Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll access to our full shows, unedited, ad free, and
Speaker 2: all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 1: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 3: Good morning, and welcome to Counterpoints. A lot of Trump
Speaker 3: news today, can you believe that? I mean, just let
Speaker 3: a day at ends and wy Yeah, not like Donald
Speaker 3: Trump making.
Speaker 4: News all over the world.
Speaker 5: That's right, all tell of it.
Speaker 3: Actually good And we're not going to do an entire
Speaker 3: segment on this, but we did want to let you
Speaker 3: know that the Senate passed the No Tax on Tips Act.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's fantastic.
Speaker 4: Let me we give credit to two people that are despicable.
Speaker 4: Ted Cruz and Donald Trump got together wrote a bill.
Speaker 5: He's not gonna come back on the show if you
Speaker 5: do that, right, and.
Speaker 4: Pat I just said something nice about him.
Speaker 3: They wrote a bill and it unanimously passed the Senate
Speaker 3: because the center really cannot hold if you have left
Speaker 3: populism and right populism actually genuinely working together, because then
Speaker 3: you're at like a seventy thirty issue or eighty twenty
Speaker 3: or ninety ten, like who's against tax on tips?
Speaker 5: So well, nobody, because it was a unanimous except the
Speaker 5: vote was unanimous.
Speaker 3: Yeah, literally, it still wouldn't have happened if the populist
Speaker 3: wings didn't push it and for left populist didn't really
Speaker 3: push it. This is yep, this is Trump. Well, i'll
Speaker 3: give us one of Trump.
Speaker 5: Kamala Harris mirrored it at one point in the camp page.
Speaker 5: It was like, yeah, okay on tips.
Speaker 4: There you go. So it caps.
Speaker 3: The income cap is one hundred and sixty thousand, so
Speaker 3: if you make a less than a hundred and sixty thousand.
Speaker 4: I was reading the bill and we'll see if it fades.
Speaker 6: In or not. You get it.
Speaker 3: Basically, a twenty five thousand dollars tax credit against against
Speaker 3: your taxes and what they mean, and it's against cash
Speaker 3: which basically means you can cheat because as long as
Speaker 3: you you can just say you got twenty five thousand
Speaker 3: dollars in tips and write that all off of your
Speaker 3: income tax. Now, most people aren't paying that much at
Speaker 3: that level, so it's kind of basically wipes out your
Speaker 3: tax bill.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's fantastic, great bell.
Speaker 4: Actually, well, and now it has to pass the House.
Speaker 4: We'll see. Yeah, great bell, but it should Why wouldn't
Speaker 4: it pass the House?
Speaker 5: I think it'll be just fine. It's a good it's
Speaker 5: a great sign that it was unanus.
Speaker 3: Costs two or three hundred billion dollars I think, yeah,
Speaker 3: over the next ten years.
Speaker 5: So it's in Golden Dome territory. Yeah, a lot less
Speaker 5: than the Golden Dome.
Speaker 4: Actually, probably just scrap the Golden Dome and pay for it.
Speaker 5: Well, we're going to get to the Golden Dome because
Speaker 5: there's all kinds of news on that front. We'll explain
Speaker 5: what the Golden Dome is, who might pay for it,
Speaker 5: who might be in charge of constructing it. His name
Speaker 5: rhymes with d Love, Trusty, So we'll get into all
Speaker 5: of that. We have news. Obviously, probably you've already heard
Speaker 5: leaked news about Israeli Plain for Iran that we're going
Speaker 5: to get into right away on today's show. Will then
Speaker 5: be going through some Trump comments that Donald Trump made
Speaker 5: yesterday he was on Capitol Hill talking with reporters. We
Speaker 5: got some pretty interesting tedbits out of that. We're going
Speaker 5: to talk about Sudan as well.
Speaker 3: Ryan, Yes, apparently DHS sent twelve migrants from ME and
Speaker 3: mar Vietnam elsewhere against a judicial order to South Sudan,
Speaker 3: and a judge has ordered them to not let those
Speaker 3: migrants out of US custody even if they're in South
Speaker 3: Sudan in case he decides that they need to come back,
Speaker 3: because he's already indicated that this was a flagrant violation
Speaker 3: of court orders.
Speaker 5: Well, speaking of flagrant, Bernie Sanders was on flagrant, We're
Speaker 5: going to have a conversation about the appearance that Bernie
Speaker 5: Sanders made with Andrew Schultz on flagrant and it's really
Speaker 5: really interesting. We're going to combine it with a New
Speaker 5: York Times article about how Democrats are looking to astro
Speaker 5: terf influencers to the tune of millions and millions of dollars.
Speaker 5: So we will break all of that down, Congressman wrote,
Speaker 5: Conna is here. He's going to respond to Jake Tapper's
Speaker 5: appearance on Megan Kelly's program yesterday. Some of his recent
Speaker 5: town hall stops. Rokanna's recent town hall stops have been
Speaker 5: pretty interesting, So there's a lot to break down with
Speaker 5: the congressman and Elon Musk speaking of him, he says
Speaker 5: he's out of politics. So he literally said he is
Speaker 5: going to stop giving money to politics unless he thinks
Speaker 5: he has a good reason to do it. So that's
Speaker 5: a huge change, a multi multi billion dollar change for
Speaker 5: the Republican Party for their incentive structure and for the
Speaker 5: influences outside influences on policy going forward.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and we're also going to talk about the potential
Speaker 3: breakdown of talks between Iran and the United States when
Speaker 3: it comes to the nuclear deal. Steve Whitkoff pushing the
Speaker 3: US position to zero Uranian enrichment, including for civilian purposes,
Speaker 3: the iotol A commandee pushing back against that, and Israel
Speaker 3: now saying well, maybe we'll just bomb them.
Speaker 5: Yeah, we'll get into that. Make sure to subscribe at
Speaker 5: Breakingpoints dot com. We do the Friday shows now, they're
Speaker 5: really fun. In the second half is paywalled for our
Speaker 5: Breaking Points subscribers. So if you want to do that,
Speaker 5: go ahead head over to Breakingpoints dot com. If you can't,
Speaker 5: no problem. Make sure to like the videos, leave us comments,
Speaker 5: all that good stuff. Subscribe and subscribe wherever you're getting
Speaker 5: your podcast. We appreciate it so much.
Speaker 7: So.
Speaker 3: Yeah, let's start with this news from CNN, which sourced
Speaker 3: it to American intelligence officials, which suggests that it's a
Speaker 3: strategic leak out of the US. They are claiming, we'll
Speaker 3: put this first onle On Sing that they have intelligence
Speaker 3: that says that Israel plans to go forward striking Iranian
Speaker 3: nuclear facilities without the United States. Now this comes after
Speaker 3: Steve Whitcoff, Trump's envoy who is in charge of trying
Speaker 3: to strike this nuclear deal which is ongoing, like we
Speaker 3: have not these talks have not ended, said that enrichment,
Speaker 3: any enrichment at all, is becoming a red line.
Speaker 4: Let's roll wit cough.
Speaker 8: Well, the President has been very clear he wants to
Speaker 8: solve this this conflict diplomatically and with dialogue, and he's
Speaker 8: given he's given all the signals. He's directly sent letters
Speaker 8: to the Supreme Leader. I have been dispatched to deliver
Speaker 8: that message as well, and I've delivered it. And but
Speaker 8: on the other hand, we have one very very clear
Speaker 8: red line, and that is enrichment. We cannot allow even
Speaker 8: one percent of an enrichment capability. We've delivered a proposal
Speaker 8: to the Iranians that we think addresses some of this
Speaker 8: without disrespecting them, and so that's important. Were we we
Speaker 8: we want to we want to get to a solution
Speaker 8: here and uh and and we think that we will
Speaker 8: be able to. But everything begins from our standpoint John,
Speaker 8: with a deal that does not include enrichment. We cannot
Speaker 8: have that because enrichment enables weaponization, and we will not
Speaker 8: allow a bomb to get here.
Speaker 3: Well, Trump was in the Middle East, there was this
Speaker 3: floating of an idea that there could be a basically
Speaker 3: nuclear and civilian nuclear Richmond cooperative among like the Amirads,
Speaker 3: maybe the Qataris, Saudi's Iran, and Iran said, fine, I
Speaker 3: think that's a great idea. We're happy to like contribute,
Speaker 3: you know, research science and be part of this, but
Speaker 3: we also want our own program m hm like so
Speaker 3: that you can't just like cut us off at a
Speaker 3: moment's notice and then your entire civilian program gets shut down.
Speaker 3: Which is a you know, a big deal if you
Speaker 3: have you know, half your country relying on civilian nuclear power.
Speaker 3: And so the the Israelis have been pushing and the
Speaker 3: pro Israel faction within the Trump administration have been pushing
Speaker 3: very hard to say zero in Richmond has to be
Speaker 3: the red line because they know that Iran is not
Speaker 3: going to accept that.
Speaker 5: Well, I mean, it's also just like, sort of in substance,
Speaker 5: a pretty reasonable red line from the perspective of the
Speaker 5: American people who listen to the bellocost rhetoric from Iran.
Speaker 5: And I'm not saying I actually support the zero enrichment target,
Speaker 5: because I don't think I do it. I don't think
Speaker 5: that's a reasonable way to come to a deal. But
Speaker 5: I guess in substance it makes sense why you would
Speaker 5: say zero enrichment from an America.
Speaker 3: You would, yes, I can imagine that that would It
Speaker 3: would poll well, no NOMA.
Speaker 4: They want Hey, that's yeah, exactly, that's their logo.
Speaker 3: Meanwhile, Israel has been threatening UH to bomb Iran for
Speaker 3: decades now is and is now, according to American intelligence officials,
Speaker 3: planning drawing up plans to do so even without the
Speaker 3: United States, and even while the US is in negotiations
Speaker 3: with Iran, so you can imagine why from Iran's perspective,
Speaker 3: they're like, doesn't sound very trustworthy.
Speaker 4: Separately, Israel keeps.
Speaker 3: Referring to their idea of zero enrichment for Iran as
Speaker 3: the Libya plan.
Speaker 5: Mm hm.
Speaker 3: And we know how Libya ended. Libya gave up its
Speaker 3: nuclear weapons and then the West overthrew Kadafi and he
Speaker 3: was sodomized to death.
Speaker 5: And we now have Trump Tower Tripoli, so things are
Speaker 5: going well, Yeah, we came, saw he died. Is that
Speaker 5: the Hillary Clinton line?
Speaker 4: Yes, that is and Libya is now.
Speaker 3: I think what Israelis would like, what the Israeli government
Speaker 3: would like Iran to be, which is a complete and
Speaker 3: total shambled failed state that therefore can't pose any threat
Speaker 3: whatsoever beyond the kind of the threats to the world
Speaker 3: public that failed states actually do present.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and we have a response here from Hamini, so
Speaker 5: we can put the next element on the screen. It
Speaker 5: always sort of tickles me in a way to see
Speaker 5: him posts, right, So he says for the Americans to say, que,
Speaker 5: we won't allow Iran to enrich uranium is utter nonsense.
Speaker 5: We aren't waiting for anyone's permission. The Islamic Republic has
Speaker 5: certain policies and it will pursue them. And that's really
Speaker 5: the flip side of what I was just saying about
Speaker 5: the American perspective on zero enrichment. If you're Iran, of
Speaker 5: course there's I don't need the United States permission to
Speaker 5: pursuing my own sovereign foreign policy.
Speaker 4: So and they already enriched uranium, like we already do it.
Speaker 5: Well, yeah, and so we'll see how far this is
Speaker 5: able to go. I wanted to point out the byline
Speaker 5: on the CNN story includes Natasha bertrand also Jim Shuddout,
Speaker 5: who is an Obama appointee. So it's interesting when they're
Speaker 5: they're sourcing is sourcing this to US intelligence?
Speaker 4: Jim and the Obama he was.
Speaker 5: The who's like a deputy advisor to the China ambassador.
Speaker 5: Pretty interesting time period China ambassador. But when they say
Speaker 5: the US has obtained new intelligence suggesting that Israel is
Speaker 5: making preparations a striker on in nuclear facilities, that's the
Speaker 5: first sentence of the story. And Ryan, I'm like, yep, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 5: the intelligence. We needed the intelligence to tell us that.
Speaker 5: So it's definitely a leak from US intelligence for some purpose, right, yeah.
Speaker 3: Aimed at There's a cynical, malevolent version, which is that
Speaker 3: the US actually is going to help Israel with this
Speaker 3: attack and is leaking this now so that they can
Speaker 3: say we didn't have anything to do with that, that
Speaker 3: was all Israel. Or on the more benevolent, benign explanation
Speaker 3: would be that the US is leaking it to try
Speaker 3: to get ahead of Israel. Well, let's say, do not
Speaker 3: do this. We're watching you, we know you're thinking about this.
Speaker 3: We're in the middle of negotiations. You do not have
Speaker 3: the right to blow up our diplomacy, our foreign policy.
Speaker 5: So and I think putting the puzzle pieces together with
Speaker 5: the Barack Ravine leak yesterday about how Trump frustrated with
Speaker 5: Netson Nahu, which is sort of an echo of the
Speaker 5: Biden leaks to Barockravied about how the American President's frustrated. Yes,
Speaker 5: when you're frustrated but you don't really think you were
Speaker 5: going to do anything about it, you just go to
Speaker 5: Barock Revied and you tell the world about it.
Speaker 4: But you'd leak to CNN two.
Speaker 5: Yes, And I think that's I actually think putting those
Speaker 5: two together that you have the Trump administration trying to
Speaker 5: suggest in the media that they're at the end of
Speaker 5: the rope with Israel, they're you know, really frustrated with
Speaker 5: Nahu and then leaking this to CNN as well. I
Speaker 5: mean that that looks to me like a pretty clear
Speaker 5: indication that they're frustrated with Israel. They actually are frustrated
Speaker 5: with Israel.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and there were reports that Trump has been you know,
Speaker 3: shown a lot of pictures of suffering children inside Gaza
Speaker 3: that are the result of you know, not letting any
Speaker 3: food in since March. Second, you'll have this bizarre argument
Speaker 3: from Israeli propagandist that it says, look, it doesn't matter,
Speaker 3: look like this, this is all hollywood, This is all fake.
Speaker 4: There's plenty of food. It's like, you haven't let food
Speaker 4: in since March.
Speaker 3: Second, Like, what do you think happens when two million
Speaker 3: people don't get fed for that for that long? Like
Speaker 3: you think, like it's just an insult to basic common sense.
Speaker 5: Well, they're also saying that it's part of their strategy, and.
Speaker 4: It's definitely saying, yeah, is it part of your strategy
Speaker 4: or not? Right? Right?
Speaker 5: Because those I mean, it's wasn't Smotrich just out like
Speaker 5: yesterday talking about how it was part of the strategy.
Speaker 5: I mean, it's it's not like they're denying that it's intentional.
Speaker 3: And what Smotridge added recently, as I think you guys
Speaker 3: talked about, is that they are now going to allow
Speaker 3: in a very minimal amount of aid, just enough to
Speaker 3: relieve Western pressure.
Speaker 5: Like kipeda a day for your yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4: And so they are doing that. They've let in maybe
Speaker 4: five to ten.
Speaker 3: There's some reports that maybe ninety seven trucks got in.
Speaker 3: Now you would need you know, five hundred a day.
Speaker 3: That's and that's not even accounting for the backlog of
Speaker 3: two months of starvation. So the indication that they're feeling
Speaker 3: pressure is that they let in any at all. It
Speaker 3: was clearly feeling no pressure at all. We know what
Speaker 3: their approach is. Zero trucks of foods, zero trucks with medicine,
Speaker 3: zero trucks with tents and any of the other you know,
Speaker 3: you know, supplies necessary to keep people alive, just and
Speaker 3: what I'm talking about the basics like soap and like
Speaker 3: other other things for basic hygiene, Like an entire city,
Speaker 3: not city, but a region of two million people need
Speaker 3: to stay alive.
Speaker 5: True to Parsi, who've obviously had on the show many
Speaker 5: of times, many times posted just yesterday, the number he
Speaker 5: says something is happening. The number of government officials from
Speaker 5: around the world who I've heard in private conversations called
Speaker 5: Israel slaughter in Gaza a genocide without qualifications and caveats,
Speaker 5: has increased dramatically in just the past weeks. The dam
Speaker 5: is breaking. Donal Trump himself obviously just got off his
Speaker 5: trip to the Middle East. So you can understand how Trump,
Speaker 5: who's sort of this like hyper pragmatist, much more than
Speaker 5: he is in in ideologue, compared at least to previous
Speaker 5: benchmarks of like neo conservative ideology that's brought into the
Speaker 5: West wing, you could understand why he in particular would
Speaker 5: be responsive to them.
Speaker 3: And in the Senate, forty six Democrats, all of them
Speaker 3: except for Fetterman, signed onto a resolution, very simple resolution,
Speaker 3: calling for Israel to allow aid in and there was
Speaker 3: a debate on the House floor yesterday. Jim rish the
Speaker 3: top Republican and the Foreign Foreign Affairs responded by saying, well, look,
Speaker 3: all Hamas has to do is surrender and to return
Speaker 3: the hostages and we'll let in food aid, which is
Speaker 3: I don't know if he realizes or not, an admission
Speaker 3: that you're using starvation as a weapon of war, which
Speaker 3: is a war crime that you just you cannot do that,
Speaker 3: and it is also a mission that wait a minute,
Speaker 3: may also it also got him to admit the.
Speaker 4: Actual crisis underway.
Speaker 3: Meanwhile, a lot of Senate Republicans will not come forward
Speaker 3: and say Israel needs to let aid in, even though
Speaker 3: Trump is saying it.
Speaker 5: Yes, well, I shouldn't come senator, he was in the Senate,
Speaker 5: but he did say yesterday.
Speaker 4: His boss says it.
Speaker 5: Right, he but it's it isn't. I mean, Mark Rubio
Speaker 5: five years ago, I don't think would have ever said
Speaker 5: what he said yesterday, which is that Israel.
Speaker 4: Ken he said yesterday.
Speaker 5: He wouldn't, right, Yeah, maybe yeah, he said yesterday that
Speaker 5: Israel can allow aid in and defend itself at the
Speaker 5: same time, something to that extent, which again the typical
Speaker 5: paradigm everyone knows this would have been for a Republican
Speaker 5: politician with such dogmatic support for Israel. But I repeat myself,
Speaker 5: would have never would reject the paradigm of the question,
Speaker 5: would would reject the premise of the question about that
Speaker 5: would say, Israel, you know, has every right to act
Speaker 5: in its own interest and defend its own people and
Speaker 5: do whatever. We trust the Israel. Yeah, exactly. So kind
Speaker 5: of kind of interesting. But you know, the cynicism when
Speaker 5: people see Biden talking like this, Kamala Harris talking like this,
Speaker 5: and now Donald Trump talking like this, especially as Trump
Speaker 5: is kind of in the middle of trying to get
Speaker 5: it ill done and leaking fresh in the White House's
Speaker 5: leaking frustrations, then yeah, I don't think the cynicism is
Speaker 5: unwarranted at all. If the pressures lead to a better
Speaker 5: outcome and to peace, then that's good, even if it
Speaker 5: is utterly cynical.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if Israel did actually bomb Iran against both the
Speaker 3: public and private wishes of the United States, used United
Speaker 3: States weapons to do it, and blew up US foreign
Speaker 3: policy and diplomatic approach to Iran, I would think that
Speaker 3: even the US Israeli relationship doesn't survive that completely intact.
Speaker 4: But what do I know.
Speaker 5: Yeah, we'll see now, Ryan, We're joined by a guest.
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 3: Eric Maddox is a podcaster from California who was detained
Speaker 3: and roughed up in Israel.
Speaker 4: This week, and he's going to join us to talk
Speaker 4: about what that was like.
Speaker 5: Let's get to it.
Speaker 3: Joining us now is the host of the Latitude Adjustment podcast,
Speaker 3: Eric Maddox from California. He's joining us from the West Bank. Eric,
Speaker 3: thank you so much for being here. So you were
Speaker 3: in the recently in the old city of Hebron when
Speaker 3: clip clip of you being detained and dragged away by
Speaker 3: Israeli forces when went viral around uh the internet. We're
Speaker 3: for people who are just listening to the podcast. We're
Speaker 3: rolling this here. Can you can you tell us kind
Speaker 3: of what you were producing first of all, when when
Speaker 3: they came upon you, and what what preceded this this moment,
Speaker 3: and then we'll get into what happened afterwards.
Speaker 9: So in brief, Hebron Orli and Arabic and Arabic is
Speaker 9: kind of the entire occupation of the West Bank condensed
Speaker 9: down to miniature, where in some cases in the West Bank,
Speaker 9: trying to travel from city to city you'll be faced
Speaker 9: with checkpoints and occasional incursions by the Idea and police.
Speaker 6: In the city of Hebron, it can be street to
Speaker 6: street just trying to cross.
Speaker 9: You won't be forced across from checkpoints I show id
Speaker 9: and subject to all man or of harassment from settlers
Speaker 9: who are literally living on top the Palestinian shopkeepers and
Speaker 9: homes and also invading their homes, stealing their homes, et cetera,
Speaker 9: and pushing them out of the city. So every Saturday
Speaker 9: for some time now, there is a march by the
Speaker 9: settlers through the old city of Hebron, which is still
Speaker 9: you know, a place where Palestinians live and do their business,
Speaker 9: and it is overseen by protected by the Israeli forces,
Speaker 9: the police and to something I would.
Speaker 6: Imagine the idea as well.
Speaker 9: And that's what that''s what I was there to document
Speaker 9: along with several Palestinian journalists on the past Saturday, four
Speaker 9: days ago. And so what happens is the Israeli forces
Speaker 9: will show up preceding the arrival of the settlers, who
Speaker 9: are given like this really bizarre entitled tour that forces
Speaker 9: Palestinians shopkeepers to shut down their business while the Israeli
Speaker 9: police are pointing their rifles at children, at the elderly,
Speaker 9: at the infirm I mean, this isn't just my opinion
Speaker 9: of something I've seen.
Speaker 6: I documented all of.
Speaker 9: These things as they were happening, and at a certain
Speaker 9: point you can see the settlers that are maybe I
Speaker 9: don't know, thirty meters away, and at that point, I mean,
Speaker 9: I was complying with all the orders of the Israeli
Speaker 9: police and at no point, I should make it clear,
Speaker 9: at no point was I told to put away my
Speaker 9: camera or to stop filming, or to hand over my camera.
Speaker 9: At no point before I was tackled in the same
Speaker 9: and we were complying, like come back pedaling. And as
Speaker 9: we're back pedaling, they're screaming at the shopkeepers and various
Speaker 9: people in the street to abandon where they are to
Speaker 9: get inside closer shops, kicking their stuff around.
Speaker 6: In otherwise making their lives hell.
Speaker 9: And at a certain point, when I could see the
Speaker 9: settlers in the background, I just shelled out, you know
Speaker 9: I've been seeing My first time in coliss I was
Speaker 9: sixteen years ago.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 9: I've had colleagues, journalists and colleagues that I have worked
Speaker 9: with killed in Gaza, and we're now facing well close
Speaker 9: to two hundred journalists and associated media personnel who've been
Speaker 9: assassinated in Gaza since October seventh. And also the routine harassment,
Speaker 9: detention and torture of Palacinian journalists in the West Bank.
Speaker 9: So I mean this is personal to me as well
Speaker 9: as something that I think should be, you know, a
Speaker 9: concern to all people in journalists, especially around the world.
Speaker 9: And so when I saw this to something at a
Speaker 9: certain point, you know, it snapped for me. Is like
Speaker 9: as Snapper University students over the past nineteen months, we've
Speaker 9: been saying the same things that I was saying in
Speaker 9: this moment, which is free Palestine. I'm an American. I'm
Speaker 9: sure some of you who are in this settlement tour
Speaker 9: are probably American or European citizens as well. And I'm
Speaker 9: tired of paying for this with my tax dollars. This
Speaker 9: is ridiculous. And then a certain point that is really
Speaker 9: started filming me the the police, and.
Speaker 6: I just said, look like enough is enough. Do you
Speaker 6: feel brave flagging women and children in.
Speaker 9: The infirm with your weapons? And this is when they
Speaker 9: charged me lunch for my camera. They wound up on
Speaker 9: the ground. I wound up on the ground and then
Speaker 9: I was immediately just beaten, handcuffed. And I can tell
Speaker 9: you what happened after what you saw in that footage,
Speaker 9: because that's the soft part everything after that was the
Speaker 9: actual like putting, beating, torture.
Speaker 3: Right, So, and as and as you're as you're leaving,
Speaker 3: there's somebody there's somebody else filming you and they say
Speaker 3: you know who are you?
Speaker 4: You say, Eric Matison from California. So the so these these.
Speaker 3: Police who are who were dragging you out of there,
Speaker 3: they know you're a Californian. So they know what California did, right, Yes,
Speaker 3: I mean definitely they know what California.
Speaker 4: The whole world knows what California is.
Speaker 3: And this is not to say that because you're from
Speaker 3: California you should not be beaten and tortured any legally.
Speaker 4: Attained like nobody should be.
Speaker 3: However, it's to acknowledge the geopolitics of the situation.
Speaker 4: So so they take you away, where do they take you?
Speaker 4: And what happens next?
Speaker 9: I do underscore your point because that's the reason I'm
Speaker 9: coming on this show in any other media I do.
Speaker 9: This isn't about me as an American getting roughed up,
Speaker 9: and it was more than roughed up. I mean, I
Speaker 9: don't want to downplay it either. I was tortured for
Speaker 9: four hours and what was done to me doesn't even
Speaker 9: begin to come close to what is done to my
Speaker 9: Palestinian colleagues in the West Bank, for those who have
Speaker 9: been assassinated and continue to be persecuted, targeted in their
Speaker 9: families as well in Gaza.
Speaker 6: So I want to make that very clear.
Speaker 9: Anything that was done to me multiply that by many,
Speaker 9: many factors up to an including death my Palestinian colleagues.
Speaker 6: So that's why I'm on the show.
Speaker 9: That's what I want to call attention to, and also
Speaker 9: the just absolute cowardice and abdication of all moralists, responsibility
Speaker 9: and professional credibility by much of Western English language media,
Speaker 9: who should be, in my opinion, resigning en mass and
Speaker 9: protest at the absolutely abysmal coverage facilitation of this genocide
Speaker 9: has been going on for nineteen months.
Speaker 3: And then I think that's a I think that's a
Speaker 3: valuable that's valuable contacts and a valuable caveat don't But
Speaker 3: as you said, it also does not justify violence against
Speaker 3: even for only four hours.
Speaker 4: So what did happen to you?
Speaker 9: So after I was out of First of all the
Speaker 9: people who called me, I didn't know them. They were
Speaker 9: just random people who happened to.
Speaker 6: Be standing there. One of them you can hear on
Speaker 6: camera ask me, who are you?
Speaker 9: And I don't know where I if I looked dazed,
Speaker 9: it's because I had my head pounded into the cobblestone
Speaker 9: streets well like several men with assault rifles took shots
Speaker 9: at me, and they escorted me, escorted to a gate,
Speaker 9: a gated area at the head of the old city,
Speaker 9: out of the view of the cameras, and that's when
Speaker 9: they just started beating the hell out of me. Punched
Speaker 9: me in the back of the head, throwing me on
Speaker 9: the ground, and then demanding that I get up. I'm
Speaker 9: cupped and unable to move. And then they got me
Speaker 9: to the top of this hill next to.
Speaker 6: An armored car.
Speaker 9: And they didn't seem to be clear and what they
Speaker 9: wanted either, because some of them were told me to
Speaker 9: get in the vehicles and were told me to get out.
Speaker 6: Then they hooded me, put a black hood over my head,
Speaker 6: told me to get on my knees. I refused.
Speaker 9: I figured if they were going to do something terrible,
Speaker 9: I'd rather not be on my knees than they did it.
Speaker 9: And so at that point they threw me on the
Speaker 9: ground and started beating me more. They avoided my face
Speaker 9: for some reasons it might be obvious, but they started
Speaker 9: going through my things, confiscating my wallet, my passports, and
Speaker 9: then continue to beat me, put me in the military
Speaker 9: or the police vehicle. Continued to beat me in the
Speaker 9: vehicle and the way to the police station. And at
Speaker 9: this point they had my camera, which was my phone,
Speaker 9: and they were twisting my arm to the point of
Speaker 9: feeling they were going to break it, and demanding that
Speaker 9: I unlocked my phone, you know, with like the biometric
Speaker 9: scan fingerprint thing, and I refused, and they were trying
Speaker 9: to open my hand and force me to use my
Speaker 9: fingerprint to open it, and I just quenched my fist
Speaker 9: as hard as I possibly could.
Speaker 6: And somehow managed to avoid that.
Speaker 9: I'm sure had it been Palestinian, they would have been
Speaker 9: brutal enough to where they might have broken me, you know.
Speaker 9: But so they eventually got me into the police station.
Speaker 9: The police were there, they saw what was happening, didn't
Speaker 9: do anything to stop it. I spent about four hours
Speaker 9: in the police station, at some points having my handcuffs
Speaker 9: taken off, being taken in to do like a preliminary
Speaker 9: discussion with the police officer who told me asked me
Speaker 9: if I had a lawyer. I said no, so then
Speaker 9: they put me in touch with the Palatinian lawyer from Haifa.
Speaker 9: She told me that I was going to be interrogated,
Speaker 9: the right not to say anything, but it might be
Speaker 9: in my interest to actually tell them at least what
Speaker 9: had happened.
Speaker 6: Then I was again puffed.
Speaker 9: They let me get some water, but before I could
Speaker 9: drink from the water bottle, they rehandcuffed me, beat me
Speaker 9: some more, and then uncock me, took me back, did
Speaker 9: the interrogation, and at that point the police officer started
Speaker 9: asking me what was your opinion of October seventh? Are
Speaker 9: you affiliated with any anti Israel groups? Are you taking
Speaker 9: money from them? And I said, I don't see how
Speaker 9: these questions are any way relevant. Are you going to
Speaker 9: ask me about all the bruises that are all over
Speaker 9: my body?
Speaker 6: And he said no? And I told them and he said,
Speaker 6: why are you in Israel? And I said, I'm not
Speaker 6: in Israel.
Speaker 9: I mean I was hooded for some period of time,
Speaker 9: so unless you've taken me out of Hebron, I'm not
Speaker 9: in Israel. And he said, yes, you are, and then
Speaker 9: he tried to ask me where I had been staying
Speaker 9: and who I was affiliate with locally. I refused to
Speaker 9: answer those questions because I didn't want other people to
Speaker 9: be put in harm's way.
Speaker 6: And I also told him I didn't recognize that.
Speaker 9: He had any legitimacy as a law enforcement officer because
Speaker 9: he had no interest in conducting and actual investigation.
Speaker 6: And then I was booked.
Speaker 9: I mean, I guess like I was fingerprinted, They did
Speaker 9: the full biometric skin on my face, they took my
Speaker 9: mug shots, and I mean it just went back and
Speaker 9: forth between these procedural things that was odd. I mean,
Speaker 9: there was this weird like juxtaposition of like kind of
Speaker 9: benign procedural stuff with just beating the hell out of
Speaker 9: me and just this really casual attitude toward just sadistics treatment.
Speaker 9: I could hear another pallete stating a guy around the
Speaker 9: corner from me being I imagine beaten severely because he
Speaker 9: was screaming his head off. I couldn't see him, so
Speaker 9: I yelled three palatine, got beaten some more, and then
Speaker 9: just mockery like pulding cameras in my face and a
Speaker 9: presumably taking pictures for Instagram, and I just said, right
Speaker 9: into their camera, I said, look, whenever this is translated
Speaker 9: into Hebrew, I want you all to know I'm surrounded
Speaker 9: by six heavily armed men.
Speaker 6: Well, I'm handcuffed and I was taken here because I
Speaker 6: was taking pictures. You guys are not on the right
Speaker 6: side of history, et cetera.
Speaker 3: When when they're when they're hitting you, you said they
Speaker 3: mostly avoided your face, Like where would they where would
Speaker 3: they hit you?
Speaker 4: What would they what would they hit you with?
Speaker 6: How many of the back of the head, back of
Speaker 6: the head.
Speaker 9: Occasionally they would like try to sit next to me
Speaker 9: or on top of me, just to try and intimidate me.
Speaker 9: And so if I would move away or I when
Speaker 9: they're taking my picture, I would stand up and tell
Speaker 9: them to stop, and they would hit me or put
Speaker 9: use pressure points, like on the inside of my neck.
Speaker 9: A lot of this was like, uh, what are called
Speaker 9: stress positions where they would take my head and force
Speaker 9: it down so hard that it felt like the back
Speaker 9: of my like my neck was going to break, putting
Speaker 9: their knees on their elbows on top of my head,
Speaker 9: but like against my hairline so that you couldn't see
Speaker 9: the bruise. A lot of the beating was like on
Speaker 9: the hairline so that the bruises aren't as easy to see.
Speaker 9: I mean, I do have bruises on my body. I
Speaker 9: mean you could see like a little bit on my
Speaker 9: wrists here, et cetera. But most of it was done
Speaker 9: in a way to seem it was left intended not
Speaker 9: to leave marks. And again I'm sure had I been Palestinian,
Speaker 9: the treatment would have been far far more so.
Speaker 5: Do and what, if anything, have you heard since being
Speaker 5: released from the Israeli government? What's it just the general
Speaker 5: reaction since the video has gone viral? What has the
Speaker 5: response been like?
Speaker 9: So the charges weren't clear at all. I was told
Speaker 9: something along the lines of obstructing with the police action
Speaker 9: you can see from the video that I provided you guys,
Speaker 9: like the last thing thankfully that actually was recorded. They're
Speaker 9: charging me, and at no point they told me to
Speaker 9: stop filming, right, So the idea that I was in
Speaker 9: any way interfering is preposterous, not that that would even
Speaker 9: justify what they had done to me. The response has
Speaker 9: been from and I do need to be careful, I
Speaker 9: think in some ways. But what I understand at this
Speaker 9: point is I've not been formally charged with anything. I'm
Speaker 9: just under suspicion of what I have no idea, and
Speaker 9: I've been banned from the city of Hibron for fifteen
Speaker 9: days from last Saturday, which honestly seems pretty light. Some people,
Speaker 9: some good friends of mine, I believe, swung it to
Speaker 9: action very swiftly, and I understand that congress people and
Speaker 9: other journalists, etc.
Speaker 6: Were contacted. I don't know.
Speaker 9: I haven't even had a chance to catch up because
Speaker 9: I'm still just dealing with this. All happened four days ago,
Speaker 9: so I'm still just kind of recovering. And then on
Speaker 9: the internet, I mean that all seems to go viral
Speaker 9: and about a day, and I mean people reaching out to.
Speaker 6: Me privately, like through social media.
Speaker 9: It's just been amazing, Like I don't think I've had
Speaker 9: one single and like I can't even keep up with
Speaker 9: all the messages. It's all been just supportive and that's
Speaker 9: been validating and also just it's done a lot to
Speaker 9: help me kind of process that experience. And it's also
Speaker 9: just that experience is humbling also, and like I don't
Speaker 9: know that I could have handled two days of that,
Speaker 9: And there's people that have been locked up for months,
Speaker 9: years and treated worse than me. The entire times. Those
Speaker 9: are the people that have been that are still alive.
Speaker 9: Like I am not a particularly great person. I just
Speaker 9: had I just had enough. And everybody has their point
Speaker 9: where they just feel like, look like.
Speaker 6: Silence.
Speaker 9: The silence is no longer an option, and that like
Speaker 9: what everybody has been saying from university campuses all around
Speaker 9: the world for the last nineteen months.
Speaker 6: I stand in solidarity with them. I stand in solidarity
Speaker 6: with the with the Palatinian people, and.
Speaker 9: I also feel like the people who are perpetrating these crimes,
Speaker 9: we could feel like there is no place where they
Speaker 9: can be will be able to not be exposed to
Speaker 9: shame for their behavior, including including Palestine itself.
Speaker 3: Did any of the people, any of the officers that
Speaker 3: you interacted with throughout the entire time, express any concern
Speaker 3: or reservations that they might be screwing up by doing
Speaker 3: this to an American, Not in the slightest.
Speaker 9: Not in the slightest, I mean, who knows what's going
Speaker 9: on in their head and whether or not that they
Speaker 9: pulled their punches a bit, But I mean they knew
Speaker 9: where I was from. I did speak to a few
Speaker 9: of them in English, and there were then there were
Speaker 9: idf soldiers who came. I became like this point of
Speaker 9: curiosity where more and more of them kept coming and
Speaker 9: like asking me like what are you doing here?
Speaker 6: They were asking me like how do you feel about Eurovision?
Speaker 6: The bizarre questions right.
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, because they got like s another from Eurovision
Speaker 4: or something. But this is like great.
Speaker 9: Before I think those were just it was just so
Speaker 9: freaking surreal. Sorry on so many levels. Yes, and while
Speaker 9: this is happening, and they were also just I kept
Speaker 9: talking because of the adrenaline and its telling them, look like,
Speaker 9: can somebody translate the word coward for me? Please tell
Speaker 9: them all? And I'm like counting. Some of them spoke Arabic,
Speaker 9: like they're Arabic speaking Israeli's Arab Israeli them assuming and
Speaker 9: one said his family was from Yemen originally, and so
Speaker 9: I just counted off in Arabic. You know, want it
Speaker 9: the auto Scottie like soldiers? There's six soldiers, one journalist.
Speaker 9: Why it's the hotey Like with my hands behind my back,
Speaker 9: you really feel brave. This is something that you're going
Speaker 9: to be proud of showing on Instagram wherever you're planning
Speaker 9: on posting this. So no zero, I mean I talked
Speaker 9: to the police officer. He kept repeating things that I
Speaker 9: can't repeat. Every time I would tell him, look like,
Speaker 9: are you embarrassed? Because he could close the door periodically
Speaker 9: and let them rough me up more than I would
Speaker 9: tell him, Look, you do realize what's happening when you
Speaker 9: shut the door and you just ignored me.
Speaker 6: No, they'll concern at all.
Speaker 5: Tell people where they can go to find your work.
Speaker 9: Sure, they can find my podcast, which I'm going to
Speaker 9: be relaunching at Latitude Adjustment pod dot com or just
Speaker 9: find Latitude Adjustment Podcasts at Spotify, Apple, wherever you listen
Speaker 9: to them. And also you can find me on social
Speaker 9: media on Instagram at mathematics.
Speaker 6: My name is Eric Maddicks.
Speaker 3: Well, Eric, thank you so much for joining us, and
Speaker 3: we wish you safe travels back to the United States
Speaker 3: whenever you decide.
Speaker 4: To come home.
Speaker 5: President Trump made a significant announcement about the United States
Speaker 5: is impending Golden Dome in the Oval Office yesterday. Let's
Speaker 5: go ahead and roll B one to get a flavor
Speaker 5: of how Donald Trump described this project and pleased.
Speaker 10: To announce that we have officially selected an architecture for
Speaker 10: this state of the art system. That we'll deploy next
Speaker 10: generation technologies across the land, sea, in space, including space
Speaker 10: based sensors and interceptors. And Canada has called us and
Speaker 10: they want to be a part of it, so we'll
Speaker 10: be talking to them.
Speaker 11: They want to have protection also, so as usual, we
Speaker 11: help Canada who the best we can.
Speaker 10: This design for the Golden Dome will integrate with our
Speaker 10: existing defense capabilities and should be fully operational before the end.
Speaker 11: Of my term, so we haven't done in about three years.
Speaker 10: Once fully constructed, the Golden Dome will be capable of
Speaker 10: intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides
Speaker 10: of the world, and even if they are launched from space,
Speaker 10: and we will have the best system ever built. As
Speaker 10: you know, we helped Israel with THEIRS and it was
Speaker 10: very successful, and now we have technology that's even far
Speaker 10: advanced from that. But including hypersonic missiles, ballistic missiles, and
Speaker 10: advanced cruise missiles.
Speaker 11: All of them will be knocked out of the air.
Speaker 10: We will truly be completing the job that President Reagan
Speaker 10: started forty years ago, forever ending the missile threat to
Speaker 10: the American homeland. And the success rate is very close
Speaker 10: to one hundred percent, which is incredible when you think
Speaker 10: of it, You're shooting bullets out of the year. I'm
Speaker 10: also pleased to report that the One Big, Beautiful Bill
Speaker 10: will include twenty five billion dollars for the Golden Dome
Speaker 10: to help construction get underway.
Speaker 11: That's the initial sort of a down post, and we have.
Speaker 10: Probably you're talking about general, we're talking about one hundred
Speaker 10: and seventy five billion dollars total cost of this when
Speaker 10: it's completed.
Speaker 5: Well, according to The New York Times, that was actually
Speaker 5: also a suggest The Defense Department suggested the Golden Dome moniker,
Speaker 5: knowing that it would probably appeal to Donald Trump's like
Speaker 5: Israel's got an iron dome, Donald Trump, you need a
Speaker 5: golden dome.
Speaker 6: A little bit.
Speaker 3: Ballsy, though, for him to go for that, when he
Speaker 3: spent years with Democrats accusing him of taking a golden shower,
Speaker 3: He's going to have a golden dome preventing us from
Speaker 3: things raining down on us.
Speaker 5: Actually, I take that back. He probably does think about that,
Speaker 5: of course. Yeah, he's very deeply.
Speaker 4: Irritated by Yes, yes, he was bothered by that one.
Speaker 5: Well, maybe the Pentagon. Actually this is really a way
Speaker 5: to continue embarrassing doal Trump the Defense Department, but it
Speaker 5: will be a pretty penny for the contractors in all likelihood.
Speaker 5: Lockheed Martin CEO is on Fox and Friends this morning
Speaker 5: saying it will be built domestically. Trump is saying it'll
Speaker 5: come in at about one hundred and seventy five billion dollars,
Speaker 5: which seems impossibly low. The Congressional Budget Office is putting
Speaker 5: that more at five hundred and forty two billion, which
Speaker 5: in the context annually.
Speaker 4: He said two to three years. CBO says twenty years.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And in the context of an annual defense budget,
Speaker 5: that's more than two trillion dollars. It's not insane to
Speaker 5: propose a half a trillion dollar idea that could hypothetically
Speaker 5: protect the country from missiles, and if it does what
Speaker 5: the Trump administration wants it to do, which is enormously ambitious, but.
Speaker 3: Missiles shot by who Normally, when you, of course, can
Speaker 3: fox some one of these things, like you, you have
Speaker 3: first spent the like propaganda capital to sufficiently scare the
Speaker 3: public into believing that a particular boogeyman or boogiey woman
Speaker 3: is going to be shooting missiles at us. And so
Speaker 3: therefore we need to spend all this money on a
Speaker 3: you know, you have to give five hundred billion dollars
Speaker 3: to Elon Musk to like build this thing because the
Speaker 3: scary people that we've told you about are going to
Speaker 3: attack us.
Speaker 4: He just skipped right over that, Like are we such pushovers?
Speaker 1: Now?
Speaker 3: We don't even need to be propagandized into interfere We're
Speaker 3: just like, okay, sure, go for it.
Speaker 4: Like who's who's shooting missiles at US?
Speaker 6: I mean, sum.
Speaker 4: Maybe, but no Iran?
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 4: I mean, we're reaching to deal with them. North Korea
Speaker 4: is it's his best friend? Russia? Is it Russia?
Speaker 5: It's China? It could be anyone, that's the point.
Speaker 11: I mean.
Speaker 4: And if it's China, come on, you think they can't
Speaker 4: get through a whatever Elon Musk puts together.
Speaker 5: I think the rate of technological advancement has has been
Speaker 5: so rapid that the world feels like an extremely scary place,
Speaker 5: to the point where people don't need to be propagandized
Speaker 5: into some type of signal an urgent single problem. Although
Speaker 5: it's probably no coincidence that it's happening as the negotiations
Speaker 5: with Iran are unfolding, either, I mean, it would be.
Speaker 4: Cool if star wars.
Speaker 3: Could you know, first kind of break the fiscal back
Speaker 3: of the Soviet Union and then break the fiscal.
Speaker 4: Back of the United States. It could kill two empires
Speaker 4: without ever actually getting built.
Speaker 5: Well, you know that's I mean, it's a complete parallel
Speaker 5: obviously to the Reagan years because on the other side,
Speaker 5: Donald Trump is working on a massive tax cut proposition
Speaker 5: right now. So as they're you know, sort of as
Speaker 5: you have your your deficit hawks freaking out about spending,
Speaker 5: you're also about cutting spending and using taxes to aspirationally
Speaker 5: juice the economy, then you're also trying to increase defense
Speaker 5: spending significantly with a massive expenditure here not Trump says
Speaker 5: again that he I mean, he's putting it way lower
Speaker 5: than the CBO estimate. That's half a trillion dollars, which is,
Speaker 5: you know, a significant chunk of the annual defense budget.
Speaker 5: But you know, I think it's if it were to
Speaker 5: do what it said it would do, it would be
Speaker 5: a big deal.
Speaker 4: Now, Trump also the budget, so.
Speaker 3: They think about this, they're estimating a particular cost for
Speaker 3: a weapons project, has it ever come in under ever
Speaker 3: in the history of the world, So this would be
Speaker 3: the first one to come in under and it's going
Speaker 3: to come in at ninety under.
Speaker 6: YEA.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so it sounds good. Yeah, it sounds like a deal.
Speaker 5: So but again, here's bid for this.
Speaker 3: Probably I will not build something and take five hundred
Speaker 3: billion dollars.
Speaker 5: You will automatically be competitive, excellent with the rest of
Speaker 5: the contractors, and you could just take it like a
Speaker 5: ten year vacation.
Speaker 6: Two.
Speaker 5: Oh, Boeing's going to do Air Force one. Don't worry
Speaker 5: about it.
Speaker 4: They're on it. So it's taken them a decade for
Speaker 4: Air Force one.
Speaker 5: Yeah, this should be nothing.
Speaker 4: We're going to build this in two years.
Speaker 5: So the parallels to the nineteen eighties continued. Donald Trump
Speaker 5: was on Capitol Hill yesterday trying to negotiate with House
Speaker 5: Republicans in particular, who want to pass their bill. Actually
Speaker 5: they want to pass it today and send it over
Speaker 5: to the Senate because they really want to. First of all,
Speaker 5: they want, Johnson said, an genuinely arbitrary deadline of Memorial Day.
Speaker 5: But from his perspective, if you don't set a deadline,
Speaker 5: then this is going to bleed into the fall. And
Speaker 5: so they really I think they want to do this
Speaker 5: by fourth of July. From the Senate side. We'll see
Speaker 5: how reasonable that is. But they actually were marking up
Speaker 5: the bill until what like six am just today. Once again,
Speaker 5: all those staffers pouring out for them tonight. They've they've
Speaker 5: had a rough couple of weeks. But let's take a
Speaker 5: listen to Donald Trump after that meeting, chatting with reporters,
Speaker 5: and bear in mind that this is, I think a
Speaker 5: parallel with the nineteen eighties in an interesting sense that
Speaker 5: Republicans are trying to get a limited government stimulus. It's
Speaker 5: the extent that you can call it that while also
Speaker 5: blowing up the deficit past. And now you're going to
Speaker 5: face questions just like this one B three.
Speaker 12: You campaign of lowering the price of groceries, Holy justify.
Speaker 11: Cutting through this sisiness and the sill. Let me, let
Speaker 11: me just tell you.
Speaker 10: The cut is going to give everybody much more food
Speaker 10: because prices are coming way down.
Speaker 11: Groceries are down. Eggs. You told me about eggs. You
Speaker 11: asked me a question about eggs my first week. You
Speaker 11: said eggs. I said, I just got here. Told me
Speaker 11: about eggs, and there's going through them. If you know
Speaker 11: that eggs now way down, everybody's buying.
Speaker 10: Eggs groceries down Energy's down gasoline is.
Speaker 11: Now buying the buying gasoline now for a dollar ninety nine.
Speaker 5: Yes, and eggs, I mean week one.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: He had a great interaction with a reporter. This was
Speaker 5: Reese Gorman from NAUS. So notice, yeah, I'm.
Speaker 4: With Trump on this one.
Speaker 5: Yes. Same. This is before Andy.
Speaker 9: Harris said that you've didn't adequately convince enough people to
Speaker 9: open the builder?
Speaker 6: How free?
Speaker 11: And you mean after this speech? They said, well, what
Speaker 11: do we see have to loads? I think it was
Speaker 11: a great great talk. Was in speech talked about that
Speaker 11: who do you work for?
Speaker 6: Nerds?
Speaker 11: Who nurse? I don't even know what they all that is.
Speaker 4: Get yourself a real job, get a haircut, and get
Speaker 4: a job.
Speaker 5: You were listening to that. What you missed was Mike
Speaker 5: Johnson awkwardly standing next to Donald Trump trying not to
Speaker 5: bust out laughing the entire exchange.
Speaker 4: Trump is funny. We gotta give him that.
Speaker 5: Oh he is funny now. B five though, is an
Speaker 5: interesting development as well. This is Wall Street Journals Olivia
Speaker 5: Beaver saying that when Donald Trump was delivering his message
Speaker 5: about Medicaid, which is basically he doesn't want cuts that
Speaker 5: don't have anything to do with quote waste Frawden abuse.
Speaker 5: He said about the Freedom Caucus quote I love the
Speaker 5: Freedom Caucus. Please leave them alone. Freedom Caucus are my guys.
Speaker 4: How do you square that you don't?
Speaker 9: You don't.
Speaker 3: Freedom Caucuss are his guys who want drastic medicaid cuts. Yeah,
Speaker 3: Trump says, don't do drastic medicaid cuts, but also leave
Speaker 3: my guys alone. It goes back that thing where like
Speaker 3: the number one thing he cares about is do people
Speaker 3: like him? And freem cos people are clear that they
Speaker 3: like him, and he prefers that to them, agreeing with
Speaker 3: his populist policy of We're not actually going to hurt
Speaker 3: poor people to do this tax cut for the rich.
Speaker 5: No, it hasn't always been that way. So when Chip
Speaker 5: Roy has pushed back on Trump, like raising the debt
Speaker 5: ceiling for example, Trump has absolutely.
Speaker 4: Exploded on right primary you and yeah.
Speaker 5: So, I mean, I'm curious how long this lasts. He
Speaker 5: does seem to be much more sympathetic to negotiating with
Speaker 5: the HFC guys than with Mike Lawler. This is the
Speaker 5: next element for the screen. This is a post from
Speaker 5: our friend Jake Sherman at punch Bowl. If he missed
Speaker 5: that segment a couple weeks ago. Just put it into
Speaker 5: your YouTube browser. Breaking Points punch bowl Sherman says that
Speaker 5: Trump went up to Lawler from the informal Salt Caucus
Speaker 5: and said, quote, I know your district better than you. Two.
Speaker 5: If you because of salt, you were going to lose anyway.
Speaker 5: And that is because Lawler is pushing for obviously a
Speaker 5: higher cap on the salt deduction than the thirty thousand dollars,
Speaker 5: which is, by the way, all we're already very generous.
Speaker 5: It's already tripling the current deduction, so quite amusing.
Speaker 3: And quote there from Trump, Lawla represents the Hudson Valley
Speaker 3: district north of Manhattan.
Speaker 4: Trump might actually know it better than him.
Speaker 3: His point is an interesting one, and it's one that
Speaker 3: I've made a mirror version of on the left at
Speaker 3: times like where it's like, look, you're not actually going
Speaker 3: to lose over this, so just go ahead and do it.
Speaker 3: And if you do lose over it, you were actually
Speaker 3: going to lose anyway. So I actually I agree, I
Speaker 3: agree with Trump's analysis, and it's I think it is
Speaker 3: actually quite possible that he does not Lawler's district better
Speaker 3: than he does the salt thing if if you're not
Speaker 3: familiar with it, it means it stands for state and
Speaker 3: local tax deduction. If you are upper middle class in
Speaker 3: a place like the Hudson Valley and you have a
Speaker 3: million dollar house or a one point five million dollar house,
Speaker 3: even if you're making let's say three hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 3: a years, is a huge amount of money. You know,
Speaker 3: all of it's going to pay this house. And then
Speaker 3: at the end of the year you get hit with
Speaker 3: these high state and local taxes. And it used to
Speaker 3: be that you could deduct all of those off of
Speaker 3: your federal taxes. Now now there's a cap on that
Speaker 3: they want to raise the.
Speaker 4: Cap so it would basically be a very big tax
Speaker 4: cut for people who live in like million dollar homes.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yep, no exactly. And so let's combine all of
Speaker 5: this together.
Speaker 4: And those are Lawlre's people.
Speaker 5: Those are Lawyer's people. And Trump to the to the
Speaker 5: point about he was making about the Freedom Caucus and
Speaker 5: about Lawler. What that gives right now is leverage for
Speaker 5: the Freedom Caucus to continue pushing for cuts. And when
Speaker 5: you ask, how do you square it to the quote
Speaker 5: waste fraud and abuse that they see in Medicaid. And
Speaker 5: the problem is you have to be able to find
Speaker 5: sufficient waste, fraud, and abuse and do it quickly enough,
Speaker 5: because part of their frustration is a lot of this
Speaker 5: is funny business with the CBO projections in order to
Speaker 5: make the numbers work. It's still blowing up. What four
Speaker 5: trillion dollars, isn't it. I have to check the number exactly,
Speaker 5: but it's still a budget busting bill and that's.
Speaker 3: A really what they'll what they'll say is that you're
Speaker 3: pushing all of the cuts to Medicaid down the road,
Speaker 3: and when we get to down the road, you'll undo
Speaker 3: the cuts. So you'll take the tax cuts now and
Speaker 3: you'll pay for them by promising to hurt poor people later.
Speaker 3: But when it actually gets to it, you won't do
Speaker 3: it because you'll realize, oh wait, we're working class party. Now,
Speaker 3: we're actually going after our own people who don't believe
Speaker 3: that they're getting a government handout just by their parents
Speaker 3: being covered by Medica or them being covered by Medicaid. Well,
Speaker 3: this is because we've worked our whole lives, and you
Speaker 3: know this is health insurance for us. It's for our
Speaker 3: parents or for our children who are suffering.
Speaker 5: It's particularly difficult when it's juxtaposed with other elements of
Speaker 5: the bill. For example, a massive corporate tax cut. So
Speaker 5: if you're going from twenty one percent to fifteen percent
Speaker 5: for corporations, yes, there would be there's some projections that
Speaker 5: say this this would be tax relief. I mean every
Speaker 5: projection basically says this would be tax relief for the
Speaker 5: middle class. The question is is it more tax relief
Speaker 5: for the rich than it is for the middle class.
Speaker 5: Some that's going to depend on what happens with Salt,
Speaker 5: But I think it's especially difficult when you're passing a
Speaker 5: big corporate tax cut to then also go after a
Speaker 5: quote unquote waste fraud and abuse in medicaid. I think
Speaker 5: that's something that people like chip Roy are aware of
Speaker 5: and know that needs to be done sensitively, but also
Speaker 5: are saying we've staked out the amount of the amount
Speaker 5: of political capital that we have put behind DOGE. For example,
Speaker 5: if you're Chip Roy, if you're a Freedom Caucus member,
Speaker 5: if you're Trump supporting member of the House of Representatives,
Speaker 5: your district is pro Trump, you have put political capital
Speaker 5: on the line for DOGE to cut waste fraud and
Speaker 5: abuse and to cut government spending, and now you're being
Speaker 5: asked to support a big spending bill. It raises the
Speaker 5: debt ceiling by four trillion dollars. I'm reading a rundown
Speaker 5: here from Politico of what's in the bill right now.
Speaker 5: It spends three point eight trillion to lock in the
Speaker 5: tax cuts. You know. It's there's the car loan deduction,
Speaker 5: so interest on car loan deductions. That's a good thing.
Speaker 5: Child tax credit increased by five hundred dollars, although some
Speaker 5: people really want that to be a lot higher. Great
Speaker 5: tax hike on university endowments, so that goes from one
Speaker 5: point four percent to twenty one percent. But it would
Speaker 5: cut six hundred and twenty five billion dollars through medicaid
Speaker 5: that right now, as political puts it is quote largely
Speaker 5: through new work requirements, and as CBO puts, it would
Speaker 5: quote lead to eight point six million more people losing
Speaker 5: their health insurance. It phases out clean energy programs, which
Speaker 5: have been sort of I'm not a fan of most
Speaker 5: of what that's done. It has been something of an
Speaker 5: industrial policy, and localities around the country over recent years
Speaker 5: they do want to cut back food stamps in certain
Speaker 5: education programs. So the headlines if this bill passes over
Speaker 5: the next year or so are definitely difficult. When the
Speaker 5: bill also had a big corporate or will have a
Speaker 5: big corporate tax cut and all of that stuff in
Speaker 5: it too.
Speaker 3: It's also idiotic just on a fiscal level, in the
Speaker 3: sense that, oh, you're going to save money by kicking
Speaker 3: seven million people off of health insurance.
Speaker 4: Okay, let's explore this magical thinking for a moment.
Speaker 3: Are these seven million people going to all of a
Speaker 3: sudden not get sick and never need any medical treatment?
Speaker 4: Because that's great.
Speaker 3: If that's the case, I support that a policy that
Speaker 3: would make seven million people magically immune to any disease
Speaker 3: for the next seven million years or.
Speaker 4: Accidents probably not going to happen.
Speaker 3: Those people, instead of going to their doctor because they
Speaker 3: have medical insurance, are now.
Speaker 4: Going to go to the emergency department.
Speaker 3: Emergency department is going to send them a twelve thousand
Speaker 3: dollars bill for showing up in the emergency department for
Speaker 3: whatever malay they had. That person doesn't have twelve thousand dollars.
Speaker 3: The health the hospital then is going to carve it
Speaker 3: up and send the bill out to everybody else or
Speaker 3: it was chump Canna yell at them to just eat it,
Speaker 3: like he's yelling at Walmart to eat the prices. No, like,
Speaker 3: if these people are still getting sick, we as a
Speaker 3: society are still treating them. The only difference is it's
Speaker 3: going to cost us more to treat them because we've
Speaker 3: kicked them off health insurance. Yeah, absolutely so we're actually
Speaker 3: like even your deficit, cutting Medicaid cuts are going to
Speaker 3: long term add to everybody's costs, whether it's raising your
Speaker 3: own cost of insurance, raising the bills that you pay,
Speaker 3: tweaking private equity to like screw you a little bit
Speaker 3: harder next time you come into one of their hospitals,
Speaker 3: or adding to the deficit.
Speaker 5: The only person or the only group of people that
Speaker 5: are are half and half system is good for right
Speaker 5: now as the same people who will benefit from this.
Speaker 5: And it's massive like conglomerates. It's not people, it's not
Speaker 5: the government, because we just have this mixed system. It's
Speaker 5: like half capitalist and half like democratic socialists subsidized.
Speaker 3: Right where hospitals are required to treat people right, And
Speaker 3: I don't think anybody wants to change that law.
Speaker 5: No, no, absolutely not. And it's completely inefficient, and it's
Speaker 5: not good for anyone except for the people who are
Speaker 5: profiting off of all of it in the meantime. So
Speaker 5: it's you know, it's going to be this entire thing.
Speaker 5: If you're the Trump administration, you have promised to make
Speaker 5: the times permanent, and that will bring some relief to
Speaker 5: the middle class. But you've also promised to get America's
Speaker 5: fiscal house in order, and you've promised to do these
Speaker 5: massive new defense initiatives, which, by the way, is the
Speaker 5: LOCKHEEDO is saying on Fox and Friends this morning. If
Speaker 5: it's built domestically, that could be a that could juice
Speaker 5: the economies in places where they're manufacturing parts of it.
Speaker 5: I don't even know what that's going to look like.
Speaker 5: I don't think anybody knows what that's really going to
Speaker 5: look like. Reagan's SDI, which sort of gets laughed at,
Speaker 5: like Star Wars sort of gets laughed at. Well. Trump
Speaker 5: made an interesting point when he was rolling out the
Speaker 5: Golden Dome announcement that he was like, Ron Reagan wanted
Speaker 5: to do this years ago, but we didn't have the technology.
Speaker 5: Now we do the technology. SDI laid the groundwork for
Speaker 5: decades of r and d that came from that massive ambition.
Speaker 5: I'm not at all laughing at the idea of having
Speaker 5: like significant ambitions and sort of pie in the sky ideas.
Speaker 5: I actually don't think that's that insane and crazy, and
Speaker 5: you know, we don't. It's fine to laugh at, but
Speaker 5: it doesn't always turn out to be a joke. You know.
Speaker 5: You can sort of nudge some things in the right
Speaker 5: direction when you do that. But this is a recipe
Speaker 5: for a fiscal disaster, and everyone knows it. But Republicans
Speaker 5: are locked in. They're locked in, and their best argument
Speaker 5: right now, what they're telling the Freedom Caucus guys, is
Speaker 5: that it's better than nothing if you're forced to choose
Speaker 5: between the lesser of two evils. The lesser of two
Speaker 5: evils is going to be some tax relief for the
Speaker 5: middle class and some modest cuts. Because everyone knows. You know,
Speaker 5: even though you have both Houses of Congress and the
Speaker 5: presidency and a man who is whose presidency is predicated
Speaker 5: on a pledge to revolutionize Washington, whether you believe it
Speaker 5: or not, you have all of the political capital in
Speaker 5: the world. And because the margin in the House is
Speaker 5: so small, you either take it or leave it, and
Speaker 5: they can lose like two people if everyone is voting.
Speaker 5: So I'm actually so very skeptical that this even gets
Speaker 5: across the finish line as a one big, beautiful reconciliation bill.
Speaker 5: It's possible that they end up having to break this up.
Speaker 4: My bad is they figure out something.
Speaker 5: The stakes are so high that it seems it seems
Speaker 5: easy to imagine people compromising.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and it's easier to agree to something that actually
Speaker 3: doesn't even make any sense.
Speaker 4: Law and then deal with the consequences later.
Speaker 5: And none of this makes any sense.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's that would that would be that would be
Speaker 3: in line with what we normally tend to do. Let
Speaker 3: me talk about South Sudan.
Speaker 5: Let's do it. Yeah, that's we'll go from Trump to
Speaker 5: Sudan and our tour around the world.
Speaker 3: So President Trump began by sending migrants from not El
Speaker 3: Salvador to Bukelli's prison, notorious prison in El Salvador. There
Speaker 3: were then reports that he was looking at sending people
Speaker 3: to Libya.
Speaker 4: There was some pushback on that. There are now reports that.
Speaker 3: DHS has deported up to twelve migrants against court order,
Speaker 3: against an explicit court order, to South Sudan, a country
Speaker 3: on the brink of complete collect and civil war.
Speaker 4: Put this first element up on the screen here that
Speaker 4: the judge has.
Speaker 3: Judge has also Judges now responded again and said, look,
Speaker 3: what you need to make sure that these migrants do
Speaker 3: not leave federal custody because the migrants who are in
Speaker 3: and we can talk about this no. Christy Noman was
Speaker 3: up on the hill yesterday talking making this argument again.
Speaker 3: Rubio is making this argument as well, that look, these migrants,
Speaker 3: we'd love to you know, follow the court order and
Speaker 3: you know, return the ones that the court is asking
Speaker 3: us to return, but we don't hold them anymore.
Speaker 4: Well, Kelly has them.
Speaker 3: It's like, oh, well, what about this invoice where you're
Speaker 3: paying them to keep them. Doesn't that suggest that you
Speaker 3: have some control over them? Ah, that's just basically that's
Speaker 3: that's a broad grant that doesn't apply specifically to this
Speaker 3: one individual. So this judge is saying, you violated the
Speaker 3: court order that says people have to have have a
Speaker 3: reasonable amount of time to contest their deportation, which is
Speaker 3: not the Apparently they gave the ones that we know about,
Speaker 3: they gave them like a couple hours and not enough
Speaker 3: time to like for the lawyers to do anything, and
Speaker 3: they handed the document to me and mar deportee in
Speaker 3: English and the person doesn't speak English.
Speaker 4: They said, that's not enough time. You have to give them.
Speaker 4: You have to give them enough time, and so you
Speaker 4: have to keep.
Speaker 3: Them now in you're in your control under humanitarian and
Speaker 3: under humane conditions, so that if I order you to
Speaker 3: return them, you can't come back with some catch twenty
Speaker 3: two argument of up too bad, already let him go.
Speaker 5: I'm on Pharah right now, and there is a registered
Speaker 5: lobbyist on behalf of South Sudan who's a former Bush
Speaker 5: administration official. So that's Joseph Slavic.
Speaker 9: I know him.
Speaker 5: But that's what I mean. It was vocal group when
Speaker 5: we were looking at what was it Libya the attempted
Speaker 5: deportations to It was Libya, wasn't it. I'm trying to
Speaker 5: remember a couple of weeks ago.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and Libya then said basically that they wouldn't allow it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and I don't remember. So, for to be clear,
Speaker 5: we have no idea whether or not the lobbyists facilitated that,
Speaker 5: but I did reach out to them and never got
Speaker 5: a response, which seems interesting. So I'm really curious why
Speaker 5: they're making these I think it's very interesting what negotiations
Speaker 5: are happening behind the scenes with African countries to make
Speaker 5: these deportations happen, because the United States obviously is competing
Speaker 5: like Belton Road in Africa and is trying to have
Speaker 5: relationships with some of these countries in ways that compete
Speaker 5: with China or provide leverage over China. So there could
Speaker 5: be all kinds of interesting stuff happening behind the scenes
Speaker 5: as to why they're making decisions for random country deportation basically, and.
Speaker 3: It seems like this fits into the Stephen Miller I want,
Speaker 3: I want spectacle type of action, like to send to
Speaker 3: send somebody into a completely war.
Speaker 4: Torn area.
Speaker 3: Where there who God only knows what type of conditions
Speaker 3: they're going to face, you know, feels in line with
Speaker 3: his policy of like let's let's make this as vicious
Speaker 3: as possible in order to discourage any any migration. Uh So,
Speaker 3: Chris Van Holland and Marco Rubio got into it over
Speaker 3: over immigration speech and and basically the entire kind of
Speaker 3: Trump you know, first one hundred plus days in the
Speaker 3: Senate lest yesterday it went. It went for quite some time,
Speaker 3: seems personal. Van Holland used his entire seven minutes basically
Speaker 3: to go after Rubio, and then Rubio insisted on having
Speaker 3: time to challenge to challenge him to come back, Let's
Speaker 3: roll a little bit of it.
Speaker 7: I have to tell you directly and personally that I
Speaker 7: regret voting for you for Secretary of State.
Speaker 4: I yield back.
Speaker 13: I respond, well, first of all, your regret for voting
Speaker 13: for me confirms I'm doing a good job based on
Speaker 13: what I'm.
Speaker 7: That's just clipping statementary.
Speaker 13: Can I respond, mister chairman, you me I didn't.
Speaker 7: Have, Senator, Please let the Secretary be happy to but
Speaker 7: then I can respond to his Your time's up, Senator,
Speaker 7: and willfully used. I might add, your reminds me to
Speaker 7: not represent the view of this committee. Well, mister Secretary, please, well.
Speaker 5: I'd like to.
Speaker 13: I can't respond to everything he said because much of
Speaker 13: these are untrue, but I'll go through a few. First
Speaker 13: of all, I'm actually very proud of the work we've
Speaker 13: done with USAID. For example, I don't regret cutting ten
Speaker 13: million dollars for male circumcisions in Mozambique. I don't know
Speaker 13: how that makes a stronger and more prosperous as a Nation.
Speaker 13: I don't reget psychosocial support services, I raised.
Speaker 7: I respond, Senator, I'd ask you to suspend. You had
Speaker 7: seven straight minutes. I chose to use my time that way,
Speaker 7: mister Chairman, that's my pleast suspend that way. Secretary Rubew, Well,
Speaker 7: I can go on.
Speaker 13: I mean, there's other things here. We spent two hundred
Speaker 13: and twenty seven thousand dollars for Big Cat's YouTube channel
Speaker 13: from usaid, we spent fourteen million dollars for social cohesion
Speaker 13: in Mali, whatever the hell that means. So I can
Speaker 13: go on and on. I got the list here, and
Speaker 13: there's more that I didn't even bring the whole list.
Speaker 13: In the case of El Salvador, absolutely absolutely we deported
Speaker 13: gang members, gang members, including the one you had a
Speaker 13: margarita with, and that guy is a human trafficker, and
Speaker 13: that guy is a gang banger, and that and the
Speaker 13: evidence is going to be clear in the days of WA.
Speaker 4: Rubio has the floor.
Speaker 7: Chairman, he can't make unsubstantiated like that. Secretary Rubio has
Speaker 7: the floor. Pedrick Rubio should take that testimony the federal Fenator,
Speaker 7: United States, because he hasn't done it under oath.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's something else.
Speaker 3: To me from from Rubio, because he has been one
Speaker 3: of the Senate's most vocal defenders of USAID for his
Speaker 3: entire political career, and now he's kind of hot. He's
Speaker 3: distancing himself from all of that support by finding a
Speaker 3: few kind of ridiculous, woke things that he can point
Speaker 3: to when he has supported it as as an apparatus
Speaker 3: of the of US foreign.
Speaker 4: Policy, you know, for for many, many years.
Speaker 3: To say that you had a margarita with this, the
Speaker 3: bou Kelly like dropped the margarita on the table between
Speaker 3: Van hollend and Abrio Garcia when Van Holland was an
Speaker 3: l Salvador and then quick snapped the picture.
Speaker 4: Get serious here, man, I like how.
Speaker 5: You pivots from like Chomsky to Stephen Miller in like
Speaker 5: half a second. And he's like going through all this
Speaker 5: ridiculous soft power usai D bullshit, and then it's like, so, yes,
Speaker 5: we did deport people to El Salvatory.
Speaker 3: It's like zero to sixty yeah, And he's like, and
Speaker 3: we and the evidence will show It's like, well, from
Speaker 3: Van Holland's perspective, it's like, okay, how about when the
Speaker 3: evidence does show that you present it in somewhere where
Speaker 3: we can adjudicate it. You don't tell us that in
Speaker 3: the future we're going to present this evidence.
Speaker 5: You know. Tybee had a really good post about the
Speaker 5: Ozark situation and how he and he brought.
Speaker 4: Up Oster a couple of times.
Speaker 3: He's like, because Rubyo is like, look, you come here,
Speaker 3: you burn down buildings which didn't happen, somebody did break
Speaker 3: a window, and you disrupt classes.
Speaker 4: Then you know we're going to kick you out. And
Speaker 4: he's like, did rams of oz turn through that? All
Speaker 4: she did was co author and op ed.
Speaker 5: And that's Ruby did not answer that question. And so yeah,
Speaker 5: this is the Your point about Rubio is an interesting one,
Speaker 5: a really interesting one. Actually, I'm with it, Like I'm
Speaker 5: applauding all of that except for the El Salvador oz
Speaker 5: Turk insanity. And Taybi had a good post actually where
Speaker 5: he's he's taken some heat for saying at one point
Speaker 5: that the Secretary of State is claiming there's going to
Speaker 5: be evidence that these people harmed national security in some
Speaker 5: significant way to warrant the revocation of their visas, because
Speaker 5: he has the power to do it if legally, if
Speaker 5: they are a harm, if their threat to American foreign policy.
Speaker 5: That's the law that allows them to revoke the visa.
Speaker 5: And so Tayabe is saying that's such a significant claim,
Speaker 5: there must be At one point he said something like
Speaker 5: he was like, maybe there isn't more evidence, but maybe
Speaker 5: there is. And so he was like, it doesn't there's
Speaker 5: some reason to say, like maybe there's something else going
Speaker 5: on here and it's never materialized, right, And so Taybi
Speaker 5: wrote a really I think it was like I forget
Speaker 5: the title of it. It was fantastic and everyone should
Speaker 5: go read it, but just being like, screw this over
Speaker 5: and over again. You know, you can look at these
Speaker 5: examples with the visa revocations where it seems like they're eluding,
Speaker 5: and Ruby in particular seems like they're alluding to something
Speaker 5: and it never materializes. So that, I mean, he doubles
Speaker 5: triples down in that exchange with Van Hannen says we're
Speaker 5: going to keep doing it, which from a communications perspective
Speaker 5: is exactly the right thing to do. I mean, to
Speaker 5: not shy away from it and to not look like
Speaker 5: you're wishy washy. So just from like a messaging standpoint, cynically,
Speaker 5: it's exactly the right thing to do.
Speaker 4: But was it the case of Rumesa Ostark is that
Speaker 4: his piece timeline.
Speaker 5: No, the timeline is good too. I'm explaining to do
Speaker 5: it might be that I'll find it. But anyway, the
Speaker 5: State Department, I don't know if you get this sense either.
Speaker 5: I think it's called ode to scum. But yeah, I
Speaker 5: don't know if you get this impression either. But it
Speaker 5: does seem to me like the State Department actually has
Speaker 5: slowed down on the visa revocations, the visa revocations, and
Speaker 5: they haven't done another like deportation to Al Salvador. They're
Speaker 5: doing the South Sudan. But how many was that? Well, yeah,
Speaker 5: and what was the attempt for Libya was? I think
Speaker 5: around like fifty. They're doing these smaller number attempts, and
Speaker 5: first of all, they have a significant number of people
Speaker 5: with actual criminal backgrounds. The said they're going to start
Speaker 5: with the worst of the worst, even that who their
Speaker 5: problem is why they're looking turning to Africa again to
Speaker 5: be cynical, is that they have all of these people
Speaker 5: with criminal backgrounds, even if it's nothing compared to what
Speaker 5: the eight million people that they claim to want to deport,
Speaker 5: they have tens of thousands of people that they need
Speaker 5: to deport. If they say they want to deport people
Speaker 5: the worst, the worst with criminal backgrounds, who's going to
Speaker 5: take a bunch of criminals that are being deported from
Speaker 5: the United States.
Speaker 3: This shows why it would be helpful if the United
Speaker 3: States was not such a bully that had such terrible
Speaker 3: relations with so many countries around the world. For instance,
Speaker 3: one of the people that apparently was sent to South
Speaker 3: Sudan is Bolivian. For why does the United States have
Speaker 3: such a bad relationship with Bolivia.
Speaker 4: Well, we were involved with a coup.
Speaker 3: In twenty nineteen and then an attempted coup in twenty
Speaker 3: twenty because and Elon Musk responded by saying, we will
Speaker 3: coup whoever we want in the context of all of
Speaker 3: the lithium reserves that Bolivia has. So yeah, So Bolivia
Speaker 3: is like, no, We're not going to take these people back.
Speaker 3: So a choice for us would be to not be
Speaker 3: thugs around the world. And then if they have a
Speaker 3: criminal who has committed you know, who has committed crimes
Speaker 3: in the United States and is also here illegally, then
Speaker 3: that person would then be deported back to Bolivia, and
Speaker 3: Bolivia has no choice but to take them unless they
Speaker 3: have a blanket policy that they don't have a relationship
Speaker 3: with us when it comes to that because we are
Speaker 3: thugs who are trying to overthrow their government, which is okay,
Speaker 3: they make a fair point.
Speaker 4: Yeah, now while you're looking for that.
Speaker 3: Christy Nome, DHS Secretary, was also on the Hill yesterday
Speaker 3: and I played.
Speaker 5: This speaking of their ability to do mass deportations because
Speaker 5: that's why Steven Miller is floating this idea. And by
Speaker 5: the way, it was also predicated on the notion legally,
Speaker 5: it must be predicated on the notion legally, there is
Speaker 5: an invasion happening this government. The Trump administration says that
Speaker 5: they have stopped the invasion and the border crossings have
Speaker 5: slowed to less than a trickle. So two things can't
Speaker 5: be true at the same time, right.
Speaker 3: So Steve Miller has said that that if judges keep
Speaker 3: ruling against them, that they're considering suspending habeas corpus. So
Speaker 3: Maggie Hassen, new Hampshire Senator, live free or to die
Speaker 3: state and asked.
Speaker 4: Christy Nome a rather interesting question. Let's roll that.
Speaker 5: So, Secretary Nome, what is habeas corpus?
Speaker 1: Well, habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president
Speaker 1: has to be able to remove people from this country.
Speaker 5: Let us spend their right. Let me let me stopbeas corpus.
Speaker 4: Excuse me, that's that's incorrect.
Speaker 5: Presidents corpus, Excuse me.
Speaker 3: Now, I don't want to come off as some elitist
Speaker 3: that everybody has to know every Latin legal term out there.
Speaker 4: There are no doubt people watching this right now who
Speaker 4: are like, what is habeas corpus?
Speaker 3: I'm not even sure those people are not the Secretary
Speaker 3: of Homeland Security.
Speaker 4: So that's cool if you don't know that.
Speaker 5: Whose administration is flirting with the idea of suspending the
Speaker 5: writ of habeas corporus.
Speaker 3: And so now the person that I'm talking to you
Speaker 3: right now who didn't know what that is, you will
Speaker 3: know for the rest of your life what it is. Yeah,
Speaker 3: a writ of habeus corpus means you are held illegally,
Speaker 3: in your your opinion, by the government, and you are
Speaker 3: able to petition for your release. It is the foundation
Speaker 3: of a free society that that you cannot be held
Speaker 3: for no reason and without charges. And so if you're
Speaker 3: if you and even if you're charged with something, but
Speaker 3: you don't get a trial you can file one eventually
Speaker 3: and say, look, I'm not even getting a trial always
Speaker 3: you just charge me and you're keep me locked up here.
Speaker 3: If you notice, at the very end, she said President
Speaker 3: Lincoln used it, and it's.
Speaker 5: True now, but saying using habeas corpus.
Speaker 4: He did not. He did not round people up and
Speaker 4: deport them.
Speaker 5: They declare habeas corpus. It's like Michael Scott.
Speaker 4: And bankruptcy exactly.
Speaker 3: Like also, we had open borders then, like we did
Speaker 3: not have this, that's not what we had this. We
Speaker 3: didn't have this system that they that we have now.
Speaker 3: So there was no deporting people. What what Lincoln did
Speaker 3: do is suspend habeas corpus in the time of war
Speaker 3: and locked up some like newspaper editors and other critics
Speaker 3: of his.
Speaker 4: And you you could say that there's a shame on him.
Speaker 3: He was also operating in a revolutionary time and maybe
Speaker 3: so maybe those were excesses.
Speaker 4: Maybe not.
Speaker 3: You know, he put points on the board, so I'm
Speaker 3: not gonna sit here. I'm not gonna sit here and
Speaker 3: second guests Lincoln. But he did he did suspend habeas corpus,
Speaker 3: which meant that if you were a newspaper editor who
Speaker 3: had written a mean op ed about him, which a
Speaker 3: lot lot did and mostly from the quote unquote anti
Speaker 3: warsaw they were these were like, you know, Southern sympathizers
Speaker 3: who hated Lincoln and wanted the war to end and
Speaker 3: wanted him to capitulate to the South.
Speaker 4: Uh, he locked some of them up. And you know that.
Speaker 4: So that my, my, my twin impulses of press, press freedom.
Speaker 3: This is like when you smashed the South and the
Speaker 3: slave class and the planter class are in conflict there.
Speaker 3: So that's why I'm not going to second guess Lincoln.
Speaker 5: It's like sometimes when and I think Obama did this too,
Speaker 5: but sometimes when you are talking about China and like Ryan, relax,
Speaker 5: China was able to build things really quick.
Speaker 4: China, we're all working, we're all working this stuff out.
Speaker 5: It was a great question for Maggie Hassen, whoknew she
Speaker 5: didn't have any idea what that is? Well, she but
Speaker 5: this is the thing. She has an idea, so what
Speaker 5: it is?
Speaker 3: And we mentioned the Lincoln thing because it shows that
Speaker 3: she's been briefed on this, because she didn't or she
Speaker 3: was skimming Wikipedia and just didn't absorb it. But habees
Speaker 3: Corpus is not the right the president to deport anybody
Speaker 3: he wants, like, or anybody at all.
Speaker 9: You don't know.
Speaker 3: If this were a like ninth grade Civics test, Yeah,
Speaker 3: that wouldn't even it wouldn't even occur to the test makers.
Speaker 4: I think to make that one of the wrong answers,
Speaker 4: that's how wrong it is.
Speaker 5: I am actually starting to think that Christina maybe one
Speaker 5: of the first sort of top level officials in Trump
Speaker 5: world who leaves their post. I don't know when the
Speaker 5: timeline will be, but I just feel like it's not
Speaker 5: worth great.
Speaker 3: Lewandowski is a patron right and he's still in well
Speaker 3: with Trump, right yeah, yeah, yep.
Speaker 5: I don't know if Corey Lewandowski has enough way to
Speaker 5: overcome Trump getting frustrated with a cabinet secretary, but.
Speaker 3: He probably loves this, like going on Fox, I'll guss
Speaker 3: it up in the like ice gear.
Speaker 5: Although there were leaks to the Wall Street Journal that
Speaker 5: people were internally upset.
Speaker 4: With that, so was Trump upset with it?
Speaker 5: I don't know.
Speaker 4: I mean, this is that's that's that's pure Trump right there.
Speaker 5: Yeah, But I think even for him, it's a lot
Speaker 5: you know, like if you're if and if you're getting
Speaker 5: some like basic stuff rung and everyone's mocking you. You know,
Speaker 5: it's that all the patients will workin at some point,
Speaker 5: and especially if it's combined with not the skuttle butt
Speaker 5: in like MAGA circles right now, like hardcore MAGA circles,
Speaker 5: Bannon World, those places. People are really really frustrated with
Speaker 5: the pace of deportations because that was one of his
Speaker 5: biggest campaign promises and that is one of the most
Speaker 5: important issues to MAGA world, like the MAGA grassroots and
Speaker 5: right now. Maybe the benefit of keeping Home around is
Speaker 5: that she's a convenient foil, so you can kind of
Speaker 5: project frustrations onto Christy Gnome rather than onto Donald Trump.
Speaker 5: But there's significant frustrations among his grassroots supporters with the
Speaker 5: pace of deportations.
Speaker 3: It seemed to me that politically they finally hit on
Speaker 3: something smart recently where they started going to California jails.
Speaker 3: As you notice that, Like, so what they did is
Speaker 3: they said, Okay, yes, this is a sanctuary city. ICE
Speaker 3: is not allowed to interact with these the sheriffs, but
Speaker 3: if you illegally re enter the country a second time,
Speaker 3: that's a felony. And so what they do is they
Speaker 3: look for people who've illegally re entered a second time
Speaker 3: and have been then arrested and are sitting in detention
Speaker 3: or jail or prison at a state level, and they
Speaker 3: go in and say, Okay, we know you've been deported
Speaker 3: once already, then you re entered, then you got arrested.
Speaker 3: Therefore that's a felony. Therefore the sanctuary city of the
Speaker 3: logic doesn't apply you. And here's a warrant, and we're
Speaker 3: going to arrest you for that. And I think that
Speaker 3: they would have ninety plus percent support from the public
Speaker 3: on that because it's like, Okay, they've been deported once,
Speaker 3: they re entered, and then they got arrested again, And
Speaker 3: they would put Democrats in a really difficult position defending
Speaker 3: that chain of events, be like, well that's actually okay,
Speaker 3: you can enter multiple times illegally and commit crimes. Like
Speaker 3: they'd have Democrats over the barrel with that. So if
Speaker 3: I were them, I would just lean into that. But
Speaker 3: they want they just want the viciousness, the cruelty, the spectacle.
Speaker 5: Well, and part of it is that they think it
Speaker 5: functions as a disincentive, and it does, I mean, but
Speaker 5: they're also frustrated with the self deportation numbers, because that's
Speaker 5: seen as a sort of cornerstone part of how you're
Speaker 5: able to do mass deportations is that you allow people
Speaker 5: to use CBP home as it's been dubbed, and get
Speaker 5: you know themselves. It's like a thousand dollars subsidy for
Speaker 5: people to return or go elsewhere outside of the United States.
Speaker 5: Right on Thursday, the President is attending a meme coin
Speaker 5: crypto dinner at his golf club outside of DC in Virginia,
Speaker 5: and Marco Rubio while he was in the Senate yesterday,
Speaker 5: got some tough questions about that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And to set the context for this, in order
Speaker 3: to come to this dinner, you had to be in
Speaker 3: the top two hundred purchasers of Trump's meme coin, so
Speaker 3: you basically had to give money to Trump directly, not
Speaker 3: even through a campaign fund directly, and then the top
Speaker 3: like fifteen or so get like VIP access to Trump.
Speaker 3: The top two hundred get direct access to Trump. And
Speaker 3: there's been reporting that the vast majority of the people
Speaker 3: who are in this top two hundred and in the
Speaker 3: top fifteen are not Americans. So yeah, so that's what
Speaker 3: Murphy here is asking Rubio about.
Speaker 12: Let me ask you about the dinner that's happening this
Speaker 12: Thursday night. The President has offered access to him to
Speaker 12: the two hundred top purchasers of his meme coin. Reports
Speaker 12: are that maybe about half or more of those individuals
Speaker 12: who will be meeting with him, many in a VIP
Speaker 12: reception or foreigners. Do you have a list of those
Speaker 12: foreign individuals who will be meeting with the president?
Speaker 11: I don't. I don't know.
Speaker 13: I think I don't even know there was a dinner
Speaker 13: on Thursday night, So I'm not sure what you're referring to.
Speaker 12: So you don't know whether any of the foreign individuals
Speaker 12: who are going to be meeting with the president this
Speaker 12: Thursday night, for instance, are on our list of sanctioned individuals,
Speaker 12: or whether any of those individuals have connections to let's say,
Speaker 12: terrorist organizations abroad.
Speaker 13: Well, I think if they had terrorist lenks, Department of
Speaker 13: Homeland Security probably would not allow them into the country.
Speaker 13: But again, I don't even know there is a dinner.
Speaker 13: You're asking me about something I don't know about.
Speaker 12: Well, but listen, this is a dinner that the president
Speaker 12: is having. It is likely going to involve some very
Speaker 12: significant foreign interests. You have to be pretty wealthy in
Speaker 12: order to be able to get inside this dinner. Isn't
Speaker 12: that a relevant question for the Secretary of State. I'm
Speaker 12: at the same which foreign interests are going to be
Speaker 12: speaking to the president?
Speaker 4: I mean, it's kind of naive to believe that there.
Speaker 12: Aren't going to be in that room talking about national
Speaker 12: security matters.
Speaker 13: Well, I don't think that that's the case at all,
Speaker 13: because that would be a but it was the case.
Speaker 13: The truth of the matter is I interact with government
Speaker 13: officials and others and governments of other countries. That's what
Speaker 13: I don't say. You're asking about a dinner or anything
Speaker 13: about I can't answer you because I don't know anything
Speaker 13: about this dinner. It's the first I heard of it.
Speaker 13: Like I said, I don't keep the president's social schedule.
Speaker 13: It's not on my phone, it's not in my pocket.
Speaker 13: I don't even know. I can't comment on a dinner.
Speaker 13: I know nothing about it.
Speaker 3: I kind of wish, from the democratic perspective that they
Speaker 3: would go after the corruption more than the national security.
Speaker 3: Like I'm actually not worried that there's going to be
Speaker 3: a suicide bomber sneak into the White House and blow
Speaker 3: himself up there or like whatever the other national security
Speaker 3: implications Murphy would be talking about. It feels like outdated.
Speaker 3: It is gross and thoroughly corrupt. What's what do you
Speaker 3: think of Rubio being like, oh, on dinner, I would
Speaker 3: invite it that dinner. I don't know anything about that dinner.
Speaker 5: He's like pissed he didn't get the social calendar. Yeah, no,
Speaker 5: I mean that's the only real answer that he can
Speaker 5: give to the question. It's entirely possible, it's true. I mean,
Speaker 5: I don't think Marko Rubio is trying to keep Donald
Speaker 5: Trump's schedule. He's probably not following crypto news that closely,
Speaker 5: although at some point it does have overlapped with the
Speaker 5: Secretary of States responsibilities. But it's obviously the biggest handicap.
Speaker 5: I think it's the biggest handicap in the future of
Speaker 5: like right wing populism, which has been infiltrated and compromised
Speaker 5: by the tech community who is eager to some of
Speaker 5: them are true believing libertarians of this like libertarian populism.
Speaker 5: You know, that's that's relevant to crypto world, But that's
Speaker 5: of you know, Rosie that's looking at it through rose
Speaker 5: color lenses. There are a lot of people who are
Speaker 5: just sort of people getting absolutely loaded off of crypto
Speaker 5: and using it to you know, wield even more influence
Speaker 5: over global politics. So Rubio in particular, you know, doesn't
Speaker 5: really want to get into that because he's a sort
Speaker 5: of a one of the figureheads, one of the like
Speaker 5: thought leaders in the world of mega populism. So he's
Speaker 5: particularly positioned poorly to face questions about that because it's
Speaker 5: a huge handicap for the movement that.
Speaker 3: He wants to be a leader in, and I think
Speaker 3: for the country too. And let's just look at this
Speaker 3: from a big picture perspective for one second. And speaking
Speaker 3: of China, what's China out there building high speed rail,
Speaker 3: automated factories like robotics that seem to be several years
Speaker 3: ahead of US evs that are like five to ten
Speaker 3: grand and you have much longer ability to travel without
Speaker 3: it needing to charge better battery technology, and on and on.
Speaker 4: What are we doing.
Speaker 3: We're building crypto, blockchain and a golden dome to protect
Speaker 3: against what like. So the last twenty years were defined
Speaker 3: by the US spending ten trillion dollars failing to occupy
Speaker 3: Afghanistan and Iraq, while China made leaps and mounds forward
Speaker 3: technologically and economically. The next ten years, we're just gonna
Speaker 3: like dump all our money into crypto and and like
Speaker 3: weapons projects, while China just continues along, like how do
Speaker 3: we think that that is going to end? So it's
Speaker 3: and it's not just this dinner Thursday night in the
Speaker 3: United States Senate this week we can put this next
Speaker 3: element up on the screen.
Speaker 4: H The Senate is moving forward on this key crypto bill,
Speaker 4: which is they.
Speaker 6: Call it there.
Speaker 4: They're gonna rate they're going to codify stable coins. Basically.
Speaker 3: The the Democrats who objected to it, which were led
Speaker 3: by Elizabeth Warren u argued that look, what you're doing
Speaker 3: here is just you're just codifying Trump's ability to do
Speaker 3: this insanely corrupt thing into law. That this this things
Speaker 3: that giant give away to the crypto industry and is
Speaker 3: going to enable all sorts of all sorts of fraud.
Speaker 3: You had a fat you had fascinating split within the
Speaker 3: Democratic Party.
Speaker 4: You can put up C six here.
Speaker 3: Uh, this is my colleague Steven Dennis, Bloomberg reporter said
Speaker 3: some drama on the Senate floor during stable coin vote.
Speaker 3: The top crypto friendly dem Kirsten Gillibrand and Elizabeth Warren,
Speaker 3: the chief foe, gotten a heated argument on the Democratic
Speaker 3: side of the chamber. A third of the Democrats ended
Speaker 3: up siding with jilibrand two thirds with Warren. The crypto
Speaker 3: folks were watching this. You can put up C seven
Speaker 3: and put up a bunch of kind of stills you
Speaker 3: could see on C SPAN.
Speaker 4: Yeah, So if you're just if you're just listening to this,
Speaker 4: basically Warren just chased Jilibrand all over the Senate floor. Yeah,
Speaker 4: just kind of berating her for this, for this bill,
Speaker 4: Like what are you doing, Like what.
Speaker 3: In this moment in time with this insane amount of
Speaker 3: eruption washing and not just washing through Washington, because that
Speaker 3: implies there's something, there's some passive force. Donald Trump is
Speaker 3: and his family and Whitcoff's kid are like flooding Washington
Speaker 3: with crypto based corruption, and Agillibrand and a third of
Speaker 3: the Democrats are going to team up with Republicans to
Speaker 3: basically rubber.
Speaker 4: Stamp that and be like that's cool, that's cool.
Speaker 3: Now, if you put the earlier element that I put
Speaker 3: up from Warren, this is Stephen Dennis, a Blueberg reporter
Speaker 3: saying that Warren's not against you know, cryptoregulation, obviously, she's
Speaker 3: she wants to regulate it practically out of existence. He says, quote,
Speaker 3: you know, she said she'd be fine with stable coined
Speaker 3: legislation with proper regulation to protect consumers, which includes CFPB oversight.
Speaker 4: Although the CFPP is getting nooked.
Speaker 3: A ban on presidents profiting off their own coins while
Speaker 3: in office, it seems like a reasonable legislation protection against
Speaker 3: systemic risks from a failed token. In other words, you
Speaker 3: have a you have a scam token that that pulls
Speaker 3: in so much money that it that it takes down
Speaker 3: counterparties with it, and we get a financial crisis because
Speaker 3: of this stuff. And better protection against criminal transactions, and
Speaker 3: a ban on stable coins issued by tech companies and
Speaker 3: other non financial companies. That's saying like, in other words,
Speaker 3: if you want to issue currency, this cryptocurrency, that you
Speaker 3: have to be regulated like a financial institution, because we
Speaker 3: we already did a great depression.
Speaker 4: We did this whole thing before.
Speaker 5: It's not just risk to individuals, it's risks entire the
Speaker 5: entire system.
Speaker 3: Right because you we don't have an opt We don't
Speaker 3: have an option to say, you know what, I don't
Speaker 3: like this crypto stuff.
Speaker 4: I'm not going to get involved with it. It's going
Speaker 4: to get involved with you when it takes the whole
Speaker 4: house parts.
Speaker 5: Death Freed, Silicon Valley Bank, Like, we already have uh
Speaker 5: sort of warning shots that have been fired, so it's
Speaker 5: not insane at all. But of course the reason Kristen
Speaker 5: Jilibran uh and others are interested in advancing this legislation
Speaker 5: is because there's a truly insane amount of money in
Speaker 5: crypto that is now being It's the exact point that
Speaker 5: you're You're like, Warren is out there trying to tell Jolibran,
Speaker 5: what are you doing? There's so much right now as
Speaker 5: the corruption is washing over the state. It was like, well,
Speaker 5: that's why joli Bran is doing it that you can
Speaker 5: be convinced to take an ideological pro crypto stance when
Speaker 5: people are throwing millions and millions of dollars at you
Speaker 5: and promising to be great allies for you going forward.
Speaker 3: And the best talking point for it is okay, look
Speaker 3: we lost Crypto's here to stay, yeah, which is kind
Speaker 3: of terrible talking point if you ask me, because like,
Speaker 3: you know, it don't sounds rather weak to just give
Speaker 3: up like that. Because you're the United States of America.
Speaker 3: You can you can, you can do big things. But okay,
Speaker 3: let's pretend you can't. Say blockchain is here to stay.
Speaker 3: Blockchain is an amazing technology. Come on, you serious, really, blockchain.
Speaker 5: We don't need to debate blockchain.
Speaker 4: Whatever, good luck to us.
Speaker 5: Exactly, that's the only place that we can leave it.