Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent
Speaker 2: coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about,
Speaker 2: it just means the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 2: But enough with that, Let's get to the show. All right.
Speaker 1: Let's move on to some pretty noteworthy comments that are
Speaker 1: being made on the Republican side about their economic plans.
Speaker 1: We just got some footage of Mike Johnson talking about
Speaker 1: their plans to continue to undermine go after dismantle repeal,
Speaker 1: et cetera, the Affordable Care Act. Let's take a listen
Speaker 1: to how that went.
Speaker 3: Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, was campaigning in
Speaker 3: Pennsylvania in a House district and was talking about Obamacare.
Speaker 3: I think we have this exchange, let's play it.
Speaker 2: Healthcare reform is going to be a big part of
Speaker 2: the agenda.
Speaker 4: When I say we're going to have a very versus
Speaker 4: first hundred use agenda, we got a lot of things
Speaker 4: on the table.
Speaker 2: No Obamacare.
Speaker 4: It.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the ACA is so deeply ingrained. We need massive
Speaker 2: reform to make this work.
Speaker 4: And we got a lot of ideas.
Speaker 3: So he says, no Obamacare, says massive reform to the
Speaker 3: healthcare system.
Speaker 2: Obamacare is pretty popular.
Speaker 1: You know, this is one of those things saga. Obamacare
Speaker 1: is now at this point very popular. It's so popular
Speaker 1: they no longer call it Obamacare.
Speaker 5: They now call it the Affordable Care Act.
Speaker 1: And healthcare is one of those issues that has been
Speaker 1: when you when you ask people what their top issues are,
Speaker 1: healthcare always ranks very high up there, and yet neither
Speaker 1: campaign has made it a focal point. The Harris campaign
Speaker 1: sometimes talks about like we're doucing prescription drug costs, but
Speaker 1: the bigger ambitions around even a public option like that
Speaker 1: is completely invisible. But Trump also has not talked about healthcare.
Speaker 1: Last time around, he famously tried to repeal the Affordable
Speaker 1: Care Act and failed with the John McCain you know,
Speaker 1: coming and deciding he wasn't going to do it. And
Speaker 1: so you know, you still have the true believers like
Speaker 1: Mike Johnson, who is the Speaker of the House, who
Speaker 1: is you know, absolutely dedicated to repealing Thefordable Care Act.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I wouldn't say Obamacare is popular. I would more
Speaker 2: say that repealing protections in Obamacare is unpopular because there
Speaker 2: is a different I mean, if you look at it,
Speaker 2: people hate the healthcare system, which is basically that's true
Speaker 2: what it is, right, Yeah, but they hate Helcare, but.
Speaker 1: They don't want to go back either to what it
Speaker 1: was before because they want to maintain the coverge for
Speaker 1: pre existing conditions and some of those reforms that have
Speaker 1: been important.
Speaker 2: That is the key. I mean, but in general, if
Speaker 2: you ask people are like, do you like your healocritism? No,
Speaker 2: our healthcare prices too?
Speaker 4: Hi?
Speaker 2: Yes, you know, like if you go down the yea absolutely.
Speaker 2: Let me think that's what Republicans always delude themselves into
Speaker 2: thinking that they'll be able to do. I mean, just
Speaker 2: recall twenty eighteen blowout midterm election almost entirely because of
Speaker 2: the ACA vote. You can ask any of the Republican candidates,
Speaker 2: specifically in the swing states, every single one of them
Speaker 2: blame the vote on repealing the Affordable Care Act as
Speaker 2: one of the reasons they're lost. Martha McSally down in Arizona.
Speaker 2: That's literally why Christen Cinema is in the Senate, which
Speaker 2: is kind of wild to think about. This does get
Speaker 2: to a broader question though, of what the hell is
Speaker 2: going to happen if Donald Trump does win. Let's put
Speaker 2: this up there on the screen and you can basically
Speaker 2: find the signs for whatever you want. So currently this
Speaker 2: is in the New York Times called the group at
Speaker 2: the center of Trump's planning for a second term. Is
Speaker 2: when you have not heard of I have heard of this.
Speaker 2: I did a monologue aout of years ago. It's called
Speaker 2: the America First Policy Institute. It is run by a
Speaker 2: woman's whose name is Brooke Rollins. She was the ran
Speaker 2: the Domestic Policy Council under Trump while he was in
Speaker 2: the White House. This is one of those institutions which
Speaker 2: has like Larry Kudlow and others on the board.
Speaker 5: Huge She founded it with Larry Cudlow.
Speaker 2: That's right, So I got Larry Cudlow. Linda McMahon, who
Speaker 2: is an official part former small business under Donald Trump
Speaker 2: now part of the transition team under Donald Trump. Also
Speaker 2: very influential on that. You got a lot of billionaire donors.
Speaker 2: If things go in this direction, where Brooke Rollins, for example,
Speaker 2: becomes the chief of staff, which had been floated there
Speaker 2: in the past. We have a very clear sign of
Speaker 2: like what the so called like corporate direction is going
Speaker 2: to look like for the Trump administration the second time around. Now,
Speaker 2: the other countercase I guess to all of this is
Speaker 2: that you do have factions, like within the Trump campaign itself,
Speaker 2: of people who are not happy with Brooke Rollins or
Speaker 2: do not agree with her direction. For example, Brooke Rollins
Speaker 2: and kind of her ilk were very hard and pushing
Speaker 2: against Jade Vance is the vice presidential pick. Now, clearly
Speaker 2: he will be there in the White House if they
Speaker 2: do win. So will he you know, I mean, why
Speaker 2: would you want somebody like that who literally ran the
Speaker 2: chief of staff? It could set up a fight around that.
Speaker 2: You have Johnny mcintee as well previously, who worked in
Speaker 2: the Trump administration. PPO had been attached to Project twenty
Speaker 2: twenty five. But I think he's gotten more of a
Speaker 2: past than everybody else's attached to Projective.
Speaker 5: I've not the dude who just said that women shouldn't
Speaker 5: be able to vote.
Speaker 2: Well, he made a joke about that on this TikTok Chris,
Speaker 2: that is correct. Yeah, he runs left really hard. I
Speaker 2: forget exactly what his channel is called it's like something
Speaker 2: date right or something like. Anyway, he's got a lot
Speaker 2: of followers on TikTok, that's all. I know that guy.
Speaker 2: Those people could very much not agree with Brook Rollins.
Speaker 2: But I'm setting people up here for if an eventual
Speaker 2: Trump wins, there are going to be some absolutely titanic
Speaker 2: fights kind of around who's going to staff the White
Speaker 2: House specifically, like what the foreign policy vision will be.
Speaker 2: On the economic you know, you're gonna have Steve Bannon,
Speaker 2: who's very much like opposed to this type of wing
Speaker 2: of the party. Will he be allowed back in there?
Speaker 2: Will Rollins be the one that is there. It can
Speaker 2: really set us up for some twenty seventeen era fights
Speaker 2: like there were between like Jared Kushner and Steve Bannon
Speaker 2: in the White House, or Gary Kohene and Steve Bannon,
Speaker 2: or you know, Peter Navarro and Steve Mnusan. I know
Speaker 2: this is probably ancient history some people, but those were very,
Speaker 2: very consequential for their policy direction that the Trump White
Speaker 2: House eventually ended up going in.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think there are a few things we
Speaker 1: can already say for sure. I mean, they're going to
Speaker 1: extend the tax cuts and jobs.
Speaker 2: I like, that's like not a question.
Speaker 1: Now, the significant tax break for billionaires, for corporations, the
Speaker 1: wealthiest among us, I think the choice, you know, the
Speaker 1: centering of Elon Musk is also incredibly significant. Elon is
Speaker 1: like this, you know, hardcore, like let's cut two trillion
Speaker 1: dollars from federal government spending, which by the way, is
Speaker 1: more than all of the federal government discretionary budget.
Speaker 5: He is a fan of Javier Malay, who.
Speaker 1: Is like this, you know, positions himself as an arco
Speaker 1: capitalist down in Argentina, and he's talking about how he
Speaker 1: wants to put the country through this sort of like
Speaker 1: economic shock therapy that is going to be deeply painful
Speaker 1: in the short term. I played some of this in
Speaker 1: my monologue the other day that you can listen to,
Speaker 1: but just for people who didn't catch it. He said
Speaker 1: in one of I think this was in one of
Speaker 1: the like Twitter live things or whatever. He talked about
Speaker 1: how Trump's agenda needs is going to cause hardship, temporary hardship, but.
Speaker 5: That is necessary. Let's take a.
Speaker 6: Listen to that as produce spending to look within our means,
Speaker 6: And yeah, that necessarily both some some temporary hardship, but
Speaker 6: it will ensure long term prosperity.
Speaker 1: He sort of reemphasized this in another exchange on too
Speaker 1: it can put d five guys up on the screen
Speaker 1: where you have this one Twitter user. He's laying on
Speaker 1: out what he thinks is going to happen in a
Speaker 1: Trump term. He says, if Trump succeeds enforcing through mass deportations,
Speaker 1: combined with Elon hacking away at the government, firing people
Speaker 1: and reducing the deficit, there will be an initial severe overreaction.
Speaker 5: In the economy.
Speaker 1: This economy, propped up with debt and artificially suppressed wages,
Speaker 1: markets will tumble. But when the storm passes and everyone
Speaker 1: realizes we're on sounder footing, there will be a rapid
Speaker 1: recovery to a healthier, sustainable economy. History could be made
Speaker 1: in the coming two years, to which Elon Musk, who
Speaker 1: again is the plan is to put him in charge
Speaker 1: of this, you know, massive government oversight agency, says sounds
Speaker 1: about right, so effectively like, yeah, we're going to cause
Speaker 1: a severe market crash and depression in the short term,
Speaker 1: no problem, which, by the way, is what's happening in
Speaker 1: Argentina right now.
Speaker 2: Well, I was going to say, like that's honest, and
Speaker 2: I support that, actually support honesty, I support just being
Speaker 2: real with people. I've said it here before. Mass deport
Speaker 2: the program though of mass husteria. Well, first of all, no,
Speaker 2: because first of all, it's also not gonna happen. I
Speaker 2: tweeted this yesterday. We all need to stop pretending that
Speaker 2: Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski are going to vote for
Speaker 2: a two trillion dollar budget cut. It's never gonna happen.
Speaker 2: If anything, they're gonna increase defense spending. I will call
Speaker 2: it here right now. The deficit will go up under
Speaker 2: Donald Trump. They will extend the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,
Speaker 2: they will increase military spending. They will maybe cut discretionary
Speaker 2: spending by one or two percent, which is like point
Speaker 2: zero zero one percent of the overall federal budget. They
Speaker 2: won't touch entitlements, SOLI, security and Medicare funding, et cetera.
Speaker 2: Will continue, and he will end. If he does win
Speaker 2: an office with a significantly bigger picture of the on
Speaker 2: the deficit that looks exactly like it is today, I
Speaker 2: will call it here. There's no way any Republican or
Speaker 2: Donald Trump administration will go in a different direction on
Speaker 2: mass deportation. Fisher King is correct. I mean, look, this
Speaker 2: gets to the heart of the entire debate. It is
Speaker 2: probably good for overall top line GDP to have mass
Speaker 2: immigration and specifically illegal immigrants. That's true if you look
Speaker 2: at human beings as literally amic utils, and yes, there
Speaker 2: will obviously be a market correction. I've been honest about
Speaker 2: that before. I think people who support mass deportation should
Speaker 2: as well. The question is what type of society do
Speaker 2: you want to live in and what type of overall economy.
Speaker 2: It's definitely not good for overall GDP necessarily to have
Speaker 2: higher wages for people who do construction like that's obviously
Speaker 2: going to increase quote unquote prices. Yes, it's true. We
Speaker 2: should all be honest if you support that policy. Now,
Speaker 2: do you think that's better in the long run, Yes,
Speaker 2: I absolutely do. I mean I can't sit here and
Speaker 2: say that tariffs are going to lower prices for everybody,
Speaker 2: but I think it's good. I think it's important. You
Speaker 2: know that washing machines are TVs that cost four hundred
Speaker 2: dollars if you buy it for six hundred, but happens
Speaker 2: to be able to mate here. Yeah, I think it's
Speaker 2: worth it. Is it easy for me to say, absolutely,
Speaker 2: you can vote your conscience and do whatever you want.
Speaker 2: But that's kind of where I look at it. So,
Speaker 2: first of all, the Elon two trillion thing, again, it
Speaker 2: will never happen. It's almost not even worth taking seriously, like,
Speaker 2: especially in a divided government or even with Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: Look at the past record in terms of what the
Speaker 2: deficit happened in terms of spending, like, there is no
Speaker 2: indication that any of this happened, even if Elon is
Speaker 2: in charge of what does it called the Department of
Speaker 2: Government Government.
Speaker 1: Efficient sage in order to promote his crypto favorite crypto.
Speaker 2: Hey, I'm still pro doge. I'm still holding disgusting, I'm
Speaker 2: still holding on myself.
Speaker 5: I mean, I guess, uh. There's a couple of things.
Speaker 1: So, first of all, I think it's noteworthy that Trump
Speaker 1: himself has embraced this austerity politics, which is the you know,
Speaker 1: old school Paul Ryan Republican position, but.
Speaker 2: It is popular too. People hate the federal government.
Speaker 5: They like, yeah, they like the idea of it.
Speaker 1: When it comes down to it, and it's your social
Speaker 1: when it's your social security and medicare whatever get slashed,
Speaker 1: that's another matter entirely. So that's number one, and number
Speaker 1: two is I do think it's a strange argument to
Speaker 1: be like, you know, uh, you should support this program
Speaker 1: because it's not you're going to support this candidate who
Speaker 1: embraces this program because the program he's pushing for isn't
Speaker 1: actually going to happen, and you know, so you don't
Speaker 1: get to pick and choose, like the parts that you
Speaker 1: like and don't like. And this is what a lot
Speaker 1: of the business community, by the way, has done with Trump,
Speaker 1: where it's like, well, we don't really think he's going
Speaker 1: to do the terrorists that are going to affect us.
Speaker 1: We don't really think he's going to do the mass deportation.
Speaker 1: We don't really think he's going to do these other things. Maybe,
Speaker 1: but maybe he is going to like lower you know,
Speaker 1: he probably is get to lower my taxes and the
Speaker 1: pieces that I like that are going to be good
Speaker 1: for me in my business he is going to do.
Speaker 1: And I think we have to take them at their word.
Speaker 1: So in any case, it's significant that Trump, who previously
Speaker 1: you know, sort of positioned himself against normal Republican austerity
Speaker 1: politics of the Paul Ryan Tea Party era, has now
Speaker 1: embraced Elon's idea of slashing two trillion dollars from the
Speaker 1: federal government budget, which again sounds all well and good
Speaker 1: until you realize that is more than all discretionary spending
Speaker 1: and would have a huge impact on basically every single
Speaker 1: federal government program, including ones that are very important to people.
Speaker 5: Let's take a listen to that.
Speaker 1: Your role for Elon b Elon Musk has a lot
Speaker 1: of roles he could take because he's a very exceptional guy,
Speaker 1: but he is a thing. He feels there's such waste, fraud,
Speaker 1: and abuse in our budgets, and he's right. So I'm curious, Hacker,
Speaker 1: do you feel like there's been a shift in Trump's
Speaker 1: economic positioning? No, because I mean this is very different
Speaker 1: from the way he positioned himself.
Speaker 2: That that message is actually quite popular now. When it
Speaker 2: comes down to it, people hate the government. People think
Speaker 2: it's inefficient. It is inefficient. The Pentagon literally can't pass
Speaker 2: an audit like in terms of cutting and all that.
Speaker 2: There are certainly places that we could cut, but it's
Speaker 2: not all that popular amongst Republicans when it comes down
Speaker 2: to it, when appropriations happen and an actual federal budget, again,
Speaker 2: you have to answer this question, do you think two
Speaker 2: trillion dollars is going to get cut. Not in a
Speaker 2: million years. Is Donald Trump going to cut Social Security
Speaker 2: and Medicare? No? Absolutely not? Is what is Donald Trump
Speaker 2: and the Republicans Congress actually going to pass TCJA? And
Speaker 2: maybe if there's a Democratic House, they'll do some child
Speaker 2: tax credit bargain to get that through. Half CTC, half
Speaker 2: TCJA extension, some corporate tax cuts and others are going
Speaker 2: to get left on the table, and the deficit it's
Speaker 2: going to go up. Like this is where we have
Speaker 2: to be real. Even if Evon was in charge of
Speaker 2: the so called Department of Government Efficiency, Like again, mechanically,
Speaker 2: people need to understand how the government works. What are
Speaker 2: you gonna do. You're gonna ask the GAO, the Government
Speaker 2: Accountability Office, to commission some blue ribbon report or whatever
Speaker 2: that's going to bring back to you. It's going to
Speaker 2: take a year to give you report about what can
Speaker 2: be cut and what's not. But again, the way that
Speaker 2: we know how government works is Congress has to sign
Speaker 2: off on every single appropriation and the executive has basically
Speaker 2: zero authority outside of some very narrow definitions about what
Speaker 2: they can and can't spend money on. Unless the Congress
Speaker 2: literally agrees to it. So like this is where you're saying, like,
Speaker 2: can't pick and choose. I'm not picking and choosing. I'm
Speaker 2: being like totally real about what this will look like.
Speaker 2: And frankly, this gets to a little bit of something
Speaker 2: annoys me is Silicon Valley arrogance around the government where
Speaker 2: they just claim things like you can cut two trillion dollars.
Speaker 2: I'm like, you don't know anything about Washington, Like if
Speaker 2: you think that that's going to happen. The people who
Speaker 2: are correct are the Wall Street guys who are like, yeah,
Speaker 2: there's no way that across the board tariff is going
Speaker 2: to happen, which is again true because it would take
Speaker 2: an Act of Congress. At best, you'll have soybeans, steel,
Speaker 2: and crops get hit with tariffs again, which is what
Speaker 2: happened last time, or critical medals or whatever like they
Speaker 2: can in the Commerce Department, how our taxes are probably
Speaker 2: going to go down, and they're correct like that is
Speaker 2: because that's a fullsome picture of Donald Trump plus the
Speaker 2: Republican Congress. If they have united government, and even if
Speaker 2: they have divided government, some version of that is going
Speaker 2: to get through. So this is just like a very
Speaker 2: realistic view of what this looks like. And if you
Speaker 2: believe the Elon's going to cut two trillion dollars, you're
Speaker 2: an idiot. Honestly.
Speaker 1: How do you feel about the closing pitch of the
Speaker 1: campaign of We're going to repeal the Affordable Care Act
Speaker 1: and crush the Yeah.
Speaker 2: That's stupid. Okay, Well, in terms of the Affordable Care Act,
Speaker 2: that's actually the dumbest one. On mass immigration, people do
Speaker 2: support mass deportation, specifically Republicans, but on the issue of
Speaker 2: Affordable Care Act, wouldn't touch it with a ten foot poll.
Speaker 2: And it certainly does get to the political genius of
Speaker 2: Mike Johnson. But look, people who are out there, you
Speaker 2: should also be honest. Yeah, that's what Republicans support, you know,
Speaker 2: the mean, mean median Republican in Congress. They want to
Speaker 2: repeal the Affordable Care Acts. So if you care about that,
Speaker 2: you should definitely consider that whenever you're voting. I'm not
Speaker 2: going to sit here in cover for them. They're idiots
Speaker 2: in terms of what they think.
Speaker 1: All right, let's go ahead and move on to the
Speaker 1: latest comments from Bill Clinton on the campaign trail stumping
Speaker 1: for Kamala Harris in the state of Michigan and talking
Speaker 1: about his view of Israel's war in Gaza, let's go ahead.
Speaker 4: And play that. I have to be careful what I
Speaker 4: say because there's only one president at a time, and
Speaker 4: none of us can get ahead of where we're going.
Speaker 4: But I think we're going to have to essentially start
Speaker 4: again on the peace process. And I understand why young
Speaker 4: Palestinian and Arab Americans in Michigan, I think too many
Speaker 4: people have died since. I get that. But if you
Speaker 4: lived in one of those kiboots them in Israel, right
Speaker 4: next to Gaza, where the people there were the most
Speaker 4: pro friendship with Palestine, most pro two state solution of
Speaker 4: any of the Israeli communities were the ones right next
Speaker 4: to Gaza, and Hamas butchered them. And so then the
Speaker 4: people who criticized it are essentially said, yeah, but look
Speaker 4: how many people you've killed in Retalent, So how many
Speaker 4: is enough for you to kill to punish them for
Speaker 4: the terrible things they did. That all sounds nice until
Speaker 4: you realize what would you do if it was your
Speaker 4: family and you hadn't done anything but support a homeland
Speaker 4: for the Palacinians and one day they come for you
Speaker 4: and slaughter the people in your village. You would say, well,
Speaker 4: you will have to forgive me. I'm not keeping score
Speaker 4: that way. It isn't how many we've had to kill,
Speaker 4: because Hamas make sure that they're shielded by civilians. They'll
Speaker 4: force you to kill civilians if you want to defend yourself.
Speaker 1: Andy went on from there. So basically, nothing is Israel's fault.
Speaker 1: The unbelievable devastation that we've seen in Gaza, where it's
Speaker 1: just total annihilation, every building, school, moss, hospital, etc. The
Speaker 1: kids buried under the rubble, the starvation, whatever, none of
Speaker 1: it is Israel's fault. Is just all the fault of Hamas,
Speaker 1: who you know, are the ones that use Palestinians as
Speaker 1: human shields, and so therefore it's all it's all justified,
Speaker 1: it's all just self defense. Which at this point, if
Speaker 1: you are still arguing that this is just self defense,
Speaker 1: like I just I don't know what to tell you,
Speaker 1: because we're talking about not just Gaza. We're talking about
Speaker 1: the West Bank, we're talking about Lebanon, we're talking about Syria,
Speaker 1: we're talking about Iran, Like, how many.
Speaker 5: Places do you have to attack?
Speaker 1: Actually, I just saw an analysis this morning saga that
Speaker 1: there's been over a thousand buildings in Lebanon destroyed, which
Speaker 1: you know has wella didn't have anything to do and
Speaker 1: the Lebanese people certainly didn't have anything to do with
Speaker 1: the October seventh attacks. So from a political perspective, this
Speaker 1: was in Michigan. This is the place where the Harris campaign,
Speaker 1: you know, has been trying to improve their standing with
Speaker 1: groups of voters that have understandably fled them Er of
Speaker 1: American and Muslim American voters in particular.
Speaker 5: But by the way, you know, I don't like.
Speaker 1: When we keep it that because there are vast loss
Speaker 1: of the Democratic base, including young voters, including non white
Speaker 1: voters who are deeply concerned on a moral basis about
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris's support for this gemicydle policy visa Vigaza. And
Speaker 1: here you have Bill Clinton in this critical swing state.
Speaker 1: You know, definitely not the message that they want to
Speaker 1: be putting out there.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, it's just very much like an old man
Speaker 2: moment takes to the campaign trail. Certainly. Yeah, there's a
Speaker 2: lot to say I think about just in terms of
Speaker 2: like Biden and Clinton and a lot of the flashbacks
Speaker 2: I know, why they have these nineties politicians.
Speaker 5: Campaigning for them.
Speaker 2: I don't know. I mean, look, he's he was a
Speaker 2: great I mean, he was very popular. He's one of
Speaker 2: the most effective politicians of all time.
Speaker 5: But he's old.
Speaker 2: Now he is old.
Speaker 5: I mean he has lost many steps.
Speaker 2: It was McDonald's when he stopped eat McDonald's and he
Speaker 2: went vegan, like whenever he gave that up after his
Speaker 2: like fifth Quinn Tipple bypass or whatever.
Speaker 5: Yeah, he was causing problems for Hillary back into.
Speaker 2: Lack.
Speaker 1: Voters said like Obamas should be getting his coffee and
Speaker 1: like that.
Speaker 5: Remember, yeah, I do.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was a South Carolinas eight.
Speaker 1: It's been a minute since this man was effective out
Speaker 1: on the campaign trail, and you're still rolling his old
Speaker 1: ass out, Like what are we really doing here? Just
Speaker 1: in terms of strategy. He is younger than Joe Biden though.
Speaker 2: Yeah, wild true?
Speaker 4: Is he?
Speaker 7: I think?
Speaker 5: Guess maybe he's like the same age as Trump.
Speaker 2: I think he's seventy eight. Yes, he must be there, right, yeah,
Speaker 2: hold on, that makes sense.
Speaker 1: Let me look, Yes, seventy eight though, the same age, right, incredible.
Speaker 1: Trump kept eating the McDonald's and Bill Clinton went away,
Speaker 1: and you know it was a big.
Speaker 2: Misakeake McDonald's actually is a key part of the American president.
Speaker 5: I just don't get the porter right now.
Speaker 2: The more unhealthy that you are, the better president that
Speaker 2: you are in my opinion. All Right, but let's continue
Speaker 2: with the Israel stuff. There's actually an interesting story I
Speaker 2: wanted to highlight. Let's put this up there on the
Speaker 2: screen from the Times of Israel where Trump apparently, according
Speaker 2: to that Israeli sources, told Netanyah, who he wants the
Speaker 2: Gaza war over by the time he enters office. He said,
Speaker 2: according to Nettyah, who's several times, win the war quickly,
Speaker 2: do whatever you need to do, but basically you need
Speaker 2: to wrap it up by the time that I take office,
Speaker 2: because he doesn't want to deal with the political and
Speaker 2: the geopolitical fallout of that situation. Now obviously kind of
Speaker 2: a difficult prospect because what it would mean would be
Speaker 2: ending the Lebanon incursion. Ending I mean, how do you
Speaker 2: what does even the end of quote unquote war in
Speaker 2: Gaza even look like? Because that would require a literal withdrawal.
Speaker 1: And that's that is the key piece right there. Ryan
Speaker 1: and Normally had a very interesting guest on yesterday I
Speaker 1: encourage every ready to listen because what Boebe is hoping
Speaker 1: is because I mean, I think it's pretty clear Bbe
Speaker 1: would like Trump to win. The overwhelming majority of Israelis
Speaker 1: would like Trump to win. Like it's the polling is
Speaker 1: not even really all that close, and the question isn't okay?
Speaker 1: You know, at some point the you know, the aggressive
Speaker 1: level of bombing that we've seen, at some point that
Speaker 1: ends and then what comes next?
Speaker 5: And Bbe, in order to keep his.
Speaker 1: Coalition together, effectively needs to resettle Gaza. Like That's what
Speaker 1: Ben Gavier and Smotrich very affirmatively want, That's what other
Speaker 1: LIQUD party ministers have been going to these resettlement conferences.
Speaker 1: And the concern from Bibi is that Kamala may actually
Speaker 1: now you can you know, have they drawn any real
Speaker 1: hard ladlines now at this point noo, but may actually
Speaker 1: make the moves to keep them from resettling Gaza. And
Speaker 1: if he's not able to do that, then his coalition
Speaker 1: effectively falls apart. So we know Trump is He's talked
Speaker 1: about you know, water for Kushner talked about Gaza's waterfront
Speaker 1: property and potential development possibilities. We know that Mary Maddilson
Speaker 1: as part of condition for her overwhelming massive support in
Speaker 1: dollars for Donald Trump, wants to be able also to
Speaker 1: annex the West Bank. So, you know, I think part
Speaker 1: of the game here in terms of what Bibe wants
Speaker 1: out of this political context is and out of this
Speaker 1: political contest, is what comes next? Am I allowed to
Speaker 1: just move forward with resettlement and ethnic cleansing or is
Speaker 1: there going to be any sort of opposition whatsoever in.
Speaker 5: The White House to that?
Speaker 2: I think really what Trump is Trump doesn't care necessarily
Speaker 2: about that situation. But for him and his people, they
Speaker 2: just don't want to deal literally with the ongoing war,
Speaker 2: and so they're like, look, man, you need to speed
Speaker 2: it up. And by the way, it's beneficial to them
Speaker 2: because it causes problems for the Democratic candidate. Kamala can't
Speaker 2: even do an event without getting interrupted by Gaza protests.
Speaker 2: At this point, Let's go next to jd Vance Spoke
Speaker 2: made some interesting crypto comments where if you read between
Speaker 2: the lines, the pro Israel lobby won't be too happy
Speaker 2: about this one. On the Tim Dillon Show. Let's take
Speaker 2: a listen to that e too, please.
Speaker 7: Obviously, you know Israel has the right to defend itself.
Speaker 7: But America's interest is sometimes going to be distinct, like
Speaker 7: sometimes we're going to have overlapping interests and sometimes we're
Speaker 7: going to have distinct interests. And our interest, I think
Speaker 7: very much is in not going to war with Iran.
Speaker 7: We recognize, okay, Israeli's Golfareb states don't like Iran. So
Speaker 7: let the Israelis and the golf Arab states provide the
Speaker 7: counterbalance to Iran. America does and have to constantly police
Speaker 7: every region of the world. We should empower people to
Speaker 7: police their own regions of the world. Right and one.
Speaker 7: We would save a lot of money too, We'd save
Speaker 7: a lot of focus. But unfortunately, I think Harris she's
Speaker 7: got this weird thing where I actually think she kind
Speaker 7: of likes war. Maybe she feels like she feels like
Speaker 7: a tough guy about it.
Speaker 2: I don't know why it is.
Speaker 7: But they've actually pursued even though they say they want
Speaker 7: to minimize Palestinian civilian casualties, they pursued the pathway that
Speaker 7: maximizes those casualties. They say that they're pro Israel, they've
Speaker 7: pursued the pathway that has prolonged the war as long
Speaker 7: as possible, which is bad for Israel, and they seem
Speaker 7: to be sort of sleep walking US into war with Iran.
Speaker 2: It's like the dumbest of all possible worlds. Hmm, all right,
Speaker 2: what did you make of that? Well, it's like a
Speaker 2: crypto that, by the way, is about as close as
Speaker 2: you're ever going to get too to some quasi Israel
Speaker 2: criticism or whatever in a world where Miriam Madelson's shelling
Speaker 2: out the big dollars buzz I appreciate it.
Speaker 1: True, I mean, I think it is is clear that
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign has been much smarter in pursuing a
Speaker 1: strategy of trying to persuade key demographic groups that they
Speaker 1: would that you know, they're a placed that they can
Speaker 1: go if they're disgusted. Now, I think if we look
Speaker 1: at Trump's comments, for one thing.
Speaker 5: They are not in line with They're very different.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they're not in line with what Jad's saying, shall
Speaker 1: we put it, trying to use this Palestinian as a slur.
Speaker 1: Trump thinks that Israel should strike Iranian nuclear facilities, which
Speaker 1: you know, would help to escalate the war in the region.
Speaker 1: Trump is very hawkish, extremely hawkish because of the Iran
Speaker 1: when he was president so the idea that he had
Speaker 1: any instinct towards withdrawing from the region is just you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, especially in terms of conflict with Iran, is
Speaker 1: just not really true. Actually, Jade Vance, one of the
Speaker 1: things in the vetting document was that he was critical
Speaker 1: of Trump on his assassination of customs solo money.
Speaker 5: Jad was right about that, by the way.
Speaker 1: And so you know, when you look at the totality
Speaker 1: of the mess coming out from the Trump from the
Speaker 1: Trump campaign, most of it is very much in line
Speaker 1: with Mary Maddeilson, Rudy Giuliani, Trump himself. You know, the
Speaker 1: problem is that Biden's holding them back. You don't hear
Speaker 1: too much of the perspective that's being offered here from
Speaker 1: jade Vance, where he correctly, by the way, points out
Speaker 1: that even if you are just narrowly trying to pursue
Speaker 1: the interests of Israel, this has been damaging. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: the country economically has suffered greatly. The governing coalition is
Speaker 1: you know, constantly on the brink of collapse. You have
Speaker 1: massive foreign direct investment that is fleeing the country. You
Speaker 1: have people, human beings who have left the country, and
Speaker 1: you know, contrary to the idea that all of this
Speaker 1: war making throughout the region is going to make israelis
Speaker 1: any safer. It's only put them at more risk because
Speaker 1: now you still have people who are evacuated from northern
Speaker 1: Israel who are unable to return and know one insight
Speaker 1: with that either. So I mean, he is correct in
Speaker 1: that point. I just don't think that that is the
Speaker 1: I don't think that that is the view of Trump.
Speaker 1: It's certainly not the view of Trump's donors. And you know,
Speaker 1: Trump is happy to sort of let people go out
Speaker 1: and freelance whatever they think is going to be effective
Speaker 1: to appeal to that audience in the moment, doesn't necessarily
Speaker 1: reflect any sort.
Speaker 5: Of a broader ship.
Speaker 1: But they've been much much more intentional about trying to
Speaker 1: do you know, the Muslim outreach and the Arab American outreach,
Speaker 1: especially in the state of Michigan.
Speaker 5: And that shows and the polling numbers.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're absolutely right. In fact, we have evidence of
Speaker 2: that strategy. Can we put E four please up on
Speaker 2: the screen here? You had a letter from Trump. He
Speaker 2: said to the Lebanese American community, during my administration, we
Speaker 2: had peace in the Middle East. We will have peace again. Soon.
Speaker 2: I will fix problems caused by Kamala and stop the
Speaker 2: suffering and destruction in Lebanon. I want to see the
Speaker 2: Middle East return to real peace, a lasting piece, and
Speaker 2: we will get it done properly so it doesn't repeat
Speaker 2: itself every five or ten years. So that obviously directed
Speaker 2: at the Michigan American vote. And it's interesting too because
Speaker 2: the Trump campaign is basically like scrolling through ethnic minorities, yeah,
Speaker 2: and then releasing letters to it, which look, maybe it's
Speaker 2: the correct way, not the way I would like to
Speaker 2: see politics. But he had another post where he's like,
Speaker 2: to all the Coptic Christians out there, I will stand
Speaker 2: up for you in the Middle East. I will make
Speaker 2: sure that we will not what was the whole Azerbaijan thing,
Speaker 2: you know, Ozer by joh Oser a ZERI uh, you know,
Speaker 2: aggression on between Azerbaijohn and Armenia. But my point is
Speaker 2: just that he seems to be just scrolling through these
Speaker 2: like subgroups and just putting out a lever where you
Speaker 2: know it could it really could be impactful.
Speaker 1: I mean, I guess if he sees the election that way,
Speaker 1: then that explains why they don't like the Puerto Rico.
Speaker 2: Yes, I agree with you. Again, this is not how
Speaker 2: I think politics should be, Like do your Lebanese Americans
Speaker 2: or whatever, let me do policy based on your homeland.
Speaker 2: I think it's a little weird.
Speaker 1: But you know, I mean, it's frankly more something that
Speaker 1: you saw, Like it feels very Democrats in twenty six,
Speaker 1: like let me put out a letter and have on
Speaker 1: stage someone from your specific like demographic identity group. Feels
Speaker 1: like the direction that the Trump campaign is going in.
Speaker 1: But you know, with regard to Arab Americans, Muslim Americans
Speaker 1: less so young people who I think you know, are
Speaker 1: either going to vote for Jill Stein by and large
Speaker 1: or they're just not going to vote. I think obviously
Speaker 1: there's a huge opening here that is no one's fault
Speaker 1: but Kamala Harrison, Joe Biden and the horrific policy that
Speaker 1: they have pursued, which has been deeply destructive and deeply immoral,
Speaker 1: and which she has been unable to separate herself on.
Speaker 1: And then you know, you have people like Bill Clinton
Speaker 1: who go out there and say the things that he says,
Speaker 1: and it's not really even though he said the quiet
Speaker 1: part out loud, but his comments are perfectly in line
Speaker 1: with the Biden administration strategy and the way that they've
Speaker 1: approached things like that is the position is Israel always,
Speaker 1: no matter or what Israel does, we'll stand by them.
Speaker 1: It's always that self defense. It's never their fault. The
Speaker 1: civilian death is never their fault. They bear absolutely no
Speaker 1: culpability whatsoever, even and we bear no culpability even though
Speaker 1: it's our bombs being sent, et cetera, et cetera. So
Speaker 1: you know, Bill Clinton is out there effectively articulating, just
Speaker 1: in a more clear cut fashion, what the actual policy
Speaker 1: of Biden Harris has been.
Speaker 2: Definitely, let's move on to Stop the Steal. Wanted to
Speaker 2: do this segment. We'll round it out today. We think
Speaker 2: we will try and make this a consistent part of
Speaker 2: the theme if Trump does end up losing the election.
Speaker 2: I'm sure you're going to hear a lot more about this.
Speaker 2: But one of the things you did last time back
Speaker 2: in twenty twenties, we just went through every single, like
Speaker 2: major claim around stop the Steal, every lawsuit, what the
Speaker 2: adjudication was, what the litigation looks like, what the judge ruling,
Speaker 2: what the claims. So we're going to start first with
Speaker 2: Donald Trump He made some comments while he was doing
Speaker 2: the garbage thing around the election. Let's take a list so.
Speaker 5: From statuside which heart would be defatient, but not say
Speaker 5: that the election was stolen.
Speaker 4: It was if it was a corrupt election, that could happen.
Speaker 6: But so far we're doing pretty well.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 6: They found a lot.
Speaker 4: Of smaller things in Pennsylvania's you know, and I think
Speaker 4: they've been corrupted and uh and taken care of they
Speaker 4: were they were corrupt. They were corrupted, but I think
Speaker 4: it's been taken care of.
Speaker 2: You called for law enforcement. I was gonna say, you
Speaker 2: anticipate to declare victory on election night. I hope they're
Speaker 2: we're going to declare victory. I mean they spend all
Speaker 2: that money on machines.
Speaker 3: Paper ballots goes to eight percent, a water machine goes
Speaker 3: eight percent.
Speaker 2: All right, so there you go, and said maybe, you know,
Speaker 2: in terms of we'll look out for if it's a
Speaker 2: corrupt election, but I don't think it'll be a corrupt election.
Speaker 1: Nonetheless, there also he also put out on true social
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania is cheating and getting caught at large scale levels
Speaker 1: rarely seen before. Report cheating to authorities. Law enforcement must
Speaker 1: act now. So I mean, you know, we laid out
Speaker 1: the he is clearly and Republicans in general are trying
Speaker 1: to lay the groundwork of like this if we don't win.
Speaker 1: It was stolen, right, it was rigged, And there's a
Speaker 1: lot more concerted effort in advance to lay that groundwork
Speaker 1: than there was last time around. You can go watch
Speaker 1: our segment about how this could all go down, the
Speaker 1: things that make it. You know, this sort of premeditated
Speaker 1: and very well funded. By the way effort in advance
Speaker 1: is something that is actually worse than last time around.
Speaker 1: On the other hand, you know, the Electoral Account Act.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is not the president of the United States,
Speaker 1: so that puts, you know, a lot on the other
Speaker 1: side of the scale. But it's very clear what he's
Speaker 1: trying to lay the groundwork to do, which you know,
Speaker 1: also with regards to this Pennsylvania thing, and Pennsylvania has
Speaker 1: been a big focus on the right side, I'm sure
Speaker 1: e's seen as well, Like you know, this kind of
Speaker 1: bit them in the ass previously in Georgia when they
Speaker 1: were running in these runoff elections, both of which they
Speaker 1: lost after Trump had just lost because there was so
Speaker 1: much conversation about how the vote had been rigged and
Speaker 1: the election was stolen, et cetera, et cetera, that they
Speaker 1: depressed their own turnout because people felt like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: if it's just going to be stolen, like why bother
Speaker 1: vote whatsoever. So there is a risk in advance, too,
Speaker 1: of trying to in advance convinced voters that like, oh,
Speaker 1: this thing is rigged and people are cheating at large
Speaker 1: scale levels rarely seen before.
Speaker 2: As Trump says in his true social press Right, So
Speaker 2: let's go through. So did a roundup on social media
Speaker 2: of all the big controversions. We're going to start with
Speaker 2: this one. Let's put this up there from Michigan. This
Speaker 2: is from the Michigan Secretary of State, Joscelyn Benson. Now,
Speaker 2: according to the Secretary of State of Michigan, there are
Speaker 2: quote issues with dominion voter access terminals and counties that
Speaker 2: use them. In the voter access terminal, specifically, it appears
Speaker 2: with the terminals that are handicapped assisting. Now, voters using
Speaker 2: this on election day will either have to vote straight
Speaker 2: ticket or manualists put their ballot. Unlike how Michigan voters
Speaker 2: usually have the option to select straight party option and
Speaker 2: then override their party selection for certain races. Benson said
Speaker 2: that this was an issue that has frustrated officials in
Speaker 2: places where these machines are used. Quote. I think all
Speaker 2: of us who use MISSI dominion machines were unhappy to
Speaker 2: learn about this during the testing period as early voting began.
Speaker 2: So we are working to seek accountability on that front
Speaker 2: and working with our clerks to ensure voters are aware
Speaker 2: of this programming issue. Again, this appears to be what
Speaker 2: is it in the assisted ballot casting part of the
Speaker 2: area from early voting, So it's not all but of
Speaker 2: course wanted to go ahead and flag it here, and
Speaker 2: it is one that has already been acknowledged by the
Speaker 2: Secretary of State, of course, and then also has been
Speaker 2: a nationwide thing that said I don't know, you can
Speaker 2: look at it either way. People sent it and were like, well,
Speaker 2: this is evidence that there's problems. I'm like, yeah, But
Speaker 2: I mean, if your evidence of a quote unquote problem
Speaker 2: or cheating, why would then the Secretary of State come
Speaker 2: out and acknowledge it and say that we are working
Speaker 2: on it. So look, nobody's going to sit here and
Speaker 2: claim that there's no issues or whatever. But it almost
Speaker 2: seems like the opposite where they're coming out acknowledging in
Speaker 2: the future talking about this quote unquote fix and exactly
Speaker 2: which type of ballots it can affect. So regardless, you
Speaker 2: can just say that's the explanation for what it is,
Speaker 2: and if it comes, you know, in the future a
Speaker 2: subject to some loss or whatever, this is the origin.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that's a great point. It's also not clear
Speaker 1: which side this would theoretically benefit. The idea is just
Speaker 1: like it makes it those particular machines make it more
Speaker 1: difficult to split ticket instead of just straight D or
Speaker 1: straight R. So again it's not really even clear which
Speaker 1: side that would potentially benefit. But it just makes it
Speaker 1: more cumbersome for people who are voting at these disabled
Speaker 1: access terminals, which is unfortunate but not cheating.
Speaker 5: It's just like more cumbersome for them.
Speaker 1: And I think it's smart that she announced this in
Speaker 1: advance to sort of pre but any potential allegations after
Speaker 1: the fact.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. But yeah, by the way, an election to
Speaker 2: election lecture for election people just say it all out
Speaker 2: in the future and avoid the mess of next time.
Speaker 2: Let's go to the next part. Let's put this up
Speaker 2: there on the screen. This was another big one. You
Speaker 2: probably saw it everywhere ABC News sixteen WNEP the affiliate
Speaker 2: people were saying, look, they already called it for Kamala Harris. Well,
Speaker 2: the alleged response or the reason for why they had
Speaker 2: this what was a reporting for Harris and Trump that
Speaker 2: showed up in the middle of a Formula one race
Speaker 2: on ESPN ABC affiliate was that there was some graphics
Speaker 2: testing package that they were doing that appeared to have
Speaker 2: up on the screen. I also think we should just interrogate,
Speaker 2: like the We should just interrogate the thought process here, Like,
Speaker 2: is the thought process that the media is going to
Speaker 2: rig the election by pre calling it for Harris and
Speaker 2: they're going to work then with the Secretary of State
Speaker 2: and Pennsylvania to just put up fake numbers. And why
Speaker 2: would you then do a dry run ahead of time?
Speaker 2: Like what is the logical explant? This is where the
Speaker 2: low IQ nature of this stuff honestly just driving me crazy.
Speaker 2: What is more likely a graphics thing or a concerted
Speaker 2: effort by w NEP to pre call the election? Like
Speaker 2: what world do you think living in here? All right?
Speaker 2: And look, I already know there's gonna be some butt
Speaker 2: hurt Republicans in the comments being like ooh, fake whatever.
Speaker 2: But it's like, look, be real with yourself. If you
Speaker 2: believe that, honestly, you're an idiot, Like I don't know
Speaker 2: what else to tell you. Yeah, if you really believe
Speaker 2: that that is a concerted effort to like steal the
Speaker 2: election by WNP ABC affiliate who put up the wrong graphic.
Speaker 2: Because local news graphics teams are of course the most
Speaker 2: crack in the business. I'm just like, what are we
Speaker 2: doing here? Is this just me working and working here
Speaker 2: to know? So obviously, how many times do you watch
Speaker 2: the show and the wrong graphic goes up on.
Speaker 1: This right, as people who have put up for wrong
Speaker 1: graphics plenty of times in the room, no offense, It's true.
Speaker 1: It happens the best of us. As someone who's been
Speaker 1: part of network like MSNBC election coverage, all of the networks,
Speaker 1: you know, they preload fake election results in order to
Speaker 1: test out like how it looks state by state and
Speaker 1: make sure there's stuff is running. In fact, we just
Speaker 1: did a test here, Mac and Griffin did a test
Speaker 1: of our election graphics literally yesterday, guys.
Speaker 2: And it could have been mistakenly put on YouTube, you know,
Speaker 2: only they uploaded uploaded.
Speaker 1: They uploaded the clip but for you know, I guess
Speaker 1: private or whatever only, but you know, very easy to
Speaker 1: accidentally click the wrong thing and it goes public and
Speaker 1: then oh my god, we're part of the election conspiracy.
Speaker 1: So just to ask yourself, Aukham's razor, which is more likely.
Speaker 1: At the same time, we have had some a few
Speaker 1: wild incidents occurring at polling stations during the early vote.
Speaker 5: We can put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: A machete wielding young Trump supporter was arrested on a
Speaker 1: variety of charges for menacing people who were going to vote.
Speaker 1: Believe this occurred in Florida, so they held a Neptune
Speaker 1: Beach Police Department held a media briefing following the rest
Speaker 1: of man in connection with an armed disturbance that occurred
Speaker 1: at the Beaches Branch Library, a polling location. You can
Speaker 1: see him there with the Trump signs and the machete
Speaker 1: and I don't know what he thought he was doing,
Speaker 1: but it was pretty, uh, menacing, stupid and illegal.
Speaker 2: So he was arrested.
Speaker 5: Good work with that, so and he was arrested.
Speaker 2: He was arrested.
Speaker 1: This one, Yeah, this is really wild. Put this up
Speaker 1: on the screen. So this dude who ran for I
Speaker 1: believe Congress. Yes in uh this is Kansas City. So
Speaker 1: former GOP candidate he stole ballots in They describe a
Speaker 1: scheme to create controversy so effectively, he got invited because
Speaker 1: he's sort of like a local you know, guys well known,
Speaker 1: he ran for Congress, etcetera, et cetera. So he got
Speaker 1: invited to this public test they were doing of their
Speaker 1: election system. Part of the test was to demonstrate to
Speaker 1: the public, like, this is all clean and free and fair,
Speaker 1: and we've got an organized system, et cetera. So he
Speaker 1: goes to this test and it was livestream the whole thing,
Speaker 1: so people could see everything that was happening, which is
Speaker 1: how he got caught. And he stole two ballots, folded
Speaker 1: them up and put them in his pocket, and then
Speaker 1: starts whispering to someone like, oh, the count of the
Speaker 1: ballots is wrong.
Speaker 5: I think they're missing some ballots, blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: After he was the one who stole the ballots, and
Speaker 1: since it was on the live stream, he got caught.
Speaker 1: But before he was caught and people went back through
Speaker 1: the live stream and saw this all happen, he went
Speaker 1: on a Facebook live and was talking about how, oh,
Speaker 1: there's election fraud and there's short multiple ballots, blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: Again because he's the one that stole the ballots. So
Speaker 1: this was an effort to, you know, try to create
Speaker 1: a narrative about how the election's rigged and it's stolen
Speaker 1: and you can't trust the results blah blah blah.
Speaker 5: And this guy got caught.
Speaker 1: Red handed being the one doing the ballot manipulation and
Speaker 1: you know, stealing these ballots during the test.
Speaker 5: So amazing stuff.
Speaker 2: Two more election updates. There was one that came out
Speaker 2: of Michigan. There was allegedly there was some one voter
Speaker 2: id where multiple voter IDs have been linked to duplicate
Speaker 2: ballots in Michigan. The Michigan Secretary of State is confirmed
Speaker 2: to the RNC that those duplicates will not be counted,
Speaker 2: and it was a glitch in the system. You know,
Speaker 2: if anything, the infrastructure at this point for election integrity
Speaker 2: and all that is so gigantic on the Republican side,
Speaker 2: hundreds of billions of dollars have now been spent on
Speaker 2: this with watchdogs, lawsuits, lawsuits, lawyers and all these other
Speaker 2: people that they are watching and investigating almost every single thing,
Speaker 2: so we will continue to do so, and in almost
Speaker 2: every case you're either been responsive or whatever, or it
Speaker 2: just turned out to be total bullshit. The other one
Speaker 2: that has come up now is the judge has extended
Speaker 2: mail balloting in Bucks County. There was a whole lawsuit
Speaker 2: about this. I just thought I would mention it where
Speaker 2: they were trying to close early voting at I think
Speaker 2: it was a deadline of five pm on October twenty nine.
Speaker 2: The judge their rule that violated Pennsylvania election Code and
Speaker 2: that they will then extend normal early voting for normal
Speaker 2: business hours before the close of business on November one.
Speaker 2: So I guess you still have a day and a
Speaker 2: half or so to go and to take it advantage of
Speaker 2: that they are in terms of the timeframe. I think
Speaker 2: they also limited it from eight am to five pm.
Speaker 2: But yeah, there you go, so look into that if
Speaker 2: you live in Bucks County, PA. Beautiful place by the way,
Speaker 2: New Hope, Pennsylvania. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think overall, one thing we noted last time is
Speaker 1: that the election apparatus really is a patchwork. You really
Speaker 1: are dependent on these individual local counties to run this election.
Speaker 1: And so of course there are going to be anomalies.
Speaker 1: There are going to be glitches. There are go every election,
Speaker 1: there's you know, people are upset because they had to
Speaker 1: wait in line too long or they feel that you know,
Speaker 1: there's always there are every election, there are going to
Speaker 1: be some issues that crop up because it's human beings
Speaker 1: trying to do a thing on mass and jurisdictions across
Speaker 1: the entire country at a time of a lot of
Speaker 1: heightened anxiety, tension, et cetera. So just take all of
Speaker 1: that in because there is something that is you know,
Speaker 1: goes awry or whatever, they don't have enough ballots, whatever happens,
Speaker 1: that is not evidence of a mass coordinated scheme.
Speaker 5: It's evidence that human beings.
Speaker 1: Are fallible and there are there will be some technical
Speaker 1: issues in glitches on election day. That is I can
Speaker 1: tell you with one hundred percent the case.
Speaker 2: Right, and ye, look, if it does look connected, if
Speaker 2: you can prove it, send me the evidence. I'd love
Speaker 2: to see it. Please. I beg you to send it
Speaker 2: to me. If we give it's the story of the century.
Speaker 2: If you could prove it, send it. I'll take a look. Yeah.
Speaker 2: And then just last thing on that, because everyone's always
Speaker 2: like going Oh, why can't we be like Brazil or
Speaker 2: France or India. Well, because we have this little thing
Speaker 2: called federalism. So you should ask yourself, do you really
Speaker 2: want the federal government to run all elections in this country?
Speaker 2: Absolutely not, No, we don't want that. I don't want
Speaker 2: that at least us. Well that's well, that's a different
Speaker 2: story in terms of rule, but I'm saying in terms
Speaker 2: of running it, you're running the overall election. That's a
Speaker 2: terrible idea and is the absolute antithesis of the electoral
Speaker 2: college and specifically of federalism itself. So that's how it's
Speaker 2: always been. I think it's probably better, if anything, the
Speaker 2: decentral system certainly as its annoyances in terms of why
Speaker 2: it takes forever and all of that. But the alternative,
Speaker 2: you know, in a French or an Indian or whatever system,
Speaker 2: is that the government itself is the one that runs it,
Speaker 2: which obviously is a massive conflict of interest there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yes, indeed, But yeah, I would like I personally
Speaker 1: would like to see federal set like consistent rules institute
Speaker 1: across the jurisdiction so that everybody has.
Speaker 5: The same rules when it comes to mail in ballot
Speaker 5: or Yeah, voter early, in person, voterize.
Speaker 1: Like let's just have yeah, the convicted, you know, felons, Like,
Speaker 1: let's just have it be standard so that you don't
Speaker 1: have the right to vote in one state but not
Speaker 1: have the right to vote in another, which I personally
Speaker 1: think is preposterous, but in any case, that's.
Speaker 2: The system we have. All right, Uh, that was fun.
Speaker 5: Yeah, we'll see show tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Ron Emily, We're going to do a little remote like
Speaker 1: election preview thing so we can break down whatever comes
Speaker 1: out today, latest polls, et cetera.
Speaker 5: So make sure to join us for that.
Speaker 2: That's right, we'll see then.