Speaker 1: Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of the show.
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 1: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 2: Good morning everyone, Welcome to Breaking Points. We have obviously
Speaker 2: a lot to cover this morning, and very fortunate to
Speaker 2: be joined by doctor tree To Parsi of the Quincy
Speaker 2: Institute for Responsible state Craft here from the start to
Speaker 2: break down what is happening with us, with Israel and
Speaker 2: with Iran. Of course, this comes on the heels of
Speaker 2: the Israelis launching an a legal, unprovoked, aggressive attack on Iran.
Speaker 2: Iran now promising retaliation. We have some updates from President
Speaker 2: Trump last night, Doctor Parsi. Before I get you in,
Speaker 2: let me just go ahead and put this up on
Speaker 2: the screen. In terms of the statement that he put out,
Speaker 2: he says, I gave Iran a chance after chance to
Speaker 2: make a deal. I told them in the strongest of words,
Speaker 2: to just do it. But no matter how hard they tried,
Speaker 2: no matter how close they got, they just couldn't get
Speaker 2: it done. I told them it would be much worse
Speaker 2: than anything they know anticipated or were told. That the
Speaker 2: US would make the best and most lethal military equipment
Speaker 2: anywhere in the world by far, and that Israel has
Speaker 2: a lot of it with much more to come. They
Speaker 2: know how to use it. Certain Iranian hardliners spoke bravely,
Speaker 2: but they didn't know what was about to happen. They
Speaker 2: are all dead now and it will only get worse.
Speaker 2: There has already been great death and destruction, but there
Speaker 2: is still time to make the slaughter. With the next
Speaker 2: already planned attacks being even more brutal come to an end,
Speaker 2: Aron must make a deal before there is nothing left
Speaker 2: and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire.
Speaker 2: No more death, no more destruction. Just do it before
Speaker 2: it is too late. God blessed you also, doctor Parci
Speaker 2: with that. If I can just get your reaction off
Speaker 2: the top here of what Israel has done and what
Speaker 2: we know about US involvement.
Speaker 3: So what the Israelis have done is to follow the
Speaker 3: same playbook as they did in Lebanon, which is that
Speaker 3: they went after the chain of command and the heads
Speaker 3: of the various military installations as organizations in order to
Speaker 3: essentially paralyze Hezbo law and disable it from being able
Speaker 3: to respond. And once that has happened, then they went
Speaker 3: all out and just destroyed as much as they could.
Speaker 3: They did the same thing in Syria as well. Once
Speaker 3: the Assauld government was gone. That's when these Radis really
Speaker 3: started bombing the country to eliminate whatever military capabilities it
Speaker 3: had left to ensure that regardless of who would come
Speaker 3: into power in Syria afterwards, they would not be able
Speaker 3: to pose a challenge to Israel for years to come.
Speaker 3: That seems to be the same strategy the Iranian seems
Speaker 3: to have complete and miscalculated, thinking that any strike would
Speaker 3: go after economic targets, It would go after oil installations,
Speaker 3: perhaps the nuclear program itself. I don't think they calculated
Speaker 3: that it would go after individuals in this manner, or
Speaker 3: perhaps they didn't think that the Israelis have the capability.
Speaker 3: I think also they were lured by what clearly now
Speaker 3: appears to have been a deception by the Trump administration
Speaker 3: in which not a deception that I think at least
Speaker 3: took place from the beginning, meaning eight or so weeks
Speaker 3: ago when talk started, but a deception that started sometime
Speaker 3: over this weekend, in which there was a signaling of
Speaker 3: talks coming up, that he didn't want to see an attack,
Speaker 3: which I think probably put the Iranians in the law
Speaker 3: thinking that if anything happens, it will happen after Sunday's negotiations,
Speaker 3: which probably won't take place right now, but instead the
Speaker 3: plan was to go ahead much sooner than that. It
Speaker 3: seems to have taken them by surprise.
Speaker 4: But I think also there's something very important here to mention.
Speaker 3: We've seen that they've been targeting apartment buildings similar to
Speaker 3: what they have done in Beirut, what they have done
Speaker 3: of course in Gaza, in a much much lower scale.
Speaker 3: What we've seen is that over the course of the
Speaker 3: last two years, but also before that, the Israelis have
Speaker 3: run a campaign to essentially eliminate all of the norms
Speaker 3: around the use of force that have been developed over time,
Speaker 3: but particularly after the Second World War, to eliminate all
Speaker 3: international law. Because what they're doing here is that they're
Speaker 3: going after civilians and military officials. But they're doing so
Speaker 3: not on the battlefield. They're not doing so in the barracks.
Speaker 3: They're doing it in their homes when they're asleep, together
Speaker 3: with their children and families, as well as scores of
Speaker 3: other families in the same apartment building. If any other
Speaker 3: country were to do this against the United States, meaning
Speaker 3: that they would target even military officials, but outside of
Speaker 3: the battlefield, outside of the barracks, but at their homes
Speaker 3: together with their families, the United States would rightfully call
Speaker 3: that acts of terrorism. But this is what Israel has normalized.
Speaker 3: And I think again the Iranians may have underestimated how
Speaker 3: far the Israelis were willing to go to break all
Speaker 3: kinds of norms when it comes to warfare.
Speaker 2: I think that's such an important point, not only of course,
Speaker 2: if our own military officers were assassinated in their homes. Certainly,
Speaker 2: if Israeli political leadership or military officers were assassinated in
Speaker 2: their homes, that would rightfully be recognized as a legal
Speaker 2: assassinations terror. And yet This is just par for the
Speaker 2: course with the way the Israelis are allowed to operate.
Speaker 2: And I think it's exactly that impunity and that diplomatic
Speaker 2: cover that US and broadly the West have offered Israel
Speaker 2: that have led to this point of extreme escalation. Just
Speaker 2: to further your point, I want to put up on
Speaker 2: the screen here the New York Times report of what
Speaker 2: exactly was struck, to the best of our knowledge at
Speaker 2: this point, so they say that top Iranians were assassinated.
Speaker 2: Mohammed Bagari, the commander in chief of the military, second
Speaker 2: highest commander after the supring leader, was killed. Ali Shamkani,
Speaker 2: leading politician who was overseeing the nuclear talks with the US,
Speaker 2: also killed. Mister Kamani moved quickly to a point replacements,
Speaker 2: aiming to avoid the appearance of leadership vacuum. In addition,
Speaker 2: in targeting the Natan's nuclear site, Israel struck at the
Speaker 2: beating heart of the Iranian nuclear program, they say. The
Speaker 2: Israeli military said it caused significant damage at Natan's and
Speaker 2: hit an underground compound housing centrifugees. Raphael Garsi, the chief
Speaker 2: of the IAEA, said there were no indications of attacks
Speaker 2: to other major Iranian nuclear sites. In addition, doctor Parci
Speaker 2: understand that there were several nuclear scientists who were also
Speaker 2: assassinated that you're understanding as well, and talked to us
Speaker 2: about the significance of these targets and how detrimental they
Speaker 2: will be to Iran and their ability to function as
Speaker 2: a ongoing administration and also in order to retaliate.
Speaker 3: So, for instance, one of the people that they assassinated
Speaker 3: was a professor at Tehran University, a professor of physics.
Speaker 4: His wife and child was also killed when they targeted
Speaker 4: his apartment building.
Speaker 3: Unclear whether there were other people in other apartments in
Speaker 3: the same building that were also killed, but the apartment
Speaker 3: does pretty bad shape now. So these are the type
Speaker 3: of things. And then when you take a look at
Speaker 3: what the Europeans are saying, they're starting off by condemning
Speaker 3: the Ivanian response, no condemnation whatsoever, what these Raelis have
Speaker 3: done instead coming out saying that Israel has a right
Speaker 3: to defend itself. So once again, even though the Israelis
Speaker 3: themselves say that this was a preemptive strike, which in
Speaker 3: and of itself is illegal, there is anticipatory self defense
Speaker 3: and international law, but this is more of a preventive strike,
Speaker 3: and there is no legality for that, and the Europeans
Speaker 3: fully understand this. Nevertheless, they come out and call this
Speaker 3: self defense. So it's the same playbook that we also
Speaker 3: see from the West in the last two years. Whatever
Speaker 3: the Israelis do, whatever impunity they have, and whatever impunity
Speaker 3: they grab, it is granted by Western powers, which then
Speaker 3: is dramatically reducing any moral standing that the West has
Speaker 3: in the eyes of the rest of the world, regardless
Speaker 3: of what the other.
Speaker 4: Countries may think of Iran.
Speaker 3: Now what this does to the program, First of all,
Speaker 3: when these Raelies have already assassinated quite a few Ivanian scientists,
Speaker 3: including the head of the atomic energy program before and
Speaker 3: another one was now killed as well, that has not
Speaker 3: had a dramatic change in the direction of the programming.
Speaker 3: Has actually accelerated the program, but it has not taken
Speaker 3: out their full capacity, because this is not a program
Speaker 3: in which you take out a couple of people at
Speaker 3: the top and it collapses. When it comes to the
Speaker 3: chain of command, then it's more complicated because without a
Speaker 3: chain of command, the military is paralyzed, at least momentarily
Speaker 3: until it can regroup.
Speaker 4: In the case of.
Speaker 3: Hisbola, it never really managed to do so whether that
Speaker 3: will be the case in Yvon or not remains to
Speaker 3: be seen. But we have to keep in mind, if
Speaker 3: I'm not mistaken, the number of actual Hebola individuals that
Speaker 3: is or killed in its pager attack was I think
Speaker 3: around four hundred and scores more that were completely innocent
Speaker 3: that were either killed or wounded. But that's four hundred
Speaker 3: out of an organization, not an entire state. Here, we're
Speaker 3: talking about ten to twenty people in the chain of command.
Speaker 3: Very important ultimately, of course, but the numbers I don't
Speaker 3: think in any way, shape or form get to the
Speaker 3: same numbers that you saw on has bullet case, which
Speaker 3: was necessary in order to paralyze that organization, but at
Speaker 3: a minimum.
Speaker 4: It will delay it.
Speaker 3: And I think this is part of the reason why
Speaker 3: we haven't really seen much of an Ivanian response yet,
Speaker 3: and perhaps it will prove to be that these Raelis
Speaker 3: were so successful that Yvonians actually cannot fully launch such
Speaker 3: a counter attime.
Speaker 2: President Trump has seemed to indicate in the true social
Speaker 2: posts that I read that he thinks this will put
Speaker 2: pressure on the Iranians to come to some sort of
Speaker 2: a deal that seems insane to me. You know, I
Speaker 2: think it seems much more likely we end up in
Speaker 2: this escalatory spiral. Obviously, the US is already saying they
Speaker 2: will protect Israel, as they have in the past, from
Speaker 2: any potential Iranian retaliation. I'm sure the Iranians, as they understandably,
Speaker 2: should see US as directly involved, even as you know
Speaker 2: our mis Oh, they did this unilaterally. We had nothing
Speaker 2: to do with it. We just knew it was going
Speaker 2: to happen and didn't stand in the way effectively. So
Speaker 2: in any case, what do you make of that rationale
Speaker 2: from Trump that this illegal, unprovoked attack on Iran will
Speaker 2: help bring them to the table to effectuate some sort
Speaker 2: of diplomatic deal.
Speaker 3: So this is the argument these Raelis have been making too,
Speaker 3: from saying either you or US or together in this case,
Speaker 3: I think it was together attack that will soften the
Speaker 3: Iranian position they will come begging for a deal or
Speaker 3: in this case, begging for capitulation. Essentially, this is also
Speaker 3: what they did in his first administration when they promised
Speaker 3: him that economic sanctions and maximum pressure would be sufficient
Speaker 3: to get the Yonians to come begging through a deal,
Speaker 3: which of course proved not to be the case this
Speaker 3: time around. If it follows the previous pattern, it will
Speaker 3: see exactly what you just mentioned. It will be an escalation,
Speaker 3: the Iranian position will harden. Would probably not be any
Speaker 3: talks this coming Sunday, because one of the elements here
Speaker 3: is that because Trump now is bragging about this and
Speaker 3: really convincing the Runians that Trump not only was in
Speaker 3: on it, Trump played a key role in the deception
Speaker 3: to love the Runians into a false sense of security.
Speaker 3: If that is the case, he engaged in that deception,
Speaker 3: why would the Runians trust him now when he says,
Speaker 3: if you just do X, Y and Z, we can
Speaker 3: have a deal. So that even if Trump's logic is
Speaker 3: that well, this will soften them and that automatically will
Speaker 3: make them come and begging for a deal, it presumes
Speaker 3: that there is a degree of confidence trust in Trump.
Speaker 3: But whatever that may have been, because the Varnians were
Speaker 3: at the table, at least there was some elemental trust
Speaker 3: there may have been destroyed precisely because of the manner
Speaker 3: that he is now bragging about having been a key
Speaker 3: part of this deception.
Speaker 2: To your point, I mean, this was a post from
Speaker 2: him hours before this strike. He says remain committed to
Speaker 2: a diplomatic resolution to the raw nuclear deal. My hired
Speaker 2: administration has been directed togotiate with Iran. They could be
Speaker 2: a great country. They first must completely give up hopes
Speaker 2: of obtaining a nuclear weapon. Thank you for your attention
Speaker 2: to this matter. So we you know, first saw the
Speaker 2: removal of some US personnel from the region, and you know,
Speaker 2: had other indications that this strike was imminent. Then the
Speaker 2: Trump administration seemed to downplay it and seemed to indicate that,
Speaker 2: you know, we really want to go forward with these talks,
Speaker 2: and we're committed to these talks this weekend. Is that
Speaker 2: what you're referring to when you talk about the psychological
Speaker 2: deception that the Trump regime was involved with here to
Speaker 2: cover and confuse Iranians in advance of this attack.
Speaker 3: I believe. So I believe something changed at this meeting
Speaker 3: at Camp David on Sunday in which Trump essentially adopted
Speaker 3: the Israeli plan but then continue to talk about diplomacy,
Speaker 3: continue to talk about the meeting on Sunday, which I
Speaker 3: think led a lot of people, myself included, thinking that
Speaker 3: if anything would happen, it would happen after Sunday, because
Speaker 3: he had said that he didn't favor and Israeli strike
Speaker 3: talks were ongoing. It made it look as if if
Speaker 3: Nathaniel did strike, it would be an active defiance against Trump,
Speaker 3: and while uh Nathaniel would love defying Biden, it got
Speaker 3: no punishment for it. It was a question mark as
Speaker 3: to whether Trump would be forgiving of them if there
Speaker 3: actually was real defiance. But now it seems clear that
Speaker 3: rather this was part of the deception in order to
Speaker 3: make the Vinyans think that nothing would happen before someday,
Speaker 3: and that may have taken them by surprise, but even
Speaker 3: then it would it would be some criminal negligence by
Speaker 3: the Iranians in the sense of even if you thought
Speaker 3: an attack was going to come three days later.
Speaker 4: It seems like the Vinyance nevertheless, had very little readiness.
Speaker 2: What is your understanding of the tug of war that
Speaker 2: has been going on within the Trump administration. You know,
Speaker 2: he fired Mike Waltz. The public explanation for that was
Speaker 2: that or else, at least what was leaked to the
Speaker 2: press was that Waltz was too excited about, you know,
Speaker 2: pulling us into a war and a con with Iran.
Speaker 2: So he was turfed. There seems to have been some
Speaker 2: other skirmishes going on between the more hawkish factions and
Speaker 2: the more what you call America First factions who would
Speaker 2: be perhaps more object more strenuously to this direction for
Speaker 2: the country. So what is your understanding of what has
Speaker 2: been going on internally and how the tug of war
Speaker 2: ended up in this place of US greenlighting and potentially
Speaker 2: being involved with these incredibly escalatory attacks which in some
Speaker 2: ways go I mean, they go against the Trumprian rhetoric
Speaker 2: of him being a pro peace candidate. They don't go
Speaker 2: against some of the direct things he said. He had
Speaker 2: said on the campaign trail, Yes, Israel should strike their
Speaker 2: nuclear facilities, but certainly the projection was, oh, he's going
Speaker 2: to be a pro peace candidate. He's not going to
Speaker 2: get us involved in another Middle Eastern war at the
Speaker 2: very least. So what do you know about that? Behind
Speaker 2: the scenes.
Speaker 3: I think there has been a real struggle and in
Speaker 3: real fight, and a fight in which those favoring this
Speaker 3: approach actually has been losing out, including of course on Waltz,
Speaker 3: but several other people in the NSC as well. But
Speaker 3: what has happened now is a reminder that at the
Speaker 3: end of the day, Trump is himself the decision maker,
Speaker 3: and he may surround himself with more people that have
Speaker 3: a restraint or the end of thinking and may not
Speaker 3: have favored this. They may have argued against it at
Speaker 3: the Camp David meeting, but nevertheless, Trump makes a decision
Speaker 3: and once he makes that decision, all of them go
Speaker 3: along with it, as of course was the case with
Speaker 3: the Biden registration as well. At the end of the
Speaker 3: day was we didn't see any senior people resigning from
Speaker 3: the Biden administration over gods that we saw some mid
Speaker 3: level of people doing so, but none of the people
Speaker 3: that were actually at the decision making table. So I
Speaker 3: do think that there has been a fight. But even
Speaker 3: though that fight was going the direction of the restrainers
Speaker 3: in a very significant way, it didn't make seem to
Speaker 3: matter because once Trump was convinced by the is RAE leads,
Speaker 3: that is the decision that is eventually ended up becoming policy.
Speaker 2: So what do you think happens now, What is the
Speaker 2: most likely chain of events to occur, and what will
Speaker 2: America's involvement be.
Speaker 3: So first, it remains to be seen whether the Vonians
Speaker 3: will have the capacity to strike back hard, and if
Speaker 3: they do so, that will change the picture potentially depending
Speaker 3: on how a large that attack is, if they actually
Speaker 3: has an effect. Right now, it does seem, of course,
Speaker 3: that Israel is completely dominating the situation, and as a result,
Speaker 3: Trump always wants to be on the side of the winner.
Speaker 3: It feels even more attractive towards claiming responsibility for what
Speaker 3: has happened now and taking credit for it.
Speaker 4: That may change and it may not change, and that's
Speaker 4: one critical element.
Speaker 3: The other element, of course, is what happens on Sunday.
Speaker 3: I don't think there's going to be any talks, but
Speaker 3: I think part of the reason why Trump is tweeting
Speaker 3: these things is essentially because he recognizes there's not going
Speaker 3: to be talked, so he's giving the Vanians warnings publicly.
Speaker 3: But again, in order even if capitulation was in the cars,
Speaker 3: you needed to have some level of credibility to make
Speaker 3: sure that the other side thought that if they capitulated X, Y,
Speaker 3: and Z that had been promised by Trump would have it.
Speaker 3: I think at this point it's going to be very
Speaker 3: difficult to convince in anyone inside the Iranian system that
Speaker 3: anything Trump says actually can be counted on and as
Speaker 3: a result, the likelihood of capitulation is much much smaller,
Speaker 3: which I think is exactly what these Raelis want because
Speaker 3: it means that there will be some sort of an
Speaker 3: ivony response, and then that increases the likelihood that these
Speaker 3: Raelis manage to get Trump to jump in fully and
Speaker 3: open the end of this world.
Speaker 2: Lastly, doctor Parson, and then I'll let you go, because
Speaker 2: I know you're very busy today. But how does this
Speaker 2: connect to Israel's genocidal onslaught in Gaza and more broadly
Speaker 2: in Palestine. I know West Bank they've now instituted a
Speaker 2: complete siege. They also had a compute complete communications block
Speaker 2: out in Gaza. You have a broader regional context as
Speaker 2: well in terms of their aggressive actions in the region.
Speaker 2: So how did these things all connect?
Speaker 3: Well, these Radis are going to continue to do that
Speaker 3: until someone stops them. United States has the capacity of
Speaker 3: doing so, and so far under Biden and under Trump
Speaker 3: chosen not to do that. I think what is also
Speaker 3: perhaps missed in all of this is that next week
Speaker 3: there is a big UN mandated conference at the UN
Speaker 3: about the creation of a Palestinian state, led by France
Speaker 3: Emmanuel Macron was supposed to attend, as well as the
Speaker 3: Saudi Crown Prince. It remains to be seen whether that conference,
Speaker 3: which many had criticized for various reasons, and there's definitely
Speaker 3: points to criticize, but there's also there was also some
Speaker 3: promise in that conference that things could actually move in
Speaker 3: a new direction because we've been just in this twilight
Speaker 3: zone of a completely dead OsO process but nothing to
Speaker 3: replace it, which then just meant that everyone was stuck.
Speaker 3: It had the potential of being able to start a
Speaker 3: new arrangement that could lead to something, but that is
Speaker 3: now going to be completely overshadowed by this new war
Speaker 3: that Israel has started, and remains to be seen whether
Speaker 3: Macron or nbs EMN will show up because this. I'm
Speaker 3: not saying that this was a key calculation of these Raelis,
Speaker 3: but one of the side effects is potentially that that
Speaker 3: conference more or less ends up becoming Now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I saw Macron putting out some terrible statement
Speaker 2: Israel has a right to defend itself, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 2: So not hopeful science there. Ryan. We just have to
Speaker 2: let doctor he could probably get in one question, Ryan,
Speaker 2: before doctor Parcy has to run. But he's got to
Speaker 2: see an end hit.
Speaker 5: He's got to get to okay, just real quickly? Then, Like,
Speaker 5: was this was this all inevitable? Is this just the
Speaker 5: inexorable logic of American empire? Like, despite all the kind
Speaker 5: of public pressure towards non interventionism, despite the fact that
Speaker 5: Trump built his political career and his campaign on ending
Speaker 5: wars not starting new ones, is the logic of the
Speaker 5: US foreign policy apparatus just such that this is what
Speaker 5: it is write its face?
Speaker 3: Yeah, Well, I mean there's part of what you say
Speaker 3: that I think I would agree with, but I would
Speaker 3: say that this was inevitable. I think things could have changed,
Speaker 3: evolved in a completely different direction. I think there were
Speaker 3: some significant mistakes that the Trump administration did that put
Speaker 3: themselves in a vulnerable position publicly because of the sensitivity
Speaker 3: they had when it comes to comparing the deal they
Speaker 3: were negotiating originally to how the Obama deal looked. And
Speaker 3: I think after that you saw how they started shifting back.
Speaker 3: If they had not gone out and said three sixty
Speaker 3: seven in that interview that Witzkop did, I don't think
Speaker 3: that opening for attacking them would have been as clear,
Speaker 3: and as a result, could have shifted in a different direction.
Speaker 3: I think there is one element of inevitability not for
Speaker 3: this specific scenario, however, is that if we continue on
Speaker 3: a grand strategy of global domination, liberal hegemony, then yes,
Speaker 3: the United States will end up in wars all over
Speaker 3: the world all the time. That is where we have
Speaker 3: been for the last thirty years. Not One of the
Speaker 3: key things that came with this administration was that there
Speaker 3: were several individuals in it that really directed that ground strategy,
Speaker 3: wanted to shift it. But I think what we have
Speaker 3: seen now is that even their presence in the administration,
Speaker 3: which was not the case in the previous administration, has
Speaker 3: not made any shift towards a more restrained form pulse.
Speaker 4: He's stable. At any moment.
Speaker 3: Trump can still change his mind because it's all about Trump.
Speaker 3: Whatever he sees to be is in his benefit, even
Speaker 3: if it completely contradicts what he has said. With the
Speaker 3: instincts of many of the people in the administration is
Speaker 3: ultimately he is a decision maker. So the stability that
Speaker 3: I think many people had hoped would come with many
Speaker 3: of these other individuals in the top ranks of the administration.
Speaker 4: With the ounceting of Mike walls, etc. Has not materialized.
Speaker 2: Thanks Treda, Doctor Parci, thank you so much to see you.
Speaker 2: Appreciate you.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 2: So Ryan. It sounds like doctor Parci is saying basically
Speaker 2: like the oh, so you're just getting back in Obama's
Speaker 2: deal provocation worked, which is so pathetic, Like it's beyond pathetic.
Speaker 2: And I mean, I will say, like to your question
Speaker 2: about was this inevitable, there's a part of me that also,
Speaker 2: you know, feels similarly in a sense, because so much
Speaker 2: of the Trump foreign policy is a continuation of the
Speaker 2: worst aspects of the Biden foreign policy. But the original
Speaker 2: negotiation of the TCGA under the Obama administration would indicate
Speaker 2: that there was a possibility of another path.
Speaker 4: And yet you have you.
Speaker 2: Know, Trump decides he's going to get out of it
Speaker 2: just because Obama did it, and so he has to
Speaker 2: do the opposite. And his administration, first administration stacked with
Speaker 2: a bunch of news. I mean, there's no dissenting voices
Speaker 2: from that in his first administration. Then you have the
Speaker 2: Biden administration come in. They should have gotten back in
Speaker 2: the deal immediately, and that opening was there, and I
Speaker 2: remember doing you know, multiple segments with doctor Parci talking
Speaker 2: about this and the time is now and you yeah,
Speaker 2: and there's going to be elections and a more hardline
Speaker 2: administration is it's going to be more difficult to do.
Speaker 2: And then of course once you have October seventh, like
Speaker 2: that is dead and gone.
Speaker 5: Because you have two and a half years into the
Speaker 5: almost exactly.
Speaker 2: Right, absolutely, and so now here we are. So you
Speaker 2: know what I mean, what is your sense of what
Speaker 2: unfold is here? Because it seems like the two pieces
Speaker 2: were they, oh, you're getting back in Obama's nuclear deal
Speaker 2: number one and number two. It looks like the Israelis
Speaker 2: maybe convinced Trump that this illegal attack would somehow create
Speaker 2: an opportunity for diplomacy in the same way that he
Speaker 2: thought the you know, maximum pressure, like let's just like
Speaker 2: crush them economically as much as possible in the first administration,
Speaker 2: like that would create some possibility that was a failure
Speaker 2: and this is clearly going to be a failure too.
Speaker 6: Right.
Speaker 5: And on the one hand, it almost doesn't matter like
Speaker 5: what rationale Nenyawho was able to use to get him
Speaker 5: to go along with it. It was whatever the argument was,
Speaker 5: it worked and it appelled forward the logic of American empire,
Speaker 5: and which is to just understand everything in terms of violence.
Speaker 5: But it does seem as a matter of historical significance
Speaker 5: that that may be possible. So and I talked about
Speaker 5: this on the livestream last night that I had spoken
Speaker 5: with an Iranian analyst who was like, our assessment here
Speaker 5: is that somehow who convinced Trump that doing this will
Speaker 5: actually make a deal more likely and better for the US.
Speaker 5: And then it gets out of that called a sack
Speaker 5: that Treeta Parsi talked about. You know, now he can
Speaker 5: say he did a better deal. This is not the
Speaker 5: Obama deal. How could it be the Obama deal? He
Speaker 5: just dropped a bunch of bombs where Israel did with
Speaker 5: his green light. And I thought that that was a
Speaker 5: bit of a far fetched analysis when I first heard it.
Speaker 5: But then Rubio's statement which came out saying we were
Speaker 5: not you know, we're saying we're not involved in this
Speaker 5: at all, do not attack us, seem to be trying
Speaker 5: to leave some room open to like continued talks with Iran.
Speaker 5: And then Trump's very explicitly says, all right, we hit you,
Speaker 5: or Israel hit you with our weapons. All the people
Speaker 5: I was dealing with are dead, all caps dead, but
Speaker 5: now you can make a deal and save the rest
Speaker 5: of you from not being dead. So it it does
Speaker 5: seem like Trump believes that this was a step towards
Speaker 5: a better deal, which is.
Speaker 7: Very is interesting. It's demented like it's.
Speaker 5: It does it does not, It does not understand uh
Speaker 5: the Iranian uh kind of government and how you know,
Speaker 5: how it's positioned like it doesn't. It didn't read the
Speaker 5: you know, his own intelligence assessments, which have always said
Speaker 5: Iran is not interested and is opposed, like Ron's leadership
Speaker 5: is opposed to pursuing a nuclear weapon for the variety
Speaker 5: of reasons. Here are the reasons. The only way they
Speaker 5: would try to pursue a weapon is if their civilian
Speaker 5: nuclear operations are targeted, then we believe then we assess
Speaker 5: this is the US intelligence, Then we assess that they
Speaker 5: would pursue a nuclear weapon. So according to that, I
Speaker 5: don't know what's right or not. They were wrong on
Speaker 5: WMD's maybe they're wrong on this, But according to that,
Speaker 5: Iran now will be trying to pursue a nuclear weapon
Speaker 5: and the US can just buy, wouldn't they yours?
Speaker 2: They would be in a much better position if they
Speaker 2: had pursued a nuclear weapon instead of getting in the
Speaker 2: deal originally with Obama. I mean, that's the cold, hard
Speaker 2: facts of the matter. That's the incentive structure that the
Speaker 2: US Empire has set up, whether it's a run around
Speaker 2: the world. I mean, quite frankly, given Israel's genocidal fervor
Speaker 2: and aggressive illegal actions not only in Iran but throughout
Speaker 2: the entire region, feel more comfortable with Iran having a
Speaker 2: new clear weapon then with Israel. I've mean, yeah, they
Speaker 2: completely unhinged. I would love for you to talk more
Speaker 2: about that because you guys cover this so closely at
Speaker 2: drop site too. I know there's a siege that was
Speaker 2: implemented now in the West Bank. I don't know if
Speaker 2: Gaza communications are still cut off, but uh, Israel's really
Speaker 2: they're really going for it right now. You know, they're
Speaker 2: really going for final solution with regard to I don't
Speaker 2: thinky even just think just Gaza, with all Palestinians. They're
Speaker 2: going for greater Israel in terms of acquiring territory of
Speaker 2: their neighbors. That the you know, hardcore fringe, formerly fringe
Speaker 2: elements now mainstream elements, have long coveted and because of
Speaker 2: every American administration allowing them to act with utter and
Speaker 2: complete impunity, they've launched this wildly escalatory, reckless attack on Iran.
Speaker 2: And I mean it's it's not a question whether we
Speaker 2: get drawn in, Like we know, if Iran seeks to retaliate,
Speaker 2: which they've already promised to do, we are going to
Speaker 2: be there defending Israel. And Iran has also said that
Speaker 2: they're going to directly retaliate against our service members who
Speaker 2: are located throughout the region.
Speaker 7: Yeah, it's this short.
Speaker 5: Term thinking that they're just one more series of assassinations
Speaker 5: is needed and then yeah, peace and justice will be
Speaker 5: on the other side of that, right, And if you
Speaker 5: truly believe that and a type of piece that is domination,
Speaker 5: not we're not talking co existence here like the way
Speaker 5: that you know, you have in say South America for
Speaker 5: the you know, for the most part, those you know,
Speaker 5: little skirmishes here and there, but most part South American
Speaker 5: countries are not lobbing missiles at each other and invading
Speaker 5: each other constantly and bombing each other.
Speaker 7: That's that's coexistence.
Speaker 5: Israel believes that kind of a piece through domination, you know,
Speaker 5: what they call the piece through piece between the lines
Speaker 5: and in the lamb, that piece that that piece is
Speaker 5: just on the other side of this assassination, and then
Speaker 5: the next assassination and the next one and the next one.
Speaker 5: Which then if that logic, if you if you buy
Speaker 5: that logic of killing a few children in the apartment
Speaker 5: along with the myer GC general or the know, the
Speaker 5: deputy chief of staff or the nuclear scientists or whoever
Speaker 5: you have just killed. If you kill a few children,
Speaker 5: you know, that's so that's an acceptable cost because on
Speaker 5: the other side is this is heavenly like peace and
Speaker 5: world of peace and justice through domination. But from their perspective,
Speaker 5: And then you know, if you bomb an entire city
Speaker 5: block to kill one person and hundreds die, that's also
Speaker 5: an acceptable cost.
Speaker 7: It was.
Speaker 5: Kimmels, who's the first North Who's who's uh uh the
Speaker 5: first North Korean president whatever you want to call him,
Speaker 5: Dictator uh had a famous quote where he said, and
Speaker 5: I think he might have been even paraphrasing maw where he's.
Speaker 7: Like, we are.
Speaker 5: Building a world of you know, workers paradise for an eternity.
Speaker 6: What is it?
Speaker 5: How do you compare if several million people are killed
Speaker 5: to get there? Compare that to the billions of people
Speaker 5: who will be liberated into this worker's paradise that we're creating.
Speaker 5: So that's the law. That's that's the logic. And and
Speaker 5: from a math if you want to take it from
Speaker 5: a mathematical level, like okay, yeah, if you really are
Speaker 5: going to create a paradise for billions of people for eternity,
Speaker 5: then yeah, a few million people dying on the way there.
Speaker 7: Is an acceptable cost to pay.
Speaker 5: Of course, all we ever get is the the few
Speaker 5: million people killed, right, And there's the only thing on
Speaker 5: the other side of that is just more suffering and more.
Speaker 2: Death and more justification for why this time bullets are
Speaker 2: going to accomplish the goal. And of course with Israel,
Speaker 2: when you add into it, and I mean they use,
Speaker 2: you know, biblical language all the time, when you add
Speaker 2: that level, and and you layer on top of that
Speaker 2: the constant posture as eternal victim, which I mean, this
Speaker 2: is one of the films they pulled this up on
Speaker 2: the screen. This is one of the things that is
Speaker 2: so disturbing and disgusting to me is the wave of
Speaker 2: American politicians. Here we have Lindsay Graham as one example,
Speaker 2: game on pray for Israel. Wave of American politicians saying
Speaker 2: pray for Israel after Israel just launched this illegal like
Speaker 2: in any other context, right, if this is Russia, Ukraine,
Speaker 2: we immediately okay, unprovoked, illegal attack in you know, as
Speaker 2: long as it's an official bad guy nation of the US.
Speaker 2: We see very clearly the implications of international law. And
Speaker 2: yet we're supposed to be praying for the aggressive, genocidal
Speaker 2: nation that has just illegally assassinated Iranian you know, political
Speaker 2: leadership and scientists while they're at home, you know, with
Speaker 2: their with their kids and with their families. I keep
Speaker 2: thinking about the the uh murder of those two Israeli
Speaker 2: embassy staffers here in d C. You know, by the
Speaker 2: Israeli logic, that would be all fine and good, no
Speaker 2: problem there. Look they're they're you know, affiliated with the government,
Speaker 2: so fair, fair game. And of course in that context,
Speaker 2: everyone see this. You can't do. This is not acceptable.
Speaker 2: This is terrorism. But when it's the Israelis who do it,
Speaker 2: it's celebrated. I mean the beeper attack, they celebrate that
Speaker 2: like that was some glorious you know, accomplishment and something
Speaker 2: to be praised and admired.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 5: And to take it even further, if the if the
Speaker 5: she was on the other foot, not only could you
Speaker 5: kill those embassy staffers, if they were surrounded by their grandparents,
Speaker 5: their cousins, their friends. Yep, that would just be unfortunate.
Speaker 5: But hey, but it's part of the game to give
Speaker 5: to give a sense of speaking of the depend we.
Speaker 2: Should be praying for the dude who assassinated them. We
Speaker 2: should be praying for them.
Speaker 7: Yeah, apparently right.
Speaker 5: And so speaking of that, to underline the depravity of
Speaker 5: our of our politics, we put up this one statement
Speaker 5: from this congresswoman, a Democratic congresswoman. Yes, I mean, I'm sorry.
Speaker 5: She's the only Iranian American that is in Congress as
Speaker 5: far as I'm almost.
Speaker 7: Certain about that.
Speaker 5: And if you remember, there was this under the radar
Speaker 5: race in Arizona that went down to this based to
Speaker 5: a recount and to court fights, and is a Democratic primary,
Speaker 5: and the the the candidate that was backed by Democratic
Speaker 5: Majority for Israel, kind of an apac shootout offshoot. She
Speaker 5: got an enormous amount of support from DMFI and beat
Speaker 5: a progressive challenger in this primary, and so she won.
Speaker 5: So now she's in office. So only Iranian American in Congress.
Speaker 5: He her statement is all about essentially supporting the attack
Speaker 5: on Iran. You know, the Islamic Republic must never be
Speaker 5: allowed to acquire nuclear weapons and the current brutal regime
Speaker 5: must be replaced. Iranian people who have suffered far more
Speaker 5: than for more than four decades at the hands of
Speaker 5: the regime deserved democracy and freedom. I do not want
Speaker 5: to see further regional escalation that could lead to US
Speaker 5: military action.
Speaker 7: De escalation, how is imperative.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is the other thing, sorry to cut
Speaker 2: you off. This is the other thing that utterly discussed
Speaker 2: me is these people that posture like are doing the
Speaker 2: Iranians of favor, right, but you know, attacking their country,
Speaker 2: embombing their cities and their scientists like.
Speaker 1: That.
Speaker 2: I mean that in n Yahoo did the same thing
Speaker 2: in his speech, which I know you and Maz covered
Speaker 2: and went through last night, to posture, Oh this is
Speaker 2: all for your own good. We're going to be greeted
Speaker 2: as liberators. I mean, that's the that's the energy, that's
Speaker 2: the vibe.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 5: I don't know how much you talked with Treat about it,
Speaker 5: but it looks like over seventy killed and you know,
Speaker 5: including you know, huge swaths of the top echelon of
Speaker 5: the Iranian military and government, the top civilians.
Speaker 2: Including some of the people who are negotiating with their talks. Yeah,
Speaker 2: which tells you. I mean, they did the same thing
Speaker 2: in the context of, you know, when they were ongoing
Speaker 2: ceasefire talks Israel and make a point of going on
Speaker 2: whoever the top political leadership is, that's right, We're going
Speaker 2: to go and assassinate them so that these talks can't
Speaker 2: continue to go forward.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 5: And according to Trump though, they're gonna go you know,
Speaker 5: no how He's got them right where he wants them.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, the Iranians have already said the talks are off.
Speaker 2: So as if that was any you know, anyone had
Speaker 2: an eat.
Speaker 7: Doubt, we didn't. We didn't know.
Speaker 5: We needed to let you know that we're not showing
Speaker 5: up on Sunday for these talks.
Speaker 7: But most of us have been killed.
Speaker 2: We're dead. Actually yeah, yeah, so we won't be there
Speaker 2: because your great ally with your weapons and very likely
Speaker 2: with your assistants, I mean definitely with those systems, like
Speaker 2: who are we kidding?
Speaker 5: Maybe last point for me on this is like I
Speaker 5: meet seagull and these and other you know, Israelis are
Speaker 5: out kind of celebrating the cleverness and the strategic brilliance
Speaker 5: of this like long running deception. The part that's missing
Speaker 5: there is that the United States and Israel do not
Speaker 5: need to to bomb a country like Iran into smitheries.
Speaker 5: We have the military capacity to tell them, Hey, Thursday
Speaker 5: at eleven thirty Eastern time, we are going to kill
Speaker 5: your nuclear scientists were peculiar. Now, it may may be
Speaker 5: difficult to pull off some of the assassinations with the
Speaker 5: heads up, but in general, the US has the military
Speaker 5: capacity to smash Iran like and could do it every
Speaker 5: five years indefinitely, you know, as long as the US
Speaker 5: remains this hegemonic power, which we're doing our best to
Speaker 5: shed ourselves of that. But we don't need deception, like
Speaker 5: Israel doesn't need deception.
Speaker 7: It has.
Speaker 5: A massive firepower advantage over Iran, and especially when the
Speaker 5: US is included, it's just overwhelming. Like this idea that
Speaker 5: like the US and Israel are some kind of plucky
Speaker 5: underdogs that needed to be super clever to defeat this
Speaker 5: gigantic military force is absurd on its face.
Speaker 2: Sager sends a DM that says Tel Aviv confirms their
Speaker 2: pride parade today is canceled. So just update there, important
Speaker 2: update there I was looking for. Let me pull up
Speaker 2: this thing that was reposted from jd Vance something he
Speaker 2: said a year ago, and get your reaction to this.
Speaker 2: And then, by the way, guys, there's other big news.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is monumental and blows everything else out
Speaker 2: of the water, obviously in terms of US involvement and
Speaker 2: where this all goes from here. There is other significant
Speaker 2: news that we're going to cover as well. This senator
Speaker 2: who was rustled to the ground and handcuffed, and there's
Speaker 2: a court decision with regard to the deployment of the
Speaker 2: National Guard. So a bunch of other things that we're
Speaker 2: going to get to here as well. But just to
Speaker 2: wrap up on that, ione Er would love to get
Speaker 2: your reflections Ryan on something that jd Vance said a
Speaker 2: year ago. He said, I'm very worried about Israel, worried
Speaker 2: about it as a country because I think what's happened
Speaker 2: the last couple months is revealed deep fishers in Israel's
Speaker 2: support around the world. A more short term worry I
Speaker 2: have with Israel, something analogous to what happened after nine
Speaker 2: to eleven will happen.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: You get all this bullshitting about how the deep state
Speaker 2: misled Bush about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or
Speaker 2: maybe Bush misled himself, or maybe Cheney misled him. There
Speaker 2: are all these series you read about why we invaded Iraq,
Speaker 2: But when you think back on it, the most important
Speaker 2: reason we invaded i Roq was social psychology. Afghanistan was
Speaker 2: too easy, September eleventh was too bad, and we needed
Speaker 2: to fuck something else up. That was just like this
Speaker 2: need to fuck something else up, and Afghanistan didn't satisfy
Speaker 2: that need. And I worry about that with Israel. I
Speaker 2: think the Hamas thing. Obviously, there are a lot of
Speaker 2: civilians who have died, but Israel expects to lose more
Speaker 2: troops going into this. I think they've had a more
Speaker 2: successful military operation than they expected to. And if I
Speaker 2: have a big fear for Israel right now, it's about
Speaker 2: the same exact dynamic that they're going to need to
Speaker 2: try to fuck something else up because the psychology impact
Speaker 2: of October seventh was so so powerful. And I guess
Speaker 2: what I would say to that. I mean, first of all,
Speaker 2: the fact that you had these JD vans and these
Speaker 2: supposedly non interventionist voices within the Trump administration didn't end
Speaker 2: up mattering one bit. I think there was a prelude
Speaker 2: to that when we saw inside the signal chats and
Speaker 2: how quickly everyone who was supposed to be in the
Speaker 2: non interventionist side just immediately folded. When Stephen Miller comes
Speaker 2: in and is like big guy, says we Mom and
Speaker 2: Yemen and they're like, okay, cool, go America USA. Here's
Speaker 2: my American flag emoji, fifth pound, etc. Like that was
Speaker 2: kind of, you know, an indication of where things are
Speaker 2: going to head. But you know, in a sense, yes,
Speaker 2: Israel has been able to bomb Gaza, to smithereens and
Speaker 2: murder God only knows how many civilians. I just saw
Speaker 2: a report yesterday that it maybe four hundred thousand Palestinians
Speaker 2: and Gaza who were killed by Israel, but there are
Speaker 2: no there is there's no amount of bombs that actually
Speaker 2: solves their problem, like they still Hamas is still there,
Speaker 2: Hamas is still in control. So in a sense, yes,
Speaker 2: they're successful at blowing shit up, but in terms of
Speaker 2: actually you know, creating some sort of lasting peace, they there.
Speaker 2: It's an utter, incomplete failure.
Speaker 5: Yes, and I think that Jade Vance's fear is well
Speaker 5: founded and born out here. The only thing I would
Speaker 5: add is that if you remember, and some of our
Speaker 5: younger audience won't, but those who lived through it can
Speaker 5: never forget the feeling, the blood curdling rage that was
Speaker 5: coursing through the American public after nine to eleven is
Speaker 5: unlike anything that has happened before since. But presumably, you
Speaker 5: know Pearl Harbor, I think if you read people talking
Speaker 5: about the moments after that that was that was probably
Speaker 5: maybe similar. Yeah, that faded after a period of a
Speaker 5: couple months. Like you kind of remember, the Baltimore Sun
Speaker 5: had an American flag they sent they sent an American
Speaker 5: flag out to everyone in the newspaper and everyone put
Speaker 5: the American flag cut out of the newspaper onto their window.
Speaker 5: And as that newspaper was withering, like two months later,
Speaker 5: people were kind of calming back down again, but there
Speaker 5: was still enough energy for the politicians to use it
Speaker 5: to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the
Speaker 5: public blood had moved down to a simmer and then
Speaker 5: back to room temperature. Israel's blood is still boiling. All
Speaker 5: of thee you can read, you can read their posts,
Speaker 5: or you can look at any poll and just squint
Speaker 5: at it and be like, I'm sorry, they seventy nine
Speaker 5: percent of people do say they would support what that's
Speaker 5: important like, So that's the you know, you know, what
Speaker 5: we were able to accomplish was just a few months
Speaker 5: of blood boiling rage. What hour you know, imperial leaders
Speaker 5: were able to accomplish imagine if they have gotten that
Speaker 5: boil on the stove for We're now going into the
Speaker 5: third you know, we're in the third year of this,
Speaker 5: so that with no with no end in sight. So
Speaker 5: this is anybody's guess. How that how this ends?
Speaker 2: So before we move on, I mean, how do you
Speaker 2: think this ends? Like what happens now? What does this
Speaker 2: look like?
Speaker 5: I mean a lot depends on you know what, you know,
Speaker 5: how how Iran responds, what and what that response looks like?
Speaker 6: Is it.
Speaker 5: Do they you know, and how effectively they have been
Speaker 5: neutered for now it does? It does seem like it
Speaker 5: would heighten Israel's isolation, but a lot could change depending
Speaker 5: on you know what what the Iranian response is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, responsible, Yeah, I mean, unfortunately, I'm not convinced that
Speaker 2: it heightens Israel's isolation. In the short term, because all
Speaker 2: of these Western countries, at least, you know, France, which
Speaker 2: had been some of these European countries that had been
Speaker 2: starting to make some noises about being unhappy what was
Speaker 2: happening in Gaza. You know, France is down immediately with
Speaker 2: the Israel has a right to defend itself blah blah
Speaker 2: blah kind of a statement. So in a sense, because
Speaker 2: Iran is such an official bad guy with Western nations,
Speaker 2: you know, in a sense, I think these attacks shore
Speaker 2: up Israel support in the West. You know, certainly with
Speaker 2: the Trump administration, they're all on board with it. You'll
Speaker 2: hear Marjorie Taylor Green will say something, but that'll be
Speaker 2: about it. On the Republican side, mostly Rand Paul, Marjori
Speaker 2: Taylor Green, you get a handful of voices, but mostly
Speaker 2: they're going to be all in for this. They're going
Speaker 2: to be all on board. The Mark Levin talking points
Speaker 2: about how this is amazing and glorious and brilliant and
Speaker 2: wonderful and going to be the greatest thing for all
Speaker 2: of us, even as we hurtle towards you know, potential
Speaker 2: massive regional war.
Speaker 5: And the other point Moz made, which is obvious but
Speaker 5: worth underscoring last night is that Iran is ten times bigger,
Speaker 5: and you know, you know, maybe they you know, uh
Speaker 5: knocked backwards their ballistic missile production, but they're making fifty
Speaker 5: missiles a month. They have a stockpile of three thousand.
Speaker 5: A war of attrition between a country that is a
Speaker 5: tenth of its size, it isn't necessarily going to go well,
Speaker 5: even if you have long term you know, even if
Speaker 5: you have the United States backing you to the hill
Speaker 5: like long we're a mess, like and we're a mess,
Speaker 5: like how long are we going to keep? Are we
Speaker 5: going to really keep sending endless amounts? We're running out
Speaker 5: of magnatum. I mean, we haven't make our own.
Speaker 7: We can't run our own.
Speaker 2: Make ours we I mean, how is our endless support
Speaker 2: of Ukraine? Has that been enough for them to push
Speaker 2: back Russia? Which is a country that I don't know,
Speaker 2: is it ten times? It's probably about similar maths in
Speaker 2: terms of you know, size differential.
Speaker 5: China had a delightful time testing all its China arms,
Speaker 5: a lot of the Pakistani military and they had a
Speaker 5: delightful time watching Pakistan, you know, go toe to toe
Speaker 5: with India, with Chinese weapons.
Speaker 7: Uh. You know, I'm sure China be happy to keep this,
Speaker 7: keep this uh absolutely.
Speaker 5: Running war going for the precise same logic that we
Speaker 5: would love to keep the Ukraine War going to tie
Speaker 5: up Russia and drain Instead of draining Russia, we helped,
Speaker 5: you know, rebuild their industrial capacity, whereas we actually are
Speaker 5: getting drained because we don't have the capacity to build anything.
Speaker 2: Yeah, China would love to continue to invest in their
Speaker 2: society and developing research and you know, uh leap frogging.
Speaker 7: Paths and missiles, the high.
Speaker 2: Tech development and you know, use development for the ice
Speaker 2: that the chart that you shared about how the bottom
Speaker 2: fifty percent in China per capita is actually doing better
Speaker 2: than the bottom fifty percent in this country. So they'd
Speaker 2: love to continue in that direction while we get ourselves
Speaker 2: tied up in another Yeah, yet another.
Speaker 5: The whole and the whole reason, the whole reason Obama
Speaker 5: wanted to do the peace deal was his He and
Speaker 5: all of like the blob, entire blob in Washington has
Speaker 5: been saying, pivot to Asia, Pivot to Asia, Pivot to Asia, like,
Speaker 5: wrap up this starting wars in the Middle East. It's
Speaker 5: it's bad for us strategically, versus China. China agrees that
Speaker 5: is good for them, bad for us. So we're going
Speaker 5: to wrap that up. We're going to move over focus
Speaker 5: over here. And I guess luckily for Asia that hasn't.
Speaker 5: We haven't been able to educate ourselves because where we
Speaker 5: decide to focus means that's where there's going to be
Speaker 5: the most you know, killing and chaos. So, yeah, if
Speaker 5: I were Asia and I heard that the country that
Speaker 5: was just focused for the last fifty years on the
Speaker 5: Middle East is now going to focus on us, like,
Speaker 5: oh boy.
Speaker 2: Thanks, yeah, new Chinese century, this may seale the deal.
Speaker 2: Truly really may seale the deal. Let's go ahead and
Speaker 2: move to the story that would have been the top
Speaker 2: news story and now seems kind of trivial in comparison,
Speaker 2: but still important. We want to cover it, which is
Speaker 2: this United States Senator from California, Alex Padia. He's the
Speaker 2: one he got elected when Diane Feinstein died, Is that right, Ryan,
Speaker 2: That's who, that's where when he gets elected. Yeah, So
Speaker 2: what happens here is he's in la he is in
Speaker 2: the federal building that has been the center of the
Speaker 2: protests and all of the action, and where the national
Speaker 2: guard have been hanging out and all of this sort
Speaker 2: of stuff. So he's in the building for a briefing
Speaker 2: about what is going on there, and he learns that
Speaker 2: a couple doors down, Christinome is giving a press conference.
Speaker 2: So he decides, I'm going to go in and I'm
Speaker 2: going to watch this press conference, and I'm going to
Speaker 2: try to assert myself and get a question answered, because,
Speaker 2: by the way, I've been trying to get some answers
Speaker 2: from Dajas and they completely stonewall and I don't get
Speaker 2: anything from them. And so a scene unfolds where he
Speaker 2: ends up getting forcibly removed by the whatever government thugs
Speaker 2: happened to be there. I don't have their FBI or
Speaker 2: what agency particular they're with, and then wrestle to the
Speaker 2: ground and handcuffed. Truly extraordinary scenes. Let me go ahead
Speaker 2: and play this is the I think this is the
Speaker 2: fullest video that I've seen, so you can see exactly
Speaker 2: what unfolded here.
Speaker 9: Hands up, hands up, I'm Senator Alex could be a
Speaker 9: I have questions for the secretary because the fact of
Speaker 9: the matter is half a dozen criminals on your on.
Speaker 10: Your on the ground, your back on your back.
Speaker 6: You right behind my back. Flat other other hand, there's
Speaker 6: no recording loud. I didn't recording a loud, right, but
Speaker 6: what I'm sorry, there's no recording. That's my boss has.
Speaker 10: Record.
Speaker 6: I'm not remember there's no recording. I understand that.
Speaker 2: No recording allowed on here by their public press conference, right.
Speaker 5: Outside the press conference. And yeah, I've seen it's that's
Speaker 5: it's such a scary, scary footage and it's very it's
Speaker 5: one of these classic police moves where you're giving the guy.
Speaker 5: You're giving the guy contradictory information, and so many people
Speaker 5: have been killed because one cop is yelling, you know,
Speaker 5: put your hands up, and the other cop is yelling
Speaker 5: don't move, yeah, and you'd come here, come there, and
Speaker 5: the guy doesn't know what to do, and then they
Speaker 5: just shoot him. In this case, they've got him down
Speaker 5: on his knees and they're pushing him towards the ground
Speaker 5: and also telling him to put his hands behind his.
Speaker 2: Back, behind his back, right.
Speaker 5: Which would very obviously lead his face to smash into
Speaker 5: the floor, right. And so he says like old on,
Speaker 5: let me let me get like stop, and so he
Speaker 5: puts his hands down. Now they think he's like resisting
Speaker 5: He's like, no, you just that was the only option
Speaker 5: you gave him, and then they man handle him further.
Speaker 7: He'd get his hands behind his back.
Speaker 5: Apparently what Crystal, what they said, they they didn't realize
Speaker 5: he was a senator. In the video, you hear him say,
Speaker 5: I'm Senator Alex Padia, and I have a question about
Speaker 5: he said violent criminals.
Speaker 2: They said he lunched towards her and did not identify himself.
Speaker 2: And by the way, in the in the post on
Speaker 2: Twitter where they say that they included the video and
Speaker 2: in the first two seconds, you hear him say, I'm
Speaker 2: Senator Alexpidihi from California. So I mean, it's just like
Speaker 2: they they expect us to just accept their lives even
Speaker 2: when they themselves are providing the evidence that their narrative
Speaker 2: of what happened is blatantly false, like in the first
Speaker 2: like two seconds of the video is provably false.
Speaker 5: That's become a new phenomenon I've noticed on social media
Speaker 5: that and this is these are in government sources that
Speaker 5: are doing this. You write, you write a statement and
Speaker 5: then the video you put under it contradicts what you
Speaker 5: just wrote and you but it doesn't matter. You're like
Speaker 5: I'm just I'm just gonna say it. Sometimes misquote.
Speaker 2: Assume people won't watch the video, and so they'll just
Speaker 2: take it for granted. I mean, it used to be
Speaker 2: that they'd at least have the you know, the the
Speaker 2: endity to falsely edit out the part that was inconvenient
Speaker 2: for them and like put together some clip mishmash to
Speaker 2: try to make it seem like it actually happened the
Speaker 2: way they're saying it is. Now that I even bother
Speaker 2: with that. They just lie in the post and just
Speaker 2: hope that you don't actually watch the video, or if
Speaker 2: you do, you're so partisan, brain addled that you can't
Speaker 2: see through the fact that their post and the video
Speaker 2: doesn't line up whatsoever.
Speaker 5: Yeah, maybe what they meant was we didn't believe that
Speaker 5: he was a senator or they did. And this is
Speaker 5: what they're doing, Like they don't care, like they they have.
Speaker 5: They have a an unpopular agenda that they're that they're
Speaker 5: planning to ram through and you're going to have to
Speaker 5: do that through force.
Speaker 2: Well, and you have already you know, you had the
Speaker 2: sort of chaos that unfolded in Newark when Mayor Ross
Speaker 2: Baraka was there with several members of Congress, and they
Speaker 2: they go to the members of Congress were at this
Speaker 2: facility as a federal facility the city, by the way,
Speaker 2: re Juxas says, it's not permitted properly, like they're in
Speaker 2: court over the presence of this facility at all. So
Speaker 2: it's disputed. To start with, there's members of Congress who
Speaker 2: are there to provide oversight, which they have the legal
Speaker 2: right to do based on a law that was passed
Speaker 2: I think during Trump's first administration. And then the mayor
Speaker 2: is there as well, trying to also gain access. They
Speaker 2: tell him okay, well you can't go in, so he leaves,
Speaker 2: and then they arrest him, and it leads to there's
Speaker 2: protesters onside. LA's chaotic scene and now not only they
Speaker 2: arrest him, then ultimately they say we can't really charge you.
Speaker 2: They drop the charges because there's no they're there with
Speaker 2: regard to him, but they've now charged one of the
Speaker 2: congresswomen who was there, represided to MacIvor is that her name, Lamonica?
Speaker 2: I think that's right, and with charges that could result
Speaker 2: in seventeen years in prison. So you know, when you ask, okay,
Speaker 2: well was this intention? Did they just not believe that
Speaker 2: he's the United States senator because his skin tone wasn't
Speaker 2: the right hue or for whatever reason. You know, you
Speaker 2: have to think about it in the context of everything
Speaker 2: else that they're doing, which is brazen lee you know,
Speaker 2: strong man authoritarian, fascist tactics. You have the National Guard deployed,
Speaker 2: you have the freaking Marines deployed, Like this is insanity
Speaker 2: for some pretty run of the mill protests that spanned
Speaker 2: a few city blocks. Okay, they're threatening the deployment of
Speaker 2: troops acted duty military troops in cities across the country.
Speaker 7: True, true, Yeah, shifts and giggles like yeah.
Speaker 2: Trump is throwing himself a birthday party military parade, and
Speaker 2: he says any protesters there will be met with force.
Speaker 2: Not violent protesters, not rioters. Protesters will be met with force. So,
Speaker 2: you know, if it was a different administration that did
Speaker 2: not have all of this track record of things that
Speaker 2: are happening, I'm just talking about the last week. Those
Speaker 2: are things that all happened this week. If it was
Speaker 2: a different administration, maybe because maybe it was a mix up,
Speaker 2: maybe they really didn't think it was a senator. Maybe
Speaker 2: you know, they you know, the FBI or whoever was
Speaker 2: there guarding her. Maybe they really did think that this
Speaker 2: was some sort of a public safety threat, even though
Speaker 2: again you're inside of a federal building wherever you could
Speaker 2: search for weapons before you even go in. Maybe, but
Speaker 2: there is no reason to give these people any benefit
Speaker 2: of the doubt when this is part and parcel and
Speaker 2: entirely consistent with the authoritarian strong man tactics that they've
Speaker 2: been deploying again and again and again. I have the
Speaker 2: statement from Senator of Padilla, his explanation of what he
Speaker 2: was trying to accomplish and how this all went down.
Speaker 2: Let's go ahead and take a listen to him, and
Speaker 2: then I can put up the DHS statement as well
Speaker 2: to give their side of the story.
Speaker 8: Good After everybody of center out, you guys have some questions,
Speaker 8: I'm going to read a brief statement. I will not
Speaker 8: be taking questions, but allow me to read my statements.
Speaker 8: I'm here in Los Angeles today, and I was here
Speaker 8: in the Federal building in the conference room awaiting a
Speaker 8: scheduled briefing from federal officials as part of my responsibility
Speaker 8: as a senator to provide oversight and accountability. While I
Speaker 8: was waiting for the briefing, with General Guillot, I learned
Speaker 8: that Secretary of None was having a press conference a
Speaker 8: couple of words down the hall. Since the beginning of
Speaker 8: the year, but especially over the course of the last
Speaker 8: over the course of recent weeks, I several of my
Speaker 8: colleagues have been asking the Apartment of Home od Security
Speaker 8: for more information and more answers on their increasingly extreme
Speaker 8: immigration enforcement actions. And we've gotten little to no information
Speaker 8: in response to our inquiries. And so I came to
Speaker 8: the press conference to hear what she had to say,
Speaker 8: to see if I could learn any new additional information.
Speaker 6: And at one point I had.
Speaker 8: A question, and I'm emphasized, just as we emphasized the
Speaker 8: right for people to peacefully protest and to stand up
Speaker 8: for their First Amendment rights, for our fundamental rights. I
Speaker 8: was there peacefully. At one point I had a question,
Speaker 8: and so I began to ask a question. I was
Speaker 8: almost immediately forcibly removed from the room. I was forced
Speaker 8: to the ground, and I was handcuffed. I was not arrested,
Speaker 8: I was not detained. I will say this, if this
Speaker 8: is how this administration responds to a senator with a question,
Speaker 8: If this is how the Department of Homeland Security responds
Speaker 8: to a senator with a question, you can only imagine what.
Speaker 11: They're doing to farm workers, to cooks, to day labors
Speaker 11: out in the Los Angeles community and throughout California and
Speaker 11: throughout the country.
Speaker 8: We will hold this administration accountable and we'll have more
Speaker 8: to say. We'll have more to say in the coming days.
Speaker 2: I think that last point is the most important one, Ryan, Like,
Speaker 2: if this is how you're treating the US senator, just
Speaker 2: imagine if you're a defenseless, nobody farm worker, dai labor mom,
Speaker 2: student who dares to ride it up at like, just
Speaker 2: imagine the way that people who don't have the ability
Speaker 2: to go in front of a camera and tell their story.
Speaker 2: Just imagine how they're being treated.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's it's really well said. And you know, we
Speaker 5: don't have to totally imagine. There are the reports that
Speaker 5: are coming out of the way that migrants and attention
Speaker 5: are being treated.
Speaker 2: Well, and some of it is Apparently even Trump felt
Speaker 2: the need to put on a statement saying like Steven
Speaker 2: m's going too far effectively, although he then quickly walked that.
Speaker 7: Back, right.
Speaker 5: You know, he was saying yes because it was going
Speaker 5: after the farm workers and hotel employees.
Speaker 7: And you know, I.
Speaker 5: Think Trump probably if you act, actually got him in
Speaker 5: an honest moment, doesn't have a problem with does doesn't
Speaker 5: want to round up everybody that works on farms and
Speaker 5: in hotels. I think that's probably pretty obvious. I think
Speaker 5: probably most of his you know, probably a lot of
Speaker 5: workers at his properties would get round up.
Speaker 7: Yep.
Speaker 5: So that seemed more like an honest moment, whereas the
Speaker 5: rest of it is kind of dishonest. But yeah, at
Speaker 5: the conditions that they're keeping people in no food, no
Speaker 5: water for long stretches, very very long stretches, keeping people
Speaker 5: in pitch dark.
Speaker 2: That's part of what sparked these protests. They were keeping
Speaker 2: in the federal building in the basement. They were holding
Speaker 2: immigrants that they that they detain, including you know, families
Speaker 2: with limited in spaces that are not meant to be
Speaker 2: you know, detention facilities, so very limited food, limited water, light,
Speaker 2: pitch black. Lights went off I think at five pm,
Speaker 2: and then you're just sitting there and pitch black. They're
Speaker 2: talking about family kids. I mean, yeah, that was part
Speaker 2: of what sparked the protests in LA to begin with that,
Speaker 2: and then the you know, the roundups at home depot
Speaker 2: and this one garment manufacturer as well were what kicked
Speaker 2: off these protests. And then, according to the reporting from
Speaker 2: the LA Times, protests start off, you know, just obviously
Speaker 2: upset but peaceful, and then the cops start throwing you know,
Speaker 2: spring to your gas and throwing flash bang grenades, and
Speaker 2: that's when you know, the more violent behavior kicks off.
Speaker 2: This is often the case started by the cops. I
Speaker 2: wanted to show you this is the DHS statement that
Speaker 2: we're referring to before center of Padilla shows disrespectful political
Speaker 2: theater again, Christy, No, I'm talking about political theater. Be
Speaker 2: so for real right now anyway, and interrupted a live
Speaker 2: press conference without identifying himself. That's the part that's like
Speaker 2: in this video right here he identifies himself or having
Speaker 2: a Senate Security pin on. As he lunged towards Secretary
Speaker 2: Nome Padia was told repeatedly to back away, did not
Speaker 2: comply with officers repeated commands. That gets to what you
Speaker 2: were saying, Ryan about how they give these conflicting commands,
Speaker 2: that that's impossible to comply with. Secret Service thought he
Speaker 2: was an attacker. Officers acted appropriately. Secretary of Noam met
Speaker 2: with Senator Padea after and held a fifteen minute meeting.
Speaker 2: And you know, it's interesting, like I think that this
Speaker 2: is I think the footage is very disturbing. I think
Speaker 2: people should be upset and disturbed by it. It's also
Speaker 2: interesting Ryan the things that really get to democratic elected officials.
Speaker 2: They've been kind of quiet about the military being unleashed
Speaker 2: against US citizens in LA. They've been kind of quiet
Speaker 2: about Trump green lighting Israel starting World War three. They
Speaker 2: have not been quiet about one of their colleagues getting
Speaker 2: arrested in this manner. And again, I don't want to
Speaker 2: downplay it, but it is just interesting to me that
Speaker 2: suddenly this is the thing that they were like, oh shit,
Speaker 2: this hits close to home. They did a you know,
Speaker 2: they I think Schumer immediately, you know, made some statement
Speaker 2: on the floor. They did a march to Senatra Foon's office.
Speaker 2: They've you know, certainly all been putting out statements, et cetera.
Speaker 2: Like they are very exercised. They're getting up off their
Speaker 2: asses for this one.
Speaker 5: And as Dave Dan pointed out, when Schumer took to
Speaker 5: the floor and asked unanimous consent for a moment to
Speaker 5: make to make that comment. What he was interrupting was
Speaker 5: a bipartisan you know, uh tongue bath for the crypto
Speaker 5: industry's like Schumer was in the middle of empowering all
Speaker 5: of the crypto allies of the Trump administration when he
Speaker 5: when he took a moment to condemn them for man
Speaker 5: handling Padilla.
Speaker 2: Two perfect too perfect and crypto speech over.
Speaker 7: We can go back to the crypto.
Speaker 2: Right, I go back over to like letting scammers fleece
Speaker 2: the American people and enrich are correct in the white
Speaker 2: and to destabilize the global financial system. Let's get back
Speaker 2: to that bipartisan work that we were doing previously. Yeah,
Speaker 2: so it says a lot, doesn't it. Yeah, let me
Speaker 2: go ahead and show you this piece which is so understandably,
Speaker 2: most of the attention is focused on the DIA, what
Speaker 2: he's doing, the arrests, you know, and being rustled to
Speaker 2: the ground, et cetera, by the way, charge him or anything.
Speaker 2: So that's good at least, which I would not have
Speaker 2: put past them whatsoever. I guess even they realized that
Speaker 2: might be a bridge too far. But it's worth taking
Speaker 2: a listen to what Christy Noam was actually saying in
Speaker 2: that press conference. So let me go ahead and pull
Speaker 2: this up. I'll read the caption and we can actually
Speaker 2: play the sound as well. But this person, Jason Kirk,
Speaker 2: is pointing out before they dragged out Padilla, Noam said,
Speaker 2: we are staying here in La to liberate the city
Speaker 2: from the socialists and the burden some leadership that the
Speaker 2: guy and this mayor have placed on this country. And
Speaker 2: he opines accurately, so sounds close to declaring a regime
Speaker 2: change attempt on millions of Americans here. You can go
Speaker 2: ahead and listen to her deliver those lines.
Speaker 12: Dane, and increase our operations in this city. We are
Speaker 12: not going away. We are staying here to liberate the
Speaker 12: city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this
Speaker 12: governor and that this mayor have placed on this country
Speaker 12: and what they have tried to insert.
Speaker 4: Into this city.
Speaker 12: So I want to say thank you to every single
Speaker 12: person that has been able to do this.
Speaker 2: Also I want to talk, so there you go. That's
Speaker 2: the moment she's interrupted is when she's announcing effectively a
Speaker 2: regime change operation in La, which, as far as I know,
Speaker 2: I mean, this has been quiet for a couple of days.
Speaker 2: Now they don't even have enough like they're there to
Speaker 2: get their riot porn images to play on a loop
Speaker 2: and Fox News, which is why I guess they were
Speaker 2: playing these images from Las Vegas which were just protesters
Speaker 2: like standing there facing off with the cops.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's interesting that they aren't aren't even getting kind
Speaker 5: of the war that they wanted the right they see,
Speaker 5: they provoked some you know way mow car burning, sent
Speaker 5: in the National Guard, then then sent in the Marines.
Speaker 5: I think hoping that they would get like another George
Speaker 5: Floyd uh moment where you know, people pour out into
Speaker 5: the streets of every city and like they're not you know,
Speaker 5: they're going to be continue to be protest, but they're
Speaker 5: not getting And maybe maybe it's so transparent that that
Speaker 5: it's what they want that a lot of people are
Speaker 5: just like, I'm not gonna I'm not going to give
Speaker 5: you what you want.
Speaker 2: What do you think of We've got these no Kings,
Speaker 2: no King protests that are happening, uh this weekend. These
Speaker 2: were pre planned Trump, as I referenced before, said protest,
Speaker 2: any protesters of his military parade are going to be
Speaker 2: met with force. Uh you know, what do you what
Speaker 2: do you expect unfold there. What do you think the
Speaker 2: significance is. I have to say, I think the branding
Speaker 2: is good, like fits with certainly, Yeah, fits with the
Speaker 2: moment certainly, and plays into like you know, there was
Speaker 2: all this criticism of like the Mexican flags. This is
Speaker 2: a deeply American sentiment. Listen, this is America. We don't
Speaker 2: have kings. So I think everybody can give them the
Speaker 2: the opjects seal of approval on this one.
Speaker 5: And they're not going to be in Washington, d C.
Speaker 5: You know, some some people may organically protest Trump's it's
Speaker 5: like a two block parade that he's having. But in general,
Speaker 5: the protests, the process organizers have said, let's, you know,
Speaker 5: protest everywhere except.
Speaker 7: Washington, d C.
Speaker 5: They don't want, you know, they don't want the conflict
Speaker 5: with the military there.
Speaker 7: It could be it could be quite.
Speaker 5: Large, you know. I you know, if you know, if
Speaker 5: you're watching this video, let us know down in the comments,
Speaker 5: like but if you're going But I my sense is
Speaker 5: that you could get enormous numbers of people coming out
Speaker 5: in the streets.
Speaker 2: I mean, the Trump administration is certainly giving them lots
Speaker 2: of incentive to go out right now just in this week,
Speaker 2: you know, provoking a large and emotional response, understandably, So
Speaker 2: I thought this was interesting. You know, in terms of
Speaker 2: the polling that we've seen so far, we've got a
Speaker 2: Washington Post pull on immigration enforcement. Let me put this
Speaker 2: up on the screen. I also saw when we would
Speaker 2: put up in just a second about the way the
Speaker 2: like places where his approval rating have declined the times
Speaker 2: during his administration. So you've got de approve of the
Speaker 2: trumpet how Trump is handling immigration enforcement, including deportations. According
Speaker 2: to this bowl, take it for what it is worth,
Speaker 2: disapprove is now fifty two percent. So even on this
Speaker 2: issue that's supposed to be his best issue, fifty two
Speaker 2: percent disapproved, thirty seven percent approve, and twelve percent are unsure.
Speaker 2: Do you support or oppose the protest in LA against
Speaker 2: federal government's immigration enforcement opposes forty percent, Support is thirty
Speaker 2: nine percent, pretty you know, much along partisan lines oftentimes, Ryan,
Speaker 2: I feel like people don't like protesters, even when they
Speaker 2: support the things that they.
Speaker 5: Are protests, especially if they especially if they see cars burning, right, yeah,
Speaker 5: once they see flames, people are like, eh.
Speaker 2: I'm out, yeah, completely, let me just hold on, Let
Speaker 2: me give me a second and let me pull up
Speaker 2: this other poll that I just saw this morning. Someone
Speaker 2: had marked up where Trump's approval rating had fallen off
Speaker 2: most quickly, and it was like, here we go. It
Speaker 2: was like when the Trump administration defied the court on
Speaker 2: Kilmara Brego Garcia. And right now there's been a significant
Speaker 2: decline over the past last week. So you've got the
Speaker 2: Trump administration defies Supreme Court on a Brego Garcia. You
Speaker 2: can see that his approval, you know, is, let's see
Speaker 2: approval declines, and then he was actually building back up
Speaker 2: here and then he deploys the National Guard in Los
Speaker 2: Angeles and it falls again. Now you know, you could say, Okay,
Speaker 2: maybe these polls are maybe there's not enough polling, maybe
Speaker 2: these poles aren't correct, etc. But I've seen enough at
Speaker 2: this point, certainly on the kilmar A Brego Garcia piece, Ryan,
Speaker 2: that I am quite convinced that fight was really bad
Speaker 2: for the Trump administration. And I think we know that,
Speaker 2: especially at this point, because he backed down and brought
Speaker 2: him back and realized that between the court pressure and
Speaker 2: the public pressure, this was not going well for him.
Speaker 2: And I think you see some similar indications of that
Speaker 2: with regard to the deploying of the National Guard in
Speaker 2: la I mean, first of all, like you said, he's
Speaker 2: not getting the scenes that he wanted out of that
Speaker 2: and thought be so great. But the fact that he
Speaker 2: put out that post yesterday, which I can pull up
Speaker 2: here in a second, where he's basically like, oh, we
Speaker 2: don't want hard working people being pulled down of the
Speaker 2: country or sent out of the country, and the you know,
Speaker 2: for the farmers and for the hotel workers, et cetera.
Speaker 2: That also was an indication to me that he did
Speaker 2: not feel like this aggressive, visible crackdown that Stephen Miller
Speaker 2: demanded where he said, stop going after the criminals and
Speaker 2: go to the home depots in the seven eleven, that
Speaker 2: he didn't feel like the optics of this were working
Speaker 2: out for him in the way that Stephen Miller had projected.
Speaker 5: Right, He's he and Steven Miller are different. Stephen Miller
Speaker 5: is a revolutionary who has an ideological vision for the
Speaker 5: revolution that he's trying to carry out. Yeah, it's exactly
Speaker 5: what Trump says, right.
Speaker 2: I mean, Stephen Miller is a white nationalist. He thinks
Speaker 2: that anyone is brown, you're illegitimately and not just by
Speaker 2: the way, undocumented immigrants, Like, that's what all of these
Speaker 2: efforts to rescind legal status to hundreds of thousands of immigrants,
Speaker 2: that's what that's about. So it's not about illegal immigrants.
Speaker 2: They're taking legal immigrants and making them illegal so they
Speaker 2: can have pretext to support as many people as possible.
Speaker 2: And then you also had you know, this strange I
Speaker 2: guess not that strange moment from a bunch of right
Speaker 2: wing influencers like Charlie Kirk and I think is Jack
Speaker 2: Pisoba and a camera. There's one other where they all
Speaker 2: started putting out the same message about how we need
Speaker 2: zero migration in from what they described as third world countries,
Speaker 2: like just making it as plain as possible that you know,
Speaker 2: we want a white ethno state, and so if you
Speaker 2: come from a country where we deem you know, the
Speaker 2: melanin shade to not be correct, then you are no
Speaker 2: longer allowed to come here.
Speaker 5: Right, And we need to double the number of medical
Speaker 5: schools and nursing schools, which we should do anyway, but
Speaker 5: they have no plan to do that.
Speaker 2: No, of course, not yeah, of course not yeah, what
Speaker 2: did you I mean, what did you have that same
Speaker 2: political read of the Trump Post, and then he also
Speaker 2: made some comments about the farmers and the hotel workers
Speaker 2: that he sort of felt like, this isn't really going
Speaker 2: that great because the polling. Also, if you ask people, Okay,
Speaker 2: do you want to deport violent criminals, They're like absolutely.
Speaker 2: If you ask them, do you want to deport day
Speaker 2: laborers at home depot who have been here for years
Speaker 2: and have no criminal record, it is overwhelming the level
Speaker 2: of opposition. I'm talking like seventy five percent or like
Speaker 2: why the hell would you do that?
Speaker 5: Yeah, And I think not just that Trump's to Trump's credit,
Speaker 5: he is always on the phone, like he and he's
Speaker 5: and talks to not just on the and not just
Speaker 5: with rich people. It's usually rich people on the phone,
Speaker 5: but you know, he authentically talks to a lot of
Speaker 5: people as he goes around the world, like it's one
Speaker 5: of it's his effort to stay you know, in touch
Speaker 5: with public opinion. And I'm sure that he was hearing
Speaker 5: from you know, farm you know, owners of large farms,
Speaker 5: ranch owners like others who and other you know, hotel
Speaker 5: types who were like having their businesses ruined by ice.
Speaker 5: And also and it's not just that, like the the
Speaker 5: level of fear that they have struck into the immigrant
Speaker 5: community is off the charts, like it's which is intentional,
Speaker 5: but it means that even if you don't get an
Speaker 5: Ice RAYD, you just have a lot of people just
Speaker 5: like not showing up right, showing up less. I'm sure
Speaker 5: that some non trivial number are are self deporting.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 5: And so people who rely on those workers aren't are
Speaker 5: then calling Trump and saying, bro, like what are you doing?
Speaker 5: And from Trusper scifety, he's liked Stephen were doing? Man,
Speaker 5: what about the criminals? Like, you know, they ran for
Speaker 5: years on how many murderers and rapists are running free?
Speaker 5: And you know it's embarrassing to them that they can't
Speaker 5: find them because because they manufactured.
Speaker 2: Them, because they don't.
Speaker 7: It's a storyline right right.
Speaker 2: And I think that's a big part of why they
Speaker 2: want this show of force, like rolling up with in
Speaker 2: a military you know, vehicle with a whole pay LANX,
Speaker 2: partly of militarized officers, partly plain clothes ice thugs with
Speaker 2: their face covered. Because if you have that level of
Speaker 2: show of force, it makes it feel like you're apprehending
Speaker 2: a criminal, even when you're just going after some guy
Speaker 2: who rises some flyers, as was the case in one instance,
Speaker 2: or you know, a dad who has no criminal record,
Speaker 2: or people even who've been doing exactly what they were
Speaker 2: supposed to do and going through the asylum process. But
Speaker 2: if you roll in with that kind of equipment, people
Speaker 2: just sort of assume like, oh, well, they must be
Speaker 2: going after some real super bad guy, violent criminal if
Speaker 2: you're coming in with that kind of you know, that
Speaker 2: kind of equipment and that kind of approach, using all
Speaker 2: these resources to go after just some random like mom
Speaker 2: who's not done anything wrong. But we know that's the
Speaker 2: case because we know when they sent they use military
Speaker 2: planes to fly migrants down to Guantanamo Bay, they had
Speaker 2: no criminal record. Most of them had no criminal records,
Speaker 2: or they had like you know, Jay walked effectively the
Speaker 2: people they sent a seacott vast majority of them no
Speaker 2: criminal record. And so so I think that's part of
Speaker 2: trying to create the perception since the reality that they
Speaker 2: had projected does not actually exist. Yep, all right, we'll
Speaker 2: go ahead and wrap the free portion of the show. Now, guys,
Speaker 2: this is the last day for the am I right
Speaker 2: about this. I think the promo ends today or at
Speaker 2: end of yesterday. I'm not sure. In any case, sign
Speaker 2: up today's.
Speaker 7: Last day, Get it today, hurry up.
Speaker 2: BP free, go do it now Breakingpoints dot Com. Free
Speaker 2: month trial. You get all the things Ryan doesn't have
Speaker 2: to read him zads. You guys know the pitch. So
Speaker 2: all right, we're going to go and end this portion now.
Speaker 2: For premium subscribers, we've got a court decision with regards
Speaker 2: to National Guard and Marines that's really important. I think
Speaker 2: we'll take a look at Zoron's beard situation just to
Speaker 2: have at least something that's fun in the show, and
Speaker 2: then we'll take a few questions as well. So we'll
Speaker 2: go ahead and get to that now. All right, guys,
Speaker 2: Two quick things. Number one, by popular demand, we are
Speaker 2: bringing back the monthly subscription.
Speaker 12: Number two.
Speaker 2: You can get a month free Ryan by putting in
Speaker 2: that promo code bpfree at Breakingpoints dot Com.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and I think the most important reason to become
Speaker 5: a premium subscriber is just as an active support for
Speaker 5: the show. It helps us do what we're doing. But
Speaker 5: if you're curious what the benefits are of doing it,
Speaker 5: take the free month and you'll see you get the amas,
Speaker 5: You get the second half the Friday show. You get
Speaker 5: the full show emailed to you earlier. It makes your
Speaker 5: life much better. Do it for a month at breakingpoints
Speaker 5: dot com. BP free is a promo code, and if
Speaker 5: after a month your life isn't dramatically improved, you can
Speaker 5: just cancel.
Speaker 7: If it is, it's just ten bucks a month.
Speaker 2: There you go.