias, so like it fits the larger truth, it
Speaker 5: fits this larger trend that we believe to be true. Therefore,
Speaker 5: I sort of automatically will take the word of Jessee smole.
Speaker 5: I will automatically take the word Juicy Smoleia, as David
Speaker 5: Chappelle would say.
Speaker 3: But I'll automatically take the word.
Speaker 5: Of Data Nessel because she seems to be the adults
Speaker 5: in the room in this interaction between If I'm being
Speaker 5: asked to choose between Rashida Tlib's truth and Dana Nessil's truth,
Speaker 5: I'm going to go with Data Nessel, and I will
Speaker 5: smear someone and accuse them of anti Semitism.
Speaker 7: The whole thing is just more evidence of the anti
Speaker 7: Palestinian bias that she said exists in these institutions. But
Speaker 7: here's how Nessl answered that.
Speaker 4: Question.
Speaker 3: Well, a couple things.
Speaker 10: First of all, in twenty twenty two, when my opponent
Speaker 10: accused me of being a groomer and a pedophile, everyone
Speaker 10: understood that those were homophobic remarks because I happen to
Speaker 10: be gay, right, I didn't have to explain it to people.
Speaker 10: Rashida Talib is an individual who is well known for
Speaker 10: making inflammatory, inflammatory and scendiary remarks that are anti Semitic
Speaker 10: in nature. So this isn't the first time that we
Speaker 10: would have heard these words out of her mouth. I
Speaker 10: think it's very clear to everybody exactly what she was saying.
Speaker 4: Hmmm, yeah, she's.
Speaker 7: Like I don't like her. I feel like she could
Speaker 7: have said that. So again, if we can put up
Speaker 7: this next element. The real pushback I think that got
Speaker 7: CNN Tech do this weak clarification was from the reporter
Speaker 7: of the actual article. This is a reply that he
Speaker 7: had to Jake Tapper said, I'm the reporter who interviewed
Speaker 7: Rishida Talib. She never said Nesselty did this because she's Jewish. Never,
Speaker 7: you are spreading lies unquote. And the Metro Times felt
Speaker 7: like they had to do a fact check, and so
Speaker 7: they wrote up a new story a week later saying, no,
Speaker 7: like she said what she said in our article.
Speaker 4: It's the funniest fact check ever. It's like all they
Speaker 4: did is.
Speaker 7: Like requote their own article, which which anybody else could
Speaker 7: have done. And we can put up B eleven, which
Speaker 7: is just so people have the specific context. Here's what
Speaker 7: Talib said, I think people at the University of Michigan
Speaker 7: put pressure on her to do this, and she fell
Speaker 7: for it. Talib says, I think President Ono and Board
Speaker 7: of Regent members were very much heavy handed in this.
Speaker 7: It had to come from somewhere. So that's in the
Speaker 7: original article in which you have Dana Bash and also
Speaker 7: Josh Kraushower or a Jewish insider. He wrote, you know,
Speaker 7: we didn't receive a reply from Talib requesting clarity on
Speaker 7: her comments about what she was referring to, because you
Speaker 7: see a lot of people saying, okay, well, she says
Speaker 7: that there's Nessel's office had Antie's Palestinian bias. It must
Speaker 7: be coming from somewhere, and therefore what she's implying is
Speaker 7: that it's actually because Nessel is Jewish. All you had
Speaker 7: to do is read the next paragraph and you question
Speaker 7: if you're actually curious gets answered.
Speaker 4: Here's the actual answer that she.
Speaker 7: Felt like she was pressured, and that the University of
Speaker 7: Michigan did not pressure nessl when it came to Black
Speaker 7: Lives Matter protesters or where it came to climate justice protesters,
Speaker 7: and so there is a difference. These protesters were treated
Speaker 7: differently the other difference to the University of Michigan pressure.
Speaker 4: That's what Talib said.
Speaker 5: It's amazing how from this entire sort of like cancel
Speaker 5: culture woke journey that we've been on in the last decade,
Speaker 5: how little lessons have been learned from applying overly broad definitions.
Speaker 5: And that's why when we were talking about the cartoon,
Speaker 5: it's like they have in their heads this own logic
Speaker 5: that ties or shoot it to leab to actual like
Speaker 5: militant groups, and I completely disagree with it.
Speaker 3: It's not rooted in bigotry for everyone.
Speaker 5: And there's just this reflex when it comes to accusations
Speaker 5: of anti Semitism. And I would say the same thing,
Speaker 5: like if we wanted to talk about on the right
Speaker 5: with jumping to accusations of racism or misogyny or whatever,
Speaker 5: that it's don't have their own logic. And the sad
Speaker 5: part of that isn't missus dealing with the actual logic.
Speaker 5: Like if you disagree with Rashida Talib's argument for Palestine,
Speaker 5: deal with it on those terms to smear her as
Speaker 5: an anti Semite. It's wildly kind of productive anyway, You're
Speaker 5: not even like making progress for your own cause.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: And the other irony, of course, is that you know,
Speaker 7: Rashida Talib is not remotely like a supporter of violence,
Speaker 7: like that's not like that's she's somebody who was it
Speaker 7: was constantly making arguments for dignity, equality, coexistence, peace, that
Speaker 7: everybody should everybody should live together and value each other
Speaker 7: as as human beings, and that that gets read as
Speaker 7: being hamas and hesbala, which I think is proves the
Speaker 7: depth of the anti Palestinian bias that she talks about there.
Speaker 7: Jordan Sheridan, our buddy, had the reporter on his show
Speaker 7: and had an interesting exchange with him. Let's roll Jordan's
Speaker 7: interview here AT's be twelve.
Speaker 11: You know the attorney general you've reported on her? Was
Speaker 11: that surprising to you that she was a week later
Speaker 11: insinuating that congresswoman to leave had somehow, I guess, was
Speaker 11: inferring something about her being Jewish in her criticism.
Speaker 12: I thought it was a bold time to attack Rashida
Speaker 12: at a time when she just got attacked in a
Speaker 12: very disgusting racist cartoon, and she did it that day,
Speaker 12: so that surprised me. I have heard though, that Dana
Speaker 12: Nessel has been has taken this Hamas attack last year
Speaker 12: very seriously, and she's lost some friendships over it. But
Speaker 12: it did surprise me that she would come out and
Speaker 12: mention this on the day that that cartoon was published.
Speaker 12: But also I was surprised that she used Rashida's words,
Speaker 12: misrepresented them, and then attacked her based on that misrepresentation.
Speaker 3: That surprised me.
Speaker 11: I want to drill in on that because I think
Speaker 11: she Congresswoman Talib used to phrase biases to refer to
Speaker 11: the Attorney General, and I think that's what the Attorney
Speaker 11: General was zeroing in. That's somehow Talib was inferring by
Speaker 11: biases that she's Jewish. I don't take it that way,
Speaker 11: and I'm Jewish, but you were saying from your reporting
Speaker 11: Attorney General Nesso, who is Jewish. She has been, however,
Speaker 11: moved or affected by the Hamas attack and she's lost
Speaker 11: friendship over it, which would indicate to me that her
Speaker 11: charges against these pro Palestine protesters on student campuses, she
Speaker 11: might feel strongly on this issue, which might then lead
Speaker 11: to some bias, and she's charging them.
Speaker 7: In more rigid ways than other types of protesters.
Speaker 12: Yeah. Yeah, And to be clear, when I talked to
Speaker 12: Rashida Tleeb what she was talking about, that bias. She
Speaker 12: was talking about an anti Palestinian bias. That's across many institutions,
Speaker 12: news organizations, companies, attorney general's offices, governor mansions. There's definitely
Speaker 12: an anti Palestinian bias. And most of those institutions aren't
Speaker 12: run by Jewish people. So when she said that, she's
Speaker 12: referring to an anti Palestinian bias, not a bias because
Speaker 12: somebody is Jewish.
Speaker 4: Right, it was.
Speaker 7: And so even when queued up by Jordan to say, well,
Speaker 7: maybe there's something to it, because the reporter's like, no,
Speaker 7: that's that's that's not what she was talking about.
Speaker 3: And he was being fair to data Essel as well.
Speaker 4: Yeah, which yes.
Speaker 7: And also so Jordan, as people might have put two
Speaker 7: and two together, knows Data Nessel quite well because of
Speaker 7: all of his hording on the Flint Water scandal, and
Speaker 7: Dana Nessel ran on a promise to prosecute Rick Snyder
Speaker 7: for that never managed to do so. Rogida Talib's kind
Speaker 7: of first tweet was she couldn't manage you. Nessel couldn't
Speaker 7: manage to prosecute Snyder for the Flint Water crisis, but
Speaker 7: could manage to file charges against these Palestinian protesters, which
Speaker 7: again not about religion.
Speaker 5: Yeah, no, absolutely so. Yeah, those super interesting from Jordan.
Speaker 5: And I think you know this, Dana Nessel, Gretchen Whitmer coming.
Speaker 5: I mean, it is just Michigan right now as a
Speaker 5: swing state head of twenty twenty four is such a
Speaker 5: weird brew of these like little dust ups over basically
Speaker 5: like Rashida Talib and Dana Nessel and it's all getting
Speaker 5: so nasty.
Speaker 7: Yeah, And this whole thing are to finish was just
Speaker 7: just wild to watch unfold.
Speaker 4: Which she didn't say that.
Speaker 7: How are we here five days later asking for clarifications
Speaker 7: and we reached out to Teleib's office. When you reached
Speaker 7: out to Teleab's office, she's already said what she said.
Speaker 5: I actually might add this to my journalism curriculum for
Speaker 5: the students because it's such a perfect example of them
Speaker 5: taking the word of a partisan director and recycling it
Speaker 5: as total and the objective.
Speaker 7: The nice part about this one for it for education
Speaker 7: purposes is you don't have to debate the underlying facts,
Speaker 7: like what she said is what she said, not how
Speaker 7: you do journalism, And you can't even you don't have
Speaker 7: to go to a place of Well, maybe she because
Speaker 7: she didn't say why she was biased.
Speaker 4: No, she said why they're biased.
Speaker 7: They're biased because University of Michigan put pressure on them
Speaker 7: to do this. Like she said that you agree or
Speaker 7: disagree with that, that's what she said.
Speaker 4: You don't need to it's not.
Speaker 5: A statement of anti semitism, very clearly. Let's move on
Speaker 5: to Kamala Harris, who this is the This is actually
Speaker 5: another kind of strange media story and strange politics story
Speaker 5: because Kamala Harris has been on the record, along with
Speaker 5: Joe Biden, opposing or actually supporting eliminating the filibuster, so
Speaker 5: opposing the continued upholding of the filibuster. Which Ryan, you'll
Speaker 5: correct my history on this. This is about the turn
Speaker 5: of the century. That the filibuster early nineteen hundreds, right,
Speaker 5: we get the philibuster late eighteen hundreds.
Speaker 7: It's very complicated depending on which philibuster you're taught there are.
Speaker 4: The sixty vote.
Speaker 7: Threshold comes in like World War World War One, because
Speaker 7: they were trying to get weapons over for the war
Speaker 7: and you had a couple of anti war You got
Speaker 7: to get around them, folks, You got to get around them.
Speaker 7: So you said, okay, well, we can end debate with
Speaker 7: two thirds and then we're gradually like becomes sixty.
Speaker 3: Anyway, it's not the Constitution.
Speaker 7: It's definitely not anywhere near the Constitution, nor was it
Speaker 7: intended to be part of the Constitution. They never imagined
Speaker 7: ever that you would need a sixty percent vote to
Speaker 7: get something past.
Speaker 5: But it's a democratic It is now seen as an
Speaker 5: absolute cornerstone of lower keysaur Republican government in the United States,
Speaker 5: and Kamala Harris and the Biden administration have openly supported
Speaker 5: getting rid of the filibuster since I think at least
Speaker 5: twenty twenty two. Kamala Harris was on a radio show
Speaker 5: in Wisconsin yesterday on WPR It's called Wisconsin Today. She
Speaker 5: told the host that she would support getting rid of
Speaker 5: the filibuster to codify Roe v.
Speaker 3: Wade.
Speaker 5: That kicked off a firestorm. So let's start actually listening
Speaker 5: to Kamala Harris.
Speaker 3: Herself as well.
Speaker 13: Within our reach to hold on to the majority in
Speaker 13: the Senate and take back the House. And so I
Speaker 13: would also emphasize that while the presidential election is extremely
Speaker 13: important and dispositive of where we go moving forward, it
Speaker 13: also is about what we need to do to hold
Speaker 13: on to the Senate and win seats in the House.
Speaker 13: That being said, I've been very clear, I think we
Speaker 13: should eliminate the filibuster Farrow, and we need to get
Speaker 13: us to the point where we fifty one votes would
Speaker 13: be what we need to actually put back in law
Speaker 13: the protections for reproductive freedom and for the ability of
Speaker 13: every person and every woman to make decisions about their
Speaker 13: own body and not have their government tell them what
Speaker 13: to do.
Speaker 5: So Joe Manchin responded to this by telling Manu Raju,
Speaker 5: we can put this next element up on the screen
Speaker 5: of CNN asked if he would back her for president,
Speaker 5: Manu says, now that Harris has vowed to gut the
Speaker 5: philibuster on this issue, Rowe Manchion said he wouldn't back
Speaker 5: of a president.
Speaker 3: Quote that ain't gonna happen.
Speaker 5: I think that basically can destroy our country, and my
Speaker 5: country is more important to me than any one person
Speaker 5: or any one person's ideology.
Speaker 3: I think it's the most horrible thing. Now.
Speaker 5: Earlier, Manu noted that Mansin responded to Kamala Harris saying
Speaker 5: she wants to quote gut the philibuster to codify Row.
Speaker 5: As Manu put it, shame on her, said Manson. She
Speaker 5: knows the filibuster, it's the holy grail of democracy is
Speaker 5: the only thing that keeps us talking and working together.
Speaker 5: If she gets rid of that, then this would be
Speaker 5: the House on steroids.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 5: I'm personally up two minds on the filibuster, this conversation
Speaker 5: on the record, even with Ted Cruz, who has told me.
Speaker 5: I'm sure he's told other people too, but I remember
Speaker 5: having this conversation with him around twenty eighteen that he
Speaker 5: brought himself from this position of the filibuster being the
Speaker 5: holy girl of democracy to believing you should just get
Speaker 5: rid of it because he believes the left is going
Speaker 5: to get rid of the filibuster first, so you might
Speaker 5: as well go down the doom spiral with the left
Speaker 5: and at least get your priorities out of the way
Speaker 5: when you control Congress. And so it's kind of a
Speaker 5: race to the bottom mentality. But it's very interesting because
Speaker 5: Kirsten Cinema responded to Kamala Harris, let's put this on
Speaker 5: the screen, CEA three.
Speaker 3: She is right.
Speaker 5: Cinema says, to state the supremely obvious, eliminating the philibuster
Speaker 5: to codify Roe V. Wade also enables a future Congress
Speaker 5: to ban abortion nationwide. What an absolutely terrible, short sighted
Speaker 5: idea against Cinema is correct, but you would never this
Speaker 5: would be I'm curious for your take on this, because
Speaker 5: this is why a lot of people on the left
Speaker 5: support getting rid of the filibuster. Republicans would in sort
Speaker 5: of modern America at this point in time. I don't
Speaker 5: know if they could recover in a decade from banning
Speaker 5: all abortion nationwide. They just don't have the public support
Speaker 5: for that. There would be I mean, it would be
Speaker 5: significantly worse than Roe if suddenly every single state banned
Speaker 5: every every single kind of abortion. So they just the
Speaker 5: political will doesn't exist to do that in the country.
Speaker 5: So that would be I think the obvious rebuttal to
Speaker 5: Kirsten Cinema.
Speaker 3: But her point is correct.
Speaker 7: Her point is technically correct, and it has a history
Speaker 7: throughout the nineties and much of the two thousands. Inside
Speaker 7: the Democratic Coalition, one of the fiercest opponents of filibuster
Speaker 7: reform was actually pro choice groups, reproductive freedom groups that
Speaker 7: made that precise argument that Cinema is making that Republicans
Speaker 7: that we've got we've got Roe.
Speaker 4: In the Constitution. Supreme Court stands by it.
Speaker 7: You know, why risk letting Republicans overturn or enact actually
Speaker 7: abortion restrictions. They were saying, you know, basically underneath Row,
Speaker 7: what Republicans would do if they had a majority and
Speaker 7: no filibuster is they would enact a lot of these
Speaker 7: the restrictions that they were enacting at the state levels
Speaker 7: that would pretend to sort of comply with Roe, but
Speaker 7: would actually you know, make abortion much more abortion access
Speaker 7: much more difficult. That changed the pro choice groups changed
Speaker 7: their position on that throughout the two thousands and came
Speaker 7: out for philibuster reform, saying, no, we actually need to
Speaker 7: go on offense on this, and they argued, don't take
Speaker 7: this from a position of defensiveness, like this is a
Speaker 7: winning issue for Democrats. Here are the polls, and they
Speaker 7: would show these Democrats polls showing the massive overwhelming support
Speaker 7: for abortion rights and Democratic leaders I don't want to
Speaker 7: talk about abortionist gross I don't believe you.
Speaker 4: I don't believe these numbers.
Speaker 7: But when it came to overturning the filibuster, they put
Speaker 7: a lot of pressure on people like Barbara Boxer and
Speaker 7: others who were holdouts on filibuster reform cinema is like
Speaker 7: wildly anachronistic on this making that point like she was,
Speaker 7: and she was making she made this point. There was
Speaker 7: a push to get rid of it, you know, as
Speaker 7: Democrats were losing their majority, when they still had a
Speaker 7: chance to do it, after Roe was overturned. And even
Speaker 7: then she said no, I'm not doing it, And she
Speaker 7: gave this reasoning because you could ban abortion. People are like, buddy,
Speaker 7: they Supreme Court just overturned Roe v.
Speaker 4: Wade.
Speaker 7: You're talking about a hypothetical banning of abortion. Like what
Speaker 7: are you talking about? Uh, good news is it doesn't
Speaker 7: matter what she thinks. Like she's done.
Speaker 4: We took her out.
Speaker 7: Ru Rubu Diego is the Democratic nominees looks like he's
Speaker 7: probably gonna win, and he has said that he would
Speaker 7: get rid of the filibuster for abortion protections. Uh, basically
Speaker 7: the entire Democratic caucus has said that at this point.
Speaker 3: And it really was unthinkable.
Speaker 5: I mean, this was a norm that Joe Mansion is
Speaker 5: very much This what Joe Manson said to Monty Roger
Speaker 5: yesterday would have been greeted with polite applause in the
Speaker 5: halls of the Capitol before I don't know, five years
Speaker 5: ago before the Trump era.
Speaker 3: Really this actually was him using the holy Grail.
Speaker 5: Term is so resonant because that actually really was the standard.
Speaker 3: People saw this genuinely as the Holy grail.
Speaker 7: Ish I was actually there for this fight, you know,
Speaker 7: so like in two thousand and nine, it really really
Speaker 7: kicked off, was Obamacare. Yeah, because Democrats lost their sixty
Speaker 7: vote threshold, and also the kind of liberal bloggisphere and
Speaker 7: I was writing for Huffing Post at the time, did
Speaker 7: not love the fact that Joe Lieberman and a handful
Speaker 7: of other centrist Democrats who gave them their sixtieth.
Speaker 3: Vote, Joe Biden.
Speaker 4: Joe Biden, Well, now he was vice president by then.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, that's true. Well but he's still pro tem, yes.
Speaker 4: No doubt, and he loved being up there.
Speaker 7: So the argument was, don't let these guys have this power.
Speaker 7: You've got fifty nine and sixty whatever. Then as their
Speaker 7: numbers dwindled, the pressure became even greater. Then as McConnell
Speaker 7: sort of blocking judicial nominations, that's what it was. And
Speaker 7: in twenty thirteen, finally there was enough pressure that there
Speaker 7: was reform on judicial nominations. So, you know, lower than
Speaker 7: Supreme Court level. Now that we got rid of it
Speaker 7: for Supreme Court as well, So there there's been that
Speaker 7: push for this long. But yeah, now Democrats are basically there,
Speaker 7: But it was it.
Speaker 5: Was it was relegated to like, well, that's a Ryan
Speaker 5: grim idea, and the Joe Biden's of the world would
Speaker 5: be horrified. They would be totally in the Mansion camp.
Speaker 5: But to have Mansion be sort of the last man
Speaker 5: standing with Kirsten Cinema on this, well, Joe freaking Biden
Speaker 5: is on that point, like, well, Joe Biden is the
Speaker 5: one who was.
Speaker 3: Saying, yeah, let's do it.
Speaker 5: It's a huge change, And it was because the Ryan
Speaker 5: grimsort won out.
Speaker 7: We packed a lot of punch back then we could,
Speaker 7: we could we can sometimes literally we could.
Speaker 4: Land a real blow.
Speaker 7: Actually sometimes literally uh that Harry Reid spokespersons every time
Speaker 7: we would do something in the Philbuster. Yeah, their phone
Speaker 7: lines would just like it absolutely lit up.
Speaker 4: Like it's really funny Grim.
Speaker 7: But but Harry Reid like saw that and saw and
Speaker 7: saw the energy and it actually kind of transformed him
Speaker 7: as a as a politician. The question of whether they
Speaker 7: win the Senate is I don't think is uh, optim optimistic,
Speaker 7: as as Harris put out new polls. You know, tester
Speaker 7: is really struggling in Montana and they need to win
Speaker 7: in Montana or Nebraska.
Speaker 3: Well, and will he cauc it? What does he think
Speaker 3: on the filibuster?
Speaker 7: Dan Well, we asked him, he said, uh, basically, he
Speaker 7: said he's pro choice, but would he get rid of
Speaker 7: the Philbus Act?
Speaker 3: Yeah, Dan Osborn, did we not ask him that? Well,
Speaker 3: we asked him about row, but I don't remember.
Speaker 4: What we didn't ask him about the filibuster.
Speaker 5: I mean, well, this is where we started this, Black
Speaker 5: saying it's kind of bizarre. We know where Kamala Harris
Speaker 5: stands on the filibuster, and because she told this radio
Speaker 5: station the news, Joe Manchin and Kirsten Cinema reacted and
Speaker 5: Joe Manson is saying she's never going to get my
Speaker 5: endorsement now, and it's like we.
Speaker 3: Have known this. It's just such a weird little media cycle.
Speaker 5: It's not really anybody's fault, but it's just crazy how
Speaker 5: one comment can suddenly become a news cycle and can
Speaker 5: raise the issue again when it's not new at all.
Speaker 3: It's not new at all.
Speaker 7: But if Democrats are smart they'll just run on it
Speaker 7: like it's an amazingly popular issue.
Speaker 4: I will codify Roe.
Speaker 7: If you give me this House, Senate, and the White House,
Speaker 7: I'll do it.
Speaker 3: And then the filibuster is not like super popular.
Speaker 7: And the reason on principle that I've been against the
Speaker 7: filibuster is that imagine a world in which politicians ran
Speaker 7: on a promise, got elected on that promise, and then
Speaker 7: actually enacted it into law, and then voters decided whether
Speaker 7: or not they liked it.
Speaker 4: Imagine that crazy system. Instead, we have the.
Speaker 7: System where you run on a thing and then you
Speaker 7: get into Washington and you can point to these parliamentary
Speaker 7: obstacles or legislative option. Well, yeah, I ran on this,
Speaker 7: but we're not gonna.
Speaker 4: Actually do it.
Speaker 3: We should get both art.
Speaker 4: Let's have another culture war fight two years later.
Speaker 5: It'd be fun to do something with Bovart's probably against it, right, Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 5: it would be fun to We should do that because
Speaker 5: it obviously is like a huge looming issue for everyone.
Speaker 5: It could completely change the way that this legislation has done.
Speaker 14: So.
Speaker 5: On that note, speaking of government working, Brian, let's transition
Speaker 5: to this block about VISA and the Department of Justice,
Speaker 5: suing the company over alleged monopoly practices. This is D one,
Speaker 5: a tear shoot from CNBC. You can see the headline.
Speaker 5: Justice Department accuses Visa a debit network monopoly that affects
Speaker 5: price of quote nearly everything. The Biden DOJ continues its
Speaker 5: streak of actually partially their streak when it comes to Google.
Speaker 5: That was a lawsuit that the Biden DOJ continued from
Speaker 5: the Trump administration. A lot of energy in the anti
Speaker 5: trust base, we know, Ryan, but going after Visa for
Speaker 5: a lleged monopoly practices, that's an escalation in a good direction.
Speaker 4: Yeah. And if we can put D two up on
Speaker 4: the screen there.
Speaker 7: The filing is about like seventy seventy five pages, and
Speaker 7: it's actually quite clear. It's well written and lays out,
Speaker 7: you know, precisely why they believe that Visa is an
Speaker 7: illegal monopoly and how they've gone about building a building
Speaker 7: a mote.
Speaker 4: And they have, you know, obviously they have like on
Speaker 4: all these good ones.
Speaker 7: They got good emails and other internal memos where the
Speaker 7: criminals lay out their criminal scheme, where they stay like
Speaker 7: this is this is how we're building our mote. It's
Speaker 7: like billiing a mote is anti competitive. Sherman Act says,
Speaker 7: you can't do that, like, you just can't like that.
Speaker 7: We have decided that that markets, in order for them
Speaker 7: to remain competitive, need some government intervention to block monopolies
Speaker 7: from completely controlling them. So they go through the history
Speaker 7: here where you know, Visa controls I think sixty to
Speaker 7: seventy percent of that debit transactions. MasterCard then has like
Speaker 7: twenty five.
Speaker 14: So it's not everything's fine, and that there were a
Speaker 14: couple of different things that happened over the last ten
Speaker 14: fifteen years that they lay out in this in this
Speaker 14: civil indictment basically civil complaint, which is one it's like,
Speaker 14: wait a minute, didn't we.
Speaker 7: Just have like PayPal and Venmo and all of these,
Speaker 7: like all this technology came about in the last fifteen years.
Speaker 7: How the heck is it that we still have this
Speaker 7: outdated technology that is still sucking seven billion dollars out
Speaker 7: of the economy every year. And that's like, wait, well,
Speaker 7: I don't pay when I swipe my debit card. Well, yes,
Speaker 7: you do pay, because the merchant that that you are
Speaker 7: buying from pays a fee to Visa and they passed
Speaker 7: that fee onto you, and so visa when all these
Speaker 7: new technologies were coming around saying uh oh, like, these
Speaker 7: are existential threats to us. They called Apple's app store
Speaker 7: or apples like Apple pay an existential threat. And the
Speaker 7: way that in a competitive, free market a company would
Speaker 7: respond to those threats is by delivering a better product
Speaker 7: at a lower price. That's how That's what you're going
Speaker 7: to hear from the Milton Freedman's.
Speaker 4: Of the world.
Speaker 7: Instead, they went out and cut deals with Apple, PayPal,
Speaker 7: all these other potential competitors and said, look, we'll just
Speaker 7: pay you to not get in our business, so you
Speaker 7: monopolize your thing over here, charge people exorbitant fees for
Speaker 7: these types of transactions. We'll charge people exorbitant fees for
Speaker 7: these types of transactions, and we'll pay each other because
Speaker 7: isn't it better for all making lots of money that
Speaker 7: we're siphoning off of consumers rather than competing with each
Speaker 7: other to offer a better product for less cost. And
Speaker 7: the end the competitors were like, hey, that's fine. This
Speaker 7: also goes to like quarterly.
Speaker 3: Which you can only get away with if you're huge and.
Speaker 7: Also right, but also the way our system is set
Speaker 7: up they call it, you know, quarterly capitalism where you're
Speaker 7: every quarter, you know, you're reporting your revenues to the market,
Speaker 7: and your your compensation as an executive is tied directly
Speaker 7: to those earnings because you're paid mostly in equity.
Speaker 4: The bulk your pays in equity.
Speaker 7: As as your revenues go up, share prices go up,
Speaker 7: your equity goes up. You become richer than you switch
Speaker 7: jobs like you don't care, like you're just trying to
Speaker 7: so for somebody, like a PayPal or another competitor, A
Speaker 7: potential competitive Visa might say, you know what, it's going
Speaker 7: to take us three years of investment and work to
Speaker 7: get to a place where we're competitive with Visa on
Speaker 7: this particular thing. That's a lot of quarters, that's a
Speaker 7: lot of quarterly conference calls where we're losing money and
Speaker 7: I want to leave here within two years, and I
Speaker 7: would like to leave here having made forty five million
Speaker 7: dollar as a vice president or whatever. And so they're like,
Speaker 7: and instead, Visa's offering me this amount of money right
Speaker 7: now if we don't compete against them, which will lead
Speaker 7: directly to a bonus for me, wouldn't that be nice?
Speaker 4: Let's do that instead.
Speaker 3: It's really aggressive from the Biden administration. I mean Visa.
Speaker 5: This is the senator from Delaware. By the way, This is,
Speaker 5: if you need it, the evidence that Joe Biden is
Speaker 5: not in charge of his own administration.
Speaker 3: You just know that they're going after Visa.
Speaker 7: Oh my god, if he found out about this, he's
Speaker 7: going to be so pissed. They used to call him
Speaker 7: a democrat from MBNA, which was the gigantic credit card
Speaker 7: company in Delaware.
Speaker 3: So maybe he wants them to go after Visa.
Speaker 7: Well they they got bought up, so they're basically Visa
Speaker 7: by now. But one thing that's interesting here, we're talking
Speaker 7: about democracy in the last block this sort of thing,
Speaker 7: because our democracy is so corrupted and bought off has
Speaker 7: to come from the Department of Justice or the FTC
Speaker 7: at this point. I spent a couple of years back
Speaker 7: in like twenty ten to.
Speaker 3: Eleven, Yeah, speaking of you being old.
Speaker 7: Thirteen, Yes, covering this intense fight over what are called
Speaker 7: swipe fees between basically merchants and these credit card companies
Speaker 7: back in like twenty eleven in Congress. It was it
Speaker 7: was the most It wasn't covered by the major press
Speaker 7: because nobody cares because it's just a fight between two major,
Speaker 7: major power players, but they were employing maybe over a
Speaker 7: thousand journalists spending hundreds of millions of dollars getting meet
Speaker 7: like lobbyists.
Speaker 4: Yeah, dominating whoops, Yeah.
Speaker 7: Dominating the entire congressional legislative agenda, fighting over what you
Speaker 7: would set a swipe fee cap at or whether there
Speaker 7: would be a swipe feed cap which rolled out of
Speaker 7: what was called the Durban Amendment from Dodd Frank. The
Speaker 7: Derbtin Amendent actually makes an appear and in this lawsuit because
Speaker 7: the DOJ points out that the Durbin Amendment had a
Speaker 7: provision that said every debit card has to have two
Speaker 7: visa in somebody else that are able to use it,
Speaker 7: which would then allow merchants to choose say, Okay, you
Speaker 7: know what, Actually I don't want to take Visa because
Speaker 7: Visa charges these huge fees. So your card also has MasterCard,
Speaker 7: so I want to you can use MasterCard that's cheaper
Speaker 7: here at my store. And what Visa did to get
Speaker 7: around this new law that required these two things. They
Speaker 7: went to stores and they said, all right, we have
Speaker 7: a lot of what are called non competitive transactions where
Speaker 7: the person only has Visa, so you can only do
Speaker 7: VISA on those If you cut a deal with us,
Speaker 7: we're gonna make them fairly cheap. And the deal is
Speaker 7: you then have to use us for everything racket. If
Speaker 7: you don't cut a deal with us, then we're charging
Speaker 7: you a boat out of money for every one of
Speaker 7: those non competitive transactions where they have to use visa.
Speaker 7: So all these merchants were just totally jammed up, and
Speaker 7: they had to sign these agreements that lock them in
Speaker 7: and doj is saying the agreements are are illegal and
Speaker 7: the court auto oust all of these. I just want
Speaker 7: to read one quote from this if put up this
Speaker 7: third element here, so I think this is the most
Speaker 7: fun story that I've ever written. It's go back and
Speaker 7: read this one. You will absolutely die reading it.
Speaker 5: I want to do like a Stefan like it's got
Speaker 5: everything saxby Chandelis.
Speaker 4: Yes, it's amazing, it's incredible.
Speaker 3: No use of the word twit pick.
Speaker 7: Twit pick used to be a thing, and cups, cups.
Speaker 4: It's such a fun story.
Speaker 7: But here's one of the most fun quotes from a
Speaker 7: moderate Democratic senator. He said to me, I'm surprised at
Speaker 7: how much of our time is spent trying to divide
Speaker 7: up the spoils between various economic interests.
Speaker 4: I had no idea.
Speaker 7: I thought it would be focused on civil liberties, on
Speaker 7: education policy, energy policy, and so on. Senator, there's a
Speaker 7: senator that the fights down here can be put in
Speaker 7: two or three categories. The big greedy bastards against the
Speaker 7: big greedy bastards, the big greedy bastards against the little
Speaker 7: greedy bastards, in some cases even the other little greedy
Speaker 7: bastards against the other little greedy bastards. What he's saying
Speaker 7: is that Congress is like a host that has shaped
Speaker 7: itself to the parasites, and the parasites are the lobbyists.
Speaker 7: And so both parties are trying to figure out how
Speaker 7: much cash they can raise for their campaigns. So they
Speaker 7: go out and they tried to find things that two
Speaker 7: big industries will fight over. Sales tax on Amazon was
Speaker 7: like another one because so, and it's basically the same
Speaker 7: way the mafia. Yes goes to a store and is like,
Speaker 7: nice store, you got here, seameus, something happened to it.
Speaker 7: They smash the windows up and then they pay them off,
Speaker 7: and then they don't smash the windows up anymore. So
Speaker 7: what Congress would do is deliberately we produce legislation that
Speaker 7: they think would be destructive to some powerful interest like Visa,
Speaker 7: and say, wow, you're making a lot of money on
Speaker 7: those swipe fees. We're going to put together a bill
Speaker 7: that caps the amount that you're able to charge these merchants.
Speaker 7: And then they go to them, and then they go
Speaker 7: to Visa and they say, hire all of our people,
Speaker 7: give money to all of our campaigns, and maybe we
Speaker 7: won't do this. Then they go to the other greedy bastards.
Speaker 7: They go to Target, they go to Walmart, they go
Speaker 7: to Home Depot, and they say, don't you hate Visa
Speaker 7: the way that they American express They're really ripping you off,
Speaker 7: aren't they. We've got this bill that will stop them
Speaker 7: from ripping you off. And all you got to do
Speaker 7: is hire all of our friends and donate to all
Speaker 7: of our campaigns. And then they will drag that out
Speaker 7: for years. That fight over the Durban Amendment is still
Speaker 7: going on today.
Speaker 5: That Senator's heart is absolutely in the right place, but
Speaker 5: it is such a naive like approach to government.
Speaker 3: That is of course what this is.
Speaker 5: This is Vegas, baby, This is Vegas with seventies.
Speaker 3: That is our economy.
Speaker 7: Yeah, so you kind of have to have the DOJ
Speaker 7: do it, and luckily, but usually the DOJ won't. Usually
Speaker 7: they won't, right because of the revolving door.
Speaker 5: It's not necessarily that they're being lobbied, it's that they.
Speaker 3: Want to lobby.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 7: Do you know how much lobbying there was against Jonathan
Speaker 7: Canter getting into the DOJ to run the antitrust policy
Speaker 7: of the vitaminstry Reid.
Speaker 5: Hoffman is openly lobbying Kamala Harris right now, not as
Speaker 5: a registered lobbyist, but just as a rich dude with
Speaker 5: a lot of power in public platforms to get rid
Speaker 5: of Lena conm The.
Speaker 7: Good news is during the New Deal, they did pass
Speaker 7: this law that says you can't do this, and so
Speaker 7: the White House at least until the Supreme Court says
Speaker 7: they can't enforce laws that weren't passed within the last
Speaker 7: five minutes, they can still they can still enforce laws
Speaker 7: that are on the books. We'll see if they feel
Speaker 7: like it good for them. All right, what well this
Speaker 7: will do lower the price of everything.
Speaker 3: Let's move on to this port strike Ryan prices.
Speaker 5: Just speaking of prices, we can put this first element
Speaker 5: up on the screen, and this is from the load
Speaker 5: Star USMX in Isla and claims Blame Game. As strike
Speaker 5: deadline looms, can you break this one down for us Ryan.
Speaker 5: We're covering a lot of Ryan Grim topics today, which
Speaker 5: is great because it's always educational and enlightening what's happening
Speaker 5: with this contract.
Speaker 7: First of all, credit to this shipping trade publication for
Speaker 7: claims Blame Games.
Speaker 3: That's funny, It is New York Post worthy.
Speaker 7: It is good, and you don't see that from trade
Speaker 7: pubs very often. The reason we're using a trade publication
Speaker 7: article here is because there's been very little mainstream coverage
Speaker 7: of what's going on here. If the International Longshoreman Union
Speaker 7: and this conglomerate of basically dudes that run ports don't
Speaker 7: come to a new contract by October first, the ports
Speaker 7: are going to shut down all along the East Coast
Speaker 7: and the Gulf. So as a result of that, already
Speaker 7: lots of shippers are moving their shipments over to the
Speaker 7: West coast. Uh and as the trade press talks about,
Speaker 7: a lot of kind of holiday merchants moved their orders
Speaker 7: way up like they're already getting in their Christmas tree,
Speaker 7: their artificial Christmas trees and all the other junk that
Speaker 7: we're going to buy buy for each other in the
Speaker 7: holiday season so that the shelves will be stocked. Because
Speaker 7: the business side here is, according to the union, offering
Speaker 7: utterly paltry wages and then lying publicly about the way
Speaker 7: that they're kind of doing the math and saying, oh,
Speaker 7: look at this huge increase or giving. And so they
Speaker 7: haven't met in months and we're at an October first deadline.
Speaker 7: The White House has said it will not use its
Speaker 7: federal power to kind of force these workers back to work.
Speaker 7: If you remember, that's the same law that they use
Speaker 7: to force the railroad basically force a contract on the
Speaker 7: rail workers a couple of years ago. They could do
Speaker 7: that again when it comes to this one. And it
Speaker 7: seems like the bosses here are banking on the fact
Speaker 7: that the White House will do that. They're saying, we
Speaker 7: don't need to negotiate with you because in October first,
Speaker 7: port shutdown would be such an absolute political crisis.
Speaker 4: They're probably right that the White House will actually.
Speaker 7: Does pete boota judge, because it's boota judge who is
Speaker 7: basically responsible for kind of being the secretariat who is
Speaker 7: in between this and trying to get to a deal.
Speaker 7: Does boota judge want this to.
Speaker 4: Be this thing?
Speaker 7: So the unions mean to want to like, just give
Speaker 7: us a decent deal and we'll come back to work.
Speaker 3: Lots of leverage.
Speaker 7: Now, one thing they could possibly do is kind of
Speaker 7: force them back to work until after the election, which
Speaker 7: is sort of what they did with the rail workers
Speaker 7: if you remember then. And what you can do is
Speaker 7: you can force them into mediation. So I tend to
Speaker 7: think that they're not going to let strike happen October first.
Speaker 7: But according to their current statements, they are now well
Speaker 7: I don't know what kind of brinksmanship that is or not,
Speaker 7: but the workers do not seem like they're in a
Speaker 7: position to get rolled over here.
Speaker 5: And what can so actual question here what Biden's power
Speaker 5: hypothetically would be in these negotiations.
Speaker 3: It probably looks what we saw. It's pretty surreal.
Speaker 7: It's pretty serious power because it involves the transportation and
Speaker 7: the cornerstone economic interests. There as a Taft Hartley Act
Speaker 7: that allows, you know, significant intervention from the US not.
Speaker 3: Just allows, but sort of incentivizes for the federal government
Speaker 3: in case.
Speaker 7: Of and and the and the bosses have relied on
Speaker 7: that for you know, since the forties or whatever to say,
Speaker 7: you know, we don't you can't go on strike because
Speaker 7: the government's going to come in and stop you. But
Speaker 7: I think they took they took a lot of heat
Speaker 7: for that, for forcing that contract on rail workers, and
Speaker 7: they certainly would rather not have the political optics of
Speaker 7: being anti union right in October before the election.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 5: Well, and you know, it's funny because this was sort
Speaker 5: of a parallel situation to what Mike Johnson was facing
Speaker 5: this week with the government shutdown on the eve of
Speaker 5: the election that he knew Republicans were going to be
Speaker 5: blamed for, which is why he and sort of Republican
Speaker 5: establishment ended up siding with the signing with Democrats and
Speaker 5: brokering a deal on the Save Act and doing this
Speaker 5: three month stop gap that would end in December, which
Speaker 5: is certainly going to result as freedom Coccus types are saying,
Speaker 5: in a big spending package right before Christmas, a nice
Speaker 5: little Christmas present, because nobody wants a shutdown over Christmas.
Speaker 5: We've seen it before, of course, but nobody really wants it.
Speaker 5: And Mike Johnson's logic explicitly was that we are not
Speaker 5: risking a shutdown, shutting down the government as Trump wanted
Speaker 5: over the Say Act, which is basically creates protections so
Speaker 5: that you can't have non citizen voting in federal elections.
Speaker 5: Shutting down the government over that would not be politically viable,
Speaker 5: politically worth it. So basically the leverage was with the
Speaker 5: people who were saying like Freedom Coucus had no leverage
Speaker 5: in this situation. And the billionaires that are being called
Speaker 5: out by these union leaders don't really have leverage in
Speaker 5: this situation because all the money in the world that
Speaker 5: they can give to Joe Biden isn't going to offset
Speaker 5: how serious the threat to the election would be. If
Speaker 5: we remember back to the the real uprising after what
Speaker 5: happened in East Palestine, this was the level of political
Speaker 5: crisis for Biden and Buddha Judge was incredibly high. And
Speaker 5: to have that literally weeks before a presidential election, I mean,
Speaker 5: they have a pretty good case going to the Biden administration.
Speaker 8: Here.
Speaker 7: It's an interesting test for Mayor Pete Secretary Pete see
Speaker 7: to see if you can get a deal here. And
Speaker 7: I wanted to cover this even though nobody else is
Speaker 7: is that there's no, they don't pay any price by
Speaker 7: forcing workers back to work.
Speaker 4: If nobody knows it's happening in the first place.
Speaker 3: Mm hmm.
Speaker 7: If if nobody, if nobody's talking about it, then the
Speaker 7: White House could actually much more easily just jam them
Speaker 7: and so you know what nobody's looking just go back
Speaker 7: to work.
Speaker 5: Well, so, Steve Lemmar, the President and CEO of the
Speaker 5: American Association of Footwear and Apparel, makes a very very
Speaker 5: very good case to Biden. He says, our members, if
Speaker 5: they can get their product to market at all during
Speaker 5: the critical holiday shopping season, will only be able to
Speaker 5: do so with massive delays at an exorbitant cost. Exporters,
Speaker 5: particularly agricultural exporters, will literally see their product wrought on
Speaker 5: the docks or in the rail yards. And just when
Speaker 5: inflation has started to come under control, American families will
Speaker 5: face the surgeon prices and product shortages not seen since
Speaker 5: the pandemic.
Speaker 7: It would be a disaster, Yeah, absolute disaster, no doubt
Speaker 7: about it. And they say that for every day that
Speaker 7: the ports are shut down, it takes about five days
Speaker 7: to clear that backlog. So even if there was only
Speaker 7: a ten day strike, you then you're talking about a
Speaker 7: two month backlog, and exactly just as the federal reservest.
Speaker 3: Go, it's already a problem.
Speaker 7: Yeah. Oh, by the way, I was gone, so I
Speaker 7: didn't get through my victory lap. I was correct on
Speaker 7: the half point cut.
Speaker 3: I know.
Speaker 5: I saw that right away. I was like, this is perfect.
Speaker 5: That's why I didn't guess.
Speaker 4: But you know, it was trading in the market.
Speaker 5: A great call. Yeah you could have. I'm sure that
Speaker 5: there were predicted bets on that.
Speaker 4: Oh, the whole market is a predictive.
Speaker 3: That's true at this point.
Speaker 5: Again, it's all Vegas. It's all Vegas all the time.
Speaker 5: On a much bleaker note, let's turn to the horrible
Speaker 5: case of Marcel's Williams, who was executed in Missouri at
Speaker 5: six ' ten pm yesterday. Now, this case goes back
Speaker 5: to nineteen ninety eight, the August murder of a Saint
Speaker 5: Louis Post Dispatch report Felicia Gail. Felicia Gale's family believed
Speaker 5: that Williams was guilty but opposed his execution. Was not
Speaker 5: at his execution, which is typical of families will often
Speaker 5: go to the viewing of the execution. Now, there was
Speaker 5: no forensic evidence that ever tied Williams to this crime
Speaker 5: through circumstantial evidence, but even that had been contaminated. This
Speaker 5: is a very typical death penalty case where there's been
Speaker 5: sort of legal back and forth for literally decades. At
Speaker 5: this point, there's been evidence in both directions there's been
Speaker 5: a man with poor legal representation, as we've seen in
Speaker 5: filings that things just ended up getting botched.
Speaker 3: Or poorly ordered or poorly argued along the way.
Speaker 5: The state Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court
Speaker 5: both rejected last minute please for Williams.
Speaker 3: Top from Williams.
Speaker 5: Camp, but this is I mean, the prosecutor from his
Speaker 5: two thousand and three convictions, so five years after this
Speaker 5: alleged murder did not support the execution. The family of
Speaker 5: the victim did not support the execution. There were stays
Speaker 5: granted to Williams back in twenty fifteen and twenty seventeen,
Speaker 5: also very typical of death penalty cases. But he was
Speaker 5: executed yesterday in Missouri.
Speaker 7: And the Supreme Court, the Federal Supreme Court, by six
Speaker 7: to three let the execution go through. Obviously, the three
Speaker 7: liberal justices would have stayed the execution, the six conservative
Speaker 7: ones went for it. He converted to Islam while in
Speaker 7: prison Khalifa ibin Rayford Daniels was his new adopted name.
Speaker 4: Was really I don't think we've talked about the death penalty.
Speaker 7: The part that has always flumixed me about conservative support
Speaker 7: the death penalty is that conservatives are quick to point
Speaker 7: to all of the problems with government inefficiency. Yes, grew ups,
Speaker 7: yes everywhere, whether it's the regulation of the markets. They say,
Speaker 7: you know, like there's government bureaucrats, they're going to screw
Speaker 7: things up. Yet in a life for death situation, they're
Speaker 7: willing to let these county bureaucrats, you know, the same
Speaker 7: people that populate the show like Parks and rec like.
Speaker 7: Let those people handle the evidence, handle the prosecutions with
Speaker 7: immense amount of power, very little oversight, and when it
Speaker 7: comes to life and death, you can't make mistakes. And
Speaker 7: from the conservative perspective, like governments are making mistakes all
Speaker 7: the time.
Speaker 4: And in this one.
Speaker 7: There was the defense argued that there was also racial
Speaker 7: bias because a prosecutor struck I think six of seven
Speaker 7: black people from the jury pool, so there was only
Speaker 7: one black person in the jury pool. And he said,
Speaker 7: and he specifically said, I struck one of them because
Speaker 7: he looked too much like Marcellus. It's like, well, I
Speaker 7: think you just admitted what's going on here, but it
Speaker 7: wasn't enough. So are you Yeah, where do you come
Speaker 7: down on that question?
Speaker 5: This issue turns me into a bleeding heart like campus leftist.
Speaker 5: It was one of the earliest issues that animated me politically.
Speaker 5: So I'm the worst person for a show called Counterpoints.
Speaker 3: Next to you on this.
Speaker 7: Well, at least you're consistent on the whole pro life
Speaker 7: thinges it.
Speaker 5: It makes me so angry, and your point about bureaucracy
Speaker 5: is such an important one. I just have a plain
Speaker 5: moral opposition to the state carrying out I mean, I
Speaker 5: think self defense is a legitimate, you know, explanation to
Speaker 5: take another life ers. I think we all mostly agree
Speaker 5: on that legitimate cases of self defense. I don't think
Speaker 5: the state has a right to take life like this, nor.
Speaker 3: Do I think it should.
Speaker 5: I think the drugs are incredibly problematic and basically forms
Speaker 5: of torture that we're also asking bureaucrats to come to
Speaker 5: conclusions on an experiment with humans. On ze Jelani has
Speaker 5: already blasted out a great piece on this particular case
Speaker 5: as sort of a hook in his subsect The American Saga,
Speaker 5: his headline is, yes, innocent people have been executed, but
Speaker 5: the death penalty is also slowly being phased out. Both
Speaker 5: points absolutely true. But if we're focusing on what you
Speaker 5: just mentioned about conservatives jumping to support the state executions
Speaker 5: and death penalty cases despite bureaucracy being an abject disaster
Speaker 5: that is often politically weaponized and just incompetent, Z points
Speaker 5: out in his piece this number that is astounding, but
Speaker 5: it's you again. You can look all of this up.
Speaker 5: In the past five decades, at least two hundred people
Speaker 5: who've been executed have actually been exonerated after they were executed.
Speaker 5: Two hundred people in the last five decades. So that's
Speaker 5: not just cases that are murky. This case is absolutely murky.
Speaker 3: This is not a.
Speaker 5: Clean cut case. It has gone fairly through the legal system.
Speaker 5: I don't need to adjudicate whether he's guilty or not,
Speaker 5: because my position.
Speaker 3: Is just as wrong.
Speaker 5: But it's not a clear cut case. And we have
Speaker 5: seen two hundred times that after people have died, at
Speaker 5: least two hundred times, because there are case is probably
Speaker 5: still to come just out of the last five decades,
Speaker 5: but two hundred times where people are exonerated, exonerated, black
Speaker 5: and white, clear cut exonerations after being executed.
Speaker 3: So it's just that's.
Speaker 5: One, I think, very obvious argument against the death penalty
Speaker 5: that should give many people who are distrustful of government pause.
Speaker 5: But just the stunning figure, stunning, stunning, And maybe it's
Speaker 5: because of technological advances that, as Zed points out, these
Speaker 5: trends are moving in the other direction. But we still
Speaker 5: have a spate of executions scheduled for what the next
Speaker 5: couple of weeks. There's a good Associated Press story on this.
Speaker 5: I mean, it's absolutely still happening.
Speaker 7: Yeah, a huge like upticking and coming over the next
Speaker 7: couple of weeks. Totally wild. But if we could put
Speaker 7: up f F two here, which is a quote from
Speaker 7: this local article, just to give you the background here,
Speaker 7: you know, face face with it, so face with the
Speaker 7: DNA evidence and other new information. Williams case, Saint Louis
Speaker 7: County prosecuting attorney Wesley Bell, who defeated Corey bush Uh
Speaker 7: sought to toss out the conviction on numerous grounds, including
Speaker 7: the results of the DNA testing and constitutional violations during
Speaker 7: the jury selection process.
Speaker 4: So this was this was the prosecutor's office.
Speaker 7: Saying that after reviewing the way that things were handled,
Speaker 7: they would they wanted to see this tossed out. It
Speaker 7: was so poorly handled that when then when they took
Speaker 7: the knife to get it tested, the only DNA they
Speaker 7: found on it was a bunch of assistant prosecutors who've
Speaker 7: been who had been improperly handling the evidence. And so
Speaker 7: once that emerged, the Williams had no way of getting
Speaker 7: out of you know, no way of kind of moving innocence,
Speaker 7: and said, look, I'll take life, I'll take life, just
Speaker 7: don't kill me.
Speaker 4: And the family was fine with that.
Speaker 7: Prosecutor signed off, but the Missouri governor and the judges
Speaker 7: insisted on moving forward with it.
Speaker 4: And so we can put up this next vo here.
Speaker 7: This is a footage of more than a million petitions
Speaker 7: asking for Williams's execution to be stayed being delivered to
Speaker 7: the Missouri Governor's office, evidence of the just intense amount
Speaker 7: of a public opposition to this state's sanctioned killing, and
Speaker 7: the governor just decided to go forward with it anyway.
Speaker 5: Now, there was a moment on Jake Tapper's show that
Speaker 5: happened just last night where Marcel's Williams attorney, Innocent Project.
Speaker 5: Innocence Project attorney heard the news from the Supreme Court
Speaker 5: right before the interview began.
Speaker 3: Let's roll this element.
Speaker 1: Have you spoken to Marcellus today?
Speaker 15: The team has spoken with him today and actually we
Speaker 15: just spoke with.
Speaker 3: Him momentarily ago.
Speaker 15: We actually just got news that the US Supreme Court
Speaker 15: has denied a stay.
Speaker 1: The US Supreme Court has denied a stay. That's horrible news.
Speaker 1: That means that that's it. That's the end of that.
Speaker 1: There's just nothing else that can be done unless the
Speaker 1: governor has a change of heart, which seems unlikely.
Speaker 15: That is correct under what we have currently from the
Speaker 15: law and the governor tonight, Missouri will execute an innocent
Speaker 15: man and they will do it even though the prosecutor
Speaker 15: doesn't want him to be executed, the jurors who sentenced
Speaker 15: him to death don't want him executed, and the victims
Speaker 15: themselves don't want him executed. That is what will be
Speaker 15: the state of justice tonight in Missouri.
Speaker 1: Why do you think that the governor or the state
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, why did they deny him climency? Why have
Speaker 1: they not stayed this execution?
Speaker 15: And what we hear time and time again, is this
Speaker 15: argument of finality.
Speaker 3: It's too late. Things should have been brought before.
Speaker 15: We you know, things have been heard before, but they've
Speaker 15: never been heard with this evidence. They've never been heard
Speaker 15: with what this prosecutor knows and concedes to that mister
Speaker 15: Williams had an unfair trial, that the prosecutor admits that
Speaker 15: he struck jurors based on their race. But we have
Speaker 15: a system that values finality over fairness, and this is
Speaker 15: the result that we will get from that.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and at minimum, you would think that if you
Speaker 7: really want to get it right, and you really have
Speaker 7: got the evidence and you can prove the trials unfair,
Speaker 7: trium again.
Speaker 4: Triump fairly well.
Speaker 3: But this is what's so I think this is so.
Speaker 5: Partially harrowing and unsettling about these really content, very modern
Speaker 5: death penalty cases, is that he has been tried so
Speaker 5: many times and it is still a question mark. I mean,
Speaker 5: you know, like we have gone through this, This man
Speaker 5: has sat so many appeals, you mean, right, right, Like
Speaker 5: this has been litigated over and over again for decades,
Speaker 5: and the family has had to put up with it
Speaker 5: for decades. The victims family has had to put up
Speaker 5: with it for decades, and it's just incredible how you
Speaker 5: can keep going and going. This is I'm reading from
Speaker 5: Saint Louis and pr This is just a little bit
Speaker 5: more details on what happened, because it was a lot
Speaker 5: of kind of back and forth. They write, Williams had
Speaker 5: always maintained he had nothing to do with the murder
Speaker 5: of Gail. Police would find some of Gail's possessions in
Speaker 5: a car that belonged to Williams, and he pawned a
Speaker 5: laptop belonging to her husband, but no forensic evidence like DNA,
Speaker 5: hair or fingerprints ever tied him to the scene. He
Speaker 5: was convicted largely on the testimony of a former girlfriend,
Speaker 5: Laura Asorrow, and a jailhouse informant named Henry Cole.
Speaker 3: I believe Laura. Yeah. Both of these witnesses have since
Speaker 3: passed away.
Speaker 5: That's how long this case has been, pinging back and
Speaker 5: forth through appeals, going on for and to end with
Speaker 5: still again a question mark. The case study is an
Speaker 5: argument in and of itself against the death penalty, like
Speaker 5: the way that this has all been prosecuted for decades.
Speaker 5: There are five executions that are said to happen in
Speaker 5: the span of a week The Associated Press has the story.
Speaker 5: The first one was on Friday in South Carolina. There's
Speaker 5: another one Texas, Alabama, and Oklahoma, and according the Associated Press,
Speaker 5: it's the first time in more than twenty years that
Speaker 5: five executions nationally have been held within seven days.
Speaker 3: So I think that is right to point out.
Speaker 5: And I think, to some extent, as we were mentioning earlier,
Speaker 5: DNA evidence probably accounts for a lot of this, which
Speaker 5: is such a sad statement in and of itself.
Speaker 3: But right now, this week five.
Speaker 7: Yeah, we didn't hear anything, by the way, from Kamla
Speaker 7: Harris on this, who when she was district's attorney, often
Speaker 7: used the argument in exoneration cases that well, you may
Speaker 7: have a good point there, but you missed the filing deadline,
Speaker 7: or you didn't make this claim of poor council previously
Speaker 7: when you could have. It's like, well, of course you
Speaker 7: didn't because you had poor counsel. So, yeah, her hands
Speaker 7: are not clean on this by any stretch.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And I mean there's obviously racial variables, but also
Speaker 5: class variables, incredible class variables in the new class conscious
Speaker 5: conservative movement. To consider there you go, so bleak note
Speaker 5: to end on, but an important one, Ryan, Glad.
Speaker 3: You got back safely.
Speaker 7: Good time in Doha, Ryan Grim in the Middle.
Speaker 5: East, I would be a little nervous. You've done some
Speaker 5: your reporting is too good. It's too good for you
Speaker 5: to be perfectly calm.
Speaker 4: But it was totally fine.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Yeah, you're speaking for Georgetown.
Speaker 7: Yeah, was at a Georgetown conference and did a couple
Speaker 7: of interviews some stories that hopefully will pan out in
Speaker 7: the next couple of weeks.
Speaker 3: Well, we'll be watching for those.
Speaker 5: We will actually be back here before I think next
Speaker 5: Tuesday show because the debate is on our next Wednesday show.
Speaker 3: Because the debate is on too.
Speaker 4: Wow, I guess I will be.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so it's coming right up. I'm feeling for Sager
Speaker 5: on Monday. But then Tuesday we'll all be here breaking points.
Speaker 5: Cinematic Universe.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 3: Maybe I'll bring some Ghosts.
Speaker 4: No Friday show this week.
Speaker 3: No Friday show this week. Sorry about that, producer Mac.
Speaker 5: We should also clarify that we have zero paid sponsorship
Speaker 5: with Ghosts. We just really like it. But Ryan's been
Speaker 5: drinking coffee, so I don't know how it could possibly
Speaker 5: be terrible for you when it has one hundred percent
Speaker 5: of four daily vitamins.
Speaker 3: There you go anyway, Thank you so much for tuning in.
Speaker 5: Breakingpoints dot com for the full version of this show
Speaker 5: right away to your inbox early, and it doesn't get
Speaker 5: cut up into a little clips, so it's a nice little,
Speaker 5: nice little park breakingpoints dot com to subscribe. Thanks everyone
Speaker 5: for tuning in, all right, see you next week.
Speaker 10: M