Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
Speaker 1: news media, and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 2: Let's talk here about Zoron, Mom, Donnie and the New
Speaker 2: York Times, because this is an interesting story. So before
Speaker 2: we jump into the New York Times piece, we have
Speaker 2: to get a little bit of Steve Bannon's take on
Speaker 2: zoron so Much Bannon in today's show, So Much Bannon,
Speaker 2: And by the way, I do want to just say,
Speaker 2: like Bannon has taken a lot of L's so I
Speaker 2: don't want to overstate his importance, but I just I
Speaker 2: always think it's interesting to hear his thoughts because he
Speaker 2: does have a better grasp I think of the political
Speaker 2: moment that many others.
Speaker 3: Let me just say anecdotally, someone who was recently on
Speaker 3: Warroom told me like after they went on war Room,
Speaker 3: immediately they had I think like within a couple of minutes,
Speaker 3: one hundred.
Speaker 4: Plus new followers on X.
Speaker 3: And so Bannon has like, you know, it's still true
Speaker 3: that your average X user is exceptional from the average
Speaker 3: American because not most people are on Twitter, and most
Speaker 3: people aren't watching, aren't watching, most people are not watching
Speaker 3: Steep Bannon. But he does actually have a really I
Speaker 3: think strong tether to the mega base itself. I think
Speaker 3: the like hardcore Maga bandon still sets the tone for them.
Speaker 3: That is not a majority of the American public, but
Speaker 3: it's a small group that he does have a lot
Speaker 3: of sway with and listens to him every day.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but I mean usually what he uses his way
Speaker 2: for is, yeah, he'll protest in advance about let's say
Speaker 2: Medicaid cuts, or about the tax cuts for the right
Speaker 2: Trump decides, or about Elon, and then once Trump decides
Speaker 2: and does whatever, then Bannon's role becomes explaining to the
Speaker 2: magabase why actually this is fine and why you have
Speaker 2: to trust the plan and why, oh, well, he must
Speaker 2: have attacked Aroun because he had more intelligence than we did.
Speaker 2: We just have to trust this guy, so that is
Speaker 2: actually the role that he starts. Nevertheless, his analysis of
Speaker 2: Zoran Hundani was a lot more interesting and intelligent than
Speaker 2: the people who were claiming that he's going to implement
Speaker 2: sharreal law in Manhattan. Let's go ahead and take a
Speaker 2: listen to a little bit of what he had to say.
Speaker 5: That's one of the most sophisticated races, and he focused
Speaker 5: on affordability and he addressed their issues. Now his response,
Speaker 5: he took the anger of the moment of populism and
Speaker 5: got engaged with people. Cuomo ran a traditional thing. This
Speaker 5: kid ran a very sophisticated campaign, a very sophisticated campaign
Speaker 5: on the grassroots.
Speaker 2: And we can put the next piece up on the screen.
Speaker 2: I mean. He talked also about how the messaging was intelligent.
Speaker 2: He said that Mumdannie's diagnosis of New York's affordability crisis
Speaker 2: sounds quite similar to Bannon's description of America's to seem
Speaker 2: to agree on seventy percent panitas fifty percent, but that's
Speaker 2: still a lot. Politics today is all about authenticity. Mam
Speaker 2: Donnie's campaign was today's equivalent of Barack Obamas. He's walking
Speaker 2: down grocery aisles, chatting on TikTok. He accepted every interview requests,
Speaker 2: relied on grassroots organizing, kuomba name recognition. His campaign raised
Speaker 2: almost forty million dollars, secured Bill Clint's endorsement. His appearances
Speaker 2: were curated. The traditional Democratic Party is dead. I wish
Speaker 2: that were true, Mom Donnie, blew it up. I wish
Speaker 2: that were true. Do you share the conservative view that
Speaker 2: an unabashed socialist and support of the Palestinian cause is
Speaker 2: a gift to Trump? Bannon shakes his head. You shed
Speaker 2: more tears for answered prayers than unanswered prayers. Who replies,
Speaker 2: Mam Donnie can bring people out. Populism is the future
Speaker 2: of politics. So he sees him as basically like And
Speaker 2: I do think that I don't want to understate actually
Speaker 2: the significance of Mum Donnie's victory because being able to
Speaker 2: run as an unabashed anti zionist in New York City
Speaker 2: and when is an earthquake and you have a huge
Speaker 2: schism in the Democratic between the democratic base and Democratic elites.
Speaker 2: I do not think that most people vote on gaza.
Speaker 2: But I do think that Gaza is becoming a litmus
Speaker 2: test issue for the Democratic base, which says to people,
Speaker 2: does this person have a shred of integrity? Are they
Speaker 2: willing to stand up against you know, political forces or
Speaker 2: you know, well organized, well funded forces and actually fight
Speaker 2: for something. And it is the sort of schism between
Speaker 2: the base and the elite of the party that you know,
Speaker 2: it's the sort of thing that Trump actually exploited in
Speaker 2: his twenty sixteen victory, and I think there is going
Speaker 2: to be a real reckoning with that in twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 2: Not to mention, of course, the economic pieces that everyone
Speaker 2: is like, you know, melting down on the grocery stores
Speaker 2: and the rent freeze, et cetera, and the overt embrace
Speaker 2: of like, yes, I'm a democratic socialist and that's just
Speaker 2: who I am, and I'm not running away from it whatsoever. No.
Speaker 3: I think that's right, and I think what Bannon is recognizing.
Speaker 3: And again, like I've seen an interesting discourse on the
Speaker 3: right about Mom Donnie since he won. Because you noticed
Speaker 3: that Bannon was talking to Marjorie Taylor Green, who posted
Speaker 3: the initial hilarious meme of the statue of liberty and
Speaker 3: what like a full burku. Yeah, and there's been there
Speaker 3: was this like initial reflex to just be completely grossed
Speaker 3: out picked out by mom Donnie, that people like Bannon
Speaker 3: started to I think, change a bit. And you've seen
Speaker 3: It's not like it's the whole right is embracing Mom Donnie.
Speaker 3: But you've seen this interesting strain, and I think it's
Speaker 3: probably in part due to new media, this interesting strain
Speaker 3: of people being like, whoa, look at what he did
Speaker 3: with young voters and millennials in New York City, having like,
Speaker 3: we have this information right in front of us. That's
Speaker 3: like a pretty clear sign that he was speaking to something.
Speaker 3: And it's just a not only a smart observation by Bannon.
Speaker 4: But I don't think it's an easy one to make
Speaker 4: right now.
Speaker 3: He can make it because he's sort of seen this
Speaker 3: like a godfather like figure, but not an easy point
Speaker 3: to make at all.
Speaker 2: All right, let's talk about the New York Times. So
Speaker 2: they published this big scoop that they apparently raced the
Speaker 2: process because they wanted to beat Chris Rufoy, who was
Speaker 2: also chasing down the same story. To put this up
Speaker 2: on the screen. They reveal exclusively that mom. Donnie identified
Speaker 2: as both Asian and African American on his college application
Speaker 2: to Columbia. Specifically, they says he doesn't consider himself black,
Speaker 2: but he said the application did not allow for the
Speaker 2: complexity of his background. They included the specific you know
Speaker 2: form and how he checked the box showing these are
Speaker 2: the questions be opposed to applicants about race and ethnicity
Speaker 2: during the two thousand and nine twenty ten application cycle
Speaker 2: when he applied and he indicated he was both black
Speaker 2: or African American and Asian. Okay, Now a little quick
Speaker 2: refresher on his backgrounds here. He was born in Uganda.
Speaker 2: He was in his family had been in Uganda for generations.
Speaker 2: There were a bunch of Indian laborers who brought were
Speaker 2: brought over by the British in the early eighteen hundreds
Speaker 2: to do basically like you know, slave labor in Uganda,
Speaker 2: indentured servitor in Uganda, and it became this thriving diaspora
Speaker 2: community that ends up being actually quite successful within Yugana.
Speaker 2: And so his family is part of that history. Obviously,
Speaker 2: he's also South Asian, being you know, ethnically from the
Speaker 2: Indian subcontinent. So he marks these two boxes and they
Speaker 2: are acting like this is sort of a giant scandal.
Speaker 2: There were three reporters put on it. One of them
Speaker 2: was a health reporter, by the way, at a time
Speaker 2: when people are like losing Medicare and the hospitals or
Speaker 2: rural hospitals are under attack, and this is what they're
Speaker 2: focused on. In addition, you may ask yourself, well, how
Speaker 2: did they how did they come upon this information? Emily,
Speaker 2: where did they Where did they get us from? And
Speaker 2: we can put C three up on the screen. They
Speaker 2: got it from this guy who posts as CRIMEA. He
Speaker 2: runs a sub stack. He's also very prominent on X.
Speaker 4: Your French is beautiful.
Speaker 2: Christ Oh, thank you very much, Mercy. He focuses a
Speaker 2: lot Emily on race and IQ quote unquote academic who
Speaker 2: focuses a lot on race and IQ prominently feature posts there.
Speaker 2: Seeks to defend the argument that average national IQs very
Speaker 2: by up to forty points, with countries in Europe and
Speaker 2: North America and East Asia at the high end, countries
Speaker 2: in the Global South at the low end, and several
Speaker 2: African countries reportedly having average national IQs at a level
Speaker 2: that experts associate with mental impairments. So basically, he's your
Speaker 2: sort of average Twitter racist that got a hold of
Speaker 2: these hacked documents from Colombia. Now, listen, I am not
Speaker 2: against news organizations using hacked material, even if it comes
Speaker 2: from a sketchy source. But you know who has been
Speaker 2: against that in the past. That would be the New
Speaker 2: York Times, who refused to report on, for example, the
Speaker 2: Iranian hacks of Trump campaign documents, including the jd Vance dossier,
Speaker 2: and refused to publish it in part apparently because of
Speaker 2: the source of those hacks. In addition, when they first
Speaker 2: put out this report, they really glossed over who this guy.
Speaker 2: They called him like an academic who's opposed affirmative action,
Speaker 2: when in reality, he's just like a brazen racist that
Speaker 2: you know, posts like your average Twitter racist posts.
Speaker 4: Ultimately, I didn't go back and look at his feed.
Speaker 4: Is it bad?
Speaker 2: It's exactly what you expect.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: So it's also, I mean, this whole story, we tease
Speaker 3: this at the beginning of the shows, so many layers
Speaker 3: to peel back, the first of which is like, I
Speaker 3: don't I think it's pretty clear that mom Nannie was
Speaker 3: playing by the rules that we as a society set
Speaker 3: for college applications.
Speaker 4: For a very long time, correct now, I don't know.
Speaker 3: I mean, if we're if you're, if you're going to
Speaker 3: do and say all of these different identities are important
Speaker 3: and material to whether or not you belong academically at Colombia.
Speaker 3: I would probably disagree with the system like that. At
Speaker 3: the same time, that is the system that existed. What's
Speaker 3: actually somewhat remarkable, crystals that with all of that, he
Speaker 3: didn't get into Colombia. Apparently he's like, you couldn't come
Speaker 3: up with like a bigger parody of like affirmative action
Speaker 3: system on paper.
Speaker 4: Right than the NANNI.
Speaker 2: Application, being like, well, the Asian part might have killed.
Speaker 4: Him, that's right, Maybe he should have left that off.
Speaker 2: So this is really about that than that, you know.
Speaker 2: I mean, I think it's what he said, and I
Speaker 2: think it's reasonable, And I also think it's reasonable, say, like,
Speaker 2: you know, he was putting what he thought would be
Speaker 2: beneficial for him on a cool application, as one does.
Speaker 2: But I think when he he was like, these boxes
Speaker 2: don't really fit my identity, and I think that's fair.
Speaker 2: His identity is complex. He talks about it a lot.
Speaker 2: It's something his you know, his dad is a professor
Speaker 2: of these sorts of things, and they clearly thought deeply
Speaker 2: about it, so I also don't think it was casually done.
Speaker 2: He sees himself as like he is from Uganda, his
Speaker 2: family is from Uganda for multiple generations as he also right, yeah,
Speaker 2: but he you know also is you know, has this
Speaker 2: Indian ethnic heritage, so to check both those boxes, like,
Speaker 2: I'm not really sure how else he should have filled
Speaker 2: out that for him.
Speaker 3: I completely agree, and I think it's the problem. I
Speaker 3: mean so from my position on this, and I bet
Speaker 3: it would have been Rufo's position on this, I think
Speaker 3: it exposes sort of the absurdities of the critical theory
Speaker 3: that mom Dannie and his father actually wax poetic about
Speaker 3: and believe really deeply in. At the same time, he
Speaker 3: has a much stronger claim to both of these heritages
Speaker 3: than somebody like and use this as a proxy. I
Speaker 3: know it's cringy, but Elizabeth Warren, who many such cases, like,
Speaker 3: she's an example of something that's happened for decades in
Speaker 3: college admissions, and I just think it all like exposes
Speaker 3: the absurdity of this and how immaterial and silly that
Speaker 3: it can be to insist that by checking off these boxes.
Speaker 3: You know a significant amount about the person based on it,
Speaker 3: and you can make a determination as to whether they
Speaker 3: belong at your school. I mean, I think it's all
Speaker 3: just absurd, But The New York Times doesn't believe what
Speaker 3: I believe.
Speaker 4: It's funny.
Speaker 3: It's just an incredibly funny anecdote, or not even an anecdote,
Speaker 3: like an experiment in them having to it's because it's
Speaker 3: the Ramm Dannie. The New York Times has decided that
Speaker 3: they're going to apply a very critical lens.
Speaker 2: You might say they're waging a jihad against him in
Speaker 2: the language of Kirsten Chillibrands. Let me, I want to
Speaker 2: jump to Curtis Lee.
Speaker 3: Why here?
Speaker 2: Who is the Republican nominee for you know in this race?
Speaker 2: And by the way, there's so much billionaire pressure on him.
Speaker 2: Bill Ackman is going to to try to get Leewah
Speaker 2: out of this race so that Eric Adams or Andrew Kuoma.
Speaker 2: I guess who did he get behind Adams or Quoma
Speaker 2: I forgot anyway one of them can consolidate and ride
Speaker 2: to victory overs or on Mom Donnie. In any case,
Speaker 2: Leewa gets asked about this on Fox News and I'm
Speaker 2: sure Fox News was expecting him to attack Zoron over this,
Speaker 2: and he did not. He chose not to do that.
Speaker 2: So let's go and take a listen to C seven.
Speaker 6: I do know he is a practicing Muslim, and I've
Speaker 6: advised our colleagues, which there on many on our side
Speaker 6: of this issue, because we know Zoran will destroy this city,
Speaker 6: do not attack his religion. Leave the religion alone. If
Speaker 6: you don't want to see him elected. There are a
Speaker 6: million Muslims in New York City who can vote, many
Speaker 6: of them with conservative values, many of them who voted
Speaker 6: for Donald Trump for president.
Speaker 7: So he credit that background in the center of his campaign.
Speaker 6: Right, you can criticize him as being a communist, socialist,
Speaker 6: anti semi check, but leave the religion alone. Now, he
Speaker 6: would consider himself Southeast Asian, although he's of Indian heritage.
Speaker 6: His mother and father he grew up in Uganda. So
Speaker 6: I guess you could sort of put it in the blender.
Speaker 6: I don't have a problem with how he shall f
Speaker 6: identify it.
Speaker 2: Put it in a blender. Emily. That is to me also,
Speaker 2: such a New York response. You know, and I mean,
Speaker 2: you say a lot of things about Chris Leewa, who
Speaker 2: I used to be on a bunch of Fox panels with.
Speaker 2: I told you so, I've met him a few times
Speaker 2: in real life. But he is a New Yorker hm,
Speaker 2: and so he's looking at this, He's like, don't attack
Speaker 2: him because he's a Musliman because of his identity, Like
Speaker 2: you want to go after him, you know, talk about
Speaker 2: his policies and whatever. But yeah, he's from Ugandha, he's Muslim,
Speaker 2: he's Indian, and he's all those things. Put him in
Speaker 2: the blender. However he self identifies whatever. Who cares? How
Speaker 2: is this really the issue?
Speaker 3: Producer Mac went viral for posting that video, and Sake
Speaker 3: Sleiwa just outwoke to The New York Times.
Speaker 4: Yeah it's true, buddy.
Speaker 2: I mean it is a point in favor of the
Speaker 2: like racist the social construct.
Speaker 3: Well, it's a point in favor of that, absolutely, And
Speaker 3: I have always taken that as being a point in
Speaker 3: favor of not using it as such material of such
Speaker 3: material importance in certain processes like affirmative action, for example.
Speaker 4: But we don't necessarily have to have that debate.
Speaker 2: Is just funny, No, I mean I don't actually disagree
Speaker 2: with you on that let's go and put let's see.
Speaker 2: I think the New York Times response is C five
Speaker 2: because they clearly their common section was furious with them.
Speaker 2: They took a lot of heat over this because we
Speaker 2: think about this. They used hack documents from a quote
Speaker 2: unquote race realist to rush out this piece. They were
Speaker 2: apparently rushed it out because they were trying to beat
Speaker 2: Chris Rufo to the punch, like what are you doing?
Speaker 2: In any case, This is one of the reporters, Patrick Keely,
Speaker 2: talking about why they did and this is so funny.
Speaker 2: He says, sometimes sources have their own motives or obtain
Speaker 2: information using means we wouldn't like Trump's taxes, WikiLeaks or
Speaker 2: Edward Snowden. It's important to share what we can about sourcing.
Speaker 2: We always independently assess newsworthiness. Okay, you are comparing this
Speaker 2: to WikiLeaks exposure of work crimes or Edward Snowden's exposure
Speaker 2: of mass surveillance. That's what Zoron's Columbia application race selection.
Speaker 2: You're comparing that to WikiLeaks. And again, just to reiterate,
Speaker 2: it would be great if the New York Times had
Speaker 2: a consistent standard here.
Speaker 1: They do not.
Speaker 2: They do not, So what is the standard ultimately, because
Speaker 2: apparently sometimes it matters whether it's hacked and who it
Speaker 2: comes from. And sometimes when they just you know, want
Speaker 2: to go after a particular candidate, then it doesn't matter,
Speaker 2: and they're happy to use hacked documents from wherever they come.
Speaker 3: I mean, from my perspective, I can't help but enjoy
Speaker 3: this because it's a story of such little consequence.
Speaker 4: Yeah that I just I have to laugh my way
Speaker 4: through the entire thing.
Speaker 2: They are embarrassing, They're absolutely embarrassing the mess. Last piece
Speaker 2: I'll put up here. We've got Eric Adams, you know,
Speaker 2: grabbing onto this, and a lot of people commented to it,
Speaker 2: could put this is c eight guys and could put
Speaker 2: up on the screen. A lot of people were noting
Speaker 2: that in the primary Cuomo was like a Cuomo aligned
Speaker 2: super pac to be specific, here was like darkening Zorn's
Speaker 2: skin and like ramping up his beard to make him
Speaker 2: look like scarier. And now in the wake of this story,
Speaker 2: they're trying to like lighten his skin and make him
Speaker 2: look more like, oh, he's just you know, basically a
Speaker 2: white guy. And so Eric Adams says or on mom
Speaker 2: Donnie identified as Asian African American has got the picture
Speaker 2: there of him checking Asian and African Americans. So whatever, Yeah,
Speaker 2: there you go.
Speaker 4: It's like how you need You just have to enjoy it.
Speaker 4: You just have to enjoy it.
Speaker 2: Incredible. All right, Let's go ahead and get to Tim
Speaker 2: Dillan and Joe Rogan. So we have continued to see
Speaker 2: some concerns raised from the sort of bro podcast sphere
Speaker 2: that had been pro Trump leading up to his election,
Speaker 2: and specifically over the issue of immigration, which, to be
Speaker 2: honest with you, is a little bit of a surprise
Speaker 2: to me, because there are lots of things in Trump
Speaker 2: two point zero that I think it's reasonable to have
Speaker 2: been surprised by. His aggressive approach to immigration is not
Speaker 2: one of them. They were literally holding up mass deportation
Speaker 2: now signs at the RNC. Nevertheless, it's good to see
Speaker 2: that there are concerns being raised here, you know, with
Speaker 2: people who maybe will be influential among a large, sort
Speaker 2: of more independent base. Let's go ahead and start with
Speaker 2: Tim Dillon and some of what he had to say.
Speaker 8: You're collecting people that are law abiding, that have been
Speaker 8: in the country a very long time, that have committed
Speaker 8: no crime. You're picking people up in church parking lots
Speaker 8: at high school graduations. It's inhumane, and I think a
Speaker 8: lot of people feel that way. But in fairness to
Speaker 8: the Trump team, they did think of this and say,
Speaker 8: what if we put them all in a prison surrounded
Speaker 8: by alligators? Would that make it feel more humane? Like
Speaker 8: I think Trump and his people were like, sure, people
Speaker 8: find these raids to be a bit abrupt and uh,
Speaker 8: you know, soulless, unkind. But if if we then took
Speaker 8: the people we swept up and put them in a
Speaker 8: prison built in an alligator swamp, would that make people
Speaker 8: feel better? It's a great way, I think, to show
Speaker 8: that it's not just a heartless policy.
Speaker 4: It's a policy that we've.
Speaker 7: Put a lot of thought into.
Speaker 2: So there you go to Tim Dllon's take on alligator Alcatraz, like, Oh,
Speaker 2: your policy that was already dreadfully unpopular, of snatching up
Speaker 2: like innocent people who've been paying their taxes, has been
Speaker 2: here for years and years from a home depot. This
Speaker 2: will make it better. I'm sure that will mess that
Speaker 2: we're serious about this, And he goes on a whole
Speaker 2: thing to about how you know, there are many other
Speaker 2: types of deadly animals throughout the us, Like, why not
Speaker 2: put them inside of like a shark literal shark tank
Speaker 2: down in the ocean, with the sharks swimming around. Maybe
Speaker 2: we could get some like grizzly bears involved. So in
Speaker 2: any case, it's interesting to me, Emily that I mean,
Speaker 2: first of all, it's interesting to me that anyone was
Speaker 2: surprised by this direction from the Trump administration, given that
Speaker 2: you've got Steven Miller running the show and running the show,
Speaker 2: and even more like, I think he has completely taken
Speaker 2: over this portfolio in a way even beyond what was
Speaker 2: the case in the twenty sixteen Trump but given the
Speaker 2: first administration, given the rhetoric on the campaign trail, and
Speaker 2: you know, given the like explicit promises that were made
Speaker 2: that this was going to be a focus. I know,
Speaker 2: Trump claimed that, oh, well, this will just be focused
Speaker 2: on He didn't say just be focused on criminals, but
Speaker 2: he made it seem like the focus of the policy
Speaker 2: would be on a mass criminal illegal alien population.
Speaker 4: The first over and over again, Right, that's what we
Speaker 4: want to do.
Speaker 2: First definitely not the case, but also they projected, they
Speaker 2: made it seem like, you know, the vast majority of
Speaker 2: undocumented immigrants were in fact criminals, which is just not reality.
Speaker 2: So I think that's where you know, they're running up
Speaker 2: against the difference between the projection of the Trump campaign
Speaker 2: and the way this was portrayed and then the actual
Speaker 2: reality of seeing moms, dads, neighbors, people who have you know,
Speaker 2: lived in this country and cause no problem committed, no crimes,
Speaker 2: done all the right things, even people who were actually
Speaker 2: following the process and trying to you know, apply for
Speaker 2: asylum and like showing up for their hearings and all
Speaker 2: of those things. This is the same thing that happened
Speaker 2: really in the first Trump administration as well, where mass
Speaker 2: immigration has never been more popular than it was during
Speaker 2: the first Trump administration.
Speaker 3: Which is why then you had every twenty twenty Democrat
Speaker 3: running on a very pro immigration in a very relaxed
Speaker 3: border policy, and you know, Biden particularly talked tough about
Speaker 3: border security and all of that, but they were telegraphing
Speaker 3: the signaling over and over again was that this would
Speaker 3: be a much more lenient and welcoming administration. And so yeah,
Speaker 3: I mean, we should roll this this Rogan clip as well,
Speaker 3: because it echoes Tim Dylan. I mean, to your point, Crystal,
Speaker 3: this is one of those political I don't want to
Speaker 3: say conundrums, but it is kind of a conundrum for
Speaker 3: the GOP, which the Republican base is very different from
Speaker 3: the rest of the country. The Trump basse, I should say, actually,
Speaker 3: it's very different from the rest of the country on
Speaker 3: the question of mass deportation. So it pulls very differently
Speaker 3: depending on what you're looking at when you get it,
Speaker 3: and you've pointed this out a lot. When you get
Speaker 3: into the specifics of what quote unquote mass deportation, looks like,
Speaker 3: people are less supportive than when you just use the
Speaker 3: phrase mass deportation.
Speaker 4: But this is really really important to the Republican base.
Speaker 3: People like Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller believe that you
Speaker 3: never have the same country again if there isn't a
Speaker 3: process of mass deportations over the course of the Trump administration,
Speaker 3: and their definition of mass deportation is really undoing the
Speaker 3: entire Biden era, which will involve basically, if you wanted
Speaker 3: to take eight million, if you wanted to deport the
Speaker 3: eight million estimated people who came in at least during
Speaker 3: the Biden administration. First of all, that's not all illegal immigration.
Speaker 3: A lot of it was legalized by the Biden administration,
Speaker 3: which created the asylum process, and well not created, but
Speaker 3: expanded the asylum process and made it really easy. They
Speaker 3: did not detain people and let them into the interior
Speaker 3: of the country while their asylum hearings waited because there
Speaker 3: were so many people, and so to undo that, you're
Speaker 3: talking about tens of thousands of deportations a week. If
Speaker 3: you wanted to do it in a year, it would
Speaker 3: be like twenty thousand deportations a day at least.
Speaker 4: So it's not.
Speaker 3: Going to I think they always knew it wouldn't be
Speaker 3: what the public looked like. It wouldn't be conger with
Speaker 3: the public's expectation. When you hear mass deportations and you
Speaker 3: see that juxtaposed with concert rhetoric about criminality and all
Speaker 3: of that, it's going to look different in practice.
Speaker 2: And they want to go further than just rolling back
Speaker 2: what happened during the Biden administration. By that, I mean
Speaker 2: you have memo from the DOJA talking about let's prioritize
Speaker 2: denaturalizing US citizens. I mean that goes that goes far
Speaker 2: beyond you. Genuinely. I mean Stephen Miller is a genuine
Speaker 2: ideologue who wants a white eth no state, and anyone
Speaker 2: who doesn't fit his category of what an American should be,
Speaker 2: he thinks should be fair game to get out of
Speaker 2: the country. And so that is, you know, the project
Speaker 2: that they're embarking on. And as aggressive as the raids
Speaker 2: have been so far, you now also have the one big,
Speaker 2: beautiful bill that floods ICE with resources where they're supposed
Speaker 2: to have ten thousand ICE agents, largest federal law enforcement agency,
Speaker 2: as I said before, a larger than the military budget
Speaker 2: of places like Brazil and Israel. Just a huge influx
Speaker 2: of resources, not to mention an extraordinary flooding of money
Speaker 2: to private prison contractors who will be setting up these,
Speaker 2: you know, mass detention centers. So in any case, you've
Speaker 2: already got the Tim Dillons and the Joe Rogan's of
Speaker 2: the world somewhat uncomfortable with what's going on. Let's go
Speaker 2: ahead and roll what Joe Rogan had to say about
Speaker 2: this dtwo.
Speaker 9: We were told there would be no There's two things
Speaker 9: that are insane. One is the targeting of migrant workers,
Speaker 9: not cartel members, not gang members, not drug dealers, just
Speaker 9: construction workers showing up in construction sites raiding them.
Speaker 10: Gardeners.
Speaker 11: Yeah, like really or passing students on college campuses or not,
Speaker 11: like there's a target. Did you see this video of
Speaker 11: this Turkish students at Tufts University that wrote an essay
Speaker 11: and then there's a video of like Ice agents, Like
Speaker 11: is that the woman? Yeah?
Speaker 10: Yeah, what was her essay about? It was just critical
Speaker 10: of Israel?
Speaker 12: Right, yeah?
Speaker 9: I mean, and that's enough to get you kicked out
Speaker 9: of the country.
Speaker 10: There's a long history of.
Speaker 11: Anti colonial activism in the US colleges, you know, that
Speaker 11: led to to you know, South Africa changing and all
Speaker 11: of that, and I think this is a continuation of that.
Speaker 2: And Emily, it seems to me like there have been
Speaker 2: a few things that have really touched a nerve for
Speaker 2: people in the Trump two point zero era with regard
Speaker 2: to the immigration policy. Number one is the what they
Speaker 2: were talking about there, the kidnapping of Ramesa Osterk which
Speaker 2: happened on camera. You have these masked ICE agents. I
Speaker 2: think they were ICE agents. I don't even know what
Speaker 2: federal agency they came from, who came multiple of them,
Speaker 2: grabbed her off the street and then lo and behold
Speaker 2: we learn what did she do? She wrote an op
Speaker 2: ed for the student newspaper, calling for the university to
Speaker 2: divest from Israel, like the most basic First Amendment protected
Speaker 2: called activism, you know, and she I think the visual
Speaker 2: not at no, at all, no. And I think the
Speaker 2: visual of seeing her snatch off the street for that,
Speaker 2: I think that was really searing for people totally. I
Speaker 2: think kill mar Abrego Garcia and what happened there. He
Speaker 2: really became, you know, as you had him and hundreds
Speaker 2: of others swept up, no due process, and the Trump
Speaker 2: administration admits that this was they shouldn't have done this,
Speaker 2: that this was a wrongful deportation, and yet they're so
Speaker 2: committed to keeping him in this horrific slave labor camp
Speaker 2: dungeon in El Salvador. I think that you can see
Speaker 2: in the poll numbers that the favorability of Trump on
Speaker 2: immigration really begins to decline there. And then the other
Speaker 2: thing that really touched on nerve for some reason was
Speaker 2: these home depot rates. And you have a moment with
Speaker 2: you know, reportedly Steven Miller goes to Ice and yells
Speaker 2: at them and says, why are you focusing on the criminals.
Speaker 2: I want to see you go to the seven elevens.
Speaker 2: I want to see you in name checks at home
Speaker 2: depots specifically, and then you see an escalation in the tactics.
Speaker 2: That's what also leads to the anti ice protests in
Speaker 2: places like LA. But something about picking up the home
Speaker 2: depot day laborers really struck guys like Joe Rogan, guys
Speaker 2: like Tim Dillon, because I think it feels so familiar.
Speaker 2: These are not like, you know, the scary theoretical gang
Speaker 2: members who are out there terrorizing community. It's like, you know,
Speaker 2: Rogan has probably been to that La home depot where
Speaker 2: that raid happened. He may have used some of those
Speaker 2: day laborers for some project around his house or something like.
Speaker 2: It just feels so suburban and so familiar that it's
Speaker 2: impossible to caricature these guys as some like nasty menace
Speaker 2: to society in the way that the Steven Miller's and
Speaker 2: the Trumps of the world want to.
Speaker 3: Well, I was gonna say this is another example of
Speaker 3: where that golf is significant. Because Rogan and Tim Dillon
Speaker 3: are wealthy, independent. You talk to the kind of red
Speaker 3: meat Trump bass, they are going to be all for
Speaker 3: home depot right It's in the Stephen Miller and Donald
Speaker 3: Trump is not quite on board with the home depot
Speaker 3: rays by the way, because he's clearly been curing from
Speaker 3: the hospitality industry, construction industry, and is.
Speaker 4: Himself bigag not sold on.
Speaker 3: What we saw from it was like the Lejoe where
Speaker 3: you had workers running through the field when Ice was
Speaker 3: trying to make a rest and that golf is I mean,
Speaker 3: it's not going anywhere. Because you have Stephen Miller making
Speaker 3: this his single priority. This is Bannon's like if he
Speaker 3: if Bannon is ranking his priorities, this is probably the
Speaker 3: literal top one because they actually believe that this is
Speaker 3: like the the Jenga block that once it's pulled, everything crumbled.
Speaker 4: They really see it that way.
Speaker 3: And because of that, Donald Trump can you know, say,
Speaker 3: we're going to be lenient with hospitality workers and agricultural
Speaker 3: workers as much as he wants, but if they're going
Speaker 3: to be funding a bunch more detention centers like Alligator.
Speaker 3: Alcatraz hasn't taken any money from FEMA so far, which
Speaker 3: is interesting because DeSantis did it on his own. Now
Speaker 3: Ice has all of this money and is going to
Speaker 3: be building more detention facilities, and most of those migrants
Speaker 3: who came in during the course of the course of
Speaker 3: the Biden administration. If they are quote unquote criminal, it's
Speaker 3: because they crossed the border twice for example, like they
Speaker 3: got deported and then recrossed, or they didn't go to
Speaker 3: an asylum or whatever it is. Like that's the that's
Speaker 3: what hasn't been followed. And for the average American, they're
Speaker 3: not going to like seeing those people rounded up and
Speaker 3: put in detention camps, let alone like shoddy ones that
Speaker 3: were constructed in a week. But the Trump base both
Speaker 3: demands it and loves it, and that's a huge political problem.
Speaker 4: Wistration.
Speaker 2: Here's what I would say. Yes, the Trump based they
Speaker 2: are not going to complain. They're going to delight in
Speaker 2: the you know, Alligator Alcatraz and the home depot raids
Speaker 2: and the you know, whatever Trump does they're going to
Speaker 2: be on board with. But whatever Trump does, they're going
Speaker 2: to be on board with. So if he wanted to
Speaker 2: moderate this policy at this point, he could, and I
Speaker 2: don't think he'll face any significant backlash from the base.
Speaker 2: There's no indication that there has ever been any significant
Speaker 2: backlash from the bezo or any Trump policy. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 2: so I don't see him as they are beholden to him.
Speaker 2: He's not beholden to them at this point. And maybe
Speaker 2: there was a different point where that was the case,
Speaker 2: but I mean the same is like I could shoot
Speaker 2: someone on Fifth Avenue. It's true, It's true his bas
Speaker 2: is with him. They will justify anything that we talked
Speaker 2: about the Epstein thing, even though there's been all this online,
Speaker 2: Oh my god, that Epstein and Trump's going to reveal
Speaker 2: it and blah blah blah, him turning on a dime
Speaker 2: and being like, no client list, nothing to see here.
Speaker 2: They're going to find a way to justify it. So
Speaker 2: I don't think he's really held hostage by the base.
Speaker 3: I think he has I think, well, he's held hostage
Speaker 3: to they sent that Stephen Miller is very powerful in
Speaker 3: the administration, and Stephen Miller wants do it.
Speaker 2: That's the point is. I think he has outsources to
Speaker 2: Steven Miller and Steven Miller and other things as well,
Speaker 2: by the way, and Steven Miller's running it, and he's
Speaker 2: not really concerning himself too much with the details, and
Speaker 2: you know feels like, Okay, I ran on mass deportation,
Speaker 2: and you know the only time he cares is when, yeah,
Speaker 2: some rich business owner calls him. I was like my
Speaker 2: farm workers are getting rounded up, or I don't have
Speaker 2: my seasonal hospitality workers or whatever, and he'll express some concern,
Speaker 2: but then you know, days later he'll go back on it,
Speaker 2: and Steven Miller is still doing his thing.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I think Steven Miller is obsessed with the details of
Speaker 3: the policy but not at all concerned about the politics
Speaker 3: of it, because they see this, at least mostly he
Speaker 3: is as.
Speaker 2: A one true administration ideologue.
Speaker 12: Yeah.
Speaker 3: They see this as the second term Trump doesn't have
Speaker 3: to run again, and that this is their last chance to.
Speaker 4: Walk a lot of this back. That walk what happened
Speaker 4: back during the Biden administration.
Speaker 3: And just as we were talking, Crystal tom Homan did
Speaker 3: a gaggle at the White House and he said that
Speaker 3: deporting three thousand people days quote not enough, and said,
Speaker 3: for those that say three thousand a day is too much,
Speaker 3: we have to arrest seven thousand every single day for
Speaker 3: the remainder of this administration, just to catch the ones
Speaker 3: Biden released into the nation. And as we were just saying,
Speaker 3: I'm sure that math actually adds up, because it was
Speaker 3: a really significant wave of immigration, the most significant since
Speaker 3: Ellis Island. As David Leonordo had written for The New
Speaker 3: York Times not too long ago. So yeah, I think
Speaker 3: those numbers add up. But the only people that really
Speaker 3: really is going to relish seeing that is the slice
Speaker 3: of the country that's hardcore, die hard MAGA and the
Speaker 3: rest of the country. It's not as though they're just
Speaker 3: gonna be like whatever. They are going to be revolted
Speaker 3: by it. And it is going to be a huge
Speaker 3: shot in the arm for the Democratic Party in the
Speaker 3: left as they try to mobilize an opposition to Trump
Speaker 3: two point zero. But Stephen Miller understands that that's a
Speaker 3: risk that they, from his perspective, have to take for
Speaker 3: it to have the policy outcome that he and Tom
Speaker 3: Holman want.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the political risks they believe are well worth taking.
Speaker 2: Well. And Steven Miller was going to be an anti
Speaker 2: immigrant sellt regardless of what happened during the Biden administration,
Speaker 2: how the immigrants came in, because he thinks it should
Speaker 2: be a white ethno state and he believes in that.
Speaker 7: He does.
Speaker 2: He believes. I mean, even Trump, I think has said
Speaker 2: that that Steven Miller only wants white people here, like
Speaker 2: that is his policy. And you increasingly have people like
Speaker 2: Charlie Kirk who are out and not admitting like we
Speaker 2: need to have zero immigration from the what do you
Speaker 2: call it, the third world, which again is just like
Speaker 2: we don't want brown people here. So, you know, the
Speaker 2: mask is kind of off for some of these guys,
Speaker 2: and he is in control, like it is his ultimately
Speaker 2: his policy, and he is running it, you know, in
Speaker 2: terms of the you know, the political fallout. The last
Speaker 2: point I'll make on this is it's not just horror
Speaker 2: at what is being done to other people. It's also
Speaker 2: that when you have any federal law enforcement agency with
Speaker 2: this large of a budget, who are doing things like
Speaker 2: snatching people off the street because they wrote an op ed,
Speaker 2: and who are saying they're going to prioritize denaturalizing American citizens,
Speaker 2: you very quickly realize that this thing does not stay
Speaker 2: confined even among the immigrant population, even among the nationalized
Speaker 2: citizen population. You are constructing a mass surveillance state, a
Speaker 2: mass police state, and that will have reverberating impacts for everyone.
Speaker 2: We already have seen American citizens who got picked up
Speaker 2: and detained for hours and hours because they had the
Speaker 2: wrong were in the wrong place, and had the wrong
Speaker 2: level of melanin in their skin and look like they
Speaker 2: might be an immigrant, and even if they had their papers,
Speaker 2: they weren't believed or they weren't listened to and were detained.
Speaker 2: But the increase in the ICE budget means those things
Speaker 2: are going to be happening more and war regularly. Palenteer
Speaker 2: wants to build their big database of absolutely everyone. I mean,
Speaker 2: this is a mass operation that if Stephen Miller's of
Speaker 2: the world get their way, Like I said, it's not
Speaker 2: just going to be about the way it impacts immigrants,
Speaker 2: although that part is important, as we you know, are
Speaker 2: all human beings and deserve some level of human rights
Speaker 2: and dignity. It's also going to impact everyone in this country.
Speaker 2: So I think, you know, we're kind of on the
Speaker 2: cusp of seeing that, and I think that our best,
Speaker 2: the best hope is just that there's a tremendous level
Speaker 2: of incompetence and they're not actually able to marshal the
Speaker 2: level of resources, the flooding of resources that they're being given.
Speaker 4: I mean, that's a pretty decent bet, it's.
Speaker 2: A pretty that's a strong possibility of that.
Speaker 3: We've never seen a deportation effort on the scale now
Speaker 3: modern history I mean, no, seven thousand a day. For
Speaker 3: Tom Holman's point, yes, they have a lot of money,
Speaker 3: but they also only have what three and a half
Speaker 3: years at this point to do it. It won't be
Speaker 3: popular with the public, so it's a it's an uphill,
Speaker 3: uphill climb for them to be sure that much we know.
Speaker 2: All right, let's go ahead and get to Jeremy Scalhill
Speaker 2: on Trump's meeting with Netanyahu this week. So, as we
Speaker 2: mentioned a couple of times earlier, Benjamin na Yaho is
Speaker 2: in town this week in DC to meet with Trump
Speaker 2: once again, so to analyze this and the possibility of
Speaker 2: any sort of a ceasefire deal, and what's going on
Speaker 2: in I Run and all sorts of other things. We're
Speaker 2: lucky to be joined by Jeremy Scahill, of course, co
Speaker 2: founder of drop site News. Great to see you again, Jeremy.
Speaker 10: Thanks for having me back.
Speaker 2: So let me just start with that question. What do
Speaker 2: you think is that the consequence what sort of things
Speaker 2: are going to be discussed at this meeting with Nan
Speaker 2: Nahou and Trump.
Speaker 13: Well, you know, of course Donald Trump has said this
Speaker 13: is the final proposal for a Gaza ceasefire, and what
Speaker 13: we've seen over the past week or so is a
Speaker 13: process where the Israelis have essentially been negotiating with themselves
Speaker 13: within netnya, who's power structure, on what positions they want
Speaker 13: to stake out. The proposal that Trump put forward was
Speaker 13: drafted in consultation with the iss with primarily Ron Dermer,
Speaker 13: who is Netnyahu's lead official dealing with these negotiations, and
Speaker 13: Hamas for its side, didn't do much in terms of
Speaker 13: revising the document, but they did zero in on three
Speaker 13: key things that they wanted changed, and basically one of
Speaker 13: them is they want a bit stronger language from Donald
Speaker 13: Trump confirming that he will continue to force Israel to
Speaker 13: hold its fire beyond an initial sixty day period so
Speaker 13: that a permanent ceasefire can be declared. Israel has pushed
Speaker 13: back very hard on that they want to be able
Speaker 13: to resume the military assault on Gaza after two months
Speaker 13: if Netanyahu decides that's what he wants to do. The
Speaker 13: second is that they wanted to have a reversion to
Speaker 13: the original ceasefire agreements map positions for Israeli forces to
Speaker 13: withdraw from Gaza. Net Yahoo has been saying that he
Speaker 13: wants to stay in the South of Gaza, that they
Speaker 13: want to create a zone along the Egypt border and
Speaker 13: try to force all of the Palestinians, two million plus
Speaker 13: Palestinians into this small sliver of the Gaza Strip. And
Speaker 13: then presumably they think that they would then fight a
Speaker 13: guerrilla war against HAMAS fighters in the rest of the
Speaker 13: Gaza Strip. And then the final term that Hamas wanted
Speaker 13: changed had to do, and this is the one that
Speaker 13: I'm told this morning by Hamas officials is most central
Speaker 13: right now in the negotiations.
Speaker 10: Hamas wants unrestricted.
Speaker 13: Aid to flow into Gaza, and they don't want this
Speaker 13: deadly aid scheme cynically known as the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation
Speaker 13: to be in any way involved with the distribution of aid.
Speaker 13: So you have a delegation right now that net Nyaho
Speaker 13: grudgingly sent to Doha, Qatar, and I was told by
Speaker 13: a Hamas official this morning there's been absolutely zero progress
Speaker 13: in those talks. Another Palestinian close to the negotiations said
Speaker 13: that if net Nyahu insists on Israel controlling the aid,
Speaker 13: that it could be a deal breaker, but all parties involved,
Speaker 13: including Hamas, know that it's irrelevant. What's happening right now
Speaker 13: in Doha all that matters is what happens between net
Speaker 13: Yahu and Trump. If Trump decides he wants a deal,
Speaker 13: he's the only person in the world that can force
Speaker 13: net and Yahoo to accept terms that he doesn't want
Speaker 13: to accept.
Speaker 2: Yeah, as it's always been.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and you broke this down in your drop site report,
Speaker 3: which folcsre saw up on the screen and can read
Speaker 3: and go into great depth and detail on Jeremy. So
Speaker 3: could you also flesh out for us what some of
Speaker 3: that stronger language might look like? Because I think when
Speaker 3: I hear that, at least I think stronger language. But
Speaker 3: what is like does a stronger language still leave wiggle
Speaker 3: room for netsan Yahoo? And would that be part of
Speaker 3: something that Trump sort of comes to the table and says,
Speaker 3: you've got to have the stronger language. Will agree to
Speaker 3: the stronger language. But wink wink, that's a stronger language.
Speaker 3: It's language at the end of the day. So can
Speaker 3: you tell us a little bit more about what Hamas
Speaker 3: is looking for when it comes to the language.
Speaker 10: I mean, this is a really important question.
Speaker 13: I think it bears repeating that Israel has constantly violated
Speaker 13: ceasefire agreements, including the agreement that Donald Trump and Joe
Speaker 13: Biden pushed through that original January agreement wouldn't have happened
Speaker 13: without Donald Trump and Steve Whitkoff, and Israel killed more
Speaker 13: than one hundred and sixty Palestinians during the ceasefire. Then
Speaker 13: it unilaterally abandoned it and resumed the military assault on
Speaker 13: Gaza on March eighteenth, and so as the discussions have
Speaker 13: happened emily over the past couple of months since that
Speaker 13: ceasefire was blown up. Hamas has been pushing US mediators
Speaker 13: and there have been some direct talks between the United
Speaker 13: States and Hamas, something that Joe Biden wouldn't do. Trump
Speaker 13: has done. And during those talks, the Palestinians have said,
Speaker 13: you know, we hear what Donald Trump says that he
Speaker 13: wants to end this war, and he wants it to
Speaker 13: be definitively ended, but we need to have Israel bound
Speaker 13: to that agreement. And so, you know, it may seem
Speaker 13: like it's splitting hairs, but what Hamas wants is for
Speaker 13: very clear language that states that the United States, Egypt,
Speaker 13: and Kutar. Egypt and Kutar are the regional mediators dealing
Speaker 13: with this ceasefire negotiation process that they want them to
Speaker 13: guarantee that while Hamas and Is negotiate a final resolution
Speaker 13: to the Gaza War, that the terms of the sixty
Speaker 13: day Initial Truth are going to apply, meaning Israel will
Speaker 13: not put a blockade on AID and meaning that Israel
Speaker 13: is not going to violate the ceasefire. Hamas knows that
Speaker 13: Israel will likely violate any agreement that it signs, So
Speaker 13: they're sort of struggling to find what is the best
Speaker 13: that we can get in this situation, and they believe
Speaker 13: that by having Trump publicly state that he is going
Speaker 13: to keep Israel in check because he wants a permanent
Speaker 13: end to the war. Now, we can talk about Trump's
Speaker 13: agenda and what he wants to see happen as a
Speaker 13: result of it, but there are indications that Trump actually
Speaker 13: does want this resolve. He also likely wants to expand
Speaker 13: the so called Abraham Accords. He may want to make
Speaker 13: a deal with the decrepit, corrupt, unpopular leader of the
Speaker 13: Palestinian authority. Whatever happens next, Hamas understands that it really
Speaker 13: only matters what Donald Trump wants and is willing to
Speaker 13: do right now. So that's why you see what appear
Speaker 13: to be kind of minor language changes actually meaning something
Speaker 13: tabas And look, if you put the two versions next
Speaker 13: to each other, there is a big difference because they
Speaker 13: took out hedge language, they took out vague phrases like
Speaker 13: if necessary, They remove just Egypt and Kutar being the
Speaker 13: guaranters of that, and reinserted the United States. It's possible
Speaker 13: that Trump is going to grant some concessions on this.
Speaker 13: The bigger issue really is going to be where do
Speaker 13: is Raeli troops withdraw to if a ceasefire is signed,
Speaker 13: because not Yahu's saying they're going to remain there no
Speaker 13: matter what. And then this other issue of the AID.
Speaker 13: I mean, it's an unspeakable situation right now in Gaza,
Speaker 13: and I'm told that that is actually the main issue
Speaker 13: that is being debated and discussed right now.
Speaker 2: So let's actually skip forward to talk more about that
Speaker 2: AID situation, the quote unquote Gaza Humanitarian Foundation that has
Speaker 2: been running these AID traps and massacre and you know,
Speaker 2: corresponding massacres. There's an interview recently with the head of
Speaker 2: the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. Now this is the guy who
Speaker 2: replaced the original guy who stepped away after saying I
Speaker 2: don't think that this is the good idea anymore. This
Speaker 2: is E three guys. Let's go ahead and play a
Speaker 2: little bit of this interview and then I want to
Speaker 2: get Jerry's reaction. On the other side.
Speaker 12: We have spoken to doctors, British doctors, Western doctors, eyewitnesses
Speaker 12: on the scene who tell us that almost every day
Speaker 12: they are coming under fire from Israeli forces trying to
Speaker 12: get to the aid point. Just before and as they leave,
Speaker 12: they are being fired on. What are you doing to
Speaker 12: ensure their safety.
Speaker 14: I don't think anybody knows entirely what's happened in the
Speaker 14: Gaza strip from from our from our point of view,
Speaker 14: based upon our experience on the ground, we don't see
Speaker 14: the impenence of this degree of of of of mass
Speaker 14: casualties directly related to the people seeking seeking aid because.
Speaker 12: You have absolutely zero way of verifying who's taken that aid.
Speaker 14: While we can't verify that every individual pack of you know,
Speaker 14: a flower, for instance, isn't somehow ending up in someplace
Speaker 14: that it wasn't intended, what we can absolutely verify is
Speaker 14: that there is no mass version issue.
Speaker 12: Based on what Because you're not verifying the people who
Speaker 12: collect the food, there is no system. Their names are
Speaker 12: not anywhere, there's no id. And also we have filmed
Speaker 12: your food being sold at astronomical prices on the black market.
Speaker 14: I just have this question for you, Deborah, do you
Speaker 14: have anything positive to say whatsoever about what we're doing.
Speaker 14: We've made a decision, and the decision is that it's
Speaker 14: worth operating in a war zone, with all the complexity
Speaker 14: and all the risk, as deadly as it is, because
Speaker 14: Gazans deserve.
Speaker 7: Food and that is laudable.
Speaker 12: So my challenge to you is take us in. Let
Speaker 12: me come and see it for myself and report the
Speaker 12: good and the bad. Because if there is nothing to hide,
Speaker 12: and this process is exactly how you're explaining and you're
Speaker 12: saying it's a good, then let us film it be transparent.
Speaker 7: That's not a decision I could. I could make a loan.
Speaker 7: I mean, there are lots of different aspects of that,
Speaker 7: including the diversion of resources solely dedicated to the people
Speaker 7: of Gaza. I would like to see from a few
Speaker 7: people in the in the in the in the press,
Speaker 7: a little less cynicism.
Speaker 2: Little less cynicism from us. Jeremy. So that was Reverend
Speaker 2: Johnny Moore, who is an evangelical leader and is now
Speaker 2: the new head of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, saying there
Speaker 2: are no mass casualty events. But also you can't come
Speaker 2: and see and verify for yourself.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I mean a couple of things.
Speaker 13: First of all, we have to understand this not as
Speaker 13: an independent entity, but as an agent of the Israeli state.
Speaker 13: That's how Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have spoken about it,
Speaker 13: and mainstream major news organist organizations including NPR, the BBC,
Speaker 13: the Washington Post have recently done expose a's where American
Speaker 13: mercenaries who went to Gaza as part of this aid
Speaker 13: scam actually described the lethal actions of their own operatives.
Speaker 13: We have Palestinians that have filmed the aftermath of these shootings.
Speaker 13: We have doctors, including international doctors in Gaza, that have
Speaker 13: described the sorts of wounds and fatal wounds that they
Speaker 13: have treated in the aftermath of people desperately trying to
Speaker 13: go and get what is actually a pittance of aid.
Speaker 13: While this clip sort of went viral and it was
Speaker 13: sort of portrayed as a gotcha moment, the journalists actually
Speaker 13: engaged in what I think is a bit of journalistic malpractice.
Speaker 13: She started questioning him about Hamas diverting the AID. Senior
Speaker 13: US officials, including the head humanitarian officer from the biden Era,
Speaker 13: have said that there's no evidence of any significant theft
Speaker 13: of AID by Hamas. But just this morning and over
Speaker 13: the past few days, Yaser Abu Shabab, who is the
Speaker 13: head of an Israeli and Palestinian authority backed militia in Gaza,
Speaker 13: has openly said in Hebrew language media interviews that his
Speaker 13: forces have stolen aid to then just attributed to people
Speaker 13: that they want to give it to. So you know, there, yes,
Speaker 13: there were really important things that came out of that interview,
Speaker 13: but also the journalist wasted so much time in her
Speaker 13: questioning based on an entirely false premise. The reality is,
Speaker 13: and I don't think anyone can dispute this, Israel has
Speaker 13: used food as a weapon of war, and the Israeli
Speaker 13: Cabinet over the weekend voted to intensify the use of
Speaker 13: food as a weapon of war. And they're rejecting putting
Speaker 13: in charge a neutral, independent body that had a very
Speaker 13: effective system for distributing AID and it was not being
Speaker 13: stolen by Hamas.
Speaker 10: That's just the fact.
Speaker 3: So Jeremy have to get your take on this Wall
Speaker 3: Street Journal piece from Elliott Kaufman that published over the
Speaker 3: last couple of days.
Speaker 4: This is E two. We can put it up on
Speaker 4: the screen.
Speaker 3: I mean, just fascinating for a lot of reasons, especially
Speaker 3: from somebody who follows this, even just as a student
Speaker 3: of the media coverage like yourself.
Speaker 4: Jeremy.
Speaker 3: So, a new Palatinian offer for peace with Israel. Hebron
Speaker 3: sheikhs proposed to leave the Palastini authority join the Abraham Accords.
Speaker 3: The reaction to this piece from people in the region,
Speaker 3: Jeremy was really fascinating. Could you tell us, first of all,
Speaker 3: what you make of the journal dropping the story a
Speaker 3: couple of days before in nsa Yah Who's visit, and
Speaker 3: basically some of the reaction that has poured out since
Speaker 3: it was published.
Speaker 13: I mean, throughout the history of Israel's occupation, you've always
Speaker 13: had small clusters of Palestinians that have sort of appeared
Speaker 13: to be more pro Israeli or maybe for their own reasons,
Speaker 13: want to try to cut a deal. I mean, the
Speaker 13: reality is, this is a tiny fraction of the Palestinian
Speaker 13: population that is making this offer, and it's not even
Speaker 13: clear that they speak for the entire community of Hebron.
Speaker 13: You know, often when these stories come up that appear
Speaker 13: to be presenting an alternative to established Palestinian political figures
Speaker 13: or movements that are about Palestinian liberation, they get an
Speaker 13: enormous amount of attention in the West. The reality is
Speaker 13: that this is basically an story on the ground in Palestine,
Speaker 13: people are concerned about the genocide and Gaza, and they're
Speaker 13: concerned about the largest force displacement campaign in the occupied
Speaker 13: West Bank since nineteen sixty seven. Fifteen members of Netnyahu's party,
Speaker 13: the Li Coud Party, over the weekend wrote a letter
Speaker 13: to Netnaho's saying, now is the time to seize to
Speaker 13: formally annex the entire territory of the occupied West Bank. So,
Speaker 13: you know, these kinds of stories may be appealing to
Speaker 13: an op ed writer in the Wall Street Journal, or
Speaker 13: sort of fun for coffee talk among people that delude
Speaker 13: themselves into believing that somehow you can co opt the
Speaker 13: Palestinian liberation struggle. But at the end of the day,
Speaker 13: the vast majority of Palestinians in poll after poll support
Speaker 13: the idea that they needed independent homeland, that it needs
Speaker 13: to be a unified one that connects both Gaza, the
Speaker 13: occupied West Bank, and Jerusalem.
Speaker 10: So, you know, I think that we have to look
Speaker 10: at this through.
Speaker 13: The lens of who's really promoting this story, because it
Speaker 13: really we're talking about a teeny tiny fraction of the
Speaker 13: Palestinian population that is advocating for this solution.
Speaker 2: Lastly, Jeremy, just to circle back to the meeting today
Speaker 2: with Trump and Matnahoo, they'll obviously also be discussing Iran.
Speaker 2: Tucker Carlson just dropped his interview with the President of Iran.
Speaker 2: I haven't had a chance to watch it, but I'm
Speaker 2: seeing some of the clips floating around. Apparently he got
Speaker 2: asked about the supposed Iranian sleeper cells in the US.
Speaker 2: He denies that and says this is just being used
Speaker 2: basically to scare Americans. He also apparently revealed claimed that
Speaker 2: Israel had tried to assassinate him, which I don't think
Speaker 2: would be a big surprise to anyone. In any case,
Speaker 2: what is your understanding of what Israel's interest is with
Speaker 2: regard to Iran, what they would like to do and
Speaker 2: what we would like to what they would like us
Speaker 2: to do on their behalf, and what Trump Himself's orientation
Speaker 2: towards Iran is at this point.
Speaker 13: Well, I mean, I think it's pretty clear that Netanyahu
Speaker 13: wants full scale regime change in Iran, and you know,
Speaker 13: to his credit, even though there was a lot of
Speaker 13: speculation that Trump was going to go forward and actually
Speaker 13: you know, assassinate the Supreme Leader Ayatola Famani and you know,
Speaker 13: bankroll and arm Israel as it actually enacted regime change
Speaker 13: in Iran, it doesn't seem to be as of now
Speaker 13: the direction that the United States wants to go in.
Speaker 13: But I think it's very likely that we will again
Speaker 13: see bombing of Iran. Whether it's only Israel or Israel
Speaker 13: in the United States remains to be seen. But you know,
Speaker 13: Iran time and again has defied people's declarations that the
Speaker 13: end of the government is just on the horizon. And
Speaker 13: you know, it really speaks to the bankrupt nature of
Speaker 13: the political media in the United States that it's left
Speaker 13: to Tucker Carlson to do interviews not just with the
Speaker 13: president of Iran, but with other figures that the United
Speaker 13: States has designated as official enemies. Anytime you get to
Speaker 13: hear the perspective of the people on the other side
Speaker 13: of American missiles. It helps to inform a society that
Speaker 13: purports to be democratic, So we should have more hearing
Speaker 13: from people that live on the other side of American missiles.
Speaker 13: And at the end of the day, whether you're a
Speaker 13: conservative or a liberal, or you're a political radical of
Speaker 13: some sort, more information means a better ability to make decisions.
Speaker 13: And I think there is a fundamental question that shouldn't
Speaker 13: only belong to the MAGA movement, and that is what
Speaker 13: is fundamentally in the US interest. I would argue that
Speaker 13: none of these wars are in the US interest, and
Speaker 13: I know that there's a minority section of Trump world
Speaker 13: that also, for their own reasons, believe that same thing.
Speaker 13: We can't continue this bankrupt, neo con view of the
Speaker 13: world that the United States can be a hammer in
Speaker 13: search of nails, and we certainly shouldn't be doing Israel's
Speaker 13: agenda because what Netanyahu wants, and clearly he has a
Speaker 13: lot of support for this in Israel, is to continue
Speaker 13: setting that region on fire. What may seem to be
Speaker 13: tactical victories right now in the short term could well
Speaker 13: produce a generation of people that seek to oppose the
Speaker 13: United States and Israel, that are far more radical than
Speaker 13: any of the forces that we now see in the region.
Speaker 10: It's it's born of an idea called blowback.
Speaker 13: And I think that, you know, Netanyahu can try to
Speaker 13: do his victory dance, being you know, the only leader
Speaker 13: that's been invited three times to see Trump. But Americans
Speaker 13: should really be asking, and I see increasingly conservatives asking
Speaker 13: this question. Major media figures in the conservative ecospace, you know,
Speaker 13: ecosystem are asking these questions. And I think it's important.
Speaker 13: Why is the United States doing the bidding of this
Speaker 13: rogue regime in Israel. That's a serious question that should
Speaker 13: be on the table right now for all Americans.
Speaker 2: Jeremie Skahill Well said, is always and great to see,
Speaker 2: so thank you so much for your reporting.
Speaker 10: Thank you both.
Speaker 2: All right, guys, that does it for us here today.
Speaker 2: I will be back for Breaking Points tomorrow and then
Speaker 2: we'll have actually Sager and for Emily on Wednesday and whatever.
Speaker 2: For sure, Yeah, absolutely, we'll just keep you guys guessing
Speaker 2: out there. Thank you guys again so much for your support.
Speaker 2: We're going to go ahead and do that. AMA Live
Speaker 2: now for premium subscribers. If you are not a premium subscriber,
Speaker 2: you can become one at breakingpoints dot com. In any case,
Speaker 2: if you guys have a great day and I will
Speaker 2: see you back here tomorrow.