Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that,
Speaker 2: let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody, Happy Monday.
Speaker 2: We have an amazing show for everybody today.
Speaker 3: What do we have, Crystal?
Speaker 1: Indeed, we do many things to get to this morning.
Speaker 1: So last week there was a star studded Biden fundraiser,
Speaker 1: three presidents, there, lots of celebrities and also a whole
Speaker 1: lot of protesters, so we will share that with you.
Speaker 1: We also have a new audio of a congressman who
Speaker 1: literally suggested to his constituents that Gaza should be nuked.
Speaker 4: Definitely want to hear that.
Speaker 1: We also have an exodus of John Fetterman communication staffers,
Speaker 1: so can only guess why they may be living his
Speaker 1: office at this point. Some explosive leaks from the Daily
Speaker 1: Wire revealing the circumstances surrounding Candice Owens firing a lot
Speaker 1: to say about that, as Ben Shapiro has been doing
Speaker 1: the rounds, doing some interviews and pretending not to talk
Speaker 1: about this, but really also talking about it.
Speaker 4: So anyway, lots of breakdown there.
Speaker 1: We've got some new updates for you on that bridge
Speaker 1: collapse and whether other bridges around the country may also
Speaker 1: be at risk, the US shipping more bunker buster bombs
Speaker 1: to Israel in the midst of all sorts of horrors
Speaker 1: unfolding there, and Morning Joe sitting quietly by as the
Speaker 1: Kafia scarf is compared to a swastika.
Speaker 4: So many things to say about all of this.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's right before we get to that though, as
Speaker 2: a reminder, we have some major upgrades coming to our
Speaker 2: premium service and there's going to be a lot of
Speaker 2: fun new features, So sign up at breakingpoints dot com.
Speaker 2: You're going to want to take advantage now, so you
Speaker 2: can be the first to find out and you can
Speaker 2: get the rollout and all of that. So we've got
Speaker 2: the discount that continues breakingpoints dot com if you want
Speaker 2: to take advantage. But as we mentioned, there was a
Speaker 2: blockbuster event in the city of New York. Three presidents
Speaker 2: current President Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama all
Speaker 2: appearing together at a major let'sy star studded fundraiser in
Speaker 2: New York City. Let's go and put this up there
Speaker 2: on the screen. A record breaking fundraiser. They are calling
Speaker 2: it some twenty five million dollars for the Biden reelection campaign.
Speaker 3: And it was supposed to be crystal. It was supposed to.
Speaker 2: Be one of those really amazing events where the party
Speaker 2: comes together.
Speaker 3: They raised a ton of money.
Speaker 2: Stephen Colbert, who hosts a news program or what an
Speaker 2: entertainment program, bizarrely is interviewing these gentlemen that are on
Speaker 2: the stage. But very very quickly things devolved and showed
Speaker 2: some of the major fractures within the Democratic Party, including
Speaker 2: President Obama.
Speaker 3: President Obama snapping back at protesters.
Speaker 2: We have some video from the event just so you
Speaker 2: can get a little of a taste of what it
Speaker 2: looked like. If we can go ahead and play that please,
Speaker 2: so you can see these three Bill Clinton, Barack Obama,
Speaker 2: Joe Biden, all answering questions, probably hard quitting questions, of course,
Speaker 2: from Stephen Colbert. What they didn't want you to see, though,
Speaker 2: were the protesters that were interrupting the event, both inside
Speaker 2: the venue and outside the venue. President and Obama in
Speaker 2: particular taking great exception to one of these people, let's
Speaker 2: go and put this up there on the screen. They
Speaker 2: said that the fundraiser was interrupted multiple times by protesters,
Speaker 2: and Obama snapped at one of them. He says, Crystal,
Speaker 2: you can't just talk that you have to listen, and
Speaker 2: these people don't really want to listen. And we saw
Speaker 2: some of that in particular outside of the venue with
Speaker 2: some of the protesters that were yelling at many of
Speaker 2: those who were coming in, one in particular saying that
Speaker 2: they will never vote for Biden and they better enjoy Trump.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen to that.
Speaker 1: How much.
Speaker 5: Enjoy Truer?
Speaker 3: So there you go, Crystal.
Speaker 2: It was supposed to be like a major event and
Speaker 2: instead Obama's freaking out. They got interrupted at least five
Speaker 2: to six times.
Speaker 3: Nobody actually knows.
Speaker 2: There were multiple videos people being let out and handcuffs
Speaker 2: and they were screaming, humping, a good old fashioned Obama scolding,
Speaker 2: something that we haven't seen in American politics in quite
Speaker 2: some time. And I think this just illustrates that you
Speaker 2: can try all you want, you know, he can't even
Speaker 2: go to a college campus. But even at his own
Speaker 2: fundraiser where people were buying what one thousand dollars tickets
Speaker 2: and all this crazy stuff with Stephen Colbert, they cannot
Speaker 2: control outbreak of outrage, in particular amongst a lot of
Speaker 2: the people who previously supported President Biden. A lot of
Speaker 2: this over the Israel policy right now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, you'll recall that they went to great lengths
Speaker 1: to try to make sure that protesters could not get
Speaker 1: into this event. That included by lifting the price of admission,
Speaker 1: thinking that all, well, the protesters perhaps won't have the
Speaker 1: money to be able to get inside. There were reports
Speaker 1: that they were using a third party organization in an
Speaker 1: attempt to vet everyone who would be in the building.
Speaker 1: This is where the Democratic Party is right now. I
Speaker 1: think it was doctor Tree de Parsi and probably many
Speaker 1: others on Twitter who pointed out, listen, this is just
Speaker 1: a little taste of what the DNC.
Speaker 4: Is going to look at.
Speaker 1: Yes, that's a great point, because you also had the
Speaker 1: police in New York who were going great lengths to
Speaker 1: keep the protesters far away from This happened at Radio
Speaker 1: City Music Hall, but there was some great footage including
Speaker 1: the part that we just showed of these rich liberals
Speaker 1: walking on of these fundraisers and you know, I'm sure
Speaker 1: they think of themselves as very progressive, great humanitarians, etc.
Speaker 1: And having to be confronted with these protesters who are saying,
Speaker 1: you're literally supporting someone who's aiding and a betting and genocide, Like,
Speaker 1: how can you live with yourself? What about these kids
Speaker 1: who were being massacred by the thousands?
Speaker 4: What about them? And so to see them have.
Speaker 1: To walk through this gauntlet of protesters listen, does it
Speaker 1: in the end make a difference.
Speaker 4: I have no idea.
Speaker 1: We know that this administration has felt enough pressure from
Speaker 1: the poll numbers and the protesters and the uncommitted vote, etc.
Speaker 1: To at least rhetorically change. It was a you know,
Speaker 1: sort of watershed rhetorical shift when Chuck Schumer had to
Speaker 1: give that speech thing that the Netanyahu government is one
Speaker 1: of the key obstacles to peace and calling for a
Speaker 1: new government, and as Professor Norman Finkelstein points out as well,
Speaker 1: having to actually rebut and deal with the charge that
Speaker 1: Israel Israel is itself a settler colonial state. Now, previously
Speaker 1: those kind of comments would just be dismissed as anti Semitism.
Speaker 1: Now they're having to actually grapple with and address those
Speaker 1: sorts of questions. So there's no doubt there's been a
Speaker 1: huge Overton window shift. There's no doubt they have felt
Speaker 1: some sort of pressure, and it's incredibly heartening to me
Speaker 1: that they know they can't go anywhere without having to
Speaker 1: face these types of questions. With regards to Obama, as
Speaker 1: you put it, his scolding or his lecture to the
Speaker 1: protester that was there, there's an account on Twitter by
Speaker 1: the handle doctor Hannah Ryan who claims to have been
Speaker 1: this protester. She says, I was this protester, Obama. I'm
Speaker 1: listening to the UN International Criminal Court testimony from the
Speaker 1: Palestinian journalists and civilians in side Gaza enduring a genocide.
Speaker 4: The question is why aren't you?
Speaker 1: And I think that's very well said, Or you could
Speaker 1: listen to the overwhelming majority of the Democratic base who
Speaker 1: is disgusted with what they see unfolding before their eyes.
Speaker 1: So when you contrast the images that came out of
Speaker 1: this fundraiser with all of these celebrities, are going to
Speaker 1: show you a little bit of Lizzo and Stephen Colbert, which,
Speaker 1: as a digression, how sad, How sad that Stephen Colbert,
Speaker 1: who once had the stones to stand next.
Speaker 4: To George W.
Speaker 1: Bush at the White House Correspondence dinner and really give
Speaker 1: him hell right there, was now chosen and again from
Speaker 1: reporting before the event because he was seen as quote
Speaker 1: unquote stafe pick.
Speaker 4: And they were right by the way. But how sad.
Speaker 1: But the contrast in those images of this star studded,
Speaker 1: glitzy fundraiser filled with all of these wealthy people who
Speaker 1: could afford the very high ticket price, and the images
Speaker 1: that are coming out of Gaza, of the slaughter that
Speaker 1: this administration has fully enabled and backed and continues to
Speaker 1: this day. I think that is truly going to be
Speaker 1: one of the sort of enduring images of this horrible
Speaker 1: thing that we have watched all unfold since October seventh.
Speaker 2: What's also interesting is just to see, as you said, visually,
Speaker 2: what it looks like for these Biden individuals. Could put
Speaker 2: this play this please video of Kareem Jean Pierre, actually
Speaker 2: we can play next, who was walking through the streets
Speaker 2: of New York, thought that she was about to come
Speaker 2: into contact with a fan and then quickly had to
Speaker 2: do a little bit of an about face. Let's watch
Speaker 2: it a green Bagrien marias the Mornings is using Gaza
Speaker 2: Tigreen having a rough time there in the city of
Speaker 2: New York. At the same time, there was a fourth
Speaker 2: president who actually was also in the city.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up there on the screen.
Speaker 2: This is important just to demonstrate where the political what
Speaker 2: some of the political fallout from this is looking like.
Speaker 2: Because Trump was actually attending the wake of a slain
Speaker 2: New York City police officer calling for law and order
Speaker 2: quote to show contrasts with Biden by attending that funeral.
Speaker 2: The side by side contrast Crystal was supposed to be
Speaker 2: one designed by the Biden administration to show unity, to
Speaker 2: show them raising a bunch of money, and instead they
Speaker 2: were interrupted, you know, pell Mell at their event. All
Speaker 2: of the headlines that came out of the event were
Speaker 2: not positive for Joe Biden. They were definitely negative. And
Speaker 2: at the same time you have here a Trump, I mean,
Speaker 2: who's now consolidated the Republican Party, not going to erase
Speaker 2: any of the problems that he has there on his own,
Speaker 2: but electorally, he's trying to show more of a consolidated
Speaker 2: party return to some of the roots of the original
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen campaign, and if you can exploit some of
Speaker 2: the divisions and the Democratic Party some of the problems
Speaker 2: there on the other side, we do see how this
Speaker 2: is becoming a major general election story.
Speaker 1: The Biden team has clearly realized they have a problem
Speaker 1: with rec to the base of the party, especially with
Speaker 1: young people when it comes to their you know, the
Speaker 1: bear hug of Netyahuo approach.
Speaker 4: So they've tried to.
Speaker 1: Message their way out of it. It's not going to work,
Speaker 1: and we can already see the direction that they're going
Speaker 1: to move in, which is not to actually change the policy.
Speaker 1: You know, as we're going to talk about later. They
Speaker 1: just shift more two thousand pound bunk or buster bombs.
Speaker 1: As they're out there claiming that they have issues with
Speaker 1: the way that this war is being prosecuted, as they're
Speaker 1: out there claiming that they're upset about a potential invasion
Speaker 1: into Rafa, but there's zero change in terms of policy.
Speaker 1: So they're quickly going to realize that attempting to message
Speaker 1: their way out of this problem is not going to work,
Speaker 1: and so we already see a shift towards what their
Speaker 1: Plan B is which is, forget these young people, screw them.
Speaker 1: You know, we're going to smear and dismiss them like
Speaker 1: we usually do, and instead we're going to try to
Speaker 1: court the Nikki hayleyfoot or we're going to try to
Speaker 1: peel off some of these you know, remaining suburban Republicans.
Speaker 1: And I think that's going to be the game plan.
Speaker 1: Do I think it will maybe possible. It's possible, you know,
Speaker 1: I do think that. I do think Trump's got a
Speaker 1: lot of issues. I think the more that his legal
Speaker 1: troubles are in the news, I do think it's actually
Speaker 1: a problem for him. The more that he's in the news, right,
Speaker 1: he benefits from when the media actually doesn't cover him
Speaker 1: as much because people sort of look at the past
Speaker 1: era through rose colored glasses and they forget some of
Speaker 1: the things that they really hated about him when he
Speaker 1: was president of the United States. You and the more
Speaker 1: he's a he was on there on easterving these completely
Speaker 1: unhinged you know, post cuntruth social I think he posted
Speaker 1: like seventy times.
Speaker 4: I mean it was insanity, right, and the one that.
Speaker 1: Was actually like the happy Easter one was just all caps,
Speaker 1: complete derangement.
Speaker 4: The more people are reminded of that.
Speaker 1: The more of a chance, the hey, you know, screw
Speaker 1: the young people were just going to pick up the
Speaker 1: nicky Haley voters has a chance of success. But boy
Speaker 1: do they run a major risk. And that's you know,
Speaker 1: putting the obviously the morality and the ethics of all
Speaker 1: of this aside.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 2: No, it's a major risk electorally. And I think for Trump,
Speaker 2: you know, the less if he can get more headlines
Speaker 2: like this. For the contrast, I did see it covered
Speaker 2: at least in some of the media, and less about
Speaker 2: whatever his happy Easter, even to the haters that the
Speaker 2: judges the I mean, it's like a meme now at
Speaker 2: this point, even though it is real, this is capturing
Speaker 2: headlines also in many ways, in particular with some of
Speaker 2: the celebrity fallout. This is a particularly hilarious one. We
Speaker 2: can go ahead and play some of the video of
Speaker 2: this Lizzo. The Lizzo despite being what it was accused of,
Speaker 2: let's just say misconduct.
Speaker 3: I think with some of her dancers.
Speaker 1: There was a banana and female gentailor I'm just going
Speaker 1: to leave it at that, and also fat shaming, which
Speaker 1: you know, kind of ironic given her positioning as a celebrity.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 2: So she was there, she was performing, she was going
Speaker 2: off the hook, but then afterwards put out the most
Speaker 2: narcissistic post of possible. Let's put this up there please
Speaker 2: on the screen. She just says, I am getting tired
Speaker 2: of putting up with being dragged by everyone in my
Speaker 2: life and on the internet. All I want is to
Speaker 2: make music and make people happy and help the world
Speaker 2: be it better than how I found it. But I'm
Speaker 2: starting to feel like the world doesn't want me in it.
Speaker 2: I'm constantly up against lies being told about me for
Speaker 2: clout and views, being the butt of joke every single
Speaker 2: time because of how I look, my character being picked
Speaker 2: apart by people who don't know me, and disrespecting my name.
Speaker 2: I didn't sign up for this shit, I quit Actually
Speaker 2: did sign up for this, Lizzo, and especially right, no, I.
Speaker 3: Mean you did. And okay, there's one thing to be
Speaker 3: an artist.
Speaker 2: I think even then when you reach the level of
Speaker 2: like household name fame, yeah you did sign up for this,
Speaker 2: But two, you're the one who chose to perform at
Speaker 2: a political fundraiser. Okay, that's it's like, you know, when
Speaker 2: people go into what kid rock or any of what
Speaker 2: are these people who ted nugent? People who support Trump? Fine,
Speaker 2: they got into the political game there, major household name.
Speaker 2: They't know what they're doing. You helped raise money for Biden.
Speaker 2: No shit, you actually did sign up for this one
Speaker 2: hundred percent. You agreed to do it. You made yourself
Speaker 2: household name, you made yourself world famous and all that.
Speaker 2: So don't be surprised if people criticize you for performing
Speaker 2: at an event like this and you just you know,
Speaker 2: either didn't do the research or don't know enough to
Speaker 2: know that this is going to be controversial, even within
Speaker 2: the circles that she runs in.
Speaker 1: There's so much about this that just pisses me off.
Speaker 1: First of all, her trying to say, oh, I'm being
Speaker 1: picked apart because of the way I look. This has
Speaker 1: nothing to do with the way you look, and everything
Speaker 1: to do with number one, the allegations that we just mentioned,
Speaker 1: and number two, the fact that a majority of Biden
Speaker 1: voters think that this man is assisting in a genocide
Speaker 1: and there you are raising money for it, and you're
Speaker 1: supposed to be a little miss peace and love in
Speaker 1: the world.
Speaker 4: Give us all a break.
Speaker 1: Second of all, as you're pointing out, Sager, it's not
Speaker 1: that she it's not just that she is a celebrity
Speaker 1: and you know, set out to become a celebrity, but
Speaker 1: she intentionally positioned herself in this like provocative lane.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 1: So you don't get to go out there and you know,
Speaker 1: be the look, fine, be who you are and whatever,
Speaker 1: but don't be shocked when people have something to say
Speaker 1: about it. You know, we don't go out there and
Speaker 1: when we get a mean tweet or whatever, like I
Speaker 1: didn't sign up for this. Actually we did, Actually we did,
Speaker 1: which is why we don't go around crying about it
Speaker 1: because it comes with the terrain. And you know what,
Speaker 1: we're incredibly lucky to be here and have this platform,
Speaker 1: and if it comes with that, so be it. We
Speaker 1: all knew that going in as big boys and girls.
Speaker 1: So if you want to rage, quit, go ahead, Lizzo.
Speaker 1: And then another thing about this is the democratic part,
Speaker 1: like what can you even say? You know, all these
Speaker 1: people supposedly have all these principles, how can you take
Speaker 1: them seriously about anything? And how do they not know that,
Speaker 1: you know, inviting this women who at this point has
Speaker 1: all kinds of baggage and the biggest one being that
Speaker 1: the accusations are she's.
Speaker 4: Just a complete hypocrite.
Speaker 1: Yes, all of her all of her body positivity is bullshit.
Speaker 1: According to a number of her dancers, she was fat
Speaker 1: shaming them, et cetera, which again just makes you the
Speaker 1: biggest hypocrite on the planet, creating a toxic work environment
Speaker 1: to say the least. And I do encourage you to
Speaker 1: go back and read the specifics we did. You will
Speaker 1: watch it, and I don't want to relive all of
Speaker 1: that year, but you know you're gonna invite this person
Speaker 1: in when you're supposedly, Oh, I care so much about women.
Speaker 4: It's give me a break, please. Just a perfect.
Speaker 1: Emblem of how out of touch and bizarre all of
Speaker 1: these individuals are.
Speaker 3: That's right, culture of narcissism at its absolute finest.
Speaker 2: So anyway, let's just say the event, it didn't go
Speaker 2: well for basically every single person that was involved.
Speaker 3: So anyway, I hope the money was worth the mission.
Speaker 1: And God bless these protesters who hound them everywhere they go.
Speaker 4: I hope they can keep it up.
Speaker 1: That look on koreeen Jean Pierre's face whence he went
Speaker 1: from the giant grin of racket. Oh I've been recognized
Speaker 1: by one of my fans to realization, Oh no, this
Speaker 1: is not a fan. This person has something to say
Speaker 1: to you. Like I said, is it making different? I
Speaker 1: have no idea, but I hope they keep it up.
Speaker 1: And you know, as I said before, just a taste
Speaker 1: of I think what the DNC is going to look like,
Speaker 1: where they're going to have much less control over who's there,
Speaker 1: who's in the room, who's outside of the room. There
Speaker 1: was going to be overwhelming media coverage, so great point.
Speaker 2: Yeah, No, DNC's gonna be a lot of fun. By
Speaker 2: the way, stay tuned for that too. In terms of
Speaker 2: our coverage, we got some plans that's gonna be fun.
Speaker 1: Let's turn to some absolutely insane, outrageous, disgusting comments made
Speaker 1: by a Republican congressman. This is Michigan Representative Tim Wahlberg
Speaker 1: speaking to his constituents about what he would like to
Speaker 1: see done in Gaza.
Speaker 4: Let's take a listen, and.
Speaker 6: We spending our money to go to court for them.
Speaker 7: Yeah, it's Joe Libs recent We need to get your
Speaker 7: manager and aid into got.
Speaker 8: I don't think we should.
Speaker 7: I don't think any of our aid that goes to
Speaker 7: Israel to support our greatest ally argument in the world
Speaker 7: to defeat it from us and our hand in Russia,
Speaker 7: probably North Threa's in there in China too with him
Speaker 7: and helping, helping you. Alas, we shouldn't be spending a time.
Speaker 9: When new manager in aid.
Speaker 7: I agree, it should be like Nasaki.
Speaker 1: It should be like Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Get it over quick,
Speaker 1: calling directly for nuking Gaza and turning it into like
Speaker 1: Nagasaki in Hiroshima. Now, the truth of the matter is
Speaker 1: already enough bombs have been exploded in Gaza to be
Speaker 1: the equivalent of more than two of the equivalent Nagasaki
Speaker 1: or Hiroshima style nukes. But to see a congressman speaking
Speaker 1: to his constituents and say that directly and think that
Speaker 1: that's acceptable to say, I mean, talk about genocidal This
Speaker 1: is insane, nowsager. He got some pushback in the local
Speaker 1: press and you know, try to quote unquote soften these Oh,
Speaker 1: it was a metaphor, a metaphor for what complete annihilation.
Speaker 1: And I can't help but notice you'll recall Congressman Rashida
Speaker 1: slib was censured in the House for retweeting something that
Speaker 1: said free Palestine from the river to the sea. This
Speaker 1: was national media. However, do you guys probably remember every
Speaker 1: Democrat got asked about these cons We had a whole
Speaker 1: national conversation about this rally, chant, etc. When she's calling
Speaker 1: for equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis, this man suggests
Speaker 1: nuking the place and crickets effectively from the mainstream media.
Speaker 1: Will he be centured by the House, of course not?
Speaker 3: Of course, not Christal.
Speaker 2: The full quote is actually even more deranged because it
Speaker 2: doesn't just call for wiping out people in Gaza. He says,
Speaker 2: get it over quick. The same should be in Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Defeat putin quick. Instead of eighty percent of our funding
Speaker 2: for Ukraine being used for humanitarian purposes, it should be
Speaker 2: eighty to one hundred percent to wipe out Russian forces
Speaker 2: if that's what we want to do. So it also
Speaker 2: wants us to use nuclear weapons and give them to
Speaker 2: the Ukrainians to wipe out the Russians without thinking then
Speaker 2: of any of the attendant consequences. Just to give people
Speaker 2: an idea of how psychotic this individual is. Did you
Speaker 2: want to hear his defense.
Speaker 1: Rageous to and she reflect on that front I mean, listen,
Speaker 1: at least when you're talking about the Russians, at least
Speaker 1: you're talking about military.
Speaker 4: Coat your nation.
Speaker 3: That's a good point.
Speaker 1: You know, in Gaza, you're talking about two point one
Speaker 1: million people, out of whom thirty thousand were Hamas, right,
Speaker 1: and you're talking about nuking the place and you know,
Speaker 1: wiping them out. There is no other word for this than,
Speaker 1: you know, a call for genocide. So that's the sort
Speaker 1: of thing that he thinks can just fly at a
Speaker 1: constituent town hall. I'm very curious whether anyone there said anything,
Speaker 1: whether what the reaction was in the crowd, because the
Speaker 1: you know, the clip cuts off right there. But since
Speaker 1: the level of dehumanization that has become normalized in certain
Speaker 1: circles is just it's honestly beyond belief, I.
Speaker 2: Would say Chrystal, I actually think the tide is turning.
Speaker 2: And I think that in the beginning. I mean, we
Speaker 2: see a lot of this is in polling. You can see
Speaker 2: a lot the whole like, get it over with, get
Speaker 2: it over quick. Like I said in September twelve, two
Speaker 2: thousand and one, what's everybody saying new Gfghanistan? Well, you know,
Speaker 2: now it's been what it's been almost six months since
Speaker 2: octom Over seventh. Public opinion is treadomatically. The Palestinian cause
Speaker 2: is a lot more sympathetic. People have watched the Israeli
Speaker 2: military campaign. It's not a lot of plausible deniability, you know,
Speaker 2: at this point. So I actually think that things are
Speaker 2: turning against us now. I don't know where this This
Speaker 2: was apparently in Dundee, Michigan, that this happened. But I
Speaker 2: also think it is noteworthy that he actually did have
Speaker 2: to walk it back. So he says the people, no, sorry,
Speaker 2: He said, as a child who grew up in the
Speaker 2: Cold War era, the last thing I would advocate for
Speaker 2: would be the use of nuclear weapons.
Speaker 3: He says.
Speaker 2: I used a metaphor to convey the need for both
Speaker 2: Israel and Ukraine to win their wars as swiftly as
Speaker 2: possible without putting American troops in harm's way. And I
Speaker 2: think what he's I mean, obviously it was clear what
Speaker 2: he was calling for, but I mean, recall what was
Speaker 2: it Brian mast and those people says there's no such
Speaker 2: thing as an innocent child and godz or recall some
Speaker 2: of these other Republican congressmen who three four months ago,
Speaker 2: they were receiving no pushback or even frankly, even a
Speaker 2: lot of media coverage outside of independent circles. This one,
Speaker 2: I mean, this got written up in the New York
Speaker 2: Times and the Detroit Free Press Michigan has obviously stayed
Speaker 2: with a lot of arabor American voters.
Speaker 3: I don't know anything about Dundee. I don't know if
Speaker 3: it's going.
Speaker 2: To hurt his electoral chances or not, but I do
Speaker 2: think it was at least somewhat noteworthy to me that
Speaker 2: they were or at least he felt the need to
Speaker 2: issue some sort of quote unquote clarification, even though it's
Speaker 2: a BS clarification and what he said is crazy like
Speaker 2: on every level.
Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, all right, Well that's a good point that
Speaker 1: at least now he feels some shame, he's forced to
Speaker 1: feel a little bit of shame around this and receive
Speaker 1: a little bit of pushback, at least in the local
Speaker 1: press in particular. There's some other political news we wanted
Speaker 1: to bring to you, which is a center fetterman who
Speaker 1: has become the greatest cheerleader for Israel doing whatever the
Speaker 1: hell they want to do in the Gaza strip and
Speaker 1: seeming to show absolute no, absolutely no care and concern
Speaker 1: for the fate of Palestinian civilians. He is suffering a
Speaker 1: mass exodus at this point of communication staffers in particular
Speaker 1: put this up on the screen. Top staffers for Democrat
Speaker 1: John Fetterman are leaving his office for more progressive jobs
Speaker 1: as the Pennsylvania sentator moves more to this center. They say,
Speaker 1: I don't know call at the center, but anyway on
Speaker 1: key issues. Joe Calvello, Fetterman's longtime communications director who helped
Speaker 1: him navigate a tumultuous Senate race working on the campaign,
Speaker 1: left to work with liberal Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson earlier
Speaker 1: this month. Quote from him, he says, Mayor Johnson is
Speaker 1: a true progressive who is committed to fighting for the
Speaker 1: working people and families of the city of Chicago. Deeply
Speaker 1: honored to join his administration. We also have Nick Gaviot,
Speaker 1: Fetterman's deputy communications director who started with his campaign, is
Speaker 1: going to head to the Working Families party.
Speaker 4: And we have.
Speaker 1: One more individual, who is Emma Mustion. I'm going to
Speaker 1: go with I'm sorry Emma, who served in Fetterman's office,
Speaker 1: who is going to work on the other Pennsylvania seditor's
Speaker 1: campaigns enter Bob Casey's re election bid. You know, you
Speaker 1: can read into this. I think probably a lot of
Speaker 1: it has to do with his just devotion to Israel,
Speaker 1: his willingness to even he is way to the right
Speaker 1: of Biden a retortally in terms of what he supports,
Speaker 1: and he's criticized by He was doing this whole song
Speaker 1: and dance about like, how can you criticize Biden on Israel?
Speaker 4: Then you're just helping Trump.
Speaker 1: But then when it came to Biden even rhetorically shifting
Speaker 1: with regard to Israel, he felt perfectly comfortable to attack
Speaker 1: him then. And apparently when he does it from the right,
Speaker 1: it's not quote unquote helping Trump.
Speaker 3: Oh that's funny.
Speaker 4: I didn't even pick up on that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's a lot going on there. But you know,
Speaker 1: I think the big question with Betterman, we had Ryan
Speaker 1: Grimm's reporting about how he originally sort of staked down
Speaker 1: this position on Israel very much looked like from Ryan's
Speaker 1: reporting that he hadn't really thought that much about the issue,
Speaker 1: And then in his campaign, when he was faced with
Speaker 1: a primary challenge in that Senate campaign against Connor Lamb,
Speaker 1: it was more of like a centrist figure in Fetterman
Speaker 1: at that point was the more of the progressive figure.
Speaker 1: He just effectively asked Democratic Majority for Israel, like, what
Speaker 1: should my position be? They literally wrote it up for them,
Speaker 1: and he has sort of stuck with it ever since.
Speaker 1: And you know, he's taken a lot of money from APAC,
Speaker 1: sure that provide it's a hefty incentive to stay lockstep
Speaker 1: in support. But I think at this point, given the
Speaker 1: fact that he's not just doing this sort of like
Speaker 1: standard issue democratic support of Israel, that he's so vocal
Speaker 1: about it, so vociferous about it, it has to go
Speaker 1: beyond the money for him, Like, I think he has
Speaker 1: become completely ideologically locked into this position, beyond any sort
Speaker 1: of reasonable understanding of the way money may have influenced
Speaker 1: him and the way that this may impact him electorally,
Speaker 1: et cetera. Because I could very much see him, you know,
Speaker 1: next time he has to face reelection, which granted is
Speaker 1: a number of years from now, but I could see
Speaker 1: him facing a challenge from the left that could be
Speaker 1: quite potent. He is definitely risking his career with being
Speaker 1: such an overt cheerleader for the horrors that are unfolding. So,
Speaker 1: you know, for these staffers, apparently just became too much
Speaker 1: to watch this man whose whole political brand now he
Speaker 1: wants to run away from the progressively. He was not
Speaker 1: running away from the progressive label when he was running
Speaker 1: he was Medicare for all. He was originally a Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders supporter. He's talking about lifting wages, supporting unions, et cetera.
Speaker 1: That was his positioning and specifically his brand as a
Speaker 1: former rust belt town mayor was you know, I'm the
Speaker 1: one who's going to look after the forgotten people. To
Speaker 1: then have zero, zero sense of the humanity of Palestinian civilians.
Speaker 1: I think for these staffers it probably just became too
Speaker 1: much to bear. And it's no accent that they're all
Speaker 1: going to, you know, places that are more progressive in
Speaker 1: a different place when it comes to Israel Gaza.
Speaker 2: For me, I think it's just clear. And these two
Speaker 2: things something we try and tell people all the time. Guys,
Speaker 2: people in the office, they're actually not that smart. If
Speaker 2: you watch the show, or if you even read, you know,
Speaker 2: any other show, or you know in general, you're probably
Speaker 2: smarter than some of them.
Speaker 3: I mean, let's think back to the words of this
Speaker 3: what was his name, the congressman or.
Speaker 2: D Wahlberg, Robert He was like, well, China and North
Speaker 2: Korea probably in there too.
Speaker 3: Like wait, what what are you talking about? Where? Where
Speaker 3: do you even get this from? Same with Fetterman.
Speaker 2: I mean a lot of these guys are either low
Speaker 2: information or they are highly selective information in terms of
Speaker 2: what they take in. They have no challenges, their staff
Speaker 2: usually either afraid or you know, just going to bubble up.
Speaker 3: Whatever they want.
Speaker 2: If you've ever been in the Senate, for people who
Speaker 2: are even in Congress, like you can create your own
Speaker 2: little reality in that world, like once you've been elected.
Speaker 2: So this is just a good view into kind of
Speaker 2: the boom or brain and how it can work. And
Speaker 2: I guess in Fetterman's case too, about how if you want,
Speaker 2: you can create an entire you know, information sphere that
Speaker 2: works exactly the way that you want.
Speaker 4: So yeah, apparently apparently.
Speaker 2: There's been some updates on the firing or I guess,
Speaker 2: departure of canvas Owans Ben Shapiro and Candace allegedly apparently
Speaker 2: agreed not to speak about it, and yet in some
Speaker 2: recent interviews Shapiro has been shedding some light into his
Speaker 2: thinking as to why it was not hypocritical to fire,
Speaker 2: or at least have Candace Owans depart his organization, The
Speaker 2: Daily Wire.
Speaker 3: Here's what he had to say an interview with Dave Rubin.
Speaker 5: The difference between a publisher like The Daily Wire and
Speaker 5: a platform like Locals is obviously that a platform should
Speaker 5: have a very broad range of speech that it allows,
Speaker 5: including speech that maybe even the creators don't believe is
Speaker 5: inside what they would consider to be the Overton window.
Speaker 5: It's a very different thing than direct subsidization of particular opinions.
Speaker 5: So the Daily Wire would not have a host, would
Speaker 5: not pay a host who was staunchly pro abortion, would
Speaker 5: have no obligation to bey a host who is staunchly
Speaker 5: pro abortion. And so when it comes to the host
Speaker 5: on the Daily Wire, obviously everyone was able to say
Speaker 5: what they want. Nobody ever comes to me and says,
Speaker 5: you can't say X. Nobody or says that's to Walsh,
Speaker 5: and no one ever said that to Candace. But the
Speaker 5: reality is that there is an Overton window at the
Speaker 5: Daily Wire. Obviously there was a non meeting of the minds.
Speaker 5: That's pretty much all I can say on this, And
Speaker 5: you know a lot of this has happened publicly, but
Speaker 5: to the extent that the Daily Wire is in fact
Speaker 5: not a publisher, that is in fact not a platform.
Speaker 5: It as a publisher. That means that there is no
Speaker 5: moral obligation for the Daily and there's no free speech
Speaker 5: problem with the Daily Wire saying we don't wish to
Speaker 5: pay a particular host, or that host saying I don't.
Speaker 3: Wish to work here anymore.
Speaker 5: Because again there's a parting of the ways that I'm
Speaker 5: that you know, is not really open for discussion at
Speaker 5: this point. This week, NBC News deciding that McDaniel is
Speaker 5: too much for them. Ron McDaniel can't work at NBC News.
Speaker 5: The Sacred Halls and NBC News must not be sullied
Speaker 5: by the former head of the RNC. Jensake, however, can
Speaker 5: have a show on MSNBC despite being the Press secretary
Speaker 5: for the White House five seconds ago. The rights response
Speaker 5: to that is I think correct to say, you guys
Speaker 5: have shut the Overton window too tight. But I think
Speaker 5: some elements of the right have basically said there is
Speaker 5: no Overton window.
Speaker 3: The Overton winner should be completely exploded.
Speaker 2: So the defense that he just gave there is the
Speaker 2: exact defense of Facebook, Twitter, and Google Crystal every single
Speaker 2: time that they take somebody down. We are not a platform,
Speaker 2: or we are a publisher, and publishers get to make
Speaker 2: editorial decisions. And yet when it was flipped around that
Speaker 2: we commonly understand that that is a form of censorship.
Speaker 2: It is obviously a term which is difficult to update
Speaker 2: to our modern laws, but we can at least understand
Speaker 2: that there are speech within Overton window, of which Shapiro
Speaker 2: has long advocated include him, but now is saying and
Speaker 2: she can't and shan't include others.
Speaker 3: It seems that with Candice, you know, the other.
Speaker 2: Thing is hypocritical to when he was talking about abortion,
Speaker 2: is they hired her with full well knowledge of who
Speaker 2: she was, how she is, and of her mo her
Speaker 2: willingness to say and whatever they want, and they were
Speaker 2: happy with it for everything except.
Speaker 3: Whenever it came towards Israel.
Speaker 2: And that's the other thing too, is that I believe
Speaker 2: Jeremy Boring, who is the CEO of the organization The
Speaker 2: Daily Wire, had said, for example, he would never hire
Speaker 2: anybody who said that the quote there was a genocide
Speaker 2: that was happening in Gaza. So it's like you have
Speaker 2: two lines at the wire. You have abortion. I mean
Speaker 2: that one's understandable to me given the history of the organization,
Speaker 2: but now it's Israel, and it's like, oh, hold, Honestly,
Speaker 2: I thought this was an organization that covered American politics
Speaker 2: and was talking about American free speech. But here is
Speaker 2: just a little bit too much for mister Shapiro.
Speaker 1: Well, how I love how suddenly we're getting very nuanced,
Speaker 1: We're getting very parsy about this whole free speech conversation
Speaker 1: and the comments about Ronald McDaniel. I mean, he's really
Speaker 1: got to work to try to justify that one, because
Speaker 1: it's very plain to see. All right, Well, if you
Speaker 1: know you think it's justified to fire Candace because her
Speaker 1: views fall outside of your quote unquote Overton window, then
Speaker 1: don't complain when NBC News fires ron McDaniel. Don't complain
Speaker 1: when there's a backlash over a Tom Cotton a ED
Speaker 1: and New York Times.
Speaker 4: They're a publisher exactly perhaps this was outside of their
Speaker 4: Overton window, so it shouldn't be published. Don't complain.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just so clear that the moment it
Speaker 1: came to this issue, that's very core for him Suddenly
Speaker 1: everything he had said in the past is gone, and
Speaker 1: he's got to find fifteen different ways to try to
Speaker 1: justify a nuance at Craft. This response to try to
Speaker 1: hide the fact that he has done a one to
Speaker 1: eighty when it comes to free speech, and just to
Speaker 1: pick up on what you were saying about.
Speaker 4: They knew who Candice was. She they were fine.
Speaker 1: And this question also over whether it was you know,
Speaker 1: she was fired for genuinely anti Semitic comments, which I
Speaker 1: think some of her comments you can say were following
Speaker 1: the category of genuinely anti Semitic in my personal opinion,
Speaker 1: or whether it was over her position with regards to Israel.
Speaker 1: And I think it's very clear because prior to getting
Speaker 1: hired by The Daily Wire, she had said that thing
Speaker 1: about if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and
Speaker 1: have things run well, okay, fine, that was no problem
Speaker 1: for the Daily Wire. She had defended Kanye even if
Speaker 1: she's out there literally saying I love Hitler, that was fine,
Speaker 1: no problem. But the minute that she has a critique
Speaker 1: of Israel and is willing to say we are watching
Speaker 1: a genocide unfold, No, that's the line. And there was
Speaker 1: there were a couple other things that were really interesting
Speaker 1: as well, because SAGERI said that thing. Oh, we didn't
Speaker 1: tell anybody.
Speaker 4: They can't. They can't.
Speaker 1: We didn't never tell Cannas she can't say anything. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: most of these news organizations MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, they're
Speaker 1: not overtly telling their staff you can't say this about
Speaker 1: Trump or you must say this about Trump. But everybody
Speaker 1: knows what that quote unquote Overton window is. Candace knew
Speaker 1: where the Overton window was. She just wasn't willing to
Speaker 1: abide by those rules and strictures. And so just like
Speaker 1: it's CNN with Mark Lamont Hill or at MSNBC with
Speaker 1: Mehdi Hassan, when they went outside of where they knew
Speaker 1: the lines were, they're gone. So you're just like them.
Speaker 1: That's the bottom line. You're just like them. Don't pretend like.
Speaker 3: You're Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: And that's the other thing is you need to understand
Speaker 2: that the if you are going to position yourself and
Speaker 2: make a million, not even it's probably hundreds of millions
Speaker 2: of dollars as a free speech organization whose entire purpose,
Speaker 2: by the way, is to blow up the Overton window.
Speaker 3: And you know what in a certain sense.
Speaker 2: Part of what I despise the most about that was
Speaker 2: He's like, well, we need to have some Overton window.
Speaker 3: I'm like, oh, now, we need to have some Overton window.
Speaker 3: I'm like, by the way, I don't even believe in it.
Speaker 2: I think people should be able to say anything, even
Speaker 2: the craziest shit, because in general, that's how a lot
Speaker 2: of truth can emerge. You really have no idea in
Speaker 2: the actual moment, and I think that's actually very good
Speaker 2: for society. But now all of a sudden he does
Speaker 2: believe in you know, where things should be, and it's like, well,
Speaker 2: you don't see the hypocrisy on how that's used against you,
Speaker 2: on transgenderism or any erase and all these other issues
Speaker 2: that these guys have made whole careers, you know, speaking
Speaker 2: out against. Here they are lockstep with Jonathan Greenblatt and
Speaker 2: all of them over at the ADL, who they have
Speaker 2: criticized a million times. So, in the words of Glenn Greenweald,
Speaker 2: that is what makes me absolutely sick. There's also some
Speaker 2: evidence too about how this all went down behind the scenes.
Speaker 2: Let's go and put this up there on the screen.
Speaker 2: This account censored. Men don't know who this gentleman or
Speaker 2: who this woman is, but been doing some great work
Speaker 2: they have actually put out.
Speaker 3: This was the.
Speaker 2: Email sent to employees at the Daily Wire informing them
Speaker 2: of the impromptu town hall that Jeremy Boring had organized.
Speaker 2: Employees were told not to bring their cell phones to
Speaker 2: the meeting. Independent contractors would not be allowed to attend
Speaker 2: at the town hall. Daily Wire leadership attempted to smear
Speaker 2: Owens as an anti Semite in front of their employees
Speaker 2: to justify if their hiring. And you can see the
Speaker 2: evidence of that town hall, which is very clearly Increase
Speaker 2: included there for the emails that were sent to their
Speaker 2: entire staff. Let's go to the next part here, please,
Speaker 2: because you can see too Candace is saying, quote, Ben,
Speaker 2: we agreed not to talk about this, but you are
Speaker 2: very much going on a public tour right now pretending
Speaker 2: not to talk about it while you were very.
Speaker 3: Much talking about it. Would you like me to do
Speaker 3: the same.
Speaker 2: Part of the reason, Crystal, that Candace is so dangerous
Speaker 2: is that her husband is a son of a billionaire.
Speaker 2: So let's just say she is not hurting for cash,
Speaker 2: and she truly is. If there is such a thing
Speaker 2: as fu money she's got it, so good for her, Yeah,
Speaker 2: she continues, Yeah, I.
Speaker 1: Mean it's it's a very revealing situation. And part of
Speaker 1: why is so important is because there's always been this
Speaker 1: incredible blind spot on the right, even at the peak
Speaker 1: of their supposed free speech commitment, when it comes to
Speaker 1: Israel and Palestine and the number of people this is
Speaker 1: like the number one issue that will get you canceled
Speaker 1: careers ruined. Hey, you have this whole like war path
Speaker 1: against students at Harvard led by Bill Ackman to try
Speaker 1: to destroy their career prospects for the entire rust of
Speaker 1: their lives for participating in protests and doing rally chants
Speaker 1: that he found to be objectionable. If you actually consistently
Speaker 1: care about free speech, you have to care about free
Speaker 1: speech when it comes to this issue, no matter what
Speaker 1: you think about Israel and Gaza and Hamas and what's
Speaker 1: happening right now, because it is about that principle of
Speaker 1: free speech, and so it is, you know, it's sort
Speaker 1: of it's sort of perfect that it comes down to
Speaker 1: Candace stepping out on the line when it comes to Israel,
Speaker 1: that that's what it comes down to, and not just
Speaker 1: Ben Shapiro but so many others on the right, including
Speaker 1: Dave Rubin, really showing their ass when it comes to
Speaker 1: their actual commitment to free speech, which is only comes
Speaker 1: into play when it is people in speech that they
Speaker 1: find to be ideologically convenient for themselves. And you know,
Speaker 1: I actually want to recall the comments that Rogan made
Speaker 1: in the context of Candace getting fired, and you know,
Speaker 1: you brought up abortion. Ben said, listen, you know we
Speaker 1: would never hire someone who's pro abortion here.
Speaker 4: Okay, fair enough.
Speaker 1: That is a moral position, a philosophical moral position on
Speaker 1: a political spectrum. Rogan's point was basically, you know, whether
Speaker 1: you want to use the term genocide or not, you
Speaker 1: have to be able to deal with the facts of
Speaker 1: what is happening here, which are not That's not an opinion, right,
Speaker 1: that's facts in reality.
Speaker 4: So I would even put.
Speaker 1: This issue out side of you know, a sort of
Speaker 1: like political sphere of debate, because clearly you aren't even
Speaker 1: at the Daily Wire. You aren't even allowed to really
Speaker 1: discuss the facts of what's unfolding. You're certainly not allowed
Speaker 1: to call it a genocide when you have you know,
Speaker 1: you on special Rappertoire, you have the ICJ saying it's plausible.
Speaker 1: You have numerous human rights organization saying this.
Speaker 4: So if if you.
Speaker 1: Can't even speak to just the facts and reality of
Speaker 1: what's happening, then you can't really call yourself a news organization.
Speaker 1: And no, I don't think that that's an appropriate quote
Speaker 1: unquote Overton window to have, where you, as a condition
Speaker 1: of working there, you have to deny reality that's unfolding
Speaker 1: in front of you.
Speaker 4: That's that's insane. And like I.
Speaker 1: Said, you can't call yourself a news organization there, You're
Speaker 1: just a propaganda allen.
Speaker 4: And that's that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And that's fine, you know, be honest about that,
Speaker 2: But don't be raising hundreds of or you know, asking
Speaker 2: people sill and asking for hundreds of millions of dollars
Speaker 2: and buy Jeremy's razors and chocolates and all the other
Speaker 2: things that these people have done toosition themselves as outside
Speaker 2: of this specifically the job of trying to crack the
Speaker 2: so called mainstream and to expand the Overton window to correctly,
Speaker 2: in my opinion, include some of the viewpoints that they
Speaker 2: have over there, and then experience and partake in the
Speaker 2: exact same censorship tactics that they did whenever you were
Speaker 2: speaking out, so I think that's really really disgusting. I
Speaker 2: also refer people to Glenn Greenwell's commentary on the subject.
Speaker 2: It was absolutely fantastic. Let's go to the next part.
Speaker 2: This is another update on a story that we wanted
Speaker 2: to make sure that we included. Let's go put this
Speaker 2: please up on the screen. We brought everybody the news
Speaker 2: about how the FEDS had rated two of P. Diddy's residences,
Speaker 2: both in Los Angeles and in Miami, allegedly over a
Speaker 2: sex trafficking investigation. It appears now from the New York Post,
Speaker 2: who definitely would have the scoop on something like this.
Speaker 2: They say the FEDS are set to widen the Diddy
Speaker 2: sex probe over cleans that the rapper boasted about shooting people,
Speaker 2: bribing jurors, and using j Lo as a gun mule.
Speaker 3: It says quote.
Speaker 2: Twenty five years ago, at two thirty am on a
Speaker 2: cold winter night, three NYPD detectives were called into Midtown
Speaker 2: North Precinct. Rap impresario Sean Combs, then known as Puff Daddy,
Speaker 2: with his girlfriend Jennifer Lopez, and his bodyguard, as well
Speaker 2: as another rapper, had been arrested following a shooting inside
Speaker 2: of a Times Square club that had wounded three bystanders.
Speaker 2: The cops then found j Lo At that time quote
Speaker 2: cuffed in the cage. Combs was in the station house
Speaker 2: and his plans for a spectacular celebration of the new
Speaker 2: Millennium man. This is really dated for a few days later.
Speaker 2: We're temporarily on hold.
Speaker 3: It says.
Speaker 2: Now the events of that night and the sensational trial
Speaker 2: which followed are back in the spotlight. Two law enforcement
Speaker 2: sources are telling the Post that the infamous shooting and
Speaker 2: the trial would be reinvestigated as part of the sweeping
Speaker 2: probe into Seawan Combs and specifically around the gun mule
Speaker 2: accusations as well as an alleged cover up and bribing jurors,
Speaker 2: and eventually got him off of one of the gun
Speaker 2: charges that we had listed and discussed here previously. Part
Speaker 2: of the reason that they swarmed and went into both
Speaker 2: of his residences, it appears, is into the sex trafficking
Speaker 2: investigation for which they were appearing to look for evidence. Obviously,
Speaker 2: transporting a minor across state lines for the purposes of
Speaker 2: sex is a federal crime of which there is a
Speaker 2: very very lengthy jail sentence, and that's exactly what mister
Speaker 2: Combs is actually being accused of and was previously in
Speaker 2: some of these losses. But it does appear, I mean,
Speaker 2: this is a serious, serious problem for him.
Speaker 3: This is up there with R. Kelly and others.
Speaker 2: I do know, Chris, There's been a lot of conspiracy
Speaker 2: that this is like about covering up some of the
Speaker 2: people that he was involved with. And it will be
Speaker 2: interesting to see are they going to tug on some
Speaker 2: of the threads here that include a Jlo or many
Speaker 2: of the other rappers and of the famous people who
Speaker 2: were in his orbit, or are they going to do
Speaker 2: what they did with Epstein, which is focused on two
Speaker 2: charges from twenty thirty years ago or whatever that don't
Speaker 2: implicate anybody. Throw Glane and jail. It just be like, yeah,
Speaker 2: we're just going to figeret that the entire thing happened. Yeah,
Speaker 2: that's gonna be a big question.
Speaker 1: And the main character turns up dead. The Epstein vibes
Speaker 1: here are off the charge. Yeah, I agree, because you
Speaker 1: have Diddy at the center of this entire ring of celebrities.
Speaker 1: I mean, he hosted these infamous white parties in the Hampton's.
Speaker 1: He had not just his you know, the it was
Speaker 1: not just the music industry, it was the fashion industries.
Speaker 4: This cultural figure with.
Speaker 1: His hands in a lot of different pots, and so
Speaker 1: a lot of people catching strays right now with regards
Speaker 1: to the Diddy allegations, a lot of rumors flying about
Speaker 1: who knew what when, Because the allegations against Diddy, I mean,
Speaker 1: they last decades, they are extensive, There is a consistent
Speaker 1: pattern that they appear to reveal. You know, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of just direct violence, there's a lot of psychological
Speaker 1: torture and manipulation, and then there's the allegations of sexual
Speaker 1: assault and you know, across state lines, which leads it
Speaker 1: into sex trafficking.
Speaker 4: Did He of course denies all of that.
Speaker 1: But if you were best days with Ditty, didn't you
Speaker 1: probably know some of these things that were going on.
Speaker 1: Were you potentially involved in some of these things that
Speaker 1: were going on? And so that's why there's so much
Speaker 1: a sort of connective tissue between him and Epstein because
Speaker 1: of these elite circles that they were living in, potential
Speaker 1: dirt that they have on other people who inhabited those circles,
Speaker 1: and so, yeah, are we going to learn how deep
Speaker 1: this went?
Speaker 4: How far it went beyond Diddy?
Speaker 1: Who was enabling You can't do the things that he's
Speaker 1: accused of, You cannot do on your own without other
Speaker 1: people knowing and being involved. So who was the Galaine Maxwell?
Speaker 1: Who were the other wealthy celebrities who kept their mouths
Speaker 1: shut because they knew what you had on them? Those
Speaker 1: are the questions that make this story, you know, significant,
Speaker 1: beyond this one man's apparent. You know, horrific depravity and
Speaker 1: you know cool, et cetera. That's what makes this incredibly significant.
Speaker 1: And it just it really is wild to see the
Speaker 1: way that, especially in the entertainment industry, it seems like
Speaker 1: you come ap across these characters in every sphere because
Speaker 1: you have these power dynamics where so many people are
Speaker 1: desperate ticket close to fame, close to money, get close
Speaker 1: to power, that they keep quiet, they enable the behavior,
Speaker 1: they watch, the way they potentially participate in the behavior,
Speaker 1: And that he was able to keep this under wraps
Speaker 1: for decades is astonishing. And you know, credit to Cassie
Speaker 1: who was a first to file a lawsuit. That really
Speaker 1: was the watershed moment that lead led to a lot
Speaker 1: of these revelations and very likely you know, ultimately led
Speaker 1: to this criminal investigation. So again he denies all the
Speaker 1: claims and the charges of the allegations, but we will
Speaker 1: see where this goes.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, and this is exactly you made a
Speaker 2: just good point here about that you can't participate or
Speaker 2: pull something like this off without a ton of infrastructure
Speaker 2: that is underneath you. I mean, part of the thing
Speaker 2: that really came out about how it is so discussing
Speaker 2: about Harvey Weinstein is not just Harvey Weinstein, was all
Speaker 2: of his assistance and all these other people, his brother also.
Speaker 4: The people were like, yeah, we know he has an
Speaker 4: open secret.
Speaker 2: It's like what, like how is this allowed to just
Speaker 2: continue happening over and over again. It's like we need
Speaker 2: to know the names of a lot of those individuals,
Speaker 2: and particularly here. I mean, again, as I understand it,
Speaker 2: this is this story is popping off in pop culture
Speaker 2: in a way that I don't really think the mainstream
Speaker 2: media has grappled with just yet, the views, the level
Speaker 2: of interest is up there with Epstein, if not actually
Speaker 2: surpassing it at least in some places. And if they
Speaker 2: participate and yet another cover up in just a matter
Speaker 2: of years, people are really really going to take notice
Speaker 2: of something like that and really learn how this so
Speaker 2: called justice system and all of that really works whenever rich,
Speaker 2: powerful people are implicated in major sex trafficking investigations.
Speaker 3: So there we go.
Speaker 2: Okay, we're going to turn down to this situation in
Speaker 2: Baltimore where they're cleanup crews remain trying to extract some debris,
Speaker 2: looking for bodies, and continue to find out what the
Speaker 2: hell exactly happened in this horrific bridge collapse after that
Speaker 2: container ship struck it in the middle of the night.
Speaker 3: We have a little bit of a video from the scene.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 6: It's a huge bridge. It's going to be in pieces
Speaker 6: and tangled. The water is murky, almost no visibility, and
Speaker 6: some current. So you combine all that and very dangerous
Speaker 6: environment for divers to work. It's sure a big, heavy
Speaker 6: Jenga game. It gets precarious and it can all come
Speaker 6: down at any moment. I think there's a lot of
Speaker 6: urgency to not only recover the decease, but open that
Speaker 6: channel and get the bottleneck of shipping flowing again. I
Speaker 6: would be guessing because I'm not there and I have
Speaker 6: not seen this myself, but I would say we're looking
Speaker 6: at I would say days, not weeks to move that
Speaker 6: ship and hopefully potentially clear the channel. It doesn't mean
Speaker 6: that the salvage would be over at that point. There
Speaker 6: will probably be debris and inspections and investigations going on
Speaker 6: for many weeks in months.
Speaker 2: Pretty crazy that the ship remains entangled within the debris,
Speaker 2: including the crew, by the way, who remain on the ship.
Speaker 2: There's still some major questions as to how something like
Speaker 2: this happens. Let's put this up there. Our friends over
Speaker 2: at lever News report this. Larry Hogan, the state's governor
Speaker 2: now turned Senate candidate, has champion quote megaships exactly like
Speaker 2: the one that destroyed the Baltimore Bridge. So this is
Speaker 2: a big question around regulation and specifically also around the
Speaker 2: safety procedures that are involved. Now, I do want to
Speaker 2: say some of the first responders and the people who
Speaker 2: are involved, they immediately closed the bridge. They definitely save lives,
Speaker 2: they worked incredibly well.
Speaker 3: But this I think goes a much at a level.
Speaker 2: Much higher than the individuals who were involved just on
Speaker 2: the night of, from the captain to those involved. There
Speaker 2: major regulatory questions around exactly around these container megaships, which
Speaker 2: has been increasing, increasing, increasing in size. I personally have
Speaker 2: actually visited, and I recommend if you ever do too,
Speaker 2: go down to the Panama Canal and go see it
Speaker 2: for yourself, specifically the new part of the canal where
Speaker 2: these megaships can actually make.
Speaker 3: Their way through.
Speaker 2: It is really difficult to actually grapple with how gigantic
Speaker 2: these things are and then the level of infrastructure, machinery
Speaker 2: and others to better necessary for them in our current
Speaker 2: infrastructure as compared to some of the older ships of
Speaker 2: just twenty five even thirty years ago, it's gone exponential,
Speaker 2: and a lot of our policy has not kept up
Speaker 2: to date with that.
Speaker 3: Crystal.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's right. So there.
Speaker 1: This was the second major bridge that collapse in similar circumstances.
Speaker 1: The federal guilelines to product bridges were drafted following the
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty collapse of the Tampa Bay Sunshine Skyway Bridge.
Speaker 1: We can actually put this article upon the screen from
Speaker 1: the Wall Street Journal. That's very good talking about Okay,
Speaker 1: so this was horrible.
Speaker 4: Is this a risk at other major bridges?
Speaker 1: And basically the answer is yes. They document these eight
Speaker 1: US bridges are vulnerable to a repeat of the Baltimore crash.
Speaker 1: Modern spans must have safeguards, but even robust structures might
Speaker 1: not withstand a direct blow from giant ships.
Speaker 4: So there are a lot of questions.
Speaker 1: Here about what needs to be done, not just in
Speaker 1: rebuilding this particular bridge to enable these megaships and to
Speaker 1: try to guard from this ever happening again, but also
Speaker 1: at these other spans around the country, what potential updates
Speaker 1: and upgrades and safety procedures can be put into place
Speaker 1: to make sure that we learn the lessons here and
Speaker 1: don't have a repeat of this war.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: No, it's really worth reading this entire thing because it
Speaker 2: demonstrates just again how the ships have become supersized, the vulnerability,
Speaker 2: the lack of regulation around a lot of this. And
Speaker 2: this also highlights the same problem where the only reason
Speaker 2: that we had the updated law was specifically because of
Speaker 2: a bridge collapse in the future. And now, I mean
Speaker 2: there's all these questions right now that are come to
Speaker 2: light around whether the federal government should pay for something
Speaker 2: like this. I also think it will be very instructive
Speaker 2: as to how well this is done. Apparently, inflation adjusted,
Speaker 2: this bridge costs around four hundred million dollars to construct
Speaker 2: whenever it was built inflation adjusted dollars. So then that's
Speaker 2: going to be a big question is like, well, have
Speaker 2: we lowered the cost? Is it going to go exponential?
Speaker 2: Is it going to be billions of dollars? If the
Speaker 2: Feds are going to pay for it, what will exactly
Speaker 2: be included in terms of the updated infrastructure for this
Speaker 2: for not? And there's also you know, obviously lots of
Speaker 2: corruption that Coolie should be on the lookout for. We
Speaker 2: can put the next one, please up there on the
Speaker 2: screen because this is highlights exactly what I was talking about.
Speaker 2: You could see exactly the size quote of a new
Speaker 2: ship when the bridge was built, which is tiny, minuscule
Speaker 2: compared quote to the size of a new ship that
Speaker 2: exists today, and even minuscule whenever you compare it to
Speaker 2: the cargo ship that crashed into the Baltimore Bridge. Don't
Speaker 2: forget this ship is relatively new, It was built in
Speaker 2: Korea by Hyundai, and demonstrates that even you know, since
Speaker 2: that time period, they continue to increase in size and
Speaker 2: in scale. Some of the graphics that they have in
Speaker 2: front of us are just literally stunning to behold, just
Speaker 2: comparing a twenty twenty three ship to a twenty fifteen ship,
Speaker 2: this one that crashed into the Baltimore Bridge, and it
Speaker 2: demonstrates again why we're going to have updated both infrastructure
Speaker 2: and thought and need for this, because this is already
Speaker 2: impacting a ton of travel shipping and travel shipping and
Speaker 2: infrastructure in the entire DMV the Baltimore metro area as well.
Speaker 2: It's becoming catastrophic and ours are already said it could
Speaker 2: turn into now a multi billion dollar boondoggle whenever they're
Speaker 2: actually trying to fix it, which I really hope they
Speaker 2: do and they get it running as fast as possible.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So just for comparison's sake, the ship that crashed
Speaker 1: into the Baltimore Bridge has the capacity to carry ten
Speaker 1: thousand containers. The largest ships that exist now can carry
Speaker 1: twenty four crazy thousand. Now, Baltimore Port was not equipped
Speaker 1: for that level of megaship, so you would never see
Speaker 1: like a twenty four thousand container ship in.
Speaker 4: That particular port.
Speaker 1: But this is the size that is now being enabled
Speaker 1: around the globe. So you know, as you mentioned, Sager,
Speaker 1: this is a huge blow to global shipping. It's a
Speaker 1: massive blow to the city of Baltimore, which really didn't
Speaker 1: need this. I mean, in terms of the economic impact
Speaker 1: here is going to be extraordinary. There may be a
Speaker 1: lot of workers, dock workers who are out of work
Speaker 1: and who are really struggling, you know, while this bridge
Speaker 1: is being constructed. All of the estimates I've seen it's
Speaker 1: going to take years. It's going to take years for
Speaker 1: this bridge to be rebuilt and for this port to
Speaker 1: be fully back up and functional. So huge impact there.
Speaker 1: Huge impact obviously in terms of traffic and congestion. I mean,
Speaker 1: this quarter is one of the busiest and already one
Speaker 1: of the most congested in the entire country, So that's
Speaker 1: going to be an extraordinary impact as well. And you know,
Speaker 1: a lot of questions here still about exactly. You know,
Speaker 1: it looks very clear there's some sort of like a
Speaker 1: technical failure. The electricity went out, impacted the steering, et cetera.
Speaker 1: I mean that the outlines of what happened, it seems
Speaker 1: like we know. But there are still a lot of
Speaker 1: questions that have been raised by our friends at lever
Speaker 1: News about whether this type of ship really, you know,
Speaker 1: whether it was ever safe for this size of ship
Speaker 1: to be navigating in those areas, whether those proper safety
Speaker 1: procedures were in place with regards to the shipping company,
Speaker 1: whether they were falling procedures, whether safety regulations were you know,
Speaker 1: appropriately followed.
Speaker 4: Whether the ship was maintained properly.
Speaker 1: So there still are a lot of questions about exactly
Speaker 1: how this was, how this unfolded.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 2: We'll continue to stay on the story, keep everybody updated.
Speaker 2: It's you know, it still remains one of the most
Speaker 2: important stories in the country. I think it really captured
Speaker 2: a lot of people's attention to and you know, just
Speaker 2: such a horrific situation. The idea of being on the bridge,
Speaker 2: the fallout bridges being something that we go along with
Speaker 2: all the time. And you know there's something symbolic about too,
Speaker 2: this great American city already on the downswing, the bridge
Speaker 2: falls apart.
Speaker 3: Can the government actually reclaim some.
Speaker 2: Of its glory like it has in the past, rebuild
Speaker 2: something like this possible even better?
Speaker 3: And I think that story is going to be very
Speaker 3: important for me.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And the heartbreak of those six workers, oh yeah, it
Speaker 1: was horrible. Most if not all of them, immigrants to
Speaker 1: this country, were there on the bridge in the middle
Speaker 1: of the night, you know, fixing potholes and at grace
Speaker 1: risk to themselves and ultimately losing their lives while trying
Speaker 1: to make people's commutes a little bit easier. So sure,
Speaker 1: our heartbreaks for them and their families as well. All right,
Speaker 1: let's go ahead and move on to the very latest
Speaker 1: with regards to our policy visa the Israel.
Speaker 4: Let's put this up on the screen.
Speaker 1: This really says it all about where we are in
Speaker 1: spite of all the rhetorical shifts from the Biden administration
Speaker 1: expressing their concern about Palestinine civilians, et cetera. Meanwhile, the
Speaker 1: US has just signed off on more bombs and more
Speaker 1: warplanes for Israel. Subhead here, despite a widening rift with
Speaker 1: the Israeli government, the Biden administration continues to authorize the
Speaker 1: transfer of two one thousand pound bombs and other weapons.
Speaker 1: So specifically, in addition to eighteen hundred new two thousand
Speaker 1: pound bombs, we've also got five hundred five hundred pound bombs.
Speaker 1: They go on to say. The two thousand pound bombs,
Speaker 1: you guys probably recall this, have been linked to previous
Speaker 1: mass casualty events throughout Israel's military campaign in Gaza. They
Speaker 1: are capable of leveling city blocks and leaving craters in
Speaker 1: the earth forty feet across in larger and are almost
Speaker 1: never used anymore by Western militaries in densely populated locations
Speaker 1: due to the risk of civilian casualties. But of course
Speaker 1: Israel has used them extensively in Gaza one and perhaps
Speaker 1: most notably in the bombing of Gaza's Jabalia refugee camp
Speaker 1: that was on October thirty first. UN officials decried that strike,
Speaker 1: which killed more than one hundred people, as a disproportionate
Speaker 1: attack that could amount to war crimes. Israel defended the bombing,
Speaker 1: saying it resulted in the death of a single Hamas leader.
Speaker 1: Two thousand pound bunk or buster bomb to at best
Speaker 1: kill one Humas leader, again, according to Israel, at the
Speaker 1: cost of more than one hundred Palestinian civilian lives.
Speaker 4: So we talked a lot about these two.
Speaker 1: Thousand pound bombs at the time because exactly what they're
Speaker 1: laying out here. Our military, which also had some issues,
Speaker 1: let's say, during the War on Terror, you know, and
Speaker 1: in Iraq and in Afghanistan, etc. With regard to protecting
Speaker 1: civilian life, they said, in a dense urban environment, two
Speaker 1: thousand pound bombs no way. The absolute max they would
Speaker 1: use is five hundred pound bombs. Not to mention here
Speaker 1: we are hearing all of this supposed concern about Rafa,
Speaker 1: where more than a million civilians are huddled, desperate, trying
Speaker 1: to seek safety. We're hearing these supposed concerns, and yet
Speaker 1: what are they doing in reality shipping the very two
Speaker 1: thousand pound bombs that could absolutely massacre these people. So
Speaker 1: don't believe them when they pretend like they care about
Speaker 1: Palestinian civilians, Like this is the real policy, and this
Speaker 1: says it all about where we actually are a vis
Speaker 1: of the Israel.
Speaker 2: That's very Honestly, I was shocked by it because first
Speaker 2: they tried to do it in secret, as.
Speaker 3: If it wasn't going to lead. Come on, guys, you
Speaker 3: really think that that's not going to get up.
Speaker 2: But really what kind of shocked me is that we're
Speaker 2: fulfilling their wish list almost to a t. These are
Speaker 2: the exact munitions that they need restock, which they don't
Speaker 2: produce for themselves and they can't buy from everybody else.
Speaker 2: It also fits with Frankly, Wood has received less scrutiny,
Speaker 2: but it was also very important. I read this with
Speaker 2: great interest yesterday. We can put it up there on
Speaker 2: the screen from the Wall Street Journal. It says quote
Speaker 2: US and Israel's unprecedented intelligence sharing draws criticism, and it
Speaker 2: basically says that we have expanded intaeil sharing with Israel
Speaker 2: after the October seventh attack, quote growing concerns in Washington
Speaker 2: about whether that information is contributing actually to civilian casualties.
Speaker 2: The justification of the intelligence sharing was that this would
Speaker 2: allow them to use precision guided munitions. But it appears
Speaker 2: actually that instead that the information either maybe disregarded or used,
Speaker 2: let's say, in a very very different way than it
Speaker 2: was passed on. And it was originally intended. It first
Speaker 2: began with hostage sharing our hostage recovery because some of
Speaker 2: the hostages are American citizens, but quickly actually expanded very
Speaker 2: much into the similar role that we're seeing with the
Speaker 2: US military play with Ukraine. But if you pair those
Speaker 2: two things together, I do think it is undeniable that
Speaker 2: their military campaign that would not at least exist as
Speaker 2: it currently is without the United States absolutely and its support.
Speaker 4: Absolutely.
Speaker 1: And from that article, they say the US shares what's
Speaker 1: known as raw intelligence, such as live video feeds from
Speaker 1: intelligence gathering drones over Gaza with Israeli security agencies. We
Speaker 1: had also apparently dramatically expanded our own surveillance of Gaza previously,
Speaker 1: so guess we have a lot of these live video
Speaker 1: feeds that we can offer up to the Israeli's Sarah Yeager,
Speaker 1: who is watching in, director of New York based nonprofit
Speaker 1: Human Rights Watch, that the intelligence sharing arrangement has little
Speaker 1: in the way of rules and restrictions end quote, essentially
Speaker 1: opens up the entire US vault. So think about our
Speaker 1: involvement here. Okay, Number one, as we just said, fulfilling
Speaker 1: the entire wish list whatever they want. Weapons wise, we've
Speaker 1: shipped more than one hundred different weapons shipments at this point.
Speaker 1: Even at this juncture when the rhetorical concerns about Palistine
Speaker 1: civilians have been elevated all the way up to Joe
Speaker 1: Biden himself, we are still shipping huge quantities of two
Speaker 1: thousand pounds bunker buster bombs that have been used to
Speaker 1: absolutely massacre civilians by Israeli. So fulfilling the entire weapons
Speaker 1: wish list. Okay, what's another key Israeli policy with regard
Speaker 1: to GASA starvation and collective punishment, which was, you know,
Speaker 1: complete siege and now, so at the beginning they then
Speaker 1: allowed in a trickle of trucks. We have also done
Speaker 1: their bidding when it comes to starving and inflicting punishment
Speaker 1: across the entire civilian population. Specifically, when they asked us
Speaker 1: to defund UNRA, we did it. Number one eight organization
Speaker 1: on the ground, we said yes. Now we have codified
Speaker 1: into law that UNRA is defunded at least through twenty
Speaker 1: twenty five. So we're do their bidding there when it
Speaker 1: comes to another key policy, which is starving the population.
Speaker 1: And now we learn which we probably could have guessed,
Speaker 1: but good to have the details here as well, that
Speaker 1: when it comes to the actual targeting and the intelligence
Speaker 1: sharing and the surveillance of Gaza work in hand in glove,
Speaker 1: no restrictions, giving them absolutely everything.
Speaker 4: They want and need.
Speaker 1: And we see Joe Biden himself describe their bombing as indiscriminate,
Speaker 1: so it's not like he doesn't know that they're not
Speaker 1: precisely targeting Hamas.
Speaker 4: And these pinpoint strikes.
Speaker 1: We can all see the Dresden level devastation of the
Speaker 1: entire Gaza strip. So in every way imaginable, we are
Speaker 1: backing and aiding in the most horrifying atrocities that are
Speaker 1: unfolding before all.
Speaker 4: Of our eyes.
Speaker 1: And to add insult to injury, let's put this up
Speaker 1: on the screen from Haretz. Buffer Zone and Control Corridor,
Speaker 1: what the Israeli armies entrenchment in Gaza looks like under
Speaker 1: the radar. The IDF is creating a border buffer zone
Speaker 1: that occupies sixteen percent of the Gaza Strip's territory and
Speaker 1: an east west control corridor to monitor Palestinians moving north.
Speaker 1: This is what it looks like in satellite images. They
Speaker 1: go on to say, without providing many details. Issue is
Speaker 1: currently pursuing a massive project in the Gaza Strip, again
Speaker 1: taking up to about sixteen percent of the Gaza Strips
Speaker 1: area for this buffer zone. They've demolished absolutely everything in
Speaker 1: this area.
Speaker 4: They say.
Speaker 1: The buffer zone will feature earth dykes and IDF forces
Speaker 1: will go in and out. There are no plans to
Speaker 1: set up any permanent military posts inside the zone. That
Speaker 1: area that has been thoroughly demolished. If you look at
Speaker 1: the satellite images used to comprise agricultural feeds, greenhouses, solar
Speaker 1: plant panels, and many residential structures, the IDF is now
Speaker 1: systematically demolishing these structures. Okay, So this matters for a
Speaker 1: variety of reasons. First of all, the one more instance
Speaker 1: of complete annihilation of Gaza civilian life unfolding before our eyes,
Speaker 1: the intentional demolition of everything that is in this area
Speaker 1: sixteen percent of the land mass of the Gaza Strip.
Speaker 1: Second of all, this goes directly against what the US
Speaker 1: has long claimed is one of our policy redlines with
Speaker 1: regards to the quote unquote day after in Gaza. Here's
Speaker 1: John Kirby speaking to exactly.
Speaker 10: That attributed to some of these ministers at this event. Irresponsible, incendiary.
Speaker 10: I'd go so far as to say, and certainly as
Speaker 10: a report, with our strong policy statement, what we have
Speaker 10: made clear that there can be no reduction in gods
Speaker 10: and territory.
Speaker 1: No reduction in gods of territory. Well, it's happening right
Speaker 1: here before your eyes. They are the US military, the
Speaker 1: US you know, intelligence apparatus certainly knows this even better
Speaker 1: than Haratz is able to report. And is there any
Speaker 1: concern over this race by the administration to the public,
Speaker 1: none whatsoever.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a bit laughable.
Speaker 2: And you know the other thing I had realized too
Speaker 2: about the intelligence is that given that the Israelis are
Speaker 2: probably number the one or two biggest counterintelligence threat to
Speaker 2: the US intelligence community. Sharing them raw intelligence and just
Speaker 2: expecting them not to gleam and possibly steal basically whatever
Speaker 2: they want and sources, methods, et cetera is also probably
Speaker 2: something that probably should be discussed and would have been,
Speaker 2: you know, privately at least in the past, but obviously
Speaker 2: was overridden by the Biden administration. But anyway, I think
Speaker 2: what you can see very very clearly is that at
Speaker 2: a policy level, as of what this was only a
Speaker 2: two day ago result, that the weapons are continuing to
Speaker 2: flow regardless of any violation of alleged US policy, which
Speaker 2: means that there is no such US policy.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that's at least the headline to.
Speaker 4: Me, that is the bottom line.
Speaker 1: At the same time, we wanted to pay a little
Speaker 1: bit of attention to what is unfolding in Israel domestically.
Speaker 1: Let's put this up on the screen. There've been huge protests.
Speaker 1: These are images out of Tel Aviv. These are from
Speaker 1: a few days ago, but these protests have continued and
Speaker 1: in fact are escalating as of today.
Speaker 4: Huge crowds here.
Speaker 1: For those of you who are just listening, you also
Speaker 1: see a very aggressive Israeli police response, which once again
Speaker 1: contrast you can see them being shot with water cannons here,
Speaker 1: once again contrast with the watermelon and cotton candy that
Speaker 1: is being enjoyed by the protesters who are there at
Speaker 1: Gaza blocking aid trucks from going in. Very different treatment
Speaker 1: here when it comes to protests who are against the
Speaker 1: net Na WHO government, there's a mix of issues that
Speaker 1: has brought people into the streets. Let's go and put
Speaker 1: this up on the screen. You know, hostage families and
Speaker 1: their advocates have really been at the center of a
Speaker 1: lot of the recent protests. You had a press conference
Speaker 1: from the families of hostages against net Nyaho said quote Netanya,
Speaker 1: who is working against a hostage deal. His behavior regarding
Speaker 1: hostages is a crime. We have no choice but to
Speaker 1: say we understand that you're the one who's blocking the deal.
Speaker 1: We'll do whatever it takes to try and end your
Speaker 1: term as PM. This is a new phase in our
Speaker 1: battle to bring our kids home. And again this was
Speaker 1: from family members of hostages in a press conference. Let's
Speaker 1: put this next piece up on the screen. Some reporting
Speaker 1: on a four day protest in Jerusalem that just launched
Speaker 1: that protest movement against the net Noaho government is expected
Speaker 1: to face its first significant challenge since the war with
Speaker 1: Hmas began after leaders called on supporters to converge outside
Speaker 1: the Kanesset in Jerusalem on Sunday four Straation to set
Speaker 1: up a tensity that will remain in place for four days.
Speaker 1: They say members of the protests organization know that the
Speaker 1: civil awakening of the past few weeks is unlikely to
Speaker 1: bring down the government in the six days remaining before
Speaker 1: the Knesset spring recess, but a good turnout would allow
Speaker 1: the movement to begin the summer session on a high note.
Speaker 1: They hope to channel public anger that returned last week
Speaker 1: mainly around the hostage deal or lack thereof, into getting
Speaker 1: Israelis back on the streets in large numbers for the
Speaker 1: first time since the war began. Organizers target a Jerusalem
Speaker 1: Tel Aviv is also a compromise a matter of habit.
Speaker 1: Families of victims have maintained a tent camp near the
Speaker 1: Canesset since the start of the war, so you have
Speaker 1: a combination of upset over the lack of a deal
Speaker 1: to free the hostages. This goes counter to the narrative
Speaker 1: that you hear from a lot of American Israel defenders about, hey,
Speaker 1: you know, just that the war has to continue to
Speaker 1: free the hostages. Well, these family members of the hostages
Speaker 1: are saying the exact opposite, that the way to free
Speaker 1: the hostages, which obviously we've seen as this war is unfolded,
Speaker 1: is to come to a deal so that there can
Speaker 1: be a cease fire and hostages can be released, and
Speaker 1: Palestinian hostages being held by Israelis can also be released
Speaker 1: as part of that deal. So we know the only
Speaker 1: time there was a significant hostage release came as a
Speaker 1: result of one of these deals. Israel has killed some
Speaker 1: undetermined number of their own hostages with this onslaught in
Speaker 1: the Gaza strip. So you can understand very logically how
Speaker 1: they came to the conclusion that your war is not
Speaker 1: rescuing our brothers, sisters, family members, etc. It is putting
Speaker 1: them at fur the grave risks.
Speaker 2: Well, one of the family members of the hostages spoke
Speaker 2: exactly to that. If we can go ahead and play that,
Speaker 2: please eate. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 8: There's a lot of pressure coming from the cabinet ministers
Speaker 8: stating these thoughts. Okay, be quiet, be quiet, play along,
Speaker 8: come with us to these delegations and then meet with
Speaker 8: the UN and put pressure on outside players, but don't
Speaker 8: say anything to contradict the fish a governmental line and
Speaker 8: the Israel Republic is being pumped with together we would win. Together,
Speaker 8: we would win, and we're not winning. We're not winning
Speaker 8: at all. So this this shorade should stop. We need
Speaker 8: some international intervention because the way things are going in
Speaker 8: Israel now we're jumping straight head down to the business.
Speaker 2: This rhetoric is part of what drives me so crazy
Speaker 2: about American politics is they have more debate in their
Speaker 2: own country than we do, are we? Why is this allowed?
Speaker 2: Why are they allowed to question their own leaders. He's
Speaker 2: directly calling for international intervention into his own country. If
Speaker 2: you called for that here in this country, I mean,
Speaker 2: imagine you know how they have smeared you look at
Speaker 2: the way that Natsan Yahu went after Chuck Schumer for
Speaker 2: calling for a new government. And yet in their country
Speaker 2: they have widespread thousands of people protesting in the street
Speaker 2: disagreement over the war policy. But that's allowed, you know,
Speaker 2: for them, But here it makes you an anti Semitic
Speaker 2: or pro Hamas or whatever. It's it's just drives me
Speaker 2: nuts to see that for them, they're allowed to have
Speaker 2: rational bounds of discussion and whatever.
Speaker 3: And look, I'm not, you know, a whole defender or whatever.
Speaker 2: But at the very least they appear to be have
Speaker 2: a much more robust debate within their own country, their
Speaker 2: media than we are allowed in our own country.
Speaker 3: And that actually makes me really really upset.
Speaker 4: To a point, Yeah, to a point.
Speaker 1: I mean, it also is true that there have been
Speaker 1: many people who have been arrested in harassed for posting
Speaker 1: propolistic victiments on social media and Israel, So I don't
Speaker 1: want to go too far. What's acceptable to do is
Speaker 1: you can criticize.
Speaker 4: The NTA WHO government. Yeah, you can.
Speaker 1: Criticize the hostage strategy. You know, you aren't allowed to
Speaker 1: say it's a genocide, right, You're not allowed to actually
Speaker 1: you know fully rebut or dissent from the desire to
Speaker 1: have this war.
Speaker 4: To begin with.
Speaker 1: Like, there are very clear lines you're really not allowed
Speaker 1: to you know, fully express support for Palisan civilians, humanity,
Speaker 1: et cetera. And as I was saying, they have very
Speaker 1: draconian policies if you cross over those lines. And you
Speaker 1: can also see the aggressive response towards these protesters as well.
Speaker 3: That's true.
Speaker 1: But what this man was saying was very important because
Speaker 1: he's revealing that behind the scenes, the Netanyahu government is
Speaker 1: putting pressure on the hostage member families to keep quiet.
Speaker 4: And you can understand.
Speaker 1: How that would be very powerful because the fate of
Speaker 1: your loved ones is in their hands. They're the ones
Speaker 1: who are negotiating who's going to be on the next.
Speaker 4: List of release.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right, and so they really could you know,
Speaker 1: they can prioritize your loved one or they cannot. And
Speaker 1: so when they're telling you, here's what you need to say,
Speaker 1: and here's the things that you're not allowed to say,
Speaker 1: and here's where we want you to be, and here's
Speaker 1: how we want you to, you know, hush up with
Speaker 1: these other concerns. Yeah, that's going to be incredibly powerful
Speaker 1: when you are desperate to see your loved one returned
Speaker 1: home safe and sound. So it's actually, you know, very
Speaker 1: revelatory that he's indicating that that sort of pressure is
Speaker 1: coming directly from the Natanyahu government. There's another issue that
Speaker 1: is unfolding in Israeli society, which you know is uh,
Speaker 1: this is a big one for them, and this goes back.
Speaker 1: You know, there's a long time debate and conflict over
Speaker 1: whether Israel is going to be an even somewhat nominally
Speaker 1: secular state or whether it is going to be sort
Speaker 1: of like an overtly religious state, and this particular conflict
Speaker 1: cuts to the core of that question. Let's put this
Speaker 1: up on the screen so dramatic. Is really Supreme Court
Speaker 1: ruling that freezes funding to ultra Orthodox seminaries unless their
Speaker 1: students serve in the military is forcing Netnahu's government to
Speaker 1: contend with its survival.
Speaker 4: They say.
Speaker 1: The headline here is netna who coalition in crisis over
Speaker 1: religious draft as war rages. Ultra Orthodox parties in the
Speaker 1: ruling coalition had been assured that they're decades long immunity
Speaker 1: from conscription would be made permanent, and they were in
Speaker 1: a rage after the Supreme Court decision. They called the
Speaker 1: decision a quote mark of Cain. They're threatening to exit
Speaker 1: the coalition. Those in the quote unquote center who joined
Speaker 1: the war cabinet last October back to the court, citing
Speaker 1: the need for war military manpower as Israel faces threats
Speaker 1: not only from Hamas and Gazaba, also from Hesbula in Lebanon.
Speaker 1: Since the war, they write, the burden of carrying the
Speaker 1: ultra Orthodox has become unbearable for large majorities of Israelis,
Speaker 1: who see their abstention from military service as unfair and
Speaker 1: a drain on the economy. Thursday's decision means hundreds of
Speaker 1: religious academies or ishivas will lose a significant portion of
Speaker 1: their funding, some up to fifty percent.
Speaker 4: And just to give you a little.
Speaker 1: Bit of the background here which they write out while
Speaker 1: on this story, they say, many Israelis have long resented
Speaker 1: this exemption of the ultra Orthodox because they don't share
Speaker 1: the security burden, but also because their eshivas received these
Speaker 1: huge governments of cities.
Speaker 4: So the men.
Speaker 1: Mostly just study religious texts and don't work. So you're
Speaker 1: not contributing to the economy, you're exempt from conscription into
Speaker 1: the military, and we're funding your schools and paying for
Speaker 1: all of this is the view of the more secular
Speaker 1: Israeli public. This portion of ultra Orthodox religious Jews makes
Speaker 1: up about thirteen percent of the Israeli population they live in.
Speaker 1: According to this article Cloister life of poverty, prayer and
Speaker 1: studying large families. They believe religious study contributes mortives or
Speaker 1: real safety than military service, and also fear their young men,
Speaker 1: if exposed a secular society will leave the fold.
Speaker 4: That's probably kind of justified.
Speaker 1: The problem is in terms of the numbers, nearly half
Speaker 1: of ultra Orthodox men are unemployed, only fourteen percent of
Speaker 1: university degrees.
Speaker 4: A quarter of children four.
Speaker 1: And younger though, are ultra Orthodox, raising questions about how
Speaker 1: the society will support.
Speaker 4: Itself in the future.
Speaker 1: So you have this significant and rapidly growing part of
Speaker 1: Israeli society, which is also becoming increasingly politically powerful, that
Speaker 1: has been exempt from the draft and had their whole
Speaker 1: lifestyle not working and just studying and their schools funded
Speaker 1: by the Israeli taxpayer, and that population is growing far
Speaker 1: faster than other Jewish demographic groups in Israel. So, as
Speaker 1: I said, this is kind of coming to a head
Speaker 1: now in terms of whether the coalition is actually going
Speaker 1: to split over this, I find it doubtful because the
Speaker 1: thing that would happen if they don't have net Nyahu
Speaker 1: is you'd end up with someone like Benny Gantz, who.
Speaker 4: Is more secular.
Speaker 1: He's still hardline when it comes to the war in Gaza.
Speaker 1: I don't think the policy that different under Benny Gantse,
Speaker 1: although as we've discussed before, he may be more sympathetic
Speaker 1: to the hostage families and more aggressive and seeking some
Speaker 1: sort of a deal there, so it could be significant there,
Speaker 1: but certainly he's not going to be on their side.
Speaker 4: When it comes to an issue like that.
Speaker 1: So I think they feel like net Nyahu is probably
Speaker 1: the lesser of two evils, to use some political phrasing
Speaker 1: from that we might be familiar with here in America.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, these people are the whole situation is
Speaker 2: because Crystal. It's not only do they get their schools funded,
Speaker 2: they are also the biggest welfare queens on the planet
Speaker 2: and they literally get paid by the state in order
Speaker 2: to sit out religion to not where they don't do anything.
Speaker 3: And they also have like ten children. It's crazy.
Speaker 2: If anybody's ever been to Jerusalem or to Israel, you
Speaker 2: see them all over. The secular Israelis hate them with
Speaker 2: the passion, specifically for this reason and especially now. I mean, look,
Speaker 2: serving in the military is not fun. You have to
Speaker 2: give up two years of your entire life. Rich and
Speaker 2: poor everybody alike, except if you're one of them, and
Speaker 2: they get paid, they get their exemptions, they have all
Speaker 2: these children, they get basically vassals of the state in
Speaker 2: order to just study religion all day. I mean, it's
Speaker 2: just outrageous, especially in an allegedly secular democracy. So anyway,
Speaker 2: I think in this particular case, though, if they are
Speaker 2: able to maintain their draft exemption even in the biggest
Speaker 2: draft call up in Israeli history, and as you've had
Speaker 2: massive blows to the economy, it does demonstrate their power.
Speaker 2: Part of the reason why some politicians don't want get
Speaker 2: on the wrong side of them is because their population
Speaker 2: booms so much that there's some projections that say some
Speaker 2: fifty percent of the country in fifty years is going
Speaker 2: to just be ultra Orthodox.
Speaker 3: Yeah, are going to be the Hurries.
Speaker 2: So they're like, well, demographics is kind of destiny at
Speaker 2: that point, and that will put very irreconcilable parts of
Speaker 2: Israeli society that really come up against each other. It's
Speaker 2: hard to even put in a US context because we
Speaker 2: really can't understand just like how different they're both visions
Speaker 2: of the country, of the state, of what it's supposed
Speaker 2: to be and all of that actually are, and they
Speaker 2: somehow coexist in the same place, which is like barely
Speaker 2: the size of a US state.
Speaker 1: Well, and their representatives would be more of the like
Speaker 1: Smotrich ben Gevier.
Speaker 6: Like.
Speaker 2: See, they have crazy beliefs. Some of them don't even
Speaker 2: believe that Israel is a real country. You know, some
Speaker 2: of them have been arrested by the secular military play.
Speaker 2: This is my other thing. Their biblical interpretations and all
Speaker 2: that are way all over the map. So even smoke
Speaker 2: tris I don't know if he's one hundred percent you know,
Speaker 2: in line. And they have much more like socially conservative
Speaker 2: views on some things. They're not necessarily as pro military
Speaker 2: in others. It's difficult to get to like wrap your
Speaker 2: head around them. It's a weird group.
Speaker 1: But just so people understand, like this Supreme Court decision
Speaker 1: is already going into effect.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so the funding is being.
Speaker 1: Pulled, the draft lifts, lists are being created.
Speaker 4: This is going into action now.
Speaker 1: There could be some sort of political comment compromise that
Speaker 1: makes its way through the Kanesset. And my understanding is,
Speaker 1: you know, that's a possibility that you don't end up
Speaker 1: fully with, you know, all of them being drafted. Maybe
Speaker 1: there's some more limited exemptions something of that nature. And
Speaker 1: funding being restored. So this isn't a done deal yet. However,
Speaker 1: as of today it is going into effect. They are
Speaker 1: taking action after this Supreme Court ruling. And you know,
Speaker 1: this is a massive, massive issue in Israeli domestic society,
Speaker 1: and it is one more thing that makes Netnahu's coalition,
Speaker 1: you know, tenuous. You add to that then the secular
Speaker 1: protests against him in the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem,
Speaker 1: which are by all accounts, you know, these are some
Speaker 1: of the most massive protests that they've seen since the
Speaker 1: war began. And you can see the pressure that he
Speaker 1: is certainly under himself. And as we have said million
Speaker 1: times before, he thinks it's in his best interest to
Speaker 1: keep this war going as long as he possibly can,
Speaker 1: because it allows him to forestall any questions about a
Speaker 1: new government, saying listen, well, you know, we'll look into
Speaker 1: the failures in October sent but it's got to.
Speaker 4: Be after the war.
Speaker 1: Yes, So it's right, guess what, you want to keep
Speaker 1: the war going forever, and apparently the US is happy
Speaker 1: to back you in that endeavor. All right, let's get
Speaker 1: to some more shocking comments made on Joe Biden's favorite
Speaker 1: morning show, program, Morning Joe. This is the head of
Speaker 1: the ADL Jonathan Greenblatt, comparing the Kafias scarf worn by
Speaker 1: Palestinian activists Palestinians themselves, peoples stand in solidarity with Palestinians,
Speaker 1: comparing that to the swastika.
Speaker 4: Take listen, you have got.
Speaker 11: To be concerned because these kids on these college campuses.
Speaker 11: Guess where they're going to your boardrooms. They're going to
Speaker 11: editorial boards, They're going to the assignment death of news
Speaker 11: networks people who stay death to the Zionists. I wish
Speaker 11: for that and worse. And if you wouldn't tolerate it
Speaker 11: if someone is wearing a swastika on their arm, I'm sorry,
Speaker 11: you shouldn't tolerate it. If they're wearing a caffeita, there
Speaker 11: are flowing death to anyone.
Speaker 1: All right, CEO of the Antidefamation, Lady Jonathan Greenblat, God
Speaker 1: bless the poor internet connection there. But you know this
Speaker 1: is outrageous to compare a kafia to a swastika and
Speaker 1: smear all of the fifty of American Jews want to
Speaker 1: cease fire, Okay, to smear anybody who associates themselves with
Speaker 1: the Palestinian cause and basic palestin humanity as an antisemit,
Speaker 1: semite and on the level of a Nazi is so
Speaker 1: dis and that that can be aired on the most
Speaker 1: mainstream of news programs. And it's not just that he
Speaker 1: says that, it's that not a single person on that
Speaker 1: We were there seven people up on the screen there
Speaker 1: sitting there listening to these comments. Not one of them objects,
Speaker 1: not one. Now, imagine, let's put the shoe on the
Speaker 1: other foot. Let's say that you had someone on the
Speaker 1: panel who equated an Israeli flag to and displaying an
Speaker 1: Israeli flag to a swastika. Do you think they would
Speaker 1: just sit back quietly and let that slide and calmly
Speaker 1: end the segment. Of course not. It would be a
Speaker 1: national news story. The entire panel would have completely melted
Speaker 1: down and freaked down.
Speaker 4: And we know this. Remember when Nina Turner was on.
Speaker 1: CNN on one of the primary election nights and she
Speaker 1: just tried to bring up the facts about what was
Speaker 1: being done and why so many people were motivated to
Speaker 1: come out out and vote uncommitted against JOBAI. They all
Speaker 1: freaked out, They melted down, Anderson Cooper wouldn't even allow
Speaker 1: her to finish her comments, yet here Kafia compared to
Speaker 1: swastika silence.
Speaker 2: Now, it is funny though, because at a certain point,
Speaker 2: if you're grasping for things now, at that level, it's like,
Speaker 2: what are we even doing here?
Speaker 3: You just look like a complete clown.
Speaker 2: What's also ironic, I would just say, is that if
Speaker 2: you look into some of these so called swastika instances
Speaker 2: on college campuses, nine out of ten of them are
Speaker 2: complete bullshit just so people do and are either inside
Speaker 2: jobs for attention or not. I actually went to George
Speaker 2: Watching University, one of the original homes of the swastika hoax,
Speaker 2: So just gonna put that out there. That's first and foremost,
Speaker 2: but second in terms of comparing the Kafia the political statement,
Speaker 2: the point that you just made is an excellent one,
Speaker 2: but it gets to the ADL philosophy of you justify censorship.
Speaker 2: Here at the top, you build yourself as an organization,
Speaker 2: and then in the moment of crisis for their true purpose,
Speaker 2: which is to serve the State of Israel, allegedly through
Speaker 2: combating anti Semitism, you narrow and use those levers to
Speaker 2: increasingly chip away at any public expression of support. It's
Speaker 2: fundamentally an anti American It is ridiculous and and it
Speaker 2: really is like hand in glove both with censorship complex
Speaker 2: to try and normalize this type of rhetoric in American media.
Speaker 2: And that's why I think it is so dangerous because
Speaker 2: it has power. It really does have power.
Speaker 4: It does, it does.
Speaker 1: And also this obsession with what college kids are saying
Speaker 1: on campus.
Speaker 4: Well, okay, we.
Speaker 1: Have a member of Congress calling for Gosita be nuked,
Speaker 1: and that gets less attention than what's some kidd Columbia,
Speaker 1: you know, at Stanford University, where The Atlantic thought it
Speaker 1: appropriate to spend five months of journalistic resources digging into
Speaker 1: what those kids says.
Speaker 4: Powerless. Yeah, I wish, I wish we could have heard your.
Speaker 3: Your compuci did you guys bring that?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, Peter and Susan Glasser and so he is
Speaker 1: a dual NEPO baby there.
Speaker 3: Former Jerusalem Correspondence. I would also say, yeah, so.
Speaker 1: The Atlantic and this dude, they find it so important.
Speaker 1: And I'm not saying that like the sentiments of college
Speaker 1: students don't matter at all.
Speaker 4: That's why we talk about how young.
Speaker 1: People view this conflict and how it's different from older Americans.
Speaker 1: But to spend five months digging into their every utterance
Speaker 1: and then allow things like, you know, this member of
Speaker 1: Congress who actually has power and influence, who is calling
Speaker 1: for Gaza being duked, and that's barely a blip on
Speaker 1: your radar screen. It's just insane. It's just pure insanity. Now,
Speaker 1: I think your rights are, like you can see from
Speaker 1: the polls, we are not really buying it. But the
Speaker 1: other thing that's discussing about it so cheapens the term
Speaker 1: anti semitism, it makes it utterly meaningless.
Speaker 4: So when people hear.
Speaker 1: This, you know, lobbied against basically like half the population
Speaker 1: for their views on Israel Gaza. Then when it genuinely applies,
Speaker 1: and in many, in plenty of instances, there is genuine
Speaker 1: anti semitism. No one yere is denying that. That is
Speaker 1: a real and disgusting phenomenon. But when it genuinely applies,
Speaker 1: people are more likely to dismiss it as you're just
Speaker 1: you know, basically swaming this person. They last week, I'm
Speaker 1: sure you saw this special rapertorre Francesca Yeah Albany sorry
Speaker 1: segment Yeah, releases a report saying there are reasonable grounds
Speaker 1: to believe that Israel is committing genocide. The response from
Speaker 1: our own State Department is to smear her as an
Speaker 1: anti semi completely baselessly based on comments that she made
Speaker 1: that yes, we're critical of Israel, but are not even
Speaker 1: colorably antisemitic. You just strip the term of literally any meaning.
Speaker 1: And that's part of why I find this so disgusting.
Speaker 2: Well, the next one is a perfect example of that too,
Speaker 2: Lindsey Graham saying it's a blood libel to criticize Israeli
Speaker 2: humanitarian policy in Gaza.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 9: I'm here also to take on and I will talk
Speaker 9: about this tomorrow. A form of blood libel in twenty
Speaker 9: twenty four, that the state of Israel is using starvation
Speaker 9: as a weapon of war. That is bullshit, And owil
Speaker 9: tomorrow walk through the food that's coming into Gaza and
Speaker 9: what you're doing to make sure that people in Gaza
Speaker 9: do not starve.
Speaker 3: So Israel is guide's back against the wall. We have
Speaker 3: your back.
Speaker 2: So that's another example of how the word blood libel
Speaker 2: is meaningless, or you know it was. It's a term
Speaker 2: that originates from the Middle Ages, where they said that
Speaker 2: Jews drink the blood of Christians. It is then resurrected
Speaker 2: and used by the Nazis in the Holocaust to continue
Speaker 2: to incur said blood libel against Jews, and I think
Speaker 2: all of us are able to intellectually understand the difference
Speaker 2: between what a genuine blood libel is and it's rhetoric
Speaker 2: and what it actually lies. Then in truth or at
Speaker 2: least in complete ability to criticize humanitarian actions, specifically taking
Speaker 2: place at the Israel border crossing, they are the ones
Speaker 2: who are destroying and cheapening their own rhetoric. And frankly,
Speaker 2: I mean, didn't you I think you've said this, maybe
Speaker 2: Daryl Cooper said this too. If if everything is anti Semitic,
Speaker 2: you're actually setting the grounds for more anti Semitism.
Speaker 3: I mean, I'm not sure, you know, for me too.
Speaker 2: At this point, if someone's like, oh, that's so and
Speaker 2: so's an anti Semi, I'm like, oh.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, well he actually say right, I'm gonna.
Speaker 2: Have to judge it for myself before I believe you,
Speaker 2: Whereas previously I'd be like, oh really, wow, you know,
Speaker 2: maybe I won't to look into it or won't be
Speaker 2: as skeptical nowadays, you know, if you hear these types
Speaker 2: of terms, any of them, Honestly, I'm.
Speaker 3: Just like well maybe let me let me make up
Speaker 3: my line for myself.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, and just to prove the point, let's put this
Speaker 1: up on the screen. This is from that you know,
Speaker 1: blood libeling left wing rag the Washington Post, looking at
Speaker 1: exactly how much aid is going into Gaza in the
Speaker 1: massive deficit post October seventh, in what needs to go
Speaker 1: in versus what is actually going in. And you can
Speaker 1: see this huge and growing deficit.
Speaker 4: And let's be totally clear, Israel.
Speaker 1: Controls this one hundred percent. There are trucks and trucks
Speaker 1: and trucks lined up at the border, thousands of them
Speaker 1: ready to go in, including.
Speaker 4: Some of our own aid trucks.
Speaker 1: So apparently the allegation is we're trying to smuggle weapons
Speaker 1: into Hamas through these truckloads. And we also know that
Speaker 1: children have and infants in particular have literally starved to death.
Speaker 1: So again, their only defense to these things is to
Speaker 1: make it out of bounds to even speak the facts
Speaker 1: of what is happening here for fear of being branded
Speaker 1: and tarred as an anti semi. And also again another
Speaker 1: Darryl Cooper point is that the more you conflate all
Speaker 1: Jewish people around the world with the state of Israel
Speaker 1: and the explicit policy right now of the net Nyahu government,
Speaker 1: the more you are directly actually stoking anti Semitism. I
Speaker 1: reject the idea that you should conflate and demand that
Speaker 1: every Jew around the world be attached to this horrifying policy,
Speaker 1: And in fact, a majority of Jewish Americans here dissent
Speaker 1: from that policy descent from the net Yahoo government. In fact,
Speaker 1: it's actually white evangelical Christians that are the strongest supporter
Speaker 1: of the net Yahoo government here in the US. So
Speaker 1: I actually think it's really wrong to look at this
Speaker 1: through the lens of religion and this holy war that
Speaker 1: actually isn't the core of what this is about at all.
Speaker 1: It's about the you know, original displacement of Palestinians. It's
Speaker 1: about a long and ongoing land dispute, and it's about
Speaker 1: the demonstrable atrocities that we're all watching unfolding in front
Speaker 1: of our eyes. And no, it is not anti semitic
Speaker 1: to just speak to the facts of what.
Speaker 4: We all see.
Speaker 1: But as I said, it's kind of like, you know,
Speaker 1: at this point, I think they're desperate. All of the
Speaker 1: other talking points have kind of worn out, So the
Speaker 1: last ditch attempt is just to say like, well, you
Speaker 1: can't say that, even if it's happening, you can't say
Speaker 1: it because you'll, you know, it's anti Semitic. So that's
Speaker 1: kind of where we are. And I think you're right
Speaker 1: that people have really seen through this tactic and it
Speaker 1: just doesn't carry the weight that it wants to.
Speaker 3: Oh, I definitely am.
Speaker 2: I mean, like I said that at the swastika thing, Swaska,
Speaker 2: They're like, if they claim a Swaska shows up literally
Speaker 2: anywhere in America, I'm like, maybe, maybe show me a
Speaker 2: camera of an actual white nationalist spraying it, and then
Speaker 2: I'll still be like, well, we'll see, just because I
Speaker 2: know that there's so much cultural cachet to be had
Speaker 2: by the ADL and others to try and blow up
Speaker 2: these incidents. In some cases people are faking them because
Speaker 2: they want to invite and create the conditions for exactly
Speaker 2: this type of discussion and rhetoric. But unfortunately for them,
Speaker 2: people can see through it, at least for now in
Speaker 2: the age of the Internet.
Speaker 3: So there we go, guys, we have a great show
Speaker 3: for everybody today.
Speaker 2: Happy is today Easter or yesterday was Easter?
Speaker 1: That non religious listen, you're not a cultural Christian like
Speaker 1: Richard Dawkins apparently is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, I wish to talk about that because
Speaker 2: he's being very unfairly smeared for that.
Speaker 3: As as a long time Dawkins guy.
Speaker 4: You think who should talk about it?
Speaker 2: Well, no, I think they're coming out against him. They're
Speaker 2: claiming that he it's a hypocrite. It's something that he's
Speaker 2: been saying for actually quite a long time, which is
Speaker 2: why it actually annoys me.
Speaker 1: Well, my issue was more than like islamophobia in the
Speaker 1: comments versus.
Speaker 3: We'll talk about it tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we'll put it in the show because it sounds
Speaker 1: like maybe you have an interesting conversation there. Anyway, Saga
Speaker 1: apparently not a cultural Christian or not a cultural myself probably.
Speaker 1: I mean we celebrate Easter just with like the bunnies
Speaker 1: in the basket.
Speaker 3: But today is apparently today is Easter Monday. It is
Speaker 3: a holiday. I guess it's a holiday in Europe.
Speaker 4: So anyway, we digress. See you tomorrow.