Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that,
Speaker 2: let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody, Happy Tuesday.
Speaker 2: We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do
Speaker 2: we have, Crystal, indeed we do.
Speaker 4: Let's to get to this morning.
Speaker 1: First of all, a nationwide freak out over campus protests,
Speaker 1: NYU going so far as to arrest their own faculty.
Speaker 1: We have those images for you. We also have the
Speaker 1: president and making some somewhat confusing muddled comments as his one,
Speaker 1: so we'll pullay that for you as well. We got
Speaker 1: to have a recap of the first day of the
Speaker 1: Trump trial opening statements, plus a little bit from the
Speaker 1: prosecution's first witness. That would be tabloid what's the tabloid owner?
Speaker 3: Is that what we call it?
Speaker 4: David Packard?
Speaker 1: Let's go with anyway, National Inquired dude David Pecker, so
Speaker 1: interesting stuff to get into there. We also have new
Speaker 1: poll with some interesting data on RFK Junior and who
Speaker 1: he may help hurt, et cetera. This comes as he
Speaker 1: gains ballid access in a number of new states, So
Speaker 1: lots of updates for you there as well. We've got
Speaker 1: Biden sparking a genuine diplomatic crisis over his fake cannibalism claims,
Speaker 1: so break that down for you. We've got a new
Speaker 1: poll showing how young people feel about the country, about Joe, Biden, etc.
Speaker 4: With a lot of interesting numbers as well.
Speaker 1: A new report suggests that Israel had planned a much
Speaker 1: larger attack on a run.
Speaker 4: Is that true? Break that down for you.
Speaker 1: We also have new revelations horrifying of mass graves in
Speaker 1: communists with hundreds of bodies. I also went on Pierce
Speaker 1: Morgan show yesterday and it was quite an experience. So
Speaker 1: I'll show you the highlight.
Speaker 3: Well, we goat it.
Speaker 2: Love that, but a little bit for what our people
Speaker 2: need to see.
Speaker 1: I just want to say, I'm really grateful for this program,
Speaker 1: grateful to get into the same this show every day.
Speaker 1: So we'll just we'll save the rest of the commentary
Speaker 1: for that segment incredible.
Speaker 2: Okay, before we get to any of that, As we teased,
Speaker 2: Ryan and Emiley are going to have a very big
Speaker 2: announcement soon. So if you want to hear first what
Speaker 2: it is and get access to whatever new content may
Speaker 2: be coming your way Breakingpoints dot Com, you can become
Speaker 2: a subscriber support all of the work that we're doing here.
Speaker 2: We have a couple other things in the pipeline that
Speaker 2: I think everyone is going to be really excited about.
Speaker 2: So sign up Breakingpoints dot Com become a premium subscriber today.
Speaker 1: Okay, So let's talk about these campus protests in particular.
Speaker 1: This is pro Palestine and Procese fire protests which are
Speaker 1: broken down across the country. Columbia University has become a
Speaker 1: real focus for a variety of reasons. They're present testifying
Speaker 1: last week in front of that anti Semitism panel on
Speaker 1: the Hill. Then following that, she immediately called the NYPD
Speaker 1: in to arrest one hundred students kick the mouth of
Speaker 1: the university property. That sparks a massive backlash. We talked
Speaker 1: about that yesterday with prem Talker, and not only a
Speaker 1: backlash at Columbia University, we can go ahead and put
Speaker 1: this up on the screen, because these are some scenes
Speaker 1: from Columbia University where you have a huge number of
Speaker 1: faculty joining the students in solidarity and in an attempt
Speaker 1: to protect them from further arrests or other disciplinary actions.
Speaker 1: But you can see that this movement has not only
Speaker 1: spread at Columbia, but really truly nationwide. We have a
Speaker 1: sampling here of some of these schools. You got University
Speaker 1: of Michigan, NYU, MIT, Vanderbilt USC where they have also
Speaker 1: started not just protest movements, but specifically these gaza solidarity encampments.
Speaker 3: There are more.
Speaker 1: Actually I kept seeing more and more reports of additional
Speaker 1: schools in a University of Maryland here here as planning
Speaker 1: one as well. This is a map of where some
Speaker 1: of the actions have sprung up, these specifically or solidarity
Speaker 1: camps calling for their schools to divest from anything connected
Speaker 1: to Israel. Let's put the next piece up on the screen.
Speaker 1: This is a truly extraordinary scene. What you're looking at
Speaker 1: here is the police who were called in to arrest
Speaker 1: faculty at New York University who had come in in
Speaker 1: solidarity again with their students and were standing at a
Speaker 1: chain attempting to protect those students, So NYU calling.
Speaker 4: The cops on their own faculty.
Speaker 1: In that video, by the way, courtesy of Katie Smith,
Speaker 1: you could see that up there in the corner. I
Speaker 1: want to make sure to give credit there wild situation unfolding.
Speaker 1: Of course, the claim is that these protests are anti Semitic,
Speaker 1: that they're violent. I would just reiterate something I said yesterday,
Speaker 1: which is that the NYPD themselves, when brought in to
Speaker 1: clear out the and arrest the one hundred students that
Speaker 1: they did the other day, even the NYPD said it
Speaker 1: was one hundred percent nonviolent. So that's the reality of
Speaker 1: what's going on. Joe Biden was asked about this. Of course,
Speaker 1: the White House was put out this statement condemning these
Speaker 1: protests as anti Semitic. Let's take a listen to what
Speaker 1: he had to say and the anti submitted protests on
Speaker 1: College capass.
Speaker 5: I condemn that protests. That's why I've set up a
Speaker 5: program to deal with that. I also condemn those who
Speaker 5: don't understand what's going on with the Palestinians and they're
Speaker 5: how they're doing.
Speaker 6: The Columbia University president resigned, but I didn't know that.
Speaker 1: I'll not have to find out more sign oh sorry,
Speaker 1: which is not there. It says, I condemn, you know,
Speaker 1: anything that's anti Semitic.
Speaker 4: That's why we've set up a program to do with that.
Speaker 4: That's I don't know what that is about.
Speaker 1: And then he says, I also condemn those who don't
Speaker 1: understand what's going on with the Palestinians and how they've
Speaker 1: been and then he just.
Speaker 4: Sort of trails off.
Speaker 2: Some might call it a very fine people on both
Speaker 2: sides moment, very very I think it's amusing from Biden
Speaker 2: because I don't even really know what he's trying to
Speaker 2: get across.
Speaker 3: Don't either.
Speaker 2: It's like, okay, got it. You know your White House
Speaker 2: put out a statement on this. Out of that, I
Speaker 2: will reiterate what you said. It also is incredibly difficult,
Speaker 2: and this was huge, deep frustration with the media. You know.
Speaker 2: Somebody texted me yesterday, go, hey, what are these protests about?
Speaker 2: And I said, you know what, let me get back
Speaker 2: to you because I wasn't one hundred percent sure whether
Speaker 2: it was ceasefire or not. So I went back and
Speaker 2: I traced the entire thing from Columbia. Columbia University President
Speaker 2: is before Congress on Wednesday. The encampments start on Wednesday.
Speaker 2: The encampment demand is a BDS specifically divestment of Columbia
Speaker 2: University endowment funds that are linked to Israel. Same now
Speaker 2: with many of these other encampments. So there is a
Speaker 2: misconception going on as to what exactly sparked this and
Speaker 2: what you know, what this specific demand or whatever the
Speaker 2: protesters was. From that point forward, NYPD was called in.
Speaker 2: This is another key part. Columbia University is a private property.
Speaker 2: The NYPD has to be invited onto campus by the
Speaker 2: university to clear out the encampment. Columbia University claimed that
Speaker 2: they were disrupting classes, so they come in and they
Speaker 2: have NYPD arrest some one hundred odd students. This sparks
Speaker 2: a huge backlash not only of hundreds now students and
Speaker 2: others who have taken to the quad, that major area
Speaker 2: in Columbia University, and now faculty members that have also
Speaker 2: joined much of that as well, which has spread out
Speaker 2: much of this part of the BDS movement. So anyway,
Speaker 2: what I wanted to say was it's important to understand,
Speaker 2: as I have not been able to see. If you
Speaker 2: just read the news quote unquote, you won't actually see
Speaker 2: why any of this really began in the first place,
Speaker 2: and it is a step by step really of escalation. Now,
Speaker 2: as I said as well previously, what you noted are
Speaker 2: there quote unquote anti Semitic incidents. There have been videos
Speaker 2: certainly that have been circulating. Again, I'm not necessarily some
Speaker 2: leftist free palace and cafia person. So I go and
Speaker 2: I look, and from what I have been able to find,
Speaker 2: the organizers and all themselves have been doing something that
Speaker 2: many BLM people never did, is they have been setting
Speaker 2: out lots of ground rules, and they're like, we are
Speaker 2: not violent, we are not participating in violence. We do
Speaker 2: not want any of this anti semitism. If you're chanting
Speaker 2: things like this making people feel and safe, don't join us.
Speaker 2: There's a lot of internal enforcement going on inside some
Speaker 2: of these protests, at least from what I've been able
Speaker 2: to see so far, I think that's a frankly, very
Speaker 2: wise decision on their parts, since they already know that
Speaker 2: the deck is generally stacked against them. But none the less, Nonetheless,
Speaker 2: it has invited now a massive call for intervention on
Speaker 2: these campuses, including calling in the National Guard, far beyond
Speaker 2: much of the NYPD. I mean you've seen large Columbia donors.
Speaker 2: We're about to get to this basically call for a
Speaker 2: massed expulsion of every single student and faculty that's participated
Speaker 2: in this protest. Donors are calling in, So I have
Speaker 2: no expectations that Columbia will quote unquote hold the line
Speaker 2: because these people it's a business, okay. And when you've
Speaker 2: got Robert Kraft, who's got his name on a building there,
Speaker 2: and you've got all these billionaire donors NYU, and also
Speaker 2: who do you think is paying those bills?
Speaker 3: And those folks, they will stand for a lot.
Speaker 2: They will not stand for anything that has any crem
Speaker 2: of Israel.
Speaker 1: So, just to elaborate on some of what you said there, Soger,
Speaker 1: because there are a lot of things being conflated here. Listen, guys,
Speaker 1: it's no revelation that number one, anti Semitism is real.
Speaker 1: It exists, It's abhorrent. There's no excuse for it. You know,
Speaker 1: I'm not here to deny the reality of anti Semitism.
Speaker 4: That's number one.
Speaker 1: Number two, is it a surprise that there are some
Speaker 1: assholes associated with a protest?
Speaker 4: No, this is not a surprise.
Speaker 1: Okay, if you were going to try to shut down
Speaker 1: every single protest that had an asshole associated with it,
Speaker 1: there would.
Speaker 4: Be no protests.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 1: Number three, Many of the incidents, purported incidents that have
Speaker 1: gone viral have not even happened on a college campus.
Speaker 1: Specifically with regards to Colombia. Actually used to live right
Speaker 1: by Columbia, and Colombia's right in the middle of northern Manhattan,
Speaker 1: and you know.
Speaker 4: You step off the campus and you're.
Speaker 1: In New York City, and so literally every incident I've
Speaker 1: seen that could be colorably described as anti Semitic or
Speaker 1: you know, aggressive or violent in any fashion has happened
Speaker 1: off the campus. So to blame the student protesters who
Speaker 1: are there peacefully and crack down on them and smear
Speaker 1: them all as anti Semites or as one of their
Speaker 1: professors did, We're going to show you this in a minute,
Speaker 1: as terrorists. It's outrageous. It's frankly outrageous, and you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's a trick like we've seen this with various
Speaker 1: protest movements in the past.
Speaker 4: It's an easy thing to do.
Speaker 1: You find like the worst actor in the protest movement,
Speaker 1: you hold them up, the video goes viral, and you
Speaker 1: use that to try to delegitimize the entire thing. That's
Speaker 1: what's going on here. And then the other thing that's
Speaker 1: being conflated is the same discourse about the rally chants
Speaker 1: and whether you know, from the river to the sea
Speaker 1: means genocide. And listen, I'm not here to tell you
Speaker 1: what you should or shouldn't be offended by. If you're
Speaker 1: offended by that, okay, you can be offended by that. Now,
Speaker 1: I think if you talk to these students, they'll tell you, no,
Speaker 1: what we mean is equal rights for all, for Palestinians
Speaker 1: and Israelis. That's what our call is for. But listen,
Speaker 1: if you're offended, that's your right. But guess what free
Speaker 1: speech is also about protecting. In fact, it's primarily about
Speaker 1: protecting speech that could be offensive or uncomfortable. So you know,
Speaker 1: the whole free speech crowd, all the free speech bros
Speaker 1: out there, who were you know, when it was the
Speaker 1: right and there was speech that was offensive coming from
Speaker 1: the right, they were all for it, and they were
Speaker 1: all against the campus censorship, et cetera. Now I can't
Speaker 1: tell you how many times I've heard these words, I'm
Speaker 1: all for free speech, but oh well, the butt means
Speaker 1: you're not for free speech. That's what that means. So
Speaker 1: listen some of the rally chants, like they wouldn't be
Speaker 1: what I would say, It wouldn't be what I would choose.
Speaker 1: I can understand why people may say, hey, I don't
Speaker 1: like that, but guess what that is?
Speaker 4: Free speech.
Speaker 1: One more thing I'll say about this and then go
Speaker 1: on to the next part of the just absolutely unhinged
Speaker 1: reaction that is happening right now, very intentionally so because
Speaker 1: you know, the Israel no matter what side, has like
Speaker 1: basically lost the debate if you look at popular opinion,
Speaker 1: especially if you look at the Democratic Party, especially if
Speaker 1: you look at young people. So this is an attempt
Speaker 1: not only to legitimized but also to distract. But with
Speaker 1: regard to Columbia University itself, it is a private university.
Speaker 1: They can make whatever rules they want to make. I'm
Speaker 1: not saying they can't do it. It's a question of
Speaker 1: what they should do. And the you know, the claims
Speaker 1: about safety of Jewish students, et cetera, are really belied
Speaker 1: by the fact that there are you know, uncomfortably for
Speaker 1: the people who want to smear this whole movement as
Speaker 1: anti Semitism as anti Semitic. There are many Jewish students
Speaker 1: who are at the core of these protests, who are
Speaker 1: organizing these protests, who are out there with signs that
Speaker 1: say Jews for Palestine. In fact, to one of the
Speaker 1: groups that was blanket banned very quickly after October seventh
Speaker 1: from Columbia University was Jewish Voices for Peace. So why
Speaker 1: are you shutting down Jewish How is that not anti
Speaker 1: Semitic if we're going to play that particular game. So
Speaker 1: let me move on to some of the more unhinged reaction. Characteristically,
Speaker 1: you've got the ADL's Jonathan Greenblatt weigh and calling for
Speaker 1: the National Guard to come in and crack down on
Speaker 1: Colbia University students.
Speaker 4: Take a listen, Jewish.
Speaker 7: Students don't feel safe on campus because they are not
Speaker 7: I meaning President should feet to do great things. Number One,
Speaker 7: median NYPD back on this campus or bring in the
Speaker 7: national car. Number two, no masks on campus. This isn't Falujah,
Speaker 7: this is Morningside Heights. And number three, the students who
Speaker 7: behave in this way to be suspended immediately.
Speaker 1: So by the way, many students have been suspended. Many
Speaker 1: students were arrested by the NYPD and Sager. I mean, listen,
Speaker 1: the calls for the National Guard are so deranged that
Speaker 1: I can't even wrap my head around it.
Speaker 4: They're peacefully protesting. Okay.
Speaker 1: Now you may talk about things happening off campus. That's
Speaker 1: a different story, it's a little messier. But in terms
Speaker 1: of the college campus protests, you're talking about bringing in
Speaker 1: the national What are you inviting another Kent State.
Speaker 4: It's insane.
Speaker 2: Their allegation is this is some like Title nine violation
Speaker 2: of the civil rights of many of the Jewish students
Speaker 2: on campus. Now look again, you actually said something important.
Speaker 2: Columbia is a private university and they can do whatever
Speaker 2: they want. I do think though, at a core of this,
Speaker 2: and this is going to be difficult for those of
Speaker 2: us who haven't ever seen elite circles. I didn't go
Speaker 2: to an Ivy League school or anything. I know many
Speaker 2: people who do. They have a religious attachment to these places,
Speaker 2: which is difficult for me to describe. And for them
Speaker 2: this is personal because they're like, this is my space,
Speaker 2: this is the place that I control, This is the
Speaker 2: place where we have you know, I spent so many
Speaker 2: of my fond memories and this is where Robert Kraft
Speaker 2: has donated his thing, and there's a hill else and
Speaker 2: we spent all this time on this. So for them,
Speaker 2: it drives them nuts that they don't have control over
Speaker 2: campus discourse in a way that they haven't now in
Speaker 2: quite a long time. And I actually think the perfect
Speaker 2: example of this is a Columbia University professor.
Speaker 3: Who has gone very viral. I guess it was. It's
Speaker 3: fair to say.
Speaker 4: He's made himself a main character.
Speaker 2: He has made himself a main character absolutely, Okay, So
Speaker 2: how do we say this gentleman's name because he's upset?
Speaker 2: Where are we going with Shihi Dividi? Shi Dividi?
Speaker 3: Okay?
Speaker 2: So Shy Dividi is a Jewish Israeli professor has been
Speaker 2: really making himself a main character on campus filming protests,
Speaker 2: calling them terrorists, saying that they're anti Semitic. He joined
Speaker 2: in Israeli news outlet I twenty four recently specifically to
Speaker 2: say that the students themselves are terrorists. Not terrorists, even
Speaker 2: supporters as many people will say, but actual terrorists themselves.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 8: This is an important topic. This is not just about Columbia.
Speaker 8: This is every US College. They have said that they
Speaker 8: are going to bring down Columbia first and as a
Speaker 8: domino effect, we'll have all other universities. But I want
Speaker 8: to make clear one thing before I talk about my
Speaker 8: own actions. What we're seeing now at Columbia, and I
Speaker 8: don't use this word lightly. We're not seeing ideological war,
Speaker 8: We're not seeing support for terrorism. We are seeing terrorism.
Speaker 8: Last night we had at Colombia a protestant, one of
Speaker 8: the protesters in the student mob, holding a sign pulling
Speaker 8: the El Casam brigade, the Hamas military wing who kill
Speaker 8: Jewish students with a with an arrow pointing at the
Speaker 8: Jewish students that we're standing there right. We are seeing
Speaker 8: Hamas on campus. And this makes President Minushafik a Hamas
Speaker 8: supporter every minute, but she does not call let in
Speaker 8: the NYPD because.
Speaker 9: She's not letting them in.
Speaker 8: That's why you see the NYPD outside and the terrorists inside.
Speaker 3: Well, Shai, I hate to break it to you.
Speaker 2: I know that in your country, Israel, that signs may
Speaker 2: be considered terrorism. In this country, the United States, that
Speaker 2: is not considered terrorism. That's actually free speech and it
Speaker 2: does not ever cross into the realm of violence. And
Speaker 2: this is very difficult to say, you know, and remain calm.
Speaker 2: But I cannot tell you how disgusting it is to
Speaker 2: me personally to see this person who is, as far
Speaker 2: as I know, not a US citizen, and if he is,
Speaker 2: I know he calls himself a Jewish is realist. So
Speaker 2: I'm just gonna say that come to here, then try
Speaker 2: to police the speech of and basically call in the
Speaker 2: National Guard, our military to go after protesters who he
Speaker 2: doesn't like. Again, that's perfectly fine in your country, Israel.
Speaker 2: It is not fine over here. It doesn't cross into
Speaker 2: the line of violence. And this is part of the
Speaker 2: other problem that I have with all of this is
Speaker 2: that the escalation of rhetoric belies reality. It's like, listen,
Speaker 2: we're not into what is a July of twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: There is not widespread looting and chaos in the streets.
Speaker 2: Again in Columbia University a private ivy league, which that's
Speaker 2: part of the other thing.
Speaker 3: That's the only reason this thing is getting so much attention.
Speaker 2: It's because all these media elites and all these other
Speaker 2: people who live in New York City and again to them,
Speaker 2: and this is like hallowed special grounds. So it really
Speaker 2: really bothers me, and it drives me crazy to see
Speaker 2: some of the ratcheting up of this and the wholesale
Speaker 2: embrace of at least a segment of a lot of
Speaker 2: the American right who are just you know, adopting all
Speaker 2: of the safe space language. I saw There's a woman
Speaker 2: named Campbell Brown. She used to work over at CNN.
Speaker 2: Then she was a Facebook executive and head of news
Speaker 2: partnerships there, and she tweeted recently she said, I'm heading
Speaker 2: with my two sons to Israel, where they will be
Speaker 2: safer than on the West side of New York. And
Speaker 2: I'm like, it's like a meme. It's like heading into
Speaker 2: an active war zone. Because on a university campus, in
Speaker 2: a contained protests zone or whatever, some people are chanting
Speaker 2: things I don't like and I could be five blocks
Speaker 2: away and I wouldn't know anything about it.
Speaker 3: Like, how stupid do you have to be to believe
Speaker 3: something like that? It's ridiculous.
Speaker 1: It is ridiculous. Words are not literally violence. Yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: part of becoming a grown up is dealing with hearing
Speaker 1: things that you may find to be apparent disgusting. Again,
Speaker 1: that's your right, but to pretend like and especially I mean,
Speaker 1: this is part of why it's so disgusting, Like you
Speaker 1: can't take it out of the context that these students
Speaker 1: are protesting what they and a majority of young people
Speaker 1: and a majority of Biden voters, and the ICJ says
Speaker 1: is plausible, and the US and YEN says there are
Speaker 1: reasonable grounds say is a genocide.
Speaker 4: Okay, look at the Gaza Strip.
Speaker 1: Look at the devastation We're going to show you here
Speaker 1: in a couple of minutes, mass grave of hundreds of people,
Speaker 1: children starving to death, under a collective punishment and a siege. Okay,
Speaker 1: you want to talk about safety in higher education? Every
Speaker 1: single university in the Gaza Strip has been systematically demolished.
Speaker 1: And I use that word very intentionally because at least
Speaker 1: one of them they did a controlled detonation. They went in,
Speaker 1: they set the charges. It's not like this was in
Speaker 1: some battle with Hamas. They intentionally set the charges and
Speaker 1: blew up a university.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 1: So to put that up against like I heard a
Speaker 1: rally chant that I don't like get at, like, what
Speaker 1: are we doing here? And that's why this conversation to
Speaker 1: me just makes me so incredibly insane.
Speaker 4: Now with regard to shy. Again, it's a free country.
Speaker 1: He can say what he wants, right, But somehow the
Speaker 1: standard he holds of I don't want to hear a
Speaker 1: rally chant I don't like because you know, then these
Speaker 1: people are terrorists and they're violent, etcetera, et cetera, is
Speaker 1: not applied to him. I mean, for you to be
Speaker 1: a university professor, these are your students. They're in some
Speaker 1: ways in your care while they're there at that institution,
Speaker 1: and you're smearing them as terrorists. I saw somebody who
Speaker 1: tweeted out like, can someone tell me what the body
Speaker 1: count is at Colombia? How many people have died? How
Speaker 1: many casualties? And it's a joke because obviously the answer
Speaker 1: is zero. So you're rendering these words utterly meaningless. You're
Speaker 1: rendering the word anti Semitic utterly meaningless. Now it just
Speaker 1: means like having a political view that you don't like.
Speaker 1: You're rendering the word now terrorist utterly meaningless because again
Speaker 1: now it just applies to as somebody has an ideology
Speaker 1: that I don't like. And this man, this grown man,
Speaker 1: pitched such a fit when some of the actions that
Speaker 1: he has celebrated and demanded more of, when applied to
Speaker 1: students were also applied to him. He had his university
Speaker 1: access to one part of campus revoked, and people caught
Speaker 1: it on Cameron, I mean the fit that he threw.
Speaker 1: He feels he should even as he's calling students terrorists,
Speaker 1: he feels he should be, you know, have full rights
Speaker 1: to campus, but not the people who he disagrees with.
Speaker 1: So it's so incredibly selective and just to show you also,
Speaker 1: and this to me is so outrageous. So the official
Speaker 1: Government of Israel Twitter account picked up and reiterated his
Speaker 1: charge that American students at Columbia University and other places
Speaker 1: are terrorists. Put this up on the screen. This is outrageous.
Speaker 1: So he had tweeted out, this is what's happening at
Speaker 1: Columbia right now. I know it's confusing, so let me
Speaker 1: spell it out for you. A. Terrorism is an ideology.
Speaker 1: B they are openly supporting terror C they are terrorists.
Speaker 1: Terrorists have taken over Columbia University. The government needs to
Speaker 1: take over Colombia. Now think about that in the context
Speaker 1: of the number of right wingers who are celebrating a
Speaker 1: government takeover and demanding a government takeover. National Guard to
Speaker 1: come into censor students. Okay, put that aside. This is
Speaker 1: important repost. If you agree, the government of Israel takes
Speaker 1: him up on that repost. If you agree, call and
Speaker 1: reiterates his terrorism is an ideology. Either openly supporting terror
Speaker 1: they are terrorists. The government of Israel calling American students
Speaker 1: protesting on campus, exercising their First Amendment free speech rights, terrorists.
Speaker 4: It is so despicable, It is so disgusting.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and what it again illustrates is that Israel a
Speaker 2: nation which just the other day President Herzog, their president,
Speaker 2: came out and said Americans should stay out of Israeli politics.
Speaker 2: I was like, yeah, I agree, I agree with you.
Speaker 2: That so why we shouldn't pay you at all?
Speaker 1: But why don't you say they got their hand down
Speaker 1: That's what I mean, more weapons, more billions.
Speaker 2: I'll take that trade any day you guys want, But
Speaker 2: then you got to stay out of our politics. Oh
Speaker 2: but on that one, it doesn't really matter as much.
Speaker 2: It's like that is what actually again just bugs the
Speaker 2: crap out of me about this. I mean, what they
Speaker 2: the problem to is what people never learn is that
Speaker 2: if you're gonna, you know, try and put down the
Speaker 2: boot or that you better go all out because if
Speaker 2: you don't, you know what's going to happen, You're going
Speaker 2: to have a widespread reaction. And sure enough, it's already happening.
Speaker 2: Let's put this up there on the screen. Just yesterday
Speaker 2: we saw Yale University students who were arrested at their
Speaker 2: protest again over a BDS investment in arms manufacturing. You've
Speaker 2: got multiple other campuses now where you see similar things
Speaker 2: that are beginning to break out.
Speaker 3: And I actually I will say this too.
Speaker 2: I think it's a very smart strategy on part of
Speaker 2: these students, because this is the other thing, you know,
Speaker 2: these traffic people and all that.
Speaker 3: We've had our debate.
Speaker 2: I think it's idiotic, stupid, counterproductive, and obviously they're also
Speaker 2: just going to get arrested in the first place. But
Speaker 2: if you're on a university squad, there is no actual
Speaker 2: plausible way that you could say you're really like affecting
Speaker 2: a lot of other people when you're on university private Produm.
Speaker 2: Maybe public university is gonna be different because then you're
Speaker 2: I think technically in terms of how the law and
Speaker 2: all that. But it's for Columbia University, for any of
Speaker 2: these other places, especially if you are again an active
Speaker 2: student there and you have certain privileges of what you're
Speaker 2: allowed and allowed not to exercise, especially whenever it comes
Speaker 2: to First Amendment rights, it's going to be a lot
Speaker 2: more difficult for people to go after them. So anyways,
Speaker 2: I think it's I think what we are going to
Speaker 2: see is there's a couple of options, which is people
Speaker 2: could try and quote unquote de escalate.
Speaker 3: I don't really see that as possibility.
Speaker 2: All of the money and institutional pressure is one way,
Speaker 2: which is on a crackdown. I think what is going
Speaker 2: to happen is that Columbia no university can withstand it's
Speaker 2: multi billionaire donors and entire alumni base freaking out at
Speaker 2: them on a consistent basis. Look at how every single
Speaker 2: one of those Ivy League universities you know, fired their
Speaker 2: presidents or whatever for saying that the genocide against calling
Speaker 2: for the genocide against the Jews is not a violation
Speaker 2: of the student whatever harassment policy. They all caved, right,
Speaker 2: they actually created more speech codes on campus. So I
Speaker 2: believe that in that effect is that there will be
Speaker 2: a epic crackdown, and it's going to come soon.
Speaker 3: I just don't see how it could possibly turn out otherwise.
Speaker 1: Well, and I think we've already seen the results of
Speaker 1: the first waves of crackdowns. I mean, we've now had
Speaker 1: arrest on multiple college campuses, including a fact members at NYU,
Speaker 1: and it has only sparked a wider movement. I mean,
Speaker 1: is poor gasoline on the fire because other students who
Speaker 1: and and by the way, sentiment on Columbia University is
Speaker 1: also pulling the other day. It's overwhelmingly in favor of
Speaker 1: what these protesters support. Sure, so the attempt to crack down,
Speaker 1: the arrest, the media coverage, all of this has only
Speaker 1: allowed the movement to grow. So you know, that's the
Speaker 1: other thing that's crazy to me, is like they're acting
Speaker 1: like the Columbia University president and is some great friend
Speaker 1: of these protesters, and just like allowing them to run wild.
Speaker 4: She suspended a whole bunch of them.
Speaker 1: She called in the NYPD, who again was like, these
Speaker 1: people are all one hundred percent peaceful, But NYPD said
Speaker 1: that to arrest one hundred of them, it's not like
Speaker 1: there's been kid gloves here, okay. So and what happened
Speaker 1: when she attempted that, you know, hard fisted crackdown is
Speaker 1: a huge backlash that just spawned even greater protests, not
Speaker 1: only at Columbia, but even further. I'm not going to
Speaker 1: claim that this isn't going to have a negative impact
Speaker 1: on the movement, because some people will see the clips
Speaker 1: on a contest, they'll seep the media freak count, and
Speaker 1: they'll be persuaded that, you know, some number of these
Speaker 1: students or all of these students or.
Speaker 4: Whatever are motivated by hatred.
Speaker 1: Of Jews, in spite of the fact again that there
Speaker 1: are so many Jewish students who are involved with or
Speaker 1: actively organizing these protests. It just makes me absolutely crazy.
Speaker 1: But in terms of, you know, the size of the
Speaker 1: protest movement, I think we're only seeing it grow and
Speaker 1: expand the more that they try to arrest, crackdown, suspend, etc.
Speaker 4: Speaking of the media.
Speaker 1: Piece, We've got a little compilation for you of the
Speaker 1: way the media has bought into this the protests or
Speaker 1: anti semitic line, hook line and sinker. Let's take a
Speaker 1: listen to a little bit of that.
Speaker 10: By the way, they are both professors and students within
Speaker 10: the university who say things that I think crossed the line,
Speaker 10: and there should be accountability I believe in free speech.
Speaker 10: Say whatever you want, but pay the consequences and don't
Speaker 10: have your face covered. I don't think that should be allowed.
Speaker 3: These are not protesters. These are violent hate monitors.
Speaker 11: The things that are coming out of the mouth burn
Speaker 11: down Tel Aviv, tel Aviv genocide October seventh. We did
Speaker 11: it once, We'll do it ten times. We'll do one
Speaker 11: hundred times, We'll do it a thousand times, We'll do
Speaker 11: it ten thousand times. This is an atrocity. And I'm
Speaker 11: going to say the quid put out loud. If there
Speaker 11: was any group spewing hate and violence against any other
Speaker 11: group Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, gaze.
Speaker 3: It would be shut down.
Speaker 11: And this needs to be shut down immediately because and
Speaker 11: once again those groups are back, those tenths are back up,
Speaker 11: and this cannot go unanswered.
Speaker 3: It's very simple, and you know there's a continuum of protesters.
Speaker 11: There's a heinous, anti violent ones that spewing hatreds, spewing death,
Speaker 11: if you will, and then there's the less malignant that
Speaker 11: say cease fire.
Speaker 3: But even ceasefire doesn't have the word piece in it.
Speaker 11: Never do you hear the word piece because this site
Speaker 11: doesn't want peace.
Speaker 3: It wants a gihad.
Speaker 11: And this is not propostinting, and this is anti Israel,
Speaker 11: and anti Israel is a misnomer because it's really anti jew.
Speaker 12: And I'll even go further, it's not almost anti Senmitism.
Speaker 12: It is anti Semitism. And this is something that is
Speaker 12: on display right now. But the sort of roots of
Speaker 12: this kind of devolving from A to B go back millennia.
Speaker 12: And this is something the roots of anti Semitism that
Speaker 12: pop up in societies that frankly tend to be a
Speaker 12: Canarian the coal mine for a society and democracy.
Speaker 4: In this case that is in a lot of trouble.
Speaker 12: Is I like to look at this and replace Jews
Speaker 12: with any other minority group here, and what would the
Speaker 12: entire country be doing?
Speaker 3: They would be outraged, rightly.
Speaker 13: So, So obviously, as you note, protest is an important
Speaker 13: part of being an American. Free speech is an important
Speaker 13: part of being an American. Where is the line? For example,
Speaker 13: I've seen video of somebody at the Gaza Encampment at
Speaker 13: Columbia standing up and talking about how great October seventh
Speaker 13: Hamas attacks on Israel was and calling the Hamas terrorists,
Speaker 13: calling them freedom fighters. Is that hate speech or is
Speaker 13: that protected free speech? Where do you come down on that?
Speaker 14: And that is believe it or not as vile as
Speaker 14: it could be, because Hamas should be destroyed from the
Speaker 14: actions they did on October seventh and other actions, But
Speaker 14: that does not fall into a crime. If someone makes
Speaker 14: a comment that they want to join a terrorist organization,
Speaker 14: that's going to come under investigation. But the Commissioner of
Speaker 14: Legal Matters at New York City Police Department is going
Speaker 14: to really break this down for New Yorkers.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, there's a lot going on there isn't
Speaker 1: there At least Eric Adams had to inform Jake Taber like, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's actually not illegal.
Speaker 3: Well what did he say? May believe it, you may
Speaker 3: not believe it.
Speaker 1: But actually people can say things even that are offensive,
Speaker 1: Like yeah, you're a journalist, Jake Tapper, you don't know
Speaker 1: the basics of the freaking First Amendment. Listen, even if
Speaker 1: you say something incredibly offensive, incredibly racist like horrific. Know
Speaker 1: the clip he's talking about too, which he mischaracterizes, but anyway,
Speaker 1: put that aside. Even if it's as represented, it's not
Speaker 1: even a borderline case.
Speaker 4: It's not close. I just listen, Donnie Deutschen there, His
Speaker 4: was probably the worst.
Speaker 1: It's in atrocity, a rally chant that you don't like
Speaker 1: calling for ceasefire. It's a atrocity, he says, because it
Speaker 1: doesn't have the word peace in it.
Speaker 6: Are you I just?
Speaker 1: And the erasure, the erasure of all of the Jewish
Speaker 1: students who are involved here just makes me insane because
Speaker 1: they keep conflating. They accuse these protesters of doing it,
Speaker 1: but they're the ones doing it. Conflating all Jewish people
Speaker 1: with the State of Israel and the government of Israel
Speaker 1: and their actions, that is actually anti Semitic, okay, especially
Speaker 1: when you have many, especially young Jewish Americans, who are
Speaker 1: appalled by the actions of this government and you want
Speaker 1: to associate them with a government that again is plausibly
Speaker 1: committing a genocide in Gaza's strip. And what impact do
Speaker 1: you think that's going to have If you force every
Speaker 1: Jewish person to be conflated with the State of Israel,
Speaker 1: that is not condoning but predictably going to lead to
Speaker 1: a rise in anti Semitism.
Speaker 4: It's just makes me so insane.
Speaker 1: And then Robert Kraft there at the beginning you mentioned
Speaker 1: him before, Yeah, that's probably the most consequential comments that
Speaker 1: we played.
Speaker 4: Here's a billionaire donor, very.
Speaker 1: Influential in Republican political circles in particular, but political circles
Speaker 1: in general, very influential at cub University because he's given
Speaker 1: oodles of money, I don't know how much to the school,
Speaker 1: saying he's pulling his donations and he believes in free.
Speaker 4: Speech, but but not when he disagrees with it, then
Speaker 4: he doesn't believe.
Speaker 2: Part of what bugs me about a lot of this
Speaker 2: analysis is it presumes that it's also okay. I mean, look,
Speaker 2: maybe it's controversial, but you know, even if white supremacists
Speaker 2: were on campus, as long as it's not hurting anybody,
Speaker 2: it is free speech.
Speaker 4: To you, like the right like thing being you know,
Speaker 4: being issued.
Speaker 1: It was very controversial ACLU, and they sort of like
Speaker 1: for each other apart. But that is like, that is
Speaker 1: the foundations, even things that are blatantly wrong, racist, anti
Speaker 1: something like, even if they were, and that's a mischaracterization
Speaker 1: of what's going on here. That's when the First Amendment
Speaker 1: actually comes important. When it's things that people agree, when
Speaker 1: they're comfortable with them, you don't need it.
Speaker 2: They're like, well, if they were saying the same thing
Speaker 2: about Jews or a or about Asians or Blacks, I'm like, well,
Speaker 2: you know, but I'm South Asian, right or Indian? I
Speaker 2: guess the South Asian is a controversial term. Here's a
Speaker 2: good example. If there was a there's like seekh separatists
Speaker 2: who are really big in America, and this drives Indian
Speaker 2: people absolutely crazy, especially the Indian government. And if there
Speaker 2: was a seek protest whenever I was going to college,
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 3: What I would do. I would walk past and i
Speaker 3: would go to the library and live.
Speaker 2: My life because I'd be like, first of all, I'm
Speaker 2: born here, I'm not from India. Second of all, I
Speaker 2: don't give a shit about seek separatists. But that's, you know,
Speaker 2: I guess more personal to me. Let's like turn up
Speaker 2: the let's turn it up even more. Let's say that
Speaker 2: there is a anti what Like, there's a whole thing
Speaker 2: going on right now with a title not nine or
Speaker 2: whatever with the women's sports and trans and all that,
Speaker 2: and there's even college athletes that have been speaking out
Speaker 2: against that. If there was a pro keep women in
Speaker 2: women's sports rally on campus, I'd be like, yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 2: you have to support it, and I have no doubt
Speaker 2: also that all of these other people would certainly also
Speaker 2: they would call for a crackdown there, and they would
Speaker 2: think that that is correct. So that's another thing where
Speaker 2: we have to not buy Dana Bash and a lot
Speaker 2: of the media framing here, which is they're like, imagine
Speaker 2: if and RFK Junior said.
Speaker 3: This too whenever he was here.
Speaker 2: We were talking about the university presidents, and he's like,
Speaker 2: imagine if they'd said that about blacks.
Speaker 3: I'd be like, well, okay, I mean it's free country.
Speaker 2: You know, I don't necessarily agree with it, but hey,
Speaker 2: like you got to be allowed to be able to
Speaker 2: say whatever you want.
Speaker 1: Let's not pretend like there aren't actual neo Nazi protests
Speaker 1: that happen. They're like sort of pathetic, you know, there
Speaker 1: was something that happened, like in Florida. They're pathetic and
Speaker 1: people find them disgusting, but the White House isn't putting
Speaker 1: on a statement on them. So I actually think it's
Speaker 1: all that should either yea, No, I think it's a
Speaker 1: polar opposite. Actually, I think there's much more of a
Speaker 1: reaction to people, you know, calling for divestment and listen again,
Speaker 1: if you don't like the rally chance, that's fine. You
Speaker 1: can be a friend of the rally chance, but you're not.
Speaker 1: It's not violence, it's not doesn't deserve the National Guard
Speaker 1: coming in and a crack. It's non atrocity. You want
Speaker 1: to see an atrocity, look at anything coming out of
Speaker 1: the Gaza Strip every single day if you want to
Speaker 1: know what an actual atrocity is. So, since we aren't
Speaker 1: at Columbia and neither are any of those idiots that
Speaker 1: we just showed you opining on what's happening there, thought
Speaker 1: we would bring you a thread of someone who actually
Speaker 1: was on the Columbia campus talking about what they witnessed.
Speaker 1: So we can sort a little bit of fact from
Speaker 1: fiction here on what's actually going on. Let's put this
Speaker 1: up on the screen. So this is Alejandra Ramos. She
Speaker 1: really works for the Today Show. But she says, listen
Speaker 1: to my usual TVV is food. But I'm also a
Speaker 1: current Columbia student, and I'm so sad and so frustrated
Speaker 1: with the way student protests on our campus are being reported.
Speaker 4: This will be imperfect, but.
Speaker 1: I can't watch things that are so contrary to what
Speaker 1: I've actually seen and stay silent.
Speaker 4: Go ahead to the next one.
Speaker 1: I'm concerned by the reports broadcasting from outside our campus
Speaker 1: gates with foot shot almost entirely off campus. Look closely
Speaker 1: at the videos. If there are stores, subway stops, close
Speaker 1: gates in the background, et cetera. This is not an
Speaker 1: on campus protest. This context matters. Continuing to the next one.
Speaker 1: Campus access is limited to those of us with Columbia
Speaker 1: I d's. The protesters on sidewalks, peaceful or otherwise, are
Speaker 1: mostly those who are not allowed to enter. Vile agitators
Speaker 1: screaming at students from outside campus are not Columbia students, and.
Speaker 4: This must be made clear in reports.
Speaker 1: Continue on reports that only show zoom interviews with students
Speaker 1: sharing one perspective feel irresponsible to me. How can you
Speaker 1: report on protests without interviewing a single protester? Why are
Speaker 1: their voices being excluded when there are so many of
Speaker 1: them willing to speak? And of course we all know
Speaker 1: the answer to that saga of why their voices are
Speaker 1: excluded by the way, Emily and Ryan have an interview
Speaker 1: set for tomorrow with one of the protest organizers at
Speaker 1: Columbia who, apparently when Ryan was in touch with her,
Speaker 1: she was busy buying the items that they need for
Speaker 1: their passover Sator dinner. So yeah, well know, there you go,
Speaker 1: some real anti Sabitic stuff going on there, that is it.
Speaker 3: Yes, agreed, I think that we should hear it out.
Speaker 2: I've done a lot of research, you know, I'm not
Speaker 2: necessarily predisposed to be like loving these people. Everything I
Speaker 2: have not found, you know, anything I find like particularly
Speaker 2: all that objectionable. And if you were to take a
Speaker 2: zoomed out view of this, I would just say, like,
Speaker 2: like you said, if you're offended by protest, chance, that's fine,
Speaker 2: you know, grow up.
Speaker 3: I don't know what to tell you.
Speaker 2: I live in an area where I disagree with like
Speaker 2: ninety five percent of my neighbors, and it's annoying, you know,
Speaker 2: walking by those dumb ass signs that are like in
Speaker 2: this house, we believe racist, you know, whatever signs is real.
Speaker 3: Et cetera.
Speaker 2: I'm a bit bombarded with George Floyd's face for the
Speaker 2: last four years, trans flags and all this other nonsense.
Speaker 3: Do I like it?
Speaker 12: No?
Speaker 3: But you know what, I just live. That's what you do.
Speaker 2: That's like, That's why I don't understand why it is
Speaker 2: so difficult to you know, live in an area like
Speaker 2: that lady the Campbell Brown saying that she literally thinks
Speaker 2: she's safer in Israel, well then in the West Side.
Speaker 2: And you know my other response, if you believe that,
Speaker 2: then Leaf just leave, because honestly, if you think that
Speaker 2: a country where you've evacuated like two hundred thousand people
Speaker 2: of your population from freaking rocket attacks and you're in
Speaker 2: the middle of a war and you just had Iranian
Speaker 2: drones come to your soil and where they had to
Speaker 2: be shot down out of the sky by the US military,
Speaker 2: if you think that is safer than the United States
Speaker 2: of America, and you, honestly you shouldn't be here.
Speaker 3: That's my actual response to this.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's so preposterous. Do you know I also
Speaker 1: used to live on the Upper West Side. I lived
Speaker 1: in all kinds of places in Manhattan. And do you
Speaker 1: know how many like happy, successful Jewish people there are.
Speaker 1: My daughter went to a JCC preschool there.
Speaker 4: Like it's just it's so delusional. I don't even know
Speaker 4: what to say about it.
Speaker 1: Like it's honestly, like the desire to like this shy,
Speaker 1: DIVIDI character, like the desire to put himself in the
Speaker 1: center of this, the you know, quest for this intense victimhood. Again,
Speaker 1: you cannot like what they're protesting, can you know, find it?
Speaker 1: That's all fine, But you're.
Speaker 4: A grown man like Deally.
Speaker 1: You don't have anything else more important in your life
Speaker 1: than not liking the rally chant of these students who
Speaker 1: you're there to teach.
Speaker 4: I don't know, I don't know what to say about it.
Speaker 3: Very stupid.
Speaker 4: All right.
Speaker 1: Let's move on to Donald Trump the his trial opening statements.
Speaker 1: All that stuff happened yesterday. Let's put this up on
Speaker 1: the screen. We got a little bit of some of
Speaker 1: the synopsis. Here is the New York Times opening statements
Speaker 1: in Trump's criminal trial.
Speaker 4: Five takeaways. Let me read you a little bit of
Speaker 4: their report.
Speaker 1: Remember there are no TV cameras a lot in the courtroom,
Speaker 1: although they are releasing full transcripts after the fact, which
Speaker 1: is appreciated anyway. They write, the charges faced by mister
Speaker 1: Trump may sound bland, falsifying business records doesn't really set
Speaker 1: the heart racing, but the prosecution made clear on Monday
Speaker 1: it plans on painting a much broader picture. Matthew Colangelo, prosecutor,
Speaker 1: laid down in his opening statement a tale that touched
Speaker 1: on tabloid journalism, tawdry affairs, covertly recorded phone calls. Jurors
Speaker 1: will likely be told about events inside fancy hotel rooms.
Speaker 1: Trump towered even the Oval Office, and the stakes the presidency.
Speaker 1: For the defense side, mister Trump's lead lawyer, Todd Blanche,
Speaker 1: used his opening statement to cast mister Trump's actions leading
Speaker 1: to this case as run of the mill business. Said,
Speaker 1: mister Trump is defending himself at trial, just as any
Speaker 1: of us would do. He argued the use of a
Speaker 1: non disclosure agreement, the document that Stormy Daniels signed after
Speaker 1: receiving the payment, was typical among the wealthy and famous.
Speaker 4: End quote nothing illegal.
Speaker 1: He continued, there was nothing wrong with trying to influence
Speaker 1: an election, adding it's called democracy. He also in this
Speaker 1: was notable and predicted, but aggressively attacked mister Cohen. Michael Cohen,
Speaker 1: former lawyer and fixer for mister Trump, said mister Cohen,
Speaker 1: who pleaded guilty to federal campaign finance crimes in twenty eighteen,
Speaker 1: was a criminal who can't be trusted. At its Stormy
Speaker 1: Daniels was biased against mister Trump and made a living
Speaker 1: off her story about the sexual encounter and called the
Speaker 1: heart of the prosecution case just thirty four pieces of
Speaker 1: paper that don't involve mister Trump. So you can see
Speaker 1: the you know, they're both trying to tell his story
Speaker 1: right in one story. This is an elaborate, potentially election
Speaker 1: defining cover up, you know, a criminal conspiracy where there
Speaker 1: was a hush money payment that was made in you know,
Speaker 1: under illicited circumstances. And the crime they can get them
Speaker 1: on is these falsifying and business records, basically lying about
Speaker 1: what the payments were for in an attempt to hide
Speaker 1: from the American public. What was going on the other
Speaker 1: side is saying, listen, this is standard business. It was Yeah,
Speaker 1: he was trying to win an election. That's not illegal,
Speaker 1: it's not a crime. It's just what politicians do. Nothing
Speaker 1: to see here, it's just you know, thirty four business records.
Speaker 4: No big deal. So and then also the trying to
Speaker 4: undermine some of the.
Speaker 1: Key witnesses is going to be a key part of
Speaker 1: this and Saga I mentioned this yesterday when we talked
Speaker 1: about this. There's an interaction in particular between Michael Cohen
Speaker 1: and Trump that Cohen claims occurred in the White House
Speaker 1: and part of this is you know, how much did
Speaker 1: Trump know?
Speaker 4: How was he in all of this?
Speaker 1: And that's a critical piece because you know, if it's
Speaker 1: a he said, he said, and they can really undermine
Speaker 1: the credibility of Michael Cohen. You know, that's obviously going
Speaker 1: to be important for their case. And obviously a lot
Speaker 1: of this also comes down to the jurors and how
Speaker 1: unbiased they can be and how they feel about Donald
Speaker 1: Trump and all of us.
Speaker 2: Huge, Yeah, up to the jurors. Also up to whether
Speaker 2: we believe Michael Cohen. We're going to get to mister
Speaker 2: Cohen here in a little bit in terms of his
Speaker 2: own credibility. And it also comes to the felony interpretation,
Speaker 2: right about how business records classify under US law or
Speaker 2: under New York law, and whether this was an intentional,
Speaker 2: like vast criminal conspiracy in addition to election interference. We
Speaker 2: do have some video of Trump who after the courtroom,
Speaker 2: where he spoke to reporters. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 9: But the point here is that the judge had no
Speaker 9: idea what was happening. And this is the same judge
Speaker 9: that two months ago made a ruling that shook the world.
Speaker 9: It shook the world everyone knows. Going to that trail,
Speaker 9: I did nothing wrong, and over here I did nothing wrong.
Speaker 11: Also, this is a Biden witch hunt to keep me
Speaker 11: off the campaign trail.
Speaker 10: Now, what are they going to look at comorans and
Speaker 10: what commerants did, because that's bad stuff.
Speaker 6: And what are they going to look at.
Speaker 5: All the lies that Colin.
Speaker 9: Did in the last trial.
Speaker 3: He got caught lined in the last trial. So he
Speaker 3: got caught lined, pure line.
Speaker 8: And what are they going to look at that?
Speaker 2: Okay, so that's what we've got. He's going after Michael Cohen.
Speaker 2: But Crystal, Michael Cole is not doing himself any favors.
Speaker 2: We're trying to remain unbiased.
Speaker 9: Is he not well?
Speaker 4: Yesterday we reported on some.
Speaker 3: Some liberal fans fiction.
Speaker 1: About Trump's flatulence is farting and passing out in court
Speaker 1: according to the lips. Now, the sleeping part, I think
Speaker 1: is pretty well sleeping big. That's real farting part unconfirmed,
Speaker 1: we'll say so. Anyway, Cohen getting in on the lib
Speaker 1: train with the situation. Let's put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: He tweeted, Hey, von shitz in pants, your attacks of
Speaker 1: me stink of desperation. We are all hoping that you
Speaker 1: take the stand in your defense. So there you go,
Speaker 1: that's the case.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he's me.
Speaker 4: And when you're trying to establish your creudit, I was gonna.
Speaker 2: Say, you're trying to establish your credibility and you are.
Speaker 2: Now you are a convicted liar. This is the other
Speaker 2: thing that always tries to create with Michael Cohen. Michael
Speaker 2: Cohen was one of the most craven Trump sick of
Speaker 2: fans for years until Trump screwed him and refused to
Speaker 2: pay his legal bills. Right, and then he gets convicted
Speaker 2: in court, okay, and then he turns into some resistance liberal.
Speaker 3: He met with Kanye West. I remember at some point
Speaker 3: he's just been you know.
Speaker 2: Writing books, just saw on the griff train ever since
Speaker 2: he had to sign uh what ever, since he served
Speaker 2: in federal prison. And now he the reason he's acting
Speaker 2: this way is because his income and his life depend
Speaker 2: on it, especially in the future future MSNBC appearances. Just
Speaker 2: so everybody knows, what's her name. Rachel matt was actually
Speaker 2: in the court yesterday. I mean, this is her superse
Speaker 2: This is literally her Super Bowl.
Speaker 1: Did you see the Michael Avenatti. Of course, of course,
Speaker 1: now he's he's now he's back on Trump's I mean
Speaker 1: it is. We do have to comment though, on the
Speaker 1: cast of characters that Donald Trump himself has surrounded himself with,
Speaker 1: including Michael Cohen. So okay, let's get to who they
Speaker 1: did actually call. There was a very brief amount of time.
Speaker 1: Apparently a juror had a medical issue they had to
Speaker 1: deal with, so they called the prosecution, called their first witness.
Speaker 1: Put up what element is that? The third one? Yeah,
Speaker 1: put up this tear sheet from the Washington Post. Who
Speaker 1: is David Packer, first witness and Trump New York hush
Speaker 1: money case. This is the guy who was the owner,
Speaker 1: is the owner of the National Inquirer. And he, you know,
Speaker 1: he's an interesting character. Actually, just to hear what he
Speaker 1: has to say separate and apart from this case is
Speaker 1: kind of kind of interesting. He talked some of some
Speaker 1: of the sort of trade secrets of the tabloid business,
Speaker 1: talking about what he calls checkbook journalism, meaning you pay
Speaker 1: for stories, saying listen, anything over ten k they had
Speaker 1: to get an official approval from me, also saying listen,
Speaker 1: in this business, I know that the only thing that
Speaker 1: matters is the cover.
Speaker 4: It's the front page. That's it.
Speaker 1: That's the only thing that matters. He testified for less
Speaker 1: than thirty minutes. But you know this is a man.
Speaker 1: He's a former publisher by the way of the National
Speaker 1: enquired just to get his title straight. He has a
Speaker 1: lot to say about long time interactions with Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: and this isn't really disputed. They use this method called
Speaker 1: quote unquote quote catch and kill, where he would buy
Speaker 1: up a story that's unflattering to Trump and then he
Speaker 1: would not run it. So he did that in two
Speaker 1: instances that we know of. One with the former Playboy models.
Speaker 1: Who's Karen McDougall.
Speaker 4: Who is that right?
Speaker 1: And I got her name right right, No, that's right,
Speaker 1: Karen McDougal, who claimed with some evidence that she had
Speaker 1: an affair with Trump.
Speaker 4: He bought that story, didn't run it.
Speaker 1: And then this less credible and I think not true
Speaker 1: story about a Dorman and Trump Tower who claimed that
Speaker 1: someone Trump had an affair with it was a mistress
Speaker 1: that had an abortion.
Speaker 4: So both of those stories he killed.
Speaker 1: The allegations are that they Stormy Daniels came to him
Speaker 1: with this story and she was asking too much money.
Speaker 1: So rather than the National Inquirer themselves doing the catch
Speaker 1: and kill, they sent this alerted Michael Cohen. He comes
Speaker 1: into play arranging these payments, figuring out how to do
Speaker 1: it in a way that's not going to be public.
Speaker 1: And that's sort of the backstory of this whole situation.
Speaker 1: So in any case, David Pecker is an interesting character
Speaker 1: and certainly has some compelling information with regard to this case.
Speaker 4: So it's not a huge.
Speaker 1: Surprise that he would be the first individual to take
Speaker 1: the stand on the prosecution's behalf.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean it all comes back to the quote unquote
Speaker 2: catch and kill scheme where Pecker what is an American
Speaker 2: media man.
Speaker 3: I can't believe. I still even remember.
Speaker 2: They go and they pay for the story, and they
Speaker 2: keep it in their vault, and then it's a big
Speaker 2: question about election interference. As you said, it's a question
Speaker 2: also about whether this is legal, especially to the extent
Speaker 2: about the way that Trump paid her paid him. If
Speaker 2: Trump had just paid Michael Cohen out of his own
Speaker 2: personal account, then none of this would have been a story.
Speaker 2: But of course they tried to write it off on
Speaker 2: some FEC thing as an election expense. That then goes
Speaker 2: back as to whether it was FEC fraud. That's eventually
Speaker 2: what Michael Cohen pleads guilty to. Now, this case goes
Speaker 2: to the question again of falsifying business wrecords in New
Speaker 2: York as a felony.
Speaker 3: With the novel interpretation, the jurors have to buy that
Speaker 3: to buy.
Speaker 2: The felony falsification, they have to buy the broader scheme
Speaker 2: that happened as world trumpling.
Speaker 1: The campaign finance piece in particular, I think, is what's required.
Speaker 4: For it to be a felony.
Speaker 2: Right, So, and yeah, that is basically Alvin Bragg is
Speaker 2: charging under the theory that Trump committed a federal felony crime,
Speaker 2: even though that federal felony crime was never actually prosecuted
Speaker 2: by the Feds. This is I believe, and as we
Speaker 2: saw a little bit in the Trump defense, this is
Speaker 2: going to also be a key part of creating reasonable doubt.
Speaker 3: As to why they should not vote to a quit.
Speaker 2: And you know, the more I've been thinking about it,
Speaker 2: especially with that one guy who said he admired Trump,
Speaker 2: I think the likelihood of a hung jury in this
Speaker 2: is a lot higher than people might have led on. Yeah,
Speaker 2: just because of the novel interpretation that you know the details,
Speaker 2: and you really only got to convince one person that
Speaker 2: you're just going a step too far, which is reasonable
Speaker 2: enough in my opinion that you don't get a conviction.
Speaker 2: So the more I've been looking and thinking about it,
Speaker 2: I think Trump is a lot better shot here than
Speaker 2: people might have given him a credible.
Speaker 4: I think that's entirely possible.
Speaker 1: You know, who knows what the jury is going to
Speaker 1: find ultimately, but the campaign finance piece is an important
Speaker 1: part of that, because what the Trump team is likely
Speaker 1: to say is, like, listen, this wasn't about hiding this
Speaker 1: from the American public.
Speaker 4: He didn't want his wife to know, right, you know,
Speaker 4: there were other reasons.
Speaker 1: Probably there are other reasons why he didn't want this
Speaker 1: story to come to light, and it had nothing to
Speaker 1: do with deceiving the American people. Now, you know, is
Speaker 1: there are there conversations that would test that would you know,
Speaker 1: be a.
Speaker 4: Testament to a different interpretation?
Speaker 1: Are there, you know, conversations that he had where he's
Speaker 1: directly saying like, we got to keep this from the
Speaker 1: American people, And who cares what Malania thinks? What sort
Speaker 1: of things are going to come to light? We don't know,
Speaker 1: We don't know how the jury's going to interpret any
Speaker 1: of this, so we shall see. Let's put this last
Speaker 1: piece up on the screen. One of the interesting things
Speaker 1: that David Packard is very brief testimony yes dreams expected
Speaker 1: to continue today, said that he had two email accounts,
Speaker 1: one for matters I didn't want my assistant to see, which, again,
Speaker 1: is this kind of funny insight into the way that
Speaker 1: he ran his business.
Speaker 4: And being a very interesting character at the heart of this.
Speaker 3: So there you go.
Speaker 4: That's what we know thus far about the Trump trial.
Speaker 3: Keep everybody updated.
Speaker 2: I know it can be boring, but it's one of
Speaker 2: those where the details matter so much because of the
Speaker 2: implication and who knows what.
Speaker 3: Wild twists and turns, mister von Hitchens that we will
Speaker 3: get out of it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, nonetheless, we will at least get the diaper don thing,
Speaker 2: which I was not aware of, and now I'm deeply
Speaker 2: invested in in terms of conspiracy theory. At the same time,
Speaker 2: we don't want to take our eye off of RFK Junior.
Speaker 2: There's been some major developments and a major sign also
Speaker 2: that the Biden campaign certainly sees him as a threat.
Speaker 2: They trotted out all living Kennedy family relatives who were
Speaker 2: willing to come and endorse him.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen. My name is Joe Kennedy.
Speaker 4: I'm Kerry Kennedy, Flory Kennedy, Kathin Kennedy, Townsend.
Speaker 9: Chris Kennedy, and I'm here to proudly endorse Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: Biden.
Speaker 8: Joe Biden.
Speaker 11: Our future is on the ballot in a way in
Speaker 11: which we haven't seen in generations.
Speaker 15: The only way to win this selection is for everybody
Speaker 15: to go out and vote for Joe Biden and come alas.
Speaker 4: What I think of modern politicians in our country in
Speaker 4: this century. I think Joe Biden is the RFK of
Speaker 4: his generation.
Speaker 6: Believes in democracy, believes in human rights, believes in the freedoms.
Speaker 4: Is a president who embodies the Kennedy legacy.
Speaker 3: Oh my god, let me just say this.
Speaker 2: He believes in the freedom scra Do you know how
Speaker 2: insulting it is to RFK, the real RFK, who is
Speaker 2: a great man and a great politician, say that Joe
Speaker 2: Biden is.
Speaker 3: The new RFK.
Speaker 2: Whether his son is or not, that's up to him.
Speaker 2: He still has to prove that. But RFK himself, man,
Speaker 2: I think I used to at least have a Yeah,
Speaker 2: there we go. Got Robert Kennedy in his Times. It's
Speaker 2: a great book. I wish people would pick it up.
Speaker 2: And that is just one of those which really bothers me.
Speaker 2: But what is ironic about this is that as the
Speaker 2: Biden campaign continues to see RFK Junior as a threat,
Speaker 2: there's actually a lot of polling now that has come
Speaker 2: out to show that he may not necessarily be just
Speaker 2: a problem for Joe Biden. Let's put this up here
Speaker 2: on the screen. This is some new data from NBC News.
Speaker 2: They say how the race shifts in a multi way
Speaker 2: field compared to a binary choice. So what you guys
Speaker 2: can see in front of you is that with the
Speaker 2: two named candidates of Trump and Biden, that you have
Speaker 2: Joe Biden at forty four, you have Trump at forty six,
Speaker 2: and then you have ten percent who are not sure,
Speaker 2: wouldn't vote and other For five named candidates, you have
Speaker 2: thirty nine percent for Biden, thirteen percent for RFK Junior,
Speaker 2: thirty seven percent for Trump. So obviously that is a
Speaker 2: huge drop for Trump from forty six to thirty seven.
Speaker 2: Biden certainly does lose some, but it appears that he's
Speaker 2: going to lose some of that four to five percent Crystal,
Speaker 2: to Jill Stein and to Cornell West and that RFK
Speaker 2: Junior is actually pulling a decent chunk of votes away
Speaker 2: from the Trump campaign. It explains too why Trump has
Speaker 2: been attacking RFK Junior recently. But this is evidence I
Speaker 2: think that we you know, this is the most evidence
Speaker 2: we've had so far as a very high quality poll,
Speaker 2: just to demonstrate that this very much could make things
Speaker 2: a lot easier for Joe Biden to win reelection. If anything,
Speaker 2: we can think about it a little bit. In the
Speaker 2: Ross perro Vane, you know Bill Clinton, Yeah, he won
Speaker 2: three hundred some electoral votes.
Speaker 3: He only won forty two percent of the popular vote.
Speaker 2: Okay, it was hw Bush and Parrot that took the rest.
Speaker 2: Hw Bush for the rest of his life basically refused
Speaker 2: to say Ross Parrot's name. I think the closest he
Speaker 2: came is he was like, He's like, I don't want
Speaker 2: to like to say his name. I think it cost
Speaker 2: me the election.
Speaker 3: And that was it.
Speaker 2: I mean, he was bitter to the very very end,
Speaker 2: and I mean maybe at a point I'm not really sure.
Speaker 2: But my whole point is here is that just with
Speaker 2: thirty nine percent for Joe Biden, If RFK Junior is
Speaker 2: able to take away let's say even within the margin
Speaker 2: of era, let's say ten percent away from Trump, that's
Speaker 2: a disaster for the Trump campaign.
Speaker 4: So here's the breakdown of the numbers.
Speaker 1: Specifically, if you take the Jill Stein and the Cornell
Speaker 1: West effect out of the you know, instead of the
Speaker 1: five gay ras, like, what happens with just the RFK voters.
Speaker 1: So it's fifteen percent of voters who originally picked Trump
Speaker 1: when it's just Trump versus Biden, fifteen percent of them
Speaker 1: switched to Kennedy. When you give them that option with Biden,
Speaker 1: it's only seven percent who originally picked Biden if it's
Speaker 1: just head to head Biden Trump who switched to Kennedy.
Speaker 1: So fifteen percent for Trump versus seven percent for Biden.
Speaker 1: And then they underscore something that I've been saying for
Speaker 1: a little while here, which is that Republican voters just
Speaker 1: have a much higher favorability for RFK Junior than Democratic
Speaker 1: voters do. So you've got among Republican voters forty percent
Speaker 1: positive and fifteen percent negative, so really highly net positive
Speaker 1: for Kennedy among Republican voters.
Speaker 4: Democratic voters is.
Speaker 1: Polar opposite only sixteen percent have a positive rating of
Speaker 1: him versus fifty three percent who have a negative rating. Now, listen,
Speaker 1: other polls have shown the opposite effect. So I think
Speaker 1: it's very unclear at this point because at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, he's still a Kennedy. And also the
Speaker 1: other dynamic is Trump supporters tend to be more enthusiastic
Speaker 1: and more locked in than Biden's supporters, so there may
Speaker 1: be more disaffected Biden voters for r K Junior to
Speaker 1: pick up than Trump voters. But it is I mean,
Speaker 1: this is something I originally when RFK got in all
Speaker 1: of the theorizing was like, no, he's definitely going to
Speaker 1: hurt Trump. Then it's sort of switched to now it's
Speaker 1: definitely going to hurt Biden. And I think it's unclear.
Speaker 1: But if I had to say today, I think this
Speaker 1: is more of a problem for Trump because you just
Speaker 1: can't deny that there's this overwhelming negative view of him
Speaker 1: among Democratic voters.
Speaker 4: And you also still have think about the way our
Speaker 4: politics works.
Speaker 1: I mean, everything is so centered around Trump and how
Speaker 1: you feel about Trump and how Trump feels about you.
Speaker 4: Et cetera. And he's gone after RFK Junior a bit,
Speaker 4: but more on policy. The vibes are like, I like him.
Speaker 4: I think it's better than Biden.
Speaker 1: You said, So he's getting the friendly treatment from Trump,
Speaker 1: he's getting the aggressively negative treatment from the Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: and I think that sends a signal to a lot
Speaker 1: of voters of like which side he's more aligned with.
Speaker 1: I mean, it shouldn't be that way, but that's just
Speaker 1: the reality.
Speaker 2: Good point negative polarization, Yeah, the biggest driving forces in
Speaker 2: US politics exactly.
Speaker 4: So in any case, it's interesting.
Speaker 1: I think it's still unsettled, but I am increasingly see
Speaker 1: There's a Wall Street Journal poll that also showed RFK
Speaker 1: Junior taking more from Trump than from Biden, which begs
Speaker 1: an interesting question of why it is then that the
Speaker 1: Biden campaign is like so much more freaked down about
Speaker 1: him apparently than the Trump campaign.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up there on the screen too.
Speaker 2: For ballot access wise, we're seeing a big, big development
Speaker 2: for RFK Junior. They a campaign announced on Thursday that
Speaker 2: they have gained ballot access in Michigan for the twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four election. Obviously Michigan key battleground state there both
Speaker 2: for Trump and for Biden. Trump wanted by about ten
Speaker 2: thousand in twenty sixteen. In twenty twenty, Biden one, but
Speaker 2: not by actually an overwhelming majority. There have been some
Speaker 2: issues there that we cover, you know, thankfully we did
Speaker 2: in Rhage and your focus group in Michigan, and we
Speaker 2: showed you that there is some real support there on
Speaker 2: the ground. Obviously, there's also a big Arab American contingent.
Speaker 2: To voters that are in Michigan, are they going to
Speaker 2: show up and are they going to vote for Biden?
Speaker 2: All of these are completely unknown questions. But the big
Speaker 2: picture is that he is gaining ballot access slowly, but surely.
Speaker 2: Let's go to the next one, please, because this also
Speaker 2: demonstrates where because of some of the money that they've
Speaker 2: got now, they're able to at least contest some of
Speaker 2: these challenges from the courts to his ballot access. So,
Speaker 2: for example, Hawaii's state Democratic Party, think about that has
Speaker 2: sought to disqualify We the People Party, which was formed
Speaker 2: specifically to get RFK Junior on the ballot. The state
Speaker 2: Democratic Party, according to the order from the Office of
Speaker 2: Elections late Friday in Hawaii, said that the Democratic Party
Speaker 2: failed to meet its burden of proof to boot the
Speaker 2: Kennedy Party from the ballot. So, as they say here too,
Speaker 2: while Hawaii's four electoral votes are not likely to be consequential,
Speaker 2: this is this victory, first victory against challenges and assigns
Speaker 2: to that keeping the independent off the ballot will not
Speaker 2: be as easy as Democrats have been thinking that it
Speaker 2: would be, and as they plan to do this across
Speaker 2: the entire nation. So this was a trial balloon. But
Speaker 2: where they're really going to be gunning for him is Michigan.
Speaker 2: If he does get Pennsylvania, if he gets Georgia and California,
Speaker 2: any of these places where he could either eat into
Speaker 2: the popular vote or actually eat into the electoral college.
Speaker 4: It's sort of.
Speaker 1: Adorable the account of how this went down because they
Speaker 1: didn't the RFK junior team didn't actually have a lawyer
Speaker 1: who was involved in these hearings. They just had like
Speaker 1: whoever they're you know, the like mom who's volunteering for
Speaker 1: their campaign on the ground in Hawaii was there. And
Speaker 1: in spite of the fact that you know, the Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: they had their lawyers whoever, you know, well paid, well trained,
Speaker 1: et cetera. And she was still able to prevail in
Speaker 1: this court in spite of the fact that Judge had
Speaker 1: to keep kind of, you know, explaining how this works
Speaker 1: and when she could speak in what sort of objection
Speaker 1: she could make, et cetera, et cetera. But ultimately they
Speaker 1: found there was really no merit to the case that
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party was trying to pursue against RFK Junior.
Speaker 4: Again, I just find it.
Speaker 1: I just find it really interesting that it's the Democrats
Speaker 1: who are so panicked about the idea of having RFK
Speaker 1: Junior in the race when it's really unclear who he's
Speaker 1: going to take more from, and so it's like, okay, well,
Speaker 1: rather than fixating on trying to crush this person, kick
Speaker 1: them off, the ballots offer voters any sort of other choice.
Speaker 1: I feel like, you know, in many ways, I don't
Speaker 1: really feel like RFK Junior is a choice, because they
Speaker 1: were all the same on a number of topics, but
Speaker 1: I won't put that aside for a moment. But rather
Speaker 1: than actually appealing to voters, their instinct is always just
Speaker 1: to like make it so that people can't have any choice.
Speaker 1: There was a really interesting I don't know if you
Speaker 1: guys saw this on Twitter yesterday.
Speaker 4: It was just so perfect. Did you see this.
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton tweet or this Nagan unto your time, Oh
Speaker 1: was just too perfect. So she tweeted out this chart.
Speaker 1: It was about climate change, and it showed under Trump
Speaker 1: the CO two emissions, under Biden the CO two emissions,
Speaker 1: and then what the target level that Biden himself set,
Speaker 1: not even like the bigger like European standards or whatever
Speaker 1: that Biden himself set, And it showed Biden wildly missing
Speaker 1: his own target that he met, but being slightly better
Speaker 1: than the Trump line. And she tweeted that out and
Speaker 1: was like, here's what's on the line.
Speaker 4: This is why you got to vote Democrat.
Speaker 1: And it's like this is just too perfect, Like you
Speaker 1: tweeted out a chart showing that you're honestly a little
Speaker 1: bit better than Trump, but still not even coming.
Speaker 4: Close to actually dealing with the issue. And it's just
Speaker 4: it's such a perfect encapsulation. Do you have what did
Speaker 4: she actually say?
Speaker 2: I have it here in front of me yet, which
Speaker 2: she said, what's at stake for our climate in this
Speaker 2: November's election?
Speaker 4: Absolutely absolutely everything.
Speaker 3: I'm blind the Biden line, the target.
Speaker 1: Absolutely everything. But he's still not going to do enough
Speaker 1: to actually like meet even the dumb about this too
Speaker 1: is that modest target that he himself said.
Speaker 3: But here's the thing. There was also a pandemic.
Speaker 2: You know, there was a massive drop in CO two
Speaker 2: emissions and some of this is also so this doesn't
Speaker 2: even reflective of policy.
Speaker 3: It doesn't make it. This is what a stupid graphic
Speaker 3: on so many levels. Yes, but isn't it.
Speaker 4: I just it's such a just pitch perfect capsulation.
Speaker 3: If you the climate, then yeah, that makes sense.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like, oh, okay, Biden's going to be moderately better,
Speaker 1: but we're still going to all, you know, die in
Speaker 1: the climate apocalypse because absolutely everything is on the line.
Speaker 4: Great, good to know, good to know if.
Speaker 2: You accept that framing, Yes, I could see why exactly
Speaker 2: that would be a problem. They're also let's put this
Speaker 2: up there on the screen. Some news from the Kennedy campaign.
Speaker 2: Nicole Shanahan donated who is the VP candidate for Urka
Speaker 2: Junior donated two million dollars to the campaign the day
Speaker 2: after that she was named to the ticket. So on
Speaker 2: March twenty seventh in the state of Nevada, two million
Speaker 2: dollars literally just on the day that she was named
Speaker 2: the VP. And of course she's probably got hundreds of
Speaker 2: millions of dollars at her disposal. This is going to
Speaker 2: finance both ballot access to initiatives and court challenges in
Speaker 2: the future should they arise, and are is definitely going
Speaker 2: to be a major asset to the Kennedy campaign going forward.
Speaker 2: So I think things are looking up for ourk Junior's
Speaker 2: campaign right now in terms of the ballot access. I
Speaker 2: mean Michigan alone, that's huge, just just as that state
Speaker 2: have it right exactly, that state could decide the entire election.
Speaker 2: If he just gets Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, then that's it.
Speaker 12: You know.
Speaker 2: Now we're truly in the ballgame, and I think some
Speaker 2: Democrats are starting to take notice. You know, we've been
Speaker 2: watching some of the activists and others go after him.
Speaker 2: But I'm very interested to see how it all turns out.
Speaker 2: Let's move on to the next part. This is the
Speaker 2: story been dying to cover now for quite a long time,
Speaker 2: and now Joe Biden is ignited an international incident after
Speaker 2: President Biden has now been making the rounds recently telling
Speaker 2: a terrible tale. The tale is of his uncle, and
Speaker 2: his uncle was on board a US military aircraft. It
Speaker 2: was after D Day his uncle went down in Papua
Speaker 2: New Guinea while fighting in the Pacific Campaign. His plane
Speaker 2: crashed in this terrible incident, and he was eventually eaten
Speaker 2: by cannibals. This is the story according to Biden, and
Speaker 2: then we'll tell you what actually happened.
Speaker 16: And my uncle, they called him Ambrose Brosie, they called
Speaker 16: him my uncle Bosey. It's a hell of an athlete,
Speaker 16: they tell me. When he was a kid, and he
Speaker 16: became an Army Air Corps before the Air Force came along.
Speaker 16: He's those single engine planes as reconnaissance over war zones.
Speaker 16: He got shot down in New Guinea and they never
Speaker 16: found the body because there used to be a lot
Speaker 16: of cannibals, for real, in that part of New Guinea.
Speaker 3: As President Biden saying he was shot down, there's no
Speaker 3: evidence of that. And why is he saying that his
Speaker 3: uncle was eaten by cannibals. That is a bad way
Speaker 3: to go.
Speaker 12: He lost his life.
Speaker 15: It's not look, I'm not we should not make jokes
Speaker 15: about it. I mean your last line, it's for a laugh.
Speaker 15: It's for a funny, a funny statement. And he takes
Speaker 15: us very seriously. His uncle, who served and protected this
Speaker 15: country lost his life serving and that should matter.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree, it should matter. And the details of
Speaker 2: that should matter too. And let's put this up there
Speaker 2: on the screen. It turns out that basically none of
Speaker 2: that that Biden said was true. President Biden, it turns
Speaker 2: out was talking about his uncle, Second Lieutenant Ambrose J.
Speaker 2: Finnegan Junior now Finnigan, who was the brother of Biden's mother,
Speaker 2: according to Biden, got shot down over New Guinea. However,
Speaker 2: the US government record of the crash, says of the
Speaker 2: missing service members, does not attribute Finnegan's death to hostile
Speaker 2: actions or even indicate Cannibal's were any factor. According to
Speaker 2: US military records and the Pentagon's MIA Accounting Agency, he
Speaker 2: died on May fourteenth, nineteen forty four, while he was
Speaker 2: a passenger on an Army Air Force plane quote that
Speaker 2: for unknown reasons, was forced to ditch in the Pacific
Speaker 2: Ocean off the northern coast of New Guinea.
Speaker 3: Quote.
Speaker 2: Both engines failed at low altitude aircraft nos hit the
Speaker 2: water hard. Three men failed to emerge from the sinking
Speaker 2: wreck and were lost in the crash, according to a
Speaker 2: survivor of the crash itself. The agency also said Finnegan
Speaker 2: was a passenger on that plane when it was lost. Quote,
Speaker 2: he has not been associated with any remains ever recovered
Speaker 2: from the area after the war and is still accounted for.
Speaker 2: So again, he didn't go over and he didn't go
Speaker 2: down on New Guinea. He went down near New Guinea,
Speaker 2: lost his life in a tragic accident. It appears not
Speaker 2: due to hostile enemy actions. Doesn't erase the man's service
Speaker 2: at all. It took a lot of courage to fly
Speaker 2: on board some of these aircraft in the Second World War.
Speaker 2: If anybody wants to go watch Masters of the Air
Speaker 2: and see exactly what it was like up there.
Speaker 3: It was a total nightmare. So I'm not a racing
Speaker 3: his man's service at all.
Speaker 2: But I do think it's actually pretty despicable that you
Speaker 2: would invent some horrible death, you know, for political purposes
Speaker 2: of your uncle who tragically died in the Second World War.
Speaker 3: And so this is either like a family tale gone awry, very.
Speaker 2: Possible, or just straight up Biden embellishment for the sake
Speaker 2: of embellishment. And the funny part is it has now
Speaker 2: caused international incident. Let's put this up there on the screen.
Speaker 2: The leader of Papua New Guinea quote takes offense after
Speaker 2: Biden implies that his uncle was eaten by cannibals. The
Speaker 2: Prime Minister quote accused Joe Biden of disparaging the island
Speaker 2: by implying that the uncle was eaten by cannibals during
Speaker 2: World War II. Biden's comments now have offended a key
Speaker 2: strategic ally in the South Pacific, and the Prime Minister
Speaker 2: said in a statement that he appeared to his imply
Speaker 2: his uncle was eaten by cannibals, and his remarks may
Speaker 2: have been a slip of the tongue. However, my country
Speaker 2: does not deserve to be labeled as such. And you
Speaker 2: know what he's right now, is true that they're cannibals
Speaker 2: or whatever on Papua New Guinea. Yes, there have been
Speaker 2: some documented instances and all that, but in this particular,
Speaker 2: in this particular instance, Biden's straight up wrong. According to
Speaker 2: the US government itself.
Speaker 1: Yes, he goes on to say, perhaps he says the
Speaker 1: remains of World War two like scattered all over, including
Speaker 1: the plane that carried President Biden's uncle. Perhaps, given President
Speaker 1: Biden's comments and the strong reaction from PNG and other
Speaker 1: parts of the world, it's time for the USA to
Speaker 1: find as many remains of World War two and P
Speaker 1: and G as possible, including those of servicemen who lost
Speaker 1: their lives. Like Ambrose Finnegan, The theaters of war in
Speaker 1: PNGG and Solomon Islands are many and littered with the
Speaker 1: remains of World War Two, including human remains, plane wrecked shipwrecks, tunnels,
Speaker 1: and bombs. Are people daily live with the fear of
Speaker 1: being killed by detonated bombs of World War Two. So
Speaker 1: he really touched a nerve with these stupid, fake cannibal comments.
Speaker 1: This is a corn pop level Joe Biden's story, Like
Speaker 1: it really has it all. You've got the like you know,
Speaker 1: old man low key or even high key racism, the
Speaker 1: you know, just like why would you There's so many
Speaker 1: stories that he makes up that you're like, why would
Speaker 1: you even make that up? What is going through your
Speaker 1: mind that you think that this somehow serves you in
Speaker 1: this moment? And then the fact that he just accidentally,
Speaker 1: through his verbal cannibal diarrhea, stumbles into some like international
Speaker 1: diplomatic conflict. It's this is just Joe Biden perfection, absolute perfection.
Speaker 1: Here by the way, for what it's worth, I looked
Speaker 1: into the whole cannibal situation New Guinea at that time,
Speaker 1: and yes, you're right, documented instances, but as scholars immediately reacted,
Speaker 1: they're like, people weren't just eating random guys who fell
Speaker 1: from the sky.
Speaker 4: There was as part of a funeral ritual. There was
Speaker 4: some ritual. Can in that context, It's not like everyone's just.
Speaker 1: Going around eating people all the time. Just so people
Speaker 1: out there know what the reality is of what was
Speaker 1: going on.
Speaker 3: Oh, thank you, Ristal.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what is a Jared Diamond is a great expert
Speaker 2: on Papua New Guinea. If you ever want to go
Speaker 2: watch some of his videos on the subject. There are
Speaker 2: some interesting there are some actually interesting survival tales of
Speaker 2: World War II planes that went down on Papua New Guinea.
Speaker 2: But it is certainly not involving any family members of
Speaker 2: Joseph Robin Ed Biden.
Speaker 3: There you go, invidible.
Speaker 2: Now, we would you remiss though, if we didn't at
Speaker 2: least tie some politics into this. Let's put this up
Speaker 2: there on the screen. What do we find that a
Speaker 2: Harvard poll of young voters says that Biden has a
Speaker 2: lead with Trump, but just nine percent of the country.
Speaker 2: Nine percent of these young voters think that the country
Speaker 2: is moving in the right direction. So despite the fact
Speaker 2: that everything is going down, Biden does have that lead
Speaker 2: over Donald Trump. This is according to registered voters, with
Speaker 2: younger voters showing Biden pulling a fifty percent support over
Speaker 2: thirty years or younger compared to Trump's thirty seven percent,
Speaker 2: But just nine percent say that the country is quote
Speaker 2: generally headed in the wrong direction, and a full sixty
Speaker 2: percent say that the country.
Speaker 3: Is on the wrong track. There are some though troubling
Speaker 3: findings though, Crystal inside the poll for Biden on the
Speaker 3: topic of Israel.
Speaker 1: Well, there's a number of interesting and difficult findings in
Speaker 1: this poll for Biden, including yes, he has a lead
Speaker 1: over Trump, but it is not as large as his
Speaker 1: lead was last time, so that matters. There's also a
Speaker 1: tremendous gender gap. His lead among young men is just
Speaker 1: six points. Among young women, his lead is thirty three points.
Speaker 1: There's some graphs you should take a look at that
Speaker 1: show you know at the same time that young men,
Speaker 1: in terms of their political preferences, although not in terms
Speaker 1: of some of their issue support, but are becoming more conservative.
Speaker 4: Young women are becoming more liberal.
Speaker 1: Something we've talked about before that shows up in this poll,
Speaker 1: which is a very interesting phenomenon. His lead overall among
Speaker 1: eighteen to twenty four year old So if you're looking
Speaker 1: at the youngest part of this poll demographic is fourteen points,
Speaker 1: and among the twenty five to twenty nine year old,
Speaker 1: so the somewhat older ones, it's actually larger twenty six points.
Speaker 1: So younger Americans, the eighteen to twenty four are actually
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, they're still favoring him by fourteen points,
Speaker 1: but the gap is a little more and narrow, which
Speaker 1: is interesting as well, in contrary to previous trends and
Speaker 1: dynamics where young voters are getting like more and more
Speaker 1: and more democratic, progressive, whatever, huge gap in terms of
Speaker 1: college students and college graduates versus the races even among
Speaker 1: young people who are not in college and who don't
Speaker 1: have a four year degree. But you're right to the
Speaker 1: point about Israel. I mean, there's just like massive overwhelming
Speaker 1: support for a ceasefire, including among every demographic group that
Speaker 1: they test, including among young Republicans. So it was across
Speaker 1: the board, massive support for a ceasefire. And then if
Speaker 1: you dig into his approval rating by issue, the issue
Speaker 1: on which he gets the lowest approval rating of everything
Speaker 1: is what they describe as the Israel Hamas.
Speaker 4: War at just eighteen percent.
Speaker 1: Wow, So a lot of warning signs for him with
Speaker 1: regard to how young voters are feeling about him, what
Speaker 1: direction politically they're moving, what issues they're prioritizing, and certainly
Speaker 1: how they're viewing his unconditional support for Israel.
Speaker 4: At this time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that it's a key point. We have
Speaker 2: talked a lot about the gender divide and the breakup.
Speaker 2: I mean, I think that's the barstool phenomenon. I'm also
Speaker 2: very intrigued exactly by what you pointed out about the
Speaker 2: tie between people who didn't go to college. That is
Speaker 2: the education phenomenon which is showing itself there. So we
Speaker 2: continue to see where the I mean, actually they're both
Speaker 2: bi directional, because whether you are a woman or not
Speaker 2: is highly determinative these days of whether you're going to college,
Speaker 2: as opposed to if you're a man. They're a likelihood
Speaker 2: if you go into college is a lot lower today
Speaker 2: than it was in the past.
Speaker 3: We're getting to a two to one.
Speaker 2: Ratio very soon on some major college campuses, so that
Speaker 2: will heavily inform our politics and the economy, which.
Speaker 3: We'll get to.
Speaker 1: It's worth looking at the poll if you guys have time,
Speaker 1: because there's some interesting questions they asked to to try
Speaker 1: to get it, like how young people feel about different
Speaker 1: gender dynamics. And they ask them questions like, you know,
Speaker 1: do you agree with the statement these days people are
Speaker 1: just too soft? Or another one was Another one was
Speaker 1: these days women are too promiscuous.
Speaker 4: Most people disagree.
Speaker 2: I think too statist one tells us that women are
Speaker 2: not that promiscuous anymore.
Speaker 3: That's true according to.
Speaker 1: Do Well, and most people disagree with that statement. By
Speaker 1: the way, Republicans agreed with it the most. On the
Speaker 1: too soft one, I think Republicans overwhelmingly Young Republicans overwhelm
Speaker 1: agreed with that.
Speaker 4: So anyway, they asked some interesting stuff that's worth it.
Speaker 2: I do agree people are too soft, but it's not
Speaker 2: it's not a youth phenomenon. But that's a whole lot.
Speaker 1: I think some of these people complaining about college protesters
Speaker 1: are definitely too soft.
Speaker 4: How about it.
Speaker 3: I was going to say, that's exactly what I meant.
Speaker 2: I think our elites are actually the ones who were
Speaker 2: softer than anybody else.
Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, let's go ahead and move on to
Speaker 1: some very serious topics with regard to Israel. Put this
Speaker 1: first report up on the screen, and so we're still
Speaker 1: trying to figure out, you know, what the hell happened
Speaker 1: with Iran, what's likely to have in the future with Iran,
Speaker 1: how this all unfolded.
Speaker 4: New York Times has a report.
Speaker 1: Take it with a grain of salt because it's frankly
Speaker 1: very flattering to the Biden administration.
Speaker 4: So good to keep that in mind.
Speaker 1: But the headline here is Israel planned a bigger attack
Speaker 1: on Iran, but scaled it back to avoid war. The
Speaker 1: strike on Iran on Friday was originally intended to be
Speaker 1: much broader in scope, but after intense pressure from allies,
Speaker 1: Biden being one of the key people that they talk
Speaker 1: about here, Israeli leaders agreed to ratchet it down. The
Speaker 1: story they tell for what it's worth, and soagram interested
Speaker 1: to hear your read on this is that basically, you know,
Speaker 1: the Israelis are trying to sell this line that they
Speaker 1: had no idea Ron would be so upset over us
Speaker 1: bombing your embassy and taking out your top military commanders.
Speaker 3: That's bullshit.
Speaker 1: There is no way, these people didn't know that this
Speaker 1: was a big deal and a massive escalation.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 1: So then the Iranian retaliatory attack, while it caused next
Speaker 1: to no damage because all of the everything was effectively
Speaker 1: shot down with very few things that actually got through,
Speaker 1: it was in its breadth much larger than originally anticipated.
Speaker 1: Again according to this article, and so immediately afterwards, the
Speaker 1: war cabinet had planned a much more aggressive response and
Speaker 1: one that they had planned to do like basically instantaneously.
Speaker 1: And then the report says Bbe talked to Biden and
Speaker 1: he was kind of talked down from immediately doing that,
Speaker 1: put some time, and then did the more limited strike
Speaker 1: which allowed iron to save enough face to sort of
Speaker 1: it appears back away from the conflict, although you know,
Speaker 1: we're taking some of the fallout here because our troops
Speaker 1: are now once again, our service members in the region
Speaker 1: are now once again under fire from you know, Irani
Speaker 1: and affiliated proxy groups. So in any case, this is
Speaker 1: the story that The New York Times has to tell
Speaker 1: that President Biden was hero here and talked Israel out
Speaker 1: of making the situation, which was already incredibly dangerous, even
Speaker 1: worse than it already is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what we can actually see also is that they
Speaker 2: talked about this quote huge offensive operation that was going
Speaker 2: to be carried out again. Also if the Iranian strike
Speaker 2: had materialized. Initially, they actually believe somehow that Iran had
Speaker 2: planned to attack with a swarm of large drones up
Speaker 2: to ten ballistic missiles. There Israeli and military leaders that
Speaker 2: all agreed on a massive counter strike. Some of this
Speaker 2: was eventually paired back by the US. But I would
Speaker 2: note a couple of things here. So it does turn
Speaker 2: out that we do have some influence with these folks
Speaker 2: whenever we want to use it whenever it comes to Iran.
Speaker 2: But second, also under estimate the war mongering like nature
Speaker 2: of a lot of the people inside the military establishment
Speaker 2: inside and political establishment inside of Israel. They were ready
Speaker 2: basically to push the red button and drag the entire
Speaker 2: world into a world war. It's only because America tried
Speaker 2: to push it back down a little bit and got
Speaker 2: them to do what they want to do that we
Speaker 2: have somewhat of a release vout. But don't be so
Speaker 2: sure that we'll be in control there in the future.
Speaker 2: This is a very very dangerous situation.
Speaker 9: To me.
Speaker 1: This lends credence to the report we brought you yesterday
Speaker 1: that was from an Israeli TV outlet that Biden was
Speaker 1: basically like, all right, fine, you can do your Rafa
Speaker 1: invasion if you do a more limited attack on Iran.
Speaker 1: If this report is true, I think it fits together
Speaker 1: with like, so what did Biden say in that conversation that.
Speaker 4: Really persuaded babe? And you know that was I guess
Speaker 4: the leverage rather.
Speaker 1: Than withholding weapons or doing ane of the things we
Speaker 1: want him to do and study, He's like, how about
Speaker 1: I sacrificed the Palestinians in Rafa, and you know you
Speaker 1: feel good about that, and then you can do this
Speaker 1: more limited strike.
Speaker 4: So to me, that seems to be the picture that's
Speaker 4: coming into focus.
Speaker 1: So we covered yesterday there's already been some strikes in Rafa,
Speaker 1: two strikes that killed twenty two people eighteen children, three
Speaker 1: women and one man, including one of the women was pregnant.
Speaker 1: They had to cut the baby from rebelly. Thank god
Speaker 1: they were actually able to save this premature infant. But
Speaker 1: that's the picture of what's going on there. We also
Speaker 1: have some important Israeli domestic political news.
Speaker 4: Let's put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: So the head of Israel's military intelligence has actually resigned
Speaker 1: over failures in anticipating and planning for the October seventh attack,
Speaker 1: he said. Major General Heron Haliva said in his resignation
Speaker 1: letter that he took responsibility for the military intelligence failings
Speaker 1: that preceded Himas's attack, which is widely regardless of worst
Speaker 1: security failure in the Jewish State's seventy six year history.
Speaker 1: He also called for an official investigation to be carried
Speaker 1: And they say that this departure is quote widely expected
Speaker 1: to be followed by further resignations among Israel's military intelligence leadership,
Speaker 1: with several other senior officials having admitted failings in the
Speaker 1: run up to Hamas's attack, and it's also expected Sager
Speaker 1: to increase some pressure on Netanyahu himself to admit some
Speaker 1: mistakes or launch this long anticipated investigation into what the
Speaker 1: hell went wrong in anticipated October seven because I don't
Speaker 1: know if you guys remember these details, but multiple confirmed
Speaker 1: reports at this point have come out saying, yeah, they
Speaker 1: saw them planning, they actually had the attack plans and
Speaker 1: were just like, and they're not going to do it.
Speaker 1: We don't think they're going to do anything. So and
Speaker 1: you know, specifically with regard to BB and his coalition.
Speaker 1: They had moved some of the IDF units that were
Speaker 1: would have been in that nearby the Gaza Strip part
Speaker 1: of Israel to protect these you know, settler maniacs in
Speaker 1: the West Bank to you know, Appeace Ben Gavir and
Speaker 1: his people. And so that's part of why not only
Speaker 1: they fail to anticipate, but then the response was horrible.
Speaker 1: It took hours and hours for you know, many of
Speaker 1: these people inno sence who were being slaughtered to have
Speaker 1: any official help.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is especially ironic because this means now that
Speaker 2: Bibi Netanyahu is now the only member of these really
Speaker 2: military establishment who was there on October seventh who has
Speaker 2: not taken responsibility for them, and instead he is actually
Speaker 2: sailing to re establishing his power. I mean, you have
Speaker 2: to in some ways just respect the cravenness of the
Speaker 2: man and how good of a politician he is. As
Speaker 2: you said, already polls are showing some people are like, yeah,
Speaker 2: you know, it was definitely bad, but he moved past it,
Speaker 2: and so you know, we'll rescue him maybe. And the
Speaker 2: other side they have few points, but he's been working
Speaker 2: with them by and large and so maybe we'll keep him. Actually,
Speaker 2: and that's exactly what dragging yourself into a bigger war
Speaker 2: despite a massive disaster was meant to do in the
Speaker 2: first place, which is, you know, pretty astounding. And I
Speaker 2: do do think it is genuinely disgusting that in their
Speaker 2: democratic society and all that which they like to brag
Speaker 2: about all the time, the person at the top who
Speaker 2: was genuinely responsible at a very deep political level and
Speaker 2: military level, has not had any accountability, while the underlings,
Speaker 2: who sure they definitely have some don't nearly as much
Speaker 2: as he does have have been allowed to take the fall.
Speaker 3: It's not right.
Speaker 1: The other thing is his whole thing was mister security.
Speaker 1: His whole thing was vote for me and I'll keep
Speaker 1: you safe. Like your core thesis about how to achieve
Speaker 1: that was completely wrong, and you were sleep at the
Speaker 1: switch and you are out there on the record multiple
Speaker 1: times talking about how you need to support Hamas and
Speaker 1: the you know, it's clear the ideology. We need to
Speaker 1: make sure we have this talking point of there's no
Speaker 1: partner for peace there. We can't possibly work with a mass.
Speaker 1: We need to keep the West Bank and the Gaza
Speaker 1: Strip divided. We can control the level of the flame
Speaker 1: quote unquote, we can go in and quote unquote mow
Speaker 1: the grass from time to time. That ideology was a
Speaker 1: comp leet failure when it comes to his core promise
Speaker 1: to the electorate being a you know, a security prime
Speaker 1: minister keeping them safe. That was the core promise. And
Speaker 1: so the fact that he's he keeps swishing it up,
Speaker 1: and that's why the war for him politically had to continue,
Speaker 1: is because he's said, listen, once this is over, then
Speaker 1: of course we're going to ask all the hard questions.
Speaker 1: There's going to be accountability, we're going to look into this, etc.
Speaker 1: And so part of the motivation to keep this thing
Speaker 1: going is because you postpone indefinitely that reckoning. Hope memories fade,
Speaker 1: Hope people feel different, Hope you can bring them some
Speaker 1: sort of you know, quote unquote victory that they find satisfactory,
Speaker 1: that they forgive and forget the failures leading up to
Speaker 1: October seventh. That's the game he's playing, and so far, frankly,
Speaker 1: he's played it with regards to his really domestic population
Speaker 1: very well and also played Joe Biden and the US
Speaker 1: political class like a fiddle as well.
Speaker 3: Very true.
Speaker 1: All right, let's get into the very latest atrocities discovered
Speaker 1: in the Gaza Strip. So you'll recall there was an
Speaker 1: all out assault on the city of Communis. Now where
Speaker 1: people are finally returning to that city and we're getting
Speaker 1: a sense of what the hell happened there. The devastation,
Speaker 1: annihilation is just, I mean, there are no words for it.
Speaker 1: And the latest discoveries are some of the most horrifying
Speaker 1: I've seen. You put this up on the screen. You've
Speaker 1: had multiple mass graves now now uncovered by the Gaza
Speaker 1: Civil Defense Agency in Communis. They're saying, and you know,
Speaker 1: mainstream media outlets are by and large not able to
Speaker 1: get in the Gaza Strip, but they're confirming the best
Speaker 1: way they can that you've had somewhere around two hundred
Speaker 1: and eighty three bodies, hundreds of bodies discovered decomposing in
Speaker 1: these mass graves. One of them was one of the
Speaker 1: large ones, was by NASA Hospital. It's known that there
Speaker 1: was intense fighting, shelling, bombing, all the rest in and
Speaker 1: around that hospital.
Speaker 4: We're seeing the horrors here. Reports are.
Speaker 1: This includes you know, not just men, but women, the elderly, wounded,
Speaker 1: young people with hospital tags still on their arms children.
Speaker 1: Just an absolutely horrifying scene. CNN had a report they
Speaker 1: had a stringer who was able to visit the scene
Speaker 1: on Sunday. They said that some people had buried their
Speaker 1: family members around the grounds of the hospital in January
Speaker 1: as a temporary measure, and then when they returned after
Speaker 1: the Israeli withdrawal, they found the bodies had been exhumed,
Speaker 1: apparently because the IDF was using DNA testing to determine
Speaker 1: whether any of the hostages held and Gaza were among
Speaker 1: the dead, and then they were dumped in these collective graves,
Speaker 1: is what they're saying.
Speaker 4: So just an absolute horror here.
Speaker 1: And you know, the other piece of this is there's
Speaker 1: like a little bit of mainstream discussion about this, but
Speaker 1: the New York Times in particular, how many stories did
Speaker 1: they do yesterday about like college protesters and whatever.
Speaker 4: This was nowhere to be found.
Speaker 2: I've got three in front of me right now, actually
Speaker 2: on the front page page.
Speaker 1: Ironically, Let's see what they just didn't even cover, mass
Speaker 1: grave with hundreds of bodies.
Speaker 4: Not worthy of coverage.
Speaker 2: Let's put the next one up there on the screen too,
Speaker 2: because this actually highlights another important thing that you were
Speaker 2: talking about. There was if we were all recall a
Speaker 2: UN review where they say Israel has yet to provide
Speaker 2: evidence that the staffers are actually terror group members. This
Speaker 2: was important because this was why the US and several
Speaker 2: other nations ended up pulling funding from the organization, and
Speaker 2: it significantly disrupted a lot of the aid that was
Speaker 2: going into the Gaza strip. But Crystal now several months later,
Speaker 2: you know, they have not been able to provide any evidence,
Speaker 2: both to the United States, to the UN, and to
Speaker 2: any other large body with evidence that they had initially
Speaker 2: claimed in a so called dossiated news organizations that have
Speaker 2: been able to actually.
Speaker 3: Be backed up.
Speaker 2: The UN oversight body that did look into the allegations
Speaker 2: within their found you know what was it like twelve
Speaker 2: instances or something like that, but the vast majority of
Speaker 2: their staff were not involved, and the Israelis have been
Speaker 2: able unable to provide widespread evidence in the organization itself.
Speaker 1: To my knowledge, there was no confirmation even if those
Speaker 1: twelve that was what the Israelis had claimed. They still
Speaker 1: this is months later, right, and this is after UNRA
Speaker 1: was defunded by some sixteen different countries. Now many of
Speaker 1: those have come back in but the US has since
Speaker 1: passed legislation saying UNRAS to be defunded at least until
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, the number one aid organization on the ground,
Speaker 1: as we pretend to care about Palestinians starving in the
Speaker 1: Gaza strip. So no, they haven't provided any evidence about
Speaker 1: the twelve. They certainly didn't provide They made this much
Speaker 1: broader claim of like, oh, there's hundreds of Hamas affiliated
Speaker 1: people in UNRA. They provided no evidence for any of this.
Speaker 1: The unreinvestigation has been unable. And by the way, this
Speaker 1: was led by a former French foreign minister. Led this
Speaker 1: what they call a neutrality review after Israel alleged that
Speaker 1: twelve UNRAS staff took part in October seventh. So it
Speaker 1: wasn't like, you know, an UNRESK staffer, which the Israeli
Speaker 1: is a smirit As being like basically Hamas.
Speaker 4: It was this attempt to bring in an independent.
Speaker 1: Third party who could look at the allegations in a
Speaker 1: serious way. And you'll recall also so immediately fired the
Speaker 1: twelve people just based on these allegations, which frankly seems
Speaker 1: unfair at this point given that there is a proof
Speaker 1: to back it up, and the US immediately just based
Speaker 1: on the allegation was with no proof, and we saw
Speaker 1: the thing that was being shopped, the dossier that was
Speaker 1: being shopped, and that mainstream news antlets like the Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal just you know, printed like a press release
Speaker 1: effectively with no evidence. So in any case, that's we
Speaker 1: immediately the US immediately. This was right after the ICJ
Speaker 1: said it's plausible committing genocide. On that very same day,
Speaker 1: we defund UNRA, helping to further that plausible genocide.
Speaker 4: And now here we are.
Speaker 1: Months later, this report will barely be it won't even
Speaker 1: be remarked upon by the most of the American media
Speaker 1: or political class. It'll just like the many other investigations
Speaker 1: that we're always waiting for the results of, you know,
Speaker 1: this will barely see the light of day.
Speaker 4: So that's where we are.
Speaker 1: I wanted to update you all on something that's unfolding
Speaker 1: that I think could be very significant. There is an
Speaker 1: AID flotilla that is attempting to leave from Turkey Medea.
Speaker 1: Benjamin of Code Pink is among the individuals who is
Speaker 1: on that AID flotilla. They're attempting to break the blockade
Speaker 1: of Gaza. This isn't the first time that a similar
Speaker 1: flotilla of aid has attempted to reach the Gaza strip.
Speaker 4: More on that in a moment.
Speaker 1: Actually interviewed Medea before she left over on Crystal Colin
Speaker 1: Friends about their goals.
Speaker 4: Let's take a listen to that.
Speaker 6: I am going on a ship that we want to
Speaker 6: go to Gaza. I don't know if we're going to mention.
Speaker 4: That, well, I was on sure if it's public yet, well, yes,
Speaker 4: we can.
Speaker 6: Talk about that, which is part of the Freedom Flotilla.
Speaker 6: And this is a tradition that in the beginning, when
Speaker 6: it first started, actually a couple of times the boats
Speaker 6: landed in Gaza. But then after that the Israelis stopped
Speaker 6: the boats from going, and in twenty ten they actually
Speaker 6: landed with by air on the boat and killed ten
Speaker 6: of the people on board.
Speaker 3: I remember that the Lavi Marmara.
Speaker 6: So this year very soon, actually we will be leaving
Speaker 6: very very soon, and there are many hundreds of us,
Speaker 6: and we represent people from thirty different countries and we
Speaker 6: will be bringing many many tons of humanitarian goods to
Speaker 6: Gaza and trying to make it by chip, and of
Speaker 6: course we hope that we will make it. We are
Speaker 6: prepared if we don't make it. I mean, we were
Speaker 6: totally nonviolent. We hope that the Israelis don't come on
Speaker 6: board and start shooting people, but we are determined to
Speaker 6: go because we have to show that a couple of things. One,
Speaker 6: the Israelis are not letting in humanitarian aid. They are
Speaker 6: and they should not be the ones to inspect this AID.
Speaker 6: We've had other inspectors and they will come and inspect
Speaker 6: our boats, but not the Israelis because they use any
Speaker 6: excuse to stop the AID from going in, and they
Speaker 6: don't have the legitimacy to be the ones to inspect
Speaker 6: that AID. And we want to show that Gaza should
Speaker 6: have the ability to use their ports, to use they
Speaker 6: did have an airport, you know, until the Israelis bombed it,
Speaker 6: and to be able to come in and out by land.
Speaker 6: And that's why there is a siege on Gaza. And
Speaker 6: there was a sea John Gaza way before October seventh,
Speaker 6: and so we think it's important to try to break
Speaker 6: the siege of Gaza.
Speaker 1: So she refers to the fact that in twenty ten,
Speaker 1: the same group free to and Floatilla is sort of
Speaker 1: a coalition of groups. They attempted us similar you know,
Speaker 1: aid mission with similar flotilla, and the IDEA raided the
Speaker 1: boat and killed ten people. Yeah, that was massive, massive
Speaker 1: diplomatic crisis. Let's put this up on the screen from
Speaker 1: the Washington Post with a few details here they say
Speaker 1: Gaza Aid flotilla plans to challenge Israeli blockade.
Speaker 4: The organizers say.
Speaker 1: They say they're preparing to sail from Turkey in the
Speaker 1: coming days on a mission aimed at breaching Israel's naval
Speaker 1: blockade and highlighting the lack of aid reaching Palestinians in
Speaker 1: the besieged enclave. They go on to say the flotilla
Speaker 1: is well traveled route the Mediterranean has gained new relevance
Speaker 1: during the current conflict, as governments and relief organizations like
Speaker 1: turn to sea deliveries to circumvent what aid groups say
Speaker 1: is Israel's persistent obstruction of deliveries to.
Speaker 4: Gaza over land.
Speaker 1: And Sagar I was able to get in touch with
Speaker 1: Medea yesterday and she said, I can you know, share
Speaker 1: this publicly because I was asking, you know, how are
Speaker 1: things going, what's the update, how are things looking? And
Speaker 1: she says it seems the US, Israel and Germany are pressuring,
Speaker 1: pressuring Turkey's Artawan not to allow the ships to leave Istanbul.
Speaker 1: We hear the Deputy director for counter terrorism from the
Speaker 1: State Department is here to talk about this, but there's
Speaker 1: a lot of grassroots pressure in the opposite direction, given
Speaker 1: that millions of people in Turkey donated money for this mission.
Speaker 1: We'll see what happens tomorrow, as we're supposed to leave
Speaker 1: on Wednesdays. So this could be potentially very significant because
Speaker 1: it could really put the US if they're allowed to
Speaker 1: leave Turkey, which apparently is an if, could really put
Speaker 1: the US in a very difficult spot here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's why we're flagging into everybody, just because we're
Speaker 2: aware of how crazy the last one went and it
Speaker 2: caused a major stand up. I remember that very vividly
Speaker 2: at the time. That was a huge news story and
Speaker 2: it took over absolutely. It almost broke diplomatic relations to
Speaker 2: turn into a whole thing. So if this one is
Speaker 2: allowed to go through or you know which air Towan,
Speaker 2: it certainly would be in his political interest to do so.
Speaker 2: It's not as if though the US wouldn't be trying
Speaker 2: to pressure it behind the scenes to dr block it
Speaker 2: as well. But if they find their way over there,
Speaker 2: everybody tune in because that is going to be a
Speaker 2: standoff for you know, for the ages.
Speaker 4: I certainly believe, so yeah, absolutely, let's move on.
Speaker 2: Final thing, Crystal appeared on the Piers what is it
Speaker 2: called Piers Morgan uncensored?
Speaker 6: Is that what it is?
Speaker 2: Okay, Beer's Moregan uncensored And there were some fiery exchanges.
Speaker 2: One gentleman in particular on the panel just wouldn't shut up.
Speaker 2: But we did cut some of the highlight reels to
Speaker 2: the extent that we were able to pull some. Let's
Speaker 2: take a liston.
Speaker 9: I mean, I can listen.
Speaker 17: I believe fundamentally in the right to free democratic protest.
Speaker 17: I mean it's the bedrock of any free democratic country,
Speaker 17: but I don't believe in violent hate rhetoric. And if
Speaker 17: you're a Jewish student at one of these colleges hearing
Speaker 17: some of these chants, which we're all hearing, it's pretty terrifying.
Speaker 3: Isn't it.
Speaker 4: Well here's what I would say.
Speaker 1: First of all, I go wajahat and saying I'm glad
Speaker 1: that both of our two co panelists are okay, and
Speaker 1: I certainly support the call for justice for Joseph, and
Speaker 1: I hope his assailant is in fact apprehended and accountability
Speaker 1: is meted out. It's disgusting and frankly a cheap trick
Speaker 1: to use some isolated incidents to smear an entire protest movement.
Speaker 1: And I think it's very clear what's going on here.
Speaker 1: You know, a majority of young people and a majority
Speaker 1: of college students, majority of Biden voters believe that Israel
Speaker 1: is committing a genocide and that American taxpayer dollars are
Speaker 1: going to assist in that genocide. They're outraged by that,
Speaker 1: and they're protesting. And by the way, the one.
Speaker 9: On Jews and you are clearly you must and Jews,
Speaker 9: am I going to be allowed.
Speaker 6: To be here?
Speaker 4: Am I going to be allowed to speak here?
Speaker 1: Okay?
Speaker 4: So a majority of.
Speaker 1: Israel is committing a genocide and they are protesting that.
Speaker 1: And by the way, they've won the argument. If you
Speaker 1: look at now, it's sixty forty against sending military aid
Speaker 1: to Israel. It's a majority that disapprove in America of
Speaker 1: Israel's action with regards to the Gaza strip. So it's
Speaker 1: a cheap trick as old as time, use a few
Speaker 1: isolated incidents to try to smear an entire movement. Which
Speaker 1: has the benefit number one of attempting to delegitimize it
Speaker 1: and number two of distracting from the continued atrocities which
Speaker 1: are unfolding at the hands of the IDF in the
Speaker 1: Gaza strip.
Speaker 4: So this is listen.
Speaker 1: I condemn anti Semitism. I certainly condemn violence. But let's
Speaker 1: be serious about who the villains are.
Speaker 9: Right now, would you agree that Hamas are the.
Speaker 3: Hang on? I've asked a question. Would you agree?
Speaker 1: Of course the villains terrorists, and so is the Israeli
Speaker 1: government given the number of civilians that they have intentionally
Speaker 1: targeted and killed, including targeting with a complete siege which
Speaker 1: has triggered a famine. So, first of all, intefada means
Speaker 1: uprising from the river to the sea. Somehow, when it's
Speaker 1: you know, Benjamin Nan Yahoo using that phraseology, you're holding
Speaker 1: up a map that literally shows Israel.
Speaker 4: From the river to the sea. Can you please, dude,
Speaker 4: just for a second, okay.
Speaker 9: Calling you.
Speaker 3: So listen, it's a lot there. I don't really know
Speaker 3: that man is too much.
Speaker 1: That is did not shut up the entire It was
Speaker 1: not just me, it was everyone, including peers. Peers are
Speaker 1: trying to ask me a question. You wouldn't even shut
Speaker 1: up to let the host ask a question. It was
Speaker 1: such a waste of time, to be honest with you,
Speaker 1: like that that you saw there. It was a freaking
Speaker 1: forty minute segment. That was the most I was able
Speaker 1: to get in because this man was just ranting and
Speaker 1: raving the entire time. I was like, what are we
Speaker 1: doing here? What is the point of this? And the
Speaker 1: point is just a circus, that's it.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, look, no, no shade Peers, but I have
Speaker 2: feel like that is just continuing the what we saw
Speaker 2: there is exactly the issue I've had with a lot
Speaker 2: of the clips that I've seen go viral from his show,
Speaker 2: and that's I exactly even told all the people when
Speaker 2: I moderated at zero Hedge debate, I was like, look, guys,
Speaker 2: I think everyone there had been on Peers or had
Speaker 2: participated in something similar, and I was like, we're not
Speaker 2: doing that here.
Speaker 3: I was like, we're not screaming over each other.
Speaker 2: And it does require I mean, in the future, what
Speaker 2: I would recommend to them is, and I wish i'd
Speaker 2: had this too, you should be able to cut people's
Speaker 2: bike they're doing something, because there's just a nightmare otherwise
Speaker 2: and it just destroys the entire discussion absolutely super annoying. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it makes it difficult on your part. It makes it difficult,
Speaker 2: you know, even for the other people. What Jahad and
Speaker 2: others who proticipated, it's like, hey man, this takes time
Speaker 2: out of people's day, Like you got to make this
Speaker 2: actually worth not just our while, but there's an actual
Speaker 2: audience that is out there. They're the ones who this
Speaker 2: is supposed to be to their benefit. That is also
Speaker 2: lost in some of this too.
Speaker 1: The other woman who was there said all kinds of
Speaker 1: things that I wildly disagree with, but he could have
Speaker 1: had an exchange that was much more more interesting than
Speaker 1: just this man like ranting incoherently.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 1: It was anyway, like I said before, it made me
Speaker 1: very grateful for this me. I always asked myself when
Speaker 1: I get asked to do these things, like you know,
Speaker 1: go on peer short show or whatever, I'm like, you know,
Speaker 1: do I not want to do it just because it's
Speaker 1: like I'm my conference zones, it's got to be confrontational whatever,
Speaker 1: Like am I just being like a baby and that's
Speaker 1: why I don't feel like doing it? Or is it
Speaker 1: like is there a legitimate reason, and this was a
Speaker 1: reminder that there are at least some legitimate reasons. Although
Speaker 1: I do blame myself in part because I made the
Speaker 1: very rookie move of agreeing before I knew who the
Speaker 1: other panelists were going to be.
Speaker 4: I knew the topic, yeah, but I didn't know who
Speaker 4: I was going to be on with.
Speaker 1: And next time, if there is a next time, that
Speaker 1: I will not make that mistake again.
Speaker 4: Although the other thing they'll do is.
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know specifically in Peers, but people
Speaker 1: will they'll like switch out guests and so there's no sties.
Speaker 2: Look, I had two hours to moderate Israel debate before people,
Speaker 2: and it wasn't enough time.
Speaker 18: You guys had what twenty minutes something like that. Yeah,
Speaker 18: it's just it just it's not possible. In general, I
Speaker 18: feel like four people is two. It is way too
Speaker 18: get two people who are solid and can really like
Speaker 18: get into it. And to me, it's much more interesting
Speaker 18: because the minute you add all these voices, you're just
Speaker 18: asking for this chaos, circus carnival atmosphere, and it becomes
Speaker 18: very difficult to drill down on a point because if
Speaker 18: you are trying to do a good job modering, make
Speaker 18: sure you spread the time around, like you know, by
Speaker 18: giving people equal time, it means that if you've got
Speaker 18: two people are really going in on something, they're going
Speaker 18: to be cut short too. So anyway, whatever it is,
Speaker 18: it is what it is.
Speaker 4: Thank you to Peers for having me on.
Speaker 1: I do appreciate the opportunity and trying to be ungrateful
Speaker 1: here and I you know, there is an irony though
Speaker 1: to the fact that his show, I guess is called
Speaker 1: Piers Morgan uncensertain He's on there like let's censor these
Speaker 1: college kids.
Speaker 3: Speaking. It does see a lot of that very different in.
Speaker 4: The UK, which Kim's fairness, Yeah, very true.
Speaker 3: He definitely found that.
Speaker 2: I mean, so it's funny because to me, I will
Speaker 2: never forget Peers because of that whole gun control thing
Speaker 2: back in twenty thirteen. Whenever he's seeing the show is
Speaker 2: canceled because that is when his like UK conservatism mashed
Speaker 2: up against America and it did not work out well.
Speaker 1: And listen, he should give himself more credit because he
Speaker 1: has been one of the big platforms for pro Palestinian
Speaker 1: activists that aren't allowed on a lot of other channels,
Speaker 1: and so he has genuinely had a platform that has
Speaker 1: been open to free speech, so you know, don't get
Speaker 1: squeamish about it when it's you know, things that make
Speaker 1: people uncomfortable that's subject to right now, just a total
Speaker 1: like unhinged moral panic that.
Speaker 4: Is really disconnected.
Speaker 1: I think we've seen from reports on the ground, from
Speaker 1: the reality of what's unfolding up these college campuses.
Speaker 4: True what I would say, all right.
Speaker 3: Thank you guys so much for watching.
Speaker 2: Become a Premium member if you can, and look out
Speaker 2: for tomorrow Ryan and Emiley You're gonna have a great
Speaker 2: counterpoint show.
Speaker 3: We will see you all on Thursday.
Speaker 5: Keep Keep.
Speaker 19: Shop, ShopKeep shut, Keep.
Speaker 3: It shut with
Speaker 6: Shot