Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of the show.
This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.
So if that is something that's important to you, please go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints dot com.
All right, let's go ahead and get to this sermon, which became quite controversial. A bishop who was presiding over services at the National Cathedral that Trump and Vance and the whole family attended after the inauguration had a special message for the president that ruffled quite a lot of feathers. Let's say to listen to what she had to say.
Let me make one final please, mister President, millions have put their trust you, and as you told the nation yesterday, you have felt the providential hand of a loving God in the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared. Now. There are gay, lesbian, and transgender children in democratic, Republican
and independent families, some who fear for their lives. And the people, the people who pick our crops and clean our office buildings, who labor in poultry farms and meat packing plants, who wash the dishes after we eat in restaurants, and work the night shifts in hospitals. They may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majoritydi of immigrants are not criminals. They pay taxes and our good neighbors. They are faithful members of our churches
and mosques, synagogues, widhara and temples. Our God teaches us that we are to be merciful to the stranger, for we will all want strangers in this land.
So this triggered a total meltdown and angry freak out on the right, which went up to and included the President himself. We could put Trump's response here up on the screen. The so called bishop who spoke of the national prea service on Tuesday morning was a radical left, hardline Trump hater. She brought her church into the world of politics and very ungraterus. She was nasty in town,
not compelling or smart. Failed to mention the large number of illegal migrants that came into our country and killed people. Many were depositive from jails and mentalans that that party just makes up. It's a giant crime wave that has taken place in the USA. Also not true. Apart from her inappropriate statements, the service was a very boring and uninspiring one. She's not very good at her job. She and her church ohe the public and apology for a very basic message of Christian mercy.
And this is what I'm pass We're atheists, Okay, this is what an atheist libs version of Christianity.
But hold on a second, what is what part of what she said first of all offends you, and second of all, what part of it is dissonant with the teachings of Jesus.
I'm not a Look, I'm not a Christian, so I won't get into the differences of Episcopal versus Catholic and all of that. And by the way, many of my episcopal friends exact complaint about the Episcopal church is exactly about this. Basically, they'll ordain anybody and that's why there's all these different offshoots and huge fights within the church over gay and BLM and all this stuff. So that's part of the reason why a lot of my friends, actually people like JD became Catholic is because of the
actual doctrine that it sticks to. But this is getting over my skis because I'm not Christian. I'm not going to Christian explain it to other people. It drives me nuts, not only with her or with others, which with the people who are what is it like preachers who are take the pulpits under their tax free status and then
use it as a pulpit to preach politics. And so here again like you're watching this message of this like glib coded bishop like explaining a political position and using that under the Word of God to make a point. And so that's why it annoys the crap out of me, my Christian friends, for them, it's a bastardization of their religion. But beyond that, it's really just about the bigger point of you're using your position and cloaking it in the
faith of the Bible, which is not one hundred percent clear. Okay, anybody out there, the Christians themselves can't even agree on what it says to then use that to push what is an overtly political point. It just seems ridiculous. So and look, I mean, no one can call me a hypocrite on this. I can't stand all this pro life preaching and all this other political activism. I think all of them should have to pay taxes, one of the
biggest scams in the entire country. So any political Christianity or any of that, I'm.
Totally incredibly hypocritical for the right to complain about politics in the church when I mean the moral majority like explicitly argue with Volwell to vote for Ronald Reagan. Politics is a central part of the certainly evangelical, Like you go to any of these megachurches, and it is super political. And the truth of the matter is, though, I mean, to the extent that politics and religion both have to do with your core values, which both of them do.
I don't think you can really extricate politics completely from religion. But what's interesting to me, I mean.
That's what they say, so that's their justification for what's in their political acting.
What's interesting to me, though, is that you know, I'm also not like you know, an expert on the Bible. However, the you know, the teachings on immigrants in particular seem to be pretty consistent and about things like compassion and remembering their humanity. I mean, just here's one verse. He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow and loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing. And you are to love those who are foreigners, for
you yourselves were foreigners in Egypt. So to me, it's very telling that there is such a vociferous, angry reaction to someone who's who didn't even say like, don't deport them, or don't do this, or he just said, you know, show mercy and have some compassion because these are human beings. Like to me, to me, that seems as.
What does compassion means? Let you stay here forever? Right?
That well, she didn't say that implication, But to me, the fact that there is such outrage at the by an entire political ideological group by just asking to recognize people's basic humanity and you know what she said again, I think is entirely consistent with the teachings of the Bible. And you know, the message of Christianity and Jesus Christ, et cetera. That that would be received so angrily is to me just it's very telling because.
Because the policy implication Crystal, which is when she says compassion, she says, oh, they need to be able to stay here. Transgender are afraid. It's like, yeah, because we want not children not to be plugged full of hormone.
But what's so much that's with her view and there's anything.
Wrong with it, But you're talking in Jesus, that's the issue.
You're also putting words in her mouth that.
She did it that she didn't say, so.
If you know, she's allowed to have her religious faith and interpretation of this, and the fact that there was such outrage over just like, hey, maybe show some mercy to these groups because they also are human beings and they're also like, you know, fearful in this moment, which I can tell you is definitely one hundred percent true.
I think that I think it displays that there's just there's such a level of dehumanization that goes on, and I think it's possible to say I have compassion for these people, but also obviously this in the view I agree with, but also I think there are these other priorities, and you know, we have to have borders and be a nation, and we have to take care of the
people here. Like you can still have empathy for human beings who are by and large trying to make a better life for themselves and trying to do the best they can for their kids and their family. You can have empathy and compassion for them, but also, you know, have a different political approach. I don't think those two things have to be dissonant. But the fact it was taken as such an attack, I don't know.
It is an attack because it is a political implication when they say compassion, we're done being syoped into oh, you know, compassion and all of this. But that mean that's why they have to stay here forever. And actually they did all deserve citizenship, and oh there are a
lot of gay and transgender people were scared. It's like nobody wants you to be scared, right, But that means that, uh, oh, we shouldn't be worried about plugging children full of hormones and h integralor whatever, you know, sports leagues and allowing men to compete in women's sports. It's like we all know what it means that's why this is being rejected. And by the way, I was around long enough to be against church and state whenever it was coming. You know,
the left was criticizing the right. I think we should do the same here. No offense. I don't really care what Jesus has to say about my country's border policy. You guys believe whatever you want at home, Okay.
Keith hag said is a Christian nationalist who wants like to use the Pentagon to wage a holy war.
Okay, that's not what he said.
I don't remember you being upset about that or the other. I'm there's many way.
There is a large Israeli holy purposes.
There is a large and significant constituency in the Republican Party that self describes as Christian nationalists. And I don't remember any upset from you or any of these people, any.
Of Brian mass all these other Christian nationalists.
Follows up, Josh hollymatively described himself as a Cristian something.
That he said about Israel, and I'll criticize it here happily.
But here's the thing like that is a has been a core part of the Republican position, This very politicized version of Christianity, which many other Christians, including our own you know, uh, the Tim Alberta. We interviewed him here about his book, who many other people think is a bastardization of their religion and the teachings of Jesus Christ that puts Trump and the Republican Party against the actual
teachings of the Bible. So so, you know, I don't see any upset about that on the right and the politicization of Christianity when it's used to their benefit. But this very mild, it's not very mild, called for mercy for groups that are fearful right now, and justifiably so in this moment, triggers a total freak out meltdown. I mean they were really triggered by this. It was like very snowflake behavioral, oh my god, how could you this
is outrageous blah blah blah. And just to give you a little bit of the reaction, I think we have Laura Ingram here that that we can go to to play let's see, this is B eight that we can play for you to get a sense of how the right reacted to this.
She was so arrogant the way she she didn't even acknowledge the President of the United States of America. She had an opportunity to minister the gospel. Instead of that she is a heretic her. She should never be allowed to preach the message of Jesus in her life because she's not even talking about Jesus.
This is why no one's going to these Yeah, this is not These denominations are dying sadly, but rather than a Christian service about God and country, they were forced to listen to the rantings of a lunatic.
I don't think it's a good look to be fighting with a bishop.
That's just me.
She has, you know what, First of all, she asks for it. She's fighting with the President of the United States. She is judging him. She feels empowered. He's in office in twenty four hours when the country wants unity, she's pulling up the leftist, progressive talking points. It's not about her in her role.
As a bishop. It's about her.
I don't care what she is. It's about her and her role as a politician using the church and the pulpit of the church to engage in political discussion.
Am I wrong?
Greg That?
First, dude, there is the one who ran the crypto scam after speaking at Trump's inaugury. She's the pastor Lorenzo who launched his own meme coin crypto scam in response to his position there. But you know, I mean, here's another leftist progressive talking point in the language of Judge Janine from Matthew for I was hungry and you gave me something to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you invited me in. I need to clothes and you clothed me.
I was sick and you looked after me. I was in prison and you came to visit me. Truly, I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me. So how is that dissonant from what Crystal?
They're sitting here, Patty, using Bible verses which have been bastardized through English now over thousands of years, and conveniently ignoring what is a Deuteronomy and all. This is what I mean. I'm not a Christian scholar. I'm not going to tell Christians you are.
To love those who are foreigners yourself.
Isn't there one in there about stoning people and a sodom and gomorn. Why are we ignoring that? What about the things that you shall not pluck? Put crops side by side, specifically make it you turn mean to Bill Maher from religious lists.
I mean, look, I'm not I'm not, That's what I mean.
Why are we picking Bible verses and saying because Jesus, because that I don't know anything?
But to be honest with you, one of the most consistent there are many inconsistencies in the Bible, maybe one of the most consistent themes is the treatment of the quote foreigner meant to be treated with compassion, humanity, et cetera. So to pretend like this is some quote unquote leftist talking point versus something that is consistent with her views. But people can hold other views, and people do hold
other views, and that's fine. But it's just to me, it's very interesting because we're outrage how outraged this was, you know, how much outrage this generated, especially because the group that primarily weaponizes Christianity and uses it to justify things that, in my opinion, should not be justifiable, is the right and has been, you know, concernedly using over many decades.
One of the biggest pushers of b l M and BLM and so quote unquote racial justice has been specifically episcopal churches and others. Walk around DC and look at all those signs.
And one of the big pushers of the you know, anti woke and anti COVID restrictions, et cetera, have also been religious and has no smoke for them whatsoever.
So again raw Man argument, where it's like you're pointing out just because some people have been hypocritical that this is some empirically good, It's not good. It's always what we don't live now in a Christian country.
What I'm pointing out is that it is interesting to me that a very mild message of have mercy and see people's humanity is treated with such visceral horror and outrage by a group of.
People and for me, alliance with your world.
To me, it is an indication of, like, I think, a political ideology that does not see people's humanity and is outrage at the suggestion that you should see people's humanity. I think that's sick. I do. I think that that is really sick. And that's the vibe that is coming on here. I mean, you talking about JD. Vans like, he's a Catholic, he's a very religious guy. Surely he recognizes the you know, with.
The Bible, everyone's humanity.
People so outrageous. Why are you rolling your eyes?
Where's the talking about people who have been murdered here by who are illegal immigrants, the people who suffer as a result of illegal immigration. Oh, there's no humanity there. Interesting, we're not going to talk about the effects of hormone changes on little girls and boys and with a sociological agenda being pushed here. That's no, there's no humanity for the victims of any of that. Those of us who have our we disagree. Yeah, that's my point.
That's completely fine.
But fact it.
Was so triggered.
We talk about those people's humanity and nobody wants to hear it. It's only the humanity of the Venezuela.
That's not.
Yes, true, it's true. Yes.
The thing I'm pointing out is she made this really basic point about the humanity of people who are LGBT or the people who are migrants, and it cause them to be so upset. Why why is it not okay to think about those people of humanity? Why is it cringe. Why is it? Why is it something that should be filled with content? Why does it trigger all of this rage. People should be viewed with humanity, including, yes, the victims of any sort of manner of crimes and their families,
et cetera. Of course, they should be seen as human beings and treated with humanity. And you know, throughout history that actually has been a radical view. That is part of what was radical about the original teachings of Christianity. And to see it like be so enraging to have someone just say, like, hey, have some compassion.
I just think it's interesting, Okay, I think we understand the point that you're trying to, which is that right winger hip Christian nationalists and all those people are hypocrites, which I don't even disagree with. That's part of the thing I don't I want this actual separation of church and state. The point is is all of us can read between the lines now in America when certain things
are said like oh please don't forget. And by the way, she was making explicitly a political point, these are the people who wash our dishes. These are the people who.
Whatever is like, is that untrue?
What she's trying to say is don't deport them?
Right?
Was that we should consider that their role is so important and not all the people who just voted democratically for a guy named Donald Trump to mass deport because they don't agree with this. Bishop, ladies.
Don't understand. I understand you disagree with her. Okay. What I don't understand is why it's so enraging, Like why even if she didn't say, don't.
I'm not with them raged at her? I mean, I guess some other Christians are.
They clearly are. I mean, they clearly are, Like this triggered a whole mountain.
Because they don't want to boization of their faith. No, because they don't.
Trump is not a he doesn't care about this.
Yes, I agree, That's one of the things I appreciate mostly.
I think actually I think it's because in order, like a core part of the philosophy has become like not just the policies, but you saw it with for example, there was that video going around of the woman who had her CBP one app appointment sure canceled and she was bereft, right, And this is not someone who was
trying to cross the border. I legally, this was someone who was trying to go through the process that was set up by the United States government, and maybe you think, and maybe she thinks, you think she deserves a place in this society, and maybe you don't. But this is a human being, right who is clearly going through it and just devastated when twenty minutes before her CBP one appointment it's canceled. And the reaction from the right is like Gleean's delight in her pain.
Okay, that's not true. First of all, is very trying to you're trying to make Twitter comments true. I don't think that that's true.
Is libs of TikTok and influential voice on.
The right, but you the only person on the right and so.
But yes, but Saga, there's a SIGNI and it's the same it's the same energy. It's the same energy here of you can have compassion for migrants and also say, you know what, they don't have a claim on our society and it's unfortunate, but like we have limited resources and we have a border. But I feel but like I have compass. I see this as a human being. You can have that approach, But I think there is
such a strain of dehumanization. That is just like, you know, glee at seeing people's appointments canceled, just horror that anyone would ask you to have compassion for migrants who are here, and yeah, again, to me, that's like, I think that's a very troubling trend.
I see. I will flip it around and say, there's what compassion have I ever seen? Except for complete ignoring of the crimes of people who are here illegally. The response is always like, oh, but the natal born population commits more crimes. Actually, it's like, okay, so the people who are not supposed to be here also commit crime. And I don't see any compassion for the people who have been killed by them or affected by them, or
victims of migrant crime. You can pay lip service to it, but in reality, when has there ever.
Give me a single example of someone dehumanizing Lake and Riley and her family?
What do you mean by dehumanizing?
I mean like expressing glee at her at them, Like that.
Would actually that would be that would be the equivalent.
Response would be glee that this person was murdered in a horrific way and that her family is suffering. That would be the equivalent response no, I haven't seen that.
I have not born from any ignoring, pretending and obfuscating crime of illegal immigrants is the de facto same thing, which is that they deserve to be here. They're actual citizens, they have just as rights as many of us, which they don't. Uh. And the point is is that all of this is about policy. At the end of the day, that bishop was making a political point. She wants Okay, she's a Bishop's makes you so mad, It makes me mad.
As a view of the Bible that includes humanity for immigrants, why does that make sense?
Because she's using the teachings to inform a political message. That's the problem. And again I'm actually consistent on this. I don't believe in the political church. I think all of these people should have to pay taxes. I don't like all of this Christian nationalism nonsense which perverts our foreign policy and others. I am a through and through actual nationalist. So in a way, you're arguing with somebody who really doesn't share or like any of this crap
that happens in the political coalition. What I'm saying clearly is that it is obvious that the compassion and all of that has actual policy implications. So when everyone's like, please, compassion.
Being people as human beings, yes, has political Yeah.
But it means actually hormone treatments for children that are like twelve value.
That's very compassionate, values based, you know, decisions which can stem from religious convictions. Of course, that has political implications.
Of course, but if people want to use their teachings to inform their vote, you do as you please. I will continue to do as I please. But the problem that it always comes back to again is that compassion is bastardized, politicized, and used for all of this to push explicitly political agendas which are now counter both to my belief and clearly at least some portion and large belief of the entire.
Country compassion belief.
No compassion. It's being used as a cloak again to encourage the transition of children and say well nothing wrong with that, to encourage illegal immigration, or to just say these people are actually better than US's amazing.
You have no smoke for the right when compassion for Lake and Riley and her family is used to effectuate a political outcome. I mean literally, the bill is named after her. Yes, isn't that a weaponization of compassion.
What's the difference political end? Well, what's the difference between those two? One's a US citizen and what's not a US citizen? Right, I care about.
Okay, but Sager, Yeah, you have no problem when compassion is weaponized for a political end, you happen to support. No, that's but when a basic message of compassion is very highly consistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ is preached, it's like hair on fire melts.
As it's a global that is because it's a contrary to the national ideal. It's not about compassion. It's about using Lincoln Rally as an example for the dangers of illegal immigration. That's what it's about. It's not about quote unquote and by the way, again, my value system is that I believe the United States should only look out
for its own interests. Those include US citizens. So yes, it's very annoying when this Christian globalist type of language is used to say, actually, the earth is flat, We're all exactly the same, and that transcends all borders, and that's why the border exist, should not exist. So that's why the border is.
She did not make any of that.
Okay, So when people I didn't say any of that.
When people go to the right is also, oh my god, free speech and stop canceling. I know you guys are so triggered by as blah blah blah.
I can't see that.
And of course I got to remember of Congress he said she should be deported. You had that dude on Fox News. It was like she should never be able to preach again. Of course they want to cancel her. That's that's the one.
Member of theres says something stupid. I'm supposed to sit here and like take everything you remember, he says, is the as the policy of the Democratic Party. No, And that would be stupid if I did. So, let's just not like extrapolate this into some major cancelation campaign. They're upset about what the lady said because it strikes at the core. Why again, I have it, But I just.
The idea that it would be so offensive to say, these are human beings and have compassion for them, I just don't. I just I think I cannot.
I think that you are desperate to understand. I think you're desperate to think that everybody who's against immigration does
not have compassion. And it's not true. The point is is that we why is soive because we see resources as finite and when messages are put out to siop the American people into thinking that those resources that are a very finite amounts to be able to distributed to our public should then be transcended by this humanistic belief is basically one that has been the de facto migration policy now of the Democratic Party and of the Biparti's
establishment for the last twenty five years. We are able to distinguish clearly that messages like this, with the tone and the delivery are very obviously have policy implications which we totally disagree with, hence we criticize them. It's not about the language of compassion. And by the way, again she selectively decides which groups to have quote unquote compassion for illegal immigrants and what did she say, gay and
transgender children? We know what's going on. Like then, the reason why that that happened is because it actually wasn't an all encompassing message for all Americans or others. It's these select groups who they decide have been more victimized than everybody else and actually deserve special status and thus are actually better than.
Us that you're like reading a million a million things you read. I think what's going on is that the I mean, the teaching, especially with regards to immigrants in the Bible. It is again I'm not a Bible expert, but is one of the more consistent teachings that there is not to you know, not to dismiss, not to be cruel, to have treat them with humanity and justice
and compassion. And so I think for people who are Christians and who hold themselves out as that being a core part of their identity, to have that like clear cut message from the Bible rub up against their political views in a way that's uncomfortable, I think that's what's created this mass backlash reaction. But like I said, I just think, I mean, just find it interesting. The response to what I thought think is very like mild and commonly held view ful ar human.
And I see how you get there, because I know it's very comfortable with your worldview. And to those people, I would say, you should be an American first, and then you can decide in terms of your religion, but in terms of your voting and what's actually good for the country, your teachings and all of that, you can inform your vote, but please don't try and impose your bullshit on the rest.
How does she try to impose her bullshit? I mean, why does that make you mad that she expressed a view.
She's allowed to disagree with the view.
Okay, but that's like, that's fine, that's fine to disagree with the view that.
I just think this is ridiculous considering how if there was some preacher who was preaching against gays and transgender and all that, I'm pretty sure what smoke you would have for that person, especially if they were influential, and they did it at Joe Biden, by the way, our first Catholic president, I mean completely, he believes in abortion. Right.
If a Catholic what Cardinal Dolan or other took the position, took the podium whatever it's called, lectern is that what it is, and lectured at the president and Nancy Pelosi, didn't he refuse them? What was it?
Communion?
Yeah, that was a big scandal. So this is what I mean. So whenever it's done against democratic politicians, I'm not hearing so much concern, even though that's consistent with theirs. Whatever Jesus says, and who you want to run your country. You do that in the Vatican or Italy or whatever.
That has nothing to do with us. So I see plenty whenever cardinals and the Catholic Church and all of them lecture democratic politicians who are alleged the Catholic the Democrats get mad and people attack them, etc. This is just simply the same reaction. I don't think it's all that different. The difference is that you just agree with this lady, and you disagree with the cardinal or the
Catholic Church. So that's where you're seeing all things. Like I could say the same, like, oh, he's just going off the teachings of Jesus. That's the teachings of the Catholic Church. You know, why should everybody be so upset about that? And they're like, oh, well, because we agree with people have the right to choose, Like okay, fine, So there's a difference between the Catholic teaching when they lecture at a politician and then how that politician behaves
with respect to government policy of the United States. Like there's three separate realms. I'm not angry with her in the way that I think that you're trying to portray it. What I'm angry at is this idea, that this is some completely non political ideology and it is often.
Weaponed Laura Ingram a hypocrite.
Yes, of course, because I'm guarantee you she's going to have people on who are hardcore Christian to justify being pro life for abortion. I'm not leaving these people off the hook. And I you know, I despise much of the Christian nationalist right, which forces people like Brian Mass and others to declare allegiance to a foreign country over our own. These are obviously very natural tensions which people go roll the tape on me and Brian Mast or
any of these folks. I think it's crazy, but that's my point, is that it shouldn't have influence on our finite, actual policy decisions as Americans. And I mean, I don't see why it's uh why it's just I don't see why it's difficult to understand then, how we can all read between the lines. I mean, I can flip her if I just only start talking about compassion for the victims of crimes of illegal immigrants. What am I trying to say? People? What am I trying to say that? Right?
But yeah, but you're fine with that, that you're fine with that you're fine with but I mean that, but that that's well, I'll just what we can finish with us. But she didn't actually call for any specific policy.
Because that would be all she said.
All she said is have mercy on people who are fearful right now. And you know these are groups that are in fact, they are in fact fearful right now. And you know, I don't think that that is outrageous. I don't think that should make people mad. I don't think that I don't think that trying to see each other's humanity. Yeah, that is the core of you know,
how I believe we should operate in the world. And I do think that that can lead you to different conclusions on There are a lot of balances that you have to strike in the political realm. But to me, being guided by seeing everybody first and foremost as a human being, Like, I don't think that that's outrageous. I don't think that should make you angry. I don't think that that is, you know, the ravings of a lunatic. I don't think you should be deported for having those views,
et cetera. But that's just me.
It sounds like you found Jesus Crystal. You should go, you should attend her her services here in Washington. At the same time, I wanted to give you guys all some inside information. There is a huge war being waged right now here in Washington, DC against Steve Witcoff, President Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, who successfully negotiated the Gaza cease fire, but also multiple other appointees to the Pentagon who completely disagree with the idea of going
to war with Iran, specifically regime change. So We're going to start off with Steve Witcoff, the war against him, and then I'm gonna explain some of the whist for campaign, the allegations, and some of the individuals who are behind
all of this. What really kicked things off was Steve Whitcoff's recent interview with Fox News, where he had the audacity to suggest that actually he wants to pursue the Phase two part of the ceasefire deal and that he was willing to negotiate with Hamas or anyone to achieve this outcome. Here's what Steve had to say. I wanted to ask you about Hamas.
Apparently they told the New York Times we are prepared for a dialogue with America and achieving understandings on everything. How do you see that?
Well, I think it's good if it's accurate. I think we were able to demonstrate that President Trump's policies peace through strength, they work. Everybody listens. I said, you've got to you got to look at the tweet, look at the truth, look at what he said. The words speak for itself. He expects a hostage release. Remember, we were working.
We had nothing to do with the mathematics behind the prisoner release and the hostage release that was set probably I don't know, eleven twelve months ago, and our job was to speed up the process because it felt like it had bogged down. And I'm actually going to be going over to Israel. I'm going to be a part of an inspection team at the Nazareem Corridor and also
at the Philadelphia Corridor. We have to make sure that the implementation goes well, because if it goes well, we'll get into phase two and we're going to get a lot more live bodies out. And I think that that is what the President's directive to me and everybody else working in the American government on this that's his directive, and that's what we're going to do. That's what we're going to do. We needed to show people that we could stop the fire, the violence, and we could have
conversation and dialogue. And so this is the beginning of that and hopefully everything over there can be settled in that way.
So christ that was his His crime is that he's like, yeah, I'll talk to Amas. That was it. That was enough to set them off. So let me give you an example. Let's put this up there on the screen. Here's a reaction from Aton Fischberger. He says, in just one interview, Trump's Middle East envoy manages to express a willingness to quote reach understandings about everything with Hamas, admits that he and Trump's team didn't even try to get any additional
hostages out. What's he talking about there? Really? And says fonds over the Katari leadership again, Now what has basically happened is this There is now a narrative being spun here in DC that Steve Whitcoff is an agent of the Katari government. Now why I find this including attacking Steve Whitcoff's kids Again, his crime is negotiating a ceasefire. His real crime is forcing Bebe to work on Shabbat actually getting this deal done. Let's just all be honest
about what's happening. So my challenge to the neo con people, and I know we're going to watch this, is this, you guys want to have an honest conversation about foreign influence and people being bought by whom. Let's go. Oh, let's go, because I know where all of your funding comes from. It's all public. I know many of the individuals personally. Who do you think that they're campaigning to
replace Steve Wikoff? Jared Kushner, Oh, the guy who's a billionaire because of Saudi Arabia And you don't have any problem with that, right Why? Because he's pro Israel, or more pro Israel apparently than Steve Wikoff, and he'll just give Bibe whatever he wants. So they're full of shit whenever it comes to the criticisms of Steve Wickcoff and his ties or whatever to the Qatari government. And you know,
at this point, I don't even care. All I want is to see peace in the region, which clearly Wikoff and the people I've spoken to who are who have spoken to those who are involved in this process are very impressed by him and believe that he is committed to actually trying to get Phase two through. Now, a lot of this is going to be up to Donald Trump, and of course there will be massive pushback here by the Israeli government. But it actually goes a level deeper
than this, which is really important. And let's put this next one up here. This is Jewish Insider. This is a publication which is run basically is a laundering of a lot of neo kan thought. And they write here pro Israel Republicans alarmed over Trump's Defense Department appointee. Now, the person they're talking about here is a guy named Mike Demino. He's been tapped as the Deputy Assistant Secretary
of Defense for the Middle East. Mike Demino is a person who had the audacity to suggest Crystal that regime change in Iran would be a bad idea. And actually he articulated himself incredibly well in interviews like on the Glenn Greenwald program or on Dave DeCamps show on YouTube. Any of you can go and watch and listen to
his words himself. We're not talking about an extremist. We're actually talking about somebody whose previous experience on the ground and involvement in the region convinced him that America's ability to compel regime change and launching adventures in the Middle East, which he says have little strategic interest to America. That's his actual And so what we're watching is a laundering of a major whisper campaign against a guy like Mike Demino.
We are watching a new attack that's being launched today, and I'll get into that in a little bit, But just look at you know, Wick Cough. All he does is just say, hey, you guys need to agree to this deal you've already agreed to in back in May. And that is alone. He is now the target of the Israeli media and of all of their allies here in Washington, DC, including Nicki Haley and some very very prominent people behind the scenes.
Nothing makes people hear more angry than when you say I'm going to talk to our adversary. If you're right that you will get uniform outrage. And it's just it's such posturing, Like listen, the reality is and this is why BV didn't want to end the war. This is why it's smoke church, and I mean, they're very upfront about their goals. But because you know, when you actually have a ceasefire, even a temporary one as of now, people have to start to grapple with the realities that
you didn't destroy Hamas. Very likely Hamas is going to continue to be in government because guess what, you didn't come up with any sort of a political solution that would lead in a different direction. And there is no there is no number of guns and bombs that is
going to solve this problem, period, end of story. But you can live in that fantasy We're never going to have to talk to Hamas and they're going to be defeated and they're just you know, evil, point blank, end of store, and you could never even speak with them. You can live in that fantasy until you actually try to have some sort of a resolution. And so, yeah, he committed the cardinal sin of being like, you know, I actually want to go to Gaza and Hamasa. They
would talk, and I think we should do that. Think about even like you know Scalhill who goes and interviews these guys, because hey, they're a party to this conflict, and maybe we should know what their thoughts are and what their thought processes and what their ideology is. The amount of outrage over even just a journalist going and interviewing them is preposter I mean, listen with regard to
how all of this pans out. We'll see, because already obviously you're seeing you know, a massive onslaught and lots of killing in the West Bank. I just saw electricity has been shut off in massive parts of the West Manga Corniana drop site News. There's all kinds of reportings about the quote unquote goodie bag that Trump and Witcoff are giving to Israel. So what are the costs of that? Phoebe's promising that he's going to return to the full on war. Trump is saying like, well, that's you know,
probably going to happen, so we'll see. But yeah, I think it is very telling just the amount of absolute rage at Wickcough. It's very good that he's Jewish. I'll just say that it's really gives him at least a little I'm sure he's getting all of the like self hating jew and all of that sort of stuff, but it's a little bit harder to just throw the anti Semite label at someone who is himself Jewish.
Wikoff is now one of the most successful diplomats on the U on the Israel Palestine issue in modern history. Like that's what they are attacking him, very lobar okay, but that's my point. That's even that is enough to be destroyed, and they're going after him like you would not believe. Let's put this up there on the screen. For example, this is Mark Levin, who by the way, this is retweeted by Ben Shapiro. It says, say what wick Coff said, it's good if the US talks directly
with Hamas. Question Mark, where's the foreign policy eighteen? Question Mark, don't we have a new Secretary of State just confirmed and answer me by the Senate. Even Blinken didn't suggest this. Hamas committed unimaginable acts of genocide. Now we are willing to talk to them to better understand them. Question Look, here's the thing, and this is the straw man. They're like, oh,
he says he wants to talk with Hamas. Steve Wikoff actually is trying to get hostages out right, So who's holding the hostages?
Oh?
Oh right, So we're not supposed to talk to Maas. But also the criticism of wik coof is. He's not supposed to get all the hostages out, so which is it? Right? So it's all bullshit. Actually, what this is all about. His real crime again is putting a little bit of pressure on the Israelis. Let's go to the next one please, from Haretz. It's also this one. He's going to visit Gaza as part of an inspection team. Right. The thing is is that they want to keep America at arm's
length and not be involved in any of this. They don't want them to enforce the terms. They don't want them to be involved. And the reason why I'm focusing so hard on wid Cough is that if he gets fired, if he gets rained in or any of that, it's over. Not just in terms of the Israel pals On issue, but the Iran issue is the most important one here. What broke out this morning again from Jewish Insider, this like Neo con rag is. They're publishing this about a
person like my friend Albert Colby. They say, in addition to Domino, another ally of Caldwells, there's a person in the interview. Albert Colby has been tapped as the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, even as his sanguine view of Iran and its nuclear ambitions, which he sees as less urgent threat to America's interest in China has long been a source of contention in Republican foreign policy circles,
and now they write this with a straight face. Perhaps most controversially, Colby has opposed direct military action against the Islamic Republic. Perhaps most controversial. Controversial to whom? I ask Jewish inside, please tell us, tell us who it's controversial to, and do you want to know who's controversial to? The person they quote underneath that to criticize Demino, Calebridge and Elbridge, Colby and Caldwell is Dick Cheney's Middle East advisor. That's
who they quote. It would it would be you know, there's a lot of people who watch the show Donald Trump. There's a lot of people who watch the show who he even interviewed, who voted for who would for AOC and for Donald Trump. And one of the main reasons they did is a departure from the foreign policy consissus. Now Trump has failed them many times in many different ways, but perhaps on this one at least through the idea
of personnel is policy. We all need to come together and to actually put pressure on the Trump administration and the outside to make sure that these people do not succeed. Because if Mike Demino gets fired, if Elbridge Colby doesn't get through, if you know, you don't have a chance in hell at getting even five percent. And the reason why I know this is that in the first Trump administration, the battle for any America First policy was lost on
day twenty three when Mike Flynn was fired. Now Flynn was an idiot, don't get me wrong, but Flynn actually believed in what Trump did. And more importantly, a lot of the people who worked for Mike Flynn who were genuinely America First, all of them were forced out by h R McMaster And h R McMaster did what He ramped up troops in Afghanistan, He encouraged all this SOULEMANI striking, He encouraged all these weapons to Ukraine. Now, listen, Trump is culpable. Of course, I'm not going to put him
off the hook. He agreed to do all of this. But he's a malleable guy according to the people around him. So if you want to play the game, we have to protect these people because otherwise it's game over. Like look, listen to them very clearly, they say that controversial. The controversy around this is to oppose war with iron. They're telling us what they want us to do. They want
to evade and impose regime change on this country. And so it's my you know, what I'm trying to do is to expose them, but also to try and assemble some people who we need to like put pressure on the administration if we actually want to see this change. Because nothing can destroy your country and its wealth and it's people more than a bad decision in the war as we saw with I Rock Well, it destroyed us.
And just to tie it all together, and I know people know this, but Israel has long wanted to drag us in of coursely to a war with a run. You'll recall bb Net Nyahu famously making trip here during the Obama administration to oppose the JCPOA that was the
Iranian nuclear deal. You know, this would be a key priority for major Donald Trump donors like Miria Madison, who was seated right there in the Daais behind him and who seemed to really get her picks in terms of a lot of the high profile cabinet level names who all had very consistent Hawkish views with regard to Iran, and you know, are some of them are just like total end times, you know, is pro Israel fanatics like my Kakabee least Stephanik Rubio has a you know, been
consistent hawk with regard to Iran, et cetera. So you know, these next layer down is kind of the next battle and so yeah, well we'll see how it all plays out. I mean, one thing that is a little different now versus previously is, you know, bipartisan administrations have really coddled the Saudi Arabians and been very cozy with them, even long past the point of utility and political sense. And you know, Saudi and Iran were very much you know,
arch rivals and at loggerheads. That has eased somewhat as they've made common cause during the Israeli genocide in Gaza. They've had some reproachment actually brokered by the Chinese, so there is somewhat less hostility between those two nations, which means that you know, even and as a top Trump priorities, pursuing this I think wrongheaded, but we can get to
that another day. Saudi normalization deal with Israel doesn't necessarily require the same, like totally hawkish and adversarial approach to Iran. But there are very powerful parts of this Republican coalition and of the Trump donor base that want the war with Iran, want the regime change, want one of the things that we gave Israel in exchange for this, at least temporary cease fire, to be joining with them, or at least green lighting attacks on Irani nuclear facilities and
those sorts of really escalatory actions. So anyway, a lot of question marks.
Okay, sticking with foreign policies, some big developments on the Russia and Ukraine front. Let's put this up there on the screen from President Trump. I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people and always had a very good relationship with President Putin. And this despite the Russia Russia Russia hoax. We must never forget Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost sixty million lives
in the process. All that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose economy is failing and President Putin a very big favor, settle now and stop this ridiculous war. It's only going to get worse if we don't make a deal, and soon I will have no choice but to put high levels of taxes, tariffs, and sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which would
never have started if I were president, over with. We can do it the easy way or the hard way, and the easy way is always better. It's time to make a deal. No more lives should be lost, he declares here. Well, this is all part of a big question mark now around Russia and Ukraine, and specifically also with Donald Trump revealing actually in the Oval Office the number of real dead in the war. So he gave this away. Actually counterpoints covered yesterday. We're a play it
for again for all of you. Let's take a listen.
Could be version and you've talked a bit about ukraining Russia of it. How long would you think.
Take to end that conflict?
And I have to speak to President put We're gonna have to find out. He can't be thrilled. He's not doing so well. I mean, he's grinding it out. But most people thought that war would have been over in about one week, and now you're into three years. Right, So he can't be he can't be thrilled. It's not making him look very good. Now, eventually, you know, I mean it's a big machine, so things will happen. But I think it'd be very well off to end that war.
We have numbers that almost a million Russian soldiers have been killed, about seven hundred thousand Ukrainian soldiers are killed. Russian is bigger, they have more soldiers to lose, but that's no way to run a country.
Let's think about that. We're talking about well over what one point five million who were killed. Now, I don't know if he's confusing casualties or the number of killed, but even if it's the number of casualties, I mean that's insane, like World War One numbers for the battle which are unseen in modern warfare. So this shows a couple of things. First, it's good. I think it's great that Trump wants to end the war and he's all
about quote unquote making a deal. The problem is is, I think crystal he's really overestimating the leverage that the United States has here. Our economies are as bifurcated as it gets. They don't sell us very much. There's not much less to tariff. There's nothing really left that they even export to the global West. They're basically a client state of the Chinese and of the Indians who will buy their gas, and you know, the North Koreans who
are giving them soldiers and weapons. They don't really need us anymore, and so Putin is in a very advantageous position if he wants to continue the war. The other problem of Trump's presumption is he's like, well, Russia, they're losing a lot of people. Putin doesn't care. He does not care that eight hundred thousand people have been killed. Well, he will sacrifice one point five million as much.
I mean, it's much larger population than Ukraine. So it's all I mean, just as a personalite. It's so grim to say this, but it's a lower consequence for the Russian nation than it is for the Ukrainians. I was just reading. Apparently the Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov indicated that Moscow is ready for an equal and mutually respectful dialogue, but was sort of like unimpressed with the threats for more sanctions. They said it didn't really sound like anything
particularly new. But while we don't have as much leverage with the Russians, because they already are the most anciented country on the entire planet and are already living and dealing with that. Not that there hasn't been any economic hardship, but they've been able to cope. The country we do have leverage with is Ukraine. Obviously, we have a lot of leverage with Ukraine. We can basically, I mean we can. We can college that they're completely dependent on our funding
and our weaponshipment and our diplomatic support and all of that. So, you know, it seems to who knows what Trump is doing behind the scenes and what his real plans are blah blah blah, who knows if he even knows, But it seems to me that the place where the leverage really needs to be applied, as with our own ally, where rich have the leverage, versus additional You really think additional sanctions on Russia are going to like significantly move the needle. I'm sorry, I just don't think that is.
No, I don't think so. I mean, I'm wondering if some of this is a psyop to get the Ukrainians to see that we are putting pressure on Russia when we also pressure them behind the scenes. I have no idea. Trump is saying that he will meet with Putin and Zelensky. I think he literally said any time. He's willing to do it, if they want to talk. Now. Zelenski, though, at Davos, is also making a lot of demands. Let's put this up there on the screen. He says the
US must be part of a Ukraine peacekeeping force. He wants US troops to be part of peacekeeping in Ukraine. Can't be without the United States. Even if some European friends think it can beat No, it can't be. Nobody will risk without the United States. So his peace condition is that we have to occupy it.
I don't know that he's not wrong, though. I mean, I no part of me wants this, But I think he might be right that if you're going to have some sort of a maintain the piece kind of a ground force, you know, I doubt that the Europeans could or would do it on their own.
Yeah, exactly, which is why the whole point is, the whole thing is untenable, terrible. So let's just sign a deal, and let's just convince the Russians it's not in their best interest. And they've eventually passed that and we'll figure it out then. But you know, the current situation is equally as bad and as untenable. Over a million people are dead in the war, you know, and like you said, proportionality is very important here. This is not a big country.
They have lost, apparently to them, three generations now of men. So you know, eighteen to twenty five or eighteen I think is eighteen to twenty five year old men are not eligible for the draft. If you're twenty five and up, the good chances are you've been drafted and into combat. And that's why the average age of their military is what some forty or fifty years old. Nobody even really
knows the data. But they're running out of people at a basic level, and you know, the depopulation already of their country would take them multiple generations just to replace, let alone. If they continue this war and inevitably do need to draft eighteen to twenty five years, then yeah, you're going to find yourself like the Soviet Union did fighting the Nazis, everyone born in like nineteen twenty to nineteen twenty five who was draft age was just dead.
You know. By the end of the war, it was horrible. It was a disaster, terrible.
Yeah, I was just looking at the population numbers Ukraine. It's the latest that says thirty seven million, and Russia is one hundred and forty four million, So I mean, it's just vastly larger population, vastly more you know, resources, endemic to the country. So it's long been a really
unbalanced situation. And you know, Trump had promised like he was going to have this all wrapped up before he even got into That was always totally preposterous and it was disconcerting that it didn't get mentioned at all on inauguration day. And I think it's still very I think he recognizes, like this is not going to be easy to deal with. And the Zelenski message at the World Economic Forum of like, oh, we're going to need us
peace group. That's an indication of how difficult it ever is to wrap up one of these conflicts and how frequently unpopular it ends up being. Because if we're being honest, American people are kind of like tuned down on this conflict at this point. Yes, it's on the back burner.
It's not causing Trump any like real political headaches. It's a lot diceier, as Biden found out when he withdrew from Afghanistan to actually end the conflict and have to deal with the aftermath and the messiness and the loss of territory and all of that in the media onslot, which will undoubtedly come. So uh yeah, we'll see, we'll see where this goes, but a lot of mixed i'd say signal swim from at this point.
Absolutely, you're absolutely right. Okay, guys, we talked too much here as usual, so we'll cover the meta story on Monday, and yeah, we'll see you all then, unless some big news breaks over the weekend.