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 4: A toughs University PhD student was picked up off the
Speaker 4: streets of Somerville, Massachusetts. We have a harrowing video of
Speaker 4: what basically looks like a kidnapping. Three masked men are
Speaker 4: picking up this student and putting her in an unmarked vehicle.
Speaker 5: The guy who's filming.
Speaker 4: It seems disturbed by what he's seeing and keeps saying,
Speaker 4: can I see your faces?
Speaker 5: How do I know that you are? How do I
Speaker 5: know that you are police officers?
Speaker 6: Like?
Speaker 4: What is am I witnessing a kidnapping?
Speaker 7: Here?
Speaker 4: Because it very much does appear that he is witnessing
Speaker 4: and kidnapping. Frankly, he is that is there, like there's
Speaker 4: there's I guess you could call it an arrest, but
Speaker 4: there have been no charges filed then, and that's what
Speaker 4: we typically understand to be to be an arrest.
Speaker 5: UH.
Speaker 4: Now apparently last night we can put let's put up
Speaker 4: D D three B. This is Meg not Bo's is
Speaker 4: a Columbia Journalism Review UH journalists who also writes for
Speaker 4: drop site News. This is a student in Alabama, Ali
Speaker 4: Reza de to Rudy, who is PhD student at the
Speaker 4: at Alabama, picked up off the street and as you
Speaker 4: can see there, if you try to figure out where
Speaker 4: he's being held now, it says under it's it is
Speaker 4: it is currently undisclosed. No word of any charges. We
Speaker 4: don't even know, like what he said, like what did
Speaker 4: he use the word genocide in a tweet? Like we
Speaker 4: don't we don't know exactly what he said to get
Speaker 4: him thrown out. This is coming after you put up
Speaker 4: D three unse O Chum, who is a Korean American
Speaker 4: student at Columbia University in undergrad who has a permanent
Speaker 4: legal resident, who has been in the country since she
Speaker 4: was seven years old, was not a leader of the protests,
Speaker 4: was not arrested as I don't think, as far as
Speaker 4: I understand, during the during the protests, went to them
Speaker 4: a couple of times, I guess, tweeted some things. And
Speaker 4: she has had her According to her attorneys, she has
Speaker 4: had her permanent legal residence status revoked and they have
Speaker 4: been hunting her. They have been using signifificant federal assets
Speaker 4: to try to find her. She suspected that this may
Speaker 4: be happening and apparently has been moving around and they
Speaker 4: have been unable to pick her up. At this point,
Speaker 4: none of these people have been charged with a crime
Speaker 4: all of them. Their only quote unquote crime appears to
Speaker 4: be criticism of Israel's attack on Gaza and the US
Speaker 4: support for that assault, which, by the way, since March second,
Speaker 4: Israel has not allowed any food, water, medicine to get
Speaker 4: into Gaza and it is creating famine like conditions and
Speaker 4: has slaughtered more than three hundred children over the last
Speaker 4: several days protesting that is enough to get them thrown
Speaker 4: into the back of these cars or have to go
Speaker 4: on the land.
Speaker 3: As you can see, you know, the first person, Miss
Speaker 3: Oz turk Is Apparently now she's a Turkish citizen, so
Speaker 3: apparently her crime is that she is quote one of
Speaker 3: several students who one of several author an opinion essay
Speaker 3: published last March in Tufts University student newspaper. The essay
Speaker 3: criticized university leaders for their response to demands and toughs
Speaker 3: quote acknowledged the Palestinian genocide and divest itself with companies
Speaker 3: to Israel. Mister Doroti who you mentioned, Ali Raza Dorati.
Speaker 3: There's not even actually any record of anything that the
Speaker 3: guy has done, and like you said, the other one
Speaker 3: just attended a protest. This was again I need to
Speaker 3: talk philosophically here. Do you see the number of agents
Speaker 3: who are involved in teresting this lady? We don't have
Speaker 3: better things to do here. I mean, look, I know,
Speaker 3: I know you disagree, Ryan, but I want to see
Speaker 3: those people applied to people who are in the country illegally,
Speaker 3: because that's what quote mass deportation was supposed to be
Speaker 3: about last time I checked, not you know, facilitating the
Speaker 3: arrests of some student PhD student late. Look fine, I
Speaker 3: mean this is where you and I have a disagreement,
Speaker 3: probably like I do think people who are here in
Speaker 3: the country on student visas and all that, you should be.
Speaker 1: A little careful.
Speaker 3: Okay, I'm not saying you don't have rights and all that,
Speaker 3: but you know, listen. But philosophically, when I go to
Speaker 3: authoritarian countries or other countries, like I don't mouth off
Speaker 3: about whatever. You know, whenever when I'm in China in
Speaker 3: Tianaman Square, you know what I don't talk about. I
Speaker 3: don't talk about the Tianaman Square mask here, but think
Speaker 3: about that.
Speaker 5: But think about that. Are we in authoritarian country?
Speaker 3: Well, I don't think that we're quote in authoritarian country,
Speaker 3: but I think common sense would dictate that whenever you're
Speaker 3: in another country or a guest in that person's country,
Speaker 3: you should generally try not to rock the boat.
Speaker 5: I did.
Speaker 4: I did a home exchange in France in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 4: We had a French family stay in our house and
Speaker 4: we stayed in their house for several weeks.
Speaker 5: It was awesome.
Speaker 1: If I France is an authoritarian country.
Speaker 4: So at the time there was some I actually did
Speaker 4: several shows from there where I was critical of the
Speaker 4: French government for their handling of the situation and jer like,
Speaker 4: should they have come in and rounded me up.
Speaker 1: Well, they could have No, that's a point.
Speaker 4: But there we have a visa process that we have
Speaker 4: established for students and for tourists, and if you go
Speaker 4: through that process, we grant you a student visa. And
Speaker 4: as long as you follow the laws of our country
Speaker 4: and you're following the remit of the visa that we
Speaker 4: have given you, we have invited you into our country
Speaker 4: and you are spending money in our country. And if
Speaker 4: you don't violate that, for us to arrest you because
Speaker 4: Israel or some pro Israel organization has put you on
Speaker 4: a list of people that they think are mean to Israel,
Speaker 4: it breaks the contract that.
Speaker 5: We with them.
Speaker 1: Totally agree with you.
Speaker 3: There's no reason for us to be doing this stupid
Speaker 3: I'm more philosophically.
Speaker 1: People are like, oh, they have a right to be here.
Speaker 1: I'm like, well, not.
Speaker 4: Really, but we gave them the right to be there
Speaker 4: by creating a visa process that they that they went through.
Speaker 5: And also people may not understand this.
Speaker 4: One of the main things that keeps our trade deficit
Speaker 4: lower than it would be otherwise is that millions of
Speaker 4: people come from overseas to the United States to study
Speaker 4: here and to do tourism here. If you look at
Speaker 4: the trade deficit that we have with Canada, it's cut
Speaker 4: like in half by Canadian tourists and students who come
Speaker 4: here and spend. And also many of them pay like
Speaker 4: full freight to go to our state and private universities,
Speaker 4: and so they're subsidizing the American students like American University,
Speaker 4: Like it's like eighty five thousand dollars a year or
Speaker 4: something for the full freight. Americans don't pay that. You
Speaker 4: know who pays is like the rich Egyptians emiratis.
Speaker 3: I don't disagree with the word you're saying, but that
Speaker 3: also raises a lot of questions.
Speaker 1: Then why is the student debt crisis so high?
Speaker 5: And why exactly expensive?
Speaker 3: Right exactly now? You know, we can debate this foreign
Speaker 3: student thing all day long. I think what we can
Speaker 3: both agree on is the appropriation of immense federal resources
Speaker 3: to hunting some South Korean lady who uh so South
Speaker 3: Korea was seven years old and attended the Columbia University protests.
Speaker 3: It's just like not very high on I think most
Speaker 3: people's list of what they thought of for mass deportation.
Speaker 3: And then when you go when you look at mass
Speaker 3: deportation figures of the actual criminal or legal aliens who
Speaker 3: are being deported. The numbers are exactly the same as
Speaker 3: they were under the Biden administration, and or roughly the
Speaker 3: same now, you know, but.
Speaker 4: I also don't think I don't think she should have
Speaker 4: to watch her mouth. She's a legal permanent resident. And
Speaker 4: the difference between US and China and US in Russia
Speaker 4: is that you don't have to watch your mouth here.
Speaker 4: You say whatever you want as a citizen.
Speaker 3: Yes, that's where I that's where I just disagree. Now
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that again. We're talking about should and can.
Speaker 5: Okay, but what if you're a citizen?
Speaker 4: Yeah, but you previously were, you were your naturalized citizen,
Speaker 4: so now you're a citizen. You've had a lot of
Speaker 4: Republicans or Trump administration officials say, well, okay, yes, they're resident.
Speaker 4: But if we would have known that once they became
Speaker 4: a permanent resident that they would go and protest Israel,
Speaker 4: we would not have given them their permanent residency. Therefore,
Speaker 4: we're taking their green card, and then we're taking the
Speaker 4: visa they had before that, and we're going to jail
Speaker 4: them and we're going to send them to El Salvador.
Speaker 4: We're going to send them back to wherever they're wherever
Speaker 4: they're from. Why would that not also apply to citizens?
Speaker 4: So we gave you your citizenship, but if we wouldn't
Speaker 4: have given it to you, if we would have known
Speaker 4: that you were going to be critical of Israel.
Speaker 3: CAZA is very different on citizenship, Stripping United A citizen
Speaker 3: and citizenship, as I understand, this is.
Speaker 5: A little harder.
Speaker 3: No, not little harder, it's like they're definitely harder. I
Speaker 3: don't actually think you can strip United Sate citizens.
Speaker 4: No, you can if if they if they, if you know,
Speaker 4: it's like in your passport, if you open it, if
Speaker 4: it's serve in a foreign military except for the IDEF.
Speaker 1: If you you know, they.
Speaker 4: Say, if you lied to get your citizenship, that's right,
Speaker 4: if you would. What they would say is you told
Speaker 4: us you support and defend the United States, and here
Speaker 4: you are criticizing Israel.
Speaker 5: So how dare you you lied?
Speaker 3: I think the difference, the difference in particular on these
Speaker 3: student visas and these permanent residents is for me, the appropriation,
Speaker 3: like I said, of federal resources purely based on speech
Speaker 3: grounds with no criminal behavior, is one that I think
Speaker 3: most people will say, yeah, that's pretty messed up, right,
Speaker 3: And because if you look in the past, for any
Speaker 3: of these, like deporting based on support for foreign it
Speaker 3: was like pretty extreme stuff.
Speaker 1: You know, if we're going to the World War two era.
Speaker 3: You literally had to be a actual like pro Nazi,
Speaker 3: like on the radio giving a speech like we need
Speaker 3: to support Hitler. For you, the Roosevelt administration or others
Speaker 3: to prosecute you for treason actually even on speech grounds.
Speaker 3: I was looking back, was recently reading a book about this.
Speaker 3: Even then, a lot of those cases had immense difficulty
Speaker 3: getting on a first minut back. That's with the citizens
Speaker 3: that we're talking about here, and that was even at
Speaker 3: a time of Kramatsu when you had Japanese Americans literally
Speaker 3: slaved in a camp, you know, illegally by their government.
Speaker 3: But in this particular case, the point is is that
Speaker 3: they are using extraordinary measures of the United States. You
Speaker 3: know what treaty exactly what is the State Department? The
Speaker 3: Secretary of State can designate any individual here and pulling
Speaker 3: their visa and then using ice and like, I mean,
Speaker 3: do you know how much money it costs to like
Speaker 3: arrest someone and fly them to Louisiana. I don't know
Speaker 3: what tens of thousands of dollars just to support these
Speaker 3: type of operations. I think that's the big problem that
Speaker 3: we see right here, and most people can agree that
Speaker 3: it's obviously a stunt. And the worst is that it's
Speaker 3: on behalf of a foreign government. And these lists of
Speaker 3: all of these people, as you and I know, are
Speaker 3: coming from these like pro Israel groups who have sat
Speaker 3: there and scrubbed social media. It's sickening for me, you know,
Speaker 3: to even watch because I have there's like these accounts
Speaker 3: on Twitter stop anti Semitism or whatever, and I'll watch
Speaker 3: them just like blow up some girl who like wrote
Speaker 3: on Strava that she was like really upset about side
Speaker 3: and she no word, she was like saw some annoying zie.
Speaker 1: It's like, okay, whatever, all right.
Speaker 3: People can post whatever they want on their social media
Speaker 3: and they're like blowing up this lady's life. Or you know,
Speaker 3: a flight attendant who has like a Palestine flag on
Speaker 3: their lapal.
Speaker 1: You know, by the way, I've been on flights four
Speaker 1: where I've seen the Israeli flag there. Whatever, maybe she's Israeli.
Speaker 3: Okay, yeah, I don't care what flags give me a drink.
Speaker 1: You know, it's like, what are we doing here?
Speaker 5: Let me get the whole can.
Speaker 6: Yeah, that's right, give.
Speaker 1: Me the can. I need to die coke can, all right,
Speaker 1: and pour it properly over. I'm joking again. I don't
Speaker 1: ever say any of this stuff.
Speaker 3: But my point is, just like who cares what the
Speaker 3: lapel and they blow these people up, they like ruin
Speaker 3: their lives and inviting this like witch hunt. And those
Speaker 3: are the people who the government is taking these lists
Speaker 3: of people from who didn't commit any crime.
Speaker 1: All they did was to speak out against a foreign government.
Speaker 7: So I don't know.
Speaker 1: I just think it's crazy.
Speaker 4: And I would say to the people who are like, well,
Speaker 4: they should be good guests and screw them.
Speaker 3: No, not to be clear, I'm not saying screw them.
Speaker 3: I'm actually on their side. I don't think they should.
Speaker 5: I mean there's they're going to be.
Speaker 3: What I get annoyed by is like this transnational American identity,
Speaker 3: as if citizenship itself doesn't mean anything. Just simply being
Speaker 3: present in the country does not mean you are a
Speaker 3: citizen who's entitled to all of the protections that we
Speaker 3: have and that the government cannot deport you. For a reason,
Speaker 3: and that it is just empirically true. If you want
Speaker 3: to argue America the exceptional country and all that, I
Speaker 3: think that's fine, But it is empirically true that in
Speaker 3: almost every country in the world that going there and
Speaker 3: in participating in a protest, specifically like in a foreign
Speaker 3: policy against the city government, they're not going to let
Speaker 3: you stay. Even in Europe and many of these other places,
Speaker 3: they're not also you know, kind and fuzzy, you know,
Speaker 3: to to.
Speaker 5: Foreign studies, particularly if it's an anti Israel protest.
Speaker 3: Yeah, try going to Germany. Okay, liberal democracy Germany or god.
Speaker 3: I can name any of the country. Uh, Like I said,
Speaker 3: even non authoritarian ones, ostensible democracies where if you do
Speaker 3: this type of stuff like you are going to get deported,
Speaker 3: you can argue.
Speaker 1: That you shouldn't. And you know, I would say, you
Speaker 1: certainly can.
Speaker 4: That's what just shut and shutting off, like you're gonna
Speaker 4: hurt tourism, and you're going to hurt You're going to
Speaker 4: hurt the number of foreign students who come to the
Speaker 4: United States, and I think people are gonna be like, well,
Speaker 4: screw it, who's there.
Speaker 1: I think we should have much less foreign Sto.
Speaker 3: I think it's completely perverted our financial system in these
Speaker 3: universities because what happens is is they increase the costs
Speaker 3: for everybody. Now they subsidize marginally the American students who
Speaker 3: are still loaded up with tens of thousands of dollars
Speaker 3: in student debt, but you also make it basically a
Speaker 3: visa farm for the richest people all over the world
Speaker 3: to be able to come here.
Speaker 1: Would they fake they're reducing course, No, but they're not.
Speaker 1: They This is the thing.
Speaker 3: If that were true, Ryan, then you would not see
Speaker 3: the inflation and overall educational costs. I mean, the more
Speaker 3: foreign students, the higher that the price actually goes.
Speaker 1: And then worse is the government.
Speaker 3: Comes in and backstops these student loans for you know,
Speaker 3: fake lower you know, oh we gave you ten thousand
Speaker 3: dollars in student aid. It's like okay, but the thing
Speaker 3: is still sixty thousand dollars. So they're going they're getting
Speaker 3: some fast alone. The government's doing that basically comes a
Speaker 3: foreign visa farm. The PhD programs and all that. There's
Speaker 3: no particular evidence that it's all that like great for
Speaker 3: the United States or that all of this money is
Speaker 3: flowing into the hands of the average American citizen. Like,
Speaker 3: I don't see any evidence that, you know, all of
Speaker 3: this educational spending has done any or increase in education costs,
Speaker 3: and subsequent dollars come in has been distributed at all to.
Speaker 1: The overall population.
Speaker 3: It's mostly just a money laundering organization for the University
Speaker 3: of Michigan or the university whatever, you know, all these
Speaker 3: other places which use these dollars to just continue to
Speaker 3: prop up and justify even more overall expenses.
Speaker 1: I'm totally against the current way that it's funded.
Speaker 4: The explosion of the cost of university is I think
Speaker 4: a separate issue from foreign students coming and spending money
Speaker 4: in universities. Like there's a correlation there, but I don't think.
Speaker 5: I don't think foreign students.
Speaker 1: No, I'm not blaming them per se.
Speaker 3: I'm saying it's all part of the incentives, as in
Speaker 3: the incentive for a university when they charge sixty thousand
Speaker 3: dollars or seventy thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: What is it now, Harvard, I don't even know.
Speaker 3: In eighty thousand something eighty five thousand, let's say, Sarah
Speaker 3: Lawrence is always famous because they have been like in.
Speaker 1: The middle of Rhode Island.
Speaker 3: They charge in like ninety grand a year. It's like, okay, well,
Speaker 3: who's paying that well, foreign students. But also even though
Speaker 3: for the student who's let's say, paying forty five thousand
Speaker 3: dollars per year, which is instill an insane amount of money,
Speaker 3: that person is taking on a government back loan, right
Speaker 3: that literally can't be discharged.
Speaker 1: And you watch as those.
Speaker 3: Two things have basically made it so that these universities
Speaker 3: can offload all the risk of participating in their financial
Speaker 3: product if you just look at like a balance sheet,
Speaker 3: they offload the risk of the government and to the
Speaker 3: individual and they take those profits home. Again, we don't
Speaker 3: see much evidence that they're distributing that funding. If it
Speaker 3: were true that all this increased tuition was so great
Speaker 3: for workers, then professors would be getting paid more. Actually,
Speaker 3: their salaries going down for the phderies right for the adjuncts,
Speaker 3: and the way that they run it's actually more restrictive
Speaker 3: than ever. Really, what they're doing is they're enriching themselves
Speaker 3: and a bunch of fund managers on Wall Street by
Speaker 3: you know, these endowments.
Speaker 1: So anyway, that's that's I.
Speaker 4: Agree with that point I think that cutting off the
Speaker 4: foreign students, well, I guess we'll get to find out
Speaker 4: what it does.
Speaker 1: Well. So yeah, I mean that is the question. I
Speaker 1: guess in.
Speaker 4: Terms of if you're a foreign student now, like for
Speaker 4: the student willingness, I would assume that you're looking around
Speaker 4: at other countries. Do you think so, I would be
Speaker 4: maybe or maybe maybe you just don't criticize Israel, which
Speaker 4: is also like that, like America has become less America.
Speaker 1: That's fair. I think that's probably the best point.
Speaker 3: I mean, I don't think that we're going to really
Speaker 3: see if anything, I'm not sure if you saw this.
Speaker 3: Law school applications went double this year, which is usually
Speaker 3: a bad sign. That means that there's a recession coming,
Speaker 3: right because people dook at a job, so that means
Speaker 3: that they're going to law school. Usually a bad financial decision,
Speaker 3: especially with that take advice to me, but you know,
Speaker 3: just saying loading yourself up with two undergrand in debt
Speaker 3: and the hopes that it might pay off in the
Speaker 3: future usually a bad idea.
Speaker 5: But you know, a lot of.
Speaker 1: People seem to think that it's good.
Speaker 3: We saw the same thing in O nine for law
Speaker 3: school applications, but The problem, I think is what you
Speaker 3: just said is that the government is enforcing policy to
Speaker 3: chill speech on an issue of a foreign government.
Speaker 1: You know, that is genuinely crazy.
Speaker 5: It's crazy.
Speaker 1: It's crazy.
Speaker 3: I mean every other time in the past we talked
Speaker 3: to Jefferson Morley, at least our government should be siopping
Speaker 3: our population to support a war that we are. You know,
Speaker 3: it's like, is that too much to ask Intel pro
Speaker 3: for you know, for Vietnam. Don't support it, but I
Speaker 3: get it right, I'm an Nixon administration.
Speaker 5: This is too much repress us to own your own
Speaker 5: process for your.
Speaker 3: For your own benefit, not for the benefit of some
Speaker 3: people in Tel Aviv, you know, who aren't even although
Speaker 3: I guess some of them are US citizens.
Speaker 4: But we forget though, like yes, they're very is powerful,
Speaker 4: et cetera. They are a client and they benefit us.
Speaker 4: They're like, there was a reason that we're not just
Speaker 4: doing it for them, like we're doing it for us.
Speaker 4: It is like they are a fundamental part of our
Speaker 4: foreign policy in the Mid East. So in that sense,
Speaker 4: we are suppressing criticism of ourselves. Several days of protests
Speaker 4: have broken out in Gaza. Israel is already working to
Speaker 4: exploit them can roll. This statement put out by Defense
Speaker 4: Minister Israel Katz is speaking to hebrewly, but he says
Speaker 4: the IDF will soon operate with full force and additional
Speaker 4: areas of Gaza, and you will be asked to evacuate
Speaker 4: from combat zones for your own safety.
Speaker 5: The plans are already prepared and approved.
Speaker 4: Hamas is putting your lives at risk, causing you to
Speaker 4: lose your homes and more and more territory that will
Speaker 4: be integrated into Israel's defense formation.
Speaker 5: The first Sinowar destroyed.
Speaker 4: Gaza, and the second Sinowar is ready to burn half
Speaker 4: of Gaza with his own hands, just to try and
Speaker 4: maintain his corrupt rule. Alongside his fellow Hamas murders and rapists.
Speaker 4: They sit safely with their families in tunnels and luxury
Speaker 4: hotels with billions in foreign bank accounts, while using you
Speaker 4: as hostages. Learn from the residents of bate Lahia, just
Speaker 4: as they did, demand the removal of Hamas from Gaza
Speaker 4: and the immediate release of all Israeli hostages.
Speaker 5: This is the only way to stop the war.
Speaker 4: This came several days after israel Cats had put out
Speaker 4: a separate statement residence of Gaza. This is your final warning.
Speaker 4: Evacuation of the population from combat zones will soon resume.
Speaker 4: If all Israeli hostages are not released and Hamas is
Speaker 4: not kicked out of Gaza, Israel will act with force
Speaker 4: you have not known before. Take the advice of the
Speaker 4: US President, return the hostages and kick out Hamas, and
Speaker 4: new options will open up for you, including relocation to
Speaker 4: other parts of the world. For those who choose the
Speaker 4: alternative is destruction and devastation. After these remarks, starting this week,
Speaker 4: you started to see organic protests not or in other words,
Speaker 4: in other words, not organized by Fatah or the Palestinian authority,
Speaker 4: which are rivals of Hamas. After the into the second day,
Speaker 4: the size and the kind of the ferocity of the
Speaker 4: protests expanded significantly.
Speaker 5: We'll see.
Speaker 4: We'll see how that develops on said Ay, which would
Speaker 4: be the third day. What has been remarkable about these
Speaker 4: protests is that they have included significant anti Hamas sentiment
Speaker 4: being expressed.
Speaker 5: And so let's talk about the.
Speaker 4: Politics here and the material conditions in which these are
Speaker 4: in which these are unfolding. So to be clear, you know,
Speaker 4: Hamas took power in two thousand and five, and in
Speaker 4: this election, and then afterwards there was you.
Speaker 5: Know, Fatsa tried to take power and there was.
Speaker 4: Amas pulled a kind of counter coup and there haven't
Speaker 4: been elections since. They have been in power now for
Speaker 4: almost twenty years. And for obviously among Palestinians and Gaza,
Speaker 4: there is a rain of opinions. They're by no means monolithic,
Speaker 4: but there are many, many people in Gaza who have
Speaker 4: serious objections to Hamas as a governing authority. Right they
Speaker 4: they have largely kind of primarily been an armed resistance
Speaker 4: organization and a national liberation move That is is their identity,
Speaker 4: that's what they see themselves. As governing has never been
Speaker 4: the thing that kind of animated them. And at the
Speaker 4: same time they've been operating under a twenty year siege.
Speaker 4: They've been a repressive government as well, and so it
Speaker 4: you know, from talking to people in Gaza yesterday, they
Speaker 4: were they were adding like, yes, people are people are
Speaker 4: frustrated with Hamas. People are people are people, and people
Speaker 4: want an end to this war. They want a lifting
Speaker 4: of the siege. People are are literally starving, and they
Speaker 4: think that if they go out and express opposition to
Speaker 4: to Hamas that that can lead to an end to
Speaker 4: this war.
Speaker 3: One of the dumbest arguments I always hear is they
Speaker 3: voted for Hamas, so they support it. Okay, Well, the
Speaker 3: median age in Gaza is eighteen years old, right, so
Speaker 3: that means that the median of Gazen was not alive
Speaker 3: whenever there was an election. And by the way, even
Speaker 3: if there was an election like let's say ten years
Speaker 3: ago or whatever. As you know, I know this is
Speaker 3: trite almost at this point, but that's the logic. O'samom
Speaker 3: bin laden use right to attack the United States on
Speaker 3: nine to eleven is they support their Zionist government under
Speaker 3: George W. Bush, So they deserve it, right, That's why
Speaker 3: we should attack and kill the average American because they
Speaker 3: are complicit in the crimes of their own government. It's like, okay,
Speaker 3: well that by that standard, you know, then there is
Speaker 3: no such thing as a civilian. Now, that's basically the
Speaker 3: argument that that has been put in place. What's also
Speaker 3: ironic about those elections is that they were pushed by us. Yes,
Speaker 3: we're the people who basically forced the is Really he
Speaker 3: didn't even want to have an election because they knew
Speaker 3: what was going to happen. The reason that we pushed
Speaker 3: it was because of Bush's brain dead freedom agenda. And
Speaker 3: it's so funny even in retrospect, they have the election,
Speaker 3: the election doesn't go the way they want, They're like, okay,
Speaker 3: now we got a sanction in blockade this entire thing
Speaker 3: because they elected the wrong people.
Speaker 1: So what happened to the whole freedom agenda thing?
Speaker 5: Right? Freedom as long as you pick our guys.
Speaker 3: Freedom as long as you pick our guys, kind of
Speaker 3: like Iraq Afghanistan?
Speaker 5: Remember Hillary?
Speaker 4: Thing is you remember Hillary Clinton's famous quote after that
Speaker 4: election she said's so good you guys can google up
Speaker 4: and find it the exact quote. But she was like,
Speaker 4: how on earth did the Bush administration hold an election
Speaker 4: where they couldn't determine the outcome of It's like, she's like,
Speaker 4: what kind of incompetence it is?
Speaker 5: That?
Speaker 4: Which just says absolutely everything about everything.
Speaker 3: That's one of my favorite things in reading history is
Speaker 3: at the Potsdam conference when Churchill lost the election, Stalin
Speaker 3: was like, I don't understand what is going on here.
Speaker 3: He's like, why didn't you just rig it? And he's
Speaker 3: like he was mystified, you didn't rig it. You're just
Speaker 3: gonna keep it that you're just leaving. He's like, you
Speaker 3: can't leave where?
Speaker 5: And he was so annoyed. He's like, now I have to.
Speaker 3: He's like, who's this new guy at Lee? He's like,
Speaker 3: who the fuck are you?
Speaker 1: You know, I don't want to deal with you.
Speaker 4: And so if we put up D eight on the screen,
Speaker 4: Israel's dropping flyers over Gaza urging Palestinians to go out
Speaker 4: and protest against Tamas. This has kicked off, obviously what
Speaker 4: you would expect, which is then a rallying around of Hamas,
Speaker 4: like because on the one hand, people are deeply frustrated
Speaker 4: with the situation, and they're deeply frustrated with you know,
Speaker 4: a lot of elements of the way Hamas is like
Speaker 4: operationally handling this situation people are suffering. On the other hand,
Speaker 4: they don't want to be seen as aligning themselves with Israel.
Speaker 4: So what as a result of this, as the rules
Speaker 4: of Israel trying to exploit the protests, You've had a
Speaker 4: lot of clans and kind of senior elder officials like
Speaker 4: up and down guys that put out statements saying that
Speaker 4: the people have a right to protest. People have a
Speaker 4: right to protest Tomas but we stand steadfast and firm
Speaker 4: with with the national liberation and with the resistance against Israel.
Speaker 4: Trying to trying to make make that, make that clear.
Speaker 4: At the same time, you're going to have political jockeying
Speaker 4: for what may be a post Hamas environment after Gods.
Speaker 5: Israel tried, you know.
Speaker 4: Very hard and was and you know, they put their
Speaker 4: plans publicly out there that they wanted to empower clans
Speaker 4: against against Tamas two.
Speaker 5: To distribute aid.
Speaker 4: They armed some of these clans, they would bomb Hamas,
Speaker 4: they would bomb secure police that were connected with Hamas
Speaker 4: to try to empower these basically gangs because then they
Speaker 4: it's the classic divide and rule situation, and so some
Speaker 4: of those gangs have obvious political motivations to try to
Speaker 4: fuel these and so what is what is relying on
Speaker 4: genuine organic sentiment of you know, very quickly is getting
Speaker 4: pulled in many different directions.
Speaker 1: That's what I really wanted to get at it.
Speaker 3: I was like, what do we really make at these
Speaker 3: protests because everyone's like, oh, it's I was like, maybe
Speaker 3: it seems a little convenient.
Speaker 4: But it's like there is and it should definitely be
Speaker 4: acknowledged that there is significant anti Hamas sentiment being expressed
Speaker 4: at these at these protests.
Speaker 3: What are your dropside colleagues say about the participants and others.
Speaker 4: That yeah, that that this is that these are that
Speaker 4: there are significant you know, anti Hamas elements to these.
Speaker 5: Protests, of course, but it's.
Speaker 4: There's also anti siege, anti occupation, like anti like end
Speaker 4: this war, like we want to live is one of
Speaker 4: the one of the main lines, main battle cries of
Speaker 4: these protests is we want to live. And then there
Speaker 4: is some frustration that the ceasefire didn't last, and it's
Speaker 4: frustration that everybody involved like they just want the but
Speaker 4: they also know who is blockading Gaza right now and
Speaker 4: they know they can in many cases you can see
Speaker 4: the trucks on the other side. Abu Baker ab Had,
Speaker 4: one of our correspondents there, is to put on Twitter
Speaker 4: the other day that or yesterday that children that he's
Speaker 4: seen are drawing food in the sand, that the depth
Speaker 4: of the hunger is at just intolerable levels. And so
Speaker 4: part of this, I think is just say flipping the
Speaker 4: table like something's got to give here, and it's it's
Speaker 4: it's being received in a very complicated way in Israel
Speaker 4: because on the one hand, the Israeli public likes to
Speaker 4: say that, look, even the Palestinians are protesting against some
Speaker 4: we told you Hamas is terrible, but that also then
Speaker 4: undercuts their argument that everybody is Hamas, and why are
Speaker 4: you killing them all? Like they're begging you to not
Speaker 4: kill them. They're saying they want to live, and there
Speaker 4: is a very clear path that Hamas has outlined that
Speaker 4: they will leave the government, make a deal. Let let
Speaker 4: let let a new government come in with some amount
Speaker 4: of sovereignty and open and open up the passes so
Speaker 4: that the trucks can get back in and they'll disarm and
Speaker 4: move on like and so. For a lot of the
Speaker 4: Israeli right, one of their biggest fears has always been
Speaker 4: being told, yes, peace and co existence is possible. We want,
Speaker 4: we want peace because Israel does not want. The Israeli
Speaker 4: right does not want, which ends the Israeli right is
Speaker 4: now almost all of Israel. They don't want peace and
Speaker 4: coexistence with Palestinians and Gaza. They want the Palestinians and
Speaker 4: Gaza to no longer be there. Right, they're setting up
Speaker 4: an entire ministry to move them to Egypt and Jordan.
Speaker 4: They want to ethnically cleanse the entire area. So peace
Speaker 4: and coexistence is a threat to that vision. So that's
Speaker 4: why it's being received in this kind of complicated fashion.
Speaker 4: And you're and you're seeing a lot of Israeli commentators say,
Speaker 4: we don't care if they're protesting.
Speaker 5: Kill them anyway.
Speaker 3: All right, let's get over to NPR and to PBS.
Speaker 3: Last piece here. But Ryan and I we were like,
Speaker 3: we need to debate something more. And foreign students is
Speaker 3: too much, that's that's not spicy enough.
Speaker 1: So what about NPR and PBS.
Speaker 3: So there have been these congressional hearings for purposes we
Speaker 3: still have yet to be explained. But anyway, they are there,
Speaker 3: and Republicans and Democrats sparring over whether the hearings are
Speaker 3: a joke, for defunding NPR, NPR not doing itself any favors.
Speaker 3: Their CEO hasn't particularly come across well with some of
Speaker 3: our own past tweets. So we compiled some We compiled
Speaker 3: some clips from what went down yesterday to give you
Speaker 3: the best and the brightest.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 6: The former senior Business editor friend PR.
Speaker 8: How long you work at MPR?
Speaker 6: I believe he was there just over twenty five years.
Speaker 8: Twenty five years award winning journalists?
Speaker 5: Do you win any awards?
Speaker 8: Are time to anybody? Award that's pretty important in it?
Speaker 8: That is a pretty distinguished journalists, right certainly? And I
Speaker 8: wrote he wrote a long story about what you do
Speaker 8: at MPR is MPR.
Speaker 6: Biased, Congressman.
Speaker 7: I have never seen any instance of never of pro
Speaker 7: political bias determining editorial decisions.
Speaker 6: Now, wells mister Berliner in his story.
Speaker 8: A couple last year wrote, I've in the DC area
Speaker 8: editorial positions at MPR. He said he found eighty seven
Speaker 8: registered Democrats, zero Republicans.
Speaker 6: Is that accurate?
Speaker 7: We do not track the numbers or the voter registration,
Speaker 7: but I find that.
Speaker 8: Award winning journalists who worked twenty five years at NPR,
Speaker 8: mister Berlin or was he lying when he wrote that.
Speaker 7: I am not presuming such. I just don't have We
Speaker 7: don't track that information about our journalist eighty.
Speaker 6: Seven to zero, and you're not biased?
Speaker 9: Do you believe that America believes in black plunder and
Speaker 9: white democracy?
Speaker 6: I don't believe that, sir.
Speaker 9: You tweeted that it is reference to a book you
Speaker 9: were reading at the time. Apparently the case for reparations.
Speaker 6: I don't think I've ever read that book, sir.
Speaker 5: You tweeted about it.
Speaker 9: You said you took a day off to fully read
Speaker 9: the case for reparations. You put that on Twitter in
Speaker 9: January twenty twenty.
Speaker 7: Chirst of all, I do want to say that NPR
Speaker 7: acknowledges that we were mistaken and failing to cover the
Speaker 7: Hunter Biden laptop story more aggressively and sooner our current
Speaker 7: editorial leadership. Woohan, We recognize that we were reporting at
Speaker 7: the time, but we acknowledged that the new CIA evidence
Speaker 7: is worthy of coverage and have covered it.
Speaker 3: So Yeah, didn't go so well for Catherine there. I mean,
Speaker 3: she's been a real target for quite some time now.
Speaker 3: I don't know in terms of in terms of whether
Speaker 3: this is a good idea or not. Before we get
Speaker 3: to the debate, though, let's also take a listen to
Speaker 3: the Democrats eat three.
Speaker 1: Please, let's take a listen.
Speaker 10: Free speech is not about whatever it is that y'all
Speaker 10: want somebody to say, and the idea that you want
Speaker 10: to shut down everybody that is not Fox News is bullshit.
Speaker 10: We need to stop playing because that's what y'all are
Speaker 10: doing in here. You don't want to hear the opinions
Speaker 10: of anybody else. And the Constitution says Congress shall make
Speaker 10: no law respecting or establishing of religion, or prohibiting the
Speaker 10: free exercise thereof, or abridging.
Speaker 5: The General Woman's time has expired.
Speaker 1: The General Woman's time has expired.
Speaker 11: Here's what I think we should be having a hearing about.
Speaker 11: After Trump and Musk took over the government, reporters noticed
Speaker 11: the State Department was trying to funnel four hundred million
Speaker 11: taxpayer dollars to Tesla. The State Department said, it's an
Speaker 11: old contract, no news here, But because of a brave
Speaker 11: whistleblower and an NPR reporter, they exposed the corruption and
Speaker 11: the lies. Madam Chairwoman, if we want to look into
Speaker 11: waste for aden abuse, why not look into that Elon Musk,
Speaker 11: who's running cabinet meetings, who's running the White House, was
Speaker 11: trying to funnel money to himself. So let's stop investigating
Speaker 11: cookie monster and start investigating how the Trump administration lied
Speaker 11: about this and was trying to funnel money to their
Speaker 11: biggest political supporter.
Speaker 5: Entry.
Speaker 12: Now, I will admit that the extreme liberal agenda that
Speaker 12: you're all pushing, I think doesn't stop there. This, of
Speaker 12: course is Burton Ernie. Now, these two guys actually live together,
Speaker 12: they're friends, they're supportive of each other. Now that might
Speaker 12: be triggering to our chairwoman and someone this committee, and
Speaker 12: perhaps that's also why we're here today, Ms Kerger, an
Speaker 12: important question. Are Burton Ernie part of an extreme homosexual agenda?
Speaker 5: No, thank you, miss Kroger, and.
Speaker 12: Thank you for being a good sport. Now I'm obviously
Speaker 12: using some humor here, but the fact that we're sitting
Speaker 12: here today talking about defunding public television is actually not funny.
Speaker 12: At a time where we can't agree on basic facts
Speaker 12: and well, the free press is under attack, we need
Speaker 12: public media like PBS and NPR more than ever.
Speaker 1: So I had no idea Burton Ernie were possibly gay.
Speaker 4: Well that's the whole thing that there was. There was
Speaker 4: a panic on the right for a while.
Speaker 11: It was.
Speaker 1: Is this a long standing thing? Is this more recent development?
Speaker 1: What's up with that?
Speaker 4: I only remember from the kind of gay panic two
Speaker 4: thousands ere.
Speaker 3: Oh really, but I wasn't These are like the people
Speaker 3: wouldn't let their kids like read Harry Potters.
Speaker 4: Yeah, okay, yeah, but maybe back in the sixties seventies
Speaker 4: there was some.
Speaker 1: Okay, So Ryan, let's uh, let's talk about it.
Speaker 3: What is your case for NPR and for PBS, and
Speaker 3: why don't we split them apart? Because NPR is news organization,
Speaker 3: not so NPR News specifically, but also NPR.
Speaker 1: Has a lot of different programming, public interest programming. I've listened.
Speaker 3: I listened to tons of NPR when I was growing up.
Speaker 3: They have great book shows, et cetera. But I don't
Speaker 3: think you can deny that it's effectively taken, you know,
Speaker 3: pretty liberal in the last decade or so.
Speaker 1: So why shouldn't public dollars be funding something like that?
Speaker 4: So I would preface this by saying that my concern
Speaker 4: for this country is like rapidly evaporating, well as we
Speaker 4: become more like China and Russia. But you like, we're
Speaker 4: giving up right exactly, So then you like it. So
Speaker 4: let's just be China. Then at China you're going to
Speaker 4: get publicly funded media, yeah, and you're going to get
Speaker 4: you know, much better public benefits.
Speaker 5: You also have then no freedom of.
Speaker 4: Like thought, association or whatever. I mean, that's an exaggeration.
Speaker 4: Sure shouldn't say that about my good chairman, she but
Speaker 4: you don't have the same level of freedom that you
Speaker 4: have here. As we're eroding our freedom here, then it's like,
Speaker 4: well then what are we what do we even have
Speaker 4: to offer?
Speaker 3: But it's kind of like the food stamp thing that
Speaker 3: we had talked about yesterday, Like why so if it's
Speaker 3: tax payer dollar, don't you have a taxpayer interest in this?
Speaker 3: And the and the democratically elected government should have some
Speaker 3: say over the way that it's.
Speaker 1: Going to ae.
Speaker 4: I agree, and and I'm and I'm and I'm fine
Speaker 4: with that. I think that I think there should be
Speaker 4: a correction in the kind.
Speaker 5: Of political bias of NPR.
Speaker 4: And I think they're doing it like I think, I
Speaker 4: think they've been chastened by the election.
Speaker 5: And how did it get so.
Speaker 1: Out of control?
Speaker 5: Right?
Speaker 4: You know, because even I think I think the way
Speaker 4: it got that was I think the way it got
Speaker 4: out of control is the realignment of our of our politics.
Speaker 4: In throughout the twentieth century, you had, you know, the
Speaker 4: kind of suburban class that is going to dominate well A,
Speaker 4: newsrooms were more working classes throughout the twentieth In the
Speaker 4: early twentieth century, yeah, as as they became more professional
Speaker 4: class in the eighties and nineties, the professional class had
Speaker 4: a lot of Reagan supporters in it, and a lot
Speaker 4: of Republicans and suburbs were Republican and so and you
Speaker 4: also had this more of an American identity where journalism
Speaker 4: was less not seen as partisan.
Speaker 5: It was seen as it was like because.
Speaker 4: You had NPR, NBC, you know, you know, PBS, CBS, ABC,
Speaker 4: like that was basically it. And they saw themselves as
Speaker 4: kind of above politics. As you move into the realignment
Speaker 4: period of the twenty and twenty tens, everybody with a
Speaker 4: college education becomes kind of a liberal, whether and whether
Speaker 4: they're Regin.
Speaker 5: Specific type liberal or not.
Speaker 4: Right, yes, and they're you know, they're pro choice and
Speaker 4: their secular there and there are a lot of our
Speaker 4: kind of pro free trade like that kind of kind
Speaker 4: of a liberal. And everybody in journalism starts to have
Speaker 4: a college degree. So the combination of those two things
Speaker 4: just meant that everybody just worked at NPR even though
Speaker 4: they still had and I know these people like they
Speaker 4: still have they still can to themselves journalism journalists first,
Speaker 4: but they they were just kind of personally liberals. Then
Speaker 4: Trump gets elected and they see him as this this
Speaker 4: kind of assault on their on their on their sensibilities
Speaker 4: and on the American Constitution.
Speaker 5: Glenn Greenwall and I have talked about this.
Speaker 4: We from the two thousands up through twenty sixteen, we
Speaker 4: had always been saying journalists need to, you know, stop
Speaker 4: pretending that they're objective and allow the public to know
Speaker 4: what their opinion.
Speaker 1: I totally agree.
Speaker 4: And then after twenty sixteen we're like, oh, maybe not
Speaker 4: like that, Like that, wow, okay, maybe maybe we were.
Speaker 5: A little off on that, Like, well, no, a little
Speaker 5: you want a little.
Speaker 3: Like they went so anti Trump. Yeah, it's like no,
Speaker 3: but that was good. That was revealing, that actually made it.
Speaker 3: It's like, no, your impartiality is actually bullshit. I'll tell
Speaker 3: you where my jump point came for NPR News in particular,
Speaker 3: put this one up there on the screen.
Speaker 1: I'll never forget this.
Speaker 3: From the day that the hundred came out, Why haven't
Speaker 3: you seen any stories from NPR about a New York
Speaker 3: Post Hunter Biden quote. We don't want to waste our
Speaker 3: time on stories that are not really stories. We don't
Speaker 3: want to waste the listeners and readers' time on stories
Speaker 3: that are just pure distractions. Now listen, am I telling
Speaker 3: you that NPR or that Hunter Biden's story was the
Speaker 3: biggest story in the world. No, do I think it
Speaker 3: should have merited coverage in the same way that any
Speaker 3: story should have merited coverage in that twenty twenty election. Yes,
Speaker 3: And in particular, they didn't just not cover the Hunter
Speaker 3: Biden story.
Speaker 1: They also didn't even cover the censorship of.
Speaker 3: That story by Twitter and others that were involved at
Speaker 3: the time. So to me, that was when it became
Speaker 3: an overtly political, taxpayer funded organization, and I said, I
Speaker 3: just don't think that can stand you.
Speaker 1: You shouldn't be doing that.
Speaker 3: I will stand for And this is where I disagree
Speaker 3: with the libertarians and others. Actually, public programming, which is
Speaker 3: educational is great. I cannot tell you how much MPR
Speaker 3: I listened to when I was growing up. Bookstore, you know,
Speaker 3: book they had all these books shows, you know, the
Speaker 3: money one. I'm forgetting exactly what the name is. I mean,
Speaker 3: in the mid two thousands and all that, a lot
Speaker 3: of people you know, turned NPR on. It maybe have
Speaker 3: been whatever was even available, and it had just general
Speaker 3: public interest programming of like highlighting stories and you know,
Speaker 3: just thinking back to kind of the explosion the pre
Speaker 3: podcast era, that was very very useful for a lot
Speaker 3: of people, and I wouldn't even really call it political,
Speaker 3: especially in its you know, non news programming. But that's
Speaker 3: where you said the educational problem starts to come in,
Speaker 3: because now even that cultural programming around books where like
Speaker 3: reviewing Ibrahim x Kendy right as part of our show thing.
Speaker 3: They're like, okay, well, you know it doesn't take a
Speaker 3: genius to see which way all this is start trending?
Speaker 5: Now?
Speaker 1: Am I saying you can't review that?
Speaker 7: No?
Speaker 3: But are you also going to have a critical author
Speaker 3: on I don't think so. That becomes the issue and
Speaker 3: you start to really see the organization from twenty fourteen
Speaker 3: onwards become just like overtly liberal. I think PBS is
Speaker 3: the same story where it's sad because it's not just
Speaker 3: about Sesame and others. I mean PBS helped a lot
Speaker 3: of kids to learn about science and how to read.
Speaker 3: If you think about you know you're in my childhood,
Speaker 3: probably in our public.
Speaker 1: Schools, what did we watch?
Speaker 3: We watched a lot of PBS programming about how to
Speaker 3: read and cartoons. I genuinely think that stuff is really
Speaker 3: very impactful, especially in a country where you can't leave
Speaker 3: it to these privatized education companies, they certainly don't have
Speaker 3: our damn interests at heart. So I guess it's more
Speaker 3: about coming back to principles. But a lot of the
Speaker 3: libertarians and the conservatives, they don't even believe it's possible,
Speaker 3: and so they just want to blow the entire thing up.
Speaker 1: So that's really where I differ with them.
Speaker 4: Right, So it sounds like we agree on the sense
Speaker 4: that in principle, public media is a good thing, and
Speaker 4: then the public coming together and deciding that they're going
Speaker 4: to use public resources to fund media and education is
Speaker 4: a good thing because the market doesn't do everything. And
Speaker 4: when it comes to NPR, for instance, apparently about three
Speaker 4: percent of their funding is tax dollars.
Speaker 5: That's the National MPR.
Speaker 4: That's the one they hate, the one that all these
Speaker 4: liberals on.
Speaker 5: North Capitol Street.
Speaker 4: When it comes to NPR stations around the country, it's
Speaker 4: at least ten percent of the funding as tax dollars.
Speaker 4: And without that funding, the NPR station that exists wherever
Speaker 4: you live, if you're outside of DC or New York
Speaker 4: and Los Angeles would.
Speaker 5: Probably go under.
Speaker 4: And those NPR stations, they're important to National MPR because
Speaker 4: it's cool how NPR.
Speaker 5: When there's a story in Alaska, they've got something in Alaska.
Speaker 4: Story in Montana they've got and not didn't fly somebody
Speaker 4: to Montana. They've got somebody that lives right there, knows
Speaker 4: the local scene reports every day for the local NPR,
Speaker 4: but then when there's a national story, they report for
Speaker 4: national MPR. And I think that these rural areas in
Speaker 4: particular are significantly worse off without those publicly funded NPR stations,
Speaker 4: and they just just from a commercial capitalist perspective, there's
Speaker 4: not going to be the audience there for them to survive.
Speaker 4: So the public should step in and provide a thing
Speaker 4: that the market can't that we consider to be valuable.
Speaker 4: And if we feel like it's going off the rails
Speaker 4: politically ideologically, I think it's fine for the public to
Speaker 4: step in and be like, look, come on, get it together.
Speaker 5: Good, that's what we're doing here.
Speaker 1: Then we totally agree, all right.
Speaker 4: Guys, But except the Republicans don't agree. They're try to
Speaker 4: cut off. Yeah, we'll see I doubt.
Speaker 3: I mean, like you said, though, what is it three
Speaker 3: percent of the funding and it's not like they also
Speaker 3: solicit to it. That's so if the only thing that's
Speaker 3: annoying meou for prs, how much they shake you down
Speaker 3: for money.
Speaker 4: But every time you listen, if Republicans do cut the funding,
Speaker 4: it will not be national NPR that will go under.
Speaker 5: It would be the local mprs.
Speaker 1: That's true, that's fair. PBS.
Speaker 3: The only reason the real thing for PBS is I
Speaker 3: love their historical programming for anybody out there.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's on Amazon.
Speaker 3: It's only like three ninety nine a month, and you
Speaker 3: can get access to the whole PBS category. I love
Speaker 3: those American Experience ones about the American presidents. Obviously, the
Speaker 3: ken Burns documentaries are just incredible.
Speaker 1: But that's a.
Speaker 3: Genuine, genuine public service in my opinion, because that stuff
Speaker 3: is used in schools to like, I mean, it's definitely
Speaker 3: gonna better than any history teacher that you're ever to
Speaker 3: see to. Actually, this like highly produced, all these interviews.
Speaker 3: That's Civil War documentary. Actually it's funny. Shane Gillis was
Speaker 3: joking about it, but I feel like he's speaking directly
Speaker 3: to someone like me. But Shelby Foot, have you ever
Speaker 3: read his books? After I watched that, I actually tried
Speaker 3: to read Shelby Foot's books they are impossible to.
Speaker 5: Read for me.
Speaker 1: They are written in that the way he talks is
Speaker 1: the way that he writes. It's lyrical, so.
Speaker 3: He'll be like mister Lincoln, you know, coming up on
Speaker 3: a broad hill. Jefferson Davis, known for the scar on
Speaker 3: his face. I'm like, dude, I can't read this like
Speaker 3: you know.
Speaker 4: He didn't write with troops such as these, did he
Speaker 4: Stonewall Jackson biography?
Speaker 1: No, I don't think he did.
Speaker 3: He wrote he wrote a trilogy which was I forget
Speaker 3: exactly what they were called. Uh yeah, the Civil War narrative.
Speaker 3: And to be fair, he even would tell you that
Speaker 3: he was not trying to write. He was writing it
Speaker 3: in like a historical uh and like a he was
Speaker 3: writing it specifically in the way that I found annoying.
Speaker 1: I just personally cannot stomach that whenever I'm reading. So
Speaker 1: there you go.
Speaker 3: Book discussion from Soger and Ryan. Ryan, it's been fun, man.
Speaker 3: Thank you for stepping in this week. We appreciate you.
Speaker 3: Back to regular programming
Speaker 1: Next week and we will see you all later.