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 the show.
Speaker 3: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 3: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 3: 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 3: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 3: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 3: dot com.
Speaker 1: Good morning, everybody, Happy Tuesday. Have an amazing show.
Speaker 4: For everybody today. There it is Ryan Brow Show.
Speaker 1: People Live for the Pound.
Speaker 3: I have to say it now at this point, it's
Speaker 3: a mantra. It's Religion's that's what people want.
Speaker 4: We need to do one of those videos about our
Speaker 4: self care room. Yeah, and in the morning we're journaling and.
Speaker 3: Then our self care routine is not nearly andrewman Huberman
Speaker 3: approve or waking up in the dark.
Speaker 1: You know you're taking care of your kids.
Speaker 3: I'm locked in I'm listening to clips from the Departed,
Speaker 3: drinking diet coke. That's how I start every day, the
Speaker 3: opening monologue that departed from Jack Nicholson.
Speaker 4: Just love it all.
Speaker 3: Right, Okay, let's talk about what we have on the
Speaker 3: show today. We've got the group chat story. This is
Speaker 3: just unbelievable broke yesterday. Literally, the National Security Advisor of
Speaker 3: the United States, Mike Waltz, accidentally ads Jeffrey Goldberg, one
Speaker 3: of the most prolific neo conservative journalists in the United States,
Speaker 3: to a group chat where secret war plans to strike
Speaker 3: Yemen are discussed, and you also see some dissent and
Speaker 3: internal decision making inside the Trump administration. Possibly one of
Speaker 3: the largest breaches in national security. And what do you
Speaker 3: think Ryan decades in terms of accidental breach, it's not
Speaker 3: saying it's like causing lang long standing damage, but in terms.
Speaker 1: Of an own goal, I mean, this is as big
Speaker 1: as it gets.
Speaker 4: It's as comical as it's unbelievable.
Speaker 3: And now they're circling the wagons around this guy, which
Speaker 3: definitely tells us a lot.
Speaker 1: We're gonna talk about Israel. Man, this is a really
Speaker 1: just horrible story.
Speaker 3: One of Ryan's colleagues over at Drop site was killed
Speaker 3: by the IDF just yesterday. He's going to break down
Speaker 3: all the details for that. We're going to talk about Soda.
Speaker 3: That's a story that we did not get to yesterday,
Speaker 3: but is again unbelievable, just showing a bunch of conservative
Speaker 3: influencers online allegedly taking money to pump Big Soda in its
Speaker 3: inclusion in the food stamp program. We're going to talk
Speaker 3: about twenty three and me this is a absolutely crazy story.
Speaker 3: Twenty three meters the company which has some fifteen million
Speaker 3: DNA samples filing for bankruptcy and its samples are basically
Speaker 3: now available to the highest bidder. Huge privacy implications, regulatory implications,
Speaker 3: all of that.
Speaker 1: Then we got to talk about bid as people know.
Speaker 3: I'm obsessed with these Chinese evs and the competition and
Speaker 3: basically what it says about our market here in America.
Speaker 3: More and more, I'm just watching this social media revolution
Speaker 3: happen where YouTubers and other car influencers are showing people
Speaker 3: that basically like astounding performance capability of these evs, and
Speaker 3: it's showing up now in BYD data. It also shows
Speaker 3: us a lot in their profits, shows us a lot
Speaker 3: about how far behind we are here in the United States.
Speaker 3: And then finally, Jefferson Morley, one of the most pre
Speaker 3: eminent journalists on the JFK assassination, he's going to join us.
Speaker 3: He's had several days now to digest the JFK file,
Speaker 3: so we can say there's no quote smoking gun. There
Speaker 3: probably never will be. But he has done the best
Speaker 3: job that there is of putting all the breadcrumbs together
Speaker 3: and he can tell us a cohesive narrative.
Speaker 4: So I'm really excited to tell you. And I was
Speaker 4: talking to him last night, you know, and he thinks,
Speaker 4: and I agree with him. The most interesting things to
Speaker 4: come out of this or the fully declassified Selessenger memo,
Speaker 4: and also the Angleton testimony that he gave in nineteen
Speaker 4: seventy seventy five. This is a guy who's basically handling
Speaker 4: the Israel file. He was working on the Castro assassinations,
Speaker 4: and now we have his full testimony from this seventy
Speaker 4: five hearing. Here you go. It's not going to tell
Speaker 4: us exactly who shot Kennedy, but it's interesting stuff about
Speaker 4: our history.
Speaker 1: Right Well, that's you know, it's funny.
Speaker 3: There's a conservative influencer YouTuber out there who recently went
Speaker 3: viral for saying I don't care who killed JFK's like, yeah,
Speaker 3: it's interesting. I'll just say it's Benchapiro, So like, yeah,
Speaker 3: I think it's interesting, but you know, it's he was
Speaker 3: shot in nineteen sixty three, and it's like, yeah, but
Speaker 3: you know something, Oliver Stone when we had him here
Speaker 3: on the show really hit home for me. It's it's like, yeah,
Speaker 3: it is history, but the reason it matters is because
Speaker 3: the knife's turn of that history let us down a
Speaker 3: catastrophic path, and the one that we can still rediscover
Speaker 3: of JFK's basically the American University speech, the peace speech, affectively,
Speaker 3: the one that got him killed, if you believe that,
Speaker 3: is really a legacy of somebody who himself had seen
Speaker 3: the inside of the deep state, he had seen how
Speaker 3: it almost destroyed him. His presidency wanted to take a
Speaker 3: different path for after the devastation of the Cuban missile
Speaker 3: crisis and how that mentally affected him, a man who
Speaker 3: literally swam miles with a life strap, a life veest
Speaker 3: strap in his teeth from the bar with a broken back,
Speaker 3: trying to save people who saw the face of what
Speaker 3: war actually means and instead, his murder leads to the
Speaker 3: war in Vietnam. I mean, the written Nixon, a decade
Speaker 3: of millions dead in Southeast Asia, the prolongation of the
Speaker 3: Cold War for multiple decades. So yeah, I think, Sorry,
Speaker 3: mister Shapiro, I do think it's still the Yeah, it
Speaker 3: matters a lot.
Speaker 4: And people will wave away that history and say that
Speaker 4: it's just a fairy tale about Camelot, But right, it's plausible.
Speaker 3: There's great avidute. No one's saying the guy was Jesus Christ. Okay,
Speaker 3: he had a lot of issues.
Speaker 1: You can go.
Speaker 3: Actually, some of the best parts that the JFK files
Speaker 3: for me is going and reading all those South Vietnam
Speaker 3: assessments and how deeply they are. They're like, oh, Ninden
Speaker 3: whatever is doing this and a previo assassination and they're like,
Speaker 3: oh in this province, this governor is saying, and you're like,
Speaker 3: oh my god. I mean, it's worse than I even
Speaker 3: imagine in terms of the puppet mastery of trying to
Speaker 3: you this fake experiment of South Vietnam the entire time,
Speaker 3: and they just would not give up if anything showed
Speaker 3: us how ideological it really was. So sure he was
Speaker 3: responsible for that, but he was starting to have different
Speaker 3: thoughts there near the end, and I think that's what
Speaker 3: got him killed. So anyway, let's get to the group chat,
Speaker 3: shall we. This is just unbelievable. Like I said, Jeffrey
Speaker 3: Goldberg the the most pre eminent neo conservative journalist in
Speaker 3: the United States, There's no question, beat the drums for
Speaker 3: the Iraq war, beat the drums for Obama bombing Iran.
Speaker 3: Actually believe that might be his most shameful episode is
Speaker 3: whenever He basically was a cutout for the Net and
Speaker 3: Yahoo government to try to put pressure on Obama to
Speaker 3: the BOMBA.
Speaker 4: He wrote a cover story within six months, right to
Speaker 4: bomb exact Ron.
Speaker 3: This was all designed, you know, basically to push in
Speaker 3: the Obama administration in a direction of wanting to bomb
Speaker 3: n That's not even me saying it. Ben Rhodes and
Speaker 3: others basically said the same thing.
Speaker 1: At the time.
Speaker 4: They're like, this is ludicrous.
Speaker 1: Some of us. Don't forget here.
Speaker 3: Jeff of course he's also written all these stories since
Speaker 3: the Suckers and Losers hoax.
Speaker 1: If you will, he could believe it if you want to.
Speaker 3: I don't know what to tell you if you do,
Speaker 3: But if you want to believe that that's the person
Speaker 3: who wrote it. He did some famous interviews there with Obama.
Speaker 3: But Trump in particular hates Jeffrey Goldberg specifically because of
Speaker 3: this whole suckers and losers stories. So there's really no
Speaker 3: where he said a bunch of like that Trump called
Speaker 3: some veterans, that's right.
Speaker 4: One.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he said that the people were killed during role
Speaker 3: allegedly said that according to John.
Speaker 4: Kelly, and everybody involved says that he didn't say that.
Speaker 3: Except for John Kelly, who was the chief of staff,
Speaker 3: who also hates Trump and can't camp in and gets him,
Speaker 3: so okay, and he decided not to go on the
Speaker 3: record about it until three years later.
Speaker 1: So you can decide that.
Speaker 4: Trump saying something crass about veteran tho.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean it's possible.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying it's not possible, but it's one of
Speaker 3: those where, look, I just think.
Speaker 1: It would have compied.
Speaker 3: Point is Trump hates them, Trump hats all right, So
Speaker 3: there's really no good reason for a national security advisor
Speaker 3: to have this guy's cell phone number. And here's the
Speaker 3: inside story from Jeffrey Goldberg about how this all went down.
Speaker 1: He was all over television last night. Let's take a look.
Speaker 5: The Houthis are not going to know about this for
Speaker 5: another couple of hours, and you know about it, well
Speaker 5: what I know about it? And I'm thinking myself, I mean, honestly,
Speaker 5: I'm thinking to myself, well, I'm glad that Mike Waltz
Speaker 5: didn't invite a HOUTHI into the group, or a Russian
Speaker 5: spy or an adversary of the United States. But put that,
Speaker 5: put that aside. I'm reading this and I'm wondering, not
Speaker 5: only why am I reading this, but why would the
Speaker 5: Secretary of the Treasury need to know the precise attack
Speaker 5: sequence of this upcoming operation. Again, I don't want to
Speaker 5: talk about weapons, systems, packages, targets in any specificity, because
Speaker 5: you know, I just I'm trying to be I want
Speaker 5: to be a responsible person and I'm more interested in
Speaker 5: the decision making anyway than i am in the.
Speaker 4: Actual technical details of it.
Speaker 5: But the thing is just very flum mixing to me,
Speaker 5: because I haven't seen this kind of unseerious behavior before.
Speaker 5: And you know, and the secondary defense, all due respect,
Speaker 5: in that presentation seems like a person who's unseerious and
Speaker 5: is trying to deflect from the fact that he participated
Speaker 5: in a conversation on an unclassified commercial messaging app that
Speaker 5: he probably shouldn't have participated in, and.
Speaker 4: There are receipts for it, which is always the danger
Speaker 4: of that.
Speaker 3: So the receipts, as we said, let's go and put
Speaker 3: these up there on the screen. You can't make this
Speaker 3: shit up, you really can't. So Goldberg gets added to
Speaker 3: this group chat. This group chat ends up having JD. Vans,
Speaker 3: Pete Hegsath, Marco Rubio, Telsea Gabbert, Steve Wickcoff, Steven Miller,
Speaker 3: Mike Waltz. Mike Waltz by the way, according to Goldberg,
Speaker 3: and this is not disputed by the White House, who
Speaker 3: says this is an authentic chain where decisions were made,
Speaker 3: adds Jeffrey Goldberg. Here where the full discussion and debate
Speaker 3: around bombing Yemen and the who theies is all taking place.
Speaker 3: So the first message here is from JD. Vance at
Speaker 3: Pete Hegsath, if you think we should do it, let's go.
Speaker 3: I just hate bailing eure Ape out again. Let's just
Speaker 3: make sure our message is tight here. If there are
Speaker 3: things that we can do upfront to minimize risks to
Speaker 3: Saudi Oil, facilities we should do, so let's go to
Speaker 3: the next one. Please, Pete hexav VP share, I fully
Speaker 3: share your loading of European free loading. It's pathetic, but
Speaker 3: Mike is correct. We are the only ones on the
Speaker 3: planet on our side of the ledger who can do this.
Speaker 3: Nobody else is even close. Question is timing. I feel
Speaker 3: like now is as good a time as any given
Speaker 3: POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes. I think we should go,
Speaker 3: but POTAS still retains twenty four hours of decision space.
Speaker 3: Steven Miller quote, as I heard it, the President was
Speaker 3: clear green light, but we should soon make clear Egypt
Speaker 3: in Europe what we expect in return. We need to
Speaker 3: figure out how do we enforce such a requirement.
Speaker 1: Eg.
Speaker 3: If Europe doesn't remunerate, then what if the US successfully
Speaker 3: restores freedom of navigation at great cost? There needs to
Speaker 3: be some further economic game extracted in return. And what
Speaker 3: we did not have here is that before these messages
Speaker 3: there was actually some descent from JD Vance where he said,
Speaker 3: quote three percent of US trade runs through Suez, forty
Speaker 3: percent of European does. There is a real RISKBLIC does
Speaker 3: not understand this or why it's necessary. The strongest reason
Speaker 3: to do this, as Potas said, is to send a message.
Speaker 3: Vance continues.
Speaker 1: I am not.
Speaker 3: Sure the President is aware how inconsistent this is with
Speaker 3: his message on Europe. Right now, there's a further risk
Speaker 3: that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil.
Speaker 1: I am willing to support the.
Speaker 3: Consensus of a team and keep these concerns myself, but
Speaker 3: there is a strong argument for delaying this a month,
Speaker 3: doing the messaging work on why this matter, seeing where
Speaker 3: the economy is, etc. So a lot of things being
Speaker 3: revealed there behind the scenes. Number one, there's only one
Speaker 3: voice actually in the group chat, Ryan, who seems to
Speaker 3: have any sense or reason, Who's like, hey, why does
Speaker 3: this matter? Actually for us? It seems to matter a
Speaker 3: lot for Europe. There's a little country with the name
Speaker 3: I whose name is also not mentioned there about who
Speaker 3: it's super important too, but not all that important for us? Right,
Speaker 3: Why are we doing this? Could shoot up oil prices?
Speaker 3: It's not consistent with the Europe message. And the best
Speaker 3: part is that Mike Waltz in the chat is the
Speaker 3: one who's like some brain dead neoliberal being like, but
Speaker 3: freedom of navigation is so how important? You know, like
Speaker 3: really like empire or unipolar moment type stuff. So you
Speaker 3: get ideological divisions very clearly happening in the group chat.
Speaker 3: You get also, though, just the sheer incompetence and idiocy
Speaker 3: of a person who adds accidentally a journalist to a
Speaker 3: group chatal and.
Speaker 4: It was Mike Waller.
Speaker 3: There's no disputing this. That's why I want people to understand.
Speaker 3: The NSC has come out and said this is an
Speaker 3: authentic chain, and the chain of events in which it
Speaker 3: happened is how it happened. Mike Wallace accidentally adds Jeffrey
Speaker 3: Goldberg to this chat where he's basically lurking and watching
Speaker 3: this debate happen, and then, according to Goldberg, sharing the
Speaker 3: war plans or the strike package or whatever. Pete Hegseth
Speaker 3: has disputed that, and we're going to get to that
Speaker 3: in a little bit.
Speaker 1: But let's say, even if.
Speaker 3: There was no classified information that was being discussed there,
Speaker 3: to add accidentally a journalist to highly sensitive internal deliberations
Speaker 3: over a wartime maneuver of bombing a foreign country is
Speaker 3: just insane in any normal administration.
Speaker 1: He's fired yesterday, not even fired.
Speaker 3: He resigns for the good of the president and yet
Speaker 3: this is where we are Ryan, So it's an show.
Speaker 4: And it's it'd be one thing if he's like US
Speaker 4: trade representative, right, who was apparently who was trying to add, Yes,
Speaker 4: he's national security advice. He's you got to be good
Speaker 4: at that stuff, especially when you're he's in the thread
Speaker 4: talking about how his opsec is on point. Yes, It's like, bro,
Speaker 4: you just tweeted to a journalist or she just yeah,
Speaker 4: d M. Journey that your object is tight, your op
Speaker 4: sect is tight. But I will give jd vance credit, Like,
Speaker 4: I think his argument is a little bit uh silly.
Speaker 3: But he didn't understand who we're talk about exactly. He's exactly,
Speaker 3: he's existent within the magnet framework.
Speaker 4: If I were making the argument to not bomb Yemen,
Speaker 4: I would make the same argument. Because this is to
Speaker 4: those guys. I wouldn't come in and be like, well, actually,
Speaker 4: the hoho Thi's are correct here right in the in
Speaker 4: the sense that it is there right under the now
Speaker 4: and their obligation under the Geneva Inventions to stop a
Speaker 4: genocide that they see unfolding. They have told Israel to
Speaker 4: continue to allow the flow of medicine, food, and water
Speaker 4: into Gaza and that is their obligation on their genief conisies.
Speaker 4: Therefore we should not bomb. That's not the argument I
Speaker 4: would make to this gang of warmongers. I would say
Speaker 4: exactly what Jada Van said. Let's couch this in the America. First,
Speaker 4: we hate Europe's stuff, which and the one reason I
Speaker 4: say it's such a silly argument. I understand tactically why
Speaker 4: he made it. But from the silliness perspective, two things
Speaker 4: A Europe didn't really have anything to do with the crisis.
Speaker 4: Like Europe passively supports the US's support of Israel, and
Speaker 4: half or more of those countries send weapons and depth
Speaker 4: diplomatic support to Israel. So they're on the hook, but
Speaker 4: they're not driving this train. The United States and Israel
Speaker 4: are driving this train. But the more important point, which
Speaker 4: never got discussed in this conversation over signal, is that
Speaker 4: their plan has no intention of even working. Right their plan,
Speaker 4: the missiles they send will blow up, they will hit buildings,
Speaker 4: they will kill people like so that part of it
Speaker 4: will work. But the idea that it was going to
Speaker 4: get the Hoothies to stop the blockade was never discussed. Yes,
Speaker 4: because it wasn't going to happen.
Speaker 1: It's literally impossible.
Speaker 3: Today was the blockade is still happening, that's right, And
Speaker 3: if it was possible to bomb them out of his business,
Speaker 3: then Biden would have done it, okay, and then the
Speaker 3: Saudis would have done it before them.
Speaker 1: We're not the first people to make.
Speaker 4: An amazing quote from Biden when he was bombing Yemen,
Speaker 4: a reporter asked him about it. Remember he said, are
Speaker 4: the strikes working?
Speaker 6: No?
Speaker 4: Will they continue?
Speaker 3: Yes?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Okay, got it.
Speaker 3: I mean, you know, in his dementia addled mind, he
Speaker 3: was actually honest for once. So here's the first reaction
Speaker 3: here from Pete haig Seth after he lands on the
Speaker 3: ground in Hawaii immediately after the story breaks.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 7: You're talking about a deceitful and highly discredited so called
Speaker 7: journalists who's made a profession of pedaling hoaxes time and
Speaker 7: time again, to include the I don't know the hoaxes
Speaker 7: of Russia Russia Russia, or the fine people on both
Speaker 7: sides hoax or suckers and losers hopes. So this is
Speaker 7: the guy that pedals in garbage.
Speaker 4: This is what he does.
Speaker 7: I would love to comment on the Houthie campaign because
Speaker 7: of the skill and courage.
Speaker 8: Of our troops.
Speaker 7: I've monitored very closely from the beginning, and you see,
Speaker 7: we've been managing four years of deferred maintenance under the
Speaker 7: Trump administration. Our troops, our sailors were getting shot at
Speaker 7: as targets, our ships couldn't sail through, and when they
Speaker 7: did shoot back, it was purely defensively or at shacks
Speaker 7: and Yemen. President Trump said no more. We will re
Speaker 7: establish deterrence, we will open freedom of navigation, and we
Speaker 7: will ultimately decimate the Houthis, which is exactly what we're
Speaker 7: doing as we speak, from the beginning overwhelmingly.
Speaker 1: So that's basically all he had. You can tell he's
Speaker 1: pretty upset about all this.
Speaker 4: You know, he's playing a Trump He's playing he's Remindingelbert Well.
Speaker 3: Actually, that's a great point, is that on television he's like, Hey,
Speaker 3: by the way, you know their person who Mike Wallace
Speaker 3: had this phone number for was the guy who made
Speaker 3: up this story, or at least reported this story, who
Speaker 3: you believe is made up. And yeah, he's messaging there.
Speaker 3: But I can tell you this, inside the administration, people
Speaker 3: are furious with Mike Waller. It's basic competence, like it's
Speaker 3: one thing if you accidentally do it, you know, with
Speaker 3: your friends or whatever. What we are told from this
Speaker 3: administration is what we're firing tens of thousands of federal workers.
Speaker 3: We're dozing the government to make it more efficient and
Speaker 3: only the best of the best. Wilson meritocracy. I believe
Speaker 3: in meritocracy. I believe in excellence. Nothing about this screams
Speaker 3: meritocracy or excellence. It just screams absolute stupidity. And there's
Speaker 3: a different word I could use, but I won't work.
Speaker 3: Right now, here's Donald Trump's reaction, pulling the old RBG.
Speaker 3: You're telling me for the first time. Here, let's take
Speaker 3: a listen the present.
Speaker 9: Your reaction to the story of The Atlantic that said
Speaker 9: that some of your top account officials and aids have
Speaker 9: been discussing very sense of material from signal, and it
Speaker 9: included an Atlantic report for that. What is your response
Speaker 9: to that?
Speaker 10: In our opinions, I don't know anything about it. I'm
Speaker 10: not a big fan of The Atlantic. It's to me
Speaker 10: it's a magazine that's going out of business. I think
Speaker 10: it's not much of a magazine, but I know nothing
Speaker 10: about it. You're saying that they had what.
Speaker 9: They were using signal to ordate on sets of materials and.
Speaker 10: Having to do with what, having to do with what?
Speaker 4: What were they talking about?
Speaker 3: Who?
Speaker 1: Who?
Speaker 8: Did you mean the.
Speaker 10: Attack or the hood is, Well, it couldn't have been
Speaker 10: very effective, because the attack was very effective. I can
Speaker 10: tell you that I don't know anything about it. You're
Speaker 10: telling me about it for the first time.
Speaker 1: You tell me about it for the first time.
Speaker 4: And by the way, can we get a definition for
Speaker 4: the word effective that somehow doesn't include accomplishing its mission?
Speaker 4: That's what nobody in the media is talking about that.
Speaker 1: Why would they because they like bombs to go off.
Speaker 4: Right, The strike didn't do the thing they said it was.
Speaker 4: He's like, oh, it's going to create a deterrent, it's
Speaker 4: gonna decimate the who he's and it's going to restore
Speaker 4: freedom of navigation. Strike one, Strike two, Strike three. None
Speaker 4: of those things happened. All you did is share your
Speaker 4: signal chat. That's Jeffrey Goldbrough. Let me tell you something,
Speaker 4: and you and blew up the construction of an oncology center. Right.
Speaker 3: There is a secondary story here where Goldberg is like
Speaker 3: a confirmed CIA spook.
Speaker 4: Because that's what he should find of a journalist?
Speaker 3: What kind of a journalist gets added to the American
Speaker 3: bat okay, gets added to a secret chat, refuses to
Speaker 3: publish or even report on the specifics of the strike,
Speaker 3: voluntarily leaves the chat, and then alerts the people being like, hey,
Speaker 3: was this real? You don't leave, bro, You stay forever
Speaker 3: until they kick your ass out, because then who knows
Speaker 3: what better information that you could get?
Speaker 4: Yeah, and you let your colleague that's right, your colleague geat.
Speaker 4: But what you do is right. Story, according to a
Speaker 4: source with direct source with.
Speaker 3: Direct knowledge in the meeting, Yeah, plans reviewed by The
Speaker 3: Atlantic tell us this this is And then, by the way,
Speaker 3: the people in the administration are gonna freak out.
Speaker 4: And then make them figure out. Yeah, and they're like, how.
Speaker 3: Did this happen? And you're gonna be a knife fight inside.
Speaker 3: It be glorious to be honest. And then actually they
Speaker 3: probably discussed leaking in the chat, and you get even
Speaker 3: more information about that's what somebody who's actually good at
Speaker 3: their job does, somebody who's not not competent does.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're right, it's not about competence.
Speaker 3: It's basically like even the way he's like, I'm not
Speaker 3: going to disclose the strike package or whatever.
Speaker 1: I'm like, why not?
Speaker 8: Okay?
Speaker 1: I mean, look, they literally brag about this ship on video.
Speaker 1: They publish a video.
Speaker 3: Showing the ship that or the yeah, the guided missile
Speaker 3: destroyer that's launching the missis You think I can't go
Speaker 3: on Wikipedia and see what kind of armaments they have
Speaker 3: over there?
Speaker 4: And if the Hohothies find out what brand of oh yeah, flying,
Speaker 4: that's they're gonna be able to Oh right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I forgot that the Hoothies have a very sophisticated
Speaker 3: anti missile detection, right, know, what are we doing here?
Speaker 1: So Goldberg is an idiot.
Speaker 3: And you're still he's just such an obvious, just like
Speaker 3: just such an obvious, like CIA cutout. This is Ken
Speaker 3: Klippenstein's been going off on this and everybody's praising Jeffrey.
Speaker 4: Goldberg, but oh he didn't publish the war plans.
Speaker 1: I'm like, what are you doing?
Speaker 6: Bro?
Speaker 3: You know when we had those Discord files, I got
Speaker 3: my hands on those over here at breaking points. Yeah,
Speaker 3: I didn't publish them like word for word until later,
Speaker 3: but we did all the reporting on the inside, you know,
Speaker 3: in the way that Glenn covered the Snowden documents. You
Speaker 3: want to do it responsibly, Okay, you don't want anybody,
Speaker 3: and even then I think you, being within your rights,
Speaker 3: just upload it if you want to. I actually would
Speaker 3: not criticize anybody for doing that. But you don't want
Speaker 3: to take any of the hits about, oh, you're in
Speaker 3: endangering national security or whatever.
Speaker 1: So just what do you do, Ryan?
Speaker 3: Whenever you publish classified information, you take it, you review it,
Speaker 3: and then you publish whatever's newsworthy within it.
Speaker 1: They're still going to scream that it's dangerous to national security.
Speaker 3: But as long as you take some responsible you know
Speaker 3: stuff here, I actually do think it's in the public
Speaker 3: interest to tell us how exactly they went this down.
Speaker 3: According to Goldberg, they had the specific names of the
Speaker 3: people that they wanted to target. I would go, hey,
Speaker 3: maybe you should publish those names, and then did they
Speaker 3: kill them or not? Because if they didn't with a
Speaker 3: two hundred dollars, that's pretty interesting, isn't it, I'll tell
Speaker 3: us a lot about our It's a good chance they didn't,
Speaker 3: because there's a very good chance that they do exactly.
Speaker 3: So that's just a lot to say there about journalism itself.
Speaker 3: Our own Emily cracked the case, she's the first person
Speaker 3: to do so about how exactly Jeffrey Goldberg got into
Speaker 3: this group chat in the first place.
Speaker 1: Let's put her tweet up here on the screen quote.
Speaker 3: My soft theory is that Walts thought he was adding
Speaker 3: the US Trade Representative Jamison Greer, who had the name
Speaker 3: JG in his context, and that has now been confirmed
Speaker 3: by the New York Post.
Speaker 1: So let me explain.
Speaker 3: The US Trade Representative is a member of the National
Speaker 3: Security Council. It's called the Principals Committee. It's everybody but
Speaker 3: the President of the United States. Mike was spelled wrong,
Speaker 3: which yeah, which, by the way, Mike well spelled wrong.
Speaker 1: That's a whole other level.
Speaker 3: Thank you for reminding me of that. We're dealing with
Speaker 3: the best of the brise here, folks.
Speaker 1: So JG.
Speaker 3: He clearly in his phone has Jamison Greer, who is
Speaker 3: the US Trade Representative, saved as JG. He also, according
Speaker 3: to Jeffrey Goldberg, recently got into contact with Jeffrey Goldberg. Now,
Speaker 3: why would you recently get into contact with Jeffrey Goldberg.
Speaker 3: You're Neil Kahn, who is now mister america first National
Speaker 3: Security Advisor, and you're now having the phone number of
Speaker 3: mister Goldberg. That's interesting, and so you accidentally add said
Speaker 3: JG to the group chat.
Speaker 1: Nobody checks.
Speaker 3: You've got Marco Ruey, got the Secretary of State, got
Speaker 3: the entire national security and you got Scott Best, and
Speaker 3: you got Steve Whitkoff in there.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the.
Speaker 3: Highest highest level of national security decision making, and the
Speaker 3: level of incompetence here from Waltz is again just unbelievable,
Speaker 3: especially when you are firing tens of thousands of people
Speaker 3: under the assumption that they're dead weight. I'm looking at
Speaker 3: the deadest weight I've ever seen here at the top
Speaker 3: of the Principles Committee.
Speaker 1: Not to mention.
Speaker 3: Somebody who is genuinely stupid, not just for doing this,
Speaker 3: but listen to his messages. Mike Wallace sitting there, Like
Speaker 3: I said, he's like repeating some religious mantra about freedom
Speaker 3: of navigation. This guy doesn't have a single original thought is.
Speaker 4: In his entire head. It's crazy to watch, And there's
Speaker 4: a lot of people kind of pearl clutching about the
Speaker 4: nature of the security breach. But it turns out there
Speaker 4: may actually have been like an actual breach. So Witkough,
Speaker 4: who is a real estate developer. Yes, so this guy
Speaker 4: not a guy that you can imagine has even two
Speaker 4: factor on his phone, you know, let alone you know,
Speaker 4: his phone on lockdown mode or taking the types of
Speaker 4: op SEC that you would need to be doing as
Speaker 4: somebody in his position and power. He was in Moscow
Speaker 4: when he got added to this signal check right, So
Speaker 4: if the Russians were anywhere near him hitting him with
Speaker 4: one of those little you know, there's like I was
Speaker 4: in Doha ones and somebody's going around with the backpack
Speaker 4: and they're like, oh, there's one of those backpacks that
Speaker 4: like gobbles up that data and I didn't. When I
Speaker 4: went to do I didn't bring my phone smart, I
Speaker 4: brought a burner phone and left my laptop at home.
Speaker 4: I'm not because just being in proximity to some of
Speaker 4: this stuff that you don't know. Plus, Pegasus can just
Speaker 4: drop on all your phone number.
Speaker 1: They don't have anything drops drop on.
Speaker 3: You don't even have to click the link and then
Speaker 3: they're in and then they can read everything you read.
Speaker 4: So, yes, signal is secure from the NSA from the outside,
Speaker 4: but if they're on your phone, so did they get in?
Speaker 4: I don't know, like they legitimately actually might have gotten in.
Speaker 4: It would have to have been good spycraft on the
Speaker 4: part of the Russians to like go after Witcough immediately.
Speaker 3: But if they did, they then they got it. Wouldn't
Speaker 3: you assume that they're doing You would think, you would think.
Speaker 3: And by the way, this is another thing. This is
Speaker 3: all on their personal devices. Just so everybody knows, you're
Speaker 3: not even allowed to have signal. It's not allowed. You
Speaker 3: can't download signal on your government phone. I confirmed this
Speaker 3: with multiple people who have had top secret security clearances,
Speaker 3: and I was like, Hey, tell me how this is
Speaker 3: all supposed to work, and they're like, dude, if I was,
Speaker 3: you know, I remember I covered the Hillary email scandal
Speaker 3: back in twenty sixteen. I actually wrote a story about
Speaker 3: a Navy sailor who accidentally had shared photos when he
Speaker 3: was on a nuclear submarine. He didn't even reveal any
Speaker 3: class fighting. They threw his ass literally in the brig
Speaker 3: he was. He was prosecuted, he served time in the brig.
Speaker 3: So the people I spoke to were like, yeah, if
Speaker 3: I was at whatever E three in the Navy and
Speaker 3: I did this, I would be prosecuted. And these guys
Speaker 3: are doing it at the highest level of government and
Speaker 3: not to and then even if you're going to do it,
Speaker 3: be subtle about it. Okay, let's also be honest as
Speaker 3: you and I know half the government's run on signal
Speaker 3: why to get around the Freedom of Information Act and
Speaker 3: the Presidential of Sports.
Speaker 1: It is, let's be honest. It's more convenient.
Speaker 3: I got everybody going to a stripe, right yeah, exactly
Speaker 3: who's going to skif they it's the weekend.
Speaker 4: Right yeah?
Speaker 3: Send email on your It's called high side. That's how
Speaker 3: it works.
Speaker 1: The high side.
Speaker 3: You can only access we can only access it inside
Speaker 3: of a skiff. Probably giving away too much.
Speaker 4: Here whatever, and I'm here.
Speaker 1: I don't have a security clearer.
Speaker 3: It's it's one of those where and people do have
Speaker 3: a right to know about how this stuff actually works
Speaker 3: in the backside. So the reason why they do it
Speaker 3: is because, like you said, it's more convenient. It's got
Speaker 3: disappearing messages, et cetera. But you know the downside of
Speaker 3: that is, as usual, what what does the hacker do
Speaker 3: whenever the system is impenetrable, you do you find the
Speaker 3: weakest Like and.
Speaker 4: Here he didn't mean have to find anything.
Speaker 3: He just let his own stupidity and incompetence give all
Speaker 3: this away.
Speaker 4: And the savage the savvy cybersecurity guys will always say
Speaker 4: that the problem with the system is when it becomes
Speaker 4: too inconvenient for users. Yes, that's right, and you know,
Speaker 4: so you'll have like, you know, the two factors. People
Speaker 4: have figured that out, authenticator codes. People are basically figuring
Speaker 4: that out. But back in the day when you used
Speaker 4: to have like you know, PGP and downloading keys and
Speaker 4: uploading this, and it became so cumbersome that people basically
Speaker 4: stopped using it and went back to insecure channels. So
Speaker 4: the government has these you have to be on a
Speaker 4: particular laptop or that you have to be you have
Speaker 4: to leave your cell phone and go into a room
Speaker 4: that has lead walls around it. And people are like, well,
Speaker 4: I can't do that.
Speaker 1: I'm busy.
Speaker 4: I like to do war on a weekend and I'm
Speaker 4: going to the Eastern Shore rightly, so sorry, I'm just
Speaker 4: going to do it on signal.
Speaker 11: Right.
Speaker 3: Won't somebody think about Mike Wallas in his ability to
Speaker 3: go to his kid's birthday party. I mean, you know,
Speaker 3: somebody's got to speak up for those.
Speaker 4: Folks, not like the war can wait for Monday.
Speaker 1: It's especially ironic.
Speaker 3: Look, you know, I don't have to be a shit
Speaker 3: lib to say this, Like, didn't you we not forget
Speaker 3: about the whole butter emails thing?
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean the emails presidential email singgne was bad.
Speaker 4: It was bad.
Speaker 1: I wrote about it.
Speaker 3: He wrote about it too. Let's go and put this
Speaker 3: up there on the screen. Here's a tweet from mister Wallace.
Speaker 3: June twelve, twenty twenty three. Biden, sitting National Security advisor,
Speaker 3: sent top secret messages to Hillary.
Speaker 1: Clinton's private account. What did the DOJ do?
Speaker 9: It?
Speaker 1: Not a damn thing?
Speaker 3: Oh okay, let's go to the next one. It's from
Speaker 3: Telsea Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence. Any unauthorized release of
Speaker 3: classwide information is a violation of law.
Speaker 1: It will be traded as such.
Speaker 4: I look forward to that, exactly.
Speaker 1: I look forward to that. A nine. This is even better.
Speaker 3: So inside the Pentagon, there's a witch hunt right now
Speaker 3: for people who are leaking class wide information. Nancy Yusef
Speaker 3: covers the Pentagon for The Wall Street Journal's Great Reporter.
Speaker 3: She says, this seems like a good time to point
Speaker 3: out DD just released a memo saying they were going
Speaker 3: to use polygraphs to find unauthorized disclosures. And then finally,
Speaker 3: of course, what do we have right now? Press Secretary
Speaker 3: Caroline Levitt releases a statement as President Trump said the
Speaker 3: attacks on the Hoothy has been highly successful and effective.
Speaker 3: President Trump continues to at the utmost confidence is national
Speaker 3: security team, including National Security Advisor Mike Wallace. Now does
Speaker 3: that mean that he is golden?
Speaker 1: Is he safe?
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't go that far yet.
Speaker 3: There's a lot of discussion right now here in watch
Speaker 3: the group chats, the actual group chats, the secure ones
Speaker 3: that we're not in are flying. From what I'm told,
Speaker 3: people inside the White House are absolutely furious with Mike
Speaker 3: walls but they may And what I'm watching right now
Speaker 3: is a downplaying of this by Maga Fox News is
Speaker 3: Jesse Waters is defending him, being like, yeah, it's bad,
Speaker 3: it was a mistake. It won't happen again. But it's
Speaker 3: not like having a private email server or classified documents
Speaker 3: next to your corvette in your garage.
Speaker 1: I'm like, no, dude, it's kind of this.
Speaker 4: It's kind of way worse.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's If anything, it might be worse.
Speaker 4: If they found war plans and Hillary's email Are you
Speaker 4: kidding right?
Speaker 3: It was just like appointments with like like ambassadors or whatever.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 4: And just so people understand the context here of this
Speaker 4: internal battle and why it's playing out. Mike Waltz is
Speaker 4: the what do you call the anti America First coalition. Yes,
Speaker 4: he's in the faction of the administration that is more hawkish,
Speaker 4: more pro war yep than the America First section that
Speaker 4: is organized around say Pete Hegeth and Jamie Vance, who
Speaker 4: are more skeptical of war.
Speaker 8: Yes.
Speaker 4: And so that's why you're going to see, you know,
Speaker 4: by an effort to weaponize this in a way that
Speaker 4: in the past you wouldn't even had to weaponize it.
Speaker 4: Like you said, the guy would just resign.
Speaker 3: Yes, ass people who screw up like this understand last time.
Speaker 4: Hey, they're gonna get charged.
Speaker 3: This is even just this has take the ideology out
Speaker 3: of all of this. In Washington, there is a creed.
Speaker 3: The creed is the staffer is never the story. And
Speaker 3: when the stafford becomes a story, you have violated the
Speaker 3: sacred creed. So here you have a staffer who is
Speaker 3: breach national security classified information strike one that's immediately a
Speaker 3: fireable sense. Two, done something so stupid you now create
Speaker 3: a problem for your boss, okay, and then three you're
Speaker 3: actually caught having been in communication and obviously leaking to
Speaker 3: a reporter who your boss hates.
Speaker 1: Any one of those three is completely.
Speaker 4: A fire And I tweeted this yesterday, but a source
Speaker 4: who's familiar with what's going on here inside the administration
Speaker 4: said that that is the running understanding that he was
Speaker 4: in regular communication with Goldberg, and that Goldberg then so
Speaker 4: then people are a, well, why would Goldberg out him?
Speaker 4: This is what a journalist does. Yeah, it's good story,
Speaker 4: a good story, and he has other sources. Yeah, that's right,
Speaker 4: he doesn't need you solo at this point. He done
Speaker 4: something so dumb he would assume that it would be
Speaker 4: dumb enough to keep him around so he can just
Speaker 4: cultivate the next nation.
Speaker 3: And also he had no choice. Also, yeah, what's he
Speaker 3: going to not report this? I agree, you have to
Speaker 3: do it. If you have it, you got to do it. Okay,
Speaker 3: let's get over today. Israel block Ryan, tell us what's
Speaker 3: going on.
Speaker 4: Israeli military killed two journalists yesterday and what were both
Speaker 4: deliberate targeted strikes? One Mac Budmontsor was killed with his
Speaker 4: family in his home. The other, Hasam Shabbat, was killed
Speaker 4: while driving in his car. Hosam Shabbat was a contributor
Speaker 4: for drops Site. He had been in communication with Sharif
Speaker 4: A Del Cadus, his editor at drop Site, within just
Speaker 4: hours of having been assassinated, going over edits for his
Speaker 4: latest story, which was which we published yesterday afternoon. We
Speaker 4: can put this up on the screen and we'll have
Speaker 4: Sharif on the program tomorrow to talk more about Hossam's
Speaker 4: life and death. Sharif is joining Democracy now where he
Speaker 4: previously worked as as a correspondent, so you can check
Speaker 4: out his interview, which should be up later this morning.
Speaker 3: We'll also have him on tomorrow. Hosam is from Northern
Speaker 3: Gaza and.
Speaker 4: Was only twenty three when he was assassinated. If you remember,
Speaker 4: northern Gaza suffered the worst of the genocidal assault by
Speaker 4: Israel throughout the war. It was the first place that
Speaker 4: where people were displaced down to the south, and Shabbat
Speaker 4: was one of the very few journalists who both refused
Speaker 4: to leave and refused until yesterday to die so that
Speaker 4: he could bear witness to the ongoing assault on his people.
Speaker 4: There we can put up this element. There's been a
Speaker 4: lot of images that have been going around of Hosam.
Speaker 4: This is the moment when the ceasefire was you know,
Speaker 4: finally implemented back in January and the feeling of euphoria
Speaker 4: to have survived this genocidal assault. Here is another video
Speaker 4: that's that's been going around, which is a young girl
Speaker 4: stops him because you know, he had become a true
Speaker 4: hero to so many throughout Gaza for his relentless willingness
Speaker 4: to you know, run toward the fire to report what
Speaker 4: was what was going on. And so here is this
Speaker 4: young girl who's telling him that she had heard that
Speaker 4: he had been martyred, uh and it was devastating to
Speaker 4: her that hope, hope had drained from her when she
Speaker 4: had heard that rumor, because you know, there would be
Speaker 4: a lot of rumors that he had been killed because
Speaker 4: he was put on a literal hit list by the
Speaker 4: IDF before before he was finally assassinated for her, so
Speaker 4: when she saw him in person to realize that he
Speaker 4: was he was still there, still still steadfast, still reporting.
Speaker 4: She was telling him it was giving her hope that
Speaker 4: she could pursue her dream of becoming a journalist so
Speaker 4: she could speak the truth. And underneath it all is
Speaker 4: this this poignant belief that if the world only understood
Speaker 4: what was happening in Gaza, that the world, whatever the
Speaker 4: world is, that the world would step in, that the
Speaker 4: that there's that there's no way that we live in
Speaker 4: a on a planet that would allow this to happen.
Speaker 4: That the only explanation, the only way that you can
Speaker 4: rationalize the decency of humanity is that people just don't know.
Speaker 4: And so therefore you go out and you risk your
Speaker 4: life to make sure that people know, and then people
Speaker 4: will step in and say this is wrong, this has
Speaker 4: to stop. I think a lot of people, Hosam, I
Speaker 4: think towards the end have come to the conclusion that
Speaker 4: that may not be true, that the world does knows,
Speaker 4: nobody's going to stop it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, in your discussions with him, was he aware that
Speaker 3: he was going to be targeted by these Oh yes military?
Speaker 4: Oh yes, they publicly they publicly announced that they intended
Speaker 4: to target him in five other journalists. And what's the
Speaker 4: just they were saying that the same justification that they
Speaker 4: use that he's a terrorist, right, which is like he's
Speaker 4: twenty three years old. He's been live streaming his life
Speaker 4: since October seventh. When did he have time to do
Speaker 4: this secret terrorism? Yeah?
Speaker 3: So yesterday they say over six months ago he was
Speaker 3: roll within Hamas, was exposed to us here on x
Speaker 3: he carried out all of his actions under the cover
Speaker 3: as an al Jazeer journalist, and yesterday he was eliminated
Speaker 3: by the IDF. Don't let the press vest confuse you.
Speaker 3: He was a terrorist. Here's a document published in October
Speaker 3: of twenty twenty four proving his participation in.
Speaker 4: Hamas utter absurdity.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what is the just get.
Speaker 4: What is they just they just make stuff up? Yeah,
Speaker 4: they just they constantly make things up. You know with
Speaker 4: other journalists they've they've said that they were terrorists when
Speaker 4: they were seven years old. None of it, none of
Speaker 4: it makes any sense. And it doesn't it doesn't have
Speaker 4: to make sense.
Speaker 3: Like the.
Speaker 4: Any any journalist who gets any level of international attention
Speaker 4: is a target. And I say, what, like if you
Speaker 4: they have actually tried to put up some evidence and
Speaker 4: it just all falls apart.
Speaker 3: Yeah, my friend Trey Yanks over at Fox News ironically
Speaker 3: has been well, let's say what the only American mainstream
Speaker 3: vidia voice who's been speaking out for pals. Fox News reporter, Yes,
Speaker 3: he deserves old friend Redding consistently yeah, well there go.
Speaker 4: Yeah, we cover the White House White House together for him,
Speaker 4: and he very consistently speaks out.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he said, you know, Palestinian journalist Mohammed Matsur and
Speaker 3: Hassam Shabbat were killed by Israel today in Gaza. One
Speaker 3: hundred and twenty four journalists were killed around the world
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty four, two thirds of them were Palestinian.
Speaker 3: As he says, journalists must be protected amid war. You know, look,
Speaker 3: he has very little power, he can't really do anything
Speaker 3: about it. But people need to understand he's a Jerusalem
Speaker 3: based correspondent for Fox News. He is really military, can
Speaker 3: kick his ass out anytime that they want or not
Speaker 3: invite him on their little press tours inside of Gaza.
Speaker 3: So he's doing this at a literal risk to his
Speaker 3: life inside of Israel, considering the you know, like the
Speaker 3: the animosity and the way that you'll have governments ancstoring
Speaker 3: violence if they want to against any American who's inside
Speaker 3: of the country and basically just hoping, you know, there's
Speaker 3: enough of us out here in the you know, world
Speaker 3: superpower who might speak up for him or for.
Speaker 4: People to like and including twenty twenty three and also
Speaker 4: twenty twenty five. You're now at two hundred and eight
Speaker 4: media workers, which includes camera people and others who have
Speaker 4: been killed in Gaza. Yeah, since since since the start
Speaker 4: of the war. And yes, Trey has been criticized every
Speaker 4: time he stands up, and he continues to do it.
Speaker 4: I wish that more journalists would would do so because
Speaker 4: israel Is feels a deep sense of impunity, but not
Speaker 4: a complete and total sense of impunity. And so their
Speaker 4: ability to kill more than two hundred members of the
Speaker 4: media over the past year and a half plus and
Speaker 4: only get criticism from US here and from Trey, has
Speaker 4: emboldened them to continue to do it and to put
Speaker 4: people on a list and say we're going to kill them,
Speaker 4: to then kill them, and then to announce that they
Speaker 4: killed them and say that they did it because they're terrorists.
Speaker 3: At the very same time, Ryan, we got this from
Speaker 3: the Financial Times, curious for what your reaction is. Quote
Speaker 3: Israel Ready, let's put it up there on the screen.
Speaker 3: Israel Ready's plans for the occupation of Gaza.
Speaker 1: So what is military like?
Speaker 3: What is distinctive of this as opposed to previous quote occupations?
Speaker 3: Is this like settlement or is this you know, they've
Speaker 3: had invasion, they've had troops on the ground, obviously, I
Speaker 3: forget the name of the corridor that they've occupied. What
Speaker 3: makes this like a next step in the military campaign.
Speaker 4: So what they are saying is they're going to clear
Speaker 4: out huge areas of it and keep everybody in the
Speaker 4: sell Malwassee corridor, which would cannot hold the number of
Speaker 4: people that they're saying would fit in there. They have,
Speaker 4: but they have also created a basically department of Ethnic cleansing,
Speaker 4: a Ministry of Ethnic Cleansing that is going to facilitate
Speaker 4: this is what the agency says it's going to do,
Speaker 4: facilitate the removal of Palestinians from Gaza. So the idea
Speaker 4: would be that maybe you can't fit all of the
Speaker 4: Palestinians who are there now, well, they're going to continue
Speaker 4: killing them for some period of time. They're going to
Speaker 4: continue dying of malnourishment. You know, there has been no
Speaker 4: food that has gotten in since March second, and then
Speaker 4: they're going to keep the rest cramped in here Now,
Speaker 4: this does not account for how they plan on eliminating Hamas,
Speaker 4: which they failed to do after you know, a year
Speaker 4: and a half long campaign. It doesn't account for the tunnels,
Speaker 4: it doesn't account for the lack of kind of reservists
Speaker 4: and manpower.
Speaker 12: On which they are having major problems with, and it
Speaker 12: doesn't account for ammunition, like they fired off so much,
Speaker 12: you know it, so many tank shells and so many
Speaker 12: one five millimeter shells in this genocide so far that
Speaker 12: they're running.
Speaker 4: You know, they've been able to replenish in the meantime,
Speaker 4: but our production capacity is not unlimited, and they're firing
Speaker 4: it off at a pace that is higher than we
Speaker 4: can produce and that Pakistan and anybody else can secretly
Speaker 4: produce for them. So it's it's a sketch, it's an idea,
Speaker 4: and it's closer to a plan than the Israeli government
Speaker 4: has put out so far, which is previously has been
Speaker 4: zero plan, just going to continue this until American tells
Speaker 4: them to stop. But it has so many you know,
Speaker 4: gaping holes in it that the only way you could
Speaker 4: see it be successful is with a you know, massive
Speaker 4: scale depopulation of the of the area, which obviously is
Speaker 4: the vision, but whether or not they can achieve that
Speaker 4: remains to be seen.
Speaker 3: Why don't you tell us now about this uh no
Speaker 3: other Land situation?
Speaker 4: Yeah, my god, yeah, put this, put this next element
Speaker 4: up and and this news came out within you know,
Speaker 4: it felt like an hour or two? Was that within
Speaker 4: hours of a learning that our our drops dropsie colleague
Speaker 4: and m kills So Hamden Ballal, the co director of
Speaker 4: No Other Land, as reported by Yuvale Abraham, his his
Speaker 4: co director was lynched by a group of settlers. Now
Speaker 4: it appears that they did not kill him, beat him,
Speaker 4: beat him ruthlessly. He was able to get into an ambulance.
Speaker 4: The IDF then or some security force has stopped the
Speaker 4: ambulance and dragged him out and took him to detention.
Speaker 4: And as often happens, the victim of this attack becomes
Speaker 4: the one that then literally gets interrogated and charged with
Speaker 4: something related to the attack.
Speaker 3: So can we put the image of him up on
Speaker 3: the screen just identify for people who aren't familiar with
Speaker 3: the god.
Speaker 4: So that's you've you've all on the far right, and
Speaker 4: that's uh, that's Hamden there to his to his left,
Speaker 4: there bald bald headed gentleman.
Speaker 8: There he was.
Speaker 3: This is in the United States of America. He was
Speaker 3: Los Angeles. So he was here a few weeks ago
Speaker 3: on the stage of his oscar, accepting.
Speaker 4: This for a documentary, making the case that these violent
Speaker 4: settlers are illegally uprooting people from their land. And then
Speaker 4: he goes back to his land and the violent settlers
Speaker 4: continue trying to uproot him from his land, which goes
Speaker 4: to the point we're making about impunity that this this
Speaker 4: because there used to be at least this sense that, okay,
Speaker 4: this is a person that the West cares about. There
Speaker 4: are millions of Palestinians, you know that we could that
Speaker 4: we can kill or disappear. But there's a handful that
Speaker 4: the West has heard of, and so we're going to
Speaker 4: leave them alone. Right too, not even follow that norm
Speaker 4: anymore suggests how far that the society is going because
Speaker 4: and the settlers, the settler society is leading. That's that's
Speaker 4: the leading edge of this kind of and.
Speaker 1: We have ada of this attack.
Speaker 3: This was released by Yuvon Abraham, the co director of
Speaker 3: the film Guys, why don't we go ahead and play
Speaker 3: some of that so people can see I mean it's
Speaker 3: like out of a movie. If the group of these
Speaker 3: settlers that literally are throwing stones and you know, attacking him,
Speaker 3: as you said, after he's attacked, what he is then
Speaker 3: arrested in the ambulance by the Israeli security forces right right,
Speaker 3: and then taken into custody for basically no reason other
Speaker 3: than what was the gentation?
Speaker 1: They didn't even give one.
Speaker 8: There were some the.
Speaker 4: Allegations that there were some Palestinians who were throwing threw
Speaker 4: some stones back, and so that may be would be
Speaker 4: the I mean, being Palestinian, right and getting attacked is
Speaker 4: enough to get you arrested.
Speaker 3: Here is the latest update from you all as we
Speaker 3: are filming. He says he is now free and is
Speaker 3: about to go home with his family. But I mean,
Speaker 3: it's pretty insane ordeal, and it's very likely, as you said, Ryan,
Speaker 3: that he was likely only freed because of the international
Speaker 3: attention on his case. This is just minutes ago according
Speaker 3: to you all, Abraham, he says, after being handcuffed all
Speaker 3: night and beaten in a military base, Handan is now
Speaker 3: free and is about to go home to his family.
Speaker 8: So that's the update.
Speaker 4: We've partnered with you'vall too yeah, drop site. You've all's
Speaker 4: had an absolutely incredible run of journalism broken some of
Speaker 4: the some of the biggest stories on idea of war crimes,
Speaker 4: the use of AI to choose and then execute on targets,
Speaker 4: which is as dystoping a thing as you can imagine,
Speaker 4: Like you just feed information into this AI and it
Speaker 4: looks at names, and then and then with a vague
Speaker 4: like sign off, you see a building collapse.
Speaker 3: Okay, and then final thing because you know you talked
Speaker 3: about the film, but you watch this film.
Speaker 4: I haven't seen it yet.
Speaker 1: Oh sorry, At the very least like.
Speaker 4: Hard to see here in the United States Oscar.
Speaker 3: You can barely ask you about that, So why don't
Speaker 3: you tell us about the difficulty of being they have.
Speaker 4: They have basically been unable to find a serious distributor
Speaker 4: in the United States that is willing to run this
Speaker 4: high profile OSCAR winning documentary that is at least half
Speaker 4: produced by Jewish Israelis.
Speaker 3: So think about like, right, and then remember the mayor
Speaker 3: of Miami Beach to try to shut down a theater
Speaker 3: that played.
Speaker 4: The document and not blocked the theater from playing it. Yeah,
Speaker 4: shut down the theater down. He has backed off of
Speaker 4: that at the very end we took it was weeks
Speaker 4: later he backed down. It's like he's like, that's the
Speaker 4: kind of thing you back down from within five minute.
Speaker 4: It's in a civilized society. He for weeks was like, Yeah,
Speaker 4: I'm gonna get this theater. It's unbelievable. And is it
Speaker 4: available on streaming? Do you know that's a good question.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I'm sure you can find it, right, I
Speaker 3: remember talk I forgot I totally forget his name. The
Speaker 3: person who did it's Brian Something. He did the the
Speaker 3: documentary on Jamal ka Shogi, if you'll recall, and he
Speaker 3: also did Icarus, so he was an Oscar winner. Yeah,
Speaker 3: he did Icarus, huge hit. Then he did his next
Speaker 3: movie on Jamal Kashowgi, and he couldn't get Netflix or
Speaker 3: anybody because he distributed exactly because Amazon and Netflix all
Speaker 3: these other people of all this business in Saudi Arabia,
Speaker 3: and people had to go and pay nineteen ninety nine
Speaker 3: or whatever on Amazon Prime just to rent the movie
Speaker 3: right just to be able to watch it.
Speaker 4: So I think that it looks like you may be
Speaker 4: able to pay eight ninety nine on Prime.
Speaker 8: Okay, but I get it.
Speaker 1: It's a little different.
Speaker 4: That's great that What that means is that it's not
Speaker 4: they did not license it is out included in your
Speaker 4: prime you have to spend on top of it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, uh, insane story. Our producers brought it to light.
Speaker 3: One of our producers, Griffin, made a good point here
Speaker 3: is it's going to be Will anyone in Hollywood speak,
Speaker 3: Will the Academy speak up?
Speaker 4: You know, for one of their Oscar winners?
Speaker 3: Will anyone in Hollywood who was you know, ostensibly met
Speaker 3: this man, was on a stage with him.
Speaker 4: Washed probably you know, probably went to a party. I mean,
Speaker 4: he's a literal Oscar winner here. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So yeah, in insane situation that this.
Speaker 4: All Adam McKay and Hassan Piker will are the only
Speaker 4: Los Angeles residents you're from. I'm sure.
Speaker 1: Good point. All right, let's turn to soda.
Speaker 3: Now this we wanted to cover this yesterday, but we
Speaker 3: just talked too long with Glenn Greenwald, So we got
Speaker 3: to get this in here. Let's put it up there
Speaker 3: on the screen. A little mini scandal erupting. This is
Speaker 3: from en Tribalism in politics. Great account actual, by the way,
Speaker 3: and he says conservative and influencer are selling their souls.
Speaker 3: I'm going to add a allegedly there to soda lobbyists
Speaker 3: for a few extra bucks.
Speaker 1: So yeah, they go to keep soda on Snap.
Speaker 3: Anyone backing this is not MAHA or make America health
Speaker 3: a gran make America healthy again. Their anti health, anti truth,
Speaker 3: and anti kids. It's time to expose the grifters trying
Speaker 3: to hijack the MAHA movement. So who is he talking
Speaker 3: about here? Let's go and put these up there on
Speaker 3: this screen, and what you guys can see in front
Speaker 3: of you are a series of tweets made by some
Speaker 3: pretty big conservative accounts. Let's go to the next part please,
Speaker 3: just to show people where they basically all boil down
Speaker 3: to the same talking points.
Speaker 1: Quote.
Speaker 3: Efforts to restrict Snap purchases takes away the autonomy of
Speaker 3: the consumer to make their own decisions. This is an
Speaker 3: example of government overreach, but an example of why people
Speaker 3: should strive not to be dependent on the government at all.
Speaker 1: Go to the next one.
Speaker 3: So these are all like pretty large accounts actually which
Speaker 3: you know significant following, et cetera. All of them just
Speaker 3: all seem to have the same language government overreach. They
Speaker 3: want to restrict a new war on soda, has begun
Speaker 3: targeting purchases made through Snap. This from Ian Miles Chong.
Speaker 3: I don't believe it's the government's role to decide what
Speaker 3: people should or shouldn't eat.
Speaker 4: Now, look, why did you say the government? Yeah, does
Speaker 4: not live here?
Speaker 1: That's right? Yeah, good point?
Speaker 4: What government?
Speaker 3: We need to make America a place where right wing
Speaker 3: influencers just live in America?
Speaker 5: Is it too much to ask?
Speaker 1: Is it too much to ask?
Speaker 4: All right? I guess, I mean it fits with my
Speaker 4: nationalist belief So I'm glad you agree with I mean,
Speaker 4: have a little light xenophobia.
Speaker 3: Ok, that guys, it's not xenophobic to just say, bro,
Speaker 3: you don't live here. You live in Islamic theocracy.
Speaker 4: Bro, Like, what are you? Why are you telling me
Speaker 4: about Snap? All right? Go find Jolo. That's what you
Speaker 4: should be focused. The government. Yeah yeah, the government. Yeah,
Speaker 4: the government is your government.
Speaker 1: You're Malaysian.
Speaker 3: Yeah, go and find find to find We'll give you
Speaker 3: a citizenship, give us jolo. All right, that's that's my
Speaker 3: DEMENTI If you don't know what I'm talking about, million yeah,
Speaker 3: that's right. For people who don't know what we're talking about.
Speaker 3: Billion dollar wall, isn't there a documentary on this yesh, yeah,
Speaker 3: watch the documentary.
Speaker 4: Read more importantly than on the run, I'm inute.
Speaker 1: The book is.
Speaker 4: Oh, that's right, you are in it.
Speaker 3: Because I texted you about it and I was like,
Speaker 3: oh my god, Ryan's and this Jolo documentary. Guys have
Speaker 3: to watch it. The book is unbelievable. It's genuinely unbelievable.
Speaker 3: That's just a side note. So Nick sorder great journalist.
Speaker 3: He uncovered what this all is. Let's put this up
Speaker 3: there on the screen. He shows us direct screenshots quote.
Speaker 3: These influencers were given a couple of templates to use
Speaker 3: by quote Influenceable. One of those templates specifically tells them
Speaker 3: to mention Trump's diet coke habit. This was done to
Speaker 3: invoke an emotional response from loyal Trump supporters, making them
Speaker 3: feel as if banning soda from snap snap is the
Speaker 3: food stamps program would be anti Trump. This is an
Speaker 3: incredibly dirty tactic meant to manipulate loyal followers. And you
Speaker 3: can actually see there's these soda bands and government over regulation,
Speaker 3: and it says up at the top the campaign highlights
Speaker 3: the dangers of government overregulation. The narrative emphasizes how such
Speaker 3: regulation is an overreach that unfairly targets consumer choice, key
Speaker 3: resources Trump with diet Coke image, and he goes on
Speaker 3: to say that these influencers were texted by Influenceable telling
Speaker 3: them to help push back against government overreach and told
Speaker 3: that they would be paid between several hundred and even
Speaker 3: one thousand dollars for each post, attempting to turn MAGA
Speaker 3: folks against RFK Junior and Maha.
Speaker 1: Now again, whatever you think.
Speaker 3: About this whole soda thing, you might even agree, right,
Speaker 3: I suspect that you do agree. I don't fear that
Speaker 3: you're getting paid a thousand rucks by the big soda
Speaker 3: lobby to say what you think. And you would think,
Speaker 3: you know, maybe I'm naive. I've never been paid to
Speaker 3: post literally anything in my entire life, and so, you know,
Speaker 3: I just thought that we all just post what we're thinking,
Speaker 3: you know, and then we all make our money in
Speaker 3: the way that we do our job.
Speaker 1: But for some people, this is their job, you know.
Speaker 3: I just thought that, at least in politics, again naively,
Speaker 3: you usually do it by building up an audience, telling
Speaker 3: people what you think, criticize whatever you know. But it's
Speaker 3: not like fashion. It makes sense that a fashion influencer
Speaker 3: will be paid by fashion companies, but here you're literally
Speaker 3: watching under the table deals to post political opinions and advocacy,
Speaker 3: specifically for the purpose of trying to shape government regulation.
Speaker 3: So it actually tells us a lot both about the
Speaker 3: right wing ecosystem where so many of these people are
Speaker 3: genuinely for sale. Also a thousand bucks what will come on?
Speaker 1: You know you guys make that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it goes a long way in Malaysia, not for
Speaker 3: the rest. It's like, really, you're not making money elsewhere.
Speaker 3: I know all of your people, I know how you're
Speaker 3: making money. You making money, You're doing speaking fees and
Speaker 3: all this other stuff. So I guess this fits into that.
Speaker 3: But it's like, is it really worth it, you know,
Speaker 3: being outed as a joke like this, because why should
Speaker 3: anybody ever trust any of you ever?
Speaker 4: Again?
Speaker 3: And now you know, you just can't help but notice
Speaker 3: and continue about how many of these campaigns are so
Speaker 3: obviously organized behind the scenes. Maybe whenever it applies to
Speaker 3: a foreign country, you know, I might be noticing some
Speaker 3: of that as well. Very interesting. Everybody always seems to
Speaker 3: be on script. Sometimes the script is real and they
Speaker 3: actually believe it. But it's pretty it's just obvious in
Speaker 3: this case, and again allegedly for some of those people
Speaker 3: hasn't been confirmed, but they haven't denied it either, that
Speaker 3: they're being paid to do this. The policy implications of
Speaker 3: it are actually important because there it is an ongoing
Speaker 3: fight within the MAHA movement to try and remove unhealthy
Speaker 3: food and soda from the food stamp program. And again,
Speaker 3: we can have a big political fight about it if
Speaker 3: we want to, but we should at least have some
Speaker 3: good faith. I would think online that these people aren't
Speaker 3: getting paid to post their opinions, and they obviously are.
Speaker 6: So.
Speaker 3: Anyway, if you saw any of those accounts, you should
Speaker 3: asking questions, ask them some questions.
Speaker 4: Yeah, right, which other of your opinions?
Speaker 8: Yeah?
Speaker 4: Which other ones you've been have paid for it? Right?
Speaker 9: That this is?
Speaker 1: Do you believe this is really?
Speaker 8: Literally?
Speaker 4: And then there's going to be a troll farm underneath
Speaker 4: all of these paid for by the Soto lobby that
Speaker 4: will be like Ian is so right, it's based?
Speaker 6: Yes?
Speaker 4: Great? Great? Take Yeah. On the On the policy itself,
Speaker 4: I have an unpopular opinion on this probably you know,
Speaker 4: I grew up on food stamps and I hate any
Speaker 4: nanny state humiliation of the poor. I just I say
Speaker 4: I want poor people to be treated like human beings
Speaker 4: like everybody else, and that if other people are allowed
Speaker 4: to buy terrible things, they should be able to buy
Speaker 4: terrible things. Now, I would say, let's.
Speaker 3: Start with I mean, you can buy terrible things with
Speaker 3: your own mind. You could buy anything you want with
Speaker 3: your own.
Speaker 4: Mind, I know, because America just cares so deeply about
Speaker 4: the poor.
Speaker 3: Okay, but but this is separate argument, right, which is
Speaker 3: we can care more about the poor, which.
Speaker 4: It's just about. Well, yeah, the then increase the snap benefit,
Speaker 4: you know, help help actually help people out. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I feel very torn about it.
Speaker 3: The food system is obviously the number one culprit here
Speaker 3: that the people who designed all of this in the
Speaker 3: first place to make it so.
Speaker 4: Stop the subsidies of the sugar industry, right, well, why
Speaker 4: do we you both right?
Speaker 1: And that's what I would say, would say, Okay, we'll
Speaker 1: send the subsidies.
Speaker 3: Let's make it so that the soda programs and others
Speaker 3: aren't even available in what high schools and others. I
Speaker 3: remember reading about the word to keep soda in high school.
Speaker 3: It's the craziest thing I've ever seen.
Speaker 4: Yes, yeah, that's completely insane, right. I think if you
Speaker 4: want to use government policy to make America healthy, do
Speaker 4: it for everybody. Yeah, I agree with that. And so
Speaker 4: then tax, you know, put a tax on sugar stuff
Speaker 4: and take this literally, because Florida is so important to
Speaker 4: our politics, sugar gets massive amounts of subsidies. And it's
Speaker 4: not just because Florida is important. It's also because the
Speaker 4: sugar lobby then uses the money and buides off politicians.
Speaker 4: Just just literally get rid of the subsidy and make
Speaker 4: sugar compete, Like why do we like you? Flip the
Speaker 4: box over and look at added sugars. It's like, really, cheese,
Speaker 4: its needs added sugars. Like cheese, its will be fine
Speaker 4: without the added sugars. Good luck. Go through the grocery
Speaker 4: store and try to find something that doesn't have added sugars,
Speaker 4: like whole wheat bread. Flip the whole wheatbread over. It's
Speaker 4: like added sugars, Like, oh my god, why are you
Speaker 4: adding sugar to wheat bread?
Speaker 3: It is Look it's have I could cause your subsidized
Speaker 3: to do it. It's it's not just upsy though. This
Speaker 3: is where it's on the consumer as.
Speaker 4: Well, and I don't think you consumer's on. They go
Speaker 4: into a lab and they figure out what makes your
Speaker 4: brain go big, Yes and no.
Speaker 3: But I mean the thing is is that if you
Speaker 3: just look at the amount of processed food that we
Speaker 3: consume now, it is just exponential compared to the past.
Speaker 1: In fact, I think that's the right.
Speaker 3: But that's not because that's not because consumers led a
Speaker 3: movement and we're like, well, that is more processed food.
Speaker 3: We're responding a bit to consumer choice. Like the truth is,
Speaker 3: you can eat healthy if you want to, you just
Speaker 3: have need time. And the people think what people don't
Speaker 3: have is time. And it's very cook Cooking is a
Speaker 3: pain in the ass.
Speaker 1: You can do it, you know.
Speaker 3: It's actually quite cheap if you want to. But the
Speaker 3: point the problem is that it takes a lot of
Speaker 3: the slow people are busy the crockpot. Yeah, you can
Speaker 3: crock pot it up.
Speaker 4: It's not that hard.
Speaker 3: But again it's about intention and brain space, which most
Speaker 3: people are busy and they don't have the time, or
Speaker 3: you have two parent households who are working. I don't
Speaker 3: blame anybody out there if you put something in the microwave,
Speaker 3: and even working for twelve hours a day. And let's
Speaker 3: say your husband's on a night shift and you're on
Speaker 3: the day shift and you're the sole caregiver. Listen, I'm here,
Speaker 3: I'm here for you. I'm with you. I'm not going
Speaker 3: to lecture you and tell you, oh, it's so easier whatever.
Speaker 3: I totally agree we should design the system to change
Speaker 3: things a little bit.
Speaker 4: Snap should cover diapers, it should cover medicine, like SNAP
Speaker 4: should be Snap should be able to cover things that
Speaker 4: you really need. Are they not other programs?
Speaker 10: Well?
Speaker 1: Diapers?
Speaker 4: I know that's a big one about silent all. Like
Speaker 4: your kid's got one hundred and four fever and they
Speaker 4: want fifteen dollars for this bottle of tile and all
Speaker 4: that they keep behind the lock and key, and you
Speaker 4: can't use your benefits for it. What good is being
Speaker 4: able to but you can use soda. See that's where
Speaker 4: That's where I am.
Speaker 3: Like the things that are included in that are very
Speaker 3: obviously part of very obviously included as part of a
Speaker 3: lobbying campaign that has been very successful over the last
Speaker 3: several years.
Speaker 4: So we'll return to the story. Like air, there's like
Speaker 4: a hot food thing. You can't get hot food, but
Speaker 4: I thought you could. There's a loophole where I've seen
Speaker 4: him in seven to eleven before. Well, there's various loopholes
Speaker 4: where if you can buy it cold but then it's heated.
Speaker 1: Oh that's right, that's right.
Speaker 4: So like this, I used to be able to get
Speaker 4: shrimp because you'd get the shrimp cold. Yeah, but then
Speaker 4: they'll steam it for you. Yes, that's right.
Speaker 1: Publics will do that. I think people always say, so
Speaker 1: that was a great public that would be covered.
Speaker 4: But if it's already steamed, forget it. It's not for
Speaker 4: you for it.
Speaker 3: Let's get over to twenty three and me. I definitely
Speaker 3: wanted to include the story in here. This has touched
Speaker 3: a nerve everywhere. So twenty three and Me. The company
Speaker 3: obviously very famous. It popularized the whole DNA testing thing
Speaker 3: to see your heritage. People found lost relatives, and there
Speaker 3: were great stories ancestry dot com. Well, now we're seeing
Speaker 3: the downside of some decades long voluntarily millions of people
Speaker 3: just giving DNA samples to private companies. Private companies have
Speaker 3: the ability to just sell it off if they want.
Speaker 3: They don't necessarily keep your data all that secure. They
Speaker 3: claim that you can have your data deleted? Is it
Speaker 3: really deleted? Well, now the company is going into bankruptcy,
Speaker 3: and its bankruptcy means that its assets. The only valuable
Speaker 3: thing on its balance sheet is what your DNA. If
Speaker 3: you submitted your DNA there our own James Lee did
Speaker 3: a video about it. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 6: Heads up, if you've ever given your DNA to twenty
Speaker 6: three and meters, you should probably go and delete that
Speaker 6: right now. This morning it was announced that twenty three
Speaker 6: and meter filed for bankruptcy and that it's CEO and
Speaker 6: with Jeki was resigning. Twenty three and me is, of
Speaker 6: course the DNA testing company. They said that this morning.
Speaker 6: Twenty three and me shares dropped more than fifty percent
Speaker 6: in early trading after the company filed for bankruptcy late Sunday,
Speaker 6: blah blah blah, shareholder value whatever. Here is what's actually alarming.
Speaker 6: Quote twenty three and Me's global database has grown into
Speaker 6: a virtually unprecedented repository of human genetic information that can
Speaker 6: now be sold in bankruptcy proceedings.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 6: The privacy statement of twenty three and meters says that,
Speaker 6: quote if they are involved in a bankruptcy merger acquisition, reorganization,
Speaker 6: or sale of assets. Your personal information may be access, sold,
Speaker 6: or transferred as part of that transaction. So what does
Speaker 6: that mean, Well, it means that the DNA that you've
Speaker 6: given them could be scooped up by whoever and used
Speaker 6: in all sorts of crazy ways, things like maybe cloning
Speaker 6: you without your permission. Your DNA could be sold to
Speaker 6: malicious actors who could then use that DNA and leave
Speaker 6: it at crime scenes that you were never at. Of course,
Speaker 6: bioweapons is always a possibility. I mean, okay, those are
Speaker 6: admittedly kind of crazy examples. Maybe they won't happen, But
Speaker 6: then there are those mundane use cases that probably will happen,
Speaker 6: one of which is insurance companies using that DNA data
Speaker 6: to deny you coverage, which is something they'd definitely love
Speaker 6: to do. So if you don't want that, here are
Speaker 6: the instructions on how you could delete your data from
Speaker 6: twenty three and meters past time read.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so, actually, yesterday after the news broke, the d
Speaker 3: twenty three meters website was experiencing problems because so many
Speaker 3: people were trying to delete their data. But you know,
Speaker 3: that's a drop in the bucket if we're being real
Speaker 3: of the fifteen million DNA samples that they have. Regulators
Speaker 3: are starting to take notice. The government of California, let's
Speaker 3: put this up there. The Attorney General is now urgently
Speaker 3: issuing a consumer alert for twenty three and meters customers,
Speaker 3: asking them to take down their genetic data. One point
Speaker 3: somebody made to me Ryan is that this is actually
Speaker 3: really scary because the worst this is the most mundane
Speaker 3: but dystopian use case. Let's say you're a healthcare company
Speaker 3: and you want to decide whether to ensure somebody or not,
Speaker 3: or how to adjust their premiums.
Speaker 1: What would you do me?
Speaker 3: I would buy let's say, genetic repository of fifteen million people,
Speaker 3: and then I would cross reference your name with any
Speaker 3: of the samples of your relatives and see what you
Speaker 3: are genetically predisposed to pre diabetic. Oh, let's add five
Speaker 3: more dollars a month to your premium. You won't even
Speaker 3: notice it. You'll just think that that's your quote. You
Speaker 3: also have something called an LM, which would easily be
Speaker 3: able to use AI and others to scrub those and
Speaker 3: flag let's say the top ten percent of the most
Speaker 3: unsurable people and then do everything you can bureaucratically to
Speaker 3: make sure that those people never become a customer of
Speaker 3: yours and give them a sky high premium whenever they apply,
Speaker 3: or let's say, deny them coverage here or there, and
Speaker 3: you can move things in a direction. And you know,
Speaker 3: if you're let's say United Health Group or Blue Cloth
Speaker 3: Cross or any of these other people, you have market
Speaker 3: caps in the hundreds of billions. This isn't going to
Speaker 3: cost anything to be able to buy this, and the
Speaker 3: potential savings for you in the future sky.
Speaker 4: High, rare. Moment to be a tiny bit grateful to Obamacare,
Speaker 4: which really because before Obamacare there was no ceiling on
Speaker 4: what you could charge for somebody with a pre existing condition,
Speaker 4: and in fact, if you were a cancer survivor, you
Speaker 4: could be straight up told no, we're actually not going
Speaker 4: to ensure you. Obamacare said you can. You basically have
Speaker 4: to keep it within this range and you can't move
Speaker 4: it much. And so, but what they will do is
Speaker 4: they would use this data and move the people that
Speaker 4: they can all the way up up to hear he'd
Speaker 4: be like, oh gee, why how'd that happened? And you
Speaker 4: don't even know because it wasn't even your DNA that
Speaker 4: got tested somebody else's.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, the craziest thing.
Speaker 3: And I really have complicated feelings about this one, right,
Speaker 3: because we all love when the Golden State killer gets caught.
Speaker 1: Oh that's fantastic. It's like, well, how did they do it?
Speaker 3: Well, they took his DNA and they uploaded it to
Speaker 3: like ten different websites, and they found his fourth cousin,
Speaker 3: and they worked his way down from the fourth cousin.
Speaker 1: Down this tree.
Speaker 3: And then we figured out this was the only guy
Speaker 3: who could have done it.
Speaker 4: And you're like, I don't know, man.
Speaker 1: It's pretty creepy.
Speaker 4: That's weird.
Speaker 1: He was just the first.
Speaker 3: There's been multiple killer actually, who are rapists who have
Speaker 3: been caught because by using this DNA database since twenty twenty.
Speaker 3: They're fascinating stories to read, but they do raise a
Speaker 3: lot of questions about privacy, et cetera. And here it's
Speaker 3: a private company. They can do whatever they want with
Speaker 3: this Ryan. Yes, they have to abide by some regulation.
Speaker 3: You have regulators who have to approve any said sale.
Speaker 3: But I mean that healthcare one I just gave. There's
Speaker 3: nothing technically that violates your privacy about that one, right,
Speaker 3: it's just that it would be used for super dystopian ends.
Speaker 3: So it's one of those where look, I never I
Speaker 3: never participated in one of these specifically because I was
Speaker 3: always afraid of things like this, and so I guess
Speaker 3: if they really will delete your data, it's worth trying,
Speaker 3: you know, right now, because this is scary stuff. And
Speaker 3: don't forget that already twenty three and me had been
Speaker 3: hacked previously. Let's put it up there on the screen.
Speaker 3: This was just you know, a few years ago. Yeah,
Speaker 3: February of twenty twenty four, hackers got nearly seven million
Speaker 3: people's data from twenty three and meters. The firm blamed
Speaker 3: users quote for not securing it enough. This was I
Speaker 3: believe it was sold on the dark web or others.
Speaker 3: And there's apparently been allegations that the Chinese government and
Speaker 3: other large data brokerages have been trying and stealing this
Speaker 3: stuff now for years and years. So this is just
Speaker 3: a wake up call really about the entire industry. And
Speaker 3: I hope that everybody pays attention. If you did submit
Speaker 3: your data to one of these, you know, maybe try
Speaker 3: and go and delete it after they've.
Speaker 1: Given what it is, or alert your relatives.
Speaker 3: I know, a lot of elderly people were doing People
Speaker 3: were giving it as gifts because they thought it was fun,
Speaker 3: and I totally get it, you know, for looking back
Speaker 3: into it. But they're real downside here, you know, in
Speaker 3: terms of what this could all become, especially in the
Speaker 3: age of AI. I think it's very scary filming that
Speaker 3: has been flagged to me by multiple different people, and
Speaker 3: I have noticed this one hit a nerve. The twenty
Speaker 3: three and me people are really upset at the idea
Speaker 3: that their you know, most intimate thing about themselves and
Speaker 3: their bodies, their genetics, their family could be used for
Speaker 3: such nefarious purposes. They were assured that this was just
Speaker 3: about ancestry, and now that the company's in bankruptcy, it
Speaker 3: literally they have a fiduciary responsibility to seek the highest.
Speaker 4: Better I think that we should trust whatever company chairman
Speaker 4: she sends out to buy this data to use it
Speaker 4: in a way that is best for the beneficial for mankind,
Speaker 4: mankind and our collective betterment.
Speaker 3: All right, yeah, movie, right, Ryan, Maybe we should just
Speaker 3: surrender to our Chinese overlords, which is a good transition to,
Speaker 3: of course, something that we uh near and dear. Here
Speaker 3: to the show's heart, which is the state of the
Speaker 3: electric vehicle market. It's just unbelievable that the world's greatest
Speaker 3: electric vehicles are not here in the United States, and
Speaker 3: we are being lapped and crushed so deeply that influencers
Speaker 3: and others who are really into cars, who don't even
Speaker 3: think about geopolitics or any of that, are experiencing them
Speaker 3: and posting videos for nerds like me to be able
Speaker 3: to watch and lust after these.
Speaker 1: Look I say this with no pleasure. It gives me
Speaker 1: no pleasure.
Speaker 4: You know what was gives me the pleasure?
Speaker 3: What did the least men to say? She was like,
Speaker 3: it gives me no pleasure to report this that we're
Speaker 3: getting destry.
Speaker 1: They we're getting destroyed.
Speaker 3: Here here's a video of very popular streamer I Show
Speaker 3: Speed otherwise known as Speed, apparently a very popular guy
Speaker 3: here in America, experiencing a Chinese vehicle for the first time.
Speaker 1: Blown away by how fast it is. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 1: Gord called retall us about six seventy thousand dollars.
Speaker 8: Seventy thousand, and it's faster than my Lamborghinea.
Speaker 11: Unfortunately it is an it's electric, all right, So I'm
Speaker 11: doing a little total Let me see, let me see.
Speaker 4: That's all whoa faster than that?
Speaker 3: Bro, ain't no way, yo?
Speaker 1: Maybe a little more up to sevent bro hold.
Speaker 8: On at.
Speaker 4: Yo, ain't no way?
Speaker 9: All right?
Speaker 8: Really yeah, I'm ready. So he calls seventy thousand.
Speaker 3: That's it.
Speaker 4: My Limborghinea calls two hundred fifty thousand dollars.
Speaker 8: Lest planning China costs about one hundred of bit more
Speaker 8: one hundred What the hell?
Speaker 1: It just funny to watch them react there.
Speaker 3: I mean, I guess it's comparable to a Tesla Model
Speaker 3: Sue Plaid in terms of zero sixty speed, but the
Speaker 3: cost differential there is a pretty significant I'm not sure
Speaker 3: what a models Plaid would running these days, probably like
Speaker 3: one hundred thousand, one hundred and twenty thousands of fifty
Speaker 3: thousand dollars cheaper.
Speaker 4: The reason why we're of magnitude more.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I wanted to.
Speaker 3: Highlight this because the sales numbers out of BYD are insane.
Speaker 1: Let's go and put this up there. Just came out yesterday.
Speaker 3: The annual sales have now topped one hundred billion dollars
Speaker 3: as of yesterday. This is the I mean, twenty nine
Speaker 3: percent increase in overall BYD revenue just from last year.
Speaker 4: I can't even think of a car company in the.
Speaker 3: United States because twenty nine percent increase year over year
Speaker 3: in its sales domination one hundred billion dollar level, huge
Speaker 3: percentage of those compared to last year actually being exported
Speaker 3: across the world, it says, quote, Unlike it's US rival Tesla,
Speaker 3: which sells only fully electric vehicles and reported revenue of
Speaker 3: ninety eight billion, China has benefited from the resurgent demand
Speaker 3: in China for hybrid vehicles. This is BYD specifically, And
Speaker 3: I actually thought, that's the most interesting thing that I've
Speaker 3: learned about all of this is their plug in hybrid
Speaker 3: market is just so fundamentally different than ours.
Speaker 1: I looked into it.
Speaker 3: The farthest range of probaug in hybrid you can get
Speaker 3: in the United States, it's something like four hundred or
Speaker 3: so miles. We're talking here about cars that have thirteen hundred.
Speaker 3: Put the next one up there, just to show people
Speaker 3: plug in hybrid with thirteen hundred miles of total range,
Speaker 3: and we're talking.
Speaker 4: This is like a sedan right now. Look at all
Speaker 4: the Alexis that can get six or seven hundred.
Speaker 1: Now, oh, is there I didn't.
Speaker 4: I don't.
Speaker 3: That may not have been available in the US though,
Speaker 3: from what I looked at a car and driver or whatever.
Speaker 3: And you know, Toyota RAB for prime is good at
Speaker 3: get It's got a forty mile electric battery. It's like, okay, cool,
Speaker 3: these guys have three hundred electric mile battery plus a
Speaker 3: eight hundred miles take a gas.
Speaker 4: That's incredible. It means like you don't have to stop.
Speaker 1: It's awesome.
Speaker 3: The point, first of all, put the caveats from a
Speaker 3: lot of the America firsters, like, oh, they're lying about
Speaker 3: their range. EPA range very different than the Chinese range.
Speaker 3: You have to chop thirty five percent. I'm like, okay,
Speaker 3: I'll chop thirty five percent off. It's still double then
Speaker 3: whatever we get over here. It is just obvious now
Speaker 3: every serious industrial person, I speak to, every serious cars person,
Speaker 3: I speak to every serious car reviewer, and all that.
Speaker 1: If you are interested at all in.
Speaker 3: Electric vehicles, the Chinese are kicking our ass. There's just
Speaker 3: no question about it. And their ability to have sales
Speaker 3: and export all across the global market is disrupting a
Speaker 3: core part of American industry, and we just have no
Speaker 3: capability yet for catch up, no plan, nothing, It just
Speaker 3: directly shows the difference in our two economic models. My
Speaker 3: friend Joe Weisenthal has a great statistic, so I actually
Speaker 3: want to read it to all of you.
Speaker 4: It is let's see here, here we go.
Speaker 3: One of the most important facts about the world is
Speaker 3: that in the last fifteen years, China has become the
Speaker 3: global manufacturing powerhouse.
Speaker 4: At the cutting edge of multiple industries.
Speaker 3: But the Shanghai Composite stock index is scarcely above where
Speaker 3: it was in two thousand and nine.
Speaker 4: So our stocks are way up. But is our material
Speaker 4: life all that better? You should ask that question for yourself.
Speaker 4: Our meme stocks are way up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Armies, Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: Let's look at how we got here.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: In the nineteen sixties, LBJ gave a speech about climate change.
Speaker 4: In the nineteen seventies, Jimmy Carter put solar panels on
Speaker 4: the roof of the White House, though Reagan took them
Speaker 4: off amid a massive disinformation and lobbying campaign from big
Speaker 4: oil and big Auto, and they and big oil and
Speaker 4: big Auto spent the next three decades saying, at first
Speaker 4: there was no climate change, and also what we need
Speaker 4: to do is block the EPA from even raising mileage standards,
Speaker 4: so like for a while in the nineties you started
Speaker 4: to actually see mileage standards go up, so we weren't
Speaker 4: getting electric vehicles, but at least like you were getting
Speaker 4: a little bit more per gallon. And that was even
Speaker 4: too much of a threat to the to the oil companies,
Speaker 4: and so they roll that back and then we do
Speaker 4: an entire war in the Middle East to make sure
Speaker 4: we have more oil. Like that is our That was
Speaker 4: the American strategic approach to this recognition that a transition
Speaker 4: was coming. China is like, let's build up a manufacturing
Speaker 4: base using American no how and then build up this
Speaker 4: a dominant electric vehicle manufacturing capacity. And here we are,
Speaker 4: like they can now sell these dope cars for like
Speaker 4: thirteen thousand dollars even with one hundred percent tariff, they
Speaker 4: would be able to sell them here in the US.
Speaker 4: So they're gonna have to like do a two hundred
Speaker 4: percent or they're market complete. I actually looked into it
Speaker 4: because I'm curious. By the way, Yeah, let me do
Speaker 4: this announcement now. I would like, I think it's time
Speaker 4: I need to drive one of these things. I've got
Speaker 4: to So if you have a laun up.
Speaker 3: If you know anybody out there who has a connection
Speaker 3: to a BYD to a zoom, can you drive them
Speaker 3: in the US or do you have to people do
Speaker 3: have them here. I think I forget exactly legally the
Speaker 3: loophole that they're able to import them.
Speaker 4: I think maybe car companies and others.
Speaker 3: I've seen car YouTubers, you know, people who've been able
Speaker 3: to get their hands on at this time, it's now time. Specifically,
Speaker 3: I'm in love with the Yang Wang eight. It's like
Speaker 3: a land Rover Defender style BYD luxury vehicle.
Speaker 4: It's awesome.
Speaker 3: I need to drive it. I need to get my
Speaker 3: hands on any BYD so and maybe I can produce
Speaker 3: one of these videos for the Breaking Points channel. So
Speaker 3: anybody out there please reach out to us if you
Speaker 3: have a line on a byd Ao me. I'll drive
Speaker 3: anything if it's an electric vehicle made in China. I
Speaker 3: just want to see what the competition is like and
Speaker 3: not just have to watch other people's videos. But with that,
Speaker 3: we've got a great guest standing by Jefferson Morley, one
Speaker 3: of the most preeminent journalists on the JFK assassination. He
Speaker 3: was going to break down the files for US.
Speaker 4: One week ago today there was a large release from
Speaker 4: the JFK archive. And you all know who we're going
Speaker 4: to ask to come on to talk about It's our
Speaker 4: friend of the show, Jefferson Morley uh, veteran journalist who
Speaker 4: has been going through these records for many decades.
Speaker 6: Now.
Speaker 4: Yeah, we won't. We don't want to. We don't want
Speaker 4: to date you. It's thank you a couple of years. Yeah,
Speaker 4: it's been a few months at least, and we wanted
Speaker 4: to wait to have you on so that you had
Speaker 4: time to kind of digest. You know, when stuff first
Speaker 4: comes out, you're like, oh wow, look at this. You're like,
Speaker 4: oh wait, they already released this. They just put a
Speaker 4: different date on it and did a different kind of redaction.
Speaker 8: I had that familiar dismal experience.
Speaker 11: Fifteen minutes after the sixty thousand pages of material drop,
Speaker 11: I get a call and somebody say, is there a
Speaker 11: smoking gun? And I say, well, I'm only reading the
Speaker 11: third document of the six So yes, after a week,
Speaker 11: we've had a chance to absorb and figure out what's
Speaker 11: important here.
Speaker 8: So there's a couple of things. You know, we need
Speaker 8: to step back.
Speaker 11: We're not going to get the answer in the day
Speaker 11: people want a smoking gun, I say, don't look for
Speaker 11: a smoking gun, look for a fact pattern.
Speaker 8: Yes, okay, don't push the string of a theory.
Speaker 11: Look for a fact pattern, and let the fact pattern
Speaker 11: tell you what's really going on here. And after sixty years,
Speaker 11: with this very significant disclosure that we got last week,
Speaker 11: the story of what happened in nineteen sixty three is
Speaker 11: becoming clearer. Two documents came out that I think are
Speaker 11: really important, and they kind of set the stage for
Speaker 11: what we're going to learn and what we have learned.
Speaker 11: And you know, I want to caution you people, this
Speaker 11: is a very complicated story. We're talking about covert operations,
Speaker 11: so they're wrapped in official secrecy, they're wrapped in deceptive statements,
Speaker 11: and we're only learning about them many years later. But
Speaker 11: as we learn about them, we do see a new
Speaker 11: fact pattern. So that's one thing. Okay, what are the
Speaker 11: important documents? The first, I think is one that really
Speaker 11: sets the stage. It's a memo that Arthur Schlessinger wrote
Speaker 11: to President Kennedy.
Speaker 1: Is the F two.
Speaker 4: If we can put this out, let's put it up
Speaker 4: on the screen.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 11: The whole page of this document had been secret for
Speaker 11: sixty two years on you can see that on the
Speaker 11: left and on the right it was what we got
Speaker 11: last week. And this is a very significant chapter because
Speaker 11: what's this memo? Kennedy is furious after the Bay of Pigs.
Speaker 11: He felt that the CIA was trying to impose their
Speaker 11: foreign policy on him, and he said, how could I
Speaker 11: have been so dumb? And he raised there's a quote
Speaker 11: that you'll see all the time. I want to split
Speaker 11: the CIA into a thousand pieces and scattered to the winds.
Speaker 11: He said that to a New York Times reporter who
Speaker 11: reported it later. But when Kennedy calmed down, he said, well,
Speaker 11: you know what can I do? And Arthur's Lessons or
Speaker 11: a liberal advisor, said well, what you could do is
Speaker 11: you could reorganize the CIA, and he writes a long
Speaker 11: memo's if you want to do that, mister president, here's
Speaker 11: how you do it, and here's why you do it.
Speaker 11: And this page that was kept secret for sixty years
Speaker 11: really tells the why of what Kennedy wanted to do. Now,
Speaker 11: ultimately Kenny didn't do it right. It's a big job
Speaker 11: to reorganize the CIA. He had other priorities. He decided
Speaker 11: not to do it. But this is an insight into
Speaker 11: his thinking, and it's an insight into his thinking that
Speaker 11: the CIA didn't want anybody to know what that Why?
Speaker 6: What is it?
Speaker 4: What does it tell us?
Speaker 8: It tells us a bunch of things.
Speaker 11: What Cezenger is talking about in this passage is what's
Speaker 11: called controlled American sources. These are American sources that are
Speaker 11: we totally control CIA officers who work for the US
Speaker 11: government in official cover positions. And Selessenger says, you know,
Speaker 11: the CIA is encroaching on your foreign policy. And he says,
Speaker 11: at the time of year inauguration, forty seven percent of
Speaker 11: the State Department political officers around the world were in
Speaker 11: fact CIA office forty seven percent. We knew a lot
Speaker 11: of CIA officers took those cover positions, we didn't know
Speaker 11: half of they had half of them. That's in nineteen sixty,
Speaker 11: I mean, and it made me wonder, what's that figure today?
Speaker 8: And you know what Deep States probably just you know,
Speaker 8: it's a classified secret. So this is very sensitive stuff.
Speaker 11: One hundred and twenty three people were working in the
Speaker 11: Paris embassy were with the CIA, and in there Flessenger
Speaker 11: tells a very telling anecdote in nineteen sixty one, there
Speaker 11: was an attempted coup against French President Charles de Gaul.
Speaker 8: He was trying to pull out of Algeria. Algeria was
Speaker 8: kind of like Vietnam for America.
Speaker 11: It was like this intractable foreign involvement and just ultimately
Speaker 11: we just had to get out. But very divisive at home,
Speaker 11: and so divisive in fact, that the right wing in
Speaker 11: the French government went after de Gaul and they were
Speaker 11: going to overthrow him.
Speaker 8: And the story was that it was known that.
Speaker 11: The CIA station in Paris was on the top floor
Speaker 11: of the US embassy, and the story was the lights
Speaker 11: in the embassy were on all night on the night
Speaker 11: of the of the coup, and de Gaull always thought
Speaker 11: that the CIA was behind that coup. A year later,
Speaker 11: when a group of assassins from the same right wing
Speaker 11: faction try and ambush to Gaull on it when he's
Speaker 11: going to his country house and almost succeed.
Speaker 8: Unlike Kennedy, Degall.
Speaker 11: Had a very good driver and when the shots rang out,
Speaker 11: he did exactly the right thing and evaded the gunfire
Speaker 11: and de Gaull escaped. But de Gall thought the CIA
Speaker 11: knew about that attempt on his life and Degall never
Speaker 11: believed the official story of the assassination. So that story, this,
Speaker 11: this memo, that page is the origin story of the
Speaker 11: mistrust between the CIA, between Kennedy and the CIA that
Speaker 11: would endure for the rest of his presidency.
Speaker 9: Right.
Speaker 1: I think it's so important for you to lay that
Speaker 1: out in.
Speaker 4: The suspicion that the CIA might assassinate it.
Speaker 1: So what is the decision tree that flows from this memo?
Speaker 3: How do we then get to characters like Angleton and Okay,
Speaker 3: the organization of an eventual alleged plot.
Speaker 11: Right, So the second most important document that came out
Speaker 11: it's not it's actually not one document. It was nine
Speaker 11: documents about four about nine documents about about James Angleton.
Speaker 11: And you know, so I don't go looking for one
Speaker 11: document that's going to tell me the whole thing. When
Speaker 11: you look at these documents taken together you and documents
Speaker 11: that have been released in recent years, you understand something
Speaker 11: that I just don't think people. I mean, I know,
Speaker 11: no one knows, and the mainstream media organizations just don't
Speaker 11: want to talk about it. Okay, Lee, Harvey Oswald was
Speaker 11: not a loan nut. He was a known quantity to
Speaker 11: a small group of CIA counter intelligence officers for four
Speaker 11: years between nineteen fifty November nineteen fifty nine November nineteen
Speaker 11: sixty three. We now have all of the information that
Speaker 11: the CIA had on Oswald's forty two documents, one hundred
Speaker 11: and eighty pages of material.
Speaker 8: And you know he was followed from beginning to end.
Speaker 11: There was no point in those four years, or very
Speaker 11: few points in those four years where top people in
Speaker 11: the CIA did not have Lee Harvey Oswald's home address.
Speaker 8: Wow, between November nineteen fifteen, and the guy's moving all
Speaker 8: the time.
Speaker 11: He goes to Moscow, to Minsk, he comes back to
Speaker 11: the Fort Worth, he moves to Orleans, he comes back
Speaker 11: to Dallas, he goes to Mexico, he comes back to Dallas.
Speaker 11: Every step of the way, top people in the CIA
Speaker 11: knew about it. So that alone is you know, that's
Speaker 11: another thing that sets the context.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 11: I have a lot of arguments with you know, mainstream
Speaker 11: media generals who say, you know, they were just incompetent,
Speaker 11: you know, they just missed him. Okay, Well, a couple
Speaker 11: of things. And this is what's important about the document
Speaker 11: that came out last week, Angleton. This new document shows
Speaker 11: lied under oath to JFK investigators. And there's a very
Speaker 11: stark exchange in the new document which shows very clearly
Speaker 11: so that he lied about Oswald's involvement in one CIA project,
Speaker 11: but Oswald tripped many CIA.
Speaker 8: So what Angleton was hiding and what the CIA was
Speaker 8: hiding was and what the story.
Speaker 11: Of the quote unquote Loan Gunman hides is this extraordinary
Speaker 11: level of interest at the top of the CIA in
Speaker 11: this alleged pathetic, sociopathic, you know, loser who nobody would
Speaker 11: ever care about, or so we are often told. And
Speaker 11: yet James Angleton, one of the smartest, most capable intelligence
Speaker 11: officers of his generation, regarded as the premier counterintelligence officer
Speaker 11: in the Western world, is paying attention to Lee Harvey
Speaker 11: Oswell for four years. The CIA has never explained this,
Speaker 11: so because they don't have to, because reporters from the
Speaker 11: New York Times don't go and say, what is this?
Speaker 8: You know, and and you have this weird cognitive dissonance going.
Speaker 11: On where, you know, people won't look at this new evidence,
Speaker 11: they won't talk about it, they won't cover it because
Speaker 11: it works like this, Well, you know, that's a piece
Speaker 11: of evidence that's you know, that's of interest to Morley,
Speaker 11: and we know he's a conspiracy theorist, so that's kind
Speaker 11: of tainted evident, and we don't need to think about
Speaker 11: it because we know for sure that Oswell killed the president, right,
Speaker 11: you know, it's like and so that's been going on
Speaker 11: for years, and so you know, nobody knows the story
Speaker 11: that's just coming into view. So you know, I'm saying
Speaker 11: somehow this is part of the JFK story. Can't You
Speaker 11: can't say? One question was does this change the narrative?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 8: One document changes the narrative, But the entire.
Speaker 11: Oswald file that James Angleton had on his desk when
Speaker 11: Kennedy left for Dallas, that changes the narrative. You know
Speaker 11: what the file shows. There were two FBI reports on Oswald,
Speaker 11: everything he had been doing recently, He'd gotten arrested, he'd
Speaker 11: gone to Mexico City, he'd come back. Two FBI reports
Speaker 11: saying Oswald's in Dallas. They land on Angleton's desk on
Speaker 11: November fourteenth and fifteenth, nineteen sixty three. Never been explained. Wow,
Speaker 11: So that's where we're at. And you know, will they
Speaker 11: will the CIA explain? You know, unlike the FBI, the
Speaker 11: CIA has not turned over any new documents as a
Speaker 11: result of Trump's order. The CIA, I would say, is
Speaker 11: not in compliance with Trump's order. They have JFK documents
Speaker 11: in their possession. So what happens with the CIA?
Speaker 8: You know, are they going to turn over the JFK
Speaker 8: documents they have in their hands. That's you know, that's
Speaker 8: a big question.
Speaker 11: But with these two diacments, I mean, I think we
Speaker 11: see kind of the big picture of Kennedy in conflict
Speaker 11: with his national security establishment and CIA officers paying close
Speaker 11: attention to the man who supposedly killed him. And we're
Speaker 11: going to learn more about that. And it is complicated,
Speaker 11: but I'll tell you a little bit of good news.
Speaker 11: I am going to testify before Representative Luna's hearing on
Speaker 11: JFK on April first, and I'm going to talk about
Speaker 11: this and you need to slow down. And I'm hoping
Speaker 11: that I'll have the time to explain to the task force,
Speaker 11: you know, what this story is and how we can
Speaker 11: get the rest of it. You know what's interesting about
Speaker 11: this story is, you know, I'm so happy to be
Speaker 11: here because right now, requests for interviews are running about
Speaker 11: two to one, three to one in favor of conservative sites.
Speaker 8: Oh really, yeah, right, Jesse Waters called me up. Jesse
Speaker 8: is my new best friend.
Speaker 11: I go on a show and he's like those Democrats
Speaker 11: they're burning down the tesla is all over the world.
Speaker 8: And I'm sitting there, man, I can't afford a Tesla.
Speaker 8: I drive a Nissan road.
Speaker 4: Was asking you about tesla?
Speaker 11: Yeah no, he didn't, So no, that was the show
Speaker 11: before and I think I'm going to say something to
Speaker 11: this I'm going to say something to this guy. And
Speaker 11: then he comes on and he does like a four
Speaker 11: minute introduction to JFK's story, and it's like, I pretty
Speaker 11: much agree with that, Jesse, you know, and you know
Speaker 11: what I realized. I think what the JFK issue does
Speaker 11: is it's unites the anti war.
Speaker 8: Base on both sides. On the left.
Speaker 11: You know, people remember Kennedy as an inspiring leader, wants
Speaker 11: to end the Cold War, wants to take the American
Speaker 11: Empire in a new direction. And our anti war today
Speaker 11: right like whatever the details of Ukraine and gods it,
Speaker 11: we're against those wars because we're against war in general.
Speaker 11: You know, we don't think there's good wars. Those wars
Speaker 11: could have been prevented and on the right, we have
Speaker 11: a similar sentiment. It's more about we don't want to
Speaker 11: spend our blood and treasure on foreigners, Okay, but it's
Speaker 11: anti war also, it's an abhorrence of war. That's what's
Speaker 11: driving the JFK story, and that's what brings people together,
Speaker 11: and that's why I have no problem going on.
Speaker 8: Jesse wat.
Speaker 4: Angleton's relationship with Israeli intelligence has also been getting a
Speaker 4: lot of attention.
Speaker 8: You unpacked.
Speaker 11: Yeah, so I talked about don't look at one document,
Speaker 11: look at nine documents. So the nine documents about Angleton
Speaker 11: tell two stories that are important. One is about the
Speaker 11: birth of co intel Pro. Okay, coin tel Pro is
Speaker 11: typically thought of as an FBI program, right j Edgar Huber,
Speaker 11: It's associated with jaig Gar Huber, But co intel Pro
Speaker 11: was really a joint CIA FBI program and which Angleton
Speaker 11: has counterintelligence chief, had a lot of influence on a
Speaker 11: counterintelligence program of the FBI. So that's one thing, and
Speaker 11: we can talk about how that emerged. That's a very
Speaker 11: interesting story that doesn't take you into the history of
Speaker 11: JFK's assassination, but takes you at a history of the
Speaker 11: repression of the left and the sixties.
Speaker 8: Very important story.
Speaker 11: Yes, And the stuff about the fair Play for Cuba
Speaker 11: committee that's in here, that's another story that's coming. And
Speaker 11: I've got another good story about CIA spies in New Orleans.
Speaker 8: It's very cool to be fun. So I'm going to
Speaker 8: tease that for you.
Speaker 11: But the other thing that the Angleton, the nine Angleton
Speaker 11: documents that came in was his very close relations with
Speaker 11: the Israelis, and he gave testimony. Angleton gave testimony to
Speaker 11: the Church Committee in June nineteen seventy five. He'd just
Speaker 11: been fired from the ci IS eager to justify himself
Speaker 11: and you say it, look, I'm really I was doing good.
Speaker 11: And he explains his extraordinary relationship with the Israeli security
Speaker 11: services going back to nineteen fifty one when he and
Speaker 11: David ben gury and come over and make a deal
Speaker 11: with Alan Dulles about how the two intelligence services will
Speaker 11: share information. That story of Angleton and the Israeli Services,
Speaker 11: which I talk about in my book about Angleton, the Ghost,
Speaker 11: and let me plug that right now.
Speaker 1: Go to Lincoln description.
Speaker 8: Yes, the go it's the Secret Life of James Jesus.
Speaker 11: Angleton tells this story and I had read a lot
Speaker 11: of these documents when I'd read all of these documents
Speaker 11: when I did my book, and now for the first
Speaker 11: time I see them and we understand the Angleton story
Speaker 11: with nuclarity, the birth of co intel Pro and the
Speaker 11: birth of US Israeli strategic relationship. Angleton, you know, like
Speaker 11: him or not. You know, people told me, people who
Speaker 11: liked him, said, this guy's a world historic figure. And
Speaker 11: you know, you can say he's sinister and he did
Speaker 11: bad things and all that, but that is not an
Speaker 11: unfair estimation of James Angleton. And he's at the center
Speaker 11: of what we're learning about the JFK story.
Speaker 1: This is where I am.
Speaker 3: This is my brain always gets so taken to about
Speaker 3: the co Intel Pro, like you were saying, and so
Speaker 3: you know, I was curious if we shed even more light.
Speaker 1: This gets to a bigger question. Ben Shapiro recently had
Speaker 1: a viral clip.
Speaker 3: I talked about it in your introduction before you were here,
Speaker 3: about where he was like, who cares who killed JFK?
Speaker 3: And he's like, I think it's interesting, but it's you know,
Speaker 3: what happened in nineteen sixty three. We're in twenty twenty five.
Speaker 3: And so I talked to Oliver Stone about this. He
Speaker 3: gave me such a poetic answer, But I want to
Speaker 3: ask you the same thing. Why does it matter who
Speaker 3: killed JFK?
Speaker 11: Because when JFK was killed and there was no accountability,
Speaker 11: the American empire took a turn. Kennedy was trying to
Speaker 11: steer the ship one way, and when Kennedy was killed
Speaker 11: and there was no accountability, the ship was steered another
Speaker 11: way and we never had a.
Speaker 8: Course correction after that.
Speaker 11: Because the faction that avoided accountability with Kennedy's murder and
Speaker 11: avoided responsibility for it, they had impunity and they could
Speaker 11: dominate all the policy debates that followed. And also because
Speaker 11: they had the secrecy of apparatus, the apparatus of secrecy
Speaker 11: around them.
Speaker 8: You know, why does it matter?
Speaker 4: Here?
Speaker 11: We are attacking the houthies, Okay, people who you know,
Speaker 11: post no threat to the American people.
Speaker 3: You know, as our vice president says secretly, chat, we
Speaker 3: only have three percent of the trade that moves through this.
Speaker 1: Why are we doing this?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 8: And so you know, I imagine a young John F.
Speaker 11: Kennedy running for president and here we're bombing the hell
Speaker 11: out of these people seven thousand miles away, And I
Speaker 11: Remember what JFK said at American University. We do not
Speaker 11: want a pas Americana. We are not the world's policeman.
Speaker 11: That would be JFK's message to us today, and that's
Speaker 11: the relevance for Ben Shapiro right there. We do not
Speaker 11: want a Pax Americana. Imagine the Democratic presidential candidate saying
Speaker 11: that today. I think if one did, they would find
Speaker 11: a lot of success.
Speaker 4: Right And I think the fact that there was no
Speaker 4: accountability led to what, to me is the most salient
Speaker 4: fact about JFK's assassination that pretty much every president after him,
Speaker 4: definitely Johnson, definitely Nixon. You can talk about whether it's
Speaker 4: every single one whether or not the CIA or the
Speaker 4: Security Services killed Kennedy. Those presidents believed that they did
Speaker 4: or probably did. And as the person now occupying that chair,
Speaker 4: that changes your calculation when you're in the room with
Speaker 4: them talking about out how many covered agents they've got
Speaker 4: in the embassy, whether or not you're going to reduce
Speaker 4: You can hear it in Johnson's phone calls. He's terrible,
Speaker 4: like Chuck Schumer, saif is going to find out that
Speaker 4: the CIA.
Speaker 1: That's right?
Speaker 3: Yeah, He's like, oh, they're going to find It's like,
Speaker 3: oh my god, we're just saying this stuff out loud.
Speaker 1: You can hear with Nixon, you know Nixon.
Speaker 3: I mean not that he was a great guy or whatever,
Speaker 3: but you could hear the terror in him and his
Speaker 3: alman's voice with Hoover, like we got I.
Speaker 8: Tell you story. I tell a story in my book.
Speaker 8: Nixon calls Helms into the overlop.
Speaker 4: I want that report on the Van Pigs goddemmic.
Speaker 11: Right, and Elms is like, mister president, why do you
Speaker 11: lead that? And you hear Nixon say it the who
Speaker 11: shot John Angele Nixon thought he knew, yeah exactly. Johnson
Speaker 11: told Walter, one of his aides, that he thought that
Speaker 11: the CIA was involved.
Speaker 8: He didn't believe the Warren Commission.
Speaker 11: And I always ask people, you know if Lyndon Johnson,
Speaker 11: who appointed the Warren Commission, didn't believe its conclusions.
Speaker 8: Like why should right? Right? Like, well, why is that irrational?
Speaker 4: Where do you come down, by the way on Johnson's
Speaker 4: knowledge or.
Speaker 11: I think the most telling thing about Lyndon Johnson is
Speaker 11: that within two days he said, we have to prove
Speaker 11: Oswald acted alone. Yes, right, I mean he's he's ordered
Speaker 11: his finding before the investigation has begun.
Speaker 8: What was he afraid of? You know, he was afraid
Speaker 8: that he would have to investigate.
Speaker 11: His own government and tear his own government apart, or
Speaker 11: he would have to go to war with the Soviet
Speaker 11: Union or Cuban and he didn't want to do either
Speaker 11: one of those things.
Speaker 8: So Oswald was the perfect solution, the patsy, the fall guy.
Speaker 8: It's all his fault, nothing's wrong. Let's move along, people,
Speaker 8: And that was the political.
Speaker 11: Solution, and it held and and a lot of people
Speaker 11: bought it, and a lot of people bought it for
Speaker 11: the best reasons. You know, we believe in our government,
Speaker 11: and you know, there's a terrible tragedy and we have
Speaker 11: to cope with it somehow, and there's this story. It's
Speaker 11: hard to believe, but you know, let's get on with it.
Speaker 11: And people's trust was really abused. And you know, and
Speaker 11: now you know, here's where the CIA inherits the whirlwind
Speaker 11: because their bogus story about Lee Harvey Oswald has bred,
Speaker 11: has bred a conspiratorial culture. Yes, you know that that
Speaker 11: that thrives on suspicion of government and undermines it.
Speaker 8: And you know that's you know, that's a terrible thing.
Speaker 11: And so when I go on these shows, you know,
Speaker 11: these the right wingers that they wanted to use this
Speaker 11: story to kind of beat up on, you know, what
Speaker 11: they call the deep state, you know, and help Trump
Speaker 11: do that. And the liberal media is kind of like, oh,
Speaker 11: you know, we hope that there's nothing in there that
Speaker 11: supports conspiracy.
Speaker 8: There is because they're you know, so irrational and stuff
Speaker 8: like that. You know, we got to get past that.
Speaker 8: You know, I agree with you, you know, and and
Speaker 8: and and and and with getting this record. And you know,
Speaker 8: kudos to Trump, right.
Speaker 11: I don't agree with him on practically anything, but he
Speaker 11: definitely did the right thing on this and you see it.
Speaker 11: We see it now, and we're going to get the
Speaker 11: benefits of it once people are a little patient, stop
Speaker 11: looking for the smoking gun and start looking for.
Speaker 8: The fact patter.
Speaker 1: Jeff Wall have you talk about Jack Ruby.
Speaker 3: That's where it all falls apart from me, where it's
Speaker 3: just not falls apart per se. But that's where the
Speaker 3: altra conspiracy starts.
Speaker 1: Here.
Speaker 4: You're not even trying.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's like, what are we doing? He shoots the
Speaker 3: sky on live television. He says he's a patsy Jolly
Speaker 3: West is involved. I mean, like I mean, after reading
Speaker 3: the Chaos book, I'm like, oh, they literally mind control
Speaker 3: is real.
Speaker 11: I'm like.
Speaker 1: A operation. Actually.
Speaker 8: So about Jack Ruby, I mean, you go read the
Speaker 8: Warren Commission they made.
Speaker 11: They tried really, really hard, and they were successful in
Speaker 11: avoiding the fact that Jack Ruby was an organized crime
Speaker 11: so and they bought this ridiculous story that you know
Speaker 11: he killed him, you know, because.
Speaker 1: He's he's a super patriot.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 11: I talked to one of the one I talked to
Speaker 11: one of the women who worked for Jack Ruby in
Speaker 11: the club and I asked her. She was very she
Speaker 11: was close to Ruby, and I said, you know, why
Speaker 11: did he kill Why did he kill Oswald? And she
Speaker 11: said I don't know, but she said Jack worked for people,
Speaker 11: and I don't think he had a choice. I thought
Speaker 11: that was very interesting, and I said, I said, did
Speaker 11: he ever say anything good or bad about President Kennedy?
Speaker 11: She said, I never heard anything, but he hated Bobby
Speaker 11: Kennedy with a purple passion, something the Warrant Commission also
Speaker 11: totally omitted.
Speaker 4: He was trying to go after all the Yeah, all
Speaker 4: the organized he did the test.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he brought them exactly.
Speaker 11: So you know, people say, was there an organized crime plot?
Speaker 11: We know the organized crime role in what happened, and
Speaker 11: that was to eliminate the most important with witness and Oswald.
Speaker 11: I was on Piers Morgan and Michael Franzine.
Speaker 1: Who was kind of a made guy in the avience YouTuber.
Speaker 11: Yeah, he's a talking head now about and he said,
Speaker 11: you know, when I was in the mob and we
Speaker 11: talked to these guys, it was common knowledge, totally accepted.
Speaker 8: You know, we were asked to get rid of Oswald
Speaker 8: and we did it.
Speaker 11: That was our part, you know, and that was they
Speaker 11: were very matter of fact about it, you know, and
Speaker 11: I thought, this guy knows, you know, he was in
Speaker 11: that world. So that's the organized crime part of it,
Speaker 11: Jack Ruby, is the organized crime component of what happened.
Speaker 11: You know, we can talk about like what really happened
Speaker 11: that day, but you know, clearly Oswall was not supposed
Speaker 11: to be captured alive. Yes, and when Oswa was captured alive,
Speaker 11: you know, those people in the CIA who'd been watching
Speaker 11: him for four years, they had big problem because Oswa
Speaker 11: was not unaware that you know, he had friends, you know,
Speaker 11: he had people who assisted him and he was a cap.
Speaker 11: You know, he's a smart guy, enterprising guy, so he
Speaker 11: took advantage of those contacts that he had. But that's
Speaker 11: the story that's coming out, is Angleton's role around Oswald,
Speaker 11: the surveillance of Oswald.
Speaker 8: What was really going on there? My friends in the
Speaker 8: mainstream media says they were just incompetent.
Speaker 11: You know, when top CIA officials lie about in a
Speaker 11: homicide investigation. I can't take that as evidence of incompetence.
Speaker 11: To me, that looks more like complicity. That's where we're
Speaker 11: at now.
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, man, I always love talking to you,
Speaker 1: Jeff h Plug. What else you got to do?
Speaker 11: So if you want to follow me JFK Fax on substack,
Speaker 11: jfkfactx dot Jfkfax dot substack.
Speaker 8: Dot com and more to come.
Speaker 3: All right, excellent, we'll have a link down in the description.
Speaker 3: Everybody go watch this testimony to April first. All right,
Speaker 3: we'll all be looking forward to that and we will
Speaker 3: see you all later.