Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 1: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 1: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 2: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 1: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 1: the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 2: But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody,
Speaker 2: Happy Tuesday.
Speaker 1: We have an amazing show for everybody today, extra amazing
Speaker 1: because it's a bro.
Speaker 2: Shows for to see. Ryan.
Speaker 3: Did we do this pump?
Speaker 2: That's right, indeed we do.
Speaker 1: Gosh, I got to set up these topics. This is
Speaker 1: always so difficult. It's Crystal's job. So we're going to
Speaker 1: talk about the GOP primary. All right, we can start
Speaker 1: off there. It's very similar to yesterdays show. Today is
Speaker 1: actually the New Hampshire primary. The first six votes have
Speaker 1: already been cast, all for Nikki Haley.
Speaker 2: But don't worry.
Speaker 1: It's a very very tiny little town. There are more
Speaker 1: reporters there than actual voters. We'll also talk about the
Speaker 1: Democratic primary. Some weird stuff going on. I'm curious to
Speaker 1: get your inside. It appears that there's some Biden effort
Speaker 1: to try and quash votes there, so we'll talk about that.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about Dean Phillips and Mary and Williamson, everybody's
Speaker 1: closing pitch. We've got some of the ads and everything.
Speaker 1: We've got actually a guest who's going to be joining
Speaker 1: us in the show. This is one of those organizers
Speaker 1: for the writ end ceasefire fire, so we will see
Speaker 1: how that goes, how that materializes.
Speaker 2: We've also got predictions. I forgot about that.
Speaker 1: Crystal actually sent us her predictions, and Ryan and I
Speaker 1: will give hours as well on how we think that
Speaker 1: the night is going to go in the GOP primary.
Speaker 1: There are some major developments in the Trump legal front
Speaker 1: in terms of that divorce case involving Fanny Willis and
Speaker 1: some of the other things that we're learning about that
Speaker 1: Trump truly is the luckiest man alive.
Speaker 2: Ran on Israel.
Speaker 1: Some crazy news just happening breaking overnight. Twenty one IDF
Speaker 1: soldiers died in a single incident in combat. It is
Speaker 1: the deadliest incident so far for the IDF. That comes
Speaker 1: amidst a new ceasefire proposal from the Israeli government, as
Speaker 1: well as a new US military assessment on how Israel
Speaker 1: Paris to be using the war.
Speaker 2: And that's good according to our strategist.
Speaker 1: Finally, and of course Bill Ackman returns to the show.
Speaker 1: I mean, at least in terms of topics, we're going
Speaker 1: to talk about some campus censorship stuff and a very
Speaker 1: insane incident at Columbia University.
Speaker 2: Before we get to the show.
Speaker 1: Though, do not forget, we've got an election special that's
Speaker 1: going on right now twenty five percent off on our
Speaker 1: yearly membership Breakingpoints dot Com.
Speaker 2: Also in terms of planning, so here's what we're gonna have.
Speaker 1: We are gonna have a breaking segment tonight after we
Speaker 1: get the results of the New Hampshire primary, and tomorrow
Speaker 1: we will have a special Breaking Points Counterpoints Crossover event
Speaker 1: where I will be joining the Counterpoints team here in
Speaker 1: the studio and we will have Crystal joining us remotely
Speaker 1: before we have our normal Thursday show. So all of
Speaker 1: your election coverage, you guys are helping us out with
Speaker 1: Breakingpoints dot Com again to become a premium member. But
Speaker 1: let's go ahead and begin with the GOP primary. So
Speaker 1: what exactly can we expect from tonight? We thought it
Speaker 1: would be prudent, as always to give people a preview
Speaker 1: of the closing pitch to New Hampshire voters. First, we're
Speaker 1: going to listen to the front runner, Donald Trump. This
Speaker 1: is his last ad in the state of New Hampshire.
Speaker 1: Let's take a list.
Speaker 4: Americans were promised to secure retirement Nicky Haley's plan and.
Speaker 3: Set social Security medicare. How would you manage the entitlements?
Speaker 3: We say, the rules have changed.
Speaker 5: We changed retirement age to reflecting life expectancy.
Speaker 1: What we do know is sixty five is way too
Speaker 1: low and we need to increase that increase.
Speaker 4: That gay Least plan cut social Security benefits for eighty
Speaker 4: two percent of Americans.
Speaker 2: Trump will never let that happen. I'm Donald J.
Speaker 3: Trump and I approved this message.
Speaker 1: Very interesting tactic there, Ryan. We're going to get into
Speaker 1: some polling, but it appears to have worked. It's also just,
Speaker 1: you know, sometimes we don't marvel enough with the fact
Speaker 1: that the GOP front runner is attacking somebody else from
Speaker 1: wanting to cut Social.
Speaker 2: Security, and that actually is pretty crazy.
Speaker 6: In twenty sixteen, it was one of the things that
Speaker 6: had people on the left so intrigued by this Republican
Speaker 6: primary because we had all seen the polling for many
Speaker 6: years and done the reporting that the center, the center right,
Speaker 6: the center left, and the right had been trying to
Speaker 6: cut solid security and medicare.
Speaker 3: For a generation.
Speaker 6: It broke the Bush presidency when he tried to do it,
Speaker 6: and despite having all of the power in Washington, they
Speaker 6: just couldn't do it because the public was so against it.
Speaker 3: That was obvious.
Speaker 6: Trump is good at recognizing what the public is for
Speaker 6: and against. Yes, they are not four cuts to solid
Speaker 6: security and medicare. Nicki Haley apparently not so good at that.
Speaker 6: And she can just use a clip of her saying
Speaker 6: that she's going to make people's lives worse, right.
Speaker 2: I mean, we've played it here. We showed it to
Speaker 2: our focus group as well.
Speaker 1: It didn't play over well with our New Hampshire GOP
Speaker 1: focus group, if you guys will recall it was one
Speaker 1: of the first focus groups we ever did here.
Speaker 2: At breaking points.
Speaker 1: Nicky Haley has a Defending Democracy super pac running ads
Speaker 1: on her behalfs we wanted to give people a taste
Speaker 1: of what the anti Trump position looks like in New Hampshire.
Speaker 1: Here's the ad that they're have on the airwaves.
Speaker 7: The new Pool shows Nicki Haley is now within striking
Speaker 7: distance of Trump heading into the New Hampshire primary.
Speaker 4: One state be Trump from winning the nomination New Hampshire.
Speaker 4: One candidate can defeat Nicki Haley. Most Granite Staters want
Speaker 4: to defeat Trump, but he'll win unless voters stand firm
Speaker 4: behind a single alternative. That's why undeclared voters must go
Speaker 4: to their polling place on January twenty third to support
Speaker 4: Haley New Hampshire. We can't waste this opportunity to defeat Trump.
Speaker 4: Defending Democracy Together is responsible for the content of this.
Speaker 1: Advertising, Defending Democracy being one of those Bill Crystal groups.
Speaker 1: The problem for Nicki Haley Ryan is that in general,
Speaker 1: she's surging amongst independents and amongst Democrats. If you want
Speaker 1: a perfect example of this, CNN actually was to going
Speaker 1: around doing interviews. At a recent Nicki Haley interview, Here's
Speaker 1: what her own voters had to say on whether they
Speaker 1: would vote for Trump or Biden plot twist.
Speaker 2: A lot of them are saying, Biden, let's take a
Speaker 2: lesson and Biden, what.
Speaker 4: Are you gonna do? That really puts me in a
Speaker 4: quandrey I Frankly am more scared of another Trump term
Speaker 4: than another Biden's term.
Speaker 2: Well, voted for him twice. I don't know that I
Speaker 2: could be a good conscience wait for him again. I mean,
Speaker 2: he does things we teach our children not to do.
Speaker 8: I would probably end up either voting for myself it's
Speaker 8: a protest.
Speaker 2: Or for Biden.
Speaker 1: Probably end up voting for myself or for Biden. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure that lady's probably going to vote for Biden.
Speaker 3: She's younger.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no shade, no shade at all. That's a totally
Speaker 2: rational position.
Speaker 1: But you know, you just got to be honest that
Speaker 1: a lot of those people isn't really even fair to
Speaker 1: call them Republicans anymore. And this is not a personal dispersion.
Speaker 1: It's just like, look, that's what a realignment looks like.
Speaker 1: That's how Biden was able to win many GOP counties
Speaker 1: back in twenty twenty in that election, it was specifically
Speaker 1: because of these former Trump voters, largely white, largely college
Speaker 1: educated people who previously would have voted for John McCain,
Speaker 1: Mitt Romney in some cases lifelong Republicans, but for Trump
Speaker 1: it was just too much. But the flip side of
Speaker 1: this is that Trump also brings out a hell of
Speaker 1: a lot of non college educated white voters who they
Speaker 1: would never vote for anybody else. In some case the
Speaker 1: never voted in twenty thirty years. So it's the flip
Speaker 1: side of that coin as well.
Speaker 6: But also this is not the NFL playoffs, This is
Speaker 6: not single elimination. Yeah, Haley can beat Trump in New Hampshire, yes,
Speaker 6: and he's still gonna romp everywhere else in the country.
Speaker 6: So this this line that they have in the ad
Speaker 6: that says one state can stop Donald Trump, that's actually
Speaker 6: not how it works.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's just not true at all.
Speaker 6: She can romp there tonight and it won't act. And
Speaker 6: I don't even think she's not gonna romp.
Speaker 2: That's it.
Speaker 1: Well, save a predictions, saving prediction. We do have another
Speaker 1: funny clip just came across the radar. Had to play
Speaker 1: this just to give you guys an idea of like
Speaker 1: how Trump voters and others have a cheap enmity for
Speaker 1: Nicki Haley. This was an incident actually on her final
Speaker 1: day of campaigning yesterday in New Hampshire. A man shouts out,
Speaker 1: will you marry me? Nicky says, well, are you going
Speaker 1: to vote for me? And she goes, no, I'm going
Speaker 1: to vote for Trump, and she's like, all right, get
Speaker 1: out of here.
Speaker 2: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 8: But you know what, we've got a lot on the
Speaker 8: line here, we really do.
Speaker 3: And you look at what's happening in this election.
Speaker 2: Yes, are you going to vote for me?
Speaker 1: Get out of here, Get out of Hereptils are off, Yeah,
Speaker 1: nuptials apparently are off.
Speaker 2: Oh well, there's some interesting questions around that, but we
Speaker 2: won't get into it today.
Speaker 1: In terms of the polling in all of that, this
Speaker 1: is one where actually the Washington Post just came out
Speaker 1: with a new Mammoth poll which is really worth digging
Speaker 1: into because it gives us a deep insight not only
Speaker 1: to Nicki Haley and her alleged like skyrocketing, but some
Speaker 1: of the group by group polling. So guys, we can
Speaker 1: please put this up there, and Ryan just chime in
Speaker 1: for anything that you see.
Speaker 2: The reason this is useful is it shows the November
Speaker 2: twenty twenty three number.
Speaker 1: Now note this, while Nicki Haley has gone from eighteen
Speaker 1: to thirty four percent, it's November. Trump has gone from
Speaker 1: forty six to fifty two. DeSantis allegedly seven to eight.
Speaker 1: Remember he just dropped out of the race. Now Chris
Speaker 1: Christy was at eleven. Now obviously he's at one. It's
Speaker 1: pretty clear that Chris Christie voters largely have crossed over
Speaker 1: to Nicki Haley, and that's what helps us consolidate her.
Speaker 2: The DeSantis number, we just don't know. We don't have
Speaker 2: any idea.
Speaker 1: The poll was conducted around the same time that Desants
Speaker 1: is actually dropping out out of the race, the very
Speaker 1: last day that they were doing it, So it's not,
Speaker 1: you know, exactly it's not exactly clear to us where
Speaker 1: those people.
Speaker 2: Are going to go.
Speaker 1: But let's say that we split the difference and we
Speaker 1: go Trump and Haley. Yeah, that would put Nikki Haley
Speaker 1: at thirty seven, but that still puts trumpet some fifty five,
Speaker 1: which is just such an incredibly dominant position. The next one, though,
Speaker 1: is this is the true money because how different groups
Speaker 1: of New Hampshire Republicans plan on voting, and they actually
Speaker 1: have a head to head here of Trump and Nikki Haley. So,
Speaker 1: for example, New Hampshire potential GOP primary voters are all
Speaker 1: fifty two percent, as we just said, registered Republicans. This
Speaker 1: is a very clear number, sixty four percent. Trump twenty
Speaker 1: two percent Hailey registered undeclared thirty eight percent Trump forty
Speaker 1: eight percent Hailey. So she's winning there amongst those undeclared
Speaker 1: voters extremely motivated to vote, That seems like a category
Speaker 1: I would want. Fifty eight percent Trump thirty percent Hailey,
Speaker 1: no college degree sixty twenty seven college graduates. Here's another
Speaker 1: big flag thirty nine percent Trump forty three percent Hailey.
Speaker 1: Very conservative Trump seventy eight, Somewhat conservative Trump fifty seven,
Speaker 1: moderate liberal Trump twenty nine, Nikki Haley fifty six. Are
Speaker 1: you noticing a trend here? And then also amongst those
Speaker 1: who believe that Biden won due to fraud eighty two
Speaker 1: percent Trump, six percent Hailey, Biden won fairly fourteen percent
Speaker 1: Trump seventy one percent Hailey. Abortion should be legal in
Speaker 1: all cases thirty eight percent, Trump forty nine percent Hailey.
Speaker 1: And then finally, Trump's abortion should be illegal in all
Speaker 1: cases seventy two fourteen.
Speaker 2: What do you make of all this? Ryan? To me,
Speaker 2: It's just this is such an obvious class.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean, Haley's Haley's got the people that we
Speaker 6: understand as never Trump or these are suburban voters who
Speaker 6: are just appalled by Trump.
Speaker 3: They're more moderate, they're they're a little wealthier, they went
Speaker 3: to college.
Speaker 6: They have been gravitating towards the Democratic Party. A lot
Speaker 6: of these, for whatever reason, a kind of are the
Speaker 6: ones who are lagging behind in the realignment.
Speaker 3: But that's who they are. And yeah, they don't like Trump.
Speaker 6: And so what Haley has been doing is that she
Speaker 6: has been consolidating this support of those never Trump type voters,
Speaker 6: but she has not been peeling any support away from Trump,
Speaker 6: which is the key.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, that's just such a problem for her.
Speaker 1: And then let's put the final slide police guys up
Speaker 1: there on the screen, and what we can see here
Speaker 1: is Trump has a big advantage over Haley in trust
Speaker 1: to handle immigration and the economy. Those are important because
Speaker 1: those are the two most important issues for Republican voters. So,
Speaker 1: for example, on immigration policy, you can see that sixty
Speaker 1: two percent say Trump, twenty six percent say Nikki Haley.
Speaker 1: On economic policy, you've got fifty eight Trump, twenty nine
Speaker 1: Nikki Haley. Foreign policy, it's fifty seven Trump, thirty two
Speaker 1: Nikki Haley. Abortion is actually the only one where there's
Speaker 1: a little bit of a split, only forty percent Trump.
Speaker 1: But obviously still got the plurality there. Something interesting that
Speaker 1: was flagged to me Ryan was that the economy numbers
Speaker 1: actually were a big one for Trump, that he was
Speaker 1: actually consolidated over time. And the reason why is those
Speaker 1: social security ads that he's been running. Those social Security
Speaker 1: ads have just been killing Niki Haley with a lot
Speaker 1: of older GOP voters, people who we had that one
Speaker 1: woman in the ads she said, I might vote for
Speaker 1: myself or vote for Biden. But people think that age group,
Speaker 1: especially sixty plus, and remember this is the vast majority
Speaker 1: of people are going to vote in the primary and
Speaker 1: frankly in the election too. So you're always going to
Speaker 1: wrap your head around that. And in that what do
Speaker 1: we see trump domination? That social security policy might be
Speaker 1: the single most popular thing that he actually believes in
Speaker 1: this primary. And a very hidden part of the media
Speaker 1: wants to talk about abortion and stop the steal obviously
Speaker 1: very important issues big in twenty twenty two, but you.
Speaker 2: Know, social security pretty important too. We don't focus enough
Speaker 2: on it.
Speaker 6: The media hates social security yea like the media class,
Speaker 6: like the owners. Top editors in general are the ones
Speaker 6: who believe in their heart of hearts that Washington spends
Speaker 6: too much money and we need to get our deficit
Speaker 6: under control. You know, we watched that circus all throughout
Speaker 6: the Obama administration. Actually, all these different efforts to cut
Speaker 6: a grand bargain where you're going to raise taxes and
Speaker 6: you're going to cut social security in Medicare and you're
Speaker 6: going to make the CBO numbers look better.
Speaker 2: Good point, and people hate that's.
Speaker 9: Yes.
Speaker 6: I think a lot of wealthy people in Washington are
Speaker 6: they kind of glad that they're going to have self
Speaker 6: security down the line, but they think of it as
Speaker 6: like gravy, like it's their iras, their four oh one ks,
Speaker 6: and their kind of generational wealth which is going to
Speaker 6: take care of them in their retirement. That's not the
Speaker 6: case for most Americans. Most Americans believe that accurately that
Speaker 6: they paid into Medicare and self security and they're relying
Speaker 6: on it in retirement. So the idea that you're going
Speaker 6: to make them work longer and get fewer benefits is
Speaker 6: just infuriating.
Speaker 1: Yes, I mean no, you're absolutely right, and that's part
Speaker 1: of the problem that we see overall. Now, finally, let's
Speaker 1: just put the RCP numbers up there. What we've got
Speaker 1: is real clear politics shows Trump at fifteen points leading
Speaker 1: currently in the RCP average. You've got the overall that
Speaker 1: you can see in almost every There's not a single
Speaker 1: poll ride that we could see from the last couple
Speaker 1: of days that doesn't show Trump at least at fifty percent,
Speaker 1: with over fifty percent in many of those. And obviously
Speaker 1: that still does not even factor in the Dysantis number.
Speaker 1: So look, if Trump wins by sixty, I mean, that's
Speaker 1: just one of those where not only is it not
Speaker 1: outside the realm of possibility, I would actually consider it,
Speaker 1: you know, relatively likely. I'm not quite sure you know
Speaker 1: what exactly she's doing here, and this is her last stand,
Speaker 1: I guess you could say.
Speaker 2: So let's move on to the predictions.
Speaker 1: I've got crystals here that I can read for everybody,
Speaker 1: and we will see. Okay, So she says this is
Speaker 1: going to be fifty five forty Trump over Nikki Haley.
Speaker 1: Now we're also going to include her Democratic predictions because
Speaker 1: these are interesting. Sixty two percent Biden, eighteen percent for
Speaker 1: Dean Phillips, seven percent for Mary Ann Williamson, and three
Speaker 1: percent for the ceasefire. What's your back of the Napkin
Speaker 1: math for the GOP and then for the Democratic primer.
Speaker 6: I think Trump pushes like fifty eight, yeah, to about
Speaker 6: thirty five. Okay, it's a blowout, Yeah, because I think
Speaker 6: a bunch of those dissantis people actually wind up with Trump.
Speaker 6: I agree, it's not as simple as people think that
Speaker 6: Trump and Dessand's only sam As and Haley don't like
Speaker 6: each other either. And also there's like some people just
Speaker 6: don't like Nikki Haley.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and Desander's endors Trump.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, that's not nothing.
Speaker 6: Uh a Democratic side, I think Trump, I think Biden
Speaker 6: maybe fifty or slightly less, Like you're gonna have to
Speaker 6: write him in.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a lot.
Speaker 1: That's a lot of work now, right in the campaigns
Speaker 1: you know, have succeeded Markowski and all that.
Speaker 2: But it's rare. It's a rare thing.
Speaker 6: So maybe maybe I think Crystal's probably about right. Maybe
Speaker 6: Dean Phillips pushes close to twenty. Maryanne pushes close to ten. Uh, ceasefire.
Speaker 6: We'll talk up later in the show about this. Probably
Speaker 6: is going to be lucky to get like a thousand
Speaker 6: votes total because it's it's very late. It's an unusual thing. Yes,
Speaker 6: people are like, what do you mean right in ceasefire?
Speaker 6: Do we get a ceasefire? If it wins, it.
Speaker 3: Could shock people DMFI.
Speaker 6: The pro Israel group is just wrote yesterday to the
Speaker 6: New hamp Sure Secretary of States saying, don't even count them.
Speaker 3: So at least there's some concern out there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well they don't know what the number over for
Speaker 1: even a thousand is thousand two. He's one too many, Okay,
Speaker 1: So mine actually think I'm gonna go Trump sixty. I
Speaker 1: think he's going to break the sixty percent threshold. He's
Speaker 1: got his you know, momentum is on his side. Everything
Speaker 1: is going just the energy that we see. New Hampshire
Speaker 1: was already Trump country back in twenty sixteen. You've got
Speaker 1: tons there. Sure, you know the New Hampshire establishment is
Speaker 1: behind Nikki Haley.
Speaker 2: No, who gives it? You know, like whatever they look
Speaker 2: at Iowa. You know you have the.
Speaker 1: Freaking governor of the state indorsed ron de Sanders. How
Speaker 1: much good did that do for him? So okay, you
Speaker 1: know everyone's like, oh, Christian new New I'm like, all right, whatever,
Speaker 1: you know, he's ready to But.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they don't. They don't listen to and they're also
Speaker 3: not electing a governor of New Hampton.
Speaker 1: Exactly right, right, So how they would vote for their
Speaker 1: senator and we've seen this previously. They can vote, they
Speaker 1: elect Democratic senators when it's a general election, but not
Speaker 1: in the primary. That's not how things work. Remember who
Speaker 1: they put up in their secreatorial candidate? Well general exactly, Yeah,
Speaker 1: how did that come? But my point just being that
Speaker 1: the electorate the primary electorate very very different. So we
Speaker 1: can keep that. I think Trump is going to beat that.
Speaker 1: I think Nikki Hilly the lucky to get thirty five
Speaker 1: percent of the vote. And then the big question is
Speaker 1: is she going to drop out tonight? You know, if
Speaker 1: she does not cross that threshold, if she doesn't win
Speaker 1: the primary. Because we got to set the calendar up
Speaker 1: for everybody. We have to remember the South Carolina primary
Speaker 1: is more than a month now away after this, So
Speaker 1: you got to twist in the wind for a whole
Speaker 1: month before you're about to play in your.
Speaker 6: Own fares state, staring at polls show you down, showing
Speaker 6: you down by forty points in your own homeste. Kamala
Speaker 6: Harris dropped out because she didn't want to get rinsed
Speaker 6: in California.
Speaker 1: Yes, exactly right, which was a head of Super two
Speaker 1: or no, not Super Tuesday. But I think a little
Speaker 1: bit after it they revised it.
Speaker 6: Yeah, the mail in voting started very early, but it
Speaker 6: was a Super Tuesday.
Speaker 1: So we can just surmise, like, it's very possible that
Speaker 1: if Trump absolutely romps, I think a sixty would do it.
Speaker 1: I think there would be enough to push her out.
Speaker 1: But listen, she's a narcissist, who knows. You know, some
Speaker 1: donors enjoy lighting their cash on fire, so maybe they're
Speaker 1: going to keep doing that. It's it's certainly possible for
Speaker 1: the Democratic primary. I tend to agree with you. I
Speaker 1: think Crystal's underestimating Dean here a little bit. She has
Speaker 1: Dean at eighteen. I'm gonna give him thirty five. I
Speaker 1: just think that, you know, being on the ballot counts.
Speaker 1: Being on the ballot matters. It's just one of those
Speaker 1: is easier is going to be, you know, near the
Speaker 1: top of the tickets, one with the most quote unquote
Speaker 1: name id that actually is there, you know, putting ceasefire
Speaker 1: and writing in Joe Biden. That takes some effort. I
Speaker 1: think you'd be lucky to crack fifty Marianne. I mean,
Speaker 1: her campaign is just really struggle. I haven't seen a
Speaker 1: poll with her above three, So I'm not even sure
Speaker 1: I would give her the seven percent ceasefire.
Speaker 2: I'm with you. I don't even think it rates. Maybe
Speaker 2: less than one percent.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think less than one percent. Just yeah.
Speaker 6: I think you're going to be counting ceasefire in numbers
Speaker 6: of votes rather than rather than in percentages.
Speaker 3: But I think I think you're right that.
Speaker 6: You know, people have been telling telling polsters, you know,
Speaker 6: eighteen percent or whatever for Dean Phillips. But they've also
Speaker 6: been telling polsters they badly do not want Biden to
Speaker 6: run for president, right, And so voting against somebody against
Speaker 6: somebody against him, you know, voting for somebody against him
Speaker 6: is a way to protest that. The other way to
Speaker 6: protest it is just to not show up. So I
Speaker 6: think I would guess like you have lower turnout than
Speaker 6: that's four point, because if you're a Democrat, you can
Speaker 6: either go out vote for somebody you don't really like,
Speaker 6: vote for these two other candidates that are on the
Speaker 6: ballot but you don't really have much passion for, or
Speaker 6: you can mess around and maybe jump over into the
Speaker 6: Republican primary and vote for Mickey Aleey. You don't really
Speaker 6: like either, and it's not even going to matter because
Speaker 6: Trump's going to win either way. So I think a
Speaker 6: decent number of them stay home. On the other hand,
Speaker 6: they have so much pride in their or little New
Speaker 6: Hampshire primary.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's true.
Speaker 1: But that's my thing is that though he certainly did so,
Speaker 1: I think there's I think there's a chance there.
Speaker 3: Could be a shockingly low number that's possible.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, so let's go through the scenario.
Speaker 1: So like very very low turnout, which would Biden win,
Speaker 1: but maybe Dean over performance. There could be medium turnout,
Speaker 1: which actually, again I would put Dean a little bit
Speaker 1: higher up in there.
Speaker 3: Here's the question too.
Speaker 6: Yeah, we have Biden beating Trump in New Hampshire lately,
Speaker 6: up by like five points or sites. Yeah, it'll be
Speaker 6: interesting to see how many votes Trump gets compared to Biden,
Speaker 6: and I think the media might pick up on that
Speaker 6: because Trump could actually end up getting in a competitive
Speaker 6: Republican primary more votes than Biden gets an uncompetitive one.
Speaker 1: Right, and that would I mean Dan to a certain extent, though,
Speaker 1: It's like, what is that we're comparing apples to oranges
Speaker 1: because you've got a competitive primary versus non competitive primary,
Speaker 1: so it's not exactly the best barometer, but yeah, you're right,
Speaker 1: it's certainly something that we will look at. Like we said,
Speaker 1: we're gonna have breaking news on that actually tonight, so
Speaker 1: you can look forward to that, and then we will
Speaker 1: also have a show tomorrow morning. All right, So let's
Speaker 1: actually go to the Democratic primary. As we said, there's
Speaker 1: a very strange thing happening in the state of New Hampshire.
Speaker 1: We've gotten a little bit of Inkling's Ryan about the
Speaker 1: Biden campaign getting worried about this. Now they're telling people
Speaker 1: to go and write in Biden, even though they're like, oh,
Speaker 1: we don't actually care, but now we do care, so
Speaker 1: panicking a little bit. And one of the instances you
Speaker 1: could know this is that there are now robocalls with
Speaker 1: deep fakes of Biden's voice actually telling people across the
Speaker 1: state to not vote tomorrow because it's important that you
Speaker 1: save your vote for the November election. Pretty sure it
Speaker 1: doesn't work that way, but let's take a listen, and
Speaker 1: again this is going out to a lot of people
Speaker 1: in New Hampshire.
Speaker 2: Let's take a listen to this.
Speaker 10: You know the value of voting democratic on our vote count.
Speaker 10: It's important that you save your vote for the November election.
Speaker 10: Will need your help in electing Democrats up and down
Speaker 10: the ticket. Voting this Tuesday only enables the Republicans in
Speaker 10: their quest to elect Donald Trump. Again, your vote makes
Speaker 10: a difference in November, not just Tuesday.
Speaker 6: So it's a deep, deep fake Biden telling people not
Speaker 6: to vote for Biden.
Speaker 1: What do you make of this? So obviously these are
Speaker 1: all these dark money groups. You never know who's actually
Speaker 1: behind this stuff. I mean, I'm not going to say
Speaker 1: it's connected to the DNC or whatever, but clearly someone
Speaker 1: on behalf of Biden is putting this out for a reason.
Speaker 1: If they don't want people to come out to.
Speaker 6: Vote, why would somebody on behalf of Biden though, want
Speaker 6: him not to vote so that they can say, well,
Speaker 6: we didn't lose because we didn't try.
Speaker 2: Yeah, something like that. I think they were.
Speaker 1: I think they just want to or maybe maybe right,
Speaker 1: maybe it's a what you think it's an anti Biden
Speaker 1: mary Anne?
Speaker 6: Oh, I think that was That was actually Mary Anne's voice.
Speaker 6: She was impersonating Biden. Yeah, I mean, it's just one
Speaker 6: of those Phillips last night.
Speaker 1: So, I mean already though this is getting attention. The
Speaker 1: New Hampshire Attorney General is actually investigating whether this is.
Speaker 2: A voter suppression.
Speaker 3: Oh, it absolutely is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean it definitely is.
Speaker 6: There's First Amendment car about when it comes to election,
Speaker 6: like deliberate misinformation around, Like you're not allowed to stay
Speaker 6: voting day is Monday, right exactly when it's actually Tuesdays
Speaker 6: unless you can prove to a jury that you really
Speaker 6: are an idiot.
Speaker 7: Didn't know?
Speaker 6: But like that's illegal, Like what what you just heard?
Speaker 6: Deep faking the president's voice and then telling them not
Speaker 6: to vote. Also, it should be legal to make so
Speaker 6: little sense. Yeah, it's a crime against logic. Yeah, you
Speaker 6: can vote in both the primary and the general, like
Speaker 6: the people do it all the time.
Speaker 3: That is quite legal.
Speaker 2: Here's what's a little weird, Ryan.
Speaker 1: The message has a phone number at the end that
Speaker 1: belongs to the former Democratic chair of the New Hampshire
Speaker 1: primary who now runs a super pac which is supporting
Speaker 1: the New Hampshire write in campaign for Biden.
Speaker 6: So I mean that's probably somebody like planting drugs on somebody, Okay, right,
Speaker 6: all right, Yeah, I think it's that's trying to point fingers.
Speaker 1: So according to her, she says in an interview that
Speaker 1: she began receiving Sunday evening calls for people who would
Speaker 1: received the message. She says that she's had called her
Speaker 1: and she was not a Biden supporter. She says that,
Speaker 1: you know, they had nothing to do with it. So
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't know exactly what's going on here,
Speaker 1: but we can track it and we can just say
Speaker 1: something is happening. There's definitely a voter suppression effort which
Speaker 1: is going on in state. Let's put this up there
Speaker 1: as well, which just shows you a little bit of
Speaker 1: his panic. This is from the New York Times, and
Speaker 1: again I want to get some of your analysis. They
Speaker 1: say that while they are, you know, they don't care
Speaker 1: necessarily about the New Hampshire ballot because they're not on it.
Speaker 1: After moving the primary to South Carolina, quote, they are
Speaker 1: still hoping that he will win, and by doing that,
Speaker 1: they're actually spending a decent amount of money on the
Speaker 1: right in So I'm curious what you think of this.
Speaker 1: What what is this something that is coming back to
Speaker 1: bite them? Are they actually panicking? You covered a lot
Speaker 1: in terms of way they rigged the Democratic primary.
Speaker 2: Give people some background on that.
Speaker 6: And the background around this particular fight is that Biden
Speaker 6: wanted to basically reward South Carolina, you know, for making
Speaker 6: him president by making South Carolina the first primary. They
Speaker 6: also punished Iowa, got rid of the Iowa caucuses after that.
Speaker 2: One's fair, This one's yeah.
Speaker 6: And also Iowa was helpful to Democrats because it was
Speaker 6: a swing state for so long.
Speaker 3: Not a swing state anymore.
Speaker 6: We used to say that elections, you know, started in
Speaker 6: Iowa and finished in Florida. Not true anymore. Both are
Speaker 6: red states at this point, and so Iowa was gone.
Speaker 6: New Hampshire then always first in the nation primary and
Speaker 6: they would say, look, it's right in our constitution. They
Speaker 6: love telling people that their constitution says they have to
Speaker 6: be the first primary. That the DNC is like, we
Speaker 6: don't really care what your constitution says, Like, we can
Speaker 6: set the primary, and we're making the first one South Carolina.
Speaker 6: New Hampshire said screw you, we're holding one anyway. And
Speaker 6: so Biden was like, well, then I'm not going to
Speaker 6: be on the ballot, Like we're not going to sanction this,
Speaker 6: We're not going to participate in it. But it's so
Speaker 6: ingrained in people's minds that if you even traveled to
Speaker 6: New Hampshire to this day, even even though it's not
Speaker 6: a sanqusd primary, Let's say six months ago somebody a
Speaker 6: Democrat traveled to New Hampster. Oh look, look look at
Speaker 6: that Gavin Newsom going in New Hampshire. Maybe he wants
Speaker 6: to be president. So it's the mythology around it is
Speaker 6: still locked into people's minds. And so as it gets closer,
Speaker 6: and as Biden's numbers continue to plummet, they they reckoned
Speaker 6: that they just simply could not withstand getting annihilated in
Speaker 6: a state like New Hampshire that has this mythology around it.
Speaker 6: So now right, you've got these Biden allities who're like,
Speaker 6: we can't, we can't have this. We need to write
Speaker 6: Biden in and then if we can writeing with Biden,
Speaker 6: if we can we can get that going, then we
Speaker 6: can show that there's that the grassroots support is really
Speaker 6: there for him. It was New Hampshire that knocked LBJ out.
Speaker 1: Yes that's right, I mean yeah, I mean there's a
Speaker 1: lot of mythology around Hampshire. You can go both ways, right,
Speaker 1: So New Hampshire is what saved Bill Clinton campaign back
Speaker 1: in ninety two. New Hampshire is really the first state
Speaker 1: that Donald Trump ever won, so the two of them
Speaker 1: have a lot of affinity for that. Iowa that's like
Speaker 1: an Obama state. That's where Obama was able to launch
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, but he ended up losing New Hampshire.
Speaker 1: So there's a lot of things that famous Hillery famous.
Speaker 1: There was also the Tabasco thing. Am I forget that
Speaker 1: right around the same time. I think it was around
Speaker 1: the same time. I'll never personally never forget that moment.
Speaker 1: But let's get and think about some of the closing pitches. So,
Speaker 1: as we already predicted, I think Dean is going to
Speaker 1: actually do a little bit better than a lot of
Speaker 1: people are expecting, just because his name is literally on
Speaker 1: the ballot. And Dean gave his final closing argument in
Speaker 1: a video that was posted yesterday to New Hampshire voters.
Speaker 2: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 7: Well, tomorrow was the big day, January twenty third, the
Speaker 7: first in the nation primary right here in the Granite State.
Speaker 7: I've spent the better part of the last three months
Speaker 7: with so many of you Democrats, independents, Republicans, Libertarians, and
Speaker 7: I just want to say thank you. It's been a
Speaker 7: remarkable experience. I know how to do this. I'm the
Speaker 7: second most bipartisan member of the entire US Congress. I
Speaker 7: came from the business world where you could never succeed
Speaker 7: by demeaning and endangering half of your customers.
Speaker 9: You actually do the opposite.
Speaker 7: You invite people, you listen to them, you learn them,
Speaker 7: you welcome them. That's what I'm going to do as president.
Speaker 7: We're going to solve these problems by working together. I'm
Speaker 7: going to take what I learned here and spread it
Speaker 7: all around the world, the way you practice democracy, what
Speaker 7: you've shared with me, and most of all, how we're
Speaker 7: going to fix it. So if you're ready for change,
Speaker 7: I'm ready to be your president.
Speaker 1: Just an uber normal pitch there. I mean, in a
Speaker 1: sane world, I think something like that would have worked.
Speaker 1: But the thing is Ryan. I mean, you know we
Speaker 1: cover this before. MSNBC literally refuse to avisment on. He
Speaker 1: still has not done an interview on the network, and
Speaker 1: the reason why is MSNBC knows of the Democrats actually
Speaker 1: trust the media. They are I've seen a few things.
Speaker 1: The Financial Times had a piece on him the Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal as well. Let's be real, like that's not
Speaker 1: going to make any difference, Like it's all about television
Speaker 1: and it's all just for especially for a lot of
Speaker 1: these boomers, the world that they're living in is one
Speaker 1: where and if it does not on linear TV, it
Speaker 1: doesn't exist. And so Dean's had a rough time. He
Speaker 1: had a campaign event where nobody showed up. But I'm
Speaker 1: just not going to discount your name being on the balance.
Speaker 1: I just think that's, you know, that's a massive strategic advantage.
Speaker 6: He never made a case for like who he was
Speaker 6: or why he was running. He started out with like
Speaker 6: this Medicare for all and he was for free college,
Speaker 6: and so you thought for a second that this guy
Speaker 6: who had been this centrist kind of lawmaker is now
Speaker 6: going to kind of run.
Speaker 3: He sees like room to Biden's left.
Speaker 6: That didn't really catch on because I think it's just
Speaker 6: didn't map to him right, Like you see that closing ad,
Speaker 6: where do you see medicare for all and like free
Speaker 6: college fitting into that ad like I'm the most bipartisan
Speaker 6: guy out there. And so after after that fell apart,
Speaker 6: he goes back to on the bipartisan guy, and then
Speaker 6: you're just Biden, except you know Cojin And at that
Speaker 6: point you're like, well, we already have Biden, and if
Speaker 6: your coach.
Speaker 2: Is not a terrible pitch, I mean something, it could work.
Speaker 3: People would have to know who he is.
Speaker 6: Yeah, that's true, Like I think Biden, but Cogin could
Speaker 6: be like a Newsome, but he's he's already understood to be.
Speaker 3: Like a threat.
Speaker 6: Like to get it, to get next to him, to
Speaker 6: get onto MSNBC requires you to have a little bit
Speaker 6: more kind of muscle behind you.
Speaker 2: That's a good point.
Speaker 1: We also have some video of Marianne Williamson in one
Speaker 1: of her last campaign events that she posted yesterday.
Speaker 2: Let's take a listen to her closing pitch.
Speaker 8: We have always been this kind of bipolar American mind.
Speaker 8: We have always been this inherent struggle. It's in the
Speaker 8: DNA of this country. Other generations rose up and they
Speaker 8: responded to the Gilded Age. They responded to it with
Speaker 8: the establishment of the labor movement. Other generations rose up
Speaker 8: and they responded to institutionalize the president of black people
Speaker 8: and segregation in the American South. I'm running for president
Speaker 8: because it's our turn now.
Speaker 1: All right, so we'll see how it goes. I mean,
Speaker 1: Marianne Crystal said this yesterday. I think it was totally
Speaker 1: true on Israel, seems to just fumble the ball because
Speaker 1: it's like, clearly that's an animating issue against Biden. Dean
Speaker 1: is pro Israel from what we've seen in a Crystal's
Speaker 1: interviews with him.
Speaker 2: So obviously that's just something that's just on the table.
Speaker 1: And now you've got the CEA Spire votes, which may
Speaker 1: even draw away from Marianne. But by not making her
Speaker 1: name synonymous with that, I think she risked the only
Speaker 1: chance of cracking let's say seven to ten percent, which look,
Speaker 1: I mean, at the end of the day, that's not
Speaker 1: just not going to cut it, period, It doesn't really matter.
Speaker 1: But you know, if we're thinking about seven to ten,
Speaker 1: it's a lot different. Seven to ten's a lot different
Speaker 1: than three maybe four, Like, we don't know where that's
Speaker 1: gonna ENDU.
Speaker 6: I think there was absolutely a path for a credible
Speaker 6: candidate to take a critical of Israel position over the
Speaker 6: last three months and put real pressure on Biden. Separately,
Speaker 6: this is another conversation we can have another time.
Speaker 3: Be fascinating. If f RFK we're in that camp.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's a good that.
Speaker 6: Would be, that that'd be and the parallels would be amazing,
Speaker 6: you know to nineteen sixty eight and LBJ And I.
Speaker 2: Mean I think you would win. I don't think there's anything.
Speaker 6: He might win, but he's but he's like to the
Speaker 6: right of Biden on Israel, so it's just not true
Speaker 6: in the world of possibility.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's one of those where I think you
Speaker 1: would definitely win a New Hampshire primary just because again
Speaker 1: a mighty ballot that's just wanted. He's already doing well
Speaker 1: there anyway. So it's one of those where he decided
Speaker 1: to go independent.
Speaker 8: And I get it.
Speaker 1: You know, the DNC was working against him and all that.
Speaker 1: He just didn't identify with the party anymore. But you
Speaker 1: cannot ever forget this. Getting on the ballot.
Speaker 2: Is really hard.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the California does not want you on the ballot.
Speaker 1: We were looking yesterday. It takes like one hundred and
Speaker 1: something thousand signatures and look, the signature wars are nuts.
Speaker 1: It requires you to get like thirty percent more than
Speaker 1: you actually need because lawyers are going to challenge the
Speaker 1: validity and even if you get totally legit ones if
Speaker 1: you don't write legibly, or if you don't write the
Speaker 1: proper address, or there's all kinds of legal tricksters that
Speaker 1: the Republicans and the Democrats have used. Really tough in
Speaker 1: these states. Yeah, I mean Texas, same thing. Good luck
Speaker 1: getting on the ballot in some big states with thirty
Speaker 1: forty fifty electoral votes like in these ones. And that's
Speaker 1: what you actually need to really compete, you know, and
Speaker 1: actually to draw some stakes away. So look, keep that
Speaker 1: in mind as we continue to cover the RFK junior campaign.
Speaker 1: Right now, he's only still on the ballot in Utah.
Speaker 1: He's got some time, you know, he's got a little
Speaker 1: bit of time, but some of the filing deadlines and
Speaker 1: all this stuff are coming up. It takes a hell
Speaker 1: of a lot of organizations. So final thoughts on the
Speaker 1: Democratic primary tonight, what do you think?
Speaker 6: It's a rare primary where I really don't know what's
Speaker 6: going to happen because of all these different variables to
Speaker 6: write in the absolute disgust with Biden, but the anemic
Speaker 6: performance of his opponents, and so it just leaves, you know,
Speaker 6: so much room for people to have to have a
Speaker 6: bunch of difficult and like unpleasant decisions in front of them,
Speaker 6: trying to express something into a system that doesn't want
Speaker 6: to hear from them and doesn't give them a good
Speaker 6: way to actually express anything.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think you're right.
Speaker 1: I like I said, I think Dean will overperform a bit.
Speaker 1: But in general, there's some tough you know, some tough
Speaker 1: work right now just for everybody going against them. And unfortunately,
Speaker 1: I think Biden's basically gotten away with rigging the primary.
Speaker 2: I think it's unfortunate. You know, you basically got It's
Speaker 2: just crazy.
Speaker 1: You get to deem a state which by all means
Speaker 1: is totally in the tank for you, with the most
Speaker 1: machine politics arguably in the whole country, whenever it comes
Speaker 1: to a primary and it's a red state, like both
Speaker 1: of these primaries. First primaries should obviously be in actual
Speaker 1: swing states. I've always thought Michigan was a great pick,
Speaker 1: something genuinely fifty to fifty industrial working class.
Speaker 2: Or you could go the other way.
Speaker 1: You could say Super Tuesday should go first and everybody
Speaker 1: should be forced to compete national But people just basically
Speaker 1: rigging things for themselves.
Speaker 2: It's not right. And you know, prior to Biden.
Speaker 1: Nobody even dared to try, but you had the opportunity
Speaker 1: decided to pick it. And I've said here before, wild
Speaker 1: you know, if you can go into this too, Obama
Speaker 1: will never happen again. That type of scenario. It will
Speaker 1: never have the insurgent cannot win. If South Carolina is
Speaker 1: going to be number one, it's going to be incredibly difficult.
Speaker 6: If you got the establishment, it'd be very hard, but
Speaker 6: it's not completely impossible. But the other thing that's changing
Speaker 6: is that these races are now so national. Like even
Speaker 6: back in two thousand and seven, when Obama is running
Speaker 6: in Iowa, he could be a lot more popular in
Speaker 6: Iowa than he could be nationally. Now, for the most part,
Speaker 6: your national polls have a gravitational poll on your regional
Speaker 6: and local polls. That the moments where you're going to
Speaker 6: have somebody who's doing extremely well in a state but
Speaker 6: not doing well nationally are basically gone because we are
Speaker 6: now a national culture and a national media environment getting
Speaker 6: because we're all in the same you know, slightly tweaked
Speaker 6: feeds from TikTok, Twitter and everybody else. And so that
Speaker 6: that's the other reason that you're not going to have
Speaker 6: somebody that can kind of come come from nowhere, because
Speaker 6: you have to have nat And the only reason that
Speaker 6: Obama got the national numbers that he did was by
Speaker 6: winning Ioway exactly that show that he could win. And
Speaker 6: so then other people were like, oh, if he can win,
Speaker 6: then I'm with him. But if you don't have that chicken,
Speaker 6: if you don't have that egg, you can't get the chicken.
Speaker 2: Very very very true.
Speaker 1: Joining us now is Andrew Veolinsky. He is an organizer
Speaker 1: and former new hand let me get this correctly, former
Speaker 1: executive counselor in New Hampshire, and he is an organizer
Speaker 1: in the right in Ceasfire campaign.
Speaker 2: Andrew, welcome to the show. Thank you for joining us.
Speaker 1: Hey, thanks for having me absolutely so. Andrew, you sent
Speaker 1: us a picture of your ballot. We're going to edit
Speaker 1: it and put it up on the screen. You have
Speaker 1: written in ceasefire there, and you've been an organizer in
Speaker 1: kind of this last minute movement. We'll give us some
Speaker 1: of the reasoning behind wanting folks to write in ceasfire
Speaker 1: on the New Hampshire ballot as opposed to rallying around
Speaker 1: a different candidate.
Speaker 5: Well in New Hampshire first in the primary means first
Speaker 5: in the nation. Primary means that we have a great
Speaker 5: deal of responsibility to make our concerns known, and our
Speaker 5: vote is our agency. I watched on October seventh as
Speaker 5: the attack happened and hostages were taken in Heart and
Speaker 5: then I kept watching in November and December, and I
Speaker 5: saw the Israeli siege of Gaza, the destruction of the
Speaker 5: healthcare system, the apparently indiscriminate bombing of non combatants, and
Speaker 5: not enough response from the Biden administration. And so in
Speaker 5: the middle of December, I penned a letter to the
Speaker 5: editor telling everyone that I was going to write the
Speaker 5: words cease fire on my ballot.
Speaker 9: That's where it started.
Speaker 5: About ten days ago, other people started reaching out to me,
Speaker 5: and now this effort is taken off with coverage on
Speaker 5: shows like Yours, Press Coverage and Politico, Nation, huff Post,
Speaker 5: Al Jazeera are at the Boston Globe. It's really gotten
Speaker 5: a bit of a life of its own, and we
Speaker 5: hope to send a message to the president about our concerns,
Speaker 5: in particular the violence that's happening perpetrated by the net
Speaker 5: Yahoo government in.
Speaker 6: The time between your letter to the editor being published,
Speaker 6: and say ten days ago when you started to get
Speaker 6: some modest financial support from around the country to actually,
Speaker 6: you know, turn this into a real campaign. How much
Speaker 6: traction had it gotten just kind of virally grassroots word
Speaker 6: of mouth wise in those couple of weeks or are
Speaker 6: we really only looking at the last ten days as
Speaker 6: a serious effort.
Speaker 5: So I have a decent following here in New Hampshire,
Speaker 5: and so there was response by I would say the
Speaker 5: people most interested in social justice issues in our state,
Speaker 5: and some rather colorful responses complaining about my letter were
Speaker 5: anatomically incorrect but.
Speaker 9: Picked up.
Speaker 5: Really, and this isn't just the influence of other people
Speaker 5: in New Hampshire's primary focus really grows in that last
Speaker 5: week to ten days and builds right through to the primary.
Speaker 5: So the idea that it was somewhat limited and then exploded.
Speaker 9: Isn't that unusual here?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 6: You recent you recently had the Secretary of State announced
Speaker 6: that they actually would be tallying, you know, the number
Speaker 6: of people who wrote in ceasefire. You've also had a
Speaker 6: super pac called Democratic Majority for Israel has written to
Speaker 6: the Secretary of State kind of urging them to reverse
Speaker 6: that decision. So where does that stand when will we
Speaker 6: learn how many people wrote in Ceasefire.
Speaker 5: So I spoke directly to the Secretary yesterday late morning.
Speaker 5: He told me that all the write in votes would
Speaker 5: be counted and that he was intending to report both
Speaker 5: the Biden write ins and the Ceasefire writ ins. Ceasefire
Speaker 5: doesn't have a million two in a pack behind it.
Speaker 5: Last night sometime Pro Israel Pack wrote to the Secretary
Speaker 5: complaining that it was illegal to report the ceasefire results.
Speaker 5: I disagree with their analysis. I've done election law in
Speaker 5: New Hampshire for the last twenty five years. I don't
Speaker 5: think they have a leg.
Speaker 9: To stand on.
Speaker 5: But there's been no announcement by the Secretary that he's
Speaker 5: going to change his position, and I expect later this evening,
Speaker 5: after the bulls close, the Secretary will announce the Ceasefire
Speaker 5: writing votes.
Speaker 1: Andrew, all we have you, it's the daily election and
Speaker 1: all that. Just what's the feeling, you know, you were
Speaker 1: elected in the state of New Hampshire. What is the
Speaker 1: feeling there of being bypassed by the Biden White House
Speaker 1: or by the DNZ by Biden and this current now
Speaker 1: effort to do a write in campaign for Biden.
Speaker 2: How does that make people feel voters there.
Speaker 5: Well, I understand the arguments that a more diverse state
Speaker 5: should go first, but someone that the DNC should have
Speaker 5: looked at our laws. We have a particular statute that
Speaker 5: says New Hampshire has to hold its primary seven days
Speaker 5: before the next primary. Caucuses don't count. The Democratic Party
Speaker 5: lost the governors raised state House, and the state Senate,
Speaker 5: so it's all Republican controlled. There was zero chance that
Speaker 5: the Republican controlled legislature was going to repeal that statute
Speaker 5: to accommodate the DNC. It was probably one of the
Speaker 5: dumber moves I've seen for the DNC to change the order,
Speaker 5: not recognizing that the secretary of the state was legally
Speaker 5: bound to hold the primary when he's holding it. So
Speaker 5: it's been an odd primary. You've got this supposed small
Speaker 5: time grassroots effort to write in the president, and then
Speaker 5: Washington Post yesterday reported it's backed by a million two
Speaker 5: in a pack. You have Republicans dropping in and dropping
Speaker 5: out almost by the minute. So now that it's a
Speaker 5: Haley and Trump race are very popular governor backing Hailey,
Speaker 5: we'll see how that works out. You have two unknowns
Speaker 5: running as Democrats, Dean Phillips and Mary Anne Williamson. There's
Speaker 5: also an interesting comedian named Verman Supreme ballot and Vermin
Speaker 5: Supreme's goal is to beat Dean Phillips.
Speaker 9: So it's, uh, there you have it.
Speaker 6: What's what's your sense of where the ceasefire votes are
Speaker 6: going to come from? Are they pulling from Vermin Supreme?
Speaker 6: Are they pulling from Biden? Mary Anne Dean?
Speaker 3: Why not.
Speaker 6: Endorse a candidate who's for a cease fire? What was
Speaker 6: your thinking there? And what's your what's your go ahead?
Speaker 5: And I have a follow that was intentional. I am
Speaker 5: not interested in replacing Joe Biden. I didn't want to
Speaker 5: support a person who would then be a threat to
Speaker 5: the president in the no member election. I wanted him
Speaker 5: to do better by recognizing the importance of this issue
Speaker 5: in the one way that he seems to pay attention,
Speaker 5: which is to the vote. So if we get people
Speaker 5: to go out and actually mark their ballots with a vote,
Speaker 5: we're in a position where President Biden can veto UN resolutions,
Speaker 5: but he can't veto the vote. And this effort has
Speaker 5: grown the another ten or fifteen states now looking at
Speaker 5: repeating this effort of writing in ceasefire instead of backing
Speaker 5: a third party candidate or a farm team candidate like
Speaker 5: Phillipson and Williamson.
Speaker 6: Interesting, what's your number in your mind as the votes
Speaker 6: are counted that would be a success for you and
Speaker 6: that would land for the president.
Speaker 9: It's not a specific number.
Speaker 5: So part of it starts with the coverage we're currently
Speaker 5: receiving across.
Speaker 9: The nation in a big way.
Speaker 5: Turnout is supposed to be high on the Republican side.
Speaker 5: It's not clear to me that it will be as high.
Speaker 5: It likely won't be as high on the Democratic side.
Speaker 5: So getting a number of votes enough that show up
Speaker 5: that make a difference, I'll.
Speaker 9: Be happy with that.
Speaker 5: But quite frankly, given all of the attention that's been
Speaker 5: paid to this and people now talking cease fire, why
Speaker 5: isn't the president doing more?
Speaker 9: We've already won.
Speaker 6: What kind of blowback have you gotten from other Democrats
Speaker 6: over this? Because I've heard people complain that this is
Speaker 6: going to give people the idea of November that they
Speaker 6: should do this. So have you heard that from people?
Speaker 6: And what have you heard?
Speaker 9: Yeah?
Speaker 5: So I'm being called an anti Semitic bigot a lot,
Speaker 5: which is kind of amusing because I'm a former Synegogue
Speaker 5: Sunday School teacher and I was president of our synagogue.
Speaker 5: So it just shows you how quickly and how crass
Speaker 5: people become. The organized Democratic leadership in our state has
Speaker 5: put out all kinds of rumors that the votes won't
Speaker 5: be counted, that we have a couple of special elections
Speaker 5: in addition to the primary, that those votes won't be counted.
Speaker 5: None of that is true. The votes will be counted,
Speaker 5: and ceasefire has no impact on the local elections. We've
Speaker 5: heard stories about how this is going to keep poll
Speaker 5: workers laid into the night. I talked to the secretary
Speaker 5: and he said, no, we count write INDs in the
Speaker 5: usual course. This isn't that big a deal. It's basically
Speaker 5: a one position race to today and we'll get the
Speaker 5: votes out and we'll tally them and we'll report them
Speaker 5: this evening.
Speaker 2: Very very interesting stuff, sir.
Speaker 1: We appreciate you joining us, and we'll be watching the
Speaker 1: results tonight, so thank you very much. At the same time,
Speaker 1: electoral wise, we always got to keep an eye on this.
Speaker 1: Let's put this up there on the screen. Trump remains
Speaker 1: the most blessed man in the US legal system. I mean,
Speaker 1: the Georgia case Ryan was one where he had a
Speaker 1: lot of problems. You know, there was not the same
Speaker 1: constitutional questions around state election law. They genuinely can in
Speaker 1: diet and prosecute whomever they want is because it's totally
Speaker 1: under their purview in terms of how they view election interference,
Speaker 1: et cetera. And the lead prosecutor there, Fanny Willis, seemed
Speaker 1: to have a pretty good case.
Speaker 2: She had one.
Speaker 1: Look, regardless of whether you think it was legit or not,
Speaker 1: she had people flipping, including Sydney Powell and all of
Speaker 1: these other individuals who worked for Trump, and you know,
Speaker 1: including his lawyer, and all of them were cooperating. Well,
Speaker 1: it then comes out, you know, soon afterwards, just in
Speaker 1: the last month or so, that the person that she
Speaker 1: had chosen as the case is lead prosecutor may have
Speaker 1: been involved in a tumultuous affair with Fanny Willis, all
Speaker 1: stemming from his divorce case.
Speaker 2: So let's just keep this up there so I can
Speaker 2: read from it.
Speaker 1: It says that the future of this election interference can
Speaker 1: now hinge on a bitter divorce case playing out in
Speaker 1: the suburbs of Atlanta, involving the case's lead prosecutor his
Speaker 1: estranged wife and the testimony she is now seeking from
Speaker 1: Fannie Willis, who the estranged wife says is his alleged paramour.
Speaker 1: Now it appears that this is going to actually be unsealed.
Speaker 1: Emergency court hearing just yesterday evening, the judge Is says
Speaker 1: that a decision on the question of whether Willis can
Speaker 1: be called as a fur testimony in this divorce case,
Speaker 1: Nathan Wade will be stayed. Now what this means is
Speaker 1: that right now the co defendant, one of Trump's actual
Speaker 1: co defendants. He's the one who unearthed this because he
Speaker 1: discovered that the two were quote having an improper, clandestine
Speaker 1: personal relationship that has now financially benefited both. I actually
Speaker 1: think the financial part of this Ryan could be some
Speaker 1: of the most damaging because this gentleman Nathan Wade, who
Speaker 1: Fanny Willis tapped, had very little experience and has now
Speaker 1: made hundreds of thousands of dollars paid by the state
Speaker 1: in legal expenses. So, I mean, this is you know,
Speaker 1: classic problems for dismissal that could be challenged, especially if
Speaker 1: something like this comes out Willis herself, I mean, is
Speaker 1: one where look, you should always say this with a Granssalt.
Speaker 2: But here's what the ex or the strange wife says.
Speaker 1: She says Willis is trying to hide under the shield
Speaker 1: of her position to avoid testimony. We are not seeking
Speaker 1: her position. Deposition is the disrettorney of Fulton Counting. We're
Speaker 1: seeking the deposition and individual capacity is the alleged paramore
Speaker 1: of my client's husband. So whatever her job is, it
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with whether or not she should
Speaker 1: have to sit for a deposition. Now, Fanny Willis's attorney
Speaker 1: says that the knowledge that she may or may not
Speaker 1: have about Wade in his marriage quote is not unique.
Speaker 1: You have got two parties in this case, one that
Speaker 1: is alleged to have an extra marital affair. If that's
Speaker 1: the case, If that is true, Nathan Wade has that
Speaker 1: information so pretty nowhere their own attorney and not dying
Speaker 1: that this is true, which I mean to me, it
Speaker 1: seems pretty true allegedly for missus Willis's lawyers. I'm just saying,
Speaker 1: you know, for my own reading of the facts are
Speaker 1: publicly available, which you have not disputed. It's not looking
Speaker 1: good for you. I mean, I can't believe this, Ryan,
Speaker 1: I said this time time. Chrystal It's like what Trump
Speaker 1: has truly been touched by God? Like there's no other explanation,
Speaker 1: and I don't even believe that God.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Like the Georgia case was always to me the
Speaker 6: biggest threat to Trump.
Speaker 3: This is the go find me the votes case.
Speaker 2: I ad to unbelieved.
Speaker 6: This is the one where he's straight up got on
Speaker 6: a call with the States Yeah, Secretary of State, and
Speaker 6: instructed his team find me eleven thousand x number of
Speaker 6: votes so that we flip this thing I become president.
Speaker 3: Right. Just seems like blatant criminality on tape.
Speaker 6: And like you said, she's a hard charge prosecutor. She's
Speaker 6: got people flipping, she's got people ready to testify. Grand
Speaker 6: jury's ready to go, and then boom. Because Trump doesn't
Speaker 6: have to necessarily win here, what.
Speaker 2: Trump needs to do is to exactly raise question.
Speaker 6: Delay this long enough that it's too close to the
Speaker 6: election and you can't can't prosecute it anymore. There's nothing
Speaker 6: better than a divorce case when it comes to opposition
Speaker 6: researchers and the journalists who are looking to dig into
Speaker 6: public figures, because that is when it all comes out. Now,
Speaker 6: you also have to take everything with a great herself.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm couching it, like, well, this is the guy's
Speaker 1: ex or a strange life.
Speaker 6: There's nobody, nobody more motivated than somebody filing, you know,
Speaker 6: a divorce case ages because divorces are all divorces are hard.
Speaker 6: But divorces that wind up in court where filings are public,
Speaker 6: that's like the top ten percent of divorces because they've
Speaker 6: gone past the place where you're going to amm aclude
Speaker 6: settle anything, going past the place where even just going
Speaker 6: to go to court. You're now like airing everybody's dirty laundry,
Speaker 6: and in some cases you're just making up dirty laundry
Speaker 6: and airing it like that absolutely happens, but like you said,
Speaker 6: doesn't look good in terms of in terms of the response. Now,
Speaker 6: what does this have to do with the case, you know,
Speaker 6: not really anything in the sense that like that doesn't
Speaker 6: change the kind of facts of the case of what
Speaker 6: Trump did or what the prosecutor has she had Fanny
Speaker 6: Willis at her defense, she said, look, there's there are
Speaker 6: three you know, you know, main primary attorneys that I've
Speaker 6: hired on this case, all friends of mine, a black man,
Speaker 6: a white man, and a white woman. It's unfair that
Speaker 6: they're only coming after the black man and accusing me
Speaker 6: of this, you know, improper relationship. On the other hand,
Speaker 6: a lot of people are saying, you know, as Trump
Speaker 6: would say.
Speaker 3: Many people are saying, yeah, I.
Speaker 6: Mean here's the thing that it's like, let's part yeah,
Speaker 6: go ahead, guy, No.
Speaker 1: I mean I mean more in looking at this. They
Speaker 1: allegate like she's not denying some of the substances of
Speaker 1: this stuff. For example, the man's been paid six hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty grand charging the state of Georgia.
Speaker 3: Now also the travel stuff.
Speaker 1: Is this is what I was about to get to.
Speaker 1: They say that there were many questions about trips that
Speaker 1: mister Wade paid for and took with miss Willis. As
Speaker 1: county officials are prohibited from receiving anything of value from
Speaker 1: people doing business with the county. So literally, if he
Speaker 1: paid for a hotel room or something that she happened
Speaker 1: to be and again allegedly that if she did not
Speaker 1: immediately reimburse him for that half, or she took trips
Speaker 1: or accepted airplying tickets and all these things. This is
Speaker 1: cut and dry corruption stuff, and these laws are in
Speaker 1: place exactly for a reason. Now maybe she can make restitutions,
Speaker 1: she can pay it back or something like that. But
Speaker 1: again we're talking in the court, not only of public opinion.
Speaker 1: We're talking about in courts of law. This is the
Speaker 1: exact type stuff. And get a case thrown out or
Speaker 1: they can delay it. Like you said, if you get
Speaker 1: the lead prosecutor removed from a case, and you know
Speaker 1: so much is going to happen now legally in terms
Speaker 1: of pushing that back. If you push it back after
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty four deadline, boom, now Trump literally could
Speaker 1: be the president again.
Speaker 2: Now he's got immunity. There's all kinds of different things going.
Speaker 6: On, right, lead prosecutor plus one of the top three
Speaker 6: kind of secondary prosecutors. But yeah, if you take the romance,
Speaker 6: the potential romantic relationship out of it, these are standard
Speaker 6: kickback laws, like in other words, a prosecutor cannot pay
Speaker 6: somebody or any state OFFICI. You can't pay somebody and
Speaker 6: then they give you ten percent back. That's a kickback. Yes,
Speaker 6: that's those are banned. And so if there is evidence
Speaker 6: of him kicking things back to her, that falls under
Speaker 6: the kickback laws, even if it wasn't a kickback, because
Speaker 6: you know, she wasn't she wasn't paying him so that
Speaker 6: she would get paid.
Speaker 3: She was, she was, They were just going on trips.
Speaker 1: Together, allegedly, irregardless, Like you pick somebody, it's still illegal.
Speaker 2: Allegedly.
Speaker 1: You know, you got a personal relationship with and you're
Speaker 1: you know, you're getting them, putting them in a nice,
Speaker 1: cushy job. We don't have a lot of expirity ground
Speaker 1: since every thousand was.
Speaker 2: A lot of money.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's a lot of money. That's one of those Yeah,
Speaker 1: maybe you had to pay an associate. Okay, still pocket
Speaker 1: in a decent amount of that. And that's only just
Speaker 1: so far. If the case goes to trial, I mean,
Speaker 1: who knows, it could be making a million plus of
Speaker 1: taxpayer dollars. So keep in mind that this is just
Speaker 1: one of Trump's legal issues. Don't forget. He's also got
Speaker 1: another one coming. Let's put this up there. This is
Speaker 1: actually gonna happen on Wednesday, which is kind of interesting.
Speaker 1: The defamation trial round two, by the way, is happening
Speaker 1: now with Egen Carroll delaying Trump's possible testimony. The judge
Speaker 1: who is overseeing Trump's defamation trial has actually delayed those
Speaker 1: proceedings after the Tuesday primary contest where this was complicated
Speaker 1: because it meant that Trump was supposed to actually offer
Speaker 1: testimony in his own defense, in the testimony or in court.
Speaker 1: His lawyer said, my client reminded me tomorrow's the New
Speaker 1: Hampshire primary. He needs to actually be in New Hampshire.
Speaker 1: Seems to be, you know, a decent enough excuse. A
Speaker 1: lawyer actually for Egen Carroll then objected to the delay,
Speaker 1: saying that they want to get this over with, Can
Speaker 1: you give people a little bit of a you know,
Speaker 1: come up with some background on the case, like with
Speaker 1: each because this is the second defamation trial, and I
Speaker 1: guess we should remember they found that what they found
Speaker 1: that he defamed her. They did not find that they
Speaker 1: any substance of the claim that he raped her.
Speaker 2: Okay. So but this is where it gets, you know,
Speaker 2: I confused.
Speaker 6: Well, they found that there's enough evidence right that her
Speaker 6: claims are solid, okay, and that him that his attacking
Speaker 6: her over making those claims is defamation.
Speaker 3: Got it, and laid a giant judgment on him for it.
Speaker 6: He immediately defamed her after that judgment.
Speaker 1: Right and according to the court, Yeah, according to the
Speaker 1: court corney or lawsuit, Yes, exactly right.
Speaker 6: Well and also like I'm to take to take a
Speaker 6: victory lap. He put out a statement like right afterwards,
Speaker 6: and immedia I think it was on this show.
Speaker 3: I was like, that's the same defamation that he just.
Speaker 6: Got nailed for, Like, there's no difference between what he
Speaker 6: just said and what the court just said is defamation.
Speaker 3: And so this time.
Speaker 6: When he went back to court, they skipped the whole trial,
Speaker 6: the whole fact finding part of you know, was their
Speaker 6: sexual assault. They said, we've already decided that there was
Speaker 6: and so now the question is these comments do they
Speaker 6: count as defamation? So they so they skip that and
Speaker 6: if he he could pay, you know, he's gonna get
Speaker 6: hit with another judgment after that.
Speaker 3: He might keep the fam here, just keep going back
Speaker 3: because like.
Speaker 2: Well how much are these judgments?
Speaker 3: So millions? Yeah, I mean millions.
Speaker 6: Now if is he ever going to pay is a question.
Speaker 6: But yeah, it was an enormous amount of money. Okay,
Speaker 6: many millions.
Speaker 1: Maybe maybe you'll get his supporters to pay for it,
Speaker 1: like he did with the Stop the Steal.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean you canal defense fund right, Sure he can't.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sure I'm sure he could. They can find
Speaker 2: a way. So it's one of those.
Speaker 1: Where it probably just never pay stronger. He put out
Speaker 1: a truth social let's put this up there. Here's what
Speaker 1: he had to say. He says, I traveled laced last
Speaker 1: night from the state of New Hampshire to New York
Speaker 1: to attend one of the crooked Joe Biden's inspired which
Speaker 1: hunt trials. Despite the fact that I was there on
Speaker 1: time and on schedule, it was then learned that one
Speaker 1: of the jurors not feeling well, and for that reason,
Speaker 1: today's session, having to do with a woman I know
Speaker 1: nothing about out has therefore canceled, with a new date
Speaker 1: to be determined. All of these various Biden political opponent
Speaker 1: trials just happened to be starting with great purpose in
Speaker 1: the middle of what will be the most election important
Speaker 1: election in the history of our country. They could have
Speaker 1: all began years ago or years after that, but certainly
Speaker 1: not during the election. In actuality, they should never should
Speaker 1: have been brought at all, because I have done nothing wrong.
Speaker 2: It is what it is. I will do what I
Speaker 2: have to do.
Speaker 1: All I ask is for fair judges and juries, and
Speaker 1: I will win every single one of them.
Speaker 2: So that's what the manhatt says.
Speaker 6: Go ahead, to back up his one of his wild
Speaker 6: claims here, he says these are Biden inspired which Hunt trials.
Speaker 3: It is true that Reid.
Speaker 6: Hoffman funded the billionaire supporter of Biden, an opponent of Trump,
Speaker 6: more an opponent of Trump than he is a supporter
Speaker 6: of Biden, financed the laws, financed her lawsuit. R Like
Speaker 6: that's a fact. Like that is a fact. The judge
Speaker 6: and jury has still found him reliable for it, though, Yeah,
Speaker 6: very important point. So anyway, that's what we got Trump's
Speaker 6: latest legal rank. Don't forget I left out the business case.
Speaker 2: What else?
Speaker 1: We have the January sixth case, we have the documents case,
Speaker 1: we have this case e Gene Carrol. I believe it
Speaker 1: was the Star case too. I forgot it one still
Speaker 1: forgot about that one. And so yeah, anyway, I think,
Speaker 1: what is it? Some ninety one criminal charges and all that,
Speaker 1: and he's got to run the table on all of them.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be a tough bet, but we'll keep you
Speaker 1: guys updated. As I said, though, there's no there's no
Speaker 1: luckier man in this world than Donald Trump whenever it
Speaker 1: comes to legal matters. In many ways, I honestly feel
Speaker 1: like he he's like some sort of like magical material
Speaker 1: which absorbs his opponents strength.
Speaker 6: I mean, it's just like he's certainly the only president
Speaker 6: in modern memory that looked younger when he left office.
Speaker 2: It's very true.
Speaker 1: He's like the sort of gryffindor y Harry Potter nerds
Speaker 1: who are out there. All right, let's move on to Israel.
Speaker 1: Some very very serious news that we can report this morning.
Speaker 1: A stunning incident happening in Gozia. Let's go and put
Speaker 1: this up there on the screen. We have the IDF confirmed.
Speaker 1: You know, this says twenty one Israeli soldiers actually been
Speaker 1: revised this morning to twenty four Israeli soldiers killed as
Speaker 1: they were rigging two buildings in southern Gaza with explosives.
Speaker 1: Hamas attacked nearby tank with RPGs and explosions in the building,
Speaker 1: causing the buildings then to collapse on top of the soldiers.
Speaker 2: This is according to the IDF.
Speaker 1: The Israeli soldiers have routinely supposed these celebratory videos on
Speaker 1: social media of themselves celebrating and laughing while doing control
Speaker 1: demolitions of Gaza neighborhoods and others, just as noted by
Speaker 1: Jeremy Scahill. I mean, we don't know yet much about
Speaker 1: the incident, Ryan, but what's your immediate reaction to this?
Speaker 1: This is this is some crazy stuff. The single deadliest
Speaker 1: incident so far in the war on Gaza for the
Speaker 1: for the IDF in.
Speaker 6: This war, right, This comes after they have claimed to
Speaker 6: have kind of operational control of major parts, if not all,
Speaker 6: of Gaza, which clearly is not the case. No, if
Speaker 6: if they're if Hamas is able to you know, launch
Speaker 6: an attack on a tank right near a building that
Speaker 6: they're trying to do a controlled demolition on. We'll talk
Speaker 6: about this later, but we have seen an enormous number
Speaker 6: of kind of TikTok videos and Twitter videos of soldiers,
Speaker 6: like Jeremy said, celebrating these controlled demolitions of just absolute entire.
Speaker 3: We're going to we actually have universities. Let's let's play.
Speaker 3: Let's play some of the clips that have gotten people.
Speaker 1: So yeah, so I can narrate some of these. Our
Speaker 1: team went ahead and compile. This appears to be people
Speaker 1: who are IDF soldiers who are joking about finding sneakers
Speaker 1: and opening a Nike store actually in the Gaza strip,
Speaker 1: going through some of the rubble. This one here again,
Speaker 1: these are all TikTok videos that they're openly posting inside
Speaker 1: of a classroom, kind of mocking the fact that it's
Speaker 1: an empty classroom. This is just you know, it's like
Speaker 1: kids with guns screwing around on kids bikes rolling around
Speaker 1: inside of a house.
Speaker 3: And kids have been falling to evacuate.
Speaker 1: This is where think, this is where things start to
Speaker 1: get become great question marks about the literal like discipline
Speaker 1: with than the IDF. I mean, these are guys like
Speaker 1: doing just demolition with target practice with the shoulder fired rockets.
Speaker 1: And then here you've got a guy just literally unloading
Speaker 1: his clip into a wall. I believe they're calling it
Speaker 1: the war on walls on social media. I'm just complete
Speaker 1: like lack of discipline fired. I mean, I just can't
Speaker 1: imagine what would happen to a US military soldier or
Speaker 1: service member serving in Iraq from you know, within their
Speaker 1: own command, if they were to conduct themselves like this
Speaker 1: in a single incident. And so look to Israel, all
Speaker 1: we can say is war of occupation. Welcome to it.
Speaker 1: You know, it's easy to bomb stuff, It's a lot
Speaker 1: harder when you got people on the ground and it's
Speaker 1: not a surprise to me Ryan that the single deadliest
Speaker 1: incident comes what months into the war, allegedly in a safeestone,
Speaker 1: and the lack of discipline and training that these guys
Speaker 1: have is genuinely stunning to me, Like, how do you
Speaker 1: lose twenty four guys in a single incident.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to think, just off the top of my head.
Speaker 1: I believe the only time the US military whatever stuff
Speaker 1: are casualties like this was like a terrible once in
Speaker 1: a decade, some bunch of Navy seals and a helicopter
Speaker 1: r you know, Operation Red Wings like comes to mind,
Speaker 1: and that's where a whole bunch of stuff goes completely wrong.
Speaker 2: This is not supposed to happen Jack period.
Speaker 1: You know, in general, a lot of little things that
Speaker 1: go into tactics and to the way that your command
Speaker 1: and all that is organized. But it's not lost on
Speaker 1: me that twenty one of the twenty four are confirmed
Speaker 1: reservists who were quote working to remove buildings and other
Speaker 1: infrastructure near the border, for example, Army combat engineers and
Speaker 1: all those. They suffered a lot, you know, with IEDs
Speaker 1: and others. So I would just say, itt Israel, like,
Speaker 1: you know, you broke it now you bought it, and
Speaker 1: now you signed yourself up for This is the future.
Speaker 2: This is what the future is going to look like.
Speaker 2: But don't forget too. This is a small country.
Speaker 1: You only got nine million people that's not marry military
Speaker 1: age males and or females. People in Israel are going
Speaker 1: to be pissed about this already. The Prime Minister Neatsayahu
Speaker 1: has ordered an investigation into this. It reminds me of
Speaker 1: an incident that we covered here previously, Ryan, where it
Speaker 1: was like ten IDF soldiers were killed in a single incident.
Speaker 1: It's like literal amateur hour you're reading this, It's like
Speaker 1: one guy, a couple guys wandered off, they get pinned down.
Speaker 1: Then you know, some Klonel for some reason is like, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm going to go and help all of them get
Speaker 1: wiped out in like fifteen minutes. Again, like this does
Speaker 1: not happen in the US military, and their total lack
Speaker 1: of discipline and others is really coming back to bite them.
Speaker 1: But it also just demonstrates like you can lose a
Speaker 1: lot of people. You know, two hundred and seventeen is
Speaker 1: a total acknowledged death toll by the IDF. We don't
Speaker 1: know what the real one is, and we definitely don't
Speaker 1: know what the wounded number is. But the longer this
Speaker 1: goes on, and the longer and longer, you've got troops
Speaker 1: in there that's going to keep on going, and you
Speaker 1: got do you lose twenty four guys, you know, even
Speaker 1: in a month, you know, you start to do the math,
Speaker 1: and we start to think about the toll that's going
Speaker 1: to take on the Israeli military.
Speaker 6: The IDF is trained and practiced as an occupation army,
Speaker 6: like most mostly in the West Bank or stationed around
Speaker 6: the Gaza envelope. But in the West Bank they are
Speaker 6: raiding homes of mostly unarmed Palestinian civilians. They can't fight
Speaker 6: that they are. They're arresting unarmed Palestinians. Occasionally, once in
Speaker 6: a while there's there's actual live fire, you know, in
Speaker 6: Jeanine or elsewhere, but it's not as if they're running
Speaker 6: up against kind of a trained, a trained military insight,
Speaker 6: and certainly not one you know, that has has had
Speaker 6: years to kind of build a tunnel infrastructure that that
Speaker 6: they that they can you know, exploit against an invading force.
Speaker 6: And this is all happening as Netanyahu keeps signaling that
Speaker 6: he's going to launch some type of ground invasion against
Speaker 6: southern Lebanon.
Speaker 3: You're like, like, what you can do is you can
Speaker 3: you know.
Speaker 6: Occupy the West Bank with the help of the Palestinian
Speaker 6: authority and you can lose the help of the Palestinian
Speaker 6: authority to do that.
Speaker 3: Uh, they're in big trouble.
Speaker 6: And yes, and you can you can bomb Gaza, you know,
Speaker 6: back to the Stone Age. You can kill tens of
Speaker 6: thousands of civilians under underneath rubble. But you're not You're
Speaker 6: not a military that it's that's equipped to do this
Speaker 6: type of thing. There's a column in Aretz this morning
Speaker 6: calling out this discipline that you just mentioned and warning
Speaker 6: that the army risks losing control, complete control of these soldiers.
Speaker 6: Then the columns has warns that there could be the
Speaker 6: formation out of this of basically gangs of like paramilitaries,
Speaker 6: because you've got all of these armed young men who
Speaker 6: are posting on social media criticism of their superiors, both
Speaker 6: civilian and military, and then getting cheered on by the
Speaker 6: Ben Gavier's and the other hard right elements of the government,
Speaker 6: and that has the potential to just spiral out of control.
Speaker 6: Like once you have if you have lost these soldiers
Speaker 6: and they feel like they can just publicly tell you, you
Speaker 6: know where to shove it, and they have allies in
Speaker 6: this factional coalition, that's a recipe for a Lebanon style debacle,
Speaker 6: like a fail like there is a risk of a
Speaker 6: failed state here.
Speaker 2: Now that's a great, great point.
Speaker 1: I mean, all of this why our military is professional.
Speaker 2: It's all volunteer and they spend.
Speaker 3: A lot tolerated first seconds. I remember TikTok.
Speaker 1: I think there was an incident where guys in Syria
Speaker 1: were wearing like they're they were posting their running data
Speaker 1: to Strava and it was used at one point and
Speaker 1: immediately they were like, all right.
Speaker 2: Everybody's banned from Strava. It's not gonna happen like that's
Speaker 2: like nobody's banned TikTok. I can't believe it.
Speaker 1: It's a stunning to me, genuinely, just given how much
Speaker 1: this is playing. Maybe they just don't care, or maybe
Speaker 1: because it's a reservist military, they don't want to put
Speaker 1: too much pressure on them.
Speaker 2: But I don't know what you guys are doing.
Speaker 6: Their entire social medi accounts that are just monitoring TikTok's
Speaker 6: and just reposting.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we just played it here on our show. It's nuts.
Speaker 1: On top of that, there's some major diplomatic news. Let's
Speaker 1: put this up there.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: The Israelis are proposing a two month fighting pause in
Speaker 1: Gaza aka ceasefire in exchange for the release of all hostages. Israel,
Speaker 1: they say, is given Hamas this proposal through the Katari
Speaker 1: and Egyptian and mediators that would include two months fighting
Speaker 1: in pause as part of a multi phase deal that
Speaker 1: would have the release of all remaining hostages inside of Gaza.
Speaker 1: You still have one hundred and thirty hostages or still
Speaker 1: that are being held, including some IDF soldiers. This is
Speaker 1: including apparently Presidential Advisor Brett McGirk, who was in Egypt
Speaker 1: on Sunday and helping work with the Kataris.
Speaker 2: In general, I just want your overall analysis on this.
Speaker 1: Apparently the Israeli War Cabinet approved this type of parameters
Speaker 1: about ten days ago and have been communicating it. The
Speaker 1: CIA Director William Burns has been involved as well. What
Speaker 1: do you think, Ryan about the prospects for something like this.
Speaker 1: I mean, usually I would say if you're not firing
Speaker 1: for two months. It's pretty hard to turn those guns
Speaker 1: back on.
Speaker 2: That said, this is.
Speaker 1: All we're talking about, So I don't think they necessarily
Speaker 1: care if you're Hamas, do you take this deal?
Speaker 2: Do you not take the steal?
Speaker 3: What do you think the other thing that they have proposed.
Speaker 6: And it's not clear if this is a kind of
Speaker 6: requirement that Hamas accept this or not, but they said
Speaker 6: they would offer quote unquote safe passage to Hamas leaders
Speaker 6: outside of Gaza elsewhere. That brings back nineteen eighty two
Speaker 6: if you remember this history, after Israel invaded Lebanon to
Speaker 6: try to clear out the ploy, Israel got an agreement
Speaker 6: from the Palestinian leadership that they would leave for Tunisia
Speaker 6: and elsewhere. There were international monitors, that international forces that
Speaker 6: came in, and the deal that the PLO and Israel
Speaker 6: cut was that the international forces would remain to protect
Speaker 6: the civilian population. Because Israel had the diahea doctrine had
Speaker 6: been attacking the civilian population to put pressure on the
Speaker 6: to put pressure on the Lebanese to then put pressure
Speaker 6: on the PLO to leave.
Speaker 3: That worked.
Speaker 6: As soon as the PLO left, the international forces left,
Speaker 6: Israel and its proxies engaged in absolutely horrific civilian massacres
Speaker 6: in southern Lebanon massacres that that were that involved Ariel
Speaker 6: Sharon and like you ministers, this is like, yeah, we're
Speaker 6: not talking, we're talking. This is Wikipedia level stuff here.
Speaker 6: And so that wasn't that.
Speaker 3: Long ago for these folks.
Speaker 6: So if you're you know, in your fifties and sixties
Speaker 6: and you're a Palestinian, you know you were ten or twenty,
Speaker 6: you know when this, when this happened, you remember this,
Speaker 6: and so hearing again, hey guys, as long as your
Speaker 6: leadership leaves, don't worry. You know we're going to cut
Speaker 6: a deal. Everything is going to be fine. You remember that.
Speaker 6: And so also you know that Israel is going to
Speaker 6: hunt you down or anywhere around the world, so you
Speaker 6: can get safe passage to Tunisia or they're going to.
Speaker 3: Cut to it, but they're going to try to get
Speaker 3: you anyway.
Speaker 6: So you're actually maybe even safer bizarrely in Gaza, even
Speaker 6: though nobody's safe.
Speaker 2: It's a Gordian knot and it's not a good situation.
Speaker 6: I think that's like the easy I think it shows
Speaker 6: that Israel is under insane amounts of pressure too to
Speaker 6: actually focus for now on the hostages, which they have
Speaker 6: not been doing.
Speaker 2: Well, that's a good segue. Guys.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna go a little bit out of order here,
Speaker 1: but can we please put d E four on the
Speaker 1: screen so I can narrate it a bit. This is
Speaker 1: showing the families actually of hostages in Gaza storming into
Speaker 1: a Kannesset meeting, which is their parliament, demanding an end
Speaker 1: to the war and a deal. Immediately they say, quote,
Speaker 1: you will not sit here while our children die. And
Speaker 1: clearly you can also see there's some signs there in Hebrew.
Speaker 1: Many of these are family members. I mean they're literally
Speaker 1: storming the meeting and taking over the entire thing, faces
Speaker 1: and others of those who have not yet been released.
Speaker 2: This is a tough, tough situation.
Speaker 1: I mean, it just demonstrates as well the disconnect in
Speaker 1: the Israeli war cabinet between those like Gavie Smo Trick
Speaker 1: and Netting On to a certain extent where they want
Speaker 1: the war to continue. They don't care about the hostage.
Speaker 1: They can say they want to, but they haven't saved
Speaker 1: a single one. The only thing they've done is shot
Speaker 1: three of them that we know. Uh.
Speaker 2: And then in terms of the bombing.
Speaker 1: I mean, listen, you know, ask the hostages who were
Speaker 1: released to say that they were bombed.
Speaker 2: So there's that we can keep that in mind.
Speaker 6: There was a mother on Facebook of a hostage who
Speaker 6: said that there the autopsies showed that her son was
Speaker 6: killed by like a poison gas attack inside a tunnel.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 6: So there's enormous amounts of pressure from these families on
Speaker 6: on the net Yahoo government to take the lives of
Speaker 6: the hostages seriously. And at the very beginning you but
Speaker 6: you had Smotris, she had Ben Gaverer saying we need
Speaker 6: to not care over much about the hostages. We need
Speaker 6: to be ruthless in how we wage this. Uh the hand,
Speaker 6: the kind of a mass version of the Hannibal directive,
Speaker 6: which is which is that you know, hostages are too
Speaker 6: costly politically for Israel, and so it's better it's better
Speaker 6: that they're they're they're killed before they can become hostages.
Speaker 6: Like that's the Hannibal theory, the Hannibal.
Speaker 3: Directive, and so.
Speaker 6: Without if Israel was accomplishing its military objectives, they might
Speaker 6: be able to push back on this on the on
Speaker 6: the families who are demanding the hostages RelA hostage release
Speaker 6: take priority. But without that, okay, you're not accomplishing your
Speaker 6: military objectives. The demands of the families become that much
Speaker 6: harder to ignore.
Speaker 1: I think you're exactly right, and that actually is a
Speaker 1: perfect subway. We can put E two up on the screen.
Speaker 1: This is news we've been holding now for a while.
Speaker 1: We wanted to make sure that we got to it.
Speaker 1: This just happened a couple of days ago. Leaked to
Speaker 1: US military assessment to the Wall Street Journal, they say
Speaker 1: that Hamas has told us far falls far short of
Speaker 1: Israel's war aims. It is really forces have killed twenty
Speaker 1: to thirty percent of Hamas fighters.
Speaker 2: US intelligence estimates.
Speaker 1: Show a toll that falls short so far of Israel's
Speaker 1: goal of destroying the group and shows that it's resilience
Speaker 1: after months of war that have laid swats to the
Speaker 1: Gaza Strip. The US estimate found that Hamas still has
Speaker 1: enough munitions to continue striking Israel and Israeli forces in
Speaker 1: Gaza quote four months, and that the group is attempting
Speaker 1: to reconstitute police force in parts of Gaza City, which
Speaker 1: already we have seen major Israeli withdrawals from Ryan You
Speaker 1: and I have discussed some of that previously. Israeli officials
Speaker 1: concede that despite the aggressive air ground campaign that has
Speaker 1: killed thousands of civilians, they have not achieved their goal
Speaker 1: of destroying Hamas, which has run Gaza now, and that
Speaker 1: they have withdrawn thousands of troops following pressure from the
Speaker 1: United States to transition to a more surgical phase of
Speaker 1: its war against Hamas. Military officials say that the war
Speaker 1: can continue for many more months, and that their survival
Speaker 1: has raised questions within Israel, the Palestinian authorities, and abroad
Speaker 1: about whether Israel can even achieve this most basic aim.
Speaker 1: Biden administration has now begun to scale down their expectations
Speaker 1: for the war. They say to Hamas's degradation as a
Speaker 1: security threat from its utter destruction, and that the US
Speaker 1: has urged Israel to shift the war toward more targeted
Speaker 1: operations are aimed at Hamas leadership. A senior Israeli military
Speaker 1: official told The Wall Street Journal, if you don't have
Speaker 1: to win, you just have to not lose. I actually
Speaker 1: would swap that around. I would say that's Hamma goal,
Speaker 1: you know. I would say for Hamas, Yeah, they don't
Speaker 1: have to win. There's no there's no winning against people
Speaker 1: who got airpower. You got no airpower, but you don't
Speaker 1: have to not lose. Ask the Taliban how that worked
Speaker 1: out for him. They're stronger when we left than they
Speaker 1: were when we invaded. Somebody makes sense of that for me?
Speaker 1: After a billion dollars or sorry, one hundred million.
Speaker 3: Dollars or so.
Speaker 1: Same with the Hoosies, same with the who thees, same
Speaker 1: with you know isis we can think about that in
Speaker 1: terms of Iraq and how much it costs. And then
Speaker 1: they talk here about some of the surviving fighters and others.
Speaker 1: They're basically saying that in terms of the number of
Speaker 1: fighters that have been killed, even if you take the
Speaker 1: Israeli military estimate, which is nine thousand, that is still
Speaker 1: thirty percent of the group's total fighting force. And that's
Speaker 1: the very very high end, right, that's not very good.
Speaker 6: And that was the fighting force at the beginning, at
Speaker 6: the beginning.
Speaker 2: That's now you don't even know.
Speaker 6: Now you've taken two million people and displaced them, how
Speaker 6: many new recruits have you created by orphaning them? By
Speaker 6: killing their brothers and sisters, their grandparents, their uncles, their
Speaker 6: their nephews. If you are if you are you know,
Speaker 6: a eighteen year old man or woman in Gaza at
Speaker 6: this point, like you're either you know, scrounging for food
Speaker 6: and medicine to keep your to keep yourself alive, or
Speaker 6: maybe you go try to join Hamas.
Speaker 3: At this point.
Speaker 6: It's very that's been the problem with that, that's the
Speaker 6: that's the doctrine, Like, that's the problem that. You know
Speaker 6: that the kind of counter terrorism effort globally has always
Speaker 6: tried to reckon with if you kill a terrorist, do
Speaker 6: you create more terrorists than you have just killed?
Speaker 1: And that's not necessarily like something that you know, it's
Speaker 1: a common talking point.
Speaker 2: People are like, oh, what does that mean? We should
Speaker 2: do nothing.
Speaker 1: It's like, listen, you should just be calibrated and you
Speaker 1: should think about whether trade offs exist and what they
Speaker 1: look like. So, for example, if we were to think
Speaker 1: about where a terrorist group genuinely could have been eradicated,
Speaker 1: I think al Qaeda in two thousand and one is
Speaker 1: a perfect example because it's a small paramilitary organization which
Speaker 1: has ties to the Taliban, but is not.
Speaker 3: Directly to that indigenous anywhere.
Speaker 1: It's not indigenous. You know, half of the people in
Speaker 1: Afghanistan are like, who are you Arabs.
Speaker 2: Why are you here?
Speaker 1: I don't even like you, right, So they're willing to
Speaker 1: get about the right They're like, get out of here,
Speaker 1: go kill him. So that was the perfect example of
Speaker 1: one where yeah, I genuinely think we could have gone
Speaker 1: in there. As long as there weren't a lot of
Speaker 1: Afghan civilians around. You could a carpet bomb, you could
Speaker 1: have killed every single one of them, would have done nothing.
Speaker 1: But then we're going to think about the Taliban. It's like, well,
Speaker 1: now you're talking about somebody's cousin, somebody's uncle, somebody who's
Speaker 1: involved in drug trafficking, and all these you know, activities
Speaker 1: including police force and anti government for very different reasons.
Speaker 1: Now we're not getting into a phase where you can
Speaker 1: just go in and kill somebody and make sure that
Speaker 1: you're not having some detrimental effect. May still be a
Speaker 1: good reason to kill him, you know, maybe they're in
Speaker 1: charge of X, Y and Z, or if you kill
Speaker 1: one person that can have a bigger effect, But at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, you're going to need a
Speaker 1: bigger political military strategy.
Speaker 2: It's why we lost the war in Afghanistan. Same thing.
Speaker 1: We killed a lot of insurgents in Iraq. How did
Speaker 1: that work out? You know, it didn't work out so well.
Speaker 6: And yeah, I is kind of is a confusing example
Speaker 6: and raise people's expectations in a way that was was
Speaker 6: inappropriate because isis basically just a bunch of Europeans, yes,
Speaker 6: who came down.
Speaker 1: There from Chechnya or Britain under Belgium. And again people
Speaker 1: in Syria are like, why are you enslaving my you
Speaker 1: know name?
Speaker 6: Or they've just radicalized on YouTube and everywhere else, and
Speaker 6: then and they come down for this like it.
Speaker 2: Much easier to kill much easier to kill it.
Speaker 6: And you can express and you can extract that from
Speaker 6: the culture because it's not indigenous to endemic to the culture,
Speaker 6: whereas this effort to call Hamas isis fails because Hamas
Speaker 6: is made up of people who are from Gaza. Yeah, like,
Speaker 6: you can say whatever you want about and they're from Gaza.
Speaker 1: They're from there, which means it's not going to be
Speaker 1: that easy to root them out. It's a lot it's
Speaker 1: a lot harder to kill them. It's a lot harder
Speaker 1: to separate them from the population. If you did want
Speaker 1: to separate them from the population, you probably do the
Speaker 1: opposite of what Israel is doing.
Speaker 2: And now you know you've got as bad You've got
Speaker 2: a bad, bad situation.
Speaker 1: So you've got twenty one, twenty four guys who have
Speaker 1: been killed here, how many more are going to be killed,
Speaker 1: you know, in this war of occupation?
Speaker 2: And now you know.
Speaker 1: They're going to face all blow up a building, They're
Speaker 1: going to face all kinds of problems inside Israel because
Speaker 1: already they've done these withdrawals and the reservists they're sending
Speaker 1: it back.
Speaker 2: They need him to work in the military.
Speaker 1: Well, we all just got a preview today of what
Speaker 1: a real war of occupation looks like. You need hundreds
Speaker 1: of thousands of people standing around on street corners with guns.
Speaker 1: You can bomb them till Kingdom come, but you can
Speaker 1: only keep it up for certain tier periods of time.
Speaker 1: And eventually you know you're going to be involved in
Speaker 1: this type of activity.
Speaker 2: You're going to get killed. A lot of you are
Speaker 2: going to get killed.
Speaker 1: Especially when you don't have good taxic, good discipline, good
Speaker 1: command and control, so many these different things. So listen,
Speaker 1: I think this is a big, big problem. Any final
Speaker 1: thoughts here.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean, if you're the family of one of
Speaker 6: these twenty four and maybe counting IDF soldiers who died,
Speaker 6: you're asking what did they die for?
Speaker 3: And you're told they were doing a controlled.
Speaker 6: Demolition of a building, right like, buildings do not threaten anybody.
Speaker 6: What threatens people are ideologies and people who hold those ideologies,
Speaker 6: who operate out of buildings and who use weapons. But
Speaker 6: you can destroy them. What does destroying a university do?
Speaker 2: Right like?
Speaker 6: What does destroy What does leveling an apartment building do
Speaker 6: to make Israel any safer? And so you're so not
Speaker 6: only did you lose at least twenty four soldiers, but
Speaker 6: you but you did it to destroy a building, like
Speaker 6: there's no there's no building that is worth that.
Speaker 1: The lucky thing is that, at least in Israel, their population,
Speaker 1: as you can see, is a lot less compliant than ours.
Speaker 1: You know, whenever their people are on the line, they
Speaker 1: genuinely do kind of act out in many cases as you.
Speaker 2: Saw in terms of storming that connected.
Speaker 1: So perhaps the families of those you know inside the
Speaker 1: country will begin to ask questions.
Speaker 2: It's a small country.
Speaker 1: When you lose somebody, you know, it's it's it's going
Speaker 1: to hit a lot more. As we were talked a
Speaker 1: lot about on October seventh. Let's move to the final
Speaker 1: part here about Harvard. We've been wanting to cover some
Speaker 1: of this campus craziness or so called I just want
Speaker 1: to say I told you so about Bill af all right,
Speaker 1: I can say it every time, but every time we
Speaker 1: get vindicated.
Speaker 2: This is just the most perfect example to me.
Speaker 1: So if we'll all recall Bill Ackman, the billionaire hedge
Speaker 1: funder who has done some very questionable practices whenever it
Speaker 1: comes to SPACs and to crashing the market after COVID,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of discussion. We can put that off
Speaker 1: to the side, just you know, giving people a context
Speaker 1: about how a man became worth four billion dollars.
Speaker 2: I've done it before. Yeah, maybe it'll do it again. Okay.
Speaker 1: So Bill Ackman on October eighth wakes up and is like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, there's all these Palestinian groups that are
Speaker 1: saying abhorrent and awful things. I should help to cancel
Speaker 1: them and make sure that they can never get a job.
Speaker 1: This morphs into after the Harvard hearing before Congress, an
Speaker 1: effort to get Claudine Gay, the president of Harvard, fired
Speaker 1: for not saying immediately the calling for the genocide against
Speaker 1: Jews constitutes a targeted harassment at the university eventually then
Speaker 1: morphs into plagiarism accusations against Claudine Gay in which she retires.
Speaker 1: But remember he didn't actually care about clip plagiarism. He
Speaker 1: cared about getting this one fired over quote unquote anti
Speaker 1: semism concerns. Well, Harvard has now heeded the call and
Speaker 1: they've created a quote anti Semitism task force.
Speaker 2: But now let's put this up there. This is pretty amazing.
Speaker 1: Bill Ackman and Larry Summers, form president of Harvard, are
Speaker 1: now decrying the choice of Derek J. Pensler, who is
Speaker 1: a professor of Jewish history and is Jewish himself, as
Speaker 1: the leader of an anti Semitism task force. Will you
Speaker 1: guess why, Ryan, because quote he helped to lead a
Speaker 1: panel which had signed a letter that was critical of Israel,
Speaker 1: describing it as a regime of apartheid for its treatment
Speaker 1: of Palestinians. Now this is very, very important here, because
Speaker 1: what they are saying is that this man, who is
Speaker 1: a Jew, a professor of Jewish history, and who is
Speaker 1: leading the anti Semitism task force himself, is not a
Speaker 1: proper person to lead the anti Semitism task force. Because
Speaker 1: he has been critical of Israel. Okay, so not that
Speaker 1: he's anti Semitic himself, but they are saying that criticism
Speaker 1: Israel equals anti semitins. That gives the whole game away,
Speaker 1: doesn't It kind of gives the whole game away. And
Speaker 1: so just give you an example about Bill Ackman. Let's
Speaker 1: put this up there on the screen. He says, Harvard
Speaker 1: continues on the path of darkness again because he was
Speaker 1: chosen as the co chair of this anti Semitism task
Speaker 1: for US, and he led a panel which then signed
Speaker 1: a letter and then also called forest easfire, which means
Speaker 1: then that criticism of Israel the government itself, according to Acman,
Speaker 1: is anti Semitism, and also according to Larry Summers, we
Speaker 1: can put his.
Speaker 2: Tweet up there on the screen. We're only giving you
Speaker 2: half of this, by the way, there's a lot more.
Speaker 2: And if you're an acinesque, but I.
Speaker 1: Mean, Ryan, this is just so blatant and transparent, you
Speaker 1: know the way that so many people have like fallen
Speaker 1: for this. Guys, none of this says anything to do
Speaker 1: with DEI. It's about Israel. It's about protecting Israel from criticism.
Speaker 1: And listen, you know, I you know, the whole apartheid
Speaker 1: thing and all that. Who cares, it's a foreign country.
Speaker 1: In this country, we are allowed to criticize the foreign country,
Speaker 1: last time I checked, except we've got an Israel. Except
Speaker 1: apparently in this case, it's just outrageous. Outrageous to me,
Speaker 1: Israel is a country.
Speaker 6: Israel is a country with policies. Criticizing those policies does
Speaker 6: not make you anti Semitic. For a long time, that
Speaker 6: had seemed like a pretty straightforward proposition, and you would
Speaker 6: often have the opponents of that proposition kind of twisting
Speaker 6: themselves into NASA say that that's not actually what they mean.
Speaker 6: But like you said, it's now very clear exactly what
Speaker 6: they mean. That you cannot have a co chair of
Speaker 6: an anti Semitism task force who is a critic of Israel,
Speaker 6: because they are by definition, he's Jewish anti semitic, and
Speaker 6: he's one of the most renowned professors of Jewish history,
Speaker 6: like in you know that is that is working today certainly,
Speaker 6: but in you know, a century, and to call him
Speaker 6: anti semitic is flatly absurd. And the apartheid question is
Speaker 6: an interesting one too, because you know, apartheid means that
Speaker 6: you have different rights, you know, within the borders of
Speaker 6: a country, depending on your ethnicity, or your or your religion.
Speaker 6: The critics of that label say it's not fair to
Speaker 6: call Israel apartheid because the occupation is temporary and at
Speaker 6: some point in the future there will be a resolution
Speaker 6: which means it is no longer an apartheid state, whereas
Speaker 6: South Africa was a locked in, permanent, permanent This is
Speaker 6: this is, this is what it is. Net Yahoo clearly
Speaker 6: stating that there will never be a Palestinian state locks
Speaker 6: that in the only alternative if there will never be
Speaker 6: a Palestinian state is that it is all under the
Speaker 6: security control of Israel, and everyone underneath Israel's security control
Speaker 6: is subject to those laws. And if you are Palestinian
Speaker 6: or Arab, you have different privileges, you have different rights.
Speaker 3: That is apartheid.
Speaker 6: And you if net Nyah, who is not willing to
Speaker 6: say to even pretend that at some point in the
Speaker 6: future there will be a two state solution, then it
Speaker 6: is a part time like that. That's just definitionally too
Speaker 6: so to say that it's uh, it's anti Semitic and
Speaker 6: out of bounds to say that. For a Jewish historian
Speaker 6: who knows the history is to demand ignorance.
Speaker 3: Yes, of your panelists.
Speaker 1: Look, I haven't even thought about it that much because
Speaker 1: I honestly think that some of these rhetorical battles are irrelevant.
Speaker 1: It's like, look, are the Palestinians treated worse than Israeli citizens?
Speaker 1: It's like, yeah, definitely, Okay, I can tell you that
Speaker 1: from I haven't seen it with my own eyes.
Speaker 2: I don't know. You'd call it whatever you want. I
Speaker 2: don't know.
Speaker 1: The whole point is just a great I mean, we
Speaker 1: get you know, it devolved into all of these rhetorical
Speaker 1: battles and it's not and it is like, listen, this
Speaker 1: is all irrelevant. The whole point is about are you
Speaker 1: allowed to say what you want in the United States
Speaker 1: of America?
Speaker 2: And the answer should be.
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, if you're a scholar of Jewish history and
Speaker 3: you want.
Speaker 2: To scholars, listen. I hate some of these scholars, all right.
Speaker 2: I brought this man and I would.
Speaker 1: Probably hate hate each We would hate over DEI over
Speaker 1: so much. And as long as he defended my right
Speaker 1: to be able to criticize him and vice versa, we're cool, man,
Speaker 1: you know, the professor and I that's the problem. Is
Speaker 1: that people are not actually properly implying these principles whenever
Speaker 1: they're talking, you know, out of both sides of their mouth.
Speaker 2: This is about Israel period.
Speaker 1: At the same time, we have a very strange situation
Speaker 1: at Columbia University. We have some video actually we can
Speaker 1: play here of two Columbia University students who were allegedly
Speaker 1: sprayed with something called skunk spray, which is apparently used
Speaker 1: on Palestinians in the West Bank by Israeli forces. It
Speaker 1: is quote known to cause nausea, abdominal pain, and vomiting,
Speaker 1: and this is self reported from some of these protesters,
Speaker 1: but appears to have some verification with their symptoms. Columbia
Speaker 1: University actually responded to these allegations.
Speaker 2: We could put this up there please.
Speaker 1: They say that the Department of Public Serifety is working
Speaker 1: with the local and federal authorities to invest agate some
Speaker 1: of these incidents. Ryan, you guys had an intercept story
Speaker 1: on this. Could you break it down for us and
Speaker 1: just tell us a little bit about what you guys found.
Speaker 6: Yeah, we can put this up in post by colleague
Speaker 6: Preem Tucker as his pieces headline Columbia scold students for
Speaker 6: quote unsanctioned Gaza rally where they were attacked with chemicals.
Speaker 6: And the allegation is that two of these students are
Speaker 6: former IDF soldiers. It would be familiar with the use
Speaker 6: of skunks.
Speaker 7: Brother.
Speaker 6: There's been some confirmation at least of that one of
Speaker 6: them was You've had at least you know, the two
Speaker 6: were attacked, but you had dozens. You were kind of
Speaker 6: sickened by this pretty intense chemical spray.
Speaker 3: And it wasn't until.
Speaker 6: Uh Prem's story went up that Columbia finally sent out
Speaker 6: a new statement, like that first state interesting that they
Speaker 6: put out was what they say they were concerning incidents.
Speaker 6: Now they're saying that they're you know, they're looking into
Speaker 6: it like that there's there's going to be an investigation.
Speaker 6: You know, if anybody has concerned, you know, they should
Speaker 6: reach out, like taking it a little bit more seriously
Speaker 6: than they were before. It felt like the Columbia administration
Speaker 6: was kind of hoping that the press just just go
Speaker 6: wouldn't cover this, and that we were the first news
Speaker 6: outlet to cover it. Is kind of shameful because and
Speaker 6: also hypocritical that if this happened in reverse, where what's
Speaker 6: his name Shy Davidson, Yeah, has been making a huge
Speaker 6: name for himself as this Columbia business professor or associate
Speaker 6: professor adjunct or something who is saying he feels deeply
Speaker 6: unsafe on campus and urging all of these students to
Speaker 6: be disciplined. If this had been a pro Israel rally
Speaker 6: and you had s JP students come and like hit
Speaker 6: them with skunk spray and somewhat to the hospital, you
Speaker 6: cannot imagine a world in which the media didn't touch
Speaker 6: it until the intercept covered it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're obviously right. And again you know it's like, look,
Speaker 1: these protesters. I don't know anything other people, but at
Speaker 1: the they're not hurting anybody, like you know in this country,
Speaker 1: stay at least you know, if someone's gonna spram, it
Speaker 1: should be the cops.
Speaker 2: And even then it's like we should probably talk about it.
Speaker 1: You know, just get the spray people unless they're attacking you.
Speaker 1: And when you do, it's like what is happening here?
Speaker 1: Like how is there not again some outrage? It's just
Speaker 1: it's nuts to me. We're not applying proper principles. I mean,
Speaker 1: for right wing people, you want maga folks to be
Speaker 1: sprayed in the face, like with skunk spray by what
Speaker 1: an agent of like the Ukrainian military or something that
Speaker 1: would be nuts, That would genuinely be nuts.
Speaker 6: What if we had a Russian student exactly, and there's
Speaker 6: like a pro Ukraine raw I'm sure the.
Speaker 1: Media would condone that. May they call it an active
Speaker 1: self defense or something. But that's my whole point is
Speaker 1: that you're not supposed to selectively, you know, apply some
Speaker 1: of this stuff. So the campus craziness continues, It certainly does,
Speaker 1: and we will continue to keep you guys updated.
Speaker 2: Right, It's been great talking with you man.
Speaker 1: We will be together tomorrow morning for the Counterpoints counter
Speaker 1: Points Breaking Points crossover reaction to the new Amster primary,
Speaker 1: in which the whole team will be here with Crystal
Speaker 1: also joining us remotely.
Speaker 2: And thank you all very much for joining us. We
Speaker 2: really appreciate you.
Speaker 1: Got the discount going on now if you can help
Speaker 1: us out breaking Points dot com otherwise, I'll see you tonight,
Speaker 1: I'll see you tomorrow. I'm gonna see you all the time,
Speaker 1: all right, see just see it tomorrow morning.