Speaker 1: Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
Speaker 3: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 3: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 3: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 3: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 3: dot com. Good morning, everybody, Happy Tuesday. Have an amazing
Speaker 3: show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal Deed,
Speaker 3: We do a.
Speaker 4: Lot that is interesting. This morning.
Speaker 2: We had some breaking news overnight, President Trump posting the
Speaker 2: private text messages that he had with Emanuel Macron and others,
Speaker 2: as well as he gets set for Davos's Greenland updates there.
Speaker 4: We've also got Don.
Speaker 2: Lemon now is threatened with charges by the administration for
Speaker 2: documenting an anti ice.
Speaker 4: Protest that disrupted church services.
Speaker 2: We've got some new crazy censorship crackdowns on Israel that
Speaker 2: you with regard to Israel commentary that you have to
Speaker 2: see to believe Josh Shapiro. So the Shapiro in the
Speaker 2: show bar here is Josh not Ben is mad about
Speaker 2: the VP vetting process is a pretty interesting one. Sean
Speaker 2: Ryan is mad about the White House protecting pedophiles. You've
Speaker 2: got some Epstein updates for you as well. And Matt
Speaker 2: Damon and Ben Affleck sounding off on a I some
Speaker 2: pretty interesting comments there from those two guys.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I know.
Speaker 3: I mean, look, I love Matt love Ben together. They're
Speaker 3: the perfect dynamic duo. And every like six months they
Speaker 3: just do. Ben in particular will just drop like immense
Speaker 3: wisdom in like a six in like a six minute period,
Speaker 3: particularly on AI, and we're like, man, you know the
Speaker 3: Goodwill hunting gang.
Speaker 4: He's had some epic Bill Maher appearance. Oh, he's an athlete,
Speaker 4: He's the legendary.
Speaker 1: That's why I just.
Speaker 3: Don't I don't understand how that person can exist in
Speaker 3: the same body as the tabloid figure of like involving
Speaker 3: all of his j LO and all this other stuff.
Speaker 1: Like what is going on?
Speaker 4: Some guys love them, crazy bitch.
Speaker 1: He's just he's the goat. But anyway, we'll talk about it. Oh,
Speaker 1: I have not watched the rip. I will admit I
Speaker 1: have not watched it yet. I also good, right, I
Speaker 1: don't know. I haven't seen any of the reviews.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 1: I think I've unfortunately been out of the game.
Speaker 3: And when it comes to film, thank you to everybody
Speaker 3: who has been subscribing to our YouTube channel. We have noticed,
Speaker 3: unfortunately that many of you who watch our videos do
Speaker 3: not subscribe, so please hit the subscribe button. And if
Speaker 3: you're listening to this on a podcast, share an episode
Speaker 3: with a friend or rate us five stars. And then, finally,
Speaker 3: if you want to support our work Breakingpoints dot com,
Speaker 3: we could deeply appreciate it. We've got all of the
Speaker 3: extra premium things that we've got going on, and we're
Speaker 3: always putting out new shows on five days a week.
Speaker 3: You get, of course the AMA benefits, which are going
Speaker 3: to be doing later today. So Breakingpoints dot com if
Speaker 3: you want to become a premium subscriber. So let's go ahead,
Speaker 3: Crystal and start with the overnight breaking news. The Mucron text,
Speaker 3: it's really not the text the most important thing. It's
Speaker 3: the economic fallout as the Greenland crisis. I guess you
Speaker 3: could call it continues threatening the strength of the US
Speaker 3: dollar and potential economic fallout here in the US.
Speaker 4: Yes, let's go ahead.
Speaker 2: And we had a big truth social burst overnight that
Speaker 2: we woke up to and had to incorporate into the
Speaker 2: show that is already moving market. So let's put this
Speaker 2: up on the screen. Among other things that he posted
Speaker 2: was this, which the French have now confirmed is a
Speaker 2: legitimate private message that was sent to Trump from French
Speaker 2: President Emmanuel Macron. He says, my friend, we are totally
Speaker 2: in line on Syria to do my friend Jackson, we
Speaker 2: can do great things on Iran. I do not understand
Speaker 2: what you're doing on Greenland. Let us try to build
Speaker 2: great things. Number One, I can set up a G
Speaker 2: seven meeting after Davos in Paris on Thursday afternoon. I
Speaker 2: can invite the Ukrainians, that Danish, the Syrians and the
Speaker 2: Russians in the margins. Let us have a dinner together
Speaker 2: in Paris together on Thursday before you go back to
Speaker 2: the US. So pretty interesting in terms of the tone here.
Speaker 2: It just shows you behind the scenes how much they
Speaker 2: all suck up to him. You also had the Secretary
Speaker 2: General of NATO, Mark Root, Is that how you say
Speaker 2: his name? In any case, we got even more sort
Speaker 2: of slavishly fawning text messages from him as well. So
Speaker 2: this is the tone that is being professed to President
Speaker 2: Trump from the Europeans behind the scenes. The Mark Root
Speaker 2: one says, mister President, dear Donald, what you accomplished in
Speaker 2: serious today is incredible. I will use my media engagements
Speaker 2: in Davis to highlight your work there, in Gaza.
Speaker 4: And in Ukraine.
Speaker 2: I'm committed to finding a way forward on Greenland. Can't
Speaker 2: wait to see you yours.
Speaker 4: Mark.
Speaker 3: Oh my god, these people are so pathetic.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's embarrassing for everyone involved. Like posting the
Speaker 2: private text message as you're getting from various world leaders
Speaker 2: is crazy. B I mean, it's that is psychotic behavior
Speaker 2: from literally anyone, especially from the President of the United States.
Speaker 4: But this tone from them, I can understand. I guess
Speaker 4: I did a little bit more.
Speaker 2: That's from the Secretary General of NATO, because truly his
Speaker 2: fate is held in the palm of Trump's hands. But
Speaker 2: I mean, like Emmanuel Macrome, have some self respect, no
Speaker 2: of a sovereign nation.
Speaker 3: Supposedly, So I said this yesterday I cannot stand the
Speaker 3: hypocrisy of these people. Can we put the text message
Speaker 3: please black up on the screen because look.
Speaker 1: And note what they deal with.
Speaker 3: We can are totally in line in our al Qaeda
Speaker 3: backed regime in Syria, where by the way, there are
Speaker 3: currently literally massacres where women are having their throats slit
Speaker 3: on camera. If anybody's interested, we can do great things
Speaker 3: on Iran. Oh, so we can do regime change in Iran.
Speaker 3: But Greenland, oh man, this is why they're all of
Speaker 3: their worship and all of this is of the UN Charter.
Speaker 3: They are happy to sponsor these CIA black wars that
Speaker 3: happened in Syria over the last fourteen years. They had
Speaker 3: nothing whatsoever. They basically celebrated turning into an is really rumps.
Speaker 2: Right now, right now, by the way, Ryan and Dropsite
Speaker 2: have been documenting them.
Speaker 1: I hate to say, I've watched some of these videos.
Speaker 3: You know it is it's like worse than Gaza in
Speaker 3: some respects, like not because it's not bopy, Like we're
Speaker 3: talking about hand to hand physical combat and actual torture
Speaker 3: of people that are happening now we have we can
Speaker 3: do great things on Iran.
Speaker 1: So we can do regime change.
Speaker 3: We can violate the UN Charter, international principles, all of that.
Speaker 3: But again, oh Greenland, Oh well, you can't have that,
Speaker 3: because that's about European sovereignty. This is where these people
Speaker 3: are just completely not only spineless, but it demonstrates that
Speaker 3: they just want carve outs for themselves. They back to
Speaker 3: the US kidnapping of Maduro. They said that the Venezuelan
Speaker 3: government was illegitimate, and they just never and that at
Speaker 3: the very same time, Oh well, it would be a
Speaker 3: violation of international norms for Russia to invade Ukraine. But oh,
Speaker 3: if the United States wants to take Venezuela, we want
Speaker 3: to do regime change on it.
Speaker 1: We are totally aligned.
Speaker 4: We want to take take over Gaza, and right.
Speaker 3: These people are gonna take over Gaza the bord of
Speaker 3: You know, the only thing they object to on the
Speaker 3: Board of Peace is that we're not colonizing Gaza the
Speaker 3: correct way.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 3: It's like, it's not that they care whenever it comes
Speaker 3: to self determination. So they have never understood that if
Speaker 3: you're going to operate like that, then yes, you will
Speaker 3: open the door, not just to China, Taiwan or any
Speaker 3: of the other US average at Russia and Ukraine. Yes,
Speaker 3: now the United States can come in with the same
Speaker 3: logic if they under their you know, under the way
Speaker 3: that they operate and be like, okay, we're gonna take Greenland.
Speaker 3: And so this is where you cannot have sympathy for
Speaker 3: these leaders. They have no self respect whatsoever. Like you
Speaker 3: were saying on NATO and Markra, it just gives the
Speaker 3: whole game away. NATO is part of the American empire,
Speaker 3: end of story period, especially whenever it comes to military power.
Speaker 3: That's why they're freaking out right now because they know
Speaker 3: that if this quote blows up NATO, which again you know,
Speaker 3: don't threaten me with a good time, Well, it demonstrates
Speaker 3: is the farcical nature of like the entire way that
Speaker 3: they have tried to operate as quasi independent. And if
Speaker 3: you're a European watching this, you should be furious with
Speaker 3: your leaders for allowing you to be in this position.
Speaker 3: This is why the people I respect the most are
Speaker 3: the friend and the European right, who are like, listen,
Speaker 3: that we have we have completely mortgaged.
Speaker 1: Are economic and foreign policy.
Speaker 3: To these Brussels bureaucrats who work on behalf of a
Speaker 3: block instead of our own national interests. And I also
Speaker 3: respect them because they're not sucking up to America.
Speaker 1: They're like, no, bitch, we're Europeans. That is not true.
Speaker 4: They are sucking up to America.
Speaker 3: No, AFE and the French right on the on the
Speaker 3: Greenland thing are not going along whatsoever.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but I mean the AFC for example. What I
Speaker 2: mean is the AFC was one hundred percent sucking up
Speaker 2: to the American right. The one thing they broke on
Speaker 2: is Greenland, which is actually not that. But that's not
Speaker 2: that different from what the liberals are doing at this point,
Speaker 2: because they suck up to Drump on everything too, and
Speaker 2: are also drawing the line at Greenland. So I didn't
Speaker 2: see their positions as being all that different.
Speaker 3: To be honest, the reason I take it differently is
Speaker 3: because they're like, no, we will never allow another country
Speaker 3: to come in to dictate, Like what exactly it means
Speaker 3: for us as Europeans to have our foreign policy? That
Speaker 3: is the prime Like, that is the prime principle whenever
Speaker 3: it comes to being nationalists, and so fundamentally, like, what
Speaker 3: these people have done is put themselves into a corner
Speaker 3: where they want to endorse Western imperialism and take over
Speaker 3: of the globe, except whenever it applies to their own territory, right,
Speaker 3: they have no leg to stand on.
Speaker 2: I mean zooming out the deal post World War two,
Speaker 2: as we discussed yesterday with Jeffrey Sachs, and I really
Speaker 2: encourage you guys to listen to that interview, is effectively, Okay,
Speaker 2: we're going to take care of like, you don't have
Speaker 2: to spend that much on your defense. You can rely
Speaker 2: on us for that. And you know we're going to
Speaker 2: do NATO. We're going to have our bases, we're going
Speaker 2: to you can count on our nuclear umbrella, we're gonna
Speaker 2: have Article.
Speaker 4: Five whatever, We're going to have all of that. And
Speaker 4: in return, you are going to accept the dollars the
Speaker 4: reserve world's reserve currency.
Speaker 2: And that is an enormous, incalculable benefit to us. So
Speaker 2: the only really strategic move on the table. There's two possibilities.
Speaker 2: One is what they're doing, which is basically like has
Speaker 2: been appeasement, like let's see if we can and they
Speaker 2: talk to this guy. Also, this is why it's humiliating
Speaker 2: for Trump too. They talked to him like he's a
Speaker 2: toddler that you're trying to appease and get to go
Speaker 2: to bed, or you know, like, oh, if you're a
Speaker 2: good boy, then we can have a you know, we
Speaker 2: can have a nice time tomorrow whatever. Like they talk
Speaker 2: to him like he's a child and clearly see him
Speaker 2: as a psychopathic like emotionally volatile, insane person. That totally
Speaker 2: comes through in the way the tenor of the text here.
Speaker 2: But in any case can do that, which is what
Speaker 2: they've been doing, Or you can reach out to the
Speaker 2: rest of the world. I'll oh, what Canada is doing
Speaker 2: with China, and you can try to Okay, we're not
Speaker 2: getting that defense part of the deal anymore. Then you're
Speaker 2: not going to be able to reliably count on us
Speaker 2: to you know, follow your policy visa VI China, like
Speaker 2: for example the UK at our request band Huawei technology
Speaker 2: in the UK. I mean, okay, so those sorts of
Speaker 2: things are not going to happen anymore.
Speaker 4: And they also hold.
Speaker 2: A good bit of our debt, of our treasury debt.
Speaker 2: Start telling some of that into the market, like if
Speaker 2: you want. And there's no choice on the board at
Speaker 2: this point other than to look elsewhere in the world
Speaker 2: and to try to achieve your own sovereignty at this point,
Speaker 2: let me put one up on the screen because we
Speaker 2: also had this which Trump posted as well, which.
Speaker 4: Is you know, him with this map that has.
Speaker 2: Canada and Greenland and Venezuela, and you pointed out Cuba.
Speaker 3: Yes, if you zoom in you can actually see Cuba
Speaker 3: in Venezuela there. Cuba is very small there as an island,
Speaker 3: but if you do zoom in you can see it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so all under the American flag. So this is
Speaker 2: another thing that he posted. And to your point, you know,
Speaker 2: the markets are reacting to all of this, including the
Speaker 2: you know, the tariff threats and the ramping up the
Speaker 2: trade war. Put them too up on the screen. Dollar
Speaker 2: falls sharply. Wall Street stock set for heavy losses after
Speaker 2: Greenland crisis. You know, at the time of this writing,
Speaker 2: you've got let's see, US currency fell point seven percent
Speaker 2: against the Euro. Futures are tracking the S and P
Speaker 2: five hundred down one point five percent amid increasing transatlantic tensions.
Speaker 4: And threats of a trade war.
Speaker 2: Tech focused Nasdaq futures were down one point nine percent. Also,
Speaker 2: the you know, US ten year treasury bond yields are up,
Speaker 2: which is a bad thing. That means our debt is
Speaker 2: more expensive. So a lot of tumult in the markets
Speaker 2: this morning because of the you know, the wild actions
Speaker 2: of the President of the United States and all of
Speaker 2: the turmoil that that entails. The other thing with these,
Speaker 2: you know, the trade thing is like the EU and
Speaker 2: the UK thought they had these trade deals and Keir Starmer,
Speaker 2: who was pathetic and unpopular. I mean, most of these
Speaker 2: leaders that we're talking about, like Emmanuel Macron is really
Speaker 2: unpopular in France, which is another thing just politically, like
Speaker 2: the leaders who stand up to Trump, obviously their approval
Speaker 2: ratings skyrocket.
Speaker 1: Look at Lula, Yeah, look at Lula.
Speaker 2: Look at I mean, Shine Mom is really popular, Like
Speaker 2: you know Carney. The whole reason he's Prime Minister is
Speaker 2: because of Canada's fight with Trump et cetera. But in
Speaker 2: any case, so politically it doesn't even even make any sense.
Speaker 2: But you know, this is this is the landscape.
Speaker 4: Where we are. They thought they had these trade deals
Speaker 4: in place.
Speaker 2: Starmar thought that this was some win that he could
Speaker 2: take and say, look, you know this thing that I negotiated,
Speaker 2: it's going to beneficial for us, blah blah blah.
Speaker 4: Now nope, that's all out the window. Like you can't.
Speaker 2: You can't do a deal with this person because he
Speaker 2: is so volatile, he is so much like a child
Speaker 2: and unpredictable, like Toddler, constantly in danger of doing something
Speaker 2: insane or throwing some sort of tantrum that may be
Speaker 2: self destructive and self defeating ultimately, and just you know,
Speaker 2: so you can't. You can't rely on anything that he
Speaker 2: says or any deal that you strike with All.
Speaker 3: That can be true, but you can also look at
Speaker 3: the people who have successfully negotiated with Trump and have
Speaker 3: come out on the right end. You've got Mexico, You've
Speaker 3: got China, and you've got Russia where running.
Speaker 2: Like invade and bomb Mexico. I don't I want to
Speaker 2: say that that's been like a you.
Speaker 1: Know, it hasn't happened yet, and they wanted to do it.
Speaker 4: Don't yet.
Speaker 3: The Claudia Scheinbaum has not only been able to work
Speaker 3: with them on fentanyl drug cartels, but has also maintained
Speaker 3: her popularity and has kept trade flowing.
Speaker 1: Look at the Chinese.
Speaker 3: The Chinese immediately whenever we levied tariffs on them, they
Speaker 3: just doubled it and then doubled it and doubled it again.
Speaker 4: Well, that's all that they showed strength.
Speaker 2: Yes, they showed strength, and I don't know why they
Speaker 2: these people can't get it in their heads. That is
Speaker 2: the only thing that he respects. It's the only thing
Speaker 2: he respects. And so if you're not willing and look,
Speaker 2: everybody knows the lopsided nature of the relationship, but it's
Speaker 2: not like the Europeans have nothing they can do.
Speaker 4: And Trump is not really down.
Speaker 2: For a lot of pain. He's very worried about the
Speaker 2: stock market. You know, he's going to be looking at
Speaker 2: these treasury bond yields. That was the thing that pulled
Speaker 2: him back from the first liberation day, right, So he's
Speaker 2: going to be looking closely at this. And so if you,
Speaker 2: you know, start selling some treasuries into the market, not
Speaker 2: you know, it doesn't have to.
Speaker 4: Be a whole huge deal.
Speaker 2: But if you say, well, hey, listen, we've got some
Speaker 2: things we can do and it's going to cause you
Speaker 2: some pain. He does not really have that kind of
Speaker 2: willpower to stay in it. And the only thing that
Speaker 2: he will ever respect is you standing strong. So these
Speaker 2: text messages like it's so embarrassing, it's so the wrong
Speaker 2: way to deal with him.
Speaker 4: It's humiliating, on the world stage.
Speaker 2: Like I said, I think it's also humiliating for him
Speaker 2: because of the way people feel, because revealing these sorts
Speaker 2: of things is just like inherently disgusting. Everybody's had that
Speaker 2: situation where their friend or there it's like an abusive relationship,
Speaker 2: is what you get from these text messages, right right.
Speaker 3: The point is around this is that they can't get
Speaker 3: out of it and they have to continue. And also
Speaker 3: we all know none of their behavior will change. They'll
Speaker 3: be privately furious, there'll be.
Speaker 1: A lamand report and then cum Davos.
Speaker 3: They're going to be kissing each other on the cheek
Speaker 3: and pretending that none of this ever happened.
Speaker 1: Because they're pathetic, they're weak people.
Speaker 3: And you know, you look at this situation and I
Speaker 3: don't know, like for me, yes you can, you know,
Speaker 3: oh Trump bad, etc. But you have to look at
Speaker 3: these people who lack self respet and who for twenty
Speaker 3: five years have been warned that the NATO security umbrella,
Speaker 3: your lack of investment and the way that you structure
Speaker 3: your society has turned you into a vassal state, incapable
Speaker 3: of defending your own sovereignty and acting independently and This
Speaker 3: is the net and the end result. That's why the
Speaker 3: people who either decoupled or built up their domestics strong militaries,
Speaker 3: they always had.
Speaker 1: Some sort of a plan.
Speaker 3: B India, China, Russia, some of the South American countries
Speaker 3: are the ones who stand strong today. Remember our trade
Speaker 3: crisis with India. Nothing happened, literally nothing to them. But
Speaker 3: they're doing fine. They're absolutely fine. Yeah down there, I mean.
Speaker 3: And so you look at these European leaders in this
Speaker 3: current context, and you're right. You know, the Japanese are
Speaker 3: the ones who dumped a huge number of US debt
Speaker 3: after Liberation Day, and that's ultimately what caused us to buckle.
Speaker 3: Don't forget that they also got a trade deal where
Speaker 3: all they had to do was like some fake promises
Speaker 3: about five hundred billion dollars and effectively in place right
Speaker 3: now with a modest amount of tariffs. Their economy is okay,
Speaker 3: and their own leader is conservative like quasi nationalists, trying
Speaker 3: to keep it relations with the US.
Speaker 1: But they've handled it well, and of course we respect them.
Speaker 3: We don't respect the French and NATO and all these
Speaker 3: other people who are going to be flocking at Davos
Speaker 3: and who are going to be kissing his ass in
Speaker 3: twenty four hours. This isn't even the first text message,
Speaker 3: private text message. People forget that Mark Rutt has sent
Speaker 3: Trump which has been released and he's the same guy. Yeah,
Speaker 3: you know, because we track this stuff every day.
Speaker 1: I remember. I also remember when he.
Speaker 3: Called Trump daddy whenever it comes to Yeah, this thory
Speaker 3: of that, this, these are the people we're dealing with.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again I can with Nato, I mean, his
Speaker 2: whole fate isn't like I feel like I sort of
Speaker 2: get the embarrassing nature of what they're doing here.
Speaker 1: It didn't have to be this way, but you made
Speaker 1: it this one.
Speaker 2: But the thing, I mean, listen with Macron, I will
Speaker 2: say he is the one European leader who came out
Speaker 2: and said they should use you know what they call
Speaker 2: this like trade bazuka, like we should use the most
Speaker 2: aggressive measures we have in our toolkit pushback against this.
Speaker 2: The and he does say in this message, like listen,
Speaker 2: we got to do something. You're like, oh, I love
Speaker 2: you on Syrian and I love you on around blah
Speaker 2: blah blah. Greenland's another matter. But the overall approach of
Speaker 2: you know, of the Europeans the rest of the world
Speaker 2: has to get their act together.
Speaker 4: I mean, that's just the truth of the matter.
Speaker 2: Like you have to move away from the US, you
Speaker 2: have to unite, and you have to move away through
Speaker 2: the US. You have to like, you know, do what
Speaker 2: Bricks has done. You have to do what Mark Karney
Speaker 2: is doing and striking these deals with China. And I
Speaker 2: think you're right that Ukraine is a big part of
Speaker 2: the reason why the Europeans have not gotten their act
Speaker 2: together to you know, unite, have some pushback, show a
Speaker 2: little bit of that is all.
Speaker 1: Let me just expand on them.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the main reason that they can't do anything is
Speaker 3: because they're obsessed with Ukraine. And I've tried to make
Speaker 3: this point for the Europeans too. If you're French, you
Speaker 3: should not mortgage your foreign policies to sovereignty and national
Speaker 3: pride to the Eastern dun Boss region of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: That's what's currently happening.
Speaker 3: The European leaders are so panicked that Trump will go
Speaker 3: and make a side deal with Russia on Ukraine.
Speaker 1: They have to they have to start.
Speaker 3: This is like the destabilization of their complete like mortgaging
Speaker 3: of sovereignty from the European Union to now the expansion
Speaker 3: of NATO has created this crisis, like you should be
Speaker 3: I mean, I could you know, go on for a
Speaker 3: long time, but like just thinking about how vindicated the
Speaker 3: de Gaal vision was about the United States NATO and
Speaker 3: how you know, he would drive us crazy at times,
Speaker 3: but in retrospect he is one of the most vindicated
Speaker 3: Europeans of all time who saw this very very early on.
Speaker 3: And they've they moved away from that vision and that's
Speaker 3: on them. They turned themselves into vassal states. They have
Speaker 3: no true economies that are capable of producing things at
Speaker 3: scale which make them truly independent and economically viable. They're
Speaker 3: totally dependent on us, and they've created a situation where,
Speaker 3: you know, where they have to act like this in
Speaker 3: public and their own democracies. You know, look, I'm not Europeano,
Speaker 3: pretend to be, but like for those people like they
Speaker 3: have created and put you in a situation where you're
Speaker 3: emasculated on such, you know, to such a historic degree.
Speaker 3: And you know it's funny, you know, I shouldn't be
Speaker 3: cheering for people to unite against America. I like balance.
Speaker 3: I think balance creates stability. This is why I would
Speaker 3: always talk about Israel. If we had a balanced nature
Speaker 3: in the Middle East, none of this would happen.
Speaker 1: There would be nothing with Palestine.
Speaker 3: And they're also you know, Syria would be a relatively
Speaker 3: stable state, and Iran too. Everything would would we would
Speaker 3: be created and have a situation where mutually assured destruction
Speaker 3: or some credible threat would make it so that rogue
Speaker 3: gangsterism is impossible now here. With the US, we have
Speaker 3: a similar situation where look, Trump is an aberration, but
Speaker 3: all he does is dial up everything that we do.
Speaker 3: He takes it from six to eleven. The United States
Speaker 3: has been operating this way for quite some time. It's
Speaker 3: caused great pain to us as citis, and you know,
Speaker 3: the world has accepted it. And so I like balance
Speaker 3: because it creates ultimately stability. And we have lived in
Speaker 3: a totally unbalanced world largely not just because of our
Speaker 3: own actions, because we've mortgaged really, you know, our unipolar moment.
Speaker 1: We also are.
Speaker 3: In this situation because of exactly people like this, and
Speaker 3: so I don't know, I just maybe I'm being too hard.
Speaker 1: I just think they're clearly my.
Speaker 2: I guess perhaps cope on all of this is that
Speaker 2: I'm hoping that Trump's the brazeness and undeniable nature of
Speaker 2: the way that Trump operates in the room will force
Speaker 2: that sort of reckoning because listen old, the old world
Speaker 2: order was already bankrupt, right it was. And these, you know,
Speaker 2: the international institutions, which I would love to I would
Speaker 2: love them to be functioning. I would love for international
Speaker 2: law to actually have some teeth and for there to
Speaker 2: be rules of the road. That's not the world that
Speaker 2: we live in. And Trump has just Trump has made
Speaker 2: that undeniable. And so I am hoping that that forces
Speaker 2: a realignment of the world order that leads to a
Speaker 2: something that is genuinely better, that is genuinely functional, that
Speaker 2: strikes some sort of balance. The danger and the risk
Speaker 2: is that is that we are breaking apart the post
Speaker 2: World War two order, which, for all its flaws, did
Speaker 2: keep US out of World War Three.
Speaker 1: So we do have to give it made.
Speaker 2: This country fantastic. I mean, it was a great deal
Speaker 2: for the US. Like all of the you know, Trump's
Speaker 2: carping ow is not fair, the Europeans taking advantage of
Speaker 2: blah blah blah, Like we set up these institutions, we
Speaker 2: set up this order to benefit us. It has been
Speaker 2: fantastically beneficial to the United States of America by design,
Speaker 2: but putting that aside, you know, my fear is that
Speaker 2: we're breaking apart those institutions without replacing them with a
Speaker 2: more stable order. And we cannot afford to do that
Speaker 2: because now we have a nuclear world, now we have
Speaker 2: AI you know, driven killer robots. It is a different
Speaker 2: it's a different time, and so that's the fear. The
Speaker 2: whole is that this forces some sort of a reckoning
Speaker 2: and a building of a world order that is actually superior.
Speaker 2: Speaking of that sort of like brazenness and reckoning, some
Speaker 2: of that is coming through at Davos, which is in
Speaker 2: a very interesting identity crisis kind of moment. We can
Speaker 2: put a zero up on the screen. Trump is going
Speaker 2: to be speaking there. Tomorrow's the World Economic Forum, you know,
Speaker 2: all of the world like global elites gather here, infamously,
Speaker 2: CEOs from major companies, a ton of world leaders.
Speaker 4: Show up, et cetera.
Speaker 2: And it says, as Davos can means, difference to Trump
Speaker 2: has replaced everything. So previously, the ethos of Davos was
Speaker 2: always stridently neoliberal right, meaning that they you know, they
Speaker 2: they want total market freedom. They want low taxes for themselves.
Speaker 2: They want low regulation, but they also want to go
Speaker 2: to Davos and talk about get pay lip service to
Speaker 2: how they're going to make the world a better place.
Speaker 1: Climate change, Yeah, buy car urban credit.
Speaker 2: They did something it talks about in this article one
Speaker 2: year just to give you a sense of this sort
Speaker 2: of thing they had, like the refugee experience or like
Speaker 2: be blindfolded and hear gunshots or whatever.
Speaker 4: Anyway, that's like you fly in on.
Speaker 2: Your private jet right where after you're you know, you're
Speaker 2: the Exon Mobile CEO or whatever. You fly in on
Speaker 2: your private jet after doing horrific things in the developing world,
Speaker 2: and then you spend a couple of days publicly pretending
Speaker 2: like you care about making the world a better place,
Speaker 2: the world that you are personally defiling, and behind the
Speaker 2: scenes you're doing deals with the other business leaders and
Speaker 2: world leaders there to continue consolidating wealth power and defiling
Speaker 2: said world. So that was the previous Davos ethos.
Speaker 4: Now in the.
Speaker 2: Trump era, they like that sort of patina of we
Speaker 2: need to be responsible citizens, We need to care about
Speaker 2: poverty or world hunger or climate change or refugee crisis
Speaker 2: or whatever. That's all kind of out the window. So
Speaker 2: the theme this year, I don't remember. It's something very generic.
Speaker 2: It's like big ideas, something like that.
Speaker 4: I have to look at the article.
Speaker 2: It was something like that, like the most generic thing
Speaker 2: that you could possibly think of, and you know, a
Speaker 2: lot of a.
Speaker 1: Lot committed to improving the state of the world.
Speaker 2: No, that's not it, that's not even it's oh, you're right.
Speaker 2: The slogan, the slogan of the forum committed to that's
Speaker 2: the overall one. But no, the specific one for this
Speaker 2: year is a spirit of dialogue.
Speaker 4: That's the theme. Spirit of Dialogue.
Speaker 1: A lot of stuff that turns me into like a
Speaker 1: raging like a true radical.
Speaker 4: Like it makes me turns me into a communist.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm like, I cannot believe we are ruled by
Speaker 3: such incompetent pathetic.
Speaker 2: Well it's and so the the previous thing has all
Speaker 2: been like the hypocrisy, right. The thing now is the brazenness,
Speaker 2: and you know that's that's the shift. And there's going
Speaker 2: to be a lot to talk about AI and crypto
Speaker 2: and all of that, but really they're in sort of
Speaker 2: the previous The guy who's founded World Economic Forum Club,
Speaker 2: he's stepped down. You've now got I think the head
Speaker 2: of like black Rock is running it along with somebody
Speaker 2: else that I remember, and and yeah, so they're in
Speaker 2: kind of like a they're in kind of an identity
Speaker 2: crisis because they don't know how to exactly position themselves.
Speaker 2: Now in the era of Trump, Trump was planning on
Speaker 2: going there and making some sort of a speech. You know,
Speaker 2: it also comes at a time of incredible, like world
Speaker 2: historic levels of income inequality. Put a three up on
Speaker 2: the screen. This is from Gabriel Zeckman, who you know
Speaker 2: is one of the leading foremost trackers of wealth inequality,
Speaker 2: fantastic economist. He says, back in nineteen ten, so like
Speaker 2: at the peak of the Gilded Era, the richest point
Speaker 2: zero zero zero zero one percent households in the US
Speaker 2: owned wealth equivalent to four percent of US national income.
Speaker 2: Today that mount is twelve percent the wealth and power
Speaker 2: the super rich, he says, now far exceeds.
Speaker 4: It's Gilded Age peak.
Speaker 2: And you can see the lines on this graph that
Speaker 2: just effectively go completely vertical. And it's set to continue
Speaker 2: even more aggressively in that direction with the advent of AI.
Speaker 2: These giant tech companies, these giant tech. You know, tech
Speaker 2: oligarchs who seek to become and are on track to
Speaker 2: become the world's first trillionaires. Of productivity in this country
Speaker 2: in particular is spiking, but workers are seeing none of
Speaker 2: those gains. They are all flowing to the very I'm
Speaker 2: not even talking about the top one percent. The top,
Speaker 2: as he says, point one percent are the ones who
Speaker 2: are consolidating the vast majority of the wealth and political power,
Speaker 2: and so that is really the backdrop in the context
Speaker 2: of Davos this year as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I mean I think that's why. That is why.
Speaker 3: Look, we were originally going to talk about inequality. Not
Speaker 3: only that, but Trump is planning on making an affordability pit.
Speaker 3: I will say, you know, one of the problems here.
Speaker 3: As much as I would love to crap on the
Speaker 3: Europeans and all that, that's a more of a side
Speaker 3: project for me personally. You know, it's just still side
Speaker 3: quests of a long health vendetta have against the continent.
Speaker 3: But you know, the thing that really matters is affordability.
Speaker 3: And actually, you know, out of the inequality graphic, it's
Speaker 3: really the importance of how people are able to make
Speaker 3: it here and to be able to fulfill even like
Speaker 3: a modicam or hope that your children are going to
Speaker 3: have a better life than you currently have, which is
Speaker 3: just currently not the case the entire millennial generation.
Speaker 1: That's the sound like.
Speaker 3: That is why the Greenland thing, even though as you know,
Speaker 3: my feelings are well known, most people are going to
Speaker 3: look at this and be like, I don't care about Greenland.
Speaker 1: This is insane, Like why are you wasting.
Speaker 4: All of this capital in percent support?
Speaker 3: Right because people they're like, I don't ultimately care that
Speaker 3: much about it, Like this is not eighteen fifteen or
Speaker 3: whatever the Louisiana purchase was, where it's like there's this
Speaker 3: vast land where we get to move into and all
Speaker 3: these resources that we're going to get because at this point,
Speaker 3: as you just pointed out, even if we were to
Speaker 3: have this idea of all these minerals and things in
Speaker 3: Greenland which would be able to exploit, nobody is under
Speaker 3: the illusion that we're all going to get rich because
Speaker 3: of that.
Speaker 1: Because of the way.
Speaker 3: That the market's and wealth and all of that is
Speaker 3: distributed broadly, right, Like, yeah, understand that this would be
Speaker 3: a bonanza to a certain select few of companies that
Speaker 3: we personally though would not reap the benefit. That's the
Speaker 3: issue that I think, you know, structurally, they're never going
Speaker 3: to be able to solve. Like from what I've understood
Speaker 3: in my conversations around, I'm like, what is up with
Speaker 3: the Greenland thing, because like, you know, what is it?
Speaker 3: And they're like, well, first of all, and I keep
Speaker 3: using this term, it's a sugar high. They're just literally
Speaker 3: like they're basking in midnight hammer and Venezuela. They're like,
Speaker 3: we can do anything where America bitch is basically the
Speaker 3: Trump doctrine. And in that they're like, well, this is
Speaker 3: something where he could solidify his legacy as expanding the
Speaker 3: territory of the United States more than any you know
Speaker 3: time since eighteen I forget when the Steward purchased of
Speaker 3: Alaska was I think it was like eighteen sixty eight,
Speaker 3: that it would be the biggest expansion of the map,
Speaker 3: and he loves that. But again, this is a central
Speaker 3: problem for Trump. The more that things are about him
Speaker 3: personally and using the US as a plaything and.
Speaker 1: Not about any of us.
Speaker 3: That's the fundamental issue in his general politics. Okay, let's
Speaker 3: get to the church. Turning now to Minneapolis has been
Speaker 3: a very high profile protest I guess if you could
Speaker 3: call it, where a bunch of BLM activists who are
Speaker 3: now part of the anti ICE movement stormed into a
Speaker 3: church in the state of Minnesota. The reasoning behind this
Speaker 3: was that they had found names of ICE officers and
Speaker 3: suspected that one of the pastors at this church was
Speaker 3: the leader of a local ICE field office. It did
Speaker 3: end up, by the way, that the pastor who they
Speaker 3: alleged was an ICE officer was not even present there
Speaker 3: at the time. It set off a high profile incident
Speaker 3: now showdown with the Trump administration. Don Lemon, the current
Speaker 3: YouTube streamer I guess, a disgraced XCNN anchor, was actually
Speaker 3: present at the protest, which has heightened some of the
Speaker 3: discussion around this. So we're going to show you some
Speaker 3: of the clips that has happened. We're going to discuss
Speaker 3: it on the other side. Let's take a listen, so
Speaker 3: you can.
Speaker 6: See the protesters here have gathered over here. They're in the.
Speaker 1: Middle of the church.
Speaker 6: So in the beginning of the church service, the pastor
Speaker 6: was speaking and Nichema stood up and said her piece,
Speaker 6: and then the protesters surrounded her. But this is a
Speaker 6: clandestine mission. I think they found out one of according
Speaker 6: to them, this is according to Operation pull Up, that
Speaker 6: one of the pastors here is a.
Speaker 1: Member of ICE.
Speaker 5: And so there we go, and we were interrupted by
Speaker 5: this group of protesters.
Speaker 1: We asked them to leave, and they obviously have not lived.
Speaker 4: So what do you think of it?
Speaker 1: I mean, this is unacceptable, it's shameful.
Speaker 6: It's shameful to interrupt a public gathering.
Speaker 1: Of Christians in workship. But there were post I have
Speaker 1: to take care of my flow.
Speaker 5: Listen, we live in there's a constitution in the First
Speaker 5: Amendment to freedom of speech and the freedom to assemblant protest.
Speaker 1: We're here to worship. We're here to worship Jesus because
Speaker 1: that's the hope of these cities. That's the hope of
Speaker 1: the world is Jesus Christ.
Speaker 5: Be very respectful, but please don't push me there.
Speaker 4: We're here.
Speaker 1: We're here to worship Jesus. That's why we're here.
Speaker 5: Tell you is that they're bearing arrays of views on
Speaker 5: the political situation here. What do you what do you mean?
Speaker 4: But I'm going to leave it at that.
Speaker 6: But there there's bearing an array of views in this
Speaker 6: church on politics of immigration, right recognize the complexity issue. Yeah,
Speaker 6: some people don't like what's happening.
Speaker 1: Some people like I'm not going to reduce it to that.
Speaker 5: I won't reduce it in that simply but acknowledge the
Speaker 5: complexity of a situation.
Speaker 4: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 5: I appreciate you talking about By the way, just so
Speaker 5: you know, this is what you get with independent journalism
Speaker 5: that you will not get with corporate media. I'm just
Speaker 5: here to tell you. So if you're in the chat,
Speaker 5: if you're with us, support us, support us, support us,
Speaker 5: like and subscribe, becoming member support independent journalists.
Speaker 3: So there's Don in the church asking for people to
Speaker 3: like and subscribe after accompanying these activists where he appeared
Speaker 3: to have had some fore knowledge. This is relevant, by
Speaker 3: the way, whenever we'll get to some of the charges
Speaker 3: that may be levied against him with the Trump administration.
Speaker 3: Of all these protesters who decide because they suspect again
Speaker 3: they did not.
Speaker 1: Even have it confirmed.
Speaker 3: It's been confirmed now later that a pastor who was
Speaker 3: not there is cape was potentially a leader of the
Speaker 3: local ice office that they decide to come in to
Speaker 3: disrupt this service, to harass, intimidate, scream at including by
Speaker 3: the way women and children. And if anybody's wondering it
Speaker 3: was a multiracial congregation, I don't know, Crystel. I mean
Speaker 3: looking at this like I think that the spirit of
Speaker 3: BLM is alive, and well it's very clear specifically because
Speaker 3: it is also a BLM group that was behind this protest.
Speaker 3: And I've actually been frustrated that everybody's talking about Don
Speaker 3: Lemon and not about the actions of these protesters themselves.
Speaker 3: And then the re action from Democratic lawmakers. So you
Speaker 3: had the Minnesota state attorney general defend this protest action
Speaker 3: and he said, oh, well, people will have to feel uncomfortable,
Speaker 3: so he doesn't see anything unlawful here. He actually doesn't
Speaker 3: think it's a violation of the Face Act. You have
Speaker 3: the state governor Walls of Minnesota put out some mealy
Speaker 3: mouthed statement, and it's like this just seems intrinsic to me.
Speaker 3: And I remember in our debate, you know, people got
Speaker 3: mad because I talked about liberal protest norms. This is
Speaker 3: liberal protest, like they seem to believe it is okay.
Speaker 3: And again, this is a violation actually a federal law.
Speaker 3: At least clearcut to me. Whenever you have the face Act,
Speaker 3: which was written in nineteen ninety four, specifically says you
Speaker 3: can't intimidate and go in and.
Speaker 1: Disrupt religious worship services.
Speaker 3: It is unbelievable to me like that there is no
Speaker 3: general consensus and effectively just silence in the same way
Speaker 3: that you seem many right wingers be silent on let's say,
Speaker 3: the excesses of ice to what is something which is
Speaker 3: so egregious in its form of protests and it seems
Speaker 3: completely normalized and permissed, like in the liberal establishment within
Speaker 3: the state of Minnesota, and the fact that the Attorney
Speaker 3: general immediately dismiss it, the local police literally doing nothing
Speaker 3: whenever these people and again let's be clear, screaming, making
Speaker 3: children cry, following them to their cars, intimidation, direct trespass,
Speaker 3: not leaving whenever they want.
Speaker 1: I just I truly do.
Speaker 3: Not understand how can this cannot be like actually condemned,
Speaker 3: especially when this already happened in twenty twenty and there
Speaker 3: was a massive backlash against it. So I really actually
Speaker 3: want like, don't I don't understand, as somebody who swims
Speaker 3: in this world, like what is happening here? Like, how
Speaker 3: is it that this is completely permissive and it's just like, oh,
Speaker 3: our side is good, so they can do whatever they want.
Speaker 3: The Minnesota state Attorney general was making a big stink
Speaker 3: about political you know, political persecutor non prosecution or whatever
Speaker 3: in the Renee Good case immediately comes out and says
Speaker 3: that this is totally fine, especially in a state where
Speaker 3: you have to shoot very recently in church, Like, how
Speaker 3: could you possibly try to encourage this type of behavior.
Speaker 1: I just don't get it.
Speaker 4: So let's separate a few things out.
Speaker 1: And that's why don't want to talk about Don Lemon,
Speaker 1: because you know, but.
Speaker 2: We do need to talk about Don Lemon because that's
Speaker 2: what they're focused on. And the administration is threatening to
Speaker 2: charge him specifically with Face Act and also with the
Speaker 2: KKK violation, which is insane.
Speaker 4: So I watched a good bit.
Speaker 2: I didn't watch the whole thing, but I watched a
Speaker 2: good bit of his stream, and to be honest with you,
Speaker 2: it was genuinely good. Like it was like, I mean,
Speaker 2: we played a little bit of it here. He was
Speaker 2: tipped off by the protesters that they were going to
Speaker 2: do this action. Okay, as a journalist, and no doubt
Speaker 2: he has a perspective. That doesn't mean that he isn't
Speaker 2: a journalist, right, So as a journalist, he goes in,
Speaker 2: he documents what they're doing. As you saw, he spoke
Speaker 2: with the pastor, he spoke with parishioners. You know, he
Speaker 2: at times was asking them challenging questions. But he also
Speaker 2: asked a challenging question of the protesters as well. So
Speaker 2: of course you come away with a sense of where
Speaker 2: Don Lemon is on the issue. But I actually it
Speaker 2: was for me it was genuinely valuable to watch his
Speaker 2: stream and to hear from the parishioners themselves, because if
Speaker 2: you do just come at this from either a right
Speaker 2: or a left perspective, then you're going to have a
Speaker 2: very flattened view of the human beings involved. But you know,
Speaker 2: it actually gave me sort of more texture and more
Speaker 2: context to be able to think about the whether this
Speaker 2: was a sound tactical approach. Hearing like that guy that
Speaker 2: we heard there who's like, listen, you know, to be
Speaker 2: honest with you. There's a lot of different political views
Speaker 2: in this church. There were other people there who said,
Speaker 2: you know, to be honest with you, like some of
Speaker 2: what the protesters are saying, like I kind of agree
Speaker 2: with I just this to me is way on a
Speaker 2: line and it's you know, too comfort and I am
Speaker 2: very upset about what they've done here, But to be
Speaker 2: honest with you, some of the things that they're saying
Speaker 2: might be things that I agree with. So you know,
Speaker 2: in terms of as a journalistic endeavor, like I think
Speaker 2: you should like and subscribe. He's on the ground in Minneapolis.
Speaker 2: He is actually tracking what is going on here and
Speaker 2: giving you a window in that is not just caricaturistion. Well,
Speaker 2: so the idea, the idea of charging him is truly insane,
Speaker 2: and we all know the reason why they are focusing
Speaker 2: on him, which I think is also we're saying as well,
Speaker 2: because he's famous, because he's liberal, because he's hated. Yes,
Speaker 2: I think because he's black and gay. All of that
Speaker 2: plays into it.
Speaker 3: But he's the first person to remind you he's black
Speaker 3: and gay. Okay, it has nothing to do.
Speaker 2: There is no doubt that that is part of why
Speaker 2: he is a lightning rod here. I just don't like
Speaker 2: that that is liberal. I think that that is deniable.
Speaker 2: But in any case, that's the reason that they have
Speaker 2: made the face. He wasn't even the only journalist there,
Speaker 2: by the way, so for don lemon for them to
Speaker 2: even float charging him with the face act with this
Speaker 2: KK insane and like on principle as journalists we should
Speaker 2: be vehemently opposed to that because genuinely, you may not
Speaker 2: like I know, you know, you don't like his views, he's.
Speaker 4: A liberal, all of that.
Speaker 1: It's not because, yes, but you don't like it.
Speaker 2: But nobody as a as a you know, as a journalist,
Speaker 2: like the ability to go in to document this protest,
Speaker 2: to be live, to talk to the protesters, to talk
Speaker 2: to the parishioners, to talk to the pastor, to talk
Speaker 2: to everybody.
Speaker 4: On the ground.
Speaker 2: It was genuine, It was actually valuable content and it
Speaker 2: is worthwhile looking at it because you know, I think
Speaker 2: he in some senses did a favor to the to
Speaker 2: the right because you get tactics, Yes, yes, because you
Speaker 2: do get more of a sense of you can't just
Speaker 2: view the church members there in a caricatureish way when
Speaker 2: you actually listen to what they have to say and
Speaker 2: you're there in the room with them and experiencing that. Now,
Speaker 2: for me, in terms of the protest tactics, you know,
Speaker 2: do I have like a moral issue with No, I
Speaker 2: don't have a moral issue I think it's crazy that
Speaker 2: there's an ICE field officer who is in any sort
Speaker 2: of position of moral leadership.
Speaker 4: This is a guy, This is a guy. Well it is.
Speaker 4: It is my business. It is a b business.
Speaker 2: I mean, I'm a taxpayer of this country. I'm paying
Speaker 2: his salary.
Speaker 4: They are, you know, in the local in the local community.
Speaker 2: Just finished for a second. So do I have a
Speaker 2: moral issue with No, I don't have a moral issue
Speaker 2: with it, do I think? And people get very mad
Speaker 2: when you say this. Do I think it was tactically smart?
Speaker 4: No, of course not.
Speaker 2: You've given a major propaganda win to your adversary. You
Speaker 2: protected zero immigrants, right the work you're undermining the good
Speaker 2: work of the will Stancils of the world who are
Speaker 2: out in the streets tracking ICE agents, blowing whistles and recording.
Speaker 4: I mean.
Speaker 2: And Trump posted actually yesterday before he started posting like
Speaker 2: his private text with Emmanuel Macron or whatever, he posted
Speaker 2: that there was too much focus on ice agents and
Speaker 2: not enough on the fraud. Why because he sees that
Speaker 2: these videos that everybody's seeing of, you know, pulling some
Speaker 2: elderly American citizen out in practically his underwear in the snow,
Speaker 2: tear gassing a six month old baby, shooting now a
Speaker 2: Venezuelan national on top of the killing of Renee Good,
Speaker 2: Like he's seeing that this is not going well for
Speaker 2: him in the public opinion.
Speaker 4: Those tactics are working.
Speaker 2: And instead today of being able to talk about those
Speaker 2: things and those abuses, we're having to have a debate
Speaker 2: about interrupting church services in this way that I think
Speaker 2: for a lot of Americans is going to look over
Speaker 2: the top and very uns.
Speaker 3: Because it is over the top and it is ridiculous,
Speaker 3: like the people violate the social contract at the most
Speaker 3: basic level.
Speaker 2: Can I ask you one thing though, because do you
Speaker 2: also I think you use the term egregious?
Speaker 4: Is that fair?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 2: Do you also think it's egregious that ICE has interrupted
Speaker 2: church services to arrest make arrests of undocumented in moment?
Speaker 3: But so you know, this is kind of my point
Speaker 3: is that it is a race to the bottom and
Speaker 3: if we want to have some sort of norms whenever
Speaker 3: we're like and by the way, even but do you
Speaker 3: because it is a bit difficult when you have churches
Speaker 3: who basically declare themselves as a place where the law itself,
Speaker 3: immigration law does not be allowed to enforce like that
Speaker 3: would be like saying that you can commit any crime
Speaker 3: inside of a church and as long as you do that,
Speaker 3: you're going to be immune from federal or estate prosecution.
Speaker 3: So you know, I do think it is fundamentally different.
Speaker 3: And then second, you.
Speaker 2: Know, journal in a sense, I mean, I agree with
Speaker 2: you that it's fundamentally different because the harm of coming
Speaker 2: in and like arrest, Like those people that were at
Speaker 2: the church, I think they were upset and they were angry.
Speaker 4: They're fine right.
Speaker 2: To come in and interrupt services, to make arrest in
Speaker 2: front of everybody and with children and families there, like
Speaker 2: that is deeply so you could.
Speaker 3: Just never arrest if a murderer was hiding inside of
Speaker 3: a church, could you go and.
Speaker 2: You could, Cary, we're not talking about them, We're not
Speaker 2: talking about violation. We're talking about what is a civil
Speaker 2: offense in terms of not all.
Speaker 3: The time, we've had multiple illegals who live in churches
Speaker 3: to escape prosecution.
Speaker 2: So then it's clear. Then you find it egregious when
Speaker 2: people protest in a church, but you do not find
Speaker 2: it egregious when Ice reads it's kit it out in.
Speaker 4: All the military year and pulls people out.
Speaker 1: I would not do it.
Speaker 3: I would not do it for some, but personally, I
Speaker 3: can only speak for myself. If it was just purely
Speaker 3: like uh, you know, like women, children, people have committed
Speaker 3: no crime, yeah, I would say don't do it.
Speaker 1: I think that you you should be able to do
Speaker 1: it a different way.
Speaker 3: What I have seen, though, is there have been extremely
Speaker 3: high profile illegal activists who are actually have committed felonies,
Speaker 3: who go and hide in churches at the direction often
Speaker 3: somebody right down there.
Speaker 2: Let's use the specifics of what we've seen unfold. There's
Speaker 2: a lawsuit right now against the federal government alleging violations
Speaker 2: of people's constitutional right to worship and disrupting, you know,
Speaker 2: their religious practices that were brought by a variety of
Speaker 2: religious organizations. I know the Quakers are involved, there's a
Speaker 2: number of other religious groups that are involved as well.
Speaker 2: And what they allege is not only that these rates
Speaker 2: have occurred, you know, during services on church property, et cetera,
Speaker 2: but it creates a climate. We're not only undocumented immigrants,
Speaker 2: but many other church members are fearful of even going
Speaker 2: to church. So you are, you know, so if you're
Speaker 2: upset about this incursion in terms of you know, protest
Speaker 2: activity where I think you're wrong about the Face Act
Speaker 2: being applicable here, but you.
Speaker 3: Know, as you can, but it also or disruptive.
Speaker 2: No, it does not know, it doesn't say disrupt the
Speaker 2: text you can find that it's about threats intimidation, but
Speaker 2: it also specifically says carves out peaceful first dimensions.
Speaker 1: Following people to the.
Speaker 4: Peaceful.
Speaker 2: But in any case putting that aside, right, I think
Speaker 2: if you are upset about people going into a church
Speaker 2: to protest peacefully during a church service, I would say
Speaker 2: that to be morally consistent, you should be even more
Speaker 2: upset about the violation by federal agents coming in during
Speaker 2: service to arrest people. And so that's why, you know,
Speaker 2: I mean the the rights upset about this. Again, I
Speaker 2: think the tactic was not smart. I think it caused,
Speaker 2: you know, gave the right something that obviously they see
Speaker 2: as a propaganda whin. I don't think it was the
Speaker 2: right way to go about things. But I also can't
Speaker 2: take seriously the rights like oh my God, the sanctity
Speaker 2: of religion, blah blah blah, because these are also in
Speaker 2: some cases the same people.
Speaker 4: I think Tommy.
Speaker 2: Tupperville, like yesterday said that all Muslims are terrible, and
Speaker 2: the enemies within the case like they have no respect
Speaker 2: for any sort of like blanket religious tradition. It's only
Speaker 2: when it comes to, you know, something they don't like
Speaker 2: from the left and specifically with regards.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but okay, you can say the other side is inconsistent,
Speaker 3: but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't condemn it. And
Speaker 3: here we have the law specifically says injure intimidate or
Speaker 3: interfere with religious worship. There's no it's like open and
Speaker 3: shut for every single one of these pro You don't
Speaker 3: think that they injure into interfere.
Speaker 4: They did not intimidate or And again there is I'm sorry.
Speaker 2: Specific car bounce for again peaceful First Amendment protest activity.
Speaker 1: I don't think now do I.
Speaker 2: Think, you know, maybe maybe like a trespassing charge potentially,
Speaker 2: But the person that they focused in on here is
Speaker 2: specifically Don Lemon, and that to me, I think I
Speaker 2: think should be again, as a journalist, I think you
Speaker 2: should find very troubling.
Speaker 1: So here's here's my transgressive take.
Speaker 3: I would agree with you if we had not already
Speaker 3: had multiple journalist who were prosecuted on the day of
Speaker 3: January sixth. You had three, at least three streamers that
Speaker 3: I know of, Isabella de Luca, Baked Alaska, and Owen Schroyer,
Speaker 3: who were all prosecuted by the DOJ and basic some
Speaker 3: of them actually spent time in prison even though they
Speaker 3: were streaming what was going on under the same thing.
Speaker 3: You could make that argument is that they were interviewing people.
Speaker 4: You support that.
Speaker 1: No, I don't. And that's why I'm saying.
Speaker 3: That's my transgressive take is while I despise don Lemon,
Speaker 3: I think we should set a standard. Actually, and this
Speaker 3: is part of my frustration is we're all focusing on
Speaker 3: don No. It's about the story is the protesters and
Speaker 3: Keith Ellison and Governor Walsh and Jacob Fray and the
Speaker 3: entire like live industrial complex, which has zero to say
Speaker 3: about it. Promila and Japaul even did the meme where
Speaker 3: she said it was mostly peaceful whenever she was.
Speaker 4: Pro And that's why I'm like, that's true.
Speaker 1: Look if a if Nike, surely.
Speaker 4: When Governor Wallas's well, Nick Shirley did go and.
Speaker 3: They care if a Somali fraudster was a leader of
Speaker 3: a mosque and it was Nick Shirley and people went in.
Speaker 3: These people would be screaming to high heaven. You think
Speaker 3: they'd be talking about mostly peaceful not for a second. No,
Speaker 3: I actually would not be defending him because I think
Speaker 3: this is crazy behavior. I'm even said that Nick Shirley
Speaker 3: literally did a piss poor job and is a retard.
Speaker 3: It doesn't know what the word benevolent means. So I'm
Speaker 3: not somebody who's sitting here and defending all of these
Speaker 3: types of tactics.
Speaker 1: And I defended all the January sixth streamers.
Speaker 3: I don't think Don Lemon should be charged, which is
Speaker 3: why I'm so frustrated that Don Lemon somehow, by the way,
Speaker 3: we can get to his little clip about claiming white
Speaker 3: supremacy and denigrating people. Again, the enduring image of that
Speaker 3: protest is an Asian family who are trying to protect
Speaker 3: their child from these freaks who are screaming.
Speaker 1: In their face.
Speaker 3: But this is the issue, is that BLM and people
Speaker 3: always are like, why does he talk about it so much?
Speaker 3: This is the beating heart of liberal activism. The right
Speaker 3: to distrib the right to be anti social protest, Yes
Speaker 3: that is protest is that they believe gives them the
Speaker 3: right to destroy.
Speaker 4: Can you acknowledge those?
Speaker 2: Can you acknowledge though that it is some crazy business
Speaker 2: to have a guy who is the.
Speaker 4: Field officer, like the head of.
Speaker 2: The agency, the regional agency of ICE, to be in
Speaker 2: a position of moral authority like that, like that is
Speaker 2: that is.
Speaker 3: Why up to me to defend. That's up to the church.
Speaker 3: And if they're okay with the then fine whatever. There
Speaker 3: are crazy black pastors around who are literally believing in
Speaker 3: like straight black national consistent.
Speaker 2: Lawsuits about all of the aggressive and illegal tactics here.
Speaker 2: And I think that, and I think the reason why
Speaker 2: people you know, oftentimes comment on how much you bring
Speaker 2: up black lives matter, and like the the level of
Speaker 2: energy that you bring to this, which is some private
Speaker 2: individuals who did a protest.
Speaker 4: That you don't like.
Speaker 2: But then to me, the much more important and consequential
Speaker 2: part of this story is those are those are like
Speaker 2: relatively powerless individuals, right who of course it is you're
Speaker 2: looking at it.
Speaker 1: Who did a thing you did?
Speaker 4: Can I finish who did a thing that you don't like? Okay?
Speaker 2: I think that that is so much less consequential than
Speaker 2: the fact that you have a the federal government with
Speaker 2: all of its powers who are aggressively and illegally using
Speaker 2: tactics in a widespread manner that amounts to a terror
Speaker 2: campaign in these communities, and with this story specifically, I
Speaker 2: find the most important and most troubling thing not to
Speaker 2: be some tactics that I don't think are effective, but
Speaker 2: to be the fact that you immediately reach for, let
Speaker 2: me criminalize this journalism. That's the part that is far
Speaker 2: more has far more far reaching consequences than you know,
Speaker 2: some protesters did a thing that you found to be distasteful.
Speaker 3: Well, I would give you the same thing. Is I
Speaker 3: find many of the tactic to the extent that I
Speaker 3: have problems with ice. It is violation of US two process,
Speaker 3: violation of US rights fundamentally built Like you, I support
Speaker 3: deporting people who are here illegally, so yes, my tactical
Speaker 3: objection is going to be on that. But fundamentally I
Speaker 3: think that people who are illegally should lead. You don't
Speaker 3: agree with that, that's fine, But this gets to my
Speaker 3: point about the moral equivalents. Is they are so certain
Speaker 3: in their moral righteousness that they can walk into and
Speaker 3: disrupt every facet of our lives. They can burn our
Speaker 3: cities to the ground, They can turn every major blue
Speaker 3: city into a literal shithole for two to three years,
Speaker 3: spike the murder, raid, take over federal and educational institutions.
Speaker 3: That's why you're saying powerless completely not true, elite, No,
Speaker 3: but it did happen. And that's why that's why people
Speaker 3: like us bring it up because when they were in power,
Speaker 3: and then Keith Ellison, who is in power, is defending this.
Speaker 3: Are we see with our own eyes very clearly? Oh right,
Speaker 3: So when you people are in power, they're going to
Speaker 3: allow this. They're going to use the same selective political prosecution.
Speaker 3: Nobody gave two shits about journalism when all of these two,
Speaker 3: when these three I think it might have even been
Speaker 3: five streamers who were all charged under January sixth, they
Speaker 3: held it up.
Speaker 1: They said they're not legitimate journalists.
Speaker 3: Now, when Don Lemon is here because now he apparently
Speaker 3: because he's black and gay, then all all of a sudden,
Speaker 3: we've rediscovered the First Amendment.
Speaker 1: There is zero consistency like there is I.
Speaker 2: Think there is zero consistency in saying it is fine
Speaker 2: for ice agents to go in and rate a church.
Speaker 2: And you haven't said anything about that up until I
Speaker 2: asked you about it, and to be so incredibly upset
Speaker 2: about one.
Speaker 4: Church service getting interrupted by a handful.
Speaker 3: Of pion because fundamentals, I think that is wildly because
Speaker 3: what you're trying to defend is the principle that illegals
Speaker 3: who are tens of millions here present can go and
Speaker 3: find safe sanctuary.
Speaker 1: I'm a church in anyone.
Speaker 4: What I'm trying to do.
Speaker 1: I don't believe criminals. I believe have the right to
Speaker 1: sanctuary anyway.
Speaker 2: ICE agents should not be brought in to American cities
Speaker 2: by the thousands to terrorize entire communities. Well, which is
Speaker 2: what has been done here and is not about this
Speaker 2: is not even about immigration, that is true, true, Then
Speaker 2: why are they in Minneapolis?
Speaker 1: Tell me?
Speaker 4: Because tell me why did they chose many.
Speaker 3: Agents are in Minneapolis? Because the Nike surely video and
Speaker 3: because that's how this administration.
Speaker 4: Operates, which has nothing to do with immigration.
Speaker 1: Well, there are.
Speaker 3: Several, like thewhelming.
Speaker 2: Number of Somali immigrants are in fact American citizens.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but that's why they're there.
Speaker 2: I mean, let's just open our eyes to what is
Speaker 2: really going on here. It has to do with the
Speaker 2: fact that they hate some They hate anyone who's not
Speaker 2: white and Christian. They are after anyone who you know
Speaker 2: has opposed to Trump.
Speaker 4: They hate walls.
Speaker 2: They now hate Jacob Fry because he opposed him as well.
Speaker 2: But I mean, if you look at what these people
Speaker 2: are actually doing, it's incredibly weak.
Speaker 4: Like Fry is out.
Speaker 2: There basically saying like there's nothing really good we can
Speaker 2: do about ice agents who are abusing people in the streets,
Speaker 2: immigrants and Americans alike. Well, I am much more, yes,
Speaker 2: I am much more upset about that, which has the
Speaker 2: backing of the largest law enforcement budget in history, and
Speaker 2: is backed by the entire federal government, and yes, my
Speaker 2: taxpayer dollars. Then one church protest that I think was
Speaker 2: probably that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 3: You're looking at as an ail advised church protest and
Speaker 3: not a sustained campaign since twenty fourteen, which has normalized
Speaker 3: this behavior across the nation and which again literally burned
Speaker 3: almost in America.
Speaker 4: Tell me about the tactics that are being used right now.
Speaker 3: Yes, I've criticized all those tactics here consistently.
Speaker 4: No no protesters, the protests.
Speaker 2: Tell me about those tactics, because it has been overwhelmingly
Speaker 2: what people have been doing is documenting what ICE.
Speaker 3: I mean ICE, Yeah, you use it, you could say,
Speaker 3: and they have tried well. Documenting is a very very
Speaker 3: small cry from the vast majority of them actually are
Speaker 3: trying to disrupt. And you know, that's a whole other
Speaker 3: type of conversation where again, we've normalized it so that
Speaker 3: ordinary Americans just think that it's that they're like Martin
Speaker 3: Luther King Junior reincarnate, going and putting their cars, let's say,
Speaker 3: often in front of ICE agents whenever they're trying to
Speaker 3: conduct a raid.
Speaker 1: I won't even defend some of the tactics of the raid.
Speaker 3: I think it's chaotic, and again, like you, I tactically
Speaker 3: think it's a bad idea, but fundamentally, like you do
Speaker 3: agree with these protesters.
Speaker 1: I think illegal should be deported. I think they should leave.
Speaker 1: And you got that's the fundamental Can you.
Speaker 2: Not see the Can you not see and that's not
Speaker 2: even true what you just said, But can you not
Speaker 2: see the vast disparity between interrupting a church service and
Speaker 2: shooting a woman dead three times in the face and
Speaker 2: facing zero accountability well, and one being a group of
Speaker 2: powerless private citizens and the other being the full force
Speaker 2: of the United States federal government and the largest law
Speaker 2: enforcement budget in history, larger than all but thirteen countries, militaries,
Speaker 2: and the Vice President of the United States saying they
Speaker 2: have quote absolute immunity, like which one is, which one?
Speaker 2: No one is more of a danger, more of a threat,
Speaker 2: or arrow.
Speaker 3: View of it, considering the fact that not that long
Speaker 3: ago they actually did have the full power of the government,
Speaker 3: nobody actually sustained they will charges they do.
Speaker 5: But they do.
Speaker 3: And that's why they don't now, Yes, because much of
Speaker 3: the tactics of the way that they're behaving, and I
Speaker 3: will even freely admit much of the way of the
Speaker 3: tactics that the Right and Ice and all of them
Speaker 3: are employing make it so that very likely these.
Speaker 1: Freaks are all going to be back into power.
Speaker 3: But you know, if we're trying to talk here about
Speaker 3: the way that this all arise and the way that
Speaker 3: liberal protest norms have evolved now to this point, and
Speaker 3: where the entire democratic liberal industrial complex will defend it
Speaker 3: and or stay silent or criticize it only as tactical,
Speaker 3: you can then realize why most people who may find
Speaker 3: the Ice thing distasteful are going to be like.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well you know, look at what we've got face
Speaker 1: in us.
Speaker 3: Whenever the other side is in power you and that's
Speaker 3: exactly what happened with Keith Hell's but saga.
Speaker 2: We can't always like go back to it's it's this person,
Speaker 2: it's that person's fault, it's this backlash, it's that backlash
Speaker 2: because you love to start with the liberal the Black
Speaker 2: Lives Matter liberal protest tactics that, yes, at times, you know,
Speaker 2: the fringe of that was very violent. It was not
Speaker 2: anything that should and not anything that should be condoned,
Speaker 2: and was incredibly counterproductive in terms of the goals of
Speaker 2: that movement. But you never look to what precipitates that,
Speaker 2: which is decades I mean of you know, decades of
Speaker 2: systematic racism, which is police killings of unarmed black men.
Speaker 2: So how is there no accountability for that that leads.
Speaker 4: To an extreme reaction.
Speaker 3: We want to relitigate reaction. It was a completely fake crisis.
Speaker 3: The number people can go check if they want you
Speaker 3: the number of unarmed black people were.
Speaker 1: Proberts in the year two. Doocrity.
Speaker 2: I know you're not genuinely I know you're not genuinely
Speaker 2: asserting that there is no racism in this country, and
Speaker 2: that there hasn't been systematic races not just from Republicans,
Speaker 2: but from both parties right in power that have criminalized,
Speaker 2: that have made it so that you have, you know,
Speaker 2: a mass incarcerated population that has backed redlining.
Speaker 4: I mean, we can go through the history.
Speaker 2: So if you so, it's not accurate to say that
Speaker 2: that protest movement was based on nothing and came out
Speaker 2: of nowhere because statistics that is just no, that's not
Speaker 2: there is no ability to create that kind of a
Speaker 2: mass movement out of nothing, right, you have to acknowledge
Speaker 2: that there has to have been something. Yes, last note
Speaker 2: to just start with the things that liberals do that
Speaker 2: you don't like, and you you act like that and
Speaker 2: you love to act like that is the biggest problem.
Speaker 2: So for example, again you have so you're so exercised
Speaker 2: about this incursion in a church, you have nothing to
Speaker 2: say about the way that systematically, across the country religious
Speaker 2: worship spaces have been violated and made unsafe by the
Speaker 2: attacks from the special.
Speaker 3: I think like quite clearly that there is a difference.
Speaker 3: And because you don't.
Speaker 2: Get the difference is that one way works and it's
Speaker 2: coming in around.
Speaker 3: They fundamentally think that illegals just have a right to
Speaker 3: sanctuary church.
Speaker 1: I don't.
Speaker 3: I don't think criminals who are here illegally have a
Speaker 3: right to sanctuary anywhere. The only sanctuary they have is
Speaker 3: in the home where.
Speaker 2: They were past presidents able to deport undocumented immigrants.
Speaker 1: I'm glad that you talked were they There's this new
Speaker 1: fake statistic.
Speaker 3: Going around about how Obama was able to deport three
Speaker 3: million people. What he did is he reclassified, turning people
Speaker 3: away at the border. Internal enforcement was an all time low.
Speaker 3: All they did was recross fight, just like they did
Speaker 3: with massive were here is the.
Speaker 2: Big previous Were previous presidents able to deport undocumented immigrants?
Speaker 5: Oh?
Speaker 3: Were they able to deport illegals at an extremely low
Speaker 3: rate and at a net rate in which it resulted
Speaker 3: in the last.
Speaker 1: Ten to fifteen million people here?
Speaker 2: Not violating church services was the key reason.
Speaker 1: No, don't.
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course, I mean, because it's ridiculous and they're
Speaker 2: doing the same things at school. Okay, so this is
Speaker 2: something that is genuinely different under the Trump administration. They
Speaker 2: rescinded the guidance that previously said schools and houses of
Speaker 2: worship are off limits, and that was fine with you.
Speaker 4: You had nothing to.
Speaker 1: Say about it. I don't think so.
Speaker 4: I don't so.
Speaker 2: I don't take seriously you're now deep concern about the
Speaker 2: sanctity of.
Speaker 4: The church services people are so trauma.
Speaker 1: As people know, I'm an atheist.
Speaker 3: I don't particularly care that much about sanctity of churches.
Speaker 3: I care about liberal protest norms because I can see
Speaker 3: and I lived through literal mass psychosis where people were
Speaker 3: storming buildings, restaurants, streets everywhere, rioting, looting, destroying property, exploding
Speaker 3: our murder rate, destroying the city that I literally lived in,
Speaker 3: to the point where we still have the same problems
Speaker 3: that from what five six years ago now at that time,
Speaker 3: Like that's why you're saying like it's an old thing,
Speaker 3: It's not like we live with the enduring consequences of that.
Speaker 3: In fact, literally across the nation, multiple cities and places
Speaker 3: and areas which I love have been ruined completely because
Speaker 3: of BLM and the so called criminal justice movement that
Speaker 3: followed and exploded through all of the people who are
Speaker 3: actually in power, people like Keith Ellison, who have nothing
Speaker 3: to say whenever a literal church is violated here because
Speaker 3: to them, that is permissible whereas any any sort of
Speaker 3: action to arrest people here illegally is what really gets.
Speaker 1: Them all spun up about. But there have the same
Speaker 1: selected that way.
Speaker 2: Not through before this, Before this, you know, multiple thousand
Speaker 2: federal agents storming the streets of Minneapolis, the whole region,
Speaker 2: twin cities. Before that, I was doing enforcement, there was
Speaker 2: immigration enforcement in Minnesota.
Speaker 1: No, that's not true, because is true. This is this
Speaker 1: is the problem.
Speaker 3: Sanctuary cities make it so that the jails do not
Speaker 3: turn over report.
Speaker 4: That is that is not true.
Speaker 1: They do not comes with detention.
Speaker 2: True when it comes to violent criminals. There has been
Speaker 2: cooperation between Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota. Have there
Speaker 2: been ICE enforcement actions in Minneapolis prior to the.
Speaker 3: Search Yes, previous regime where you only believe that people functions.
Speaker 2: Under this Trump administration, there have been ongoing ICE actions
Speaker 2: in and around Minneapolis.
Speaker 4: Did they stoke this back? No, So what does that
Speaker 4: tell you.
Speaker 2: No, people do not object to any undocumented in or
Speaker 2: there may be some people like that, but by and
Speaker 2: large to any undocumented immigrants getting deported. No. What they
Speaker 2: object to is what they're seeing right now in the
Speaker 2: streets of Minneapolis, and.
Speaker 4: They should object to that they should be horrified by that.
Speaker 4: I'm horrified by that.
Speaker 2: I'm horrified by giving the absolute immunity to a bunch
Speaker 2: of massed thugs who have said to people now they
Speaker 2: have threatened them, They've said, didn't you learn the lesson
Speaker 2: from that lesbian bitch. They are using the murder of
Speaker 2: Renee Goods as their ability to threaten people with the
Speaker 2: same type actions we have already seen now multiple shootings.
Speaker 2: We've seen also immigrants dying routinely now when they're in detention.
Speaker 2: So yes, I think people are right to be upset
Speaker 2: about that. That doesn't mean that they object to any
Speaker 2: immigrant ever being deported. It means they object to what
Speaker 2: is happening right now, and they should.
Speaker 4: And so I am.
Speaker 2: Going like, I think that is a far more consequential
Speaker 2: thing to happen in this country right now, backed by
Speaker 2: our tax dollars, with this private army for Trump and
Speaker 2: for Steven Miller that is completely rogue and completely unaccountable
Speaker 2: to the law. I think that is a vastly, vastly
Speaker 2: more important issue than some protesters who you know, I
Speaker 2: think you could probably listen. I think when you protest,
Speaker 2: if you violate the law, like there's an expectation that
Speaker 2: you may risk arrest, like could they get trespassing charges potentially,
Speaker 2: you know, will the government go after them for the
Speaker 2: Face Act? That can be litigated in court. I don't
Speaker 2: think that they'll succeed, but sure they took on that risk.
Speaker 3: Is vie is usually not is met with a fine.
Speaker 3: So just to be clear, like, I'm not saying all
Speaker 3: these people should be thrown in prison for years at all,
Speaker 3: and that's why again I would ignore it. But you know,
Speaker 3: to your point there, I do think it is a
Speaker 3: bit of a canard whenever people are saying they don't
Speaker 3: like even when you're talking about violent protesters, People like
Speaker 3: me believe, I mean Joe Biden, the so called moderate
Speaker 3: believe that people who are here illegally, who are caught
Speaker 3: drunk driving should not be deported. That is insane, insane.
Speaker 3: You're putting people at risk and you shouldn't be deported.
Speaker 3: The liberal line appears now to be that unless you're
Speaker 3: a violent rapist or murderer, that you get to stay here,
Speaker 3: even though you cross into our country illegally, and even
Speaker 3: though you're probably going to be a massive net drain
Speaker 3: on our social safety net, which just grant you all
Speaker 3: citizenship like this is what like is. It is genuine
Speaker 3: slide of hand. There are tens of millions, somewhere between
Speaker 3: twenty and thirty people thirty million people who are present
Speaker 3: in this country illegally, and I think people should just
Speaker 3: be honest liberals and say, yes, we want to vast
Speaker 3: we want to legalize the absolute, vast majority of them
Speaker 3: areless of the consequences, and we want people I would
Speaker 3: like to talk about tax dollars to pay for all
Speaker 3: of their healthcare.
Speaker 1: People who don't speak any English.
Speaker 2: Authority of them are net contributors to This is a
Speaker 2: complete canard.
Speaker 1: And even if you had a small percentage, which are
Speaker 1: going to be.
Speaker 4: I think people should be saying that.
Speaker 2: I think people should say that because that is actually
Speaker 2: the place where the American people are, that is where
Speaker 2: the majority position is. They be No, even even at
Speaker 2: the height of the anti immigrant backlash, even at the
Speaker 2: height of that, you still had much more complex views
Speaker 2: on immigration than has been portrayed. So yes, the American
Speaker 2: people do not they the view that you're articulating as
Speaker 2: being just like some stupid liberal position.
Speaker 4: That is the position of the American people.
Speaker 1: That we should legalize everyone and give them all free.
Speaker 2: But if you that, if you have been here and
Speaker 2: you've abided by the law and you've paid your taxes,
Speaker 2: that there should be some path to citizens.
Speaker 1: And yet they don't.
Speaker 2: They don't agree with what is going on. They don't
Speaker 2: agree certainly with the you know, insane tactics of this
Speaker 2: private these private thugs, which again, I it your immigration
Speaker 2: is the pretext here, but this really is about a
Speaker 2: police state.
Speaker 4: It is about a mass crackdown.
Speaker 2: It is about threatening retribution against the opposition, making it
Speaker 2: so that you know, things are you know, basic protest
Speaker 2: is criminalized.
Speaker 1: I think the multiple things can be true.
Speaker 2: The administration believes that if you protest against them, you
Speaker 2: are a domestic terrorists. That is there, That is their
Speaker 2: stated definition. And again I think that is like, that's
Speaker 2: that's the thing that we should really be focused on
Speaker 2: right now, because these are the people that are in
Speaker 2: power right now. This is what they're doing right now,
Speaker 2: and you know, most of America is horrified by it.
Speaker 1: Frankly, look, I think they should be horrified.
Speaker 3: I objected immediately to labeling Renee Good a terrorist, but
Speaker 3: you know, one of these is it's always you know,
Speaker 3: yesterday I was feeling very left wing.
Speaker 1: Today I feel very right wing. I'm like, oh, right,
Speaker 1: I forgot what.
Speaker 3: Exactly it is like or would be like to live
Speaker 3: back under the thumb of these people, And like, I
Speaker 3: don't think that we should really forget what you know,
Speaker 3: you're talking about normalization. This was normalized over literally a decade.
Speaker 3: It has been accepted. There is an extreme position in
Speaker 3: the way that you look at mass deportation, Like I'm sorry,
Speaker 3: like legalizing people giving them free health care. No, it's
Speaker 3: not happening if I get.
Speaker 4: This free healthcare this country.
Speaker 3: Your position is free health care for everyone, and legalization
Speaker 3: that is for illegals and for people who are here illegally.
Speaker 3: That is not something I will ever support. I don't
Speaker 3: think anybody should support that empirically. And like, this is
Speaker 3: where I do think it is important to also note
Speaker 3: that because of the position of the moral righteousness, which
Speaker 3: is the heart of all liberal activism, where they genuinely
Speaker 3: cannot see, like, I don't think anybody can see in
Speaker 3: the way that you're framing it. Your look ice purely
Speaker 3: as some sort of intimidation factor, and the fact is
Speaker 3: immigration is a part of that. Now, can it be
Speaker 3: done without many of the bad things that they've done.
Speaker 1: And that's what you know.
Speaker 3: Often the criticism is like, you only object to the tactics.
Speaker 3: It's like, yeah, because I agree with the idea they
Speaker 3: should get deported. I think it's basically your view here
Speaker 3: on the protests. Yes, we can't agree on enforcement. I
Speaker 3: would be much happier with one hundred percent remittance tax
Speaker 3: and mandatory verify and taking a bunch of these employers
Speaker 3: who vastly profit off of all of this and throw
Speaker 3: them in prison and then basically encourage everybody to go back,
Speaker 3: more humane way to do it, less headlines. Yeah, but
Speaker 3: to be honest, and let's let's be clear here. Libs
Speaker 3: would be screeching and crying about that too. They would
Speaker 3: like the idea that they only object to ice tactics
Speaker 3: is bullshit.
Speaker 4: They want them to stay your legally hypothetical.
Speaker 3: We have the reality the criticized them and gide in
Speaker 3: anybody who even remotely sent people back.
Speaker 1: They were mad about it.
Speaker 3: They believe that they should stay it and we should
Speaker 3: do nothing. They don't care about the time.
Speaker 4: Are allowed to have that view. We're allowed to have
Speaker 4: that view.
Speaker 1: You can leave anything.
Speaker 2: Here's The thing is, you know, you're very upset about
Speaker 2: their moral righteousness, like they are allowed to have a perspective.
Speaker 2: And I do think, I do think that their perspective
Speaker 2: is morally righteous because it is about you know, so
Speaker 2: I don't quit. I don't think the two things are equivalent,
Speaker 2: like I don't think that no position of the right
Speaker 2: eye and the position of the left are more. But
Speaker 2: I'm saying there is there is right and wrong, Like
Speaker 2: it is wrong watching that man, elderly man drug out
Speaker 2: on the street in the cold, humiliated in his shorts only,
Speaker 2: and you know, turns out he's an American citizen. Hours
Speaker 2: later they bring him back. Right, Watching that seventeen year
Speaker 2: old at Target who they beat the shit out of
Speaker 2: him and then drop him off, you know, miles away,
Speaker 2: and he's crying and bloodied, watching a six month old
Speaker 2: baby get tear gassed.
Speaker 4: And then the way they lie about all of it.
Speaker 2: This Venezuelan man who got shot on the leg completely
Speaker 2: lied about all of that, and of course Rene good like, yes,
Speaker 2: I yes, I feel.
Speaker 4: Very much that is on the correct, morally right.
Speaker 2: Tous side to say those things are wrong, and that
Speaker 2: the people who are protesting those things are genuinely courageous
Speaker 2: and noble, and that like more people should aspire to
Speaker 2: hold values and actually fight for them.
Speaker 4: Which is why, you know, even with.
Speaker 2: These protesters, the only reason I'll criticize the tactics.
Speaker 4: I think the tactics were foolish, but I think.
Speaker 2: It was freakin' ballsy. I admire the fact that they
Speaker 2: have the balls to do something I'm not doing right
Speaker 2: now and go out there in the streets and try
Speaker 2: to make a difference. Do I think that this was
Speaker 2: the wrong approach in terms of the Yes, I do.
Speaker 2: I don't think it was beneficial. Admire the hell on
Speaker 2: and yeah I do, I actually do, because they are
Speaker 2: putting their actions where their mouth is. They're not just
Speaker 2: complaining about it on Twitter or posting. They're going out
Speaker 2: and they are trying to do something about a moral
Speaker 2: wrong that they see. And I think that is I
Speaker 2: think it is incredibly noble thing to do to have
Speaker 2: a value and to be willing to actually go out
Speaker 2: and fight.
Speaker 3: Fine, then you know, every right winger January sixth was
Speaker 3: courageous and noble under your definition, because only because you agree,
Speaker 3: you're basically saying no, because because we are actually.
Speaker 4: Moral there.
Speaker 2: Is defined, but you don't even agree with the thing
Speaker 2: they were doing. Like the election was not rigged and stolen.
Speaker 2: They were like breaking the law and violent, like you know,
Speaker 2: beating up cops. Yes, and it was vastly more violent
Speaker 2: than anything that we have seen.
Speaker 1: I'm not protest. I'm saying that moral equivalence is.
Speaker 2: It's no, no, no, no, I'm saying there is no moral
Speaker 2: equivalence between those two things, only for.
Speaker 1: Many people, the morality of tens of millions of people here.
Speaker 4: I legally, you're doing like a very relativist thing.
Speaker 1: Yes, where we live in a country.
Speaker 2: No, you're doing a moral relativist position where there can
Speaker 2: be no right or wrong. It's all just in the
Speaker 2: eye of the beholder, which is actually a very left
Speaker 2: wing thing to do and which I don't agree with.
Speaker 2: I think there is right and wrong. I think there
Speaker 2: is good and bad. I think there is good and evil,
Speaker 2: and so, yes, what they did on January sixth was
Speaker 2: stupid and it was for a bad and wrong cause.
Speaker 4: What these protesters are.
Speaker 2: Doing in general in Minneapolis is for a righteous cause.
Speaker 2: And I think that that is no, because there is
Speaker 2: such a thing as good and bad.
Speaker 3: Yeah, everybody who marched against civil rights who were in
Speaker 3: the white crowds. Black people thought that they were in
Speaker 3: the right and they were uploading and they were wrong.
Speaker 1: That's my point.
Speaker 2: That's my point is that the January sixers, but in
Speaker 2: their mind they were morally righteous, were incorrect. Right, these
Speaker 2: people are correct, And you agree with me on that,
Speaker 2: like you also objected these ice tactics, and you also
Speaker 2: don't think that the election was stolen and that that
Speaker 2: was stupid.
Speaker 4: So clearly there is some you know.
Speaker 2: Ability to see objectively that some things causes are worthy
Speaker 2: and noble, and some causes are bad and wrong. That's
Speaker 2: all I'm saying. Okay, fine, because you're doing a home
Speaker 2: morel relative.
Speaker 4: Well, in their mind they think, but they're wrong and
Speaker 4: these people are not.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but if I went back to the nineteen fifties,
Speaker 3: a vast portion of the public would have agreed with
Speaker 3: the people who were storming, and there would have and
Speaker 3: let's say a debate here on and many people. Okay,
Speaker 3: we could say that in retrospect. But the point is
Speaker 3: is what matters actually in the moment, and what matters
Speaker 3: in the moment, as you just laid out, is while
Speaker 3: you think it's noble and courageous. I think that anybody
Speaker 3: who wants to normalize these types of things is despicable.
Speaker 1: In the same way that we.
Speaker 3: I mean, I feel like I'm living in crazy land
Speaker 3: sometimes because it's like we haven't sat here and criticized ice.
Speaker 3: We haven't sat here, and so that the tactics are
Speaker 3: bad as if we haven't sat here and said yes,
Speaker 3: they've often violated.
Speaker 1: All of that is readily admittable.
Speaker 3: However, However, again that does not give you license to
Speaker 3: be rampaging through private institutions and to go and intimidate
Speaker 3: people who you disagree with, which is the fundamental belief
Speaker 3: of left wing activism in and of itself. They do
Speaker 3: not actually believe that my position or the position of
Speaker 3: millions of people, for many who voted in twenty twenty
Speaker 3: four that mass deportation and illegal should go back, which
Speaker 3: again won the popular vote. Let me remind everyone that
Speaker 3: is not a legitimate position, and that any of those
Speaker 3: people should be driven from public life and have no
Speaker 3: right and tower to speak. That is probably the mainstream
Speaker 3: view of liberal activism. And let's say DSA or any
Speaker 3: of these types of people, that is objectionable because it
Speaker 3: is pretty clear to me that those people are not
Speaker 3: really consistent with any sort of democratic values. And for
Speaker 3: all the left's talk of nineteen thirties Germany, what they
Speaker 3: forget is that these were the same tactics used by
Speaker 3: the communists. This is actually the exact same playbook of
Speaker 3: street gangs and all of that that was playing out
Speaker 3: of anarchism at the time didn't work out so well
Speaker 3: for all of you. Or the Spanish Civil War and
Speaker 3: the same murder of a lot of people who were
Speaker 3: in religious institutions, which is eventually what led to the
Speaker 3: rise of Spanish fascism.
Speaker 1: Because it's not just about tactics.
Speaker 3: It is also about the same level of moralism of
Speaker 3: protest behavior, and I view that fundamentally as a danger.
Speaker 3: You don't because you think it's courageous. It is a
Speaker 3: massive danger to living in a heterogeneous society. And the
Speaker 3: same way that you see illiberalism on the right, I
Speaker 3: can point to this exactly and the handling and the
Speaker 3: basically effective endorsement of this by the democratic industrial complex
Speaker 3: and to say, wow, illiberalism is still alive and well
Speaker 3: whenever it comes to the institutionalized that we can.
Speaker 4: We can wrap this up.
Speaker 2: But I will just say there is really no comparison
Speaker 2: between the quote unquote illiberalism of the Biden administration, which
Speaker 2: I you know, yes condemn, you were.
Speaker 1: One of the few europe that's.
Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, and the illiberalism of the Trump administration. There
Speaker 2: is no comparison. There is no comparison. And I mean
Speaker 2: we're about to cover some of the like rise of
Speaker 2: censorship and whatever. You have the criminalizing of pro Palestinian descent,
Speaker 2: you have the labeling of anyone who would protest them
Speaker 2: as domestic terrorists. You have the absolute immunity granted to
Speaker 2: ice thugs to rampage in American streets.
Speaker 1: Can we can we just say just because the Vice
Speaker 1: president said it doesn't make it true?
Speaker 2: That is no, but it but not to harp on this,
Speaker 2: but it does actually make it true because that is
Speaker 2: the way that they're operating. I mean, is Jonathan Ross
Speaker 2: being investigated?
Speaker 1: No, but you absolutely yes.
Speaker 3: It would be to say that he's forever has immunity,
Speaker 3: which is like not true. Liberals will eventually come back
Speaker 3: into power and there's no statute of limitation on murder.
Speaker 3: I think you would also, Yeah, but it's pretty maybe,
Speaker 3: I mean, but yet that are even eligible for pardon.
Speaker 1: Yes, uh, well, yeah, I'm pretty sure.
Speaker 3: I checked on this and there was some weird case
Speaker 3: lock something about state charges.
Speaker 2: I'm not exactly sure, but my understanding is that he
Speaker 2: could be pardoned the state and federal thing. It's a
Speaker 2: it's a question mark. But in any case, the view
Speaker 2: of this administration is that they have absolutely immunity, and
Speaker 2: that is the way that they have that those agents
Speaker 2: have clearly internalized based on the way they're acting and
Speaker 2: also the things that they're saying to protesters on the street.
Speaker 2: So in any case, that is nowhere like they are
Speaker 2: not in the same ballpark with the illiberalism that was
Speaker 2: evidenced in the Biden administration, which was you know, marginal
Speaker 2: compared to what we are seeing here in terms of
Speaker 2: the criminalization of dissent and the you know, the crushing
Speaker 2: of the media, the crushing like even bringing law firms
Speaker 2: to heal universities, getting professors fired, all of that, and
Speaker 2: they genuinely, like Trump will say it, he thinks it
Speaker 2: should be illegal to criticize him. He says that out loud, right,
Speaker 2: So I don't see the two things as equivalent, and
Speaker 2: you can rely on me that if you know, democrats
Speaker 2: are the left gets in power and there is our
Speaker 2: abuses that are truly illiberal that I will be critical there,
Speaker 2: but I am not going to do it both sides,
Speaker 2: because I don't think that the two sides have been
Speaker 2: remotely equivalent. And by the way, one of them is
Speaker 2: in power right now and one of them a list.
Speaker 3: One will soon be in power. And I think that
Speaker 3: many of the norms that may have kept the Biden
Speaker 3: administration or any of those people from doing what truly
Speaker 3: was in those hearts are now shattered. And next thing
Speaker 3: we know, and you know, I mean, I don't think
Speaker 3: people should confuse. I am really not arguing with you.
Speaker 3: I don't think you're the problem. I really don't. Yeah,
Speaker 3: but I think the democratic industrial complex is the problem.
Speaker 3: And Keith Ellison and all of the people who are
Speaker 3: actually going to be in power, I'm like, oh yeah,
Speaker 3: especially we it's have been normalized now under Trump. I
Speaker 3: think a lot of people like a lot of the
Speaker 3: same tactics which were dreams of the BLM movement and
Speaker 3: all of that and anti racism amendments.
Speaker 1: After what has now.
Speaker 3: Happened under the Trump administration, I think it will be
Speaker 3: a reality, and I don't doubt that you would speak
Speaker 3: on behalf of civil liberties for right wingers, but I
Speaker 3: don't think that that's necessarily a consistent view, and much
Speaker 3: of the right is to blame for it as well,
Speaker 3: which is why I often call it out, especially on
Speaker 3: the censorship stuff, because I'm not dumb. The people who
Speaker 3: are lawyers, professors, and governors are all watching this and saying, Okay,
Speaker 3: we never did it out of norms. Now the norm
Speaker 3: is shattered, which means it's going to happen. And I
Speaker 3: think that America is basically going to go through some
Speaker 3: sort of like nineteen nineties South Africa truth and reconciliation
Speaker 3: movement whenever a Democrat comes back into the White House.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I don't think it's going to go that well,
Speaker 1: all right, long debate.
Speaker 3: I apologize to the audience, but I hope it was
Speaker 3: somewhat elucidating.
Speaker 1: Is that the right word. Let's get to the next block.