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 get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and 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. Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday. Have an amazing
Speaker 3: show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal?
Speaker 2: Indeed, we do a lot of interesting things that are
Speaker 2: happening in the world. So what the hell is going
Speaker 2: on in New Jersey? It's an evergreen question, really, But
Speaker 2: this morning we'll be exploring specifically with regards to these
Speaker 2: drones that people are reporting. Reporters have seen them. The
Speaker 2: US government is not answering any questions, so we will
Speaker 2: evaluate some of the various theories that are out there.
Speaker 2: We also have some updates on Luigimanngioni and Cardibal Fox
Speaker 2: News segment where they're literally calling for Bernie Sanders and
Speaker 2: Elizabeth Warren to resign from the Senate because of their
Speaker 2: comments expressing why people feel so much anger at the
Speaker 2: healthcare industry. Joe Biden issued a raft of pardons and
Speaker 2: one of them in particular is truly horrible. Break that
Speaker 2: down for you. We also have an update on Nancy Pelosi.
Speaker 2: She injured herself pretty significantly in a fall overseas. Why
Speaker 2: the hell are our nation's leaders so damn old? That
Speaker 2: is another question we will explore yet again. I think
Speaker 2: you've actually done some of the best commentary on those
Speaker 2: particular questions, so we can revisit some of that ABC
Speaker 2: News settling with Trump giving his presidential library fifteen million
Speaker 2: dollars to settle this defamation case. It's kind of a
Speaker 2: wild turn of events, so we'll break down what may
Speaker 2: be going on there. I'm taking a look at Trump's
Speaker 2: plans for a massive giveaway to crypto billionaires and the Man,
Speaker 2: the Myth, the Legend. Scott Wharton is going to be
Speaker 2: here to talk about his new book on Ukraine. Provoked
Speaker 2: really excited for that conversation and looking forward.
Speaker 1: To that one.
Speaker 3: He's like an encyclopedic encyclopedia knowledge is incredible. True, guys
Speaker 3: should see that book too. We have I think we
Speaker 3: have a copy around here somewhere. I was slipping through.
Speaker 3: The text size is so tiny and it's still like
Speaker 3: eight hundred pages.
Speaker 2: It's just incredible, unbelievable number of footnotes, and I just
Speaker 2: have the feeling that he's the type of guy who
Speaker 2: could just sit down and write it without even looking up.
Speaker 4: It's just all in there in the noggin.
Speaker 1: So let's help.
Speaker 3: Let's help Scott sell some books and want have links
Speaker 3: down definitscription. Thank you to everybody bringing subscribers. Really appreciate you,
Speaker 3: especially in the holiday season so you can become one
Speaker 3: breaking points dot com.
Speaker 1: We appreciate your support.
Speaker 3: We've got big plans in the new year, lots of
Speaker 3: meetings and things happening around here, and I think that
Speaker 3: you guys will really enjoy that.
Speaker 1: So if you want to be a fan.
Speaker 4: Specifically for premium subscribers, yes, we are.
Speaker 1: Of course came through.
Speaker 3: They're number one always on the list. Although you know,
Speaker 3: if you're not a premium describer, it's fine for those
Speaker 3: of you who can't afford it or just be able
Speaker 3: want to be able to watch for free, just help
Speaker 3: us out, like and subscribe on YouTube, or if you're
Speaker 3: listening to this on the podcast, share it with somebody.
Speaker 1: Really really helps us in the algorithm. In growth.
Speaker 3: We've had an explosion of organic growth actually on our
Speaker 3: podcast ever since the election, which is amazing. Most news organizations,
Speaker 3: which we'll talk about maybe tomorrow, are significantly declining in
Speaker 3: their ratings and others, but we have actually seen an
Speaker 3: explosion of interest. It gives me a lot of hope
Speaker 3: and a.
Speaker 1: Lot of hearts.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's actually kind of fascinating who has prospered post
Speaker 2: election and who has fallen off. It's a very very
Speaker 2: mixed picture. But we're proud to be one of those
Speaker 2: news organizations that people are trusting in the aftermath of
Speaker 2: the election to make sense of the world. So thank
Speaker 2: you guys as always for that. And with that, let's
Speaker 2: get to New Jersey.
Speaker 1: New Jersey.
Speaker 3: As we brought you all the news on Thursday, the
Speaker 3: mystery was beginning and it certainly, it certainly had reached
Speaker 3: what I thought was the peak. And then even more
Speaker 3: drones began to appear even more lies from the United
Speaker 3: States government. Wanted to start it off with a friend
Speaker 3: of the show, Rich McHugh's report from News Nation. Rich,
Speaker 3: for those who don't remember, previously worked at NBC News
Speaker 3: with Ronan Farrow. He was one of the reporters who
Speaker 3: helped blow open the Harvey Weinstein investigation, as well as
Speaker 3: a lot of other stories that were buried actually by
Speaker 3: NBC News. He is a absolute straight down the line
Speaker 3: shooter reporter and here is his report on the New
Speaker 3: Jersey drones. You can see that he himself was skeptical
Speaker 3: going in, but this is what he had to say.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5: I gotta be honest here. You know, when this story
Speaker 5: first came out a few weeks ago, as a resident
Speaker 5: of New Jersey, as a journalist, I didn't pay it
Speaker 5: much credence. I thought it would turn out to be
Speaker 5: a bunch of pranksters and this would all be over
Speaker 5: by now. The experience I had last night, however, changed
Speaker 5: the way I feel about this story completely. What I
Speaker 5: saw was more sophistic hid than I ever imagined.
Speaker 4: Take a look.
Speaker 5: One, two, three, four, at least five lights, six lights.
Speaker 5: I didn't believe what I was seeing. But what was
Speaker 5: I seeing? We're here in Central Jersey. We've been looking
Speaker 5: for the past hour. I think we've seen about forty
Speaker 5: or fifty of these drones. In fact, there's one over
Speaker 5: my shoulder right there, One after another after another. These
Speaker 5: drones appeared in the night sky. If you look real close,
Speaker 5: they look like fixed wing aircraft about eight to ten
Speaker 5: feet wide, colorful white blinking lights.
Speaker 1: That is not a plane.
Speaker 5: Definitely not an airplane. But what was it? Hours earlier,
Speaker 5: I was invited to join the Ocean County Sheriff Department.
Speaker 5: They launched their own drones to see if they could
Speaker 5: intercept the mysterious aircraft New Jersey residents have been reporting
Speaker 5: in recent weeks. The department says these mystery drones evade
Speaker 5: detection because they don't give off heat like regular drones.
Speaker 5: Why do you think that is? We don't know. It's
Speaker 5: just something that we haven't you know, it's not something
Speaker 5: that we've had our hands on.
Speaker 1: It's not something that we've experienced.
Speaker 5: Something they hadn't experienced until now. One of their officers
Speaker 5: called nine to one one after seeing fifty of them
Speaker 5: come off the ocean Advice.
Speaker 6: After we made contact with that officer that there were
Speaker 6: fifty that came off the ocean, fifty five zero. That
Speaker 6: was my reaction. Also, there were fifty that were coming
Speaker 6: off the ocean.
Speaker 1: And this is a sworn officer, a sworn officer.
Speaker 6: Yes, we contacted State Lease, We contacted the FPI, We
Speaker 6: contacted the coast Guard, at which point the coast Guard
Speaker 6: went out with their boat and they reported seeing thirteen
Speaker 6: following their boat. And then the coast Guard also advised
Speaker 6: that they went over them about three hundred feet and
Speaker 6: had a wingspan of about eight feet.
Speaker 3: So there you go all the hallmarks you might say,
Speaker 3: of a UFO full blown UFO siding. So I want
Speaker 3: to note a couple of characteristics. Number one, heat signature.
Speaker 3: That's one that has been well known all the way
Speaker 3: going back to David Fraverer and his initial encounter with
Speaker 3: the tic tack UFO. You also note that this is
Speaker 3: over the ocean that then comes on land. Three is
Speaker 3: one that happens what near a United States military installation.
Speaker 3: On Thursday Chrystal, we confirmed via a statement from the
Speaker 3: Naval Air Station Naval State Earl that there had been
Speaker 3: a confirmed siding over that And yet despite all of
Speaker 3: this we are told by our government absolutely nothing to
Speaker 3: see here. I'm again just going to show people the
Speaker 3: images you can decide for yourself. Some they say are
Speaker 3: commercial aircraft or fixed wing aircraft, small planes. Let's take
Speaker 3: a view. Actually here we have some of these images.
Speaker 3: Here's one from Flanders, New Jersey, December third, twenty twenty four.
Speaker 3: One of this is one of the early sidings. You
Speaker 3: can see lights there in the sky. All the images
Speaker 3: that we've pulled, by the way, are from the Associated
Speaker 3: Press and others that have been vetted.
Speaker 1: This one is particularly interesting.
Speaker 3: You can see that glowing or I will note for
Speaker 3: some of those who see the glowing kind of circular nature,
Speaker 3: some of that can sometimes be ascribed to a camera
Speaker 3: effect as it tries to lock in on the lights.
Speaker 3: But the lights themselves and the number of drones, lights
Speaker 3: in the sky and others being observed simply just do
Speaker 3: not comport with any traditional explanation of a private plane
Speaker 3: or a small plane or commercial aircraft and others. Keep
Speaker 3: in mind, all of those can be tracked very easily
Speaker 3: if anybody has I live near an airports, I do
Speaker 3: this Sometimes I open up my app and I just
Speaker 3: look up in the sky, and I can say, oh,
Speaker 3: that's American Airlines two three two coming from Orlando, or
Speaker 3: like oh that's small plane coming from you know wherever.
Speaker 3: It's actually a fun thing to do if you live
Speaker 3: near the airport, Yeah, it's fun. You know where the
Speaker 3: best place to do it is. Palm Springs are somewhere
Speaker 3: with totally clear skies. You could see everything that is
Speaker 3: up there. But my point is that in with all this,
Speaker 3: none of these you know, have ascribed tail numbers or others.
Speaker 3: They can't explain this one away, and yet they are
Speaker 3: doing everything they're damnedest. While the locals are freaking out,
Speaker 3: while the state police, while the governor and others are
Speaker 3: saying we have a full blown crisis on our head,
Speaker 3: the FEDS are the ones who are telling us absolutely
Speaker 3: nothing to see here at all, Crystal.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, their instinct is always, in every circumstance, extreme secrecy.
Speaker 2: But they want to say like, oh, it's nothing to
Speaker 2: worry about. And then it's like, okay, well if you
Speaker 2: can't tell us what it is, yeah, how can you
Speaker 2: assure us that it's nothing to worry about? If John
Speaker 2: Kirby at the podium, this man is very schooled in
Speaker 2: lying and obfuscating all the time about all topics. Here
Speaker 2: he is getting asked about these I don't know why
Speaker 2: exactly we're calling the drones.
Speaker 4: I guess because of their size, but.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well because of their movement patterns too, in the
Speaker 3: way that they're flying. You're right, I mean calling it
Speaker 3: a drone or whatever is kind of it kind of
Speaker 3: caught on. I don't really know why. I guess people
Speaker 3: assumed they were drones in the beginning. You're right, I mean,
Speaker 3: UFO is the is literally the correct terminology.
Speaker 2: But in any case, let's take a listen to John
Speaker 2: Kirby trying to reassure us but also trying to give
Speaker 2: us absolutely no information.
Speaker 7: If the President, as commander in chief, believed, based on
Speaker 7: the information that he'd been given, that there was a
Speaker 7: national security threat at play here, or even a public
Speaker 7: safety threat at play here, he would issue the appropriate
Speaker 7: directives to not only law enforcement, but perhaps even the
Speaker 7: military if that was needed. I want to go back
Speaker 7: to something I said at the top. There has been
Speaker 7: no evidence of any of this activity in or near
Speaker 7: restricted spaces.
Speaker 8: What the senator said in the letter, They said, in fact,
Speaker 8: that they've been observed maneuvering their critical infrastructure, sensitive locations,
Speaker 8: including reservoirs and military installations, and sided a concern from
Speaker 8: law enforcement about public safety threats because a MEDEVAC helicopter
Speaker 8: was prevented from transporting a seriously interpatient for care because
Speaker 8: of the presence of these drones.
Speaker 7: I stand by my opening statement.
Speaker 1: Can you make that make more sense?
Speaker 8: Because I think people in New York and New Jersey
Speaker 8: see drones assizement SUV over their house every night and
Speaker 8: think that that doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 7: Surely I understand why people would be looking at this
Speaker 7: and being concerned about it. We're concerned about it too,
Speaker 7: which is why we have the Department of Homeland Security
Speaker 7: and the FBI, my goodness looking at this, and we're
Speaker 7: taking it seriously.
Speaker 1: My goodness, my goodness. I like that.
Speaker 4: Ladies that are day. She's like, well, make it make
Speaker 4: more sense. You's like, basically not.
Speaker 1: It's a total lie.
Speaker 3: As I just said, the Naval station themselves confirmed the
Speaker 3: drone siding. Furthermore, let's put this one up there on
Speaker 3: the screen. This broke yesterday from the war Zone AX outlet.
Speaker 3: They do tremendous work over there. Drone incur this is
Speaker 3: all the way in Ohio. Right Patterson Air Force Base
Speaker 3: was closed on Friday night after the detection quote of
Speaker 3: small aerial systems that were spotted over right Patterson. You
Speaker 3: can even listen to some of the audio. We didn't
Speaker 3: have time to put it in here, but it is astounding.
Speaker 3: They say, drones quote ranging in sizes and configurations, swarmed
Speaker 3: the base.
Speaker 1: Quote.
Speaker 3: Our units are working with local authorities to ensure the
Speaker 3: safety of base, personnel, facility, and assets.
Speaker 1: I mean we have also.
Speaker 3: Had reports in Florida as far away, I mean literally
Speaker 3: all over the country. All of them same thing have
Speaker 3: in common, which is yes, they're overpopulation, but many of
Speaker 3: them are United States military installations. Here we have new
Speaker 3: Jersey state senator who has been briefed on some of
Speaker 3: the information, accusing the federal government of a full blown
Speaker 3: cover up.
Speaker 1: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 9: You know, this started as some questions and now it's
Speaker 9: reached the point of almost insanity. You think about a
Speaker 9: United States senator who has to go out with the
Speaker 9: local police to look for drones. That's where a United
Speaker 9: States senator is getting information. We had a briefing from
Speaker 9: the state police, the colonel and the State police. He
Speaker 9: was frustrated he had no idea where these drones are
Speaker 9: coming from. Not only did I call for a limited
Speaker 9: state of emergency and the FAA shutting down the airspace
Speaker 9: for drones, but also having the Department of Defense come
Speaker 9: in and answer questions. If the Department of Defense doesn't
Speaker 9: know where the origins are for these so called drones,
Speaker 9: then we're in trouble. So my guess is there is information,
Speaker 9: but they're holding it back. And now what you have
Speaker 9: is panic. Originally some questions, Now you have serious, serious concerns,
Speaker 9: and at the next point somebody's going to do something stupid.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we are in ol blown panic mode.
Speaker 3: Now people are even shooting at him, apparently in some jurisdictions,
Speaker 3: even though authorities are like, please don't do that.
Speaker 1: Let's put this one up there on the screen.
Speaker 3: Donald Trump, President elect, says, quote mystery drone sidings all
Speaker 3: over the country. Can this really be happening without our
Speaker 3: government's knowledge? I don't think so, or I says, I
Speaker 3: don't think so. Let the public know and now otherwise.
Speaker 1: Shot them down.
Speaker 3: So you can see that's clearly wrote that. Definitely wrote
Speaker 3: that one himself. You know, it's funny if you think
Speaker 3: back to the Kirby one and he's like if the
Speaker 3: president of the United States thought, I'm like, well, does
Speaker 3: he think anything?
Speaker 1: That's just one right?
Speaker 3: Does he literal brain power to be able to think anything?
Speaker 3: Who's in charge of this situation? So look, that's really
Speaker 3: what we know right now. I mean again, at this point, sure,
Speaker 3: people are panicked. They're looking up at this guy, probably
Speaker 3: more sore than normal, and they may be reporting some
Speaker 3: that are you know, fixed wing aircraft, commercial aircraft, et cetera.
Speaker 1: But but, and I think this is the key.
Speaker 3: You cannot, as rich laid out there, as the state
Speaker 3: police and others have shown, there have been too many
Speaker 3: now encounters, you know, pictures, videos, reports from the state
Speaker 3: and local authorities to just wash this one away. Yeah,
Speaker 3: the FEDS they just tell us there's nothing to worry
Speaker 3: about here. I just don't believe them. I mean, look,
Speaker 3: we have two options. Either it's them or they have
Speaker 3: no idea. I'm in the no idea camp. I think
Speaker 3: that they don't want to panic people. They just simply
Speaker 3: have no clue what the hell is happening. And that again,
Speaker 3: this is exactly like other UFO sidings in the past,
Speaker 3: where They just hope that the public moves on. I mean,
Speaker 3: this has this has a lot of character. There was
Speaker 3: a swarm in Belgium in the nineteen nineties. This is
Speaker 3: very similar. There've been similar incidents that happened near San Diego,
Speaker 3: that's where the tic Tac incident occurred. There have been
Speaker 3: incidents like I just said in Wright Patterson that has
Speaker 3: now happened. But New Jersey is the most high profile.
Speaker 3: I think, probably just because it's the most.
Speaker 2: Populated off the coast of Virginia beach too, the coast
Speaker 2: of Virginia be Oh yeah, another significant And anyone want
Speaker 2: to tell.
Speaker 1: Me what's in Virginia exactly? Thank you.
Speaker 3: It's like, you know, it doesn't take a genius to
Speaker 3: figure some of this stuff out, and yet they continue
Speaker 3: to tell us that there's nothing to see. And so look,
Speaker 3: if it is a government program, I mean, first of all,
Speaker 3: that's kind of interesting, extraordinary you were able to develop
Speaker 3: a drone with no heat signature and to be able
Speaker 3: to evade all of these other state and local technology
Speaker 3: possible possible, Right, I don't have that much faith in
Speaker 3: our government. The other option is that we just don't know.
Speaker 3: It could be a foreign adversary. They claim it's not
Speaker 3: you know, and others. I guess theoretically it could be China, Russia,
Speaker 3: or it's just simply completely unexplained. But I mean, the
Speaker 3: truth is is that they are it's a full blown
Speaker 3: cover up. They're basically pumpany information fullies. I guess the
Speaker 3: good news is that the state and the local authorities
Speaker 3: are so freaked out because they have so many they
Speaker 3: have to deal with the actual people.
Speaker 1: They're continuing to pressure the government.
Speaker 2: So it seems like, and you can tell me if
Speaker 2: there are any additional theories out there, we can just
Speaker 2: run through the theories. So theory number one that people are
Speaker 2: just having like MASSESTERI imagining things I agree with, you
Speaker 2: can basically rule that out. I do think some like
Speaker 2: the Maryland governor, for examples, like oh my god, I
Speaker 2: saw them. People were like, that's literally a consolation.
Speaker 1: Relax.
Speaker 2: There are some of that going on, certainly, as people
Speaker 2: are taking in this news, looking up at the sky,
Speaker 2: seeing things that they just aren't normally paying attention to.
Speaker 2: They're like, oh my god, I saw on. There is
Speaker 2: some of that going on. But the fact that you
Speaker 2: have people like Rich McHugh, Michael Tracy also was not
Speaker 2: one to you know, just randomly imagine things or you know,
Speaker 2: launch into some sort of hysteria. Gives me enough confidence
Speaker 2: there is something going on here. And the fact, you know,
Speaker 2: you talk to those local police officer sheriffs that are
Speaker 2: saying that they're seeing things as well. Okay, I don't
Speaker 2: think it's all just people imagining things. The possibility that
Speaker 2: to me has the most merit is that it's the
Speaker 2: US government, which is would explain how they could be like,
Speaker 2: it's nothing to worry about. But also we're not going
Speaker 2: to tell you what it is. I mean, their instinct
Speaker 2: is always secrecy. They keep things secret even when they
Speaker 2: shouldn't keep them secret. So if they have some sort
Speaker 2: of technological development that they don't want people to be
Speaker 2: in on, like, it's plausible to me that that's what's
Speaker 2: going on. There's one theory that's floating out there that
Speaker 2: they're doing some sort of search for nuclear material or
Speaker 2: a dirty bomb or something like that. That's one of
Speaker 2: the Internet theories that's out there for why there's so
Speaker 2: many of them in this sort of like grid like pattern,
Speaker 2: et cetera. So that's one possibility that I think has
Speaker 2: some merit. Another possibility is that it's a foreign government.
Speaker 2: I think that's less likely because if it was a
Speaker 2: foreign adversary, they would be much more aggressively trying to
Speaker 2: deal with the situation. And I don't think they would
Speaker 2: be like if this was some sort of you know, Chinese, Russian,
Speaker 2: Iranian attack, as one congressman floated that Jeff Andrew dude
Speaker 2: from a New Jersey floated like, I think they would,
Speaker 2: that information would be would be provided to the American public,
Speaker 2: and I also think that they would be aggressively trying
Speaker 2: to make sure that the problem was dealt with. So maybe,
Speaker 2: but I think to me that's less likely. Another theory
Speaker 2: that's been floated is that basically there's been too much
Speaker 2: like eat the rich talk out there, and this is
Speaker 2: some sort of a sigh up to distract people from
Speaker 2: you haven't seen that one. Maybe that's in left wing Twitter,
Speaker 2: I don't know, but.
Speaker 1: Anyway, you're now in full blown.
Speaker 2: Like lu like Luigi MANGIOI this is an attempt to
Speaker 2: change the conversation for Luigi Mangione and healthcare CEO being
Speaker 2: murdered on the streets of New York. And so this
Speaker 2: is like a distraction tactic. That's one idea that's out there.
Speaker 2: And then the other one, obviously is that it is aliens.
Speaker 2: And you know, look, I'm a bit of a skeptic,
Speaker 2: not that I don't think that there's things that exist
Speaker 2: out there, but it's just that would be the most
Speaker 2: extraordinary obviously explanation, and so I'm gonna have to see
Speaker 2: a lot more before that's the one.
Speaker 4: That I jumped.
Speaker 1: Let's run through, right, So innocent government.
Speaker 4: I miss any that's pretty much.
Speaker 1: A project, rightbeam.
Speaker 3: That's the other one, which is which is which is
Speaker 3: what basically this idea of like you bring in UFOs
Speaker 3: and you create AO.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a siop.
Speaker 3: Yeah that's a fun thing, but it's more about for
Speaker 3: to invite government control.
Speaker 5: All right.
Speaker 3: So everyone says, oh, well, we're just testing things. Yeah,
Speaker 3: you're going to test an experimental aircraft over a massive
Speaker 3: populated center. No, we have the entire state of Nevada
Speaker 3: is owned by the federal government. Basically, we have the Mahave,
Speaker 3: you have you know, so many different testing grounds where
Speaker 3: us no population centers.
Speaker 1: That would never happen specifically.
Speaker 3: Because of this, look at all of the history of
Speaker 3: experimental weapons technology do they do it over majorly populated centers.
Speaker 1: No, okay, so we can rule that one.
Speaker 2: Well, but do you what about the one they're searching
Speaker 2: for something, so they're not just testing the technology is
Speaker 2: actually being used for some purpose or The other theory
Speaker 2: that I softloaded is that the test is to see
Speaker 2: whether how people are going to react and whether there
Speaker 2: is going to be some sort of like a mass
Speaker 2: chaotic page.
Speaker 3: Theoretically possible for that to happen, you and have to
Speaker 3: believe in some like hyper functional part of the United
Speaker 3: States government which is like somehow not able to leak
Speaker 3: in one of the most extraordinary domestic syops in modern history,
Speaker 3: and it just seems unbelievable, Like, I guess theoretically possible
Speaker 3: with an extremely small team, but especially in the modern era,
Speaker 3: like how would that happen?
Speaker 1: The second is that just.
Speaker 4: Think all the explanations seem under right, right exactly.
Speaker 3: That's my point for how to open the mind. So
Speaker 3: then number three is this whole dirty bomb theory. I
Speaker 3: mean again, you know, if we have to think about
Speaker 3: what that looks like. By the way, all of the
Speaker 3: dirty bomb plans and all this and I went and
Speaker 3: look it's all published by NYPD and others because this
Speaker 3: is a theoretical possibility that major populated centers have been
Speaker 3: having to deal with since two thousand and one.
Speaker 1: This does not fit with any of the.
Speaker 3: Established search patterns or whatever of what they would normally do. Now,
Speaker 3: I guess theoretically they wouldn't tell us, but I mean,
Speaker 3: at this point we've had almost twenty years to contend
Speaker 3: with what that would look like for what you know,
Speaker 3: even radiation, et cetera. Also, if there really was a
Speaker 3: true threat like that, they would just evacuate the area
Speaker 3: or they would issue some sort of a guidance to
Speaker 3: the public. Well, there's risk ends of millions of people's.
Speaker 2: Lives, and we've seen in the I mean we've seen
Speaker 2: in the past both here with nuclear fallout and also
Speaker 2: in you know, Soviet USSR. There's such a desire to
Speaker 2: keep a lid on any situation and deal with it
Speaker 2: before the public knows anything.
Speaker 4: That to me, it's not crazy.
Speaker 2: That if they're the US government is concerned about some
Speaker 2: significantly like dangerous situation, rather than sparking a mass panic,
Speaker 2: they want to try to like keep the lid on it.
Speaker 2: And yeah, I think they're willing to risk people's lives
Speaker 2: at times, So it's not again all to me. All
Speaker 2: of the possibilities are far fetched and unbelievable, but like,
Speaker 2: that's what we have to work with. All a range
Speaker 2: of possibilities that are all relatively far fetched. So I'm
Speaker 2: trying to grasp onto the one that is the least
Speaker 2: far fetched.
Speaker 3: Let me also say, what was it the foreign government one?
Speaker 3: So well, okay, this is easy. That's actually the easiest
Speaker 3: one to be able to rule out, not based on
Speaker 3: having the technology.
Speaker 1: It's theoretically possible.
Speaker 3: China and Russia would have more advanced drone technology than US,
Speaker 3: but drones have to fly from somewhere. No, they can't
Speaker 3: just fly from the Russian mainland or the Chinese mainland,
Speaker 3: which means they would have to come.
Speaker 1: Off of a ship.
Speaker 3: Commercial satellite technology is widely available to literally all of
Speaker 3: US news organizations and others can buy it straight from
Speaker 3: any of these companies. I could go out and buy
Speaker 3: it if I and it was like, hey, give me
Speaker 3: a shot.
Speaker 1: Of the Atlantic Ocean or whatever. It'd be easily found.
Speaker 3: So in all of these categories, you know, there's just
Speaker 3: none of them stand up any weight. I guess the
Speaker 3: only again, I think there's only two. I think it's
Speaker 3: extraterrestrial or it's the United States government secret program. The
Speaker 3: secret gut program just doesn't fit to me because of
Speaker 3: all the things I just laid out about so called testing,
Speaker 3: et cetera, or their quote unquote searching for something, you know,
Speaker 3: trying to not exert to uh, you know, have mass panic. Again,
Speaker 3: it's possible, but at this point in time, like, what
Speaker 3: could we really even be talking about, you know, in
Speaker 3: terms of what you know? The dirty PALMD thing is
Speaker 3: the one I've seen circulating a lot BI there's no
Speaker 3: evidence for that. It was just a random person on
Speaker 3: Twitter who put it out there. I mean, I get
Speaker 3: that it sounds appealing, but I guess part of what
Speaker 3: you're talking about is that, yes.
Speaker 1: All of these sound genuinely unbelievable.
Speaker 3: And that is why I think the FED should just
Speaker 3: tell us if they really have no clue. That should
Speaker 3: be like, look, we don't know, we don't know what
Speaker 3: it is. I literally have no clue what it is.
Speaker 3: Give us high resolution technology. Another thing this is a
Speaker 3: tell to in terms of the FEDS, where I think
Speaker 3: they're afraid is that they haven't activated in any US
Speaker 3: military assets. US North Command has basically been like we've
Speaker 3: been advised not to assist. We've not asked to be
Speaker 3: able to do anything.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 3: You know another thing that we learned, remember whenever it
Speaker 3: came out, you know, with the sea about that Titanic
Speaker 3: submarine and how America actually knew that all those guys died.
Speaker 1: After like a day, like literally the day of Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's another one, because they knew because they have
Speaker 3: exactly we have the entire sea basically wired with sonar
Speaker 3: and all of this other listening technology. Like our tech
Speaker 3: for all those place is extremely good, like and if
Speaker 3: they were detecting any of that stuff, we would know.
Speaker 1: I think they're terrified because they have no clue.
Speaker 2: Our tech is so good that we have a mass
Speaker 2: operation of drones.
Speaker 4: So I mean without what is it that doesn't give
Speaker 4: out heat? His signature?
Speaker 3: But I've talked about is I've talked about this before
Speaker 3: with the so okay, if that's true, then that means
Speaker 3: that an extraordinary part of engineering, of systems, of material
Speaker 3: engineering and all this has been classified from inception to date.
Speaker 3: I talked about this with the atomic bomb. The atomic bomb,
Speaker 3: theoretically it was possible, but.
Speaker 2: However, if the government knows about aliens, that would also
Speaker 2: require a mass, government wide cover up, so it also
Speaker 2: would require but you, I mean, based on your previous commentary,
Speaker 2: it seems like you do think that they know about
Speaker 2: some of these things that are going on, and that
Speaker 2: would also require an extraordinary, multi decades long cover up.
Speaker 2: So you know, it doesn't seem any less plausible to
Speaker 2: me that they're able to cover up this whatever this
Speaker 2: particular technological advancement is and whatever they're out there doing.
Speaker 2: You know the fact, I think it is telling to
Speaker 2: your point that there hasn't been some sort of military
Speaker 2: marshaled response. They haven't as local politicians have called for.
Speaker 4: Them to do.
Speaker 2: They haven't issued a state of emergency. They haven't shut
Speaker 2: down the skies for drone, you know, for use of
Speaker 2: other commercial or civilian drones. And so to me, that
Speaker 2: is a tell that either it's US and they know it,
Speaker 2: or you know your theory that it's extraterrestrial. I just
Speaker 2: think there is that is such an extraordinary and implausible
Speaker 2: explanation that it requires a lot more evidence than just
Speaker 2: seeing things that are unexplained in the US government acting
Speaker 2: where because the US government always acts weird and secretive,
Speaker 2: even about things that it shouldn't be.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I totally agree, and I take your point on
Speaker 3: the quote unquote UFO cover up. Part of what makes
Speaker 3: it so extraordinary and annoying is that everything is about obfuscation,
Speaker 3: it's about terrifying, it's about nobody knows anything. They just
Speaker 3: know that it's not other things, and so it's not
Speaker 3: that complicated. Also, I would say that the United States
Speaker 3: government of the nineteen forties, which initially covered up Roswell
Speaker 3: and everything, was a very, very competent government that set
Speaker 3: up a program which literally could not exist today. So
Speaker 3: we can go that will take forever to go through.
Speaker 3: But my point of just why, I think that at
Speaker 3: the very least we can all agree that there's a
Speaker 3: full blown cover up. Let's please put a eight up
Speaker 3: on the screen. The new Jersey Governor Phil Murphy is
Speaker 3: saying quote rest residence deserved more concrete information on mystery drones.
Speaker 3: He sent a letter to President Biden on Thursday, urging
Speaker 3: the President to continue to direct federal agencies to find
Speaker 3: the origin of the unmanned aircraft systems.
Speaker 1: Quote.
Speaker 3: While I'm sincerely grateful for administration's leadership and addressing this
Speaker 3: concerning issue, it has become apparent that more resources are
Speaker 3: needed to fully understand what is behind this activity.
Speaker 1: He continues to.
Speaker 3: Put out tweets and others him looking at just one
Speaker 3: from last night where he spent the night actually with
Speaker 3: the FBI and with others who were in New Jersey
Speaker 3: to quote discuss drone FBI investigation into recent drone sightings quote,
Speaker 3: we are ready to assist the federal government in getting
Speaker 3: to the bottom of this. So clearly he's mounting a
Speaker 3: pressure campaign on the FEDS to try and get them
Speaker 3: to send more resources. I don't know if any of
Speaker 3: this will be successful. I think they'll just continue to
Speaker 3: try and to wait it out. But it is just
Speaker 3: it's truly extraordinary. It really is about what's happening here,
Speaker 3: and you know, it just gives me even less faith,
Speaker 3: I guess, in the government than ever before.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it is. It is certainly extraordinary.
Speaker 2: And you know, I have ruled out that it's just
Speaker 2: like nothing and people are imagining things, so.
Speaker 1: It's just not possibly on Yeah, at this point, it's
Speaker 1: just not possible.
Speaker 2: You got any faith in your man coming in revealing
Speaker 2: any of those classified information?
Speaker 4: Trump?
Speaker 3: Who oh, Trump well, first of all, wouldn't call him
Speaker 3: my man. But do I have any faith in Donald Trump?
Speaker 1: Maybe? I mean there's a bigger question.
Speaker 4: Don't really reveal anything last time.
Speaker 3: The question is is it even up to Donald Trump?
Speaker 3: Is it even something that's in his repertoire or his
Speaker 3: like of options.
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I mean, I don't.
Speaker 3: Think that's the way that the system has been able
Speaker 3: to live for so long.
Speaker 1: But I could be wrong.
Speaker 3: I certainly hope. So you know, you could try, maybe
Speaker 3: you can get one percent. Even one percent would be
Speaker 3: amazing to be able to get any out of this.
Speaker 3: At the very least. What he could do is continue
Speaker 3: the public rhetoric. He's got an interest.
Speaker 1: You know, he has a.
Speaker 3: House in New Jersey, in Bedminster where they've apparently had
Speaker 3: sightings before. And one of the ways he can easily
Speaker 3: reel it out too, is that there's an FAA guidance
Speaker 3: so that you're not allowed to fly anything.
Speaker 2: I'd pretty in the married, Oh absolutely, especially with some
Speaker 2: of these theories about like oh, there's a secret dirty
Speaker 2: bomb and they're like, okay, I don't.
Speaker 3: Yeah, right, And that's another reason that the FED should
Speaker 3: just tell people what's happening because people are gonna freak out.
Speaker 1: You know, you're gonna have mass panic. And I don't know, I'm.
Speaker 4: Surprised there's not actually more right now.
Speaker 2: People just seem to find it sort of like intriguing,
Speaker 2: Yes that's right, versus like really scary.
Speaker 3: Well, if we see anymore, you know, you were only
Speaker 3: like one incident away or something like that from really
Speaker 3: igniting something really bad.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I think it could be. I think at
Speaker 1: the very least, stay tuned.
Speaker 2: All right, let's go ahead and get to you some
Speaker 2: updates with regards to Luigi Mangioni and the media reaction,
Speaker 2: in particular this extraordinary segment on Fox Business where they
Speaker 2: took great issue with the comments that both Bernie Sanders
Speaker 2: and Elizabeth Warren have made, basically saying, listen, of course,
Speaker 2: murder is wrong.
Speaker 4: We all know that.
Speaker 2: However, you have to understand the public reaction and how
Speaker 2: they see the healthcare system as itself being violent, cruel
Speaker 2: and evil. In response this Fox Business, I guess what
Speaker 2: is Joe Conca a contributor there?
Speaker 1: Conca, Yeah, a media.
Speaker 2: Contributor anyway, media critic, whatever, analyst was brought on to
Speaker 2: call for their resignation over these comments.
Speaker 4: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 10: This absolutely makes my blood boil, Liz, and I'm sure
Speaker 10: that's true of anyone saying and sob who advocates a
Speaker 10: civil society. These are including Elizabeth Warren. Bernie Sanders has
Speaker 10: had the same sentiment. Two US senators that we're talking about.
Speaker 10: They've been in office for decades and they think that
Speaker 10: shooting a father of two boys a husband in the
Speaker 10: back like a coward on the street, like this six '
Speaker 10: sixth person Luigi Mangioni did last week. They're saying that
Speaker 10: what Brian Thompson, the CEO, had it coming somehow. Both
Speaker 10: should resign from the Senate for this rhetoric. They are
Speaker 10: begging copycat killers to come along and start taking out
Speaker 10: other CEOs or anybody in a position of power whom
Speaker 10: they disagree with or whose industry they disagree with. Every
Speaker 10: Democrat on Capitol Hill should be asked that they support
Speaker 10: or condemn this ridiculous, reckless rhetoric. The same kind of rhetoric, Liz,
Speaker 10: by the way, that Democrats used that nearly got Donald
Speaker 10: Trump killed twice, including once on national television. I mean, look,
Speaker 10: I thought that Obamacare was supposed to bring down the
Speaker 10: cost of healthcare and premiums, and the opposite has happened.
Speaker 10: Are we going to hear criticism from Elizabeth Warren about
Speaker 10: the architect of Obamacare or the president it was named after. Doubtful.
Speaker 10: Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders should be shamed into oblivion
Speaker 10: for this, as should every member of the media. By
Speaker 10: the way, that is turning this lunatic into a sex symbol.
Speaker 10: It's nauseating as a father, as a human being, so
Speaker 10: to state.
Speaker 2: The obvious analysis of the public reaction is not the
Speaker 2: same thing as advocacy for murder, quite clearly. Number two,
Speaker 2: hilarious for Republicans to parol Clutch over violent rhetoric when,
Speaker 2: of course Donald Trump was out there like calling for
Speaker 2: the military to be turned on his political enemies. Number three,
Speaker 2: the idea of SACA, the Bernie Sanders in particular, but
Speaker 2: also Elizabeth Warren haven't been critical of Obamacare is kind
Speaker 2: of preposterous. And number four, there's a later part in
Speaker 2: the segment, which it was like a five minute segment,
Speaker 2: so we don't want to play the whole club is
Speaker 2: just too long where he starts going off on AOC
Speaker 2: two and He's like, why don't these people offer solutions.
Speaker 2: It's like they literally have been offering You may not
Speaker 2: like their solutions, but medicare feral is a solution that
Speaker 2: they have been pushing for Bernie Sanders in particular, for
Speaker 2: probably literally.
Speaker 4: Decades at this point.
Speaker 2: So whole thing is just fake outrage over you know, what,
Speaker 2: has been a mass reaction against the healthcare industry in
Speaker 2: the wake of the killing.
Speaker 1: So I think there has been a mass reaction.
Speaker 3: I think what I'm begining, I guess I'm just starting
Speaker 3: to get skeptical that this is okay. Having lived through
Speaker 3: some leftist you know, justifications for violence and others, there
Speaker 3: generally seems to be an overestimation of quote unquote how
Speaker 3: much the public is with you. So just because something
Speaker 3: is viral on TikTok or elsewhere. I mean, BLM was violent,
Speaker 3: viral on not TikTok, social media or whatever at the time,
Speaker 3: but people publicly turn against it. So I'm not saying
Speaker 3: that the quote unquote rage and all of that isn't there.
Speaker 3: But I also am a little bit skeptical that people
Speaker 3: are full blown like, yeah, I'm actually like genuinely happy
Speaker 3: that this person has been killed.
Speaker 4: Oh, I don't. I'm not saying that.
Speaker 3: Okay, but you know there's but I mean, for example,
Speaker 3: there's this theory, like you just laid out, that people
Speaker 3: are like crying out for universal health care. But you know,
Speaker 3: if you look at the statistics, I mean, the vast
Speaker 3: majority of people are quote okay with their own health
Speaker 3: care plan or coverage.
Speaker 1: I don't agree with that. I think youro healthcare plan,
Speaker 1: coverage and et cetera is way too expensive, is bad?
Speaker 3: People mostly have affinity for their doctors. I mean a
Speaker 3: lot a small portion of the US public, some thirty
Speaker 3: to forty million, is genuinely like destroyed by the US
Speaker 3: healthcare system. I think those are the people who probably
Speaker 3: have been speaking out against this. But I also don't
Speaker 3: think we should overstate the case of like what all
Speaker 3: this is like.
Speaker 1: If the people truly.
Speaker 3: Cried out for universal health care, I think they would
Speaker 3: get it. And I just genuinely don't think that.
Speaker 2: You think you live in a democratic system where people
Speaker 2: get what they want they support it popularly, because that
Speaker 2: has not been my experience. I mean, if you think
Speaker 2: back even to the twenty twenty primary, right, Bernie Sanders
Speaker 2: is running on Medicare for all. Yeah, every poll showed
Speaker 2: that majority, large majorities of Democratic voters, even in states
Speaker 2: like Mississippi, supported Medicare for all over maintaining the current system. However,
Speaker 2: they backed Joe Biden, yes, because they were convinced that
Speaker 2: he was the only person who could be Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: and they were convinced by the electability argument. There was
Speaker 2: recent pulling i think from Gallup that showed the highest
Speaker 2: level in recent years of people saying that they believe
Speaker 2: it should be the government's responsibility to provide.
Speaker 4: For universal health care same as all though.
Speaker 2: And that's but I'm not saying exactly, but I mean
Speaker 2: that is a commitment to this should be a human right.
Speaker 2: Healthcare should be a right and not a privilege. And
Speaker 2: I do think even if you look at the polling
Speaker 2: in this election, neither candidate ran on healthcare. I mean
Speaker 2: outside of like, oh, we're going to lower a few
Speaker 2: prescription drug prices or whatever that was it, healthcare has
Speaker 2: been completely excised from the national political conversation up until
Speaker 2: this moment.
Speaker 4: But even with that being the.
Speaker 2: Case, with neither political party really pushing the issue, you
Speaker 2: still had people ranking healthcare reform as one of their
Speaker 2: top issues. It clearly is a system that causes a
Speaker 2: great deal of pain. Now you're right, do you want
Speaker 2: to take what happens on Twitter as always real life?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 2: But the fact that you had this same reaction across
Speaker 2: every single platform, I think definitely tells you that there
Speaker 2: is some there there. And there was actually polling that
Speaker 2: came out we didn't include it in this segment, but
Speaker 2: some pretty extraordinary polling, especially of young people, where Luigi
Speaker 2: Mangioni the killer has a higher approval rating than healthcare
Speaker 2: in the United States, health insurance companies and Brian Thompson,
Speaker 2: who's the slave and CEO.
Speaker 3: But this is part of the problem with the cherry
Speaker 3: picking stats like thirteen Congress has a thirteen percent approval rating.
Speaker 3: Ninety percent of people approve of their member of Congress, right.
Speaker 3: So the point is is that it's complicated in terms
Speaker 3: of how it actually manifes.
Speaker 4: You think people are actually satisfied with Congress.
Speaker 3: I think people like their congressmen or delude themselves into
Speaker 3: thinking that their particular congressman is the good one and
Speaker 3: it's all the other bad ones that are the wa
Speaker 3: It's like doctors. I've talked about this before. Everyone loves
Speaker 3: their doctor. Nobody wants to talk about why our doctors
Speaker 3: are wildly overpaid. Sorry docs, I know you'll crucify me
Speaker 3: for that one. Compared to every other developed country in
Speaker 3: the world, Like, this is the thing is that if
Speaker 3: you actually dig into it and you look all right,
Speaker 3: even coming back to the universal health care point like
Speaker 3: you just talked about, the government has responsibility. That's not
Speaker 3: the same thing as a single payer system. Right now,
Speaker 3: if you look at faith in our medical system, public health,
Speaker 3: and others, after you've just gone through COVID, how could
Speaker 3: you want the government to take over universal health care?
Speaker 3: That's insane considering the amount of bullshit that they talked
Speaker 3: and lied to us for over five years. So anything,
Speaker 3: America has become way more libertarian, But whenever it comes.
Speaker 2: To health you want big pharmaceuticals talking about what I
Speaker 2: want with this motive, and health insurance with a for
Speaker 2: profit motive. I mean, if you just look at our
Speaker 2: system compared to Listen, I'm not saying that every other
Speaker 2: country with universal health care where it's perfect and nobody
Speaker 2: has any complaints, but the cost is lower, the care
Speaker 2: is better, and people live longer. Agree, Like, it's very clear,
Speaker 2: And is it a universal sentiment in favor, No, of
Speaker 2: course not. But there's I think it's pretty undeniable at
Speaker 2: this point that this moment has struck a chord with
Speaker 2: people because so many Americans have had some horrible experience
Speaker 2: with the healthcare system and do experience it's as effectively.
Speaker 4: Cruel and terrible and inhuman.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's just at its core, like putting profits
Speaker 2: over actually caring for people when they're ill, making sure
Speaker 2: they get what they need. That is an immoral system
Speaker 2: that we have set up. And yes, I think that
Speaker 2: millions and millions of Americans experience it as such, and
Speaker 2: that's why they're reacting to it so to you know,
Speaker 2: just like dismiss that, and I just don't.
Speaker 4: I just don't agree.
Speaker 1: I'm not dismissing it. I'm just not. I don't want
Speaker 1: to overstate it.
Speaker 3: I think there's it's trending and it's cool right now
Speaker 3: to talk about Luisi Imanji and I get Look, it's funny,
Speaker 3: all right. Like as somebody who's been on four chand
Speaker 3: since literally a teenager, I understand dark humor, et cetera.
Speaker 3: It doesn't bother me all right. Like if anything, I'm
Speaker 3: laughing right there with you. But I'm not going to
Speaker 3: overstate the case as some sort of like mass social movement.
Speaker 3: I just think it's a lot more multifaceted than a
Speaker 3: lot of people who want quote unquote universal healthcare believe
Speaker 3: trusting government is an all time low trust and institutions.
Speaker 1: I mean, the vaccine rate is now basic like following.
Speaker 3: I think the flu shot had the lowest uptick literally
Speaker 3: ever in modern American history. The number of people who
Speaker 3: are produsing personal exemption and are outwardly flouting government guidance
Speaker 3: is higher than ever. I don't even think any of
Speaker 3: that is necessarily a bad thing, because people are asking
Speaker 3: questions for themselves.
Speaker 1: Look like Medica but that's not.
Speaker 3: But yeah, okay, old people like when Medicare pays their bills,
Speaker 3: but they don't like whenever they get told what to do.
Speaker 2: But that's what But that's what Medicare comes down for
Speaker 2: all would be.
Speaker 4: Is It's not that's what Medicare for all.
Speaker 2: That's the proposal for Medicare for all is just to
Speaker 2: expand Medicare already a very popular program, and Bernie's plan
Speaker 2: specifically would just continuously lower the age until you have
Speaker 2: everyone covered by Medicare, much lower administrative costs, much better outcomes,
Speaker 2: you know, in line with what many other countries have done.
Speaker 2: So it's not like you're going to be going to
Speaker 2: like your government issued doctor. Although I will also say
Speaker 2: that the VA healthcare system is also much better than
Speaker 2: the private healthcare.
Speaker 3: You certainly listen. I don't disagree about health outcomes, et cetera.
Speaker 3: I just don't think we live in a society that
Speaker 3: can tolerate this right now. I mean I can talk
Speaker 3: about Japan all day long, but tolerate that can tolerate
Speaker 3: like literal government administration, rationing, and so in Canada and
Speaker 3: the UK, these are baked in social programs from World
Speaker 3: War II onwards.
Speaker 2: Yeah, people too, they love they love Medicare again and
Speaker 2: social security. They like universal programs are very popular.
Speaker 3: They like it when the government pays their bills. They
Speaker 3: don't necessarily like it whenever they're being told what to
Speaker 3: do or in their rational care or whenever we had
Speaker 3: what was it There was huge COVID outbreaks and a
Speaker 3: lot of these medicare.
Speaker 4: So what do you think that the best solution would be?
Speaker 3: So, if you ask me about solution, I think we
Speaker 3: should have universal coverage, not necessarily single pair. I think
Speaker 3: there's certainly every American should have access to low cost
Speaker 3: health care, but a lot of people will not like
Speaker 3: what it takes.
Speaker 4: Together, like a public option.
Speaker 1: I'm not really sure.
Speaker 3: I mean, really it's about democratic because the point is
Speaker 3: is that we need to have sure that people have coverage.
Speaker 3: We also need to break up and destroy a lot
Speaker 3: of the cost vectors, which is private equity hospitals, which
Speaker 3: is doctors, the American Medical Association. The fact that our
Speaker 3: people are getting five times more salary than the average
Speaker 3: doctor in Europe, it's outrageous.
Speaker 2: I feel like there's a treatment of the American people
Speaker 2: as if they're this static entity that have their minds
Speaker 2: made up and we just have to like analyze what
Speaker 2: that is. And in reality, people are very like their
Speaker 2: minds change and they're persuadable, and you know, when an
Speaker 2: event occurs that causes them to think about the healthcare
Speaker 2: system differently, they change their minds and they open their
Speaker 2: minds to new possibilities. I mean, you know, previously in
Speaker 2: the early Obama era, for example, the idea of something
Speaker 2: like medicare for all, I mean that wasn't even on
Speaker 2: the table. Now there is large and potentially majority. Certainly
Speaker 2: some polls have shown majority support for Medicare for all.
Speaker 2: So I just think, you know, you can't just treat
Speaker 2: the American people like this is what they think, and
Speaker 2: that's that you also have to make the case for
Speaker 2: what you think would be a better solution to try
Speaker 2: to persuade people, especially in a moment of an opening
Speaker 2: right that right now, like we're having right now that
Speaker 2: previously didn't exist, I mean under the Kamalin Trump and
Speaker 2: that campaign and what was being discussed there, Like this
Speaker 2: conversation wasn't even on the table, and now it is.
Speaker 2: And so I think potentially what you're reacting to is, yes,
Speaker 2: the fact that a lot of leftists who have long
Speaker 2: said this system is immoral and horrible and we should
Speaker 2: not have a for profit system are using this opening
Speaker 2: where there is a national conversation happening about healthcare to
Speaker 2: suggest an alternative. Ye, there is absolutely that is going on.
Speaker 2: But I think that's a pause. I think that should
Speaker 2: be that's an appropriate conversation to have in this moment,
Speaker 2: rather than hey, maybe the solution is like murdering healthcare CEOs,
Speaker 2: which is obviously preposterous saying, yes, we understand why you're
Speaker 2: angry at this system. Here is a solution that would
Speaker 2: be much more effective, has been tried in other countries,
Speaker 2: would save money and would save lives. I think that's
Speaker 2: the leftist conversation that's going on here outside of just
Speaker 2: shit posting.
Speaker 1: Fair enough, Yeah, and there is a lot.
Speaker 3: First of all, there is a boomer tendency right and
Speaker 3: left to take seriously shit posts which are obviously a joke.
Speaker 3: So again, as everybody who's grew up on four Chan,
Speaker 3: it doesn't bother me, and I'm not reacting to any
Speaker 3: of it at all.
Speaker 4: You don't think bernieh resigned, No, I do not think.
Speaker 3: And by the way, I'm fine with analy I'm fine
Speaker 3: with the intellectual analysis of quote unquote justification of violence,
Speaker 3: because that's all of history is about thinking about why
Speaker 3: we have certain extreme reactions.
Speaker 1: Sometimes in the.
Speaker 3: Case of Luigi Cocks and what totally October I could think.
Speaker 3: But forever, I mean, you know, any killing January sixth, right,
Speaker 3: how many conversation we have here on this show. I
Speaker 3: remember talking about that guy who died of a heart attack,
Speaker 3: who voted for Barack Obama in Alabama and was a
Speaker 3: union worker who literally died of a heart attack while
Speaker 3: storming the Capitol on January sixth.
Speaker 1: How does that happen?
Speaker 3: It's an interesting sociological story, which obviously has major societal implications.
Speaker 3: So I don't object to any of that. I'm just
Speaker 3: what I am like looking at is this theory of like, oh,
Speaker 3: like healthcare itself is the answer, and politically it just
Speaker 3: has a bad track record. I mean, if you look
Speaker 3: at Obamacare destroyed in the midterms twenty ten, Trump then
Speaker 3: gets destroyed in twenty eighteen when he tries to repeal Obamacare.
Speaker 3: The general thesis to me, it seems to me, is
Speaker 3: when you screw with the healthcare system, people are pissed.
Speaker 3: I mean that doesn't mean that the system itself is good.
Speaker 3: But I keep coming back to that Congress thing where
Speaker 3: people say that they're outraged. But when you actually want
Speaker 3: to change something, or if they actually want to vote
Speaker 3: for something different, they never do it. I mean, so
Speaker 3: if you look at their actual voting.
Speaker 11: Patterns are different, like why they keep the whiplash back
Speaker 11: and forth. That's to the presidential parties, like there clearly
Speaker 11: has been We live in an era where people are
Speaker 11: consistently voting for change and never really getting the change
Speaker 11: that they ultimately want. I mean, you know, Obamacare is
Speaker 11: an interesting example because, yeah, people were dissatisfied with certain
Speaker 11: aspects of it, in my opinion, especially you know, if
Speaker 11: a single pair wasn't on the table, then at least
Speaker 11: having a public option there would have made the bill
Speaker 11: much more effected, much more popular in the short term.
Speaker 11: But even Obamacare, as imperfect as it is, over time
Speaker 11: it has been clear to people it did make some improvements,
Speaker 11: which is why when Trump tried to take it away,
Speaker 11: there was this mass reaction against going backwards in our
Speaker 11: healthcare system.
Speaker 4: So in any case, like I said.
Speaker 2: I'm not claiming that everyone in the country support suddenly
Speaker 2: supports Medicare for all. What I am saying is that
Speaker 2: when you have an opening in the conversation that wasn't
Speaker 2: there before, of course makes sense for people to put
Speaker 2: forward their ideas. For Hey, instead of having vigilante violence,
Speaker 2: how about we reform the system in this way so
Speaker 2: that we have less cruelty sickness, illness, bankruptcy, and death.
Speaker 2: This is an idea that could accomplish that, and try
Speaker 2: to push the conversation for it, because ultimately you know,
Speaker 2: otherwise there is no real change.
Speaker 3: Again, first, I don't even really disagree in terms of
Speaker 3: the sociological annalysis. I guess it's just one of the
Speaker 3: comments on the general politics of it. I'll tell you
Speaker 3: what doesn't help the general politics of it and gives
Speaker 3: a left disappoint Let's put this up there on the screen.
Speaker 3: Corporate America quote gets more reclusive following CEO's killings and
Speaker 3: fear in the c suite. After night, Healthcare CEO is
Speaker 3: gunned down, and now all of a sudden, you know,
Speaker 3: public officials and others are talking about Actually, this is
Speaker 3: my exact prediction.
Speaker 1: I was like, the only thing that's going to come
Speaker 1: out of this is that there's going.
Speaker 3: To be security guys out there, former Navy seals and
Speaker 3: others who are going to be printing money off of
Speaker 3: the quote unquote fear in the c suite, people taking
Speaker 3: down their websites like Bill Burr talked about as well.
Speaker 3: So this is obviously the ironic reaction is instead of
Speaker 3: talking about health care practices or whatever is that, of
Speaker 3: course they turn to, oh, well, we need to make
Speaker 3: sure that our CEOs and our executives are better protected
Speaker 3: against all.
Speaker 2: Of The other reaction has been to try to criminalize
Speaker 2: criticizing health insurance companies. Yes, what's going on in Florida
Speaker 2: with this woman who was arrested as being charged for
Speaker 2: inciting terrorism and threatening terrorism? I mean, completely insane for
Speaker 2: you know, repeating that I always get it wrong, like
Speaker 2: deny defend a Poe, repeating what Luigi Mangioni had on
Speaker 2: his bullets to some call center employee and say you
Speaker 2: all are going to be next, not even saying like listen.
Speaker 4: Threats have to be credible and specific.
Speaker 2: Okay, lots of people are out there, probably you and
Speaker 2: I just don't really look getting death threats on Twitter
Speaker 2: and all kinds of other places all day long, and
Speaker 2: unless it's incredibly specific and credible.
Speaker 4: It is not illegal.
Speaker 2: The idea that what this woman said is illegal is
Speaker 2: utterly preposterous.
Speaker 1: To post bail, do we know?
Speaker 6: Ye?
Speaker 1: She was even one hundred.
Speaker 2: Thousands confinement now, but there was some rumors online that
Speaker 2: they had dropped the charges. Her family is updated and
Speaker 2: said that they have not dropped the charges. They are
Speaker 2: still pursuing. This completely utterly insane. I talked to Ken Clippenstein,
Speaker 2: who has been doing incredible and reporting that the mainstream
Speaker 2: media has not touched on this whole situation, and he
Speaker 2: has been discussing how there have been you know, multiple
Speaker 2: people from within the national security apparatus, including incoming.
Speaker 4: Effectively terrors aresb.
Speaker 2: Gorka, who wants to use this as a pretext for
Speaker 2: additional crackdowns on quote unquote anti capitalist extremists extremism. So yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean that's if you don't reform and you have
Speaker 2: an increasingly unequal and cruel system, that is the other
Speaker 2: pathway is basically like security state crackdown, which is of
Speaker 2: course something that we have experienced over years and years
Speaker 2: of that increasing ratcheting up of the surveillance and civil
Speaker 2: liberties like going going away endlessly for the past I
Speaker 2: don't know how many years. So that is the other
Speaker 2: reaction we've seen here. And then this was hilarious. Kathy Hochl,
Speaker 2: Governor of New York, who is just utterly apathetic and
Speaker 2: unimpressive and every way you can imagine put this up
Speaker 2: on the screen. She's apparently according I like the way
Speaker 2: that Luke Goldswein puts this. Kathy Hockel is holding a
Speaker 2: therapy session with one hundred and seventy five corporate representative
Speaker 2: CEOs to calm the nerves of the New York City
Speaker 2: business elite in the wake of Brian Thompson's killing quote.
Speaker 2: Demonization of corporate executives is not new, said Kathy Wild,
Speaker 2: CEO and president of the Partnership for New York, who
Speaker 2: is leading this outreach meeting. So you know, this is
Speaker 2: her response, rather than trying to push for sort of
Speaker 2: any sort of healthcare reform, it's to hold the hands
Speaker 2: of these corporate CEOs. And you know, I expect that
Speaker 2: would be the immediate Democratic Party response. You have plenty
Speaker 2: of people out there who are not sounding like Bernie
Speaker 2: Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, who are you know, are not
Speaker 2: trying to understand why people are so angry at a
Speaker 2: system that is so unjust barbaric and cool.
Speaker 3: Well, in this case, the state of New York literally
Speaker 3: runs on rich people and on conferences.
Speaker 1: Like their entire tax revenue.
Speaker 3: I think it's like fifty percent of their tax revenue
Speaker 3: is paid by a fifty individual something.
Speaker 1: Really well, yeah, it's insane in New.
Speaker 4: York City, some Gilded age stuff.
Speaker 3: It's literally it's and that's why these are non functional places.
Speaker 3: Places like San Francisco and New York. If you lose
Speaker 3: a single individual, that's why they're their whole. Like idea
Speaker 3: of taxation and the way that it works was great
Speaker 3: as long as you have like a moat around business.
Speaker 3: And that's why you need to reassure because what was
Speaker 3: that you know, what was Brian Thompson headed to from
Speaker 3: his hotel his shareholder conference, right, So like there you go.
Speaker 3: So without that and the hotels and the money and
Speaker 3: the ability of extreme the extremely basically the global elite
Speaker 3: to converge on New York City for business, they have
Speaker 3: nothing going for them period. Yeah, they just have their
Speaker 3: high social services. So it explains, you know, and these.
Speaker 4: Are their friends, these are their donors.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly the way it works.
Speaker 2: One more piece here that I just wanted to flag.
Speaker 2: I will say, you know, I'm not like, you know,
Speaker 2: I'm skeptical of a lot of conspiracy the theories, but
Speaker 2: I am a little bit suspicious of the official narrative
Speaker 2: of how Luigi Mangioni was ultimately apprehended. In any case,
Speaker 2: Wall Street Journal had this piece saying that the way
Speaker 2: that they were able to apprehend him was this mix
Speaker 2: of new technology, advanced surveillance tech and.
Speaker 4: Old school sleuthing.
Speaker 2: The official narrative here is that they used all of
Speaker 2: this incredible surveillance architecture within New York City to be
Speaker 2: able to capture that one image of Luigi Mangioni with
Speaker 2: his mask down at the hostel. Then they put that
Speaker 2: out to the public. And by the way, speaking of
Speaker 2: rich people, this is a Tish. She's one of the
Speaker 2: a member of the you know, wealthy multi billionaire Tish family,
Speaker 2: owners of the Lower which, yeah, I learned that in
Speaker 2: this article. I was wondering because I noted the last name.
Speaker 2: They're part owners of the Giants. Anyway, very storied, wealthy,
Speaker 2: extremely wealthy New York family are in any case, so
Speaker 2: she is the NYPD commissioner, which is interesting and of itself.
Speaker 2: So anyway, there theory is okay, they or their story is,
Speaker 2: they got this picture, they put it onto the public,
Speaker 2: and then some random person in McDonald's is able to
Speaker 2: spot Luigi Maanngioni based on that photo call in a tip.
Speaker 2: The police are there minutes later and find the murder weapon,
Speaker 2: the manifesto, the bullets, et cetera. And that's how they're
Speaker 2: able to bring him to justice.
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 2: It just seems I know that they were getting hundreds,
Speaker 2: if not thousands of tips into this hotline. Is it
Speaker 2: really probable that this one tip they would act on
Speaker 2: so immediately.
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I find that a little bit hard to believe. And
Speaker 2: some people were pointing out online that McDonald's kiosks do
Speaker 2: have cameras and some sort of like, you know, facial
Speaker 2: recognition technology at these McDonald's kiosks, and wondering whether there
Speaker 2: was some ability to use this private surveillance tech by
Speaker 2: the public officials, which would obviously be you know, extraordinary
Speaker 2: violation of privacy rights, et cetera. So just putting that
Speaker 2: out there that, you know, to keep an eye on
Speaker 2: the official story about how this or individual was apprhanded.
Speaker 1: They suspected it, then they checked the camera, and then
Speaker 1: they exactly right.
Speaker 4: You know what I mean, you get very much.
Speaker 3: I mean I said, it's not outside the realm of possibility.
Speaker 3: I've involuntarily been face scanned at airports where they don't
Speaker 3: even check your ID in some cases if you fly
Speaker 3: through a major airport like Washington, Dulles or elsewhere. Sometimes
Speaker 3: TSA is doing these pilot programs where you don't even
Speaker 3: hand the TSA agent your ID. They just scan your
Speaker 3: face and it pops on your boarding pass. And when
Speaker 3: you're bored in international flights these days, it's a it's
Speaker 3: a game.
Speaker 1: Like when you.
Speaker 3: Board, the default is that you're boarding by face by
Speaker 3: face scan.
Speaker 1: It's creepy.
Speaker 3: Nobody ever consented to, at least I don't remember checking
Speaker 3: a specific thing. I mean maybe even if it's a farce,
Speaker 3: just scan the boarding pass. It makes me feel better
Speaker 3: as opposed to like twenty three E.
Speaker 4: You're like, WHOA, that is creepy.
Speaker 1: I mean it is.
Speaker 3: And that's a private company, right, and then you think
Speaker 3: about the TSA and all that is there. I've pretty
Speaker 3: much given it all up after enrolled. I don't know,
Speaker 3: I'm enrollment to Global Entry and all of these other
Speaker 3: things voluntarily just so I don't get detained for three
Speaker 3: hours waiting in line. But that's another way the government
Speaker 3: gets you on a lot of these programs. You know,
Speaker 3: forty five million people have TSA pre check now, which
Speaker 3: means that their fingerprints are on file, that their you know,
Speaker 3: face and and others are inside of a government database.
Speaker 1: What are you going to do?
Speaker 3: What the alternative is they're like, screw you, wait in line.
Speaker 3: Oh you're going to miss your flight. You know, That's
Speaker 3: that's how they get you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and it's phones that can be you know, that's
Speaker 2: a position by the cops and Alexa devices and surveillance camera.
Speaker 2: That is one thing you realized too in the story
Speaker 2: about following this when it was a man hunt, just
Speaker 2: how many cameras are recording you.
Speaker 3: That's why I didn't think you would ever get away
Speaker 3: with it. I was like, there's just no way these days.
Speaker 3: I mean, they can track everything.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, but you know, I do think if
Speaker 2: he had immediately boarded a flight to another country before
Speaker 2: they had because they said.
Speaker 4: They didn't have a name, they didn't have really anything.
Speaker 2: Yeah until that photo didn't even come out until the
Speaker 2: next day.
Speaker 3: Yeah, his biggest mistake was not just getting on the
Speaker 3: train to JFK and going to I don't know, Zimbabwe
Speaker 3: or something.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he probably thought that they would have had his
Speaker 2: face ideed more quickly than that being able to apprehend
Speaker 2: him at Therapore, or maybe he wanted to get gone.
Speaker 4: I mean, I do think that's a possibility.
Speaker 3: We had the manifesto, the gun and the exactly which
Speaker 3: was done.
Speaker 2: And he had ditched the backpack with the monopoly money.
Speaker 2: So you'd been ditching things along the way, seemingly kind
Speaker 2: of intentionally. So why didn't you ditch the murder weapon
Speaker 2: in the manifold whatever? Who knows what's going on in
Speaker 2: his mind. But anyway, those the latest updates we have
Speaker 2: for you there. As Joe Biden reaches the end of
Speaker 2: his time in office, there have been, of course a
Speaker 2: lot of discussion about pardons once he has already given
Speaker 2: link to his son, and we had a whole new
Speaker 2: raft of pardons that I'll get into momentarily, but also
Speaker 2: question of whether or not he should and whether he
Speaker 2: will issue preemptive pardons for people who may be threatened
Speaker 2: by retribution from Donald Trump. Bernie Sanders weighed in on
Speaker 2: this question and said he was in favor of pardons
Speaker 2: for members of the January sixth Committee.
Speaker 4: Let's take listen to that.
Speaker 12: We know the White is considering potential preemptive pardons of
Speaker 12: those who've clashed with President elect Trump in light of
Speaker 12: what the President elect said to me that yes, he
Speaker 12: does think that members of the January sixth Committee should.
Speaker 4: Go to jail.
Speaker 12: Do you think that mister Biden should issue preemptive pardons
Speaker 12: for the entire January sixth committee.
Speaker 13: Well, I think he might want to consider that very seriously. Look,
Speaker 13: that is an outrageous statement. This is what authoritarianism is
Speaker 13: all about. Us with dictatorship is all about. You do
Speaker 13: not arrest elected officials who disagree with you, who undertake
Speaker 13: an investigation, so all of us, And I would tell
Speaker 13: you Christ and I think there are a lot of Republicans.
Speaker 13: You just heard Lindsey Graham make that statement. I think
Speaker 13: that idea of Trump is not going to go very far.
Speaker 13: It is so quite outrageous, so kind of interesting.
Speaker 2: He on the one hand says, like, yes, I think
Speaker 2: he considered that, should consider that. On the other hand,
Speaker 2: he says, I don't think a lot of these ideas
Speaker 2: are going to go very far the action as we
Speaker 2: could move on to.
Speaker 1: This, I just think it's kind of cringe.
Speaker 3: But I mean, like, look, maybe will happen, maybe not,
Speaker 3: I don't know. I mean, like you said, I find
Speaker 3: it genuinely unbelievable. It also just gets to the Biden
Speaker 3: theory of pardons.
Speaker 1: Of which I've been thinking about.
Speaker 3: Which you also floated. Look, I don't agree with pardoning
Speaker 3: people on the death penalty. But I understand the like
Speaker 3: moral and philosophical case. But considering that his people who've
Speaker 3: been pardoned so far are his son and then a
Speaker 3: bunch of crooks who are about to get to people
Speaker 3: who should rot in hell for the rest of their lives.
Speaker 3: While probably what most people would consider like non violent
Speaker 3: offenses or whatever, are people genuinely deserving of clemency, especially
Speaker 3: if you're a democratic, your leftist, or you said you're
Speaker 3: gonna pardon all these people, when you allow those people
Speaker 3: you know to continue to be in prison, I'm just
Speaker 3: very interested that elected lawmakers are the ones that are consideration.
Speaker 3: My son is the very first person I pardon is
Speaker 3: my son. Then I will follow with commutations.
Speaker 4: Kind of wild, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 3: So it's like, oh, so we're worried about the elected officials,
Speaker 3: the sons and corrupt budges, but not others. Now, look,
Speaker 3: I'm not a leniency person in general, but if that's
Speaker 3: your framework, you got to see a lot of corruption here.
Speaker 1: So that's what I would say to Berniesham.
Speaker 2: So so I think it makes sense given the threats
Speaker 2: against like people who were just on the January sixth
Speaker 2: committee whatever. I think it's reasonable to issue preemptive pardons there.
Speaker 2: But let's go and talk about what Biden has actually
Speaker 2: done already, because it is kind of well, let's put
Speaker 2: this up on the screen. So he issued a raft
Speaker 2: of some fifteen hundred's historic clemency package for fifteen hundred
Speaker 2: convicted criminals who the White House said, quote, deserve a
Speaker 2: second chance. Most of these commutations were for people who
Speaker 2: had been released during COVID.
Speaker 4: There was an effort, this was actually under Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: To alleviate some of the pressure in federal prisons and
Speaker 2: help stop this bread which was really quite significant within
Speaker 2: the prison system. So people who were non violent, who
Speaker 2: I think were towards the end of their terms were
Speaker 2: sent home to some sort of home imprisonment. And these
Speaker 2: fifteen hundred people were part of that program. And apparently
Speaker 2: in this mix of fifteen hundred people, one of the
Speaker 2: individuals who was pardoned is just one of the most
Speaker 2: despicable criminals you can possibly imagine. This judge who was
Speaker 2: in cahoots with the builders of these private juvenile detention facilities.
Speaker 2: That was part of a scheme to sentence kids as
Speaker 2: young as like eight years old to juvenile detention, some
Speaker 2: of whom ultimately several of whom ultimately committed suicide in
Speaker 2: these facilities because the conditions were so horrible and their
Speaker 2: lives were so horrible and so tortured. They called this
Speaker 2: man I remember covering this case. It was the Kids
Speaker 2: for Cash was what they called him. And there was
Speaker 2: another judge that was in cahoots with him, and he
Speaker 2: was one of the people that was pardoned as part
Speaker 2: of this. The headline here from CNN they say, victims
Speaker 2: of major public coruption cases in Pennsylvania and Illino are
Speaker 2: angry President Joe Biden grant and clemency this week to
Speaker 2: two convicted officials. So in addition to this crooked Pennsylvania judge,
Speaker 2: there was also what they describe as a notorious Illinois
Speaker 2: fraudster who had been convicted. Rita Crundwell is her name.
Speaker 2: She'd been convicted of a fifty four million dollar embezzlement scheme,
Speaker 2: believed to be the largest municipal fraud in US history.
Speaker 4: But just so you understand.
Speaker 2: How horrific this was the situation with the judge his
Speaker 2: partner in crime, like I said, ordered children as young
Speaker 2: as eight to juvenile detention.
Speaker 4: Many of them.
Speaker 2: First time offenders would be for things like petty theft, jaywalking, truancy,
Speaker 2: smoking on school grounds, other minor infractions. The judge often
Speaker 2: ordered you he had found delinquent to be immediately shackled, handcuffed,
Speaker 2: taken away without giving them a chance to put up
Speaker 2: a defense or even say goodbye to their families. The
Speaker 2: mother of one of these children who died by suicide
Speaker 2: after spending time in one of these facilities since she
Speaker 2: was shocked and hurt after learning of Biden's decision to
Speaker 2: commute the rest of Conahan's sentence. And to your point, Sager,
Speaker 2: you know, think of some of the people whose sentences
Speaker 2: you could commute. I mean, Joe Biden claims to be
Speaker 2: against the death penalty. You have significant number of federal
Speaker 2: inmates on death row. He could commute their sentences. You know,
Speaker 2: to life in prison hasn't done that. Let's put this
Speaker 2: up on the screen. You have Leonard Peltier who was convicted.
Speaker 2: He is a Native American activist who was convicted in
Speaker 2: the seventies, has been in prison for forty four years,
Speaker 2: is elderly. The original conviction would not hold up to
Speaker 2: scrutiny today. There was basically, no evidence that he committed
Speaker 2: the crime that they accused him of committing, no sign
Speaker 2: that he's, you know, planning to pardon Leonard Peltil. The
Speaker 2: pressure continues and members of Congress have been pushing him
Speaker 2: to go in this direction. Next one up on the screen,
Speaker 2: Julian Assange. Not in prison anymore, but he is still
Speaker 2: being urged to also pardon Assage and clear him of
Speaker 2: his charge, just to send a message on media freedom.
Speaker 2: Jim McGovern a Democrat from Massachusetts, and Thomas Massey, libertarian
Speaker 2: Republican from Kentucky.
Speaker 4: They both wrote to the President.
Speaker 2: With a bipartisan request to pardon Julian Massange earlier in November.
Speaker 4: Another one up on the screen.
Speaker 2: Someone we've had on this show, Stephen Donziger, who stood
Speaker 2: up to Chevron and was prosecuted and persecuted for doing such.
Speaker 2: There are thirty four members of Congress who were calling
Speaker 2: on Joe Biden to pardon Stephen Donziger. He was jailed
Speaker 2: directly by Chevron lawyers. Many experts call it the nation's
Speaker 2: first corporate prosecution. And again he prioritarized pardoning his own
Speaker 2: son and pardoning this crooked, horrible judge kids for cash
Speaker 2: judge over any of these much more deserving and wrongfully
Speaker 2: imprisoned individuals.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, look, I mean again, presidential pardon is crazy,
Speaker 3: and it's funny that whenever they get to use it,
Speaker 3: nine out of ten times they do what their monarchical
Speaker 3: predecessors always did, which is pardon their friends and oligarchical allies.
Speaker 3: Eventually they will throw some crumbs or whatever to the
Speaker 3: people with a few things like this, but it's really
Speaker 3: I mean, the cash for kids one just makes no discussing.
Speaker 2: And look, I think what happened is they just didn't
Speaker 2: look into it. There was just like mass pardons for
Speaker 2: all these people.
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 3: But because remember under Trump they had this whole there's
Speaker 3: no pardons process and all of this.
Speaker 1: They so they have a process there there is.
Speaker 3: No way a pardon gets to the President of the
Speaker 3: United States desk under this administration, where they were not aware.
Speaker 1: At least incompetence is very well, maybe incompetence, but.
Speaker 2: What means signative zience as chief of staff has been
Speaker 2: an utter disaster, and so it would not surprise me.
Speaker 2: Obviously Joe Biden's brain is cooked, like he's not looking and.
Speaker 1: So he's just signing whatever.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, whether it's like whether it's actually they
Speaker 2: affirmatively wanted this guy to be released, or it's incompetence,
Speaker 2: it doesn't lessen how disgusting it is that this person
Speaker 2: was was included in the fifteen hundred who received pardons.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 3: And that's kind of the point, is that if you
Speaker 3: look at some of the people who they do pardon
Speaker 3: and who they do, you know, I just can't get
Speaker 3: over that the very perverse person is his own son.
Speaker 3: You know, it's all about him. Then it's about the
Speaker 3: people work for him. Then it's about rich Pete donors
Speaker 3: or you know, all these other people who've got strings
Speaker 3: and all these other things.
Speaker 1: And then eventually maybe we'll get to the.
Speaker 3: People who have no power whatsoever. But that's the story.
Speaker 3: That is literally the story of pardons. I think the
Speaker 3: whole thing is completely.
Speaker 4: It's a very selfish individual.
Speaker 3: That means, one of the most selfish men to ever
Speaker 3: occupy the Oval office, which sounds crazy, but it is.
Speaker 3: If you look at the decisions, every single one of
Speaker 3: them is true. The most important decision he ever had
Speaker 3: to make was whether he was going to run again,
Speaker 3: which requires self knowledge and he literally, in his own words,
Speaker 3: decided to doom the country to fascism. According to him,
Speaker 3: be referred to salvage his own ego. I cannot, I
Speaker 3: literally cannot think of a more selfish act. It's crazy,
Speaker 3: absolutely crazy.
Speaker 2: All right, we have an update on our gerontocracy. So
Speaker 2: Nancy Pelosi is apparently in the hospital or wasn't the
Speaker 2: hospital suffered a fall while she was overseas in Luxembourg.
Speaker 2: We can put up this statement on the screen. It's
Speaker 2: from Ian Craig, or her spokesperson, while traveling with a
Speaker 2: bipartisan congressional delegation in Luxembourg, Speaker Amrita Nancy Pelosi sustained
Speaker 2: an injury during an official engagement, was admitted to the
Speaker 2: hospital for evaluation. Say, she's currently receiving excellent treatment from
Speaker 2: doctors and medical professionals, continues to work. Regrets she's unable
Speaker 2: to remain to attend the remainder of the Codell engagements.
Speaker 4: Blah blah.
Speaker 2: So significant injury here that was sustained by her, And
Speaker 2: my understanding is what she ended up having to have
Speaker 2: a hip replacement.
Speaker 4: Is that what happened or.
Speaker 3: I haven't seen it yet. Yeah, looking for the same thing.
Speaker 3: But you know that's no joke when you're how old
Speaker 3: is she? She's eighty something. She is eighty four years old.
Speaker 3: Hip replacement is not a joke. Fall is one of
Speaker 3: the leading causes or contributors to death of people who
Speaker 3: are over the age of seventy. By the way, that's
Speaker 3: a good reason to always try and stay in shape,
Speaker 3: because it's very difficult whenever you lose muscle mass, nos,
Speaker 3: especially to rec after a situation like this, it can
Speaker 3: often lead to degradation.
Speaker 1: I hope for the best, and I hope she's okay,
Speaker 1: but it is.
Speaker 3: It is just it's sad because it just highlights that
Speaker 3: these people cling to power no matter what.
Speaker 1: You're eighty four years old, you're worth over.
Speaker 3: One hundred million dollars right at your ostensibly.
Speaker 4: Not all well earned.
Speaker 3: The speak yeah, yeah, totally well well deserved. You know,
Speaker 3: it's listen, meritocracy, right.
Speaker 2: I just pray it is a hip replacement. She had
Speaker 2: to have a hip replacement here in Luxembourg, so significant fault.
Speaker 1: You're in a foreign country.
Speaker 3: You know, this is not a you know, in terms
Speaker 3: of all these things you're subjecting yourself to and you're
Speaker 3: doing it at this point for what you lost, the
Speaker 3: signature achievement of the Pelosi you know leaders. Everyone says
Speaker 3: she's one of the greatest leaders of all time. It's like, well,
Speaker 3: you know, not when you put it up against Rayburn
Speaker 3: and some of the other great speakers of the House.
Speaker 3: But just objectively, like, look at the course of the
Speaker 3: Democratic Party under her. You had Barack Obama, and they
Speaker 3: were all jazzed and excited for that, and they got
Speaker 3: blown out in twenty ten. They brief returned to power
Speaker 3: as a bulwark against Trump to resign him to the
Speaker 3: dust bin of history. As you'll all recall and then project,
Speaker 3: over the last twelve years, the political project has been
Speaker 3: a failure.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 3: It has led now to again the rise of Donald
Speaker 3: Trump into no House majority. So people can say that
Speaker 3: you've been such a great accomplishment and wielder of power, etc.
Speaker 1: Like I just I don't see any of that at
Speaker 1: all at this point.
Speaker 3: If anything, it's just time you gotta go, just go home,
Speaker 3: retire in peace.
Speaker 2: Even if we think of her chest move with regard
Speaker 2: to I, she was instrumental and getting Biden good right
Speaker 2: move obviously should have been done long before then, so
Speaker 2: there could actually be a Democratic primary process. But okay,
Speaker 2: you got Joe Biden out, but then she didn't have
Speaker 2: the stones or the savvy to make sure there would
Speaker 2: be some sort of a process so that it wouldn't
Speaker 2: be Kamala Harris and Joe Biden endorses Kamala and reportedly
Speaker 2: Pelosi and Obama both wanted to have some sort of
Speaker 2: an open process that result in a candidate other than
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris, but they.
Speaker 4: Didn't have the.
Speaker 2: Savvy, the stones, the boldness, the whatever was required in
Speaker 2: order to push for that open process so that there
Speaker 2: would be a better chance for Democrats to unite behind
Speaker 2: a stronger candidate than Kamala Harris. Because they were all
Speaker 2: well aware of what her weaknesses were. And so even
Speaker 2: in this that you consider to be like your your
Speaker 2: core mission here to defeat Donald Trump, and I think
Speaker 2: she did take that very seriously, she's unable to actually
Speaker 2: fully execute and complete that job. The other thing to
Speaker 2: note about Nancy Pelissi right now is aoc is has
Speaker 2: been working and apparently pretty successfully, working behind the scenes
Speaker 2: to become ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, which
Speaker 2: is quite significant. Whatever you think of AOC, she has
Speaker 2: done a good job in past questioning of officials and
Speaker 2: holding them to account, and obviously as young and one
Speaker 2: of the younger faces of the party, et cetera, et cetera,
Speaker 2: AOC has also done so much to suck up to
Speaker 2: the establishment wing of the party and make herself acceptable
Speaker 2: to them, et cetera, et cetera. But I guess Nancy
Speaker 2: BLOWSI has never forgiven the fact that AOC protested outside
Speaker 2: of her office when she was on her way into Congress,
Speaker 2: and so she apparently is working behind the scenes to
Speaker 2: thwart AOC's bid to be ranking member on the House
Speaker 2: Oversight Committee and put in Jerry Connelly. He's just like
Speaker 2: a you know, he's actually from northern Virginia here. He
Speaker 2: represents Fairfax County, very standard issue establishment friendly Democrat, and
Speaker 2: so she's working to push his bid into AOC. So
Speaker 2: it just shows you, even in her dottage, she is
Speaker 2: still one of the major power players in Washington, DC.
Speaker 2: And it's not just Democrats who suffer from this problem.
Speaker 2: Emily and Ryan did a great job last week reporting
Speaker 2: on Mitch McConnell's increasingly infirm condition. Emily exclusively was able
Speaker 2: to get this picture of Mitch in a wheelchair being
Speaker 2: wheeled through Ronald Reagan National Airport, so suffer to fall?
Speaker 2: Was that just last week that that happened as well,
Speaker 2: And so you know, once again you have a very
Speaker 2: elderly individual who was trying to hold on to power.
Speaker 2: He apparently part of why he wants to stay in
Speaker 2: his position. We can put this up on the screen
Speaker 2: is to make sure that aid continues to flow to Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Scott Horten may have more to say about that later
Speaker 2: in the show, but you know, this is a trend
Speaker 2: in American society. Ken Klippenstein had a good piece on
Speaker 2: his substack, which you all should subscribe to you if
Speaker 2: you're able with a chart showing how the average age
Speaker 2: of a member of members of Congress has been getting
Speaker 2: older and older and older. We can put that chart
Speaker 2: up on the screen. I think we have that for
Speaker 2: you as well. Look at that percentage of Congress over
Speaker 2: the age of seventy. Look at the way that skyrockets
Speaker 2: like that is insane and soccer. I always think you
Speaker 2: made the best point, which is that this really in
Speaker 2: a fundamental sense, reflects a failure of democracy. That's what
Speaker 2: allows these people to basically rig the system to circumvent
Speaker 2: any sort of real democratic process and just hold on
Speaker 2: to power forever. And literally some of them literally die
Speaker 2: in office, like Diane Feinstein, and there was a I
Speaker 2: believe what was a Republican last year who also died
Speaker 2: while he was in office, some eighty some years old.
Speaker 4: Like that's insane, insane.
Speaker 2: That they hold on to power until they are literally
Speaker 2: taking their last dying breath.
Speaker 1: I agree. I also though it comes back to our
Speaker 1: healthcare thing.
Speaker 3: I've just increasingly resigned where it's true they resigned the system,
Speaker 3: rig the system and all that.
Speaker 1: But people just seem to excuse it.
Speaker 3: I don't understand the chuck rat, Like he's like ninety
Speaker 3: two years old. McConnell got reelected, so did Pelosi.
Speaker 1: It's nuts. She's up every two years and they're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: we're cool with this. I don't get it.
Speaker 3: I just don't understand why people continue to prop this
Speaker 3: thing up. And I mean, on their end, I do
Speaker 3: with McConnell. I mean, it's literally a joke. He has
Speaker 3: a new peace out this morning in foreign affairs, the
Speaker 3: price American retreat, Why Washington must reject isolationism and embrace primacy.
Speaker 3: It's like, yeah, how's that im primacy going in Iraq,
Speaker 3: bro and in Syria. So I'm sure it worked out
Speaker 3: really well, but this is it also shows to the
Speaker 3: things that they hang on and that they cling to,
Speaker 3: and what four are so just ridiculous. They're not hanging
Speaker 3: on to the bitter end just to make sure that
Speaker 3: Kentucky is great again or is revitalized. They're doing it
Speaker 3: so the city of Kiev can be revitalized. So look,
Speaker 3: sometimes a talking point, but it is genuinely true. They
Speaker 3: do actually care more about Ukraine, about NATO and all
Speaker 3: these other places than they do about you.
Speaker 1: And those are the people that continue to elect it.
Speaker 1: So I just don't know what to do about it.
Speaker 4: Just a last thought on that point.
Speaker 2: So in Kentucky in particular, Mitch McConnell is not liked,
Speaker 2: like they hit very unpopular, yes, and so you do ask, well, okay,
Speaker 2: well why does he continue to get re elected? And
Speaker 2: I mean it is a sort of anti democratic process
Speaker 2: where Kentucky's a red state now, so they don't want
Speaker 2: to vote for a Democrat. So when he gets into
Speaker 2: a general election contest versus also, Democrats put up terrible
Speaker 2: canons like Amy McGrath but whatever, he's very likely to
Speaker 2: get elected, but he has that Republican Party on Lucke
Speaker 2: in the state, so that he is not really challenged
Speaker 2: in a Republican primary. So it is a circumventing of democracy.
Speaker 2: And then in the case of Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco,
Speaker 2: you know, first of all, all the money in the world, right,
Speaker 2: wealthy woman herself and probably the most prolific fund raiser
Speaker 2: in the Democratic Party. I'm sure Mitch McConnell's no slouch
Speaker 2: in the Republican Party in terms of raising funds as well.
Speaker 2: But then in addition, she refused to do any sort
Speaker 2: of democratic debate visa her challengers in the Democratic primary,
Speaker 2: where again it's a situation where it's a blue, very
Speaker 2: blue area. You're not going to have a Republican succeed
Speaker 2: in that district. So the whole game is in the
Speaker 2: Democratic primary, and so again it's really there's a real
Speaker 2: failure of a democratic process there.
Speaker 4: I mean, you saw the same thing with.
Speaker 2: Diane Feinstein where she's able to hold on and so
Speaker 2: you know, literally like didn't even literally didn't even know
Speaker 2: where she was. Also, because they've locked having any sort
Speaker 2: of a democratic debate and the powers that be lined
Speaker 2: up behind her and you know, short circuited the progressive
Speaker 2: challenger who was you know, making the case that we
Speaker 2: should go in a different direction. And so a lot
Speaker 2: of these things do come down to basic failures of
Speaker 2: democracy and show that erosion of real ability to you know,
Speaker 2: effectuate change and have any kind of real choice within
Speaker 2: this current locked in system.