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 Tuesday.
Speaker 2: We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do
Speaker 2: we have, Crystal, Indeed we do.
Speaker 4: There's a hell of a lot unfolding around the country
Speaker 4: as we speak.
Speaker 1: We're going to start the show with some additional exclusive
Speaker 1: polls here with Jail Partners about how Israel may impact
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four. We've got it broken down by age
Speaker 1: demographic and pretty fascinating look at how different age groups
Speaker 1: are viewing this conflict. We've also got a look at
Speaker 1: a new bad poll for by actually a couple new
Speaker 1: bad polls for Biden, both in terms of the overall
Speaker 1: general electorate and also in terms of the battleground states.
Speaker 4: We've been tracking some wild crackdowns. We've got some unbelievable
Speaker 4: video for you coming out of ut Austin. We also
Speaker 4: have at Columbia student protesters have taken over the same
Speaker 4: campus building that they did back in nineteen sixty eight,
Speaker 4: obviously very intentional there. Also getting reports out of Virginia's
Speaker 4: VCU where they are tear gassed protesters, So a lot
Speaker 4: unfolding there. We're also taking a look this morning at
Speaker 4: the housing market and a little bit of a helpful
Speaker 4: story some state and federal pushback on the trend of
Speaker 4: Wall Street buying up single family housing and making it
Speaker 4: wildly unaffordable. Something a little bit hopeful there. Something not
Speaker 4: so hopeful though.
Speaker 1: Israel is reportedly preparing to install checkpoints to make sure
Speaker 1: that men are locked into RAFA when they begin they're
Speaker 1: all out assault. Take a look at that, and also
Speaker 1: some recent comments from Tony Blincoln and potential progress on
Speaker 1: ceasefire ICC, possible arrest warrants. A lot going on there.
Speaker 1: We also want to show you a notable exchange between
Speaker 1: Piers Morgan and John Mehersheimer. Very interesting, it's so good,
Speaker 1: very divergent ideological views of America's role in the world,
Speaker 1: So worth getting into that.
Speaker 4: I've got a monologue.
Speaker 1: I'm looking ahead all of the people who are so
Speaker 1: very confused why anyone would protest their government helping to
Speaker 1: participate in genocide in the Gaza.
Speaker 4: Strip and big news.
Speaker 1: Essential candidate for the Green Party, doctor Jill Stein, is
Speaker 1: going to join us. Very noteworthy for her to be
Speaker 1: here this week. We showed you yesterday she was arrested
Speaker 1: and assaulted by a police officer with a bike. Want
Speaker 1: to check in on how she's doing and what her
Speaker 1: goals are for her campaign.
Speaker 4: So really honest to be joined by her this y Yeah.
Speaker 3: We got really lucky.
Speaker 2: We booked her a long time ago and then it
Speaker 2: just so happened that this entire thing had happened. So
Speaker 2: we're going to debrief the incident with her, if we appreciate.
Speaker 2: Everybody's been signing up to support us. So we had
Speaker 2: that exclusive poll yesterday. We're going to debut even more
Speaker 2: of the information. Now today we've got a candidate interview
Speaker 2: here with Jill Stein. So this is really what we're
Speaker 2: all about, which is doing something that mainstream media is
Speaker 2: physically incapable of actually asking real questions, delving into their effect.
Speaker 2: We're showing everything that we've got to you and with
Speaker 2: Jill Stein, we're going to hear her out the way
Speaker 2: that we will hear out any independent candidate for president,
Speaker 2: given the fact that she's going to get ballot access
Speaker 2: most likely in many of these states, and of course
Speaker 2: was blamed for Hillary's loss in twenty sixteen, she was blamed.
Speaker 3: Obviously, it's complete bs.
Speaker 2: We are very proud to be able to give her
Speaker 2: a platform to hear her out and speak for democracy.
Speaker 2: So she will have a highly consequential role in this election.
Speaker 2: We're going to give her the due that most people
Speaker 2: are not willing to do. So anyway you can help
Speaker 2: us out at Breakingpoints dot com, we would really appreciate it.
Speaker 2: As Christl said, though, we do have a lot more
Speaker 2: exclusive polling. Today, we're going to break it down in
Speaker 2: terms of how Americans feel about the Israel Palestine conflict.
Speaker 2: And we're also going to break it down by age.
Speaker 2: So why don't we go ahead and start with our
Speaker 2: very first one. We can go and put this up
Speaker 2: there on the screen. These are the top line numbers, guys.
Speaker 2: As a reminder, who do you most trust to handle
Speaker 2: foreign policy on the Israel Palestine conflict.
Speaker 3: There's a bad number here for.
Speaker 2: Joe Biden, Joe Biden thirty one percent, Donald Trump thirty
Speaker 2: five percent, Robert Kennedy Junior nine percent don't know at
Speaker 2: twenty five percent, So obviously a little bit there up
Speaker 2: for grabs.
Speaker 3: But let's break it down by age now if we
Speaker 3: can go.
Speaker 2: To the next one, because this is the most consequential,
Speaker 2: and I'm just going to read for by age demographic
Speaker 2: as it is before you, guys, so you understand again
Speaker 2: the question is who do you most trust to handle
Speaker 2: foreign policy on the Israel Palestine conflict. So starting with
Speaker 2: the eighteen to twenty nine demographic, Joe Biden twenty one percent,
Speaker 2: Donald Trump thirty one percent, Robert Kennedy Junior thirteen percent,
Speaker 2: don't know thirty six percent. Now we're moving to the
Speaker 2: thirty to forty nine twenty eight percent for Joe Biden,
Speaker 2: thirty four percent for Donald Trump, twelve percent for Robert
Speaker 2: Kennedy Junior, twenty six percent for don't know. For fifty
Speaker 2: to sixty four, we have thirty five percent Joe Biden,
Speaker 2: thirty six percent, Donald Trump seven percent, Robert Kennedy Junior
Speaker 2: twenty two percent for don't know. But then amongst boomers,
Speaker 2: this is where things get interesting, sixty five plus thirty
Speaker 2: nine percent for Joe Biden, forty percent for Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: five percent for RFK Junior, sixteen percent for don't know.
Speaker 2: So it is very clear here again, Crystal, that Joe
Speaker 2: Biden's best numbers on who you trust for Israel Palestine
Speaker 2: are amongst the fifty to sixty four and the sixty
Speaker 2: five plus demographic, relatively tied with Donald Trump in those two.
Speaker 2: But when you go actually to younger voters, it is
Speaker 2: Trump who leads, presumably amongst younger Republicans, but Joe Biden
Speaker 2: has absolutely no trust amongst the younger demographics.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, Well, if you look at every single
Speaker 1: age demographic, I mean, many of these are within the
Speaker 1: margin of ra especially among the older groups, but Trump
Speaker 1: edges them ount in every category. So listen the reality,
Speaker 1: of course, in terms of how they would handle this conflict,
Speaker 1: it's probably very similar. All three of these candidates are
Speaker 1: extremely pro Israel, basically locksteck step in their views. We're
Speaker 1: going to talk later about, you know, Trump truth that
Speaker 1: they need to stop the protests. So he's a little
Speaker 1: more like vociferous and clear in his language. But Joe
Speaker 1: Biden has been overseeing this authoritarian crackdown.
Speaker 4: Don't know what RFK Junior would do. Haven't heard him comment.
Speaker 1: On this specifically, not that he hasn't said anything. I
Speaker 1: haven't seen him say anything. But they're basically aligned on
Speaker 1: the policy. So there's not a lot here to dissent from.
Speaker 1: But in terms of the political impact, you know, it
Speaker 1: continues to show that for young people in particular, there
Speaker 1: is a sizable minority. I'm not saying it's a majority,
Speaker 1: but a sizable minority for whom this is the number
Speaker 1: one issue. This is the issue they will vote or
Speaker 1: not vote on, and he's lost them. I don't think
Speaker 1: there's anything he could do at this point to make
Speaker 1: it up to them, because it's been almost seven months now.
Speaker 1: They've watched these horrors unfold. They've seen the way they've
Speaker 1: been routinely smeared from the White House podium, and yeah,
Speaker 1: all of your cajoling is not going to do any good.
Speaker 1: And they're like, your guy is helping with the genocide
Speaker 1: and by the way, smears us at every single chance
Speaker 1: that he gets.
Speaker 2: You don't want.
Speaker 4: So it is a dire political situation for Joe Biden.
Speaker 2: Something I was thinking about too, is that there's an
Speaker 2: more honest pro Israel support for Donald Trump, because Trump
Speaker 2: doesn't even pretend, whereas with Biden. He does basically have
Speaker 2: the same policy visa of the Israel, but then rhetorically,
Speaker 2: you know, is of course trying to appease like you know,
Speaker 2: human rights concerns and others. RFK Junior also the same
Speaker 2: much like Trumps just like, yeah, I support Israel like
Speaker 2: one hundred percent. So you know, in a certain way,
Speaker 2: there's an honest, like at least representation I think by
Speaker 2: both Trump and I guess RFK Junior to a certain extent,
Speaker 2: Whereas with Biden. You know, on a policy level, anybody
Speaker 2: who's smart enough to pay attention to the conflict, they
Speaker 2: know there's also about him having the power, like he
Speaker 2: actually has the powers and acted that.
Speaker 3: And I think that's the key part.
Speaker 1: That's it is if you look at his overall approval
Speaker 1: ratings and other polls on Israel Palestine, it's one of
Speaker 1: it is the worst area for him because you have
Speaker 1: people who are vehemently pro Israel, who are like, how
Speaker 1: dare you even suggest that Israel should exactly writing things
Speaker 1: in or say that that's over the top. Their response
Speaker 1: and then you have people who are like this as
Speaker 1: a genocide, and I hate that you're overseeing a genocide.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, I'm not alone and feeling like
Speaker 1: many of the things I was most terrified under Trump
Speaker 1: are coming true before my eyes under Joe Biden. So yeah,
Speaker 1: you are really not pleasing anyone at this point. You're
Speaker 1: certainly not pleasing your own base, which is wildly at
Speaker 1: odds with what your policy has truly been. And the
Speaker 1: bottom line is, this isn't unfolding under Donald Trump, it
Speaker 1: isn't unfolding under RFK Junior. It's unfolding under your watch.
Speaker 1: And so if people who are not happy with the
Speaker 1: direction of the policy in any direction, they're gonna blame you.
Speaker 1: So it makes sense from that perspective that you know
Speaker 1: Donald Trump would edge him out. But it's not like
Speaker 1: he has a huge clear lead here on the conflict either,
Speaker 1: because I don't think people feel like he's particularly trustworthy
Speaker 1: when it comes to foreign affairs either.
Speaker 3: I think we can think of Israel like abortion.
Speaker 2: It is a very animating issue for some people, and
Speaker 2: amongst those people, they're going to have real witness. Taks
Speaker 2: Yea from talking more about in the pro life community
Speaker 2: in particular, and so if we think about it that way,
Speaker 2: it actually makes sense electorally.
Speaker 3: You're going to see this in our next graphic.
Speaker 2: Let's go and put this up there on the screen,
Speaker 2: because this illustrates a little bit of what we're talking about.
Speaker 2: How do you feel Joe Biden is handling the conflict?
Speaker 2: So doing well is twenty seven percent neither well or badly,
Speaker 2: eighteen percent doing badly, forty nine percent don't know. Six
Speaker 2: Let's go to the next part. This again breaks it
Speaker 2: down by age. I'll start with eighteen to twenty nine
Speaker 2: demographic for Joe Biden doing well eighteen percent neither, seventeen
Speaker 2: percent doing badly, fifty four percent, eleven percent is don't know.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right, majority of people.
Speaker 2: Now, actually, amongst the thirty to forty nine, you see
Speaker 2: similar numbers. Twenty six percent say he's doing well, eighteen
Speaker 2: percent neither, doing badly is forty eight percent. That's, you know,
Speaker 2: forty eight percent of people. That's a pretty decent amount,
Speaker 2: definitely plurality within that age group. And then don't know
Speaker 2: at eight fifty to sixty four you see similar twenty
Speaker 2: nine percent doing well, twenty one percent neither well or badly,
Speaker 2: forty seven percent doing badly, three percent don't know. And
Speaker 2: then amongst boomers, this again there's some interesting numbers. Thirty
Speaker 2: two percent doing well, so definitely the highest percentage of
Speaker 2: people say it's doing well, fourteen percent saying neither well
Speaker 2: or badly, so basically a wash. But you still got
Speaker 2: a full fifty fifty percent of people boomer saying doing badly,
Speaker 2: probably more pro Israel in the way that they think
Speaker 2: about it in four percent say don't know. So interesting
Speaker 2: that the fifty plus demographic has more definite opinions on
Speaker 2: where he's doing well or badly, but there is a
Speaker 2: sizeable doing badly.
Speaker 3: Figure. Let's go to the next one, because this is probably.
Speaker 1: Near majorities in every single age group. That's right, even
Speaker 1: with the option of don't know, it's still near majorities
Speaker 1: in every age group.
Speaker 2: That's like, you suck absolutely. Now, this is the key question. Actually,
Speaker 2: are you more or less likely to support a candidate
Speaker 2: as strong as supports Israel more likely thirty five percent,
Speaker 2: doesn't matter, thirty one percent less likely, eighteen percent don't know,
Speaker 2: sixteen so it is not a you know majority, It's
Speaker 2: not even the biggest number by far. In this Israel
Speaker 2: is a wash for most people, and that makes sense.
Speaker 2: But again amongst that fervor, let's break it down by age,
Speaker 2: because this is where it matters the most. Are you
Speaker 2: more or less likely to support a candidate strong in
Speaker 2: sports is real? Amongst eighteen to twenty nine, Here we
Speaker 2: see twenty four percent more likely, twenty six percent doesn't matter.
Speaker 2: But you've got a third who're saying thirty one percent
Speaker 2: less likely, eighteen percent don't know. Now amongst the rest
Speaker 2: of the age groups, so like, for example, thirty to
Speaker 2: forty nine, twenty seven percent more likely, thirty five percent
Speaker 2: doesn't matter, nineteen percent less likely, twenty percent don't know,
Speaker 2: fifty to sixty four thirty five percent more likely, thirty
Speaker 2: four percent doesn't matter, fifteen percent less likely, sixteen percent
Speaker 2: don't know. But then here amongst boomers you can actually
Speaker 2: see the switch. Fifty six percent say more likely to
Speaker 2: support somebody who's strongly supports is reel, twenty seven percent
Speaker 2: don't know, less likely, eight and ten amongst that don't know.
Speaker 3: Figure for the boomer.
Speaker 2: So overall you've got a pretty decent chunk there of
Speaker 2: eighteen to twenty nine year olds in the less likely category,
Speaker 2: and then you've got a big chunk there of boomers
Speaker 2: in the more likely category. So that is the big
Speaker 2: generation square off their crystal overall. Again, I mean, nobody
Speaker 2: should pretend the entire election is going to be determined
Speaker 2: on this. The question is only about this, you know. Again,
Speaker 2: the pro lifers pro lifers within the GOP maybe twenty percent,
Speaker 2: fifteen percent, you know, at best, but they rule the
Speaker 2: day for a reason, because you needed them to get
Speaker 2: you over that finish line. So we should think about
Speaker 2: it as a minority which has sizeable voting power and
Speaker 2: is a very important part of the overall constituency because
Speaker 2: of young voters and their importance for turnout in a
Speaker 2: high turnout election.
Speaker 1: Well that's the thing. No one's saying this is going
Speaker 1: to be the top issue for everyone, but given what
Speaker 1: is likely to be a very close election, it actually
Speaker 1: could be determinative. You only need a relatively small minority
Speaker 1: of people who are voting on this issue for it
Speaker 1: to be the determinative factor. I'm looking at Listen, anytime
Speaker 1: you look at these subsamples in one poll taken with
Speaker 1: grains of salt, et cetera. But in the recent CNN
Speaker 1: poll among voters age eighteen to thirty five, you've got
Speaker 1: Trump beating Biden by eleven points, Trump beating Biden among
Speaker 1: young voters by eleven points. As a reminder, back in
Speaker 1: April of twenty twenty, heading into that election, Biden was
Speaker 1: up on Trump by thirty one points in this same pole.
Speaker 1: So not all of that is Israel Pales nine, but
Speaker 1: some of it is because we know how we can
Speaker 1: see what's unfolding on college campuses around the country, we
Speaker 1: can see how important this issue is to a certain
Speaker 1: segment of young voters in particular, and so in fact,
Speaker 1: it really could be determinative. We also asked that question
Speaker 1: the other way, in terms of are you more or
Speaker 1: less likely to support a candidate that strongly supports palastine
Speaker 1: and can put these numbers up on the screen. So
Speaker 1: here you've got the top line numbers, and you've got
Speaker 1: eighteen percent who are saying it's more likely, and you've
Speaker 1: got thirty one percent plurality saying it's less likely. Thirty
Speaker 1: another thirty one percent say I don't really care. Let's
Speaker 1: put the age numbers up, because once again you see
Speaker 1: the divide among the youngest demographic thirty six percent say, hey,
Speaker 1: if that cand it strongly supports Palestine, that makes me
Speaker 1: more likely to want to vote for them, and the
Speaker 1: less likely category is only twenty three percent. Total reversal
Speaker 1: among you know, the older you go up the demographic chain,
Speaker 1: you've got Among sixty five plus, only seven percent say
Speaker 1: support for Palestine makes them more likely and forty eight
Speaker 1: percent say that it makes it less likely. And also
Speaker 1: keep in mind, you know, we also broke out these
Speaker 1: pull numbers by media consumption habits, and it's exactly what
Speaker 1: you'd expect. Young voters are overwhelmingly a majority strong Madri
Speaker 1: I think was like fifty nine percent are getting their
Speaker 1: news from social media to include TikTok, Twitter, Instagram, whatever,
Speaker 1: and older voters are overwhelmingly getting there is from cable news. Now,
Speaker 1: part of that is those platforms, because those the demographics
Speaker 1: they're serving, they serve content that fits their pre existing views.
Speaker 1: And part of that is, I would say, in particular
Speaker 1: when it comes to cable news, shaping their view of
Speaker 1: the conflict and really helping to reinforce and further strengthen
Speaker 1: this divide between the demographics. But that's also an important
Speaker 1: part of what we're seeing here and you know, it
Speaker 1: also helps make sense why like Joe Biden, for example,
Speaker 1: in spite of the fact that the Democratic Party is
Speaker 1: not with him on this policy. But as you point
Speaker 1: out over and over again, I mean young people, they vote,
Speaker 1: but it's not in the same numbers as the oldest demographics.
Speaker 1: Not to mention, Joe Biden is three hundred and twenty
Speaker 1: three years old, So these are the people that he like,
Speaker 1: identifies with most and who shares their worldview. So it's
Speaker 1: both ideological and it's political. And then when you add
Speaker 1: in the influence of APAC money and the military industrial
Speaker 1: conflict complex, that's how you end up with this very
Speaker 1: flexing situation where you've got a Democratic president who seems
Speaker 1: to be willing to sacrifice his own reelection because in
Speaker 1: his political career it has never politically been the wrong
Speaker 1: move to support Israel too strongly. No politician in his
Speaker 1: experience has ever paid a price for that. He may
Speaker 1: here be the first one. Given how clearly animating this
Speaker 1: is for young voters above all other demographics.
Speaker 3: It's very possible.
Speaker 2: Again, you know, we have no idea what effect this
Speaker 2: will all have on the margins, but this is and
Speaker 2: I have to put numbers here behind this, because people
Speaker 2: get angry, they're like, what do you mean young people
Speaker 2: don't vote? Only about fifty two percent of eligible voters
Speaker 2: between eighteen to twenty nine voted in the twenty twenty election,
Speaker 2: and that was eight percent higher than the twenty and
Speaker 2: sixteen election.
Speaker 3: Just so people understand.
Speaker 2: So actually, in twenty sixteen, the majority of young people
Speaker 2: didn't vote who were eligible to vote. Now, what do
Speaker 2: everybody think that the number is? For the boomers age
Speaker 2: sixty five plus, seventy percent of them voted in this
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen election, seventy four percent of them voted in
Speaker 2: the twenty twenty election. Now, if we're a high turnout
Speaker 2: elect twenty twenty is a record high for turnout, there's
Speaker 2: actually no expectation that we should come even close to
Speaker 2: that if we see changes, let's say, and vote by
Speaker 2: mail or in general. I mean, twenty twenty was just
Speaker 2: such a high tension political year in a lot of respects.
Speaker 2: While people are upset, people feel a little bit more
Speaker 2: tuned out than ever from politics today. We know that,
Speaker 2: by the way, from data. There is tons of data
Speaker 2: out there that shows that news consumption not our show necessarily,
Speaker 2: but like all for general election news is at a
Speaker 2: record low for this time around. Yeah, that is very
Speaker 2: indicative of people tuning out, which means they're not going
Speaker 2: to vote. So if we have a lower turnout election,
Speaker 2: you have you burn out. You turn out at like,
Speaker 2: you know, forty to fifty percent again, but the boomer
Speaker 2: turnout remains steady at normal levels, or just say it
Speaker 2: normalized this to seventy again, you're going to see a
Speaker 2: big increase in the amount of people who are voting
Speaker 2: who are older. Now, a lot of changes to this right,
Speaker 2: Abortion scrambled everything. So don't get me wrong. If anything,
Speaker 2: I personally would bet on record high Democratic women turnout
Speaker 2: more than anything because of abortion. Now, those people, you know,
Speaker 2: I don't know what they feel about Israel, but I
Speaker 2: know they definitely care about abortion more than anything else.
Speaker 2: So they're still going to be coming out. I wouldn't
Speaker 2: write Biden off. I continue to see that though, Crystal.
Speaker 2: There are a lot of people out there who are
Speaker 2: like Biden is cooked and all that. But you know,
Speaker 2: having sat in the studio for the twenty twenty two election,
Speaker 2: it just been burned, you know, and seen too much
Speaker 2: with the referendums and all that I refuse to discount
Speaker 2: any you know, context of a surprise because of the
Speaker 2: abortion question, which I always want to lay out in
Speaker 2: these segments.
Speaker 4: In my view, it's really fifty fifty.
Speaker 3: I agree with that.
Speaker 4: I really think it's fifty to fifty.
Speaker 1: I mean, on the one hand, obviously, as we're talking
Speaker 1: about Joe Biden has huge issues with young people. He
Speaker 1: does huge issues if you look at his approvalry. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is supposed to be the core of the Democratic base,
Speaker 1: and they hate his guts. I mean, his approval rating
Speaker 1: is at its lowest among that demographic.
Speaker 4: That should be the verse.
Speaker 1: He should, judging by recent Democratic Party history, have his
Speaker 1: highest approval rating among young voters, and they despise him.
Speaker 1: Abortion is the other side of the coin, though. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's a disaster for the Royal Republican Party, and it
Speaker 1: has specifically been a disaster provably in election after election
Speaker 1: for Republicans. So it's not just ballid initiatives. It really
Speaker 1: has translated into strong democratic performance when people actually have
Speaker 1: to show up and vote. On the other hand, those
Speaker 1: are special elections that turn out as smaller what happens
Speaker 1: in a general election. There are way too many factors,
Speaker 1: and the polls are way too unreliable to actually say
Speaker 1: who is up, who was down, how this is all
Speaker 1: likely to unfold. And then you also have all the
Speaker 1: Trump courtroom drama, which God knows what that's going to do,
Speaker 1: if anything. So anyone who's telling you like, for sure
Speaker 1: this person's going to win it, for sure that person's
Speaker 1: going to win, they have no idea.
Speaker 4: They have no idea. We have no idea.
Speaker 1: All we can tell you is some of the factors
Speaker 1: that are going into this mix, and it is a
Speaker 1: truly complicated brup.
Speaker 2: We are only trying to present you what most people don't.
Speaker 2: And this is my biggest problem with cable is that
Speaker 2: they are all about just single narratives. They don't prepare
Speaker 2: their audiences for I mean, it would be the easiest
Speaker 2: thing in the world Biden has cooked. That's an easy
Speaker 2: way to get views. We're not going to lie to
Speaker 2: you people because you look like an idiot, you know,
Speaker 2: and that's a lot of people did look that way
Speaker 2: back in twenty twenty two. It's very important what we're
Speaker 2: trying to do here is present the whole picture for
Speaker 2: what everybody can take away. So thank you for supporting
Speaker 2: this polling, because it really does, you know, help me
Speaker 2: at least understand like the effects of it and kind
Speaker 2: of wrap my head around it.
Speaker 3: And I hope it does the same for everybody too.
Speaker 2: Let's get to some of those general election polls that
Speaker 2: we're talking about and some of the mainstream media who
Speaker 2: are now all noticing a very consistent trend. Every poll
Speaker 2: that there is that exists. Maybe it's flawed, maybe it's not.
Speaker 2: It certainly shows Trump with a massive edge. Here is
Speaker 2: CNN admitting as such on their own program.
Speaker 3: Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5: Our new poll, which was conducted by SSRs, finds is
Speaker 5: leading Biden, who has ample work to do with his
Speaker 5: base and with independent voters who were breaking to his
Speaker 5: GOP rival and the head to head raise, Forty nine
Speaker 5: percent of voters say they'd picked Trump for president, compared
Speaker 5: to forty three percent for Biden. That's a nine point
Speaker 5: Trump advantage with independent voters. And add in third party
Speaker 5: candidates and Trump's lead jumps even more. He has forty
Speaker 5: two percent to Biden's thirty three percent, and Robert F.
Speaker 5: Kennedy Junior gets sixteen percent of the vote. Our poll
Speaker 5: also underscores the challenges of incumbency and that voters four
Speaker 5: years later have a better view of Trump's presidency compared
Speaker 5: to Biden's fifty five percent say Trump's time in office
Speaker 5: was success, with only thirty nine percent saying the same
Speaker 5: about Biden's presidency.
Speaker 2: So you can see that there's a huge disapproval there
Speaker 2: with Joe Biden. You can see Trump almost six point
Speaker 2: lead outside the margin of error being admitted. And again,
Speaker 2: you know, the other confounding variable here for the Biden
Speaker 2: question is just about how people feel about him.
Speaker 3: Let's put this up there please. I mean, this is
Speaker 3: just straordinary.
Speaker 2: This is not something that you want as your headline
Speaker 2: that is going in to the election. Biden is the
Speaker 2: least popular president in seventy years, below even Nixon and
Speaker 2: Jimmy Carter. At this point in his presidency, Trump, whenever
Speaker 2: he was in this part of his presidency, had a
Speaker 2: forty six percent approval rating ahead of the election. Keep
Speaker 2: in mind that was during the COVID nightmare back in
Speaker 2: April of twenty twenty. Think about how insane that period was.
Speaker 2: Even Nixon and Carter had fifty three and forty seven
Speaker 2: percent respectively. I mean, Eisenhower had a seventy three percent.
Speaker 2: He was the highest there at this point in his presidency.
Speaker 2: But Biden really is in a league of his own
Speaker 2: in terms of low approval. Now I want to say
Speaker 2: this is the caveat, and I've been thinking about this
Speaker 2: a lot. There are two elections that this will turn
Speaker 2: out to be. It's either going to be nineteen sixty eight,
Speaker 2: which I did a hole monologue on, or it's going
Speaker 2: to be nineteen forty eight.
Speaker 3: And let me explain. Nineteen forty eight was Harry S.
Speaker 2: Truman. He went into the election historically unpopular. People were
Speaker 2: fed up, union strikes, there was rapid inflation, but there was,
Speaker 2: you know, all this change after post World War two Korea,
Speaker 2: there was like there was a crisis. The Berlin Lyft.
Speaker 2: Korea came a little bit later, but more what I'm
Speaker 2: saying is there's a lot of geopolitical you know, consternation,
Speaker 2: and every poll that was out there, the Gallup polling,
Speaker 2: I think it was a major one at the time,
Speaker 2: was like Truman's cook, there's nowhere, never going to happen.
Speaker 2: Truman ends up mounting kind of a run from behind campaign.
Speaker 2: The famous Dewey defeats Truman, which if he holds up,
Speaker 2: and he ends up winning based upon flogging the rest
Speaker 2: of the political establishment, saying that Thomas Dewey and that
Speaker 2: do nothing Congress were the real ones that were responsible
Speaker 2: for the problem, not him, and he gets himself elected
Speaker 2: as a shock to the entire country. The other inverse is,
Speaker 2: like I said nineteen sixty eight, nineteen sixty eight, where
Speaker 2: you see a split of the Democratic coalition over Vietnam,
Speaker 2: you have all the chaos of RFK Junior, RFK Senior.
Speaker 2: They're you know, dividing the coalition. Hubert Humphrey, he's unable
Speaker 2: to consolidate that. You have a third party candidate like
Speaker 2: George Wallace. It's about thirteen percent of the vote in
Speaker 2: the South. Richard Nixon is able to carry it law
Speaker 2: and order message about forty percent of the vote for
Speaker 2: popular vote. He ends up winning a stunning electoral college victory.
Speaker 2: So one of those two is going to happen. If
Speaker 2: Biden wins, is going to be forty eight. And if
Speaker 2: Biden loses, I think it's going to be in nineteen
Speaker 2: sixty eight.
Speaker 1: Very interesting, very interesting. I mean I just keep thinking about, like,
Speaker 1: what are the core reasons people voted for Joe Biden
Speaker 1: in the first place because they thought he was like
Speaker 1: a nice guy, because they wanted to end the chaos.
Speaker 3: That's it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well they don't think he's a nice guy anymore.
Speaker 1: He's not a nice guy. Regardless of what you know
Speaker 1: they said at the White House Correspondence dinner about how
Speaker 1: decent he is whatever, He's not a good guy if
Speaker 1: people don't feel that way about him anymore. And number two,
Speaker 1: there's chaos. So you're not making an affirmative case for
Speaker 1: your presidence. You haven't bothered to tell anyone that you're
Speaker 1: even going to like try to do anything in particular
Speaker 1: with the second term. So why would what is the
Speaker 1: affirmative case for Joe Biden's time around. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: people were really frigging hey, Donald Trump to and they
Speaker 1: don't necessarily want to go back to that time period either.
Speaker 1: And the more that we get into the election cycle,
Speaker 1: you know, it's early, like right now, yes, CNN's numbers
Speaker 1: say people have fond memories of the Trump time period.
Speaker 1: They think it was more successful than the Biden time period.
Speaker 1: You know, there's a little bit of rose colored glasses
Speaker 1: there and whatever. But as we get more into the
Speaker 1: election cycle, and people have to deal with Donald Trump
Speaker 1: in their face all day every day, in his court
Speaker 1: romantics and whatever the hell else he's going to say
Speaker 1: and do it between now an election day, does that
Speaker 1: change the feeling is abortion is the rollback of rights
Speaker 1: that people had kind of taken for granted and the
Speaker 1: horror stories that we're seeing in state after state after state.
Speaker 1: Does that end up being the determinive factor? Because it's certainly,
Speaker 1: you know, if we're looking at the election results so far,
Speaker 1: it really has been, and that in that way, the
Speaker 1: polls have actually been skewed against Democrats. Democrats have been
Speaker 1: outperforming the polls in a lot of these places because
Speaker 1: they are not anticipating the surge of voters who are
Speaker 1: disgusted with extremist abortion policy and states and localities across
Speaker 1: the country. So that's the landscape we're looking at. And
Speaker 1: then you know, there's a lot of questions about obviously
Speaker 1: they have poured gasoline on the fire about to talk
Speaker 1: about some of the extraordinary, very nineteen sixty eight esque
Speaker 1: scenes playing out in college campuses across the country. This
Speaker 1: really does divide the Democratic base. It also really pretends
Speaker 1: very ill for how the DNC is going to go
Speaker 1: and the level of chaos that is going to be
Speaker 1: on display there as you know, Joe Biden continues his
Speaker 1: unconditional support for Israel no matter what. We don't know
Speaker 1: what is about to happen with regards to RAFA and
Speaker 1: the additional whores that could unfold there. So there's just
Speaker 1: a you know, there's a lot going on. And the
Speaker 1: bottom line is this is the election that almost no
Speaker 1: one wanted. No one wanted this rematch, no one wanted it.
Speaker 1: But there was very little Democrat There was basically democracy
Speaker 1: completely shut out on the Democratic side, the Republican base
Speaker 1: still very fond of Trump, and you know, very little
Speaker 1: contest ultimately there either And so the overwhelming majority of
Speaker 1: Americans who were like, isn't there anyone else we could run?
Speaker 1: Aren't there any other choices from the two major parties
Speaker 1: we could have?
Speaker 6: No?
Speaker 1: And that's why you see such low interest and excitement
Speaker 1: about this election cycle, because the people who are going
Speaker 1: to actually, you know, actually going to throw this election
Speaker 1: one way or the other are the people who say,
Speaker 1: I don't like either of these dudes, I don't want
Speaker 1: either of them to be president. But I guess at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, I have to pick. So
Speaker 1: that's where we are as a country. It's not exactly
Speaker 1: an aspirational choice.
Speaker 2: No, it is not aspirational. That's why, you know, if
Speaker 2: I had to bet, it's so hard to pick. Obviously,
Speaker 2: I don't know what's going to happen. But part of
Speaker 2: the thing that did happen in nineteen sixty eight is
Speaker 2: there also was not a lot of excitement. Remember, people
Speaker 2: knew Richard Nixon, and they knew a lot about him,
Speaker 2: and they didn't necessarily like him all that much. People
Speaker 2: also knew a lot about Hubert Humphrey. His name may
Speaker 2: be dead today, but at the time he was the
Speaker 2: vice president, he was a very known quantity. He was
Speaker 2: a star Democrat, but they didn't trust him because he
Speaker 2: was taught by LBJ. There was not a lot of insightment.
Speaker 2: People really felt like under attack in nineteen sixty eight,
Speaker 2: and there was like a chaos in this in the
Speaker 2: middle of the chest, which is something that I would
Speaker 2: probably say is very analogous today. Let's put the next
Speaker 2: one up there on the screen. You can also see
Speaker 2: this too, which is what Chrystal was talking about in
Speaker 2: terms of how tight things are going to be the
Speaker 2: latest CBS News poll out of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, the
Speaker 2: so called what is it Blue Walls, I think we
Speaker 2: dropped out, Well, what are the polls there?
Speaker 3: So very very tight race, very tight race.
Speaker 2: Now currently, what we see in Michigan if you look
Speaker 2: at the current rating for how people say the state
Speaker 2: of the economy is thirty eight percent in Michigan, thirty
Speaker 2: eight percent Pennsylvania, forty two percent Wisconsin.
Speaker 3: But then look at how people feel about Trump.
Speaker 2: Looking back during the Trump era, here was whether they
Speaker 2: think the economy was good sixty two percent, sixty one percent,
Speaker 2: sixty two percent. That is such a strong number that
Speaker 2: I just can't get over. It was highly determinative. If
Speaker 2: you look at the end of the year since the
Speaker 2: COVID pandemic, whether people think the things have gotten better.
Speaker 2: It's in the twenties for people in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
Speaker 2: If you look at people who say understands people like me.
Speaker 2: For Biden, in August of twenty twenty, it was at
Speaker 2: forty four percent today it's forty For Trump, it was
Speaker 2: thirty seven percent now it's forty two.
Speaker 3: So but Trump is actually beating.
Speaker 4: Biden category that Biden used to have that John.
Speaker 2: That is one of the most important things about him,
Speaker 2: is like, yeah, I no, he says crazy stuff, but
Speaker 2: he seems like a nice guy and he feels like
Speaker 2: he understands me. And that's one of those two where
Speaker 2: if you look at each one of these states, how
Speaker 2: does Biden make you feel? Worried? Number one response in
Speaker 2: the state of Pennsylvania. Worried number one response in the
Speaker 2: state of Pennsylvania. If you look at who you rate
Speaker 2: the state of if you basically if you just look
Speaker 2: at finances where they're doing better, it's in the twenties
Speaker 2: and all three states. So it's like on all the
Speaker 2: pocketbook stuff, all the traditional rules of politics, Like I said,
Speaker 2: Biden should be cooked. This should not even be a question.
Speaker 2: He's Jimmy Carter and there's no a single thing but Trump.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know the fact that it's still tight.
Speaker 2: He's got his own confounding variables there. Yeah, and it
Speaker 2: is very possible that he could still lose. One of
Speaker 2: the things I looked at is also state by state
Speaker 2: Senate elections, which can be very predictive. Carrie Lake right
Speaker 2: now is down by like double digits in Arizona. She really, Yeah,
Speaker 2: it's a disaster. Same thing in Pennsylvania. Bob Casey is
Speaker 2: crushing David McCormick for ten percent. So that's another one
Speaker 2: you want to look at too, because you take Biden
Speaker 2: Trump out of it and you see a huge lead
Speaker 2: for the Democrat there. That's another sign. Sometimes sometimes you know,
Speaker 2: split ticket of voting in these days very very rare,
Speaker 2: so it could indicate some hidden Democratic strength.
Speaker 1: Interesting, that is very interesting. I mean the irony is
Speaker 1: I think if Democrats had chosen like, you know, random
Speaker 1: relatively generic Democrat, I think they be beating Trump pretty easily.
Speaker 1: I think if Republicans had chosen you know, random relatively
Speaker 1: generic Republican, I think they be biting beating bind very easily.
Speaker 1: It's like, you know, so they both put up their
Speaker 1: like weakest possible contenders, and yeah, we'll see who wins.
Speaker 4: I don't know, see how she all plays out.
Speaker 3: We'll see, folks, it's going to be a fun one.
Speaker 1: A lot of time between now and then. Let's go
Speaker 1: ahead and get to some of what is unfolding around
Speaker 1: the country, some extraordinary scenes. We want to start at
Speaker 1: Columbia University, which really has been kind of ground zero
Speaker 1: for these protests and for the crackdown on these protests.
Speaker 1: So we can put these images up on the screen.
Speaker 1: You're talking about the echoes of nineteen sixty eight. So
Speaker 1: here we have protesters taking over Hamilton Hall on campus
Speaker 1: that was one of the same buildings that nineteen sixty
Speaker 1: eight anti Vietnam War protesters took over at that time.
Speaker 1: You can see they have hung a flag that says
Speaker 1: hins Hall. That's a reference to that little girl who
Speaker 1: It was horrible. I did a whole modelogue about it.
Speaker 3: She was in a.
Speaker 1: Car, her family was killed by an IDF strike. She
Speaker 1: was still alive, she was able to call the Red Crescent.
Speaker 1: She was begging for them to and help her. They
Speaker 1: stayed on the line with her, they got the route
Speaker 1: deconflicted so they could come and save her. And not
Speaker 1: only was she assassinated by the IDF, this little six
Speaker 1: year old, adorable girl, but her would be rescuers also
Speaker 1: assassinated by the IDF and documented on the scene. That
Speaker 1: ambulance coming to save her was just a block away.
Speaker 1: So Hinshall in honor of Hint and her loss of life.
Speaker 1: So again, these echoes of nineteen sixty eight now being
Speaker 1: very intentionally stoked, and that connectivity very intentionally created by
Speaker 1: the protesters at Columbia. I'll give you some more updates
Speaker 1: on Columbia in a minute, because I want to show
Speaker 1: you some of the scenes out of ut Austin, where
Speaker 1: Texas Governor Greg Abbott has decided to go full crackdown mode.
Speaker 1: Any of his pretend pretenses around free speech clearly gone.
Speaker 1: Here you can see police taking out someone carrying them
Speaker 1: their hands are found. Here, you see these officers coming
Speaker 1: in in what appears to be riot gear, approaching the
Speaker 1: student protesters. Here you see some cop beating the hell
Speaker 1: out of someone. Fist flying there as you know, the
Speaker 1: cops are pushing up against the protesters. Here we see
Speaker 1: people being sprayed mace I assume, as they try to
Speaker 1: clear on this this area, in this encampment.
Speaker 4: And then this is incredible.
Speaker 1: So after the police cleared the whole area, this is
Speaker 1: protesters coming back in and the police actually having to retreat.
Speaker 4: And then this is my favorite.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you guys can hear this in
Speaker 1: the background, but they're chanting you failed Uvaldi. Because DPS
Speaker 1: was there on the scene at Valdi and While they're
Speaker 1: pretty courageous when it comes to beating up unarmed college kids,
Speaker 1: not so courageous when it came to rescuing these poor
Speaker 1: babies who were trapped and being murdered inside of that
Speaker 1: elementary school and ultimately bleeding. So just extraordinary scenes there.
Speaker 1: I don't know how many arrests were made, but student
Speaker 1: protesters at u T Austin very determined, even in spite
Speaker 1: of the crackdown, to come back in and reset up
Speaker 1: the encampment, restart the protest. Reportedly soccer from the scenes
Speaker 1: on the ground, the protests have only grown in size
Speaker 1: as a result of this attempted crackdown. So we can
Speaker 1: put Greg Abbott's sweet up on the screen. Like I said,
Speaker 1: all of his free speech commentary previously is now out
Speaker 1: the window. He says, no encampments will be allowed. Instead,
Speaker 1: arrests are being made. Your thoughts on what is unfolding there.
Speaker 2: It does look like about one hundred demonstra This is
Speaker 2: k kV U E ABC got to give a shout
Speaker 2: out to the local media and they're seeing at least
Speaker 2: one hundred demonstrators there arrested. Returning back to that Hamilton Hall,
Speaker 2: that monologue that I gave, Yeah, it's very significant.
Speaker 3: I mean, they obviously did it on purpose.
Speaker 2: So nineteen sixty eight, that building, Hamilton Hall, was actually
Speaker 2: occupied by the VA non war protesters and they barricaded
Speaker 2: themselves inside.
Speaker 3: I will say, maybe.
Speaker 2: You'll disagree with me, Crystal, I think it was a
Speaker 2: mistake because one of the reasons one of the things
Speaker 2: that they did is a significant amount of property destruction.
Speaker 2: And they blew open the doors with with metal, you know,
Speaker 2: and broke the glass and all of that. You can
Speaker 2: think that's significantly if you want, but once you crossed
Speaker 2: into the line of straight up property damage, and you know,
Speaker 2: we're no longer in the real realm of like camping
Speaker 2: on private property, which is university and that obviously you know,
Speaker 2: it's very different. It's actual like destruction of property. That
Speaker 2: and barricading themselves inside vandalization. You're setting yourself up for
Speaker 2: some sort of police demonstration. And so I'll be honest,
Speaker 2: I think it was a mistake what they did because
Speaker 2: destroying property and vandalizing. Now at the same time, look Columbia,
Speaker 2: you know, I don't really know what their deal is
Speaker 2: because Columbia says the Columbia is like you haved until
Speaker 2: two pm, and we were all prepared. We were like, Okay,
Speaker 2: here we go, let's go. And then two pm comes
Speaker 2: and goes and nothing happen, and the Columbia University faculty
Speaker 2: are all there and then they start getting suspended, but
Speaker 2: there's no actual enforcement. So in a certain sense, it's
Speaker 2: like you're setting deadlines and then nothing is happening. So
Speaker 2: I feel like they've chosen the worst of all worlds.
Speaker 2: If you're gonna have rules, you're going to enforce them
Speaker 2: and enforce them. But if not, they're in this tricky situation.
Speaker 2: I will also say, in the student's defense, one of
Speaker 2: the things that Columbia prides itself on is its history
Speaker 2: of student activism, right, and they sell themselves about like, listen,
Speaker 2: we are so sorry about what happened in nineteen sixty eight,
Speaker 2: and it was a huge on their website to go it.
Speaker 4: Yet literally it took a decade to recover.
Speaker 2: From that leaders of activists, So in a certain sense,
Speaker 2: Columbia does not have anybody but itself to blame. But
Speaker 2: I do think it was a huge mistake to vandalize
Speaker 2: property and to break into the building, because you're setting
Speaker 2: yourself up for a crackdown. And I've said this before.
Speaker 2: You know, as long as people are peaceful, I think
Speaker 2: it's fine. But you start breaking stuff, burning stuff, vandalizing stuff,
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna lost EmPATH before.
Speaker 1: Well, here's the thing in terms of Columbia's response, because
Speaker 1: they threw everything at these students for a holy, peaceful protest.
Speaker 3: And in the beginning, you're in the beginning.
Speaker 1: Yes, they broad in the cops, they threatened the National Guard,
Speaker 1: they suspended students indiscriminately. And so when you throw the
Speaker 1: whole kitchen sink at them to begin with, well, you
Speaker 1: got nothing left, They got nothing left to fear. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is something that I've come to realize as a
Speaker 1: parent in terms of, like, you know, disciplining children.
Speaker 4: It's your biggest fears.
Speaker 1: They realize that, like you don't actually have any power
Speaker 1: over them. Carefully, Ella don't want the same, but at
Speaker 1: a certain extent, like you know, I can't, I can ground,
Speaker 1: I can tell you away the foot. Once you've done
Speaker 1: all the things, what else is there to do? And
Speaker 1: so that's what Columbia did here. They're cracked out at
Speaker 1: the beginning, was so aggressive, We're gonna send in the
Speaker 1: cops and it's going to be aggressive, and we're threatened
Speaker 1: the National Guard and all these politicians are gonna they're
Speaker 1: gonna smear its anti semis, we're going to kick you
Speaker 1: on a school and you're we're gonna graduate.
Speaker 4: You're not allowed to set foot on campus.
Speaker 1: And when the students were like, all right, well that's happened,
Speaker 1: what else is there left to be threatened with?
Speaker 2: I agree, which is what you're pointing to is And
Speaker 2: this is why it was such a mistake to initially
Speaker 2: send in the NYPD, because initially this is a peaceful protest.
Speaker 2: Yes they're in violation of rules, but it was they
Speaker 2: sent in the cops and then there was a huge backlash,
Speaker 2: and then they tried negotiation, and that's a big mistake because,
Speaker 2: as you said, you're suspending people, you're sending in the cops,
Speaker 2: and you're kind of boxing people into a corner. But
Speaker 2: then you're giving them deadlines. You're not enforcing the deadlines
Speaker 2: because you're obviously, look, these people, they have no idea
Speaker 2: what to do. They're terrified of the headline and sending
Speaker 2: in the NYPD again and inviting a new backlash, and
Speaker 2: so they kind of ratcheted up the ante. I mean,
Speaker 2: if you think about it, this is a bad analogy,
Speaker 2: but it's like a prison, right, So it's like when
Speaker 2: you have good behavior and then you have a violation
Speaker 2: of that.
Speaker 3: I just watched that whole Unlocked thing on Netflix, but.
Speaker 2: It's very instructive about how people feel and like, like
Speaker 2: you were saying about enforcement and rules, is okay, if
Speaker 2: you have a medium in action, you should be met
Speaker 2: with a medium sized reasonable response. So the reasonable response
Speaker 2: at that time would have been to do what they
Speaker 2: did in the interim, which is meet with them and
Speaker 2: be like, okay, guys, like what's going on here. Hey,
Speaker 2: we have commencement in two weeks. You're all going home.
Speaker 2: If you don't clear out, you're gonna get suspended. That's
Speaker 2: going to be a problem, and you don't want that.
Speaker 2: You've paid all this money. You know, we have all
Speaker 2: this going on, and I think you know that we're
Speaker 2: we're talking about lowering tension. But they threw the cops in.
Speaker 2: There was a huge mistake that said. Now though, you know,
Speaker 2: by box people into a corner and also kind of
Speaker 2: both throwing the cops and then backing down, they've set
Speaker 2: very unclear expectations, and now we have property damage and
Speaker 2: a wholesale you know, occupation of the hall, and unfortunately,
Speaker 2: I do think it's going to end in some tear
Speaker 2: gas or something, and there's no other what other options
Speaker 2: they have, there's no other way to clear people out.
Speaker 2: You're gonna barricade yourself inside of the hall, Like, what
Speaker 2: are you going to do? And especially if they start vandalizing,
Speaker 2: which they already did, you know to get in there.
Speaker 1: Well you should just you know, do what students want
Speaker 1: you to do, which is to divest.
Speaker 4: No, no, I know, I know, but that's.
Speaker 3: Not gonna happen. But yeah, but why not? Unstand that?
Speaker 3: But why not?
Speaker 1: Because there was a vote Columbia barn and it was
Speaker 1: overwhelming in favor of diving out.
Speaker 3: But the students don't control the endowment.
Speaker 1: But like, if you have faculty and students that are
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly like, just do this thing, then why not just
Speaker 1: do that thing?
Speaker 4: And then you won't have.
Speaker 1: Your whole occupied and you won't have to send in
Speaker 1: the cops, et cetera. But you know, I think bottom
Speaker 1: line is, like I said, these students have already been
Speaker 1: kicked on school and arrested, so.
Speaker 2: There will summary. We don't we don't really know. Here's
Speaker 2: what I also would say this, don't throw your future
Speaker 2: away for this.
Speaker 3: I know some of these protesters. Please don't do this.
Speaker 3: Your parents spent a lot of mine.
Speaker 4: I disagree with you.
Speaker 2: You want to get your spell if they're like, what
Speaker 2: are you going to do?
Speaker 1: These are people who have agency and who feel like
Speaker 1: they're standing against the genocide and I can't.
Speaker 4: I'm proud of them. I think it's incredible.
Speaker 2: Be a footnote to history. You're going to be in
Speaker 2: some idiot long YouTube and me but who can talk
Speaker 2: to you will know you're not going to have a degree.
Speaker 2: You will know a bunch of money.
Speaker 1: There are more things to achieve in life than like
Speaker 1: getting your startup funded or getting hired by Wall Street.
Speaker 4: Yeah, they're gonna know.
Speaker 3: You do you can be a teacher, you know.
Speaker 1: These are Yes, these are young people, but they're also adults,
Speaker 1: and they're also perfectly capable of making their own decisions
Speaker 1: about what's important to them in their lives and the
Speaker 1: way that they want to live. They're not buying into
Speaker 1: this crap, this part of actually what's in my monologue.
Speaker 1: They're not buying into this crop about the only success
Speaker 1: that matters is success in terms of a capitalist marketplace.
Speaker 1: They have values. Those values are important to them. They're
Speaker 1: willing to I think it's incredibly admirable that they're willing
Speaker 1: to sacrifice in many instances for people they don't know
Speaker 1: and we'll never meet. Like that's extraordinary and I think
Speaker 1: it's brave. I think they're to be commended, not scolded
Speaker 1: for making the wrong life decisions.
Speaker 2: I'm not going to scold anybody. I'm telling you I
Speaker 2: wouldn't do it, and you're.
Speaker 4: Not doing it. You didn't do it, and it's fine.
Speaker 2: But ten years ago, nobody remembers a fucking thing that
Speaker 2: I said. And there's a good reason for that. You do,
Speaker 2: but you do, no, I certainly do.
Speaker 6: You do a lot.
Speaker 1: And they will know when they're old and gray and
Speaker 1: they look back and everyone else is pretending to have
Speaker 1: been on the right side, they will know where they were,
Speaker 1: and they will know what they can tell their kids
Speaker 1: about what they do.
Speaker 3: That's not going to feed you or your kids.
Speaker 2: I mean, ask some of these Vietnam War people how
Speaker 2: it all worked out for them, and what is it
Speaker 2: nineteen that's twenty years later, So nineteen eighty eight, we
Speaker 2: elected Reagan. You know, we had your own contra and
Speaker 2: all that, Like, did it really make a difference what
Speaker 2: happened to a lot of those folks? Not much petered out,
Speaker 2: Nixon got elected. Law and order skyhigh. Murder rates most
Speaker 2: exactly are.
Speaker 1: Such a real it's such a clinical view of the
Speaker 1: world though, feel like, basically nothing matters, No protest matters.
Speaker 1: You know your genuine concern about this, you're protesting the government,
Speaker 1: you're disrupting political speeches. Nothing you do matters, So just
Speaker 1: like go out and get your bag. I think that's
Speaker 1: I think that's a really cynical, not nothing and disturbing
Speaker 1: view of the world.
Speaker 3: Not nothing matters, but a very little does matter.
Speaker 4: Listen, here's the bottom line.
Speaker 1: We know what will happen if these protests don't proceed,
Speaker 1: if these kids don't risk the things that they're risking.
Speaker 1: That again, I think they should be absolutely commended for
Speaker 1: we know what will happen, absolutely nothing.
Speaker 4: We don't know what will happen if they try.
Speaker 1: And we've seen at least that there has been some
Speaker 1: pressure placed on the administration, and I think that's important.
Speaker 1: And we see globally this is another thing I have
Speaker 1: in my monologue. We see that the people in Gaza
Speaker 1: see them, these Palestinians and Gaza are being starved to
Speaker 1: death and threatened with bombing, and the entire male population
Speaker 1: and Rafa now basically threatened with execution and murder. They
Speaker 1: see these protests and it means something to them. I mean,
Speaker 1: not alone, is I think significant and important. And you
Speaker 1: see the way that international problem mean you see the
Speaker 1: way Netanyahu is kind of freaking out about the fact
Speaker 1: that there's international pressure and these students are part of
Speaker 1: that larger movement.
Speaker 4: So, yeah, there are no guarantees here.
Speaker 1: You're right there was a backlash to the Vietnam War protesters,
Speaker 1: and you're right that could happen again. But we know
Speaker 1: damn well what happens if these kids do nothing, and
Speaker 1: that is the status quo perseveres Palestinians are probably you know,
Speaker 1: kick down on their land altogether, continue to be murdered,
Speaker 1: continue to be slaughtered. We know that's what happens. If
Speaker 1: they don't protest. They think there's a chance they could
Speaker 1: change something, and I applaud them for doing it.
Speaker 3: They may be right. I think they're wrong.
Speaker 2: I think it's a misreading of history and of power
Speaker 2: and of how that all works. Now again, I'm I
Speaker 2: would take it back. I don't want to scold people.
Speaker 2: I would only give you some advice that when you're
Speaker 2: very young, it can be really easy to get caught
Speaker 2: up and whatever the current thing of the day is.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to think back from twenty twelve or whatever,
Speaker 2: when whenever I was in college, Daca, that was a
Speaker 2: big one. All right, people, Mars or Doca. Oh, this
Speaker 2: was all over. Sorry, you know, look it ended up
Speaker 2: working out nothing like I'm just I'm just asking people
Speaker 2: to have a little bit of historical literacy and to
Speaker 2: be mindful that actions are gonna have consequence. Now you're
Speaker 2: an adult, you do whatever you want to do, and
Speaker 2: I support your right to do that. And I've spoken
Speaker 2: here openly I support people's right to protest and all that.
Speaker 2: I would just caution folks to not get caught up
Speaker 2: and to think, you know, this ain't nineteen sixty six
Speaker 2: and sell ma Alabama and all that. And there's too often,
Speaker 2: you know, lack of thinking about these consequences. Let's think
Speaker 2: back to BLM. I mean, people took to the streets.
Speaker 2: They thought this was going to be a revolution. What's
Speaker 2: the actual lasting consequence? You almost got Donald Trump reelected.
Speaker 2: You know, you have a sky high murder rate. Nothing
Speaker 2: change in terms of police action. So I hope you
Speaker 2: felt better. But like that's pretty much it, you know.
Speaker 2: I mean, and a bunch of grifters got to buy
Speaker 2: mansions in Los Angeles, like you didn't change.
Speaker 4: You're just arguing for, like, give up.
Speaker 3: No, I mean, that is your understand.
Speaker 1: That is what you're arguing. Give up, don't try, don't bother.
Speaker 1: If you care about something, you know what, keep your
Speaker 1: mouth shut, stay home and go get your bag.
Speaker 4: That's what you're arguing for.
Speaker 1: And I think, listen, the reality is, we know how
Speaker 1: hard it is to have our democracy actually reflect what people.
Speaker 4: Want in the will of the people.
Speaker 1: But I don't know why you're even doing what you're
Speaker 1: doing here and caring about politics. If you think, then
Speaker 1: nothing ever matters and nothing ever changes. Obviously, we've had
Speaker 1: protest movements in our history that have mattered, have changed.
Speaker 1: We can look back at LGBTQ rights in the very
Speaker 1: recent past, where there was an organized movement and there
Speaker 1: was protests, and guess what change came and it mattered,
Speaker 1: and it happened the Black Lives Matter protest situation. I
Speaker 1: think part of what happened there and led to a
Speaker 1: backlash that you're right, absolutely nothing changed is number one
Speaker 1: the co optation, as you said by Grifter's. Number two,
Speaker 1: the lack of any sort of like organized specific demands,
Speaker 1: and number three the fact that in direct contrast to
Speaker 1: these protests you actually had real widespread violence and property
Speaker 1: destruction and damage.
Speaker 4: You have not had that here.
Speaker 2: I totally agree and I commend these people. I said
Speaker 2: it from the beginning. I'll explain then you know why
Speaker 2: am I sitting here Because I want to convince people
Speaker 2: and understand how power really works in this country and
Speaker 2: the ways in which it can change.
Speaker 3: So let's think about the Civil rights era.
Speaker 2: There's a great series of books called The Parting of
Speaker 2: the Waters is three three series.
Speaker 3: I highly recommend people read it.
Speaker 2: A misreading of history is I think that Martin Luther
Speaker 2: King Junior in the cell Alabama March is the only
Speaker 2: thing that mattered, and it's totally wrong. LACP working with
Speaker 2: Lyndon Johnson and with the US Senate over a period
Speaker 2: of twenty five years in the legislative process, using and
Speaker 2: using the protest movement and then specifically co opt and
Speaker 2: hit the powers of center that mattered, actually resulted in
Speaker 2: the nineteen sixty four Civil Rights Act on top of
Speaker 2: the assassination of John F.
Speaker 3: Kennedy.
Speaker 2: It was the perfect moment for it to actually be
Speaker 2: able to come through. That's how it worked, right. So
Speaker 2: it's not just taking to the streets. Now, I'm not
Speaker 2: going to diminish the people who took the streets, right,
Speaker 2: but they're not actually the ones who really changed anything. Well,
Speaker 2: it was Lbjr. And it was the people that were
Speaker 2: Hubert Humphrey and all the cocktail.
Speaker 4: What they didn't matter.
Speaker 3: I mean, it mattered a.
Speaker 2: Lot less than the NAACP and then Lyndon Johnson, Hubert
Speaker 2: Humphrey and the leaders.
Speaker 1: But you're pretending like what's happening on Columbia is the
Speaker 1: only thing happening in the entire country. I mean, again,
Speaker 1: this movement has already won the argument. This movement has
Speaker 1: already dramatically changed public opinion, especially in terms of young people.
Speaker 4: This movement has made it.
Speaker 1: But for the first time, you know, Canni's like Summer
Speaker 1: Lee can actually be out and out oppositional to critical
Speaker 1: of Israel and Apec didn't even try to defeat her
Speaker 1: because they knew she was.
Speaker 4: Too strong, she was gonna win.
Speaker 1: For the first time, there is actual political weight on
Speaker 1: the side of the Palestinians where it's only been on
Speaker 1: one side previously. So those are all changes that are
Speaker 1: being made. And by the way, as I said, this
Speaker 1: is not the only thing that's happening. You also have
Speaker 1: organizations that are forming, that have formed, that are designed
Speaker 1: to put money on the other side of the equation.
Speaker 1: Organized on the other side of the equation, you have
Speaker 1: unions that have gotten involved, who have come out in
Speaker 1: favor of ceasefires and putting their organizational weight in might
Speaker 1: behind it. So to pretend like this is the only
Speaker 1: thing that's happening, and so you know, so it's not
Speaker 1: going to matter. To pretend that protests just haven't ever
Speaker 1: mattered in history. I just think that that is I
Speaker 1: think it's preposterous. I think it's nihilistic, and I just
Speaker 1: think it's ASTiP.
Speaker 3: I don't think that it doesn't matter.
Speaker 2: I think that it is part of a broader hole,
Speaker 2: and I would encourage people to not overestimate what part
Speaker 2: of one is and underestimate the life. I completely agree
Speaker 2: with you on the Union part, on the Congress part,
Speaker 2: and that you know, why do we spend so much
Speaker 2: time here? That shit really does matter? Like who really
Speaker 2: votes for x Y? You know A to Ukraine? Why
Speaker 2: do you think we spend so much time here? Or
Speaker 2: I care so much about Congress and the way that
Speaker 2: Ukraine ad matters and explaining all this shit about parliamentary
Speaker 2: procedure because that's the stuff that really governs our lives,
Speaker 2: like me taking to the streets and if I started
Speaker 2: an anti Ukraine war protest, which I would love to
Speaker 2: participate in, if anybody ever wants to let me know
Speaker 2: the next one that is happening, it's matter, But that's
Speaker 2: my point. It wouldn't do anything. It actually wouldn't do anything. No,
Speaker 2: if I spend all my time here and I win
Speaker 2: the argument and I try and work, you know, pressure
Speaker 2: lawmakers to actually do something that's going to be a
Speaker 2: little bit different, and explaining to the people here about
Speaker 2: how some of that stuff works and to the limited
Speaker 2: extent that we actually have a check in our huge
Speaker 2: democratic system, that is a real understanding. I think of
Speaker 2: kind of how the power works. Again to when you're
Speaker 2: twenty one years old, you don't have any power regardless.
Speaker 2: So yeah, this is probably your best bet in terms
Speaker 2: of participating in the whole. I am only saying you
Speaker 2: should also think about your future and what it's like
Speaker 2: in the you know, in a way, it's a little
Speaker 2: bit nihilistic to think that me getting expelled from school
Speaker 2: over participate or you know, breaking down a Hamilton Hall
Speaker 2: window is going to change the world. Like, I'm sorry,
Speaker 2: you know, the most likely outcome is that you're screwed.
Speaker 2: Ten years from now, nobody remembers you don't have a degree,
Speaker 2: you got expelled, and now you're what one hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty thousand dollars in debt. You know, I worry about
Speaker 2: those people too. I mean, I'm certainly how are they
Speaker 2: going to be able to buy a house or whatever. Actually,
Speaker 2: the single worst situation you can be in is to
Speaker 2: have no degree and all of the attendant Ivy League
Speaker 2: school debt, which none no wonder a lot of these
Speaker 2: people are going to be in. That's just, you know,
Speaker 2: in a way, that's nihilism as well, thinking that this
Speaker 2: is the most important thing that's ever going to happen
Speaker 2: in your life.
Speaker 3: The truth is it's not. Almost by a large.
Speaker 1: Channel for the things that you believe in, and you're
Speaker 1: willing to bear a costs and a consequence. I think
Speaker 1: is what we call like courage and is admirable. And yeah,
Speaker 1: they know that there is a potential price that they
Speaker 1: are paying. They're not stupid, quite aware of that. Their
Speaker 1: administration of Columbia has made them quite aware of that.
Speaker 1: The political leads, the media clause have made them quite
Speaker 1: aware of that. And Bill Ackman threatening to keep them
Speaker 1: from ever being hired like that should already happen, being
Speaker 1: doxed and smeared. Why do you think they all wear
Speaker 1: masks at the protest?
Speaker 4: That's why. Okay, they're very well aware of.
Speaker 1: The consequences and they're doing it anyway, and I think
Speaker 1: they deserve to be commended for that. If we can
Speaker 1: move on to the next element though, to update on
Speaker 1: what Columbia is actually doing. So, as Soccer mentioned previously,
Speaker 1: you had a two pm deadline issued to specifically the
Speaker 1: protesters that were in the encampment, saying listen, you need
Speaker 1: to clear on here or we're going to clear you
Speaker 1: out effectively. In advance of that, you can put B
Speaker 1: three up on the screen. You actually had very moving
Speaker 1: scenes of these people wearing the orange vest.
Speaker 4: These are all faculty.
Speaker 1: In these like designated vests so that they can be
Speaker 1: clearly identified as such. And you can see quite a
Speaker 1: number of Columbia University faculty who are linking arms here
Speaker 1: and surrounding the encampment to try to protect these students.
Speaker 1: You also had a march of at least one thousand students,
Speaker 1: quite a number who were encircling the encampment as well,
Speaker 1: also in an effort to protect the students who were
Speaker 1: in camp there. But you know, we were watching closely.
Speaker 1: Two PM came and went, and there was no visible action.
Speaker 1: There were some reports of cops outside of the university
Speaker 1: to sort of stand and buy, but there were no
Speaker 1: actual police action to clear out the encampment as we
Speaker 1: had seen previously. But we did get this news put
Speaker 1: this up on the screen from Axios. Reportedly, Columbia did
Speaker 1: then start instead of using force to clear out the encampment,
Speaker 1: they just started suspending everyone. So Ben Chang, vice president
Speaker 1: for Communications at Columbia, confirmed suspensions had begun at a
Speaker 1: press briefing at five pm, three apps or hours after
Speaker 1: the school had set that deadline. Didn't say how many
Speaker 1: students are going to be suspended but confirmed, they'll be
Speaker 1: unable to finish the semester, unable to graduate, and they're
Speaker 1: also going to be barred from entering any campus housing
Speaker 1: or academic buildings. So that is the Columbia response. I
Speaker 1: don't think it's probably going to do anything to tamp
Speaker 1: down the continued protests. Korein John Pierre, Biden's press secretary,
Speaker 1: was asked about free speech rights and had this to say.
Speaker 7: I see administration's response specifically to the use of police
Speaker 7: force in some of these college campus protests.
Speaker 5: You saw is at DNA University, Ohio State m LDT, Austin.
Speaker 8: Yeah, so again I'm going to be really repetitive here.
Speaker 8: Americans have the right to peace fully protest within the law.
Speaker 8: That is really important here. Anti Semitism is dangerous. I know,
Speaker 8: I've seen We've seen the videos that have pretty much
Speaker 8: gone viral out there, and I can't speak to that.
Speaker 2: We may have more to say.
Speaker 8: About those videos once we look into that, once you know,
Speaker 8: we'd have to look into them. Just don't have anything
Speaker 8: to share beyond that.
Speaker 1: I mean, listen, regardless of what, But did you know
Speaker 1: anti semitism is bad? Thank you for that public service announcement.
Speaker 1: I really appreciate. Think about this, like whether you think
Speaker 1: that these kids deserve to have their skulls cracked and
Speaker 1: thrown in prison, or whether you think that they are
Speaker 1: exercising their First Amendment rights and deserve to not be smeared.
Speaker 1: Anti Sell like this is unfolding at campuses across the
Speaker 1: country and this is all you have to say about it.
Speaker 4: It's so pathetic.
Speaker 3: And she basically says she's not aware.
Speaker 2: I mean, in a certain sense, I don't really want
Speaker 2: the White House to be involved in Colombia, Like we
Speaker 2: can have it a couple of ways. Yeah, the White
Speaker 2: in my opinion, the federal government shuld have nothing to
Speaker 2: say about what's going on Columbia. That should be a
Speaker 2: matter at Columbia as a private university, and it's a
Speaker 2: private place. As long as the First Amendment rights are protected,
Speaker 2: I don't really give a shit. You know, private university
Speaker 2: can do whatever they want now. At the same time, though,
Speaker 2: we live in the age where everybody has to have
Speaker 2: an opinion on everything.
Speaker 4: Well, the RKA already weighed in, right.
Speaker 2: And they weigh in all the time for you know,
Speaker 2: like some random crime or wherever if it's a transperson, right,
Speaker 2: they were like, oh my god, this is like the
Speaker 2: greatest paddic in the history of the world or something
Speaker 2: like that, like trans policy at the University of Ohio.
Speaker 2: It's like, well, if you're going to weigh in on that,
Speaker 2: then you can't really be saying, well, I'm not really aware,
Speaker 2: but anti semitism is bad and no on this particular one,
Speaker 2: I haven't seen the videos or whatever. It's like, it's
Speaker 2: very selective in the way that things are. Yeah, so
Speaker 2: we can have it both ways. I prefer the former,
Speaker 2: but you guys have chosen this.
Speaker 1: And well, here's the thing. I mean, many of these
Speaker 1: institutions are public universities. It's not like it's only columb
Speaker 1: we're talking about you know, U see Austin, We're talking
Speaker 1: about Virginia, Tag. We were talking about all sorts of
Speaker 1: public university state schools across the country where there are
Speaker 1: First Amendment rights have to be respected. So in that way,
Speaker 1: it really is a federal government issue. And then also
Speaker 1: it's so hypocritical with all their like democracies on the
Speaker 1: ballot and Trump's authoritarian whatever, and you're watching this unfold
Speaker 1: you cheered it you provide a cover for it with
Speaker 1: your bullshit statement smearing all these kids as anti semites,
Speaker 1: and now you've got nothing to say about them all
Speaker 1: being you know, arrested and based and tear gased at
Speaker 1: VCU faculty, elderly faculty, being thrown on the ground and assault.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is insane, and you're just like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I haven't seen it. I'm not really aware any of
Speaker 1: my next question.
Speaker 2: Right utterly, and it is bullshit, as you and I
Speaker 2: know that these people haven't seen because they're more online
Speaker 2: ten times than we are, so it's like you saw it,
Speaker 2: of course exactly.
Speaker 4: Of course.
Speaker 1: Meanwhile, you have Trump making very go to B seven,
Speaker 1: you have Trump making very clear what he thinks about this,
Speaker 1: you know, any sort of like free speech pretense clearly over.
Speaker 1: He just says, stop the protests now. So him and
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, Greeen, Jean Pierre all on the same page
Speaker 1: apparently on this one. No daylight between them. You know,
Speaker 1: we didn't make up an element for this. But you
Speaker 1: have Senator Marsha Blackburn, who was another one who five
Speaker 1: seconds ago, oh, free speech people have to be allowed
Speaker 1: to descend college campuses, blah blah, blah. Now she's calling
Speaker 1: some students to be put on a terrorist no fly list. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's the sort of thing that's happening in the United
Speaker 1: States Congress right now, led in part by Speaker Mike Johnson,
Speaker 1: who had this to say recently, we're.
Speaker 9: Looking at very seriously reducing or eliminating any federal funds
Speaker 9: at all to campuses who cannot maintain basic safety and
Speaker 9: security of true students. I mean, it sounds ridiculous to
Speaker 9: say that this is what it's come to, but that's
Speaker 9: what we're looking at. We're looking at some other things
Speaker 9: as well. I mean, if you're a foreign student here
Speaker 9: and you're participating in this madness, you don't have a
Speaker 9: right to do that. Maybe your visa should not be extended,
Speaker 9: Maybe it should be revoked if you're going to threaten
Speaker 9: your own classmates here or come here for that purpose.
Speaker 1: So we've got yesterday we covered Richie Torres and Mike
Speaker 1: Lawler the Columbia Acts. They want to install anti Semitism
Speaker 1: monitors to make sure no one is saying a rally
Speaker 1: chant that they don't like at schools and threaten their
Speaker 1: federal fundation if someone says something somewhere that is unacceptable
Speaker 1: to Benjamin Nett.
Speaker 4: Yahoo.
Speaker 1: Now you've got Mike Johnson also threatening federal funding and
Speaker 1: student visas for any foreign students who are participating in
Speaker 1: protests that they don't like or are participating in wrong think.
Speaker 1: And you've got Marsha Blackburn saying put these kids on
Speaker 1: the no fly list. I mean, it's extraordinary. You know,
Speaker 1: I should have predicted it because we both knew both
Speaker 1: sides were posture about free speech like Republicans. We knew
Speaker 1: they were posturing about like pretending to care about as
Speaker 1: long as it didn't conflict with their values. It would
Speaker 1: take an issue like this where there's such elite bipartisan
Speaker 1: consensus effect, Yes for the full crackdown, because it's exactly
Speaker 1: like you know, Poster Rock War and Patriot Act. It's
Speaker 1: when they agree and they use the full force of
Speaker 1: the federal government to enforce their elite consensus, that's when
Speaker 1: things get the ugliest.
Speaker 3: No, it's terrifying.
Speaker 2: The no fileists in particular is nuts. I'm currently re
Speaker 2: listening to our listening to the latest season of Cereal.
Speaker 2: I actually highly recommend it. It's about the Guantanamo Bay
Speaker 2: and just putting myself back in time fifteen years ago,
Speaker 2: You're like, oh yeah, this country lost is freaking mine
Speaker 2: and this was wild stuff in terms of what we
Speaker 2: allowed in terms of the the Fourth Amendment rights and
Speaker 2: just so many ways in which we bridge that gap.
Speaker 2: We don't need to be going back there. No fly
Speaker 2: lists are completely unconstitutional. They shouldn't even exist in the
Speaker 2: first place. The implementation of this was a huge disaster
Speaker 2: in any US that is in place on a no
Speaker 2: filist for participating in a protest against foreign government is
Speaker 2: as Unamerican as it gets. The only thing I'll say is,
Speaker 2: don't threaten me with a good time in terms of
Speaker 2: provoking federal funding from Ivy League universities, because if that's
Speaker 2: what it takes, then they're all going to burn to
Speaker 2: the ground and I'm not going to be all that
Speaker 2: upset about it. I do agree, though, Crystal, as we
Speaker 2: had talked about, if the impetus is that and if
Speaker 2: federal funding is contingent on being Zionist or notugh, I mean,
Speaker 2: that's a bridge too far from me. All I want
Speaker 2: is to see these places burn to the ground anyways.
Speaker 2: But it is very clear that this is a carrot
Speaker 2: and a stick and the big problem is that we
Speaker 2: all know they're not actually going to do it. Columbia
Speaker 2: will buckle, and that this will only lead to a
Speaker 2: morson storious environment in terms of all Ivy League universities,
Speaker 2: a strengthening of DEI, decrease with the First Amendment, a
Speaker 2: decrease really of civil rights and of equal protection for everybody.
Speaker 2: And that is why I'm going to oppose it, as
Speaker 2: you know, if that's the way.
Speaker 1: That's going, because it's the precedent being said is we're
Speaker 1: going to use the full weight and force of the
Speaker 1: federal government to enforce a particular ideology on a school
Speaker 1: that's right. And whether it's this ideology or another ideology
Speaker 1: that is by you know, endorsed by an elite consensus
Speaker 1: or by whatever power party is in power, once you
Speaker 1: open that door, there is no walking back through.
Speaker 4: It, as it is with the Patriot Act.
Speaker 1: So anyway, that was our look at what's happening, a
Speaker 1: little bit of what's happening around the country, and I
Speaker 1: think there are many more dramatic scenes to unfold between
Speaker 1: now and graduation day, and certainly between now and the DNC.
Speaker 1: All right, guys, thanks to sacronize a little spirited, unplanned debate.
Speaker 1: We no longer have time to talk about housing today,
Speaker 1: so don't worry. We'll bring in that story in the
Speaker 1: future room and make sure we get to doctor Jillstein
Speaker 1: on time. So let's god and move on to the
Speaker 1: very latest with regards to Israel, because there is a
Speaker 1: whole lot that is consequential that is happening there, in
Speaker 1: particular the possibility of a ceasefire deal, the imminent possibility
Speaker 1: of a RAPA invasion, and the imminent possibility of ic
Speaker 1: C arrest warrant. And these things may seem disconnected, but
Speaker 1: there actually are all connected. I'll get to that in
Speaker 1: a moment, But first of all, let's listen to how
Speaker 1: Sanctuary State Tony Blinken is talking about this potential ceasefire deal.
Speaker 10: Moss has before a proposal that is extraordinarily, extraordinarily generous
Speaker 10: on the part of Israel. And in this moment, the
Speaker 10: only thing standing between the people of Gaza and a
Speaker 10: ceasefire is a Moss. They have to decide, and they
Speaker 10: have to decide quickly.
Speaker 1: Oh, an extraordinarily generous offer. Wow, Wow, Let's see what's
Speaker 1: in this extraordinarily generous offer that's been made. Put this
Speaker 1: up on the screen from the New York Times. So
Speaker 1: the offer includes a forty day ceasefire, that's it, forty days,
Speaker 1: and the release of potentially thousands of Palacitan prisoners in
Speaker 1: exchange for the Israeli hostages. Apparently the big concession is
Speaker 1: releasing Instead of releasing forty hostages, the Israeli government is
Speaker 1: prepared to settle for only thirty three. And you know, frankly,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of reports that many of the hostages
Speaker 1: have been killed.
Speaker 4: I mean, they've been in an active.
Speaker 1: War zone for seven months now and subject to the
Speaker 1: same you know, siege conditions as everyone else in the
Speaker 1: Gaza strip. So you have pretty wide distance between the
Speaker 1: Hamas position, which is not only we want a permanent ceasefire,
Speaker 1: not forty days, a permanent ceasefire. And this is a
Speaker 1: critical piece too. They want people to be able to
Speaker 1: return to northern Gaza, to whatever's left of northern Gaza,
Speaker 1: and that's been something that the Israeli government has been
Speaker 1: adamantly opposed to by very one sided framing here of Oh,
Speaker 1: the whole problem.
Speaker 4: Is with Hamas.
Speaker 1: Obviously, these are negotiations. Both sides have to give and take.
Speaker 1: But to present this as like extraordinarily generous and the
Speaker 1: best offer and how could they possibly refuse Sagara, I
Speaker 1: think is very disingenuous.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's just the key sticking point between them is
Speaker 2: that Israel says we're going to continue the war no
Speaker 2: matter what, and the ceasefire is just like a temporary
Speaker 2: thing on the way, and Hamas, of course they're trying
Speaker 2: to use their leverage, which are hostages, and they're like, no,
Speaker 2: we're gonna give up these hostages and then the war
Speaker 2: just needs to end.
Speaker 3: Period.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is a huge problem in Israeli society too,
Speaker 2: because this is how they they are. Really, what Israel
Speaker 2: wants is to have their cake and eat it too.
Speaker 2: They want to get their they want the hostages out.
Speaker 2: There were huge pro you know, it's funny we cover
Speaker 2: protests in America. In Tel Aviv they're lighting shit on
Speaker 2: fire in the middle of the street yesterday because there's
Speaker 2: a huge protest continuing around hostages, around the conduct of
Speaker 2: the war and nets on Yahoo. So the big what
Speaker 2: they want to do is they want to release all
Speaker 2: the hostages, which releases the pressure valve and Israeli society
Speaker 2: because then there won't be any more pressure on the
Speaker 2: government to conduct the war or differently. But they don't
Speaker 2: want to commit to ending the war at all. So
Speaker 2: this is obviously the key sticking point. If I had
Speaker 2: to guess what Blincoln and the Biden administration's theory of
Speaker 2: the case here is is that and one I don't
Speaker 2: think he's unreasonable is once guns stopped firing for forty days,
Speaker 2: it's very difficult to restart the guns.
Speaker 9: Now.
Speaker 2: That said, if I had to bet anybody who would
Speaker 2: do it, I think that the Israelis would. And that's
Speaker 2: part of the conundrum that we really face here is
Speaker 2: that Bbe and his coalition and really Israeli society, I
Speaker 2: think we'll be honest, they want to go into Rafa,
Speaker 2: and they want to destroy it, and they want to
Speaker 2: level it. America doesn't want that, you know. Biden, for
Speaker 2: domestic reasons and for geopolitical reasons is like, hey, the
Speaker 2: more violence that we have, the more problems I have
Speaker 2: here at home and abroad. So we're really stuck because
Speaker 2: we don't want this to happen period. This is a
Speaker 2: delaying action with the hope that we can achieve some permanency,
Speaker 2: spire or whatever. In the future, but unfortunately, I don't
Speaker 2: think it's possible with the current Israelis on the other side.
Speaker 1: Of the table well, and with the US unwilling to
Speaker 1: use leverage to enforce any kind of outcome. I mean,
Speaker 1: just like asking Boebe nicely, obviously.
Speaker 4: Is it worked, and it's not going to work.
Speaker 1: So you're absolutely right that there's no reason to expect
Speaker 1: that even if they do secure this forty day cease
Speaker 1: fire deal, Phoebe has promised, he repeatedly, just promised again,
Speaker 1: and you were sending it to me, that we will
Speaker 1: go into Rafa, whether there's a temporary cease fire or not.
Speaker 4: We are going in.
Speaker 1: Another thing that I want to point out, which we
Speaker 1: talked about at the time, but for some reason the
Speaker 1: mainstream media is I know what reason, but they just
Speaker 1: chose to ignore the beginning is that hamas said, offered
Speaker 1: almost immediately and all for all deal, all hostages in
Speaker 1: exchange for palest to mean prisoners and the family members
Speaker 1: of the hostages. They sort of just learned about this,
Speaker 1: at least some of them, and are realizing like, oh,
Speaker 1: you Bbe Night, now you've all of your talk about
Speaker 1: your concern for the hostages This is all bullshit. This
Speaker 1: has just been an emotional manipulation tactic because if they
Speaker 1: were actually your number one priority, they would have been
Speaker 1: returned already. So there's that at the same point, you know,
Speaker 1: they're trying to use. First of all, Rafa has taken
Speaker 1: on this horrifying symbolic importance, both in terms of.
Speaker 4: You know, Bob's making the case.
Speaker 1: That the reason they haven't achieved victory yet is because
Speaker 1: I haven't gone into Rafa and your right saga that
Speaker 1: I think Israeli public overwhelmingly is in favor of continuing
Speaker 1: the annihilation into Rafa, where you have one point three
Speaker 1: million Palestinians who are sheltering right there along the border
Speaker 1: with Egypt. This is also being used as negotiating leverage,
Speaker 1: basically a threat of we're going to do more horrors
Speaker 1: and atrocities in Rafa if you don't secure this you know,
Speaker 1: limited forty day cease fire deal. And we're getting some
Speaker 1: truly dystopian, horrifying indications of what exactly is planned for Rafa.
Speaker 1: Let's put this up on the screen. So this is
Speaker 1: according to Middle East I, Israel is planning a ring
Speaker 1: of checkpoints around Rafa to prevent any men quote unquote
Speaker 1: military age men from fleeing the Rafa assault, So they
Speaker 1: say here the checkpoints are designed to allow some women
Speaker 1: and children to leave Rafa ahead of an expected Israeli offensive,
Speaker 1: but unarmed civilian Palestinian men will likely be separated from
Speaker 1: their families and remain trapped in Rafa during an expected
Speaker 1: Israeli assault. Previously unreported disclosure of Israel's construction of a
Speaker 1: ring of checkpoints around Rafa underscores how Israel's pushing ahead
Speaker 1: with plans to attack that city, where over one million
Speaker 1: displaced Palestinians are sheltering intents and makeshift camps. So, Sagar,
Speaker 1: this is directly a war on men. That fits very
Speaker 1: much with the assumption that we've seen from the Israeli government,
Speaker 1: official policy, and frankly media buy in that if a
Speaker 1: man was killed, if even a sixteen year old boy
Speaker 1: was killed, they must inherently just be because they're a
Speaker 1: man of military age, they must be a terrorist ergo,
Speaker 1: they're a legitimate target. That's the way they have been operating.
Speaker 1: But this is another level of codifying into their approach
Speaker 1: that if you are a man, any man within what
Speaker 1: we can colorably describe as military age, then you deserve
Speaker 1: to be tortured, kidnap bombed, and ultimately killed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this has its roots in kind of counterinsurgency policy,
Speaker 2: except what they're missing is that they didn't have any
Speaker 2: effort to separate like non terrorists from actual terrorists. We usually,
Speaker 2: I mean, this has done and done in the past,
Speaker 2: for example, giving everybody opportunity to flee and then saying
Speaker 2: anybody who remains in the city will be considered.
Speaker 3: You know, it's.
Speaker 2: Basically like a free fire zone in Pauza City, right exactly.
Speaker 2: But what they should do, what you really want to do, is,
Speaker 2: if you actually wanted to do this, you separate the
Speaker 2: male population from the terrorist population.
Speaker 3: Now if that sounds easy, and it's not easy.
Speaker 2: It does require a lot of death, but it also
Speaker 2: requires actually using your military and putting them at risk,
Speaker 2: which is something that you know, it's been a while
Speaker 2: since we've seen Israelis engage in active combat like actually
Speaker 2: on the ground.
Speaker 3: They're just not willing to do it.
Speaker 2: They're just basically willing to take as many civilian casualties
Speaker 2: as possible while keeping their own men safe. Now, in theory,
Speaker 2: you would be like, well, why wouldn't anybody do that, Well,
Speaker 2: America didn't do that in the Iraq War and in Afghanistan.
Speaker 2: You can have plenty of criticisms of our military, but
Speaker 2: people extraordinary measures and many American lives were lost specifically
Speaker 2: to try and prevent situations like this from happening, which
Speaker 2: is basically just everybody is declared, you know, free fire zone.
Speaker 2: There are may be very limited instances, but commanders and
Speaker 2: the overall eth those of the military is that is
Speaker 2: not the way that you can fight in a country
Speaker 2: which you're occupying with a huge you know, millions and
Speaker 2: millions of people that are there, including millions of men.
Speaker 2: In this scenario, they're basically just putting all that aside
Speaker 2: and engaging in whatever they would want. And I think
Speaker 2: it's just going to be further evidence, you know, against
Speaker 2: them and their lack of really in their lack of
Speaker 2: willingness to fight as a.
Speaker 3: First world military.
Speaker 2: There are no first world military on Earth that would
Speaker 2: ever fight this way period.
Speaker 3: I feel very comfortable.
Speaker 1: Saying that many people are putting out that part of
Speaker 1: what led the ICJ to conclude that Sir Berncia was
Speaker 1: a genocide was the all out slaughter of men. Eight
Speaker 1: thousand men who were murdered. They are very similar like
Speaker 1: their men, So we're going to kill them, and we're
Speaker 1: just going to assume their military age. There was also
Speaker 1: a motive of quote unquote revenge that was offered as justification.
Speaker 1: There so a lot of historical echoes. But you know,
Speaker 1: this is this is deeply chilling. And the reason I
Speaker 1: say that the media has been complicit in allowing this
Speaker 1: framework is I mean both in terms of they're just
Speaker 1: overall coverage, but the way they have assumed from the
Speaker 1: beginning that okay, any casualties, any deaths outside of the
Speaker 1: women and children, we're just going to assume, according to
Speaker 1: the Israeli government, that these are Hamas militants who are
Speaker 1: legitimate targets by the allowance of the really military to
Speaker 1: operate in such a way.
Speaker 4: I mean, this is this is.
Speaker 1: Part of why the IDF murdered their own hostages, both
Speaker 1: because they were they were men and because they were
Speaker 1: in this you know, kill zone where they just assume
Speaker 1: anyone who's still there must be a Hamas militant. And
Speaker 1: so this is the part of the way that you've
Speaker 1: ended up with these overwhelming civilian casualties So in any case,
Speaker 1: RAFA is being used both as a political tool for
Speaker 1: Phoebe to hold on to power and say victory awaits
Speaker 1: if we just go in and destroy RAFA. It's also
Speaker 1: being used as a bargaining chip in terms of these
Speaker 1: ceasefire negotiations. I wanted to just put this up on
Speaker 1: the screen so people know what's going on, just in
Speaker 1: terms of how Hamas is positioning themselves. Is this another
Speaker 1: thing that you know is unlikely to be covered by
Speaker 1: many mainstream outlets. So you had a Hamas official who
Speaker 1: was saying, actually that they would lay down their arms,
Speaker 1: they would demilitarize if you established a Palestin Union state
Speaker 1: along the nineteen sixty seven borders. This isn't the first
Speaker 1: time they're saying it. But you know, then you can
Speaker 1: think that they're not serious. I think that's entirely legitimate
Speaker 1: to be like, yeah, but you can't take their word
Speaker 1: for it. But you do have Benjamin Natanya who very
Speaker 1: clearly like, we will never allow Palisinian state and I'm
Speaker 1: opposed to it with every five from my being. And
Speaker 1: you do have the Hamas people saying, actually, we will
Speaker 1: lay down our arms and accept to state solution. Which
Speaker 1: is contrary to their more genocidal rhetoric from the past.
Speaker 1: So make of that what you will. Let me put
Speaker 1: this next piece up on the screen, because this is
Speaker 1: also incredibly important and connects together potential ceasefire RAFA and
Speaker 1: ICC arrest warrants. Apparently, the US and their allies are
Speaker 1: basically threatening the ICC that if they do issue arrest
Speaker 1: warrants for the Israelis, then we're gonna we're going to
Speaker 1: blow up the piece. They're not going to be any
Speaker 1: kind of truths. There's not gonna be any kind of
Speaker 1: even temporary ceasefire. So this is you know, what was
Speaker 1: described as a quiet diplomatic effort, it's really just a threat.
Speaker 1: It's like basically threatening, can tinue the slaughter of Palestinians
Speaker 1: if they dare actually issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and
Speaker 1: others and Sagar. There's been obvious total hypocrisy with regard
Speaker 1: to the ICC, you know, and they're issuing arrest warrants
Speaker 1: for Russia that we were, well, thank you for doing
Speaker 1: a great job. This is incredibly important now when it's
Speaker 1: our great friends the Israelis who have listened. Just by
Speaker 1: the numbers, the slaughter has been vastly greater from the
Speaker 1: Israelis visavi the Palestinians in a much shorter period of time.
Speaker 1: Now this is illegitimate, and we have to take actions.
Speaker 1: And you've got you've got members who are threatening Members
Speaker 1: of Congress who were threatening to pass legislation to target
Speaker 1: the ICC and retaliation. You got the Wall Street Journal
Speaker 1: editorial board threatening some sort of you know, retaliation against
Speaker 1: the ICC. So very different response when it comes to Israel.
Speaker 2: It didn't work out so well, did it. Whenever a
Speaker 2: year ago it was genocide at Boucha, whenever, like fifty
Speaker 2: people were killed. But now they're like, oh no, we
Speaker 2: can't be used. It's just so ridiculous. Shows you the
Speaker 2: US policy, by the way, which I oppose these things
Speaker 2: in the first place. Let's go and put this up
Speaker 2: there on the screen. This is my personal favorite pet peeve,
Speaker 2: the US military peer in Gaza. You guys, remember it
Speaker 2: was supposed to have been built by now, it's supposed
Speaker 2: cost about one hundred.
Speaker 3: Fifty million dollars.
Speaker 2: Well now it's actually scheduled to be built late and
Speaker 2: it will cost about three hundred and twenty million dollars.
Speaker 2: Could have predicted three hundred and twenty million dollars and
Speaker 2: pictures are now coming out. You know, I would note
Speaker 2: Crystal that the Port of Baltimore is not yet fully functional,
Speaker 2: but apparently we have all the money in the world
Speaker 2: to build a humanitarian aid peer which is going to
Speaker 2: put American troops at risk off the coast of Gaza.
Speaker 2: When the easiest thing that you could do is to
Speaker 2: just be like, hey, is real, this le's to my
Speaker 2: aid in there, you know, by road that seems like
Speaker 2: a lot keeper and a lot easier for US.
Speaker 1: Thousands miles and miles of trucks right backed up at
Speaker 1: these best worts, you don't need a They did actually
Speaker 1: start construction on the pier, by the way, We did
Speaker 1: see some movier started today.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're already like basically the deadline for when they
Speaker 1: said the thing would be complete. But yeah, the obvious
Speaker 1: answer is let in the trucks that are lined up
Speaker 1: at the border. You can use a little bit of
Speaker 1: US pressure and leverage to make that happen instead of
Speaker 1: this whole peer debacle, which I think it's worth once
Speaker 1: again mentioning that BB floated, Hey, maybe we'll use this
Speaker 1: peer to help with our ethnic cleansing program and help Palestinians,
Speaker 1: help them voluntarily migrate out of the territory that we
Speaker 1: utterly bombed, ucimated, destroyed, and left unfit to have to
Speaker 1: live in.
Speaker 3: Just ridiculous, totally ridiculous.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, this is just some of the best TV that
Speaker 2: you can watch. Professor John Meersheimer, who have been trying
Speaker 2: to get on the show for quite a long time.
Speaker 3: So Professor, if you do hear this, we would love
Speaker 3: to have you.
Speaker 2: Personal hero and inspiration of mine, joined Piers Morgan for
Speaker 2: an interview and there was a clash of ideologies like
Speaker 2: one that you've never seen here. You basically seeo liberal
Speaker 2: neo conservatism personified in Piers Morgan is John Meerscheimer with
Speaker 2: utter realism, and you tell me which comports more with reality.
Speaker 3: Let's take a lesson.
Speaker 11: You want to remember that if you look at what's
Speaker 11: happening in the conventional war, it looks like Putin's going
Speaker 11: to win. Despite the fact that we've now passed this
Speaker 11: large scale arms package for Ukraine, Putin is likely to win.
Speaker 12: Why is that not a terrible thing for America and
Speaker 12: the West.
Speaker 11: Because you have to prioritize the threats that you face
Speaker 11: in the world. And the fact of the matter is
Speaker 11: that what happens in Ukraine does not matter that much
Speaker 11: to the United States. I know, for people like you,
Speaker 11: this is a life and death matter. The thought of
Speaker 11: any country on the planet that the West defends losing
Speaker 11: is a major defeat and has catastrophic consequences. I mean,
Speaker 11: you felt this way about US pulling out of Afghanistan,
Speaker 11: but I think that places like Thatistan, places like Ukraine,
Speaker 11: don't matter that I didn't really I felt with Afghanistan
Speaker 11: America should have kept a small military presence there to
Speaker 11: maintain some kind of order.
Speaker 12: And I think I was justified in saying that given
Speaker 12: what's happened, since I thought throwing the country back to
Speaker 12: the Taliban was a catastrophic error of judgment, and it
Speaker 12: wouldn't have happened in the way it's happened if America
Speaker 12: kept a couple of thousand troops there, as it does
Speaker 12: all around the world in endless bass. So it seemed
Speaker 12: to me, having done many, many years of hard work
Speaker 12: in Afghanistan as a response to nine to eleven, to
Speaker 12: then simply just overnight throw everybody out and leave the
Speaker 12: country to the Taliban, particularly for women's rights, never mind,
Speaker 12: nothing else I thought was an abrogation of America's duty
Speaker 12: and the UK.
Speaker 11: Right. But this is your worldview, which is the United
Speaker 11: States has a responsibility to be everywhere and.
Speaker 12: Everywhere, but it should certainly be preserving freedom and democracy. Otherwise,
Speaker 12: why self style yourself as leader of the free world?
Speaker 12: A leader of the free world, and America still has
Speaker 12: I think half the world's military firepower, I'm obviously one
Speaker 12: of the biggest economies. You either are that entity leader
Speaker 12: of the free world or you're not. And if you are,
Speaker 12: then what comes with that is a responsibility to protect
Speaker 12: freedom and democracy when it comes under attack from tatalitarian regimes,
Speaker 12: I would think.
Speaker 11: I think if you look at the history of American
Speaker 11: foreign policy, it's very hard to make the case that
Speaker 11: our principal goal has to bend to protect freedom and democracy.
Speaker 11: The United States has a rich history of overthrowing democracies
Speaker 11: around the world, and we have a rich history of
Speaker 11: siding with some of the world's biggest dictators. So this
Speaker 11: idea that we're out there protecting freedom and democracy and
Speaker 11: it's our principal goal, in my opinion, doesn't mesh with reality.
Speaker 4: Very diplomatically, I love him so much.
Speaker 2: He is such an old He's been on it for years.
Speaker 2: You guys should read his books and his interviews. He's
Speaker 2: an incredible person. But what he does so effectively there
Speaker 2: is watch it with peers on Afghanistan. Right, He's like,
Speaker 2: you want to stay there forever? He's like, I don't.
Speaker 2: I didn't say that. I just thought, which it's a
Speaker 2: couple of thousand troops to protect women's rights forever, forever.
Speaker 3: Right, So what's that?
Speaker 2: And I just love He's like, well, the fact is
Speaker 2: that what happened in Ukraine doesn't matter very much to
Speaker 2: the United States. And this is the thing that what
Speaker 2: John gets at the most is that this can sound
Speaker 2: cold blooded, but in practice it's more moral because when
Speaker 2: you don't cast yourself as the freedom and democracy defender
Speaker 2: and all of that, and you make choices that are
Speaker 2: actually in your interest in the long run, then you
Speaker 2: don't end up meddling in other countries and creating a
Speaker 2: goddamn mess that for the people that are actually over there,
Speaker 2: or like this Israel, you know thing, for example, would
Speaker 2: any of this even have happened if America wasn't the
Speaker 2: total guaranteur of Israel's security.
Speaker 3: Never in a million years, not a chance, because they
Speaker 3: would get checked by the Arab powers. Now same in
Speaker 3: Ukraine and Russia.
Speaker 2: Would we there really be this invasion? I know, I
Speaker 2: already know comment brigade is coming from me on this one,
Speaker 2: but I'll argue till I'm bluwing the face. The NATO
Speaker 2: expansion in the nineteen nineties was a horrific disaster for
Speaker 2: the United States to croach and encroach all the way
Speaker 2: up to all these Baltic states which are utterly useless
Speaker 2: to American security too. And then even just yesterday, Crystal,
Speaker 2: the US Ambassador to NATO, said Ukraine will be a
Speaker 2: part of NATO.
Speaker 3: The US ambassador is out there.
Speaker 1: But you know, even if you don't even if you
Speaker 1: don't accept that, right, even if you look at Putin's
Speaker 1: rider and you're like, listen, he's an imperialist.
Speaker 4: He wants to conquer terry. Sorry, okay, you.
Speaker 1: Know, even if you think that without our intervention, I
Speaker 1: think it's ninety percent likely there would have been a
Speaker 1: deal at the beginning, because the Ukrainians would have looked
Speaker 1: at this and like there's like we have no chance here,
Speaker 1: we have to settle, Like it's not ideal, but we
Speaker 1: have to settle and we're gonna have to give some
Speaker 1: things up.
Speaker 4: And it is what it is.
Speaker 1: And you wouldn't have, you know, again, a war and
Speaker 1: men of generation at least of Ukrainian men who've been
Speaker 1: sent to the slaughter and you know, horrors unfolding there
Speaker 1: and they were dragged into it by us. So, you know, we,
Speaker 1: you and I have a different view of the world.
Speaker 1: I would like us to actually like stand up for
Speaker 1: the values we pretend to, but to actually look at
Speaker 1: American history and think that we do. It's it's precious right,
Speaker 1: It's precious to still hold on to that view. We
Speaker 1: literally fund we are seventy three percent of the world's dictatorships,
Speaker 1: and you're like freedom and democracy even in Afghanistan, like
Speaker 1: the you know, the women's rights. I support women's rights. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but then we've got our buddies, Saudi Arabia not exactly
Speaker 1: like feminist icons over here, and we're happy to fund them.
Speaker 1: We're talking about you know, Biden's like obsessed with this
Speaker 1: pipe dream of normalization, and we're going to provide them
Speaker 1: with security guarantees in exchange for them normalizing relations with Israel,
Speaker 1: like get on of here with your idea that we're
Speaker 1: protecting freedom and democracy around the world. Okay, yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean it's it's just utterly preposterous. It's never been more
Speaker 1: preposterous than it is right now when you see what
Speaker 1: we're enabling and encouraging and funding and supplying these railings
Speaker 1: to do to the Palestinians in direct contravention of the
Speaker 1: international law that we pretended to support when it came
Speaker 1: to Russia.
Speaker 2: That's part of what I'm saying. That's why I won't
Speaker 2: eve want to pretend anymore. I'd be like America, this
Speaker 2: was good for America. You know what we care about
Speaker 2: Saudi Arabian we deal with these barbarians is because we
Speaker 2: want oil. That's it, period. That's you know, let's be all,
Speaker 2: let's all be honest. Qatar, same deal, natural gas. It's
Speaker 2: the second amount of natural gas we're going to do
Speaker 2: trade with you, period.
Speaker 3: And the story.
Speaker 2: Let's just stop, because that's what opens up the gateway
Speaker 2: to Oh now we've got to deploy US military assets
Speaker 2: to dive so that Talibans, that girls in Cobble can
Speaker 2: go to school.
Speaker 3: Ridiculous.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's just this is exactly what drove me
Speaker 2: crazy about the entire thing. When you don't pretend, as
Speaker 2: I said, it leads to better outcomes. I mean, as
Speaker 2: look at what up in Afghanistan. Hour we propped people
Speaker 2: up and then we fell down. We wasted a hundred
Speaker 2: billion dollars people. If it worked out for them, it's
Speaker 2: been a terrible outcome. It would have been better if
Speaker 2: we left them to sort it out for themselves.
Speaker 3: And same with the Israelis.
Speaker 2: If Israelis actually have to deal with this Jewish homeland,
Speaker 2: you know, post nineteen seventy eight, that they have to
Speaker 2: defend against the Arabs, what do you think you're going
Speaker 2: to do? You're going to have diplomacy with your neighbors. Now,
Speaker 2: everyone says that that's completely impossible. People can deal with anything,
Speaker 2: even when they hate each other. Yes, sometimes it will
Speaker 2: lead to war, but the instinct of survival whenever you
Speaker 2: have two relatively equal, you know, military powers.
Speaker 3: Look at the Egyptians in the Israelis, it's lasted for decades.
Speaker 3: They're not stupid.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they don't like each other necessarily, but they're like, look,
Speaker 2: we don't want to kill each other anymore. It's all good,
Speaker 2: shake hands and we'll just divide this thing up. That's
Speaker 2: a model for how actual balance works. So this is
Speaker 2: my case for Professor Meerscheimer's view of the world. It's
Speaker 2: considered a moral but I actually really believe it leads
Speaker 2: to a more stable international system. So anyway, I really
Speaker 2: enjoy the interview. I encourage people to go and to
Speaker 2: watch the whole thing.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Absolutely, it's very revealing, an interesting.
Speaker 3: Exchange, Crystal, what are you taking a look at?
Speaker 2: Well?
Speaker 1: Liberal Zionists appear to be going through some things right now.
Speaker 1: They don't want to totally accept bb Nannya who's framing
Speaker 1: of college kids as literal Nazis, But they can't just
Speaker 1: accept that perhaps these students protesting the murder of Palestinian
Speaker 1: civilians might have a little bit of a point. They're
Speaker 1: also not ready to one hundred percent co signed Jonathan
Speaker 1: Greenblatt of ADL's assertion that student protesters are Iranian proxies Akinda,
Speaker 1: Hezbla or Hamas. But they would also like to try
Speaker 1: to undermine the protesters in their own special way, because
Speaker 1: to admit that these are genuine humanitarian protesters would be
Speaker 1: to force a hard reckoning for these individuals who see
Speaker 1: themselves as virtuous and like to imagine that they would
Speaker 1: have stood alongside past protest movements against past injustices. But
Speaker 1: the current protests can't really be against injustices, right. Can't
Speaker 1: be that college kids are genuinely horrified by kids being
Speaker 1: blown apart and rushed under rubble. Must be something else, right,
Speaker 1: But what could that something else be. That's where things
Speaker 1: get really interesting and the mental gymnastics get really wild.
Speaker 1: So let's start with this one. Professor Scott Galloway, Don Lemon,
Speaker 1: and Bill Maher. They got together last weekend to offer
Speaker 1: their insightful analysis of exactly what's going on here now.
Speaker 1: For Lemon and mar opposing genocide, it's just a fad
Speaker 1: that all the kids, cool kids are into. Galloway had
Speaker 1: a bit of a more unique take, though. Take a listen.
Speaker 13: Part of the problem is young people aren't having enough secks,
Speaker 13: and so they go on the hunt for fake threats.
Speaker 13: And the most popular threat throughout history. Type into google
Speaker 13: anti Semitism and pick your century and you're going to
Speaker 13: find it. A Jewish girl onna way to get a
Speaker 13: manicure is not your mortal lenoma.
Speaker 3: Stop it for God's.
Speaker 4: So there you go.
Speaker 1: College kids they're just not having enough sex, so they
Speaker 1: became rabid anti semites. In response, do you people realize
Speaker 1: how insane you sound? Yeah, I'm sure if they were
Speaker 1: just getting laid more often, they stopped caring about babies
Speaker 1: who are starving to death, that must be the real
Speaker 1: issue here. Galloway, by the way, seems to apply this
Speaker 1: sex analysis to all kinds of things that young people
Speaker 1: are into. I remember distinctly how he berated young men
Speaker 1: for bidding up game stop rather than trying to get
Speaker 1: laid peers. This is kind of a whole ideology for them,
Speaker 1: and is deployed every time the youths do something that
Speaker 1: he can't quite explain or wrap us head around. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Sann's Freed Zakaria, he had a somewhat jettler version of
Speaker 1: Galloway's take, wrote an entire column for CNN wrestling with
Speaker 1: why it is that college campuses have become a center
Speaker 1: of protest that's never happened before. For for Reid, it's
Speaker 1: not because students are horrified by their tax dollars being
Speaker 1: used to drop two thousand pound bombs on refugee camps,
Speaker 1: or because of a backlash to the authoritarian crackdown on
Speaker 1: those protesting these atrocities. It's really because these students are lonely,
Speaker 1: and a piece titled why the Gods of War has
Speaker 1: spun campuses into chaos, he writes, it's difficult to know
Speaker 1: what to make of the turmoil on college campuses these days,
Speaker 1: the protests, polarization, intimidation, and general bitterness. In a revealing
Speaker 1: article in The Wall Street Journal, higher education reporter Douglas
Speaker 1: Belkin sets these events against a broader backdrop, the disappearance
Speaker 1: of a sense of community. He points to research demonstrating
Speaker 1: that college students today are lonelier, less resilient, and more
Speaker 1: disengaged than their predecessors. The university communities they populate are
Speaker 1: socially fragmented, diminished, and less vibrant. One wonders whether this
Speaker 1: loss of community has led to more distrust, sharper disagreements,
Speaker 1: and more anger. People are encountering one another at these protests,
Speaker 1: often for the first time, often as strangers. Zacario goes
Speaker 1: on to talk about ras who are upset students went
Speaker 1: to zoom into dorm meetings rather than go to them
Speaker 1: in person, and look, it's legitimate to talk about the
Speaker 1: erosion of community in America. We've done it too, in
Speaker 1: general and on campus specifically. But I find it baffling
Speaker 1: how difficult it is for so much of the liberal
Speaker 1: elite class to just accept many people are profoundly upset
Speaker 1: by children being starved and killed en Mass, I see
Speaker 1: this response actually all the time. Are you so emotional?
Speaker 1: Why do you care about this so much? I don't know,
Speaker 1: Maybe because I've spent the last seven months seeing kids
Speaker 1: being amputated on without anesthetic, bodies buried alive, still screaming,
Speaker 1: listening to the panicked call from a little girl named
Speaker 1: Hind who watched her family murder and was then assassinated
Speaker 1: alongside her would be rescuers. What kind of a sick
Speaker 1: person we have to be to not be emotional about
Speaker 1: these things? And yes, it should be tense when you're
Speaker 1: interacting with those who would seek to justify those sorts
Speaker 1: of atrocities. To mister Zakaria, these tense and emotional reactions,
Speaker 1: they're actually a sign of mental health, not dysfunction. They're
Speaker 1: a sign of humanity, not disconnect and indifference. We're not
Speaker 1: done yet. Nate Silver had a phenomenal contribution to this
Speaker 1: weird inability to understand that young people are horrified by horrors.
Speaker 1: Since his brand is being the rational data guy, he
Speaker 1: opined that these other more impressionable human beings are just
Speaker 1: responding to base tribal instincts. Silver's contribution was sparked by
Speaker 1: the Musicans of Substack writer Philip Lemoyne, who wrote this
Speaker 1: on Twitter, quote, My basic model of student protests is
Speaker 1: that in general, students don't know shit about what they're
Speaker 1: testing against. They do it because it's cool, makes them
Speaker 1: feel like they're part of something important, and they want
Speaker 1: to be with their friends. In the last majority of cases,
Speaker 1: their beliefs on the topic are very superficial. They just
Speaker 1: repeat slogans they don't really understand. But that's not a
Speaker 1: problem for them because it's primarily about signaling group membership
Speaker 1: run loyalty to specific ideas, to which Silver replied, this
Speaker 1: is probably right. Most people don't form political opinions through
Speaker 1: deep examination of the issues or reasoning from first principles.
Speaker 1: It's more like picking some particular fashion label or way
Speaker 1: of dressing, especially for younger people who face more peer pressure.
Speaker 1: First of all, have any of you guys actually talk
Speaker 1: to these young people, because if you do you'll find
Speaker 1: many are deeply informed. In fact, plenty have a direct
Speaker 1: connection to the conflict themselves. Perhaps you should speak as
Speaker 1: Ryan and Emiley did to the women organizing at the
Speaker 1: Colombia encampment, who is both well informed, well adjusted, and
Speaker 1: quite insightful. Perhaps you should speak as we did to
Speaker 1: Motas Salem, who has been confronting members of Congress and
Speaker 1: Capital ill is now involved with GWU's campus protests. Motas
Speaker 1: has lost one hundred plus family members in Gaza. I
Speaker 1: would wager he knows a hell of a lot more
Speaker 1: about it than Nate Silver does.
Speaker 4: Here's the other thing.
Speaker 1: Though liberals love to use this, it's complicated and you
Speaker 1: just don't understand as a dodge on Israel and Palestine,
Speaker 1: but it's actually not innocents.
Speaker 4: They're being slaughtered.
Speaker 1: You don't need a PhD in Middle Eastern studies to
Speaker 1: be human being who thinks that's wrong, and it is, yes,
Speaker 1: quite emotional about that. Posing genocide is not some cool,
Speaker 1: fashionable trend that kids are just jumping on to have
Speaker 1: fun and make friends. Do you understand, Nate Silver, These
Speaker 1: young people are taking tremendous risk, They're facing tremendous consequences.
Speaker 1: Their schools are putting snipers on the roof and sicking
Speaker 1: cops on them. They're being pursued by private investigators and
Speaker 1: they're being arrested. Billionaires are dosing them and promising to
Speaker 1: end in their careers before they even begin. But you
Speaker 1: think they're just risking it all for an in group
Speaker 1: fad cool thing to do. Is your soul really so deadened?
Speaker 1: You can't even conceive of idealistic young people sincerely just
Speaker 1: opposing a genocide, even if you don't think it's a genocide.
Speaker 1: They do, and many scholars and international bodies, by the way,
Speaker 1: agree with them, But you can't fathom being outraged by
Speaker 1: such a thing. That's us far more about you than
Speaker 1: it says about them. But I couldn't end without. One
Speaker 1: of my favorite contributions to this whole discourse came from
Speaker 1: this VC startup investor lady, who professed that she was
Speaker 1: deeply confused by all of this campus activism. She wrote,
Speaker 1: can I ask why do all these students from top
Speaker 1: schools want to be activists to begin with? Like you
Speaker 1: got such high grades in SAT scores, I'm surprised so
Speaker 1: many of you apparently want to be MLK instead of
Speaker 1: lead some industry. Now, books could be written about the
Speaker 1: mindset and ideology that would lead to such a question
Speaker 1: and to such confusion. It's honestly pitch perfect gen X liberalism,
Speaker 1: from the fixation on the high grades and SATs to
Speaker 1: the deep befuttlement at smart students wanting to emulate NLK,
Speaker 1: literally one of the most consequential men in all of
Speaker 1: American history. It's feasd to on mind that has fully
Speaker 1: embraced the notion that the only achievements which are worthwhile
Speaker 1: it are be found in the capitalist marketplace. Get your
Speaker 1: startup funded, make enough money to become an angel investor,
Speaker 1: wrap it all up in a female empowerment narrative to
Speaker 1: put a nice, virtuous bow on all of it. Do
Speaker 1: well by doing good, they said, she can't conceive of
Speaker 1: organizing a protest movement as legitimate achievement unless it's part
Speaker 1: of an Ivy League college admissions essay or a line
Speaker 1: in your bio for Fordes thirty under thirty. By the way,
Speaker 1: after being relentlessly dragged, she did delete the tweet, But
Speaker 1: you know who's having no trouble understanding appreciating the college
Speaker 1: campus protest movement Palston means in Gaza. In what is
Speaker 1: a truly beautiful display. Falstonian children young adults in RAFA
Speaker 1: held a rally to show their appreciation for the American
Speaker 1: solid Some even spray paint in their tents with messages
Speaker 1: like the ones that you can see here. This says,
Speaker 1: in part, thank you students and solidarity with Gaza. Your
Speaker 1: message has reached us. Another one directly said thank you Columbia. Yeah,
Speaker 1: thank you Colombia. Thank you for risking your career futures
Speaker 1: in the hope that Palestinians might have a.
Speaker 4: Future at all. And soccer I couldn't even put into
Speaker 4: this monologue all and if you.
Speaker 2: Want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a
Speaker 2: premium subscriber today at Breakingpoints dot Com.
Speaker 1: Very honored to be joined this morning by Green Party
Speaker 1: presidential candidate and activist doctor Jill Stein.
Speaker 4: It is so great to have you.
Speaker 3: Welcome, great to.
Speaker 7: You, mass, So great to be yes, really great to
Speaker 7: be with you. Ball, Thanks Crystal and Slider.
Speaker 1: Yeah, of course. So I guess my first question for
Speaker 1: you is just actually are you okay? Because we watch it,
Speaker 1: we can put this up on the screen. We watch
Speaker 1: some pretty extraordinary footage of you being assaulted with a
Speaker 1: police officers by here and ultimately being arrested as part
Speaker 1: of a campus protest. So maybe you could just tell
Speaker 1: us what happened and you know what the fallout was,
Speaker 1: and if you're doing okay.
Speaker 7: So you know, we were at an event, a campaign
Speaker 7: event at a public library just a couple of blocks away,
Speaker 7: and a student several students had attended, who were you know,
Speaker 7: really inspirational, I have to say. And afterwards one of
Speaker 7: these students asked us to come and support their their encampment,
Speaker 7: which we said, of course, thank you so much. You're
Speaker 7: putting everything on the line here for all of us,
Speaker 7: for our rights of free speech, our rights of protest,
Speaker 7: and you know, really expressing American public horror at this
Speaker 7: genocide that we are funding.
Speaker 6: So we went to show support.
Speaker 7: When we got there, I was asked, along with two
Speaker 7: of the elected officials for Saint Louis who were also there,
Speaker 7: some two of the older men or older women, I
Speaker 7: guess you would say, uh, to go speak with the
Speaker 7: administration and to see if we could help de escalate.
Speaker 7: We tried, we you know, and they seem to back
Speaker 7: off for a couple of hours, and then then the
Speaker 7: students asked us to join their line at the front
Speaker 7: to see if the eyes of the world through a
Speaker 7: presidential candidate platform might discourage their worst abuses. And you know,
Speaker 7: it didn't, and you know, in some ways, I think
Speaker 7: we may have even been targeted. My campaign manager and
Speaker 7: deputy campaign manager were also there, and we were really
Speaker 7: assaulted with these bicycles and what you see happening in
Speaker 7: that footage while we're practically being pushed over onto our backs,
Speaker 7: you know, and as a person with osteoporosis, I was
Speaker 7: not anxious to be pushed over, you know, onto my
Speaker 7: neck and risk a neck fracture.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 7: In that footage right there, they are they're trying to
Speaker 7: force us back onto the ground. That's the officer on
Speaker 7: the right there picks up one of my feet as
Speaker 7: we are just about to fall over backwards. He picks
Speaker 7: up one of my feet to further destabilize me, and I,
Speaker 7: you know, in trying to maintain my balance, I struggled
Speaker 7: to get free and then he yelled at me that
Speaker 7: I had just assaulted him because he was in the
Speaker 7: way of my foot as he was toppling me backwards.
Speaker 6: Onto my head.
Speaker 7: So I'm now accused not only of trespassing, I think
Speaker 7: we're all accused of resisting arrest, and I'm accused of
Speaker 7: assaulting a police officer.
Speaker 1: Well, they're charging with you with assaulting a police officer.
Speaker 6: Is that hysterical or what?
Speaker 3: Oh my god, that's outrageous, absolutely unbelievable.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I can't believe it was pulled up in court,
Speaker 7: but that's the way they're starting.
Speaker 3: Yeah, right, well, let him test it out.
Speaker 2: If anything, it will be good to publicity, I think
Speaker 2: for the campaign right now.
Speaker 3: Well, that's one of the things we booked this before.
Speaker 2: One of the things just zooming out a little bit
Speaker 2: we want to hear from you is what are you
Speaker 2: hoping to get out of this campig?
Speaker 3: What would your day one agenda be?
Speaker 7: Okay, So day one agenda is picking up the phone
Speaker 7: and calling Bibnet Yahoo and telling him that our support
Speaker 7: has ended, you know, until the occupation is over, until
Speaker 7: the genocidal war on Gaza is over, and until the
Speaker 7: apartheid state is over, that Israel needs to comply with
Speaker 7: international law. So on day one, the flow of weapons stop.
Speaker 7: It's actually illegal for the Congress to be appropriating and
Speaker 7: the president to be transferring weapons right now.
Speaker 6: It's a violation of US law. We should not be arming.
Speaker 7: Uh, you know, human rights abusers, and this is human
Speaker 7: rights abuse on steroids. So that's uh, that's number one,
Speaker 7: you know.
Speaker 6: Number two.
Speaker 7: Uh, the political prisoners like Julian Nsange and Edward Snowden,
Speaker 7: Leonard Peltier, et cetera. They go free. Also, amnesty to
Speaker 7: those who are serving prison time for the non violent
Speaker 7: simple possession and use and cultivation of cannabis. That's over.
Speaker 7: We instruct the the Drug Enforcement Agency to begin addressing
Speaker 7: substance use as a public health problem, not a criminal problem.
Speaker 6: Those things begin.
Speaker 7: Also, we declare an environmental emergency, a climate emergency, which
Speaker 7: in fact we have, and that enables us to basically
Speaker 7: stop the construction of fossil fuel infrastructure, which needs to
Speaker 7: happen on an urgent basis, and it also unleashes hundreds
Speaker 7: of billions of dollars to basically create jobs in the
Speaker 7: renewable energy sector, in conservation efficiency, weatherization of homes and
Speaker 7: school buildings, government buildings, et cetera. It enables us to
Speaker 7: begin that transition that we urgently need to do because
Speaker 7: the climate crisis is you know, by all signs is
Speaker 7: actually exploding. It's sort of off the radar right now
Speaker 7: because we're focused on you know, the human rights emergency,
Speaker 7: you know, the blood on our screens right now, but
Speaker 7: we do have an ongoing climate emergency as well. So
Speaker 7: those are some of the very first things that we
Speaker 7: could do on day one, even without the support and
Speaker 7: consent of the Congress. But in my view, you know,
Speaker 7: our administration would operate in a very different way from
Speaker 7: our predecessors. The president would not simply be the commander
Speaker 7: in chief. The president would be the organizer in chief,
Speaker 7: enabling people to achieve those things that we need urgency urgently,
Speaker 7: like a Medicare for all system that would save us
Speaker 7: half a trillion dollars, by the way, just from reducing
Speaker 7: the waste and inefficiency the paper pushing the big CEO salaries,
Speaker 7: et cetera in our current healthcare system that wastes one
Speaker 7: out of every three healthcare dollars instead of putting them
Speaker 7: into health You know, the overhead in our current system
Speaker 7: is thirty three percent. With Medicare it's three per So
Speaker 7: there are enormous efficiencies.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 7: People across the political spectrum, you know, are experiencing this
Speaker 7: incredible crisis in our healthcare system, and that's something we
Speaker 7: can begin to meet on day one.
Speaker 1: Doctor Seinier, obviously a veteran of many protests movements, and
Speaker 1: I know you are regularly talking to two young people,
Speaker 1: young student organizers, et cetera. You are you surprised at
Speaker 1: the breadth of the protest movement? Are you surprised by
Speaker 1: the way that you know, these these kids watching the
Speaker 1: genocide that's unfolding with our taxpayer dollars, the way that
Speaker 1: this has struck a nerve, and the extraordinary nature of
Speaker 1: their response.
Speaker 7: It really is extraordinary. And they are in fact risking everything,
Speaker 7: you know, they are risking expulsion, They're risking homelessness. Uh,
Speaker 7: they are risking all that they've invested into their you know,
Speaker 7: into their education and their degrees. I am really unbelievably
Speaker 7: impressed and inspired by how they are putting everything on
Speaker 7: the line, you know, both for our basic American values
Speaker 7: and our right to free speech and to protest, and they're,
Speaker 7: you know, standing against this horrific genocide, and they're standing
Speaker 7: up for you know, what the majority of Americans feel,
Speaker 7: what nations around the world have expressed, but the international
Speaker 7: Court of Justice has expressed they are really I think
Speaker 7: they're expressing our highest you know, ideals as you know,
Speaker 7: as human beings who are ultimately part of the same
Speaker 7: civilization here, you know, And in our campaign, we you know,
Speaker 7: we have a saying which is that as Gaza goes,
Speaker 7: we all go. We're looking at the normalization of the
Speaker 7: torture and murder of children on an industrial scale. This
Speaker 7: should not be normalized. We're also looking at the destruction
Speaker 7: of international law and human rights. So, you know, all
Speaker 7: of us are incredibly at risk for what's going on
Speaker 7: right now. And it's just such a tribute to the
Speaker 7: you know, the moral fiber and the courage of these
Speaker 7: students that they are willing to stand up and say
Speaker 7: it stops here because they are entirely you know, in
Speaker 7: their rights to be doing this.
Speaker 6: You know, this is a critical issue that needs discussion.
Speaker 7: As someone from the Jewish community myself, I am very
Speaker 7: aware of what a rude wake up it is to
Speaker 7: come to terms with what Zionism actually is, and you know,
Speaker 7: and to reject Zionism is not anti Semitic, and that
Speaker 7: is a you know, it's a really repressive mythology to
Speaker 7: imply as such. So you know, the students are are
Speaker 7: are undertaking a discussion that has to be had, and
Speaker 7: this has to be had also.
Speaker 6: On our campuses.
Speaker 7: As someone who grew up during the Civil rights movement,
Speaker 7: you know, in the sixties, the same thing.
Speaker 6: Was going on.
Speaker 7: It was very hard for people in dominant white culture
Speaker 7: to come to terms with, you know, with essentially white
Speaker 7: racism that part of all of our institutions, and there
Speaker 7: were enormous efforts made to criminalize people who were raising
Speaker 7: these issues of basic civil rights and it was a
Speaker 7: very hard discussion. But it has to happen, and our
Speaker 7: universities should be supporting this discussion. It's a sad commentary
Speaker 7: on our universities that they are so dependent on the
Speaker 7: financial support and the contracts and so forth from you know,
Speaker 7: from the war industry and you know, Boeing, et cetera.
Speaker 7: You know that they have all these contracts that they
Speaker 7: are dependent on. You know, it reflects the degree to
Speaker 7: which we've become a war economy, militarized economy, and that
Speaker 7: has to be fixed as well.
Speaker 2: One of the things I wanted to get your take on, ma'am,
Speaker 2: is obviously you're not going to be the only non
Speaker 2: bipartisan candidate two party system in the race. So what
Speaker 2: are your thoughts on doctor Cornell West and Robert Kennedy Junior,
Speaker 2: who presumably will be facing up against on the ballot
Speaker 2: across in November.
Speaker 7: That's right, you know, I think Americans deserve choices. You know,
Speaker 7: this should be a part of our system. We should
Speaker 7: also have ranked choice voting so that multiple candidates are
Speaker 7: not perceived as a threat. But the reality is our
Speaker 7: campaign is the only pro worker, anti war, anti genocide
Speaker 7: campaign that is on track right now to be on
Speaker 7: the ballot as a choice across the country. Doctor West,
Speaker 7: you know, we have essentially identical agendas. But doctor West
Speaker 7: had decided to go solo. In doing so, he gave
Speaker 7: up his ballot access. He gave up what was worth
Speaker 7: at the time some five million dollars of a ballot lines,
Speaker 7: because the Greens have preserved and protect their ballot lines.
Speaker 7: So we began this race with almost seventy five percent
Speaker 7: of the work done. He gave that up, and those
Speaker 7: costs have greatly inflated, I think because of the number
Speaker 7: of independent candidates now seeking ballot status, So the cost
Speaker 7: of getting support has really gone up. Robert RFK will
Speaker 7: certainly be on the ballot, but we have a completely
Speaker 7: different agenda. I think, you know, in fact, there are
Speaker 7: going to be three pro war, pro genocide candidates on
Speaker 7: the ballot. I hope they will split the pro war
Speaker 7: vote among them, and our campaign will be the one
Speaker 7: anti war, anti genocide choice that's on the ballot. We
Speaker 7: already have, as I said, more than seventy five percent
Speaker 7: of the work done, and we are well on our
Speaker 7: way to completing that. Doctor West, you know, has founded
Speaker 7: a new party. They are struggling to get on the ballot.
Speaker 7: They have a couple of lines mainly going through other
Speaker 7: small parties, but you know, they don't really have any
Speaker 7: realistic pathway forward. To get on the ballot in California
Speaker 7: or Texas, one needs hundreds of thousands of signatures.
Speaker 6: I don't think that's going to happen.
Speaker 7: It's very unlikely, and we have, you know, the majority
Speaker 7: of the difficult states are already behind us.
Speaker 6: New York is where we have a you know.
Speaker 7: New York past a very oppressive ballot access law really
Speaker 7: as a hidden poison pill within a budget law. In
Speaker 7: twenty twenty two, I think it was where they tripled
Speaker 7: their requirement. It's now probably the most difficult state in
Speaker 7: the country where the requirement is for forty five thousand
Speaker 7: so called valid signatures, meaning the signature has to match
Speaker 7: exactly the registration signatures. So if your middle initial is Jane,
Speaker 7: but you put j period, your signature can be discounted.
Speaker 6: People try to do that.
Speaker 7: So you can't just get forty five thousand signatures. You
Speaker 7: have to try to get at least eighty or ninety
Speaker 7: thousand signatures in six weeks.
Speaker 6: This is almost impossible.
Speaker 7: But you know we are we are full more you know,
Speaker 7: attempting to do this because this is just you know,
Speaker 7: this is blatant political repression. It's an attempt to silence
Speaker 7: a political competition which is supposed to be the heart
Speaker 7: of our democracy.
Speaker 11: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well it's weird because Democrats run New York and
Speaker 1: I thought that they were saying their pro democracy and
Speaker 1: democracy was on the ballots.
Speaker 4: So it's very strange.
Speaker 1: We'll have to have to discuss with them what exactly
Speaker 1: is going on there. Speaking of what's going on with Democrats,
Speaker 1: I want to get your reaction to some interesting commentary
Speaker 1: from James Carvill, who had some choice words for young
Speaker 1: people who may not be fully on board with another
Speaker 1: term of Joe Biden. Many young people, of course, see
Speaker 1: him as back in the genocide. Let's take a listen
Speaker 1: to what mister Carville had to say. We'll get your
Speaker 1: reaction on the other side.
Speaker 14: If they get a hold, there will be no government left,
Speaker 14: there'll be no rights left, you'll live under theocracy. You'll
Speaker 14: end up Christian nationalism. But that's all right. You know,
Speaker 14: fucking twenty six year old, you don't feel like the
Speaker 14: elections in part and they they're not addressing the issues
Speaker 14: that I care about. So my advice to tell these
Speaker 14: young people to get off your motherfucking ass and go vote,
Speaker 14: because you should vote like your entire future, in the
Speaker 14: entire future of this United States depends on it, because
Speaker 14: quite frankly.
Speaker 6: It does.
Speaker 14: And that's not an exaggeration.
Speaker 4: Your reaction there, doctor Stein.
Speaker 7: Well, I do agree with him that we really should
Speaker 7: be voting like our lives depend on it, because in
Speaker 7: fact they do. But you know, it's an extremely anti
Speaker 7: democratic sentiment to say that people shouldn't have choices, especially
Speaker 7: when people are clamoring for choices.
Speaker 6: That's nuts.
Speaker 7: And to say that people should continue to support the
Speaker 7: parties and the candidates that have essentially thrown them under
Speaker 7: the bus is absolutely nuts. You know, we say, don't
Speaker 7: listen to what they say, listen to what they do,
Speaker 7: and what they do has been an unmitigated disaster for
Speaker 7: most working people. You know, some sixty three percent are
Speaker 7: living paycheck to paycheck. Half of all renters are economically strapped,
Speaker 7: you know, just distress, trying to keep a roof over
Speaker 7: their head, that is paying more than thirty percent, well
Speaker 7: over thirty percent in New York State. It's like fifty
Speaker 7: or sixty percent of your income just to keep a
Speaker 7: roof over your head.
Speaker 6: You know.
Speaker 7: Poles of young people show that half of half of
Speaker 7: young people describe themselves as hopeless. One quarter of young
Speaker 7: people have considered doing harm to themselves within two weeks
Speaker 7: of the pole.
Speaker 11: You know.
Speaker 7: So these are really horrific indicators about the state of
Speaker 7: our world.
Speaker 6: If we just keep you know, keep our.
Speaker 7: Heads down and take marching orders from the political and
Speaker 7: economic elites that are doing just fine, thank you very much.
Speaker 7: You know, if we continue doing as they tell us,
Speaker 7: we will continue going in this direction, which is, you know,
Speaker 7: we are in.
Speaker 6: A tailspin right now.
Speaker 7: It's like we're in the airplane and the engine has stopped,
Speaker 7: and that airplane is you know, it is going into
Speaker 7: a tailspin.
Speaker 6: And people see what's happening.
Speaker 7: You know, whether you look at the crushing inequality, the
Speaker 7: impending ecological collapse across the board, you know, the Colorado
Speaker 7: River is about to run out of water. The Washington
Speaker 7: Post ran a night is Colorado River matter because it
Speaker 7: supplies the California agriculture system, which feeds half the fruits
Speaker 7: and vegetables in the country are coming basically from the
Speaker 7: Colorado River. The Colorado River is within one to two
Speaker 7: years of not making it out of Lake Mead because
Speaker 7: of you know, persistent drought, and there is no Plan B.
Speaker 7: The Washington Post ran a headline about a year ago
Speaker 7: that used the term. They described this as the doomsday scenario.
Speaker 7: We are in that stay scenario right now, you know,
Speaker 7: in several parameters, and you know there is no Plan B.
Speaker 7: So we need a different way for it. We do
Speaker 7: need to vote like our lives depend on it. And
Speaker 7: anyone who suggests that they own your vote and that
Speaker 7: they are entitled to your vote should disqualify themselves right
Speaker 7: then and there from any consideration of receiving your vote,
Speaker 7: Well said.
Speaker 3: Go ahead.
Speaker 4: I was just going to say, doctor Sigin.
Speaker 1: Just to follow up on that, and so to sort
Speaker 1: of play devil's advocate here. You know, the last you
Speaker 1: got blamed in twenty sixteen wrongly for helping to elect
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. No doubt, if Donald Trump gets elected again,
Speaker 1: you're going to be part of the reason they said
Speaker 1: that they didn't win, that it was your fault. You know,
Speaker 1: you're siphoning off votes that rightly should have gone to
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. And what is your response to that? What
Speaker 1: is your response to people who say, listen, you may
Speaker 1: like what doctor Stein has to say, you may support
Speaker 1: her opposition to genocide as one example, But at the
Speaker 1: end of the day, it's either going to be Biden
Speaker 1: or Trump.
Speaker 4: It's a binary choice.
Speaker 1: So if you're not voting for Joe Biden, you're de
Speaker 1: facto voting for Donald Trump or helping Donald Trump get
Speaker 1: back to the White House.
Speaker 7: Well, you know, to tell you the truth, I regard
Speaker 7: it as a badge of honor. You know, I consider
Speaker 7: myself very powerful to have determined the outcome of elections.
Speaker 7: And beyond that, you know, I actually don't waste my
Speaker 7: time because the majority of Americans are really hurting for
Speaker 7: something else.
Speaker 6: You know.
Speaker 7: The the numbers are off the charts right now. The
Speaker 7: Gallop Gallop does a poll every year. It's like sixty
Speaker 7: three percent now, a record high, who want another choice,
Speaker 7: who want another candidate because they feel like they have
Speaker 7: been thrown under the bus quite enough. And I usually
Speaker 7: feel like people who are you know, being good little
Speaker 7: boys and girls and parroting the propaganda of the DNC,
Speaker 7: I generally feel sorry for them, like that they are
Speaker 7: in an abusive relationship.
Speaker 6: It's an abusive.
Speaker 7: Political relationship, and you know, they need to break up
Speaker 7: with that abusive political partner. And I hope that they
Speaker 7: will come to that someday. But I don't feel like
Speaker 7: it's my responsibility to help them out of it, you know.
Speaker 7: And yes, I think Donald Trump would be a really
Speaker 7: scary president. And yes I think that Joe Biden is
Speaker 7: a really scary president.
Speaker 6: I think fascism is here right now.
Speaker 7: We're seeing it, you know, rolling out on our campuses
Speaker 7: and you know, around the country.
Speaker 6: Fascism, he's here.
Speaker 7: There is no greater trademark of fascism than genocide.
Speaker 6: I think we've got that now, you know, we've.
Speaker 7: Got oodles of fascism around us, and I think that
Speaker 7: solution to fascism is democracy. It's not the suppression of
Speaker 7: you know, our political views and our political debates. We
Speaker 7: have to stand up and assert our democracy. If people
Speaker 7: are concerned about vote splitting, which I must say is
Speaker 7: not supported by the facts, the facts suggest that nearly,
Speaker 7: you know, like two thirds of our votes are coming
Speaker 7: from people who otherwise won't vote.
Speaker 6: They just won't. And right now that is off the charts.
Speaker 7: If you look at, for example, the New York State
Speaker 7: Democratic primary about three weeks ago, there was a twelve
Speaker 7: percent so called uncommitted, but there was an eighty three
Speaker 7: percent no show, eighty three percent relative to the numbers
Speaker 7: who came out for Joe Biden in twenty twenty at
Speaker 7: a time when the race was already decided. You know,
Speaker 7: it's not like, oh, you know, it was an active
Speaker 7: race back then. No, it wasn't. It had already been settled.
Speaker 7: Joe Biden had been coronated. But people were participating in
Speaker 7: the Democratic Party. Now they are not, you know, now
Speaker 7: they are basically voting with their feet. So, you know,
Speaker 7: I think this is we need to sees the moment
Speaker 7: here because we're all kind of going over the cliff
Speaker 7: right now.
Speaker 6: You know, in whatever to mension you want to look at.
Speaker 7: We're in really bad shape and we need to take
Speaker 7: back the reins of our democracy, you know, take back
Speaker 7: the promise of our democracy and have debate and dialogue.
Speaker 7: You know, and to your credit, breaking points is one
Speaker 7: of the few places where that debate has had.
Speaker 6: This needs to be the norm, not the exception.
Speaker 10: You know.
Speaker 7: We need anti trust laws enacted against our corporate media.
Speaker 7: We need the Internet and social media to be regulated
Speaker 7: as a public utility, not you know, the playground for
Speaker 7: billionaires to kind of do what they want in collaboration
Speaker 7: with you know, government security agencies behind the scenes, you know,
Speaker 7: censoring our discussion. We need to re establ you know,
Speaker 7: we need to get money out of politics and have
Speaker 7: publicly funded elections at a cost that could be massively
Speaker 7: reduced if we are in fact using the public airwaves
Speaker 7: for public purpose. We can have publicly funded elections without
Speaker 7: having this legal you know, this legalized bribery, which is
Speaker 7: essentially how our elections are run right now, you know.
Speaker 7: And then money pouring into our elections now, particularly through
Speaker 7: undisclosed vehicles using either super PACs or dark money which
Speaker 7: can contribute to super PACs you know, through the Democratic
Speaker 7: Party now or the Republicans using this this institution called
Speaker 7: Victory Funds, which I think was started by the Clinton
Speaker 7: campaign in twenty sixteen, a single donor can write a
Speaker 7: check for over six hundred thousand dollars a single donor,
Speaker 7: and it basically gets you know, gets laundered and comes
Speaker 7: back to a single campaign and a single candidate, which
Speaker 7: enables you know, single donors with deep pockets to have
Speaker 7: inordinate influence on our political institutions. This is you know,
Speaker 7: this has everything to do with why they are completely
Speaker 7: sold out and incapable of serving the American people. In
Speaker 7: the Green Party, we do not take corporate packs. We
Speaker 7: don't take we don't sanction super packs, we don't countenance them,
Speaker 7: and we you know, we dissapow any super pac. You know,
Speaker 7: we work by the rules. You know, we are a
Speaker 7: small donor campaign. I think our average donation is somewhere
Speaker 7: around ten or fifteen dollars. You know, that's that needs
Speaker 7: to be the norm and not the exceptions, so that
Speaker 7: you know, we're in this situation now we have the
Speaker 7: best democracy money can buy and it is no democracy at.
Speaker 2: All, well said ma'am, and we appreciate your void of
Speaker 2: vote of confidence.
Speaker 3: And Crystal sold my question.
Speaker 2: So I think we're good to go, and we want
Speaker 2: to appreciate you very much for joining us. All candidates
Speaker 2: should and we hope to see you on every ballot
Speaker 2: in the country. So thank you very much.
Speaker 4: Yeah, thank you, doctor Stein. Thank you for your time today.
Speaker 4: We're grateful.
Speaker 6: Thank you so much. Good to be absolutely it's our pleasure.
Speaker 2: Thank you guys so much for watching. We really appreciate it.
Speaker 2: If you could support us, we'd help us out. We
Speaker 2: have candidate interviews, exclusive polling. We're really working our way
Speaker 2: up to the twenty twenty four election. Counterpoints got an
Speaker 2: awesome show for everybody tomorrow and an even banner show
Speaker 2: for everybody on Friday. If people are gonna love this,
Speaker 2: So if you can again support us Breaking Points otherwise,
Speaker 2: Counterpoints will see tomorrow.
Speaker 3: We'll see you on Thursday.