Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio ad staff, give you, guys, the best independent.
Coverage that is possible.
If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show everything. Good morning, everybody, It's Thursday. We have a great show for everyone today. What do we have, Rissell?
Indeed we do.
We have all the latest of the fallout in details from President Biden's trip to Israel. We also have some additional information which you can do with whatever you want, about what happened with that hospital in Gaza, so we'll break that down for you. We also have new questions about how quickly humanitarian aid could move into.
Gaza after President Biden says that he was able to strike a deal with.
Netanyahu, so we'll give you those details. We also have some new details about how the White House is planning on dealing with trying to get Ukraine aid and Israel aid and border funding and Gaza humanitarian assistance through Congress. Of course, right now there is no Speaker of the House, so we are actually going to bring in Emily and Kyle to talk about some domestic politics, both in terms of.
The speaker situation.
New poll, very interesting with regards to RFK and who he hurts more in terms of the general elections, some details about Cornell West campaign. And excited to bring you the last of our results from that focus group down in Atlanta with Democratic base voters.
Yes, that's right, and just thank you to everybody's been taking advantage. We do have a focus group special going on right now. Everybody's been helping support our show. I know it's been a lot of work on all of our staff's behalf, not only the focus group, but you know, keeping up with the day to day grind of Israel Palestine. So appreciate everybody for your support and all that. It
does certainly mean a lot. With that, let's go ahead and get to the as you said, fallout really from the trip President Biden going on the ground in Israel after the cancelation of his follow on Arab summit in Jordan, having to turn around and come back. He made these comments while he was on the ground. Let's take a listen to what he said when.
I come to Israel with a single message, You're not alone. You are not alone as long as the United States stands and we will stand forever. Well, not let you ever be alone. We've seen it described as Israel's nine to eleven. Well for a nation, the size of Israel was like fifteen nine elevens. But I caution this. While you feel that rage, don't be consumed by it. After nine to eleven, we were en raised in the United States. While we sow justice and got justice, we also made mistakes.
I'm the first dress president to visit at Israel in time of war. I made wartime decisions. I know the Troyas are never clear or easy.
For leadership.
There's always cost. It requires being delivered, requires asking very hard questions. It requires clarity about the objectives and an honest assessment about whether the path you're on will achieve those objectives.
So that was an interesting That was basically a matchup that our team did there. The major takeaway from the US was Israel does not stand alone.
The United States is behind you.
But a slight note of caution describing it though as fifteen times nine to eleven. He's also like, also maybe exercise a little bit of restraint. He would certainly know, having participated in much of the war beating for up to Iraq. But this also really what those comments came is after critical meetings not only with Benjamin Netanyahu, but with the Israeli war cabinet, and in that war cabinet, we are learning more details from Israeli media about what
Biden promised them. Let's go and put this up there on the screen again. This is from the Times of Israel military reporter. He says, quote, the new Biden administration has privately been urging Israel not to launch a military campaign against Hezbolah. Washington is working to keep the current
war from spreading beyond Gaza. The US recognizes Israel must respond to the increased targeting of its northern border Hi Hesbola since the October seven onslaught but repeated attacks by the Lebanese terror group in fact that Israel failed to anticipate this assault have led to the intensification of discussions about whether Israel must be the one to initiate a battle in order to maintain the upper hand. Let's go to the next one, because this is where things get very,
very complicated for America. Sutch talk has been a cause of concern for the US, which is privately warning Hasbola and Iran not to open a war on the northern Front. The US has cautioned Israel to be careful in its military responses. But here is the critical tweet Biden officials have indicated to Israel in recent days, if Hesbola initiates a war against Israel, the United States military will join the IDF in fighting the terror group. Let's go to
the next one, please. The Pentagon has already dispatched a pair of aircraft carrier strike groups the Eastern Mediterranean near Israeli border in order to deter Israeli an American adversaries in the region. Has Bulah has already fired dozens of anti tank guided missiles, rockets and mortars into Israeli positions.
So this actually demonstrates crystal that behind the scenes, President Biden did give a guarantee, or at least rhetorical assurance, that should has Bula officially entered this war, that the United States will back them.
So originally it.
Was talked about deterrence, this carry a strike Group, but we have two thousand United States Marines which are on their way already to the region. I mean, certainly if it's not like they've given us yet an indication of ground troops. But I mean, this is a significant military declaration on behalf of the President. And I can't help but think nobody in Congress ever voted for this. Just so we're all aware, you know, it's not like the two thousand and one AUMF can cover has BULA, although
I'm sure the White House lawyers will try. But it just again, the underscores that President Biden's visit was not just to try and quote unquote tamp down tensions or to give assurances. There were also military talks happening behind the scenes, which absolutely and something we've tried to underscore here from the beginning, could embroil and bring the United States into this war at a very very immediate direction.
Something Emily and I covered yesterday is this report in Axios suggesting that these discussions had taken place within the US government context. And one of the things they laid out in Axios is the legal justification that they would use to get involved in these hostilities with Americans without having to go to the American people, let alone go through Congress. What they say is that undercommonly held understandings of Article two of the US Constitution, the President can
enter US forces into hostilities to protect Americans abroad. So they would use the fact that there are Americans in Israel who could potentially be in danger to justify US getting involved.
This expert added that if Biden were.
To make that decision, he'd be to notify Congress within forty eight hours under the War Powers Resolution of nineteen seventy three, that would give Biden sixty days to act before Congress's approval to use military force would be required. And we of course have seen many times presidents use authorities without going to Congress whatsoever and getting US involved
in various conflagrations abroad. So this is a very very real possibility, especially as we look in the wake of that horrific hospital carnage and you see the protests and anger erupting in cities across the region. You see protests outside of US embassies, Israeli embassies, you see Palestinians clashing with police in the West Bank.
So the level of anger and outrage.
Throughout the region is incredibly heightened, which puts a lot of pressure on HESBLA to do more. So far, they have sort of calculated like, we can do just enough to signal our solidarity found this going into a broader escalation. But there is a huge, huge risk here, and the fact that the US is explicitly telling the Netnyahu government, if we go there, we will have your back, we will involve our military is incredibly consequentially.
Yeah, I'm not so sure though, because you know, I mean, they've killed five IDF soldiers, not nothing. Imagine if somebody killed you five US soldiers, you know, that certainly would invite a response. They have used and I can't emphasize this enough. Hazbola is not Hamas, it is not Palestinian Islamic jihad. These people have serious weapons. They brought it to the IDF hardcore in two thousand and six. They've only gotten better since then. They have fought sustained military
campaigns throughout Syria. These are battle trust, battle hardened, trusted veterans, and they have, you know, the recruiting pipeline dream. If the United States were to get them involved, they would have certainly population that would back them. If there were to see like an external Western power and not just Israel that were to do that. But the real danger in all this is that it goes up the escalation chain. Because Hespola of course is controlled or at least you know,
in some way by Tehran. IRGC forces almost certainly would be involved. So then you know, Iranians could be getting killed if America is and then you just keep going, you know, up up the ladder of then Tehran things. They have to get involved, and already, you know, the very day of the attack, there were already calls for.
The United States to get involved.
Now, imagine if a Hesbola rocket or something like that falls on a US base, or it goes after and hits some American soldiers, or they use you know, I mean, look at the Hoho this. They were able to fire things against US ships. It's not like it is outside of the capability of these of these militias to inflict damage. And also there were we focus now on what the
US has told Israel. Let's also focus on what Israel has told the US about what the forthcoming operations in could look like, which almost certainly fall on the backdrop of how the Arab world itself is going to respond specifically, has Bola. Let's put this up there on the screen. This was a report from Barackravid. He is an Israeli reporter here in Washington and he works for Axios. He actually put this out in Hebrews, so we are reading the rough translation by Google.
But it's been confirmed. This is just the gist of it, he says.
US President Joe Biden has said during his meeting with the members of the War Cabinet that he understands the operation in Gaza will be protracted and will take time. According to a senior Israeli official who is aware of the contents of the meeting, let's go to the next one, please, he says. Senior of Israeli officials have stated that Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Defense Minister, and the Minister have told Biden that the move to dismantle Hamas and change the
reality in Gaza will be lengthy. Quote it could take years. Go to the next one, please, and says Gallant has said that the operation in Gaza will be long and difficult. Israel will need American political support and security assistance for a long period of time. And then finally, he says, Biden told the members of the War Cabinet, it is important to respond to the humanitarian needs in Gaza in order to preserve the international support that currently exists for
the IDF operation. So this is where I also think that we need to spend some time thinking about the geopolitics the hospital situation. We're going to talk a little bit about what happened with the hospital, all of that in terms of what exactly who was responsible for the explosion. Okay, in the immediate aftermath though, regardless of how the Western media or anybody would have reported it, here's the truth.
No matter what the New York Times the BBC said, people in the Arab world were going to protest anyway, Crystal. They are primed to believe that this is something that Israel would do because they have done something and stuff like that in the past. They are also primed not to believe the West and to disregard anything that we say.
They also are getting instantaneous updates.
I don't think people really comprehend how much of the Arab world is both on Twitter and gets all of their news on WhatsApp, which is forwarded to them by their friends. It only takes one tweet in order to spark something like this. This was just five hundred people, and I'm not diminishing the death. And also we don't
even yet know the five hundred number is real. But this was a claim of five hundred people for a single Hospit now imagine a full fledged years long according to the Israelis urban combat situation with tens of thousands of civilian deaths over the course of a year. The hospital is happening every day with combined armed tactics. Israelis did this, Palestinians says, nobody knows. In the immediate aftermat all we do know is videos coming out of carnage,
blood and dead bodies all over the street. There is simply no way that the situation will be contained to Gaza. That was one incident, one alleged airstrike and or misfired rocket. This is actual combat on the ground that will just go on forever. And you know what we as we all saw in Ukraine, I mean, the blood in the carnage of what modern urban combat.
Looks like is horrific.
Luckily, most people did not pay much attention to that, at least, you know, outside of the news. For what was happening inside of Ukraine. It didn't, you know, hadn't have the same level of emotional resonance. But for the global Islamic population of two million, like, this is a highly emotional issue and they are not going to forget in the very same way that many American Jews and Israelis will never forget the carnage as well. I'm not
even morally equivocating it. I'm only saying that if you think that they will sit by and just watch this happen, you're out of your mind. And so we have to consider that, we have to consider what the future is going to look like if we want stability.
Horrific carnage.
I mean, you already have very high civilian death rate, You already have over a thousand children in Gaza, and those images will be playing on a loop on social media and on regional televisions, you know, for apparently for years to come. Let's also think about from a US perspective, and we're already embroiled in this proxy war in Ukraine. Now we're going to be embroiled even if we don't get directly involved, which is a big If we're now going to be embroiled in a second multi year indefinite
proxy war. I want to go back to some of what Biden was saying. They're, you know, warning, very gently, warning about the lessons of nine to eleven, and make sure you understand what your objectives are, and make sure you understand that if you're if what you're doing right now is actually leading to the accomplishment of that of those objectives. And we're about to talk a little bit more of that in a moment, but it's already clear that those lessons have not been learned.
I mean, it's already clear.
The Israeli government has admitted they have no plan for the day after if they actually want to go in and root out Hamas, which is an absolutely worthy and legitimate goal. Just bombing the hell out of a mostly civilian population is not going to accomplish that goal, is certainly not going to win you the trust of any locals to help you be able to decipher and figure out who is part of the Hamas terrorist organization who
is just an innocent civilian. So you can already see the lessons of nine to eleven have not been learned here and are not being heated.
And no little like gentle.
Warning from the American President who has already said We're going to do whatever you need for years to come, to whatever extent that you need. None of that is going to be listened to whatsoever. And I just have to say, on a side note, the like nine to eleven math thing really irritates the hell out of me, because I understand why they say they want to impress upon people like how devastating and how horrific this attack was, which I think anybody who is looking at what happened
here can fully understand and acknowledge. But there's such a weird desire to make some sort of math equation to
analogize it to nine to eleven. And it's like, can't we just acknowledge that, like, these lives were lost and they were precious and that matters a lot without doing some sort of weird nine to eleven math, which by the way, is never applied on the Palestinian side of like, well, this is an even smaller population, and look how many lives are there, then this is like seventy nine eleven.
It's just it's to me, something about it really irritates me and sort of indicates that certain lives mean a lot more than other lives.
Yeah, I mean we were talking about this previously. The only why reason why it's useful is just to emphasize that it's a small country, which means that somebody knows somebody who was impacted by the attack. I personally think you can just leave the weird math out of that, because you know, by that standard, it's like every car accident in Israel would be magnified higher. It's like no, it's like, look, human life is equal. Yes, it is
a catastrophe. We can intellectually understand that in a smaller country it will hit harder than in a larger country, although I'm still not even entirely sure that that is true.
Give you four people will have a direct connection to it within that country, right, But.
I mean I could argue it the other way, which is that this is a country which has been at war since its foundation and has you know, sustained and has baked into it the idea of military service, and so maybe they would emotionally see like there's no point
in trying to do all of these games. It's just like fourteen hundred people were viciously and horrifically killed by Hamas terrorists leave it at that, and I actually think emotively we can all empathize with that because we also went through it something similar on nine to eleven.
If you factor it out more.
I mean, I think everybody knows somebody who served in Iraq or Afghanistan or nor somebody who did, and I think we can all just you know, empathize and having seen that person with a little bit of the light, you know, fade out of their eyes over time, or they just changed a little bit after they came over
from there. So let's just try and you know, bring it back to relating to people on a human level, and then how we all process collectively the trauma that we also went through posts nine to eleven, not just from the attack, but from the wars that we engage in. I was listening to a podcast by Jocko Willik and Darryl Cooper. They do a podcast called Jocko The Unraveling, and Darryl in particular, he has a Twitter account called Martyr Made and he has a podcast as well, which is fantastic.
I highly recommend it.
They have been sounding off with some of the most sane takes from analytical and strategic historical perspective that I've heard yet, And I actually wanted to play some of this audio where Jocko, who served as an officer in the Battle of Ramadi in Iraq has extensive experience with urban combat, gave some advice on how he would handle the current situation in Gaza if he was Israel, and it was so unlike anything that I've heard yet before. I want to play for everybody. Let's take a listen.
That immediate military action that they took was really good. It was a good, solid military action that they took quickly at this juncture. You know, I think it's going to be and I think I would, like you said, I already kind of said what I'd be doing, I would be I would probably stop bombing Gaza right now that you've got there's people in tunnels, the enemies you're not killing. You're not killing bad guys at this juncture with air strikes, so what you're doing is just destroying.
You're destroying the city and you're giving Hamas opportunities to win the information operations. If I was Emperor of Israel right now, we would be annihilated on the information operations. We would be doing humanitarian missions.
And you showed me a video of the aftermath of some strikes on Hamas. It was just, you know, wasteland. And the first thing I thought, whenever I see something like that, You know, as you as somebody who who has has combat experience as a soldier, when you see a landscape like that, knowing that there's tunnels throughout the area and everything, what are you thinking when you look at that.
It's a nightmare. It's a nightmare. And that's why I like, even again, going to the emperor position, I would not be super excited to roll in there and start hunting for Hamas with my troops. I'm going to take a lot of casualties. I'm going to take a ton of You want to start talking about clearing what do they say, three hundred miles of tunnels? Is what's down there? Three hundred miles tunnels? Three hundred miles of tunnels. This to
me turns into siege warfare. And I start doing siege warfare with this over arching idea of benevolence to take care of the civilian populace and show them that we will help. We are here. We we don't we want to, we want to figure out a peaceful solution to this. We're going to help you out, and we're going to starve and crush Hamas and oh, you don't want to
get starved and crushed. Cool come to this location at this time, and I know it sucks, but that is how you actually get the other side to see your perspective a little bit as well.
The first, the first thing that has to happen if you're going to win those hearts and minds, though, right, is you have to you have to destroy Hamas. Just like when you were in Ramadi you could you could uh drill all the wells and do all the things you wanted. None of that matters if you don't kill the Jihadis in that city.
So the reason I thought that that was interesting.
I'm curious for your perspective, Crystal, is these guys were are knowledgeable about counterinsurgency warfare. Jocko in particular has successive combat experience urban combat operations, and I have not heard a single commentator describe it that way.
Yeah, and it's immediately where.
My mind went, just having, you know, spend so much time with people who served in the global war and terror, but also having really you know, intellectually been fascinated by
that conflict. Is understanding that this you know, where he what he describes exactly is what the United States tried to do at its best whenever it was in Iraq and the post surge period, which was understand that we have to both restore security, but you have to build a sustainable political calculus for the Iraqi population not to gravitate towards the Jihatis, which would make us less safe
and actually made their lives miserable. And what he specifically points to is the nightmare of what military operations would look like. This would look like. But he also, you know, very I think correctly pointed out. He's like, look, I
understand that it sucks. He actually even continues, he's like, I had to look my guys in the face and tell them why they had to risk their lives running humanitarian operations while we were in Iraq and the reason why we had a broader strategic goal of winning over the population. And yes, many of my men died on similar operations, and I still had to explain to them why this is part of a bigger picture.
He's like, that's leadership.
So I don't know, I wanted to play that because you know, these are people who were battle hardened in these exact type of conflicts and who intellectually had to grapple with the exact same problem of an embedded jihadist group inside of a mass urban environment, civilian populations.
They basically had to deal with all of us.
They also had to deal with more modern media, and they are very very discordant with the current Israeli strategy and they're they said multiple times, they're like, I think Israel is losing, you know, in terms of the information operation. What they mean by that is like the way that the rest of the world I understanding the perception exactly of what's happening. So I'm curious what you thought about what he said.
I mean, I think it's also important. I know a lot of people know who JOCKO is, but this is not some like liberal left yeah yeah, which is part of what gives them credibility here. And I think what for me it underscores is that the truth of the matter is net Yahu and his government these are no dummies. Really, what the current program is about is vengeance. Because if your goal was actually we're going to root out hamas we're going to come to some sort of peaceful, more
secure situation visa VI the Palestinians. I mean, ultimately that should look like some sort of statehood, but even leaving that off of the table for now, just some sort of more peaceful coexistence.
This is not what you would be doing.
And let alone the fact that they acknowledge they have no plan for what it looks like going forward. And so you know, there are doing what is very easy. They are doing what is you know, direct like emotional reaction to the horror that their population suffered. And you know, emotionally you can understand that human instinct, even as you recognize first of all, you are inflicting even more carnage on civilians in Gaza, and second of all, it is
completely discordant with your stated goal. But to do what Jocko is discussing here, I mean, you're going to lose a lot of IDF soldiers. You're going to lose you know, you're going to take a lot of casualties. It's going to take a lot of time. It's going to take you know, really acknowledging the humanity of Palestinians and really you know, trying to not only win the messaging, but
in reality try to improve their lives. And then hanging over this whole conversation about what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan is.
That we did it really poorly.
Yeah, it didn't work.
So even with a better sort of theoretical philosophy about how to approach taking out militants and winning over the population, you know, tell me what's going on in Afghanistan right now and how well this worked out over twenty years.
One of the things that I really learned from Darryl who highlighted and really taught me from his podcast about the actual military capabilities of the idea is that the last twenty years they're not It's not a good story. Two thousand and six was a nightmare against Lebanon. What the IDF did is they were taking significant ground casualties and they relied on what most modern militaries do is they retreated and they just let the air force try and do their work for them. But that was a
story that played out again. The last time that we had major ground combat ground combat operations was twenty fourteen, the major warre in Gaza. Huge portion of the city was killed, like sorry, a huge portion of the city was leveled. Twenty five hundred something people were killed. We don't know yet how many of those people were Hamas, but exact same story. IDF rolled in the Hamas had learned a lot from two thousand and six hasbo Lah.
They tried to get as close to the Israelis as possible, which means that the IDF can't come in and provide ground support. And when you're engaged in a full blown like it's almost like hand to hand combat where you're flighting like block by block and it's just you know, it's just guns against guns. Well, that is a great equalizer for a lot of people, especially in urban combat environment.
It's the same thing.
The IDF was taken pretty bad casualties, they pulled back, they relied more on ground operations and just absolutely bombed the crap out of them. But in all of those situations, what did we learn. It didn't actually eliminate Hamas and it didn't necessarily even accomplish the military objective that they wanted it to. So in this case, they are saying we need to eliminate Hamas. That is very similar to the US mission in Iraq during the surge or like, we need to eliminate al Qaeda in Iraq, and it
sounds easy. We're like, okay, well we killed Zarkawi years earlier. Why does this group even still exist. It turns out that the population has been suppressed by the Shia majority, and now there are these tribes which are allying with them. We spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to buy off tribal leaders, sending in our soldiers who all got killed by the way, on behalf of trying to keep these people safe and restore security and all that, and
as you point out, it still didn't needn't. Frankly, it didn't work because we didn't commit to the strategy for long enough peereriod of time, and that probably wasn't even politically sustainable anyway. So what he said repeatedly is he's like, look, if they were serious about this, you've got to separate the population from the actual jihadis the best way to do that is to convince the population that you believe in their humanity and you want the best for them.
He even said, he's like, I would open the border right now, and I'd bring these people in and being like, hey, come work over here.
You can have a better life.
We're going to pay you, even in terms of a humanitarian assistance he was talking about. He's like, you need to have sector bisector, you need to secure it, you could set up checkpoints, and then within that life needs to be normal. You can get everything that you want, and you need to draw as big of a contrast as possible if you truly.
Want to eliminate this group.
And yes, it still would take years, but I think what nobody's prepared themselves for in that scenario is what we're talking about here is thousands of IDF soldiers that have been killed. Yeah, thousands, and israel I don't think. I don't think they've ever lost the number of people that it would probably require to have a sustained counterinsurgency
campaign inside of Gaza. So then it comes back to like, now, what you know, your only real option if you want to eliminate Hamas without losing a lot of people, is to wipe Gaza off the face of the earth. And that's two point two million people with you know, a million children, and I just don't think that that's a politically sustainable solution in the current environment.
There's just simply, no way the Arab world would sit back and.
Let that happen, not to mention probably shouldn't do a genocide. Yeah, I know you're just trying to be analytical, but like, I can't leave the morality out of the equation that you're talking about genociding an entire population when.
And that kind of rhetoric.
I mean, that's much closer to the rhetoric that the Israeli government is using versus what Jocko is suggesting and what Biden has kind of hinted at of like, let's be clear, not all Palestinians are Hamas.
You have to separate the two.
Meanwhile, you have the President of Israel, Herzog saying, quote, it is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true this rhetoric about villions not being aware, not involved, It's absolutely not true. They could have risen up, they could have fought against that evil regime which took over Gaza in a coup desta. So making the case that no, we don't really believe in this whole innocent civilian concept. That's their messaging, and that I think is
in part what Jocko is responding to here. Of you know, even if you are on israel side and you want them to win this war and you want you know, their messaging and propaganda to win the day, they are going in the polar opposite direction. The other thing I would say is like we already have a track record
of this specific approach from Israel. They have been mowing the grass in Gaza, which is basically like you know, periodic indiscriminate bombing of you know, some Hamas terrorists and lots of civilians and lots of civilian infrastructure over many years now.
And guess what, it has not worked.
It is only further served to radicalize the population, and you know, hasn't done anything to weaken Humas. And of course that's putting aside the fact that people like Netnya who thought it was beneficial to actually strengthen Humas because they knew that it would help to thwart a potential Palestinian statehood movement to have this you know, evil foil out there for them to use. So they are going in the polar opposite direction of what Jocko is suggesting there.
And then I would again just remind that even.
If they followed his advice to a t it's not like this really worked out well for US in Iraq or Afghanistan, and so it seems like, you know, I don't even know if it's not it's that the lessons weren't learned, it's that they're not really interested in learning those lessons right now. And I think part of it also does come from netnya who's incredibly precarious political position
where he's desperate to hold on to power. And so if what the Israeli population wants right now, just as we did after nine to eleven, is vengeance and that's what feels good, he's not thinking too far in the fire.
That's what he's going to deliver.
Well, then they can find it out the way that the United States did.
After you lose you know, fifteen hundred or so of your soldiers and you have a heightened domestic terrorist issue and you have to spend a couple of trillion dollars. We're all trying to save you trillions and.
Also save lives.
But they can go through the exact same painful growing periods that we did. That's very unfortunate. But you know, as Mark Twain famously might have said, history rhymes, So there you go.
So let's talk a little bit about where we are with regard to humanitarian aid, because, of course, the situation on the ground in Gaza continues to worsen as they suffer through these siege conditions with little water, no electricity, little food, no fuel, et cetera. One of the goals that Biden claimed for his visit to Israel was to try to make some sort of a deal to secure some sort of quarter for humanitarian aid to pass into the strip.
Let's take a listen to a little bit of what he had to say.
Work this out.
Was he reluctant to do?
It's complete?
Well, I've had a decent relationship with him. He's got he's got his own problems on other issues. He's got his entire border, there's wars going on the side of his country. And so he was U I've known a while. He was sure to say, very cooperative. I mean there was now I thought I'd have to spend more time trying to convince him on the timing, But he was. He still stepped up, and as did as his babie,
and and I was as well. They probably told you I was very blunt with the Israelis and uh guse Look, Israel has been badly victimized. But you know the truth is that if they have an opportunity to relieve suffering, uh, people who are have nowhere to go, they're going to be It's what they should do, and if they don't, it'll be held account ways that may be unfair, but that's what being too. And my point to everyone is, look, if you have an opportunity to alleviate the pain, you
should do it, period. And if you don't, you're going to lose credibility worldwide.
So warning there that if they don't take steps to move aid and they have the ability to alleviate pain, they will lose credibility worldwide. Let me give you the details of the deal that was announced. Put this up on the screen. This is per BB dot Yahoo's office. He says, in light of the overwhelming and vital support from the US and the light of US President Joe Biden's demand for basic humanitarian aid to be able to reach Gaza, Israel's War Cabinet has decided the following number one.
Israel will not allow any humanitarian aid to be delivered from its territory to the Gaza Strip until the hostages being.
Held by terror groups are returned.
Number two, Israel demands Red Cross be able to visit hostages and will work to mobilize international support for this demand. Number three Israel will not, and this is the key one, will not thwart humanitarian supplies from reaching Gaza from Egypt as long as it is only food, water, and medicine for the civilian population in the strip. Any supplies that reach Hamas will be thwarted by Israel. So this all comes back to that Rafa crossing, which has been bombed
four times in recent days. So there is damage to the roads there. You know, even with them saying okay, we're not going to thwart the AID coming through, it is a lot more complex than just you know, now those trucks can roll in, the roads actually have to be repaired before the trucks can.
Even come in.
The White House is indicating that could happen over today and perhaps AID could enter tomorrow. There are hundreds of trucks that are masked at that border. You also have all kinds of you know, foreign nationals, including American citizens that are masked at that border, and lots of Palestinians also who are right there. Because of promises that were made from the US about oh, American citizens are going to be able to pass through. Well that has not
come to fruition whatsoever. But you at this point have hundreds of trucks that are lined up there waiting for the go ahead and waiting for those roads to be fixed so that they could roll through. So far they're saying they're only going to allow twenty trucks through. You know, we're getting word from from various authorities and you know, people who are focused on humanitarian aid that one of
the critical needs here is water. There are reports and figures that people now only have three leaders of clean water per person today. The absolute minimum that they should need, you know, bare bones, is fifteen leaders for drinking, cooking, and basic hygiene. So there's a long way to go here before you actually have significant aid rolling into Gaza to help the people there who desperately, desperately need it.
And Saga.
I've mentioned this before, but just so people remember what a dire situation this is with regard to water in particular, in the best of times, the majority of water in Gaza is not drinkable, not potable. So when you have this additional siege light conditions. You've had hospital workers so desperate they're drinking IV bags. You've had reports of people drinking seawater, you know, really having to limit and curtail
their use of water. There's also a lot of concerns about sewage treatment, and of course with aunt electricity, it's it's just a very dire situation.
So hopefully this aid can roll through.
But what they're discussing right now would be a real drop in the bucket of the overall need.
Yeah, the real thing, and yeah, I think what is it? The number is twenty trucks of aid that I've seen floated from the Egyptians and from the US. My also major concern is what about our citizens who are currently trapped inside of Gaza. As I mentioned, my friend Trey yinst Over at Fox News had an interview with an American woman inside of Gaza.
Here's what she had to say.
How are you feeling right now?
Just as an American citizen?
They you know, I'm an American citizen.
I'm not helping us to leave Gaza.
We're trapped here.
They start bombing at night morning, Like you.
We stay in one room everyone because in Gaza they don't.
Have shelters under the grounds like Israel, so no one has.
A safe bawt the house to stay in, so everyone stays in the winder.
Room and people to stay bombed the house you're in, everyone.
Dies, you know.
Yeah, you can just hear the terror in her voice there, Crystal, what she's describing, And yeah, well, I mean, this is a woman as an American citizen, and we've gone to extraordinary links correctly to get our citizens out of Israel. But you know, the Egyptian and the Israeli government have not been playing ball with us really at all. It's interesting too. I've watched some of the mainstream commentariat be like, hey, we give all this money to Egypt and Jordan and
they don't even meet with our president. It's disgraceful. And I'm like, oh, are we setting a standard where we give you a ton of money that maybe you should listen to something that we say and actually show us some respect, because I would love for that standard to be applied to Saudi Arabia or Ukraine, maybe a little country called Ukraine that we've given more money than probably anyone else except for Israel, which also doesn't necessarily listen to us.
But the thing all the time, when the aid has zero conditions, and when you're out there just saying like yeah, we'll be with you no matter what doesn't matter, then of course then like there's no leverage being used here. Well, we could have leverage in the situation, we choose impotence. It's all on all on our leaders. At the same time, another thing I want to point out, the US just vetoed a UN resolution that would have condemned all violence
against civilians in Israel and in Gaza with Palestinians. They said it was too early to craft and appropriate Security Council response, and in particular they took issue with the fact that there was not language in there underlying Israel's
right to self defense. So in terms of you know what's happening at the UN, for whatever it's worth, we vetoed that resolution which would have condemned violence and called for humanitarian aid to Gaza and condemned violence on both the Israeli and the Palestinian side.
So that's where we.
Are with that.
But you know, with that audio that we just played of this American woman who is stuck in Gaza, think of how dark and chilling that is, there are no bomb shelters, So their strategy isn't like, here's how we're going to protect ourselves. It's we're all going to be in one room so that if we get hit by missiles, we all die, that we all die. Like that's how grim,
that is, how grim it is. And I also want to underscore, you know, Israel told one point one million Gazans to leave the northern part of Gaza and go to the southern part of Gaza, with the idea being like that's where safety would be. But that is not turned out to be the case whatsoever. There are plenty of air strikes that are happening in southern Gaza as well. So people really feel like, and you've had you've had apartment buildings hit. Let's put the hospital aside. We're going
to get to that in just a minute. You've had apartment buildings hit, you've had residential houses level, you've had marketplaces hit, moss, you've had other medical facilities, you've had place you know, schools that people had sought relief at. All of these places have been bombed and leveled, and so people really feel like there is just literally nowhere I could go right now and be safe. And they are completely trapped in Gaza, whether they.
Want to be or not.
I hope we get our people out of there.
All right, Let's talk about the very latest in terms of what we know with regards to this horrific explosion at the hospital all of the you know, it's even unclear right now what the death count is, what the casualty number is, but we've seen from the photos there was absolutely horrific carnage here. So we've got some new evidence on kind of both sides of the equation. I'm just going to lay it out and you all can
make of it whatever you will. The first piece that I think is really critical here is actual photos in daylight of what the explosion and the fallout at this hospital was. Let's go and put this up on the screen.
So you can see.
It looks like whatever happened here did not hit the hospital directly. It was in this courtyard where all of these cars are. And you know, one of the one of the things that people who thought this was Israeli missile we're saying is listen, this was way too much
damage for a Hamas rocket. This paints a little bit of a different picture, because now there's a theory of all right, but it could have been you know, Islamic Jahad or Hamas rocket that you know, missfire and falls into this courtyard and then ignites a fire with the fuel in these cars. So these photos, you know, give some credence to that potential theory.
You also have Biden.
You know, yesterday we told you that he indicated he thought it was done by the other team, which I could really do without the casual like sports team analogies here when you're talking about human life.
But we'll put that aside for a second.
At that time, he did not indicate whether that was based on what the Israeli government was telling him or whether that was based on our own intelligence assessments. He later clarified that this was based on our own intel community. Let's take a listen to what he has to say.
Deeply said and outrage by the explosion at the hospital and cousing yesterday. And based on what I've seen, it appears as though it was done by the other team, not you. But there's a lot of people out there not sure. So we've got a lot We're going to overcome a lot of things.
The hospital people all over the region are upset about the hospital.
And don'tus SOSIY believe you or the Israelis that they didn't have anything.
Do they drew a messages to the people in the streets.
Right now or if you understand why in this circumstance they wouldn't leave. I can understand that, but I would not notice, I know, safe things like that unless I have faith in the source so much on our Defense Department says it's highly unlikely that Israelis, but if a different flip fan and intercept us anyway, And so that's why I noticed. I didn't say it first, and I want to make sure that I knew and look, and I'm not suggesting that Hermosque that.
Literally did it either.
It's that old thing.
I got a lot of shoe student, you know.
And it's not the first time Hermas says wanted something that couldn't function very well. So I don't know all the detail that I do know. If people at the Defense Department who I respect in tells the community that I respect is highly improbable, it is really so.
The official statement from a spokeswound for the National Security Council is quote, the US government assesses that Israel was not responsible for an explosion that killed hundreds of civilians yesterday at that hospital. Our assessment is based on available reporting, including intelligence, missile activity, and open source video and images of the incident. I'll just give you a little bit more details of what the intelligence community is anonymously telling
the New York Times. They're cautioning this analysis is preliminary. They were continuing to collect and analyze evidence. Neither side's claims about whose response will been independently verified still by
any news outlet. And this is part of the problem is that journalists buy and large not allowed into Gaza to be able to see for themselves and interview people and try to assess the evidence that exists that American intelligence includes satellite and other infrared fread data showing a launch of a Rocketer missile from Palestinian fighter positions within Gaza.
American intelligence agencies have also analyzed open source video recordings collected by journalists and others of the want showing it did not come from the direction of Israeli military positions, according to those officials. Israeli officials have also provided the US with intercepts. We're going to get to that a minute of Hamas officials allegedly saying the strike came from
forces aligned with Palestinian militant groups. Of course, I don't have to tell you that US intel community and the Israeli intel community have every incentive here to paint things is in a certain portrait.
But that is what they are saying.
We do have a little bit of an independent investigation from the BBC of open source information basically that is available. Let's go and put this up on the screen. This BBC investigation. They took some of the photos of the site and they were actually able to get one of their journalists into Gaza to also talk to people on the ground and get like eyewitness reports about what they say happened here. But they contacted twenty different think tanks,
universities and companies with weapons expertise. Nine of them did not respond, five couldn't say either way, and then there were experts that they spoke to. At the remaining six, they asked whether the available evidence, including the size of the explosion the sounds heard beforehand, could use to determine the cause of the hospital blast. So far they say
the findings are inconclusive. But they did have three experts who say it is not consistent with what you would expect from a typical Israeli airstrike with a large munition. They were looking at things like the size of the crater. They were looking at the size of the fire. They were looking at the videos and the flashes that were in the sky. One person says they likely indicate the projectile was a rocket with an engine that overheated and stopped working.
So that's what they said.
Let me get you in on this and then I'll tell you the piece on the other side as well.
Yeah, I'll be honest. This is the difficulty of really covering and operating all this approach for with extreme skepticism
from the beginning. The big issue that has happened here was with Hamas specifically they have I'm not even going to say I had any credibility with them, but for them to come out immediately and say that the hospital itself was destroyed and then report a death count which is clearly now not accurate, that does a tremendous blow for our ability to even trust the most basic casualty information that was coming out of there, which I think
most of the international community previously. I'm not saying that they weren't skeptical, but previously they're like, yeah, this like roughly tracks with an independent assessment, So good luck to them now from now on out, because it's not like you can really believe it out in terms of the pictures.
The pictures themselves, and based on evidence and testimony that I reviewed from people who were former Human Rights Watch investigators and others who do not have an agenda and previously been highly critical of Israel, they say it's not consistent with the Jadam, which is what the type of munition that the Israelis typically drop on Gaza and would be more likely to be What the Israelis are claiming is that it's a misfired Palestindi and Islamic jihad group
rocket that fell tragically misfired and fell onto this parking lot, because the hospital itself remains standing, the scorch burd marks that are on the top of the vehicles, the smaller crater that is inside of the hospital, and all of that combined with the images themselves, which just don't appear consistent with the what other images of Israeli strikes inside God's which traws a tremendous amount more damage, not necessarily carnage,
because carnage is different because it could be. And that's just only honestly highlights how packed Goza is there. All these people are in this freaking parking lot because they thought it was safe. So it's a tragedy and a situation.
From all of that, the only skepticism I have is that the transparent nature of how I'm not gonna say fabricated, but suspect that much of the evidence is really is put out is difficult for me, and I think that's where some of us have to be honest, where their evidence that they put out actually made me more skeptical, Whereas if I had just looked at this from photos in daylight, I'm.
Like, all right, it wasn't.
In narrowly it is really strike and I still actually believe that, you know, based on what I saw. But the stuff that they put out has honestly only poisoned the well more in terms of what they've released. You guys covered it yesterday releasing a video with the wrong time stamp than deleting it. And then yeah, if you want to get into the transcript of the conversation that they put out, where I would almost tell them, my black guys, you just shit this out because a lot
of people don't believe you. There are some serious questions about much of the stuff that you've put out there. The best thing you have going for you right now are the actual photos of the damn parking lot.
Yeah, so well, because I mean part of the reason the parking lot piece and like the size of the crater is so Hamas rockets.
Have literally never caused this much damage.
And while we don't know the exact death count, I mean there was a significant loss of life here, huge numbers of people who were killed. I mean we've seen the videos of the dead and the wounded. It was obviously a grave catastrophe, whatever the specific death count is. So when you look at that and you're like, there's never been an Islamic Jahad or Hamas rocket, which are these like rinky dink Frankenstinian cobbled together from like leftover
Israeli missiles, they have never caused this much damage. That puts questions in your head. And I mean there's also just like Israel's bombing the hell out of Palace out of Gaza right now, their whole like, oh, we would never target hospitals is bullshit. They even this specific hospital
was damaged days earlier. They've hit medical facilities in this specific war, not to mention going back historically, and you know, with a variety of situations, but specifically we'll talk about Shri Naboo Aklade like they've been caught basically fabricating evidence in the past.
So that's why.
People were immediately skeptical. You shouldn't believe what Hama says. You should not believe what the Israelis say either. And let me tell you. Let me give you a couple pieces here. So number one, let's put this up on the screen from Kent Roth. This is per Lamon, but
I've seen other outlets also validate this. At this point, they report that this hospital had already been damaged by Israeli bombings on October fourteenth, and on October fifteenth, they had done these like you know, little they call them like a warning or a like knock on the roof. Israeli army had called the hospital's director to tell him those two shots were warnings to evacuate, according to the local health ministry, but again has also been independently verified.
A saw in the New York Times this morning, for example.
That this specific hospital they had hit with minor damage twice on October fourteenth and October fifteenth, said you have to evacuate and then so then you know, it doesn't seem crazy that then it was actually hit at least in the courtyard by something. So that's one piece of evidence. On the other side, the other one is you reference this. So we already had the video that they put out that they had to delete because it had the wrong
time stands. They got called out immediately like this is not the same strike that you know hit this hospital.
What are you doing? So they had to delete it.
Then they claim to have additional visual evidence and this intercepted conversation between what they are claiming is two Hamas militants that has really been called into question for its veracity. Let's take a listen to this is a British news channel, as Channel four talking about this quote unquote intercepted conversation.
They present what they say is to has operatives talking about the.
Attack of the supers.
Have you.
Hamas called this an obvious fabrication. Two independent Arab journalists told us the same thing because of the language accent dialect, syntax, and tone, none of which is they say credible. Equally, Israel claims the Islamic you had failed missile was fired from here, a cemetery very close to the hospital. But look again at the video of the event. The trajectory of the missile doesn't line up with that location. Too high,
too horizontal. Confusingly, the Israeli's presentation also says the missile was fired from a location down in the southwest. It can't be both Islamiger had say it was an Israeli missile, and they have the warhead to prove it, but they haven't produced it.
Well, release the damn warhead, Yeah for sure.
Yeah, and again this would all be.
This could be ameliorated if journalists were allowed into gazas. You could have more independent verification because we're relying on you know, propaganda both sides.
But if you I don't.
Speak Arabic, I have no idea what a local Gaza accent sounds like.
But there were you know, I was seeing a lot of.
People online who were saying, this does not sound like a local Gaza accent. And then you have two independent journalists who were saying, no, I'm not buying it from the tone, the like, the way they're talking, the expressions they're using. This doesn't sound like it at all, And just reading the conversation itself is so stilted as to be sort of ridiculous. They're like, yes, it was certainly us,
it was definitely not the Israelis. And another piece they point out is that their claimate came from the cemetery. That doesn't line up with the visual evidence. So there you go.
I don't know. Look, I don't know. I'm not ammunitions expert. I don't speak any Arabic. I can barely order food or not coffee. That's the extent of what I've got.
What I know to say, thank you.
Yeah, it's there you go. In terms of how it all goes for me, it has nothing to do with anything that the States have put out. It is purely based on what you see from there, and again from munitions and analysts, experts who are attached to organizations here in the West, who I believe not have an agenda that's not the best from my analysis and of theirs, And based on all that, it doesn't seem to me like it was in Israeli strike.
So there it is. I just think though that I don't know. I mean, it is difficult.
This has become some sort of like massive crisis online. I'm curious what you think of it. You know, for all of that it is, I have sympathy for the people who believe it was the Israelis. I think most people did to be honest, and I think correct it was a very logical explanation. At the same time, I think it's a good lesson that we can all move in forward, like we cannot really believe.
A single word that Hamas says.
We have to be deeply skeptical from all of them, and everyone's like, oh, like Rashida Talib and ilhan Omar and all that. I honestly do think they should delete their tweets at this point. I did think because based upon the evidence or the very least, they should come forward and should clarify their core message was not a bad one and it is not unacceptable or pro terrorist. If you go and you read what they were saying is they're like, look, we want to stop hostilities.
People want to die.
And I think, look, I will not live in a world where that is not acceptable discourse In the United States of America. So anyway, that's my take for all of this, for the assessment and all of that, be skeptical and you should wait.
I'm glad that you guys.
I'm actually very thankful that you guys didn't come on the air until the next morning when there were more details and you could offer more And now you know, we're forty eight hours or away.
So into this.
I will say, though, the most annoying take that I've heard on this is they're like, it's the New York Times fault for reporting what Hamas said that there were protests in Lebanon. I'm like, yeah, you know, guys in Lebanon are like, hey, let's go storm the US embassy because the New York Times said so, right, not because they're you know, shthead friend on WhatsApp is like, brother,
they have done this based upon what Hamas says. It's like, if you really believe that you don't know anything about the Middle East or about how these people getting in their news.
It's preposterous to imagine that the US media is anti Israel.
There is that's a whole zero.
I mean, when you look at the language they use about, you know, the humanity they grant rightfully, so to the Israeli citizens who were killed versus the way Palestinians are treated. And look at the way they've covered this conflict, there is no doubt which side they tend to favor. So I think the idea that you know, New York Times or any of these US based media outlets are anti
Israel anyway is completely absurd. But you know, the last thing I'll say, just to put all of this in context, is you already have thousands of Palestinians who've been killed. You have over a thousand Palestinian children who have been killed. You have a million Palestinians in Gaza who have been displaced, You have a dire humanitarian situation. Like whatever happened with this hospital doesn't take away from the fact war is hell. The carnage is horrific, and this is only just the beginning.
So I do agree with that.
I will say though, that you do they do a desperate at a disservice to their cause whenever they're caught lying like this, and so it's important to be It's important to be accurate, you know, if you're going to be Yeah.
That's true for Israel too. Lie all the time.
Of course, here I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about people in the United States who are boosters of their cause. It's like it just makes you, like, I think, to leave in an ilhan Omar, they look like fools, you know, for immediately jumping on this and they haven't deleted it, they haven't even addressed it. I mean, look, you know you already know when you're in a position of weakness, like you have to do everything in your power in order to bolster the ground that you stand
on because you know that your critic. I mean, we know this when on Ukraine, right, Like the media can lie about Ukraine ten out of ten times, and nobody's going to say a damn right. If we say one wrong thing one out of ten times, that's it. The next nine out of ten, if you get them right, it doesn't matter. I don't think it's fair, but like
that's just how it goes. And so I think for them, they have a responsibility to the anti war cause, to the pro Palestinian cause here in order to try and be more accurate and retrenching than behaving on the other side. I mean, that doesn't make you noble or good, you know, based on what I've seen from the two of them so far.
I mean, that's just my I'd be curious what you think.
Yeah, I mean, I think it would be reasonable for them to address now there are way more I see. For me, I'm still fifty to fifty on what you know the evidence actually shows and who was actually responsible.
But it was an entirely logical conclusion when your Israel's literally dropped, you know what, six thousand and seven thousand bombs on Gaza at this point, to see this carnage and say obviously was and especially when you have no track record of any Himas or Islamic Jahad rocket creating this kind of damage, to come to that conclusion, I think it would be appropriate for them to acknowledge that there is a lot more evidence in the other direction now, I think absolutely.
But your point about you know.
Of course they're going to be held to a higher standard, like how much of the like Israeli propaganda and lies that have been documented over many years goes down And there's never any question about it, there's never any like demands to retract or correct or whatever. But you're right, the expectation should be that they're going to be held to a different standard because anytime you have a distant political view.
That's just the way it work.
That's how it goes. I mean, I'm not saying it's fair, but it's life, and that's just how it goes. Speaking of Ukraine, as we were just talking about, let's put this up there on the screen, the White House is now pushing for a one hundred billion dollar package for Israel Ukraine border and disaster relief. That will mean United States is requesting approximately ten billion dollars for Israel, sixty
billion dollars for Ukraine. They just happen to sneak that one in there, even though it's six times times the number for the actual conflict that this is allegedly being tied to. And then the rest of it is border and disaster money that they had tried previously to get through the Congress. Included in that is a one hundred million dollar announcement today for Palestinian aid that will be directed towards humanitarian efforts. This comes at a very critical
time actually for the war in Ukraine. Remember, previously, the United States had not passed through the Congress any extension of aid or even transfer authority that has not stopped the Biden administration though, from throwing even more weapons into the conflict, this time arguably one of the most escalatory weapons that they've sent there so far.
Let's put this up there on the screen.
Confirmed now use of long range missiles inside of Ukraine against Russian forces for the first time, used against the Russian Air Force. At least these were used crystal inside of occupied Ukraine, so you know there were used actually on their own territory.
But let me repeat again, there is not one thing stop.
Them save for their word, which they have broken, that striking deep inside of Russian territory. Not one thing of which they have done before. They've used drones, They've repeatedly struck inside of Russia. I'm not talking about what Russia claims is Russia or Crimea. I'm talking about Russia Russia. There's nothing stopping them from being able to do this. And I also wanted to bring up something very critical
behind the scenes. The New York Times had one of their long profiles inside the decision to send this directly leaked from the Pentagon. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin opposed this decision for a single reason. He said this dramatically draws from US readiness. We cannot produce these on a long enough timeline, and if we need these in the immediate term, within the next year, we're screwed. Biden sent them anyway. That's from the Secretary of Defense, not any
chicken hawk. This is a guy who's like, look, my job is to tell you this is making us a lot less safe and it will be very difficult for us to produce seas in the future. And Biden sent these weapons to Ukraine anyway, even though we're at the tail end of any amount of aid that's ever going to pour into this conflict.
Do you think so, I'm not so sure about that.
I think that calculus sixty billions going that.
Calculus has changed significantly with the introduction of the Israeli conflict, because there's nothing to keep you know, there is an overwhelming bipartisan consensus in favor of sending, you know, Israel whatever Israel wants, and there's no end to just tying the two together and pushing them both through for you know, forever and ever. And you've already got the Israelis saying, hey,
this is going to last year. So to me, whereas very recently it looked like, you know, they could be coming really at the tail end, or perhaps Ukrainian AID was not going to get through any longer at all.
I think that that landscape has dramatically shifted very quickly, and even have you know, well like it's probably not going to be Jim Jordan's speaker now, but the fact that he was even out there at least in trying to convince some moderates that he may even be amenable to doing that after he's been very si I firstly opposed to Ukrainian AID, I think tells you the changing landscape.
But you know, just to pause again on these long range missiles and just remind everyone this is one of the things that Joe Biden had originally specifically said no to. And you know, it should have been the minute that Ukraine started striking inside of Russia, including drum strikes in Moscow itself, that should have been an absolute red line. Now you will never get the long range missiles, and instead they provide them. They don't want to talk about it.
You know, they did it quietly without really announcing it publicly. They won't comment on the delivery or use of these missiles. But they're there, and we're still in this quagmire situation with really no end in sight, but additional prospects for continuing the aid flowing in definitely. So this is why I'm very happy with the speaker chaos.
I hope it lasts forever.
I hope they never get a speaker, like the next election or whatever. I hope it just continues in perpetuity to be a quagmire because the instant that you have a speaker in place, some major aid packed package, both for Ukraine, Israel and probably border securities. Likely.
This is the point that Michael Tracy he is making. He's like, the longer we have no speaker, the safer.
That this nation is.
I think he's absolutely it's correct on that front. And it's very important to remember that this is now having the full weight of the White House being put behind it. Let's put this up there, President Biden. Just everybody knows, we'll be making an address from the Oval Office, a very rare thing for him to do directly to the American people, both on the Israel Hamas conflict and the war in Ukraine, on Thursday evening at eight pm. I
don't know why these people are using military time. I despise military.
You get a war, you get a war, whatever, you get a war.
So the White House set on Wednesday and pre announced that, so everybody tune in. I guess at eight pm if he says anything worthwhile, we will cover it here on the show and make sure bring breaking coverage. But he just goes to show you they're gonna milk this thing for everything it's worth. They're going to use the overwhelming bipars and consensus on Israel. They're going to tie Ukraine in there. And then, like I said, do not forget
what the actual breakdown is. They're using a biparts and consensus for ten billion on Israel to try and shoehorn sixty billion. And let's just remember the track record of Ukraine's use of US military aid. They have not made one square inch of net gain in twelve months. That is according to even the most hawkish analytical groups in
the United States, for their so called counter offensive. In fact, if you look at it, you have a better case for Russia came out better during this counter offensive, and analysts predict that the winter months will almost certainly be to the benefit of the Russian forces given what they've learned in their overall industrial capacity. You know, I was just reading the Russian spun up Crystal, a sophisticated ammunitions production manufacturing center in eight and a half months, eight
and a half months inside of Russia. Can you imagine that in the United States we have not done anything like that since World War Two? You know, we can't even we can't replace AMMO. And it's like, I'm watching them, and we are severely underestimating their wartime economy, their ability in order to you know, I mean, look, they had no choice. They're basically like, fine, we have to bring
everything in house and produce what we need. They're spending everything that they need to in order to keep the war machine going. And there is not a single sign of degradation of what we were promised from day one about these so called sanctions.
So let me let me also just quickly make a political point. Janet Yellen recently was a famous hey, can we afford these two wars? And her answer was, I
think the answer is absolutely Okay. Now that that may be the case, but you know, to make a political point here, as we're heading into a presidential election, how do you think the American people who feel very poorly about the economy, who feel very poorly and are struggling in terms of their own financial well being, who are you know, housing has never been more unaffordable, who have struggled with inflation, wages declining, all of those issues, bank
accounts declining, credit card debt going up. And you see the answer when it comes to sending you know.
Military aid is Oh, of course, of course, We'll.
Find the money for that, and we'll find a will to do it. It doesn't matter if Republicans are a post something. We're going to find a way to get this done. Where is the urgency when it comes to our own financial situation? And so, you know, this is a real problem, most important materially for American people who are struggling, but it is also a huge political problem for Joe Biden to have the specter of endless money or these two conflicts and nothing for our own people.
Yeah, well, said Crystal.
All right, let's go and bring in Emily and Kyle to talk about a few domestic political issues.
Let's get to it.
Okay, We've got Kyle Kleinsky and Amily Guiski here at the desk. We're going to have a nice power panel. We're going to discuss the speakership RFK. Let's start with the speaker. Let's put this up there on the screen. Jim Jordan has lost support yesterday for his second failed House speaker vote. There will maybe be another vote today. Everything is up in the air and it comes after
a sustained campaign by Jordan allies. We can put the next one, please up there on the screen to try and what is it?
Arm twist?
Some of the people who had actually voted against him turns, I'm actually fine with that, but it didn't work, so I guess we're not fine with it.
Whenever that happens.
His like wife got anonymous emails like your husband better support Jim George.
I support that apparently I.
Sent it to I told him, Emily, give us your take. You're tapped into the conservative circles first, Just like, what's going on? What is going to happen? Is there doesn't appear to be a vote today. Is Patrick McHenry the speaker pro tempt? Is he going to get expanded speaker powers? Deal with the Democrats? What are you hearing?
What are you thinking?
Yeah, so there's a package being discussed right now to give Patrick McHenry the pro tem people remember him banging the gavel really hard in his little bow tie, to give him powers until janu third, so for the rest of the year and then they can come back to
the table and figure things out. Well, that's not going to happen because now Conservatives, the same people who were doing the arm twisting campaign to support Jim Jordan are basically never mckenry, because the Conservative movement is mounting a campaign to say a deal to put McHenry in office is a deal with Democrats. Basically, to make that math work, centrist Republicans are probably going to need the help of
centrist Democrats and maybe then they can get it. Either way, it's going to be difficult because of that never McHenry faction of Jordan supporters. The problem with the math though, is that there are never Jordan supporters that are now in the McHenry camp, which basically is impossible. And again this is why after fifteen ballots with Kevin McCarthy, they
went through those fifteen ballots. McCarthy went through those fifteen ballots because every single person in the Republican Conference knew that only Kevin McCarthy could bridge what are now the people in the never McHenry and the never Jordan Camps.
He was the only person who could do it.
And that doesn't mean Kevin McCarthy is amazing, does mean Kevin karthy is a hero for the Savior of the Republic. It just means he had put years of work into bridging those two groups and nobody else is able to do that, so they're completely at an impasse.
He actual like had no shame, like he was willing to do whatever, yeah, to get to get it done.
I mean, what are you making?
First of all, I think all the speakers are like that, the ones who actually get to power.
It's like you raise the most money and.
You can like appease the most people behind the scenes, and maybe you know, got like a snake in a sense and say one thing over here, one thing over here. But I found it really interesting because Jim Jordan was a vocal supporter of McCarthy, and he actually argued with Gates on the House floor that I think McCarthy should stay in power. But he also has gates blessing because
he's a mentor to Gates. So the thing that I'm stuck on is like, if it's not him, who's it going to be, Because this guy in theory should have the blessing of the McCarthy people and the Gates people. And I think that what it comes down to is Jordan is an outsider conservative firebrand who's like, you know, built his name on right wing media, and I don't think he does the behind the scenes backslap in politics
like a speaker needs to do. Yeah, he doesn't, And so I think, never mind, that's awesome.
Well, I mean, let me push back on your McHenry thing here, because you know, I have made the prediction that it will just end up being mckenry by default. So I'm very invested in my prediction coming true. That's the only thing. I really don't care about this fight otherwise personally, But it seems to me like no one
has the votes. Jim Jordan is actually further behind where Kevin McCarthy was, and so the status quo is the most likely outcome here where McHenry may not be like elected speaker, but they could figure out workarounds of like all right, you know, like a government funding is about to run out or about to have a shut down, A very short period of time.
It's not like the House was doing that much anyway.
So if they come up with these workarounds of like, all right, I guess you can keep the government open. I guess you can pass your Israel in Ukraine and border aid or whatever it is that they're putting this package together, that seem still seems to me like the most likely outcome because I don't see any other person being able to cobble together sufficient votes to get this done.
I agree with that.
I mean, if I had to put money on any outcome right now, it would be the mckenry outcome. And I think your reason for that is really like probably the most correct, like default is the easiest way for everybody?
Is the default exactly.
Yeah, And so at the same time, though, that's becoming more and more difficult for people. As we're seeing this develop right now, and you've probably noticed this over the last couple of days, people who work in the sort of activist conservative circles are putting together a really strong campaign to pressure and this.
Is actually partially what pushed people away from Jordan.
Yeah, they're really trying to say, they're trying to make this a red line in the sand. They're trying to mobilize constituents and say, the Republican grassroots wants Jim Jordan.
If you're voting.
Against Jim Jordan, if you can't get on this bandwagon, we are going to cast us a rhino. We're going to punish you. And for some of them that might be good. They might like that in their districts and purple districts. The other hand, probably for most of them, it's not good, and so it's becoming I thought Jordan was basically dead in the water when so many people
started shifting towards mckenry. But then you started to see this really get traction in the conservative movement, and that does make it difficult for Republicans to vote against.
It doesn't mean that it's.
Going to happen, That's right, Kye.
Somebody say, I have a question for Emily.
Is it not Jordan because people are still mad at Gates? Or is it not Jordan because Republicans from purple districts are like, I can't do Jordan because you know he supported the insurrection, et cetera, et cetera.
Which is what is it both of them? Or what is it?
Yeah?
I think it's mostly that because people Jim Jordan like basically was one of the early Freedom Caucus people. He was very close with Mark Meadows, founder of the Freedom Caucus, actually with Ronda Santis.
All of those.
Guys were the bomb throwers in the Bayner era, and so they earned so much bad will, Like people just bitterly resent them for throwing the house into chaos so often during those years, they blame them for Trump, they blame them for January sixth, and some of that is now personal, not just political.
So it's a really like a lot of bitter feuds.
Or did some of them fall in line like the Purple District Democrats, because I know twenty two now voted against Jordan. So would you say, like the twenty two Republicans are the more moderate Republicans where they're also like thirty more moderate Republicans who were.
Like, all right, I'll just fall in line as well.
A lot of them did, but don't forget that of that twenty the New York Caucus in particular is highly represented because a lot of those people are like Long Island folks, and they are more in purple districts. My personal favorite thing I stuff floaded behind the scenes, Crystal Is Jordan was like, Okay, well, maybe we'll lift the
salt cap. Yeah, we're just to explain to everybody. Yeah, state and local tax deduction got straight lifting a tax cut for the rich people so they can write because New York has very high state and local taxes, so that they would be previously, before Trump, they were able to write off that portion from their federal income tax. And they're like, this is an outrage, We're being double tax The overwhelming majority of the benefit for the salt cap goes to people who make over one million dollars
per year. Therefore, it is the number one priority of the New York Democrats and Republicans.
And I'm not in New Jersey too. That's Gotten Jersey is New Jersey.
I call him mister Saul.
Anyway, the one promise that I think it Jordan has is he was like, okay, guys, what do you want And they were like, you got to.
Lift the salt I anything.
I have to think that another part of it is not just like his his the things he's done in the past and the bomb throwing nature and like you know, the shutdowns and the debt ceiling showdowns and all of that, But they also have to be worried about if he is their leadership in the House, what is he going to do going forward? Because he's very interested in the like, you know, impeach Biden and let's have all of these hearings and investigation. I mean, that's what he wasn't legislating.
Those are the things that he was focused on. So I have to think part of their fear is, like, how are we going to look if this guy who's been nothing but a bomb thrower is our leadership in the House, Like, we can't be closely associated with this guy and Kyle like there's nothing he can promise them, he can't promise them to, like I'm no longer going to be Jim.
Jordan, But like, is there really that much of a substantive difference on policy between like him and Kevin McCarthy, Like I'm genuinely curious about that in my opinion, because it would you if you have Jordan's Speaker of the House, would you just like not get bills that pass at all?
Passes at all?
It depends on which policy.
For example, Kevin McCarthy was far more i think less ideological on Ukraine. He was one of those people's like, look, I just want to pease everybody personally. I like pro Ukraine. He almost certainly he would have brought something to the floor. Jim Jordan from the very beginning was like, I'm not bringing any a to Ukraine. Yeah.
But then but then.
Behind the scenes, But then behind the scenes, there was that least reporting that he indicated to moderates who were on the fence, like well, maybe I would put Israel and Ukraine AID together.
So I don't know whether that was just.
Like him lying to try to get their votes or whatever, but he definitely left them with the impression that that's what was going to happen.
Maybe someone needs to lift the soul.
In Ukraine, Yes, but I don't think the oligarchs are pantextic is.
Must be lifted. Jim Jordan is your man.
See Kyle's question is super interesting, I think because Kevin McCarthy. It speaks to I think Kevin McCarthy moved over a lot, and he when I talked to him, he.
Talked about how the first.
Impeachment was he didn't use this word, but kind of radicalizing for him. And the question then becomes, what's the substant in different substance in difference between Jim Jordan and like now ken Buck, who is out in moderate land.
It's been right, like is this what happens when you become speakers?
Like, well, I guess in some ways we got to get something done, like we have to get a budget passed, So I guess I gotta do this in this because Democrats hold a Senate, Democrats out the White House.
You could pass virtue signal bills all day, but Biden can veto it for the Senate. You know, not bad, I will say.
And this is actually why I thought Jordan was the best candidate, is I thought he was the best to avoid a government shutdown because they have the most credibility amongst the people who would have pushed for a shutdown, as in he would have been able to wrangle votes that I think McCarthy never would have been able to on a future debt ceiling. So you almost want like a member of that elk to be in higher power because when the push comes to it, they're like, look, guys,
we got a shutdown. You know me, this is the best deal I possibly could get. They never trusted that with McCarthy, and they said that over and over.
That's true.
The boys for a shutdown too. You know, that's the risk you run. Yeah, but you know, like he might be like, no, I want to do the shutdown too.
Maybe, but the political calculus is, Look, Republicans have lost every shutdown ever. You know that every single time they shut down the government, they took the public eyre and the blame all the way going back to nut Gingrich. I don't Jordan is I mean, even right now. And while you know this, like he hates to lose. He would not want to be on the losing end of a government shutdown and be like the like a fill
in the country's eyes for the wrong reasons. He's happy to do it whenever it comes to being anti Hillary or any for a political benefit. But I don't think that there is that benefit for that. So I don't know least thing Christal would.
Well, the last thing I would say is, you know, part of why I don't haven't been that invested emotionally and who ends up as speaker is because I do feel like whoever ends up in that position is going to be an extraordinarily weak place, just as McCarthy was.
Yes, you're right, and so it's not like McCarthy was like running the show.
He was trying to appease these various factions and navigate in this certain way, and ultimately, you know, ended up in an untenable position where he had no other option but to basically make a deal with Democrats and then head out the exits. There was no other move left on the chessboard. And so to me, whether it's Jim Jordan or McHenry or who you know, Ken Buck or whoever the heck else might pop up, they're going to be basically subject to those same pressures. They're going to
be an incredibly weak position. They're still going to have these same factions that they're trying to deal with that this has really been the case or Republicans for quite a long time. So that's why I feel like the person who ends up in that slot it probably doesn't make all that much of a difference my personal opinion.
And they're obsessed with the motion of ak because that's what empowered Matt Gates. Yeah, that's on the table in these negotiations, and if that doesn't go away, there's nothing you can do about Matt Gates. There's always going to be a Matt Gates and it just takes one when you have the motion of.
A K word it good point. Why don't we get to.
All right, let's move to the presidential election.
And as you guys all know, RFK Junior has moved out of the Democratic primary is now running as an independent, and we're just starting to get some polls indicating what that might look like. Let's put this up on the screen with some numbers we have here showing who he takes more away from. So in a head to head, if it's just Biden versus Trump, Biden has an edge by just three points forty nine forty six. But when you add RFK into the mix, he grabs sixteen percent
of the vote, which is not too shabby. Biden gets forty four and Trump gets thirty seven. So Biden's lead surges to seven points in the event that you have Kennedy on the ticket as an independent. Part of why this happens is Trump loses actually ten points with Republicans, Biden only loses five points with Democrats. RFK also tends to take more of the independence who were backing Trump.
They tend to move towards him, so at least Kyle in this particular poll, it does look like, you know, all the Mega people who are like freaking out now about the fact that RFK is running independent after they propped him up a lot, it looks like their analysis is reflected in this poll that this could be a problem from Trump.
Well, what's interesting is what will happen if Trump really starts to go in on RFK. Right, And we already saw like Sean Hannity very clearly turned on RFK when he had previously been boosting him.
Yeah, he's like, actually, I looked at your record. You're really liberal.
Bro. That's an opening question, I question, Yeah, what is that?
So I'm curious if that dynamic will hold. You know, I don't know. I feel like anything could happen on election day, where theoretically he takes fifty percent from Trump, fifty percent from Biden, or seventy percent from Trump three percent for Biden or the reverse of that.
So like, I don't know what's going to happen, But you know you have in the conversation is what you're saying, Yeah, I wouldn't conut on this.
And also, okay, so in that poll, it's like you have Biden up seven points nationally.
There was a pole like two weeks ago that at Trump up.
Ten points nationally, and then I looked at the polling average last night and they were literally dead tied at forty four point three percent in the polling average nationally. So it's like we're kind of reading the tea leaves a little too much here. But any analysis about RFK should also include Cornell West because in theory, both of them will be on at least some ballots in some states, right, so you have to include him in the picture as well.
That's an excellent way, you think, Goluge.
Yeah, I mean, I think that's a great point, especially because we saw what Jill Stein and like the oh it was all Russia stuff. But like when you're in on the bout in Pennsylvania, even if you're you know, not like at rfk's level, you can still eat away
at some really really important margins. And I'm curious about you guys think, because I have a theory that as soon as RFK starts to really look like he's a threat more to Trump than to Biden, which this pole starts to show us that, it'll be fascinating to see where people go, when Trump starts attacking him as super liberal, does that make him more appealing to the types of people that might be interested in Cornell West but also might be like a Bernie Sanders voter that is like,
holy smokes, this guy did so much for the environment in New York State.
He has this like very long record.
I'm not I don't know whether that's the case, because there's so many points of tension now, even between you know, kind of Bernie people and you know somebody who might like RFK first stance on vaccines, right.
A lot of that's that's my thing is like, look for I think Oliver Anthony is a good archetypal person. I don't know how big of a constituency represents, but it's not zero. And when I listen to his interview with Rogan, he was like, look, I'm pro Second Amendment, you know all of this. But he's like, well Trump, you know, he had a lot of problems too. He's like like Operation WARF Speed And I was like, oh.
That's interesting, but vaccine.
But but I was like, oh, okay. And so then he starts talking, you know, positively about RFK junior, and so look, maybe there's a million two million people who exit who are very upset about the vaccine or vaccine mandate.
They especially RFK.
I just saw put a tweet out the other day about I'm not going to take your guns away. He's very sympathetic on h a lot of libertarian esque type border right, so he's like he is as long as he strikes the right message. I could see an Oliver Anthony, you know, our type voter photo of him. Now, how big is that? I don't know, As Emily says, though, I think we did this right when it announced.
I pull the numbers.
In terms of Joe Jurgenson, she won like one point six percent of the vote in Georgia, I mean or the libertarian camp in twenty twenty. That's arguably the Trump margin of victory. She won over one percent in Pennsylvania and in Arizona. Once again, we are talking in all three states. It's funny because on the right there isn't the same like yeah, culture, like.
It's all her fault.
But I mean, you could make a good case under that idiotic theory. So yeah, I mean to me, RFK with his last name, let's say you guess three percent, which I think will probably get more.
Let's say it's five percent. I mean, that's some serious carnage.
Will be on the all.
My question is about the ballot though, Christal, do you think they're going to be on the ballot.
Well, he has a lot of mine. Yeah, I mean, I know, even.
The Green Party is only forty six out of fifty states or something like that.
Yeah, But I mean I'm saying I think I don't know.
I don't have enough detailed knowledge about like the ballot process and how involved it is and whatever. But he certainly has the funding to be able to build out an organization, surely to get on a ballot, especially in key states. I do think it's worth adding into this conversation the fact that, you know, especially looking back at
twenty sixteen, and this is traditionally what happens. A lot more people say they're going to vote third party than actually end up voting third party, because it makes sense when it comes down to it, you know, it's getting close to election day, things are, emotions are as pitched as they could possibly be. You know, it can feel very existential and you realize, like this guy's not going
to win. So let me pick between the two candidates who actually it's going to be one or the other of them, and so usually or not, but usually the third party number tends to collapse as you get close to election day. So I don't think he's going to get anywhere close to sixteen percent.
Of the vote.
But I have always been wary of the ironclad assumption that because his support tends to be more Republican leaning now, that it will stay static through election day, because that Kennedy name is very powerful.
Number one and number two.
I do think when Trump and his allies really go in on him as like this guy voted for Hillary Clinton. That's all I have to say to really kill his esteem with you know, the Republican base that has been interested in him thus far, And.
They started circulating his quotes about Hillary Clinton on the day he announced, the Republican Party was circulating those, and yeah, you can see how they would be really devastating with a Trump voter who you know, is tweeting things about hashlea Clinton body count, like that's not going to these are not compatible possessions.
It's not going to go well.
And then it's like when I saw Harrelson and I think he was wearing like a Kennedy twenty twenty four hat. I was like, oh, boy, like you start seeing stuff
like that popping up. I know that sounds silly, but there's something about the Kennedy brand, and you talk and think about this a lot that's just really potent, especially with left leaning Americans, not entirely, but especially with like your average left of center voter, that if he can tap into that by running a smart campaign, there could be something pretty powerful.
What he is a perfect example, you know, especially for RFKR. If he's lived in LA for a long time, he knows a lot of these celebrities wh obviously have a lot of brand. But like Wood, he is anti war. He was, you know, I'm not he wasn't anti vax but he's like skeptical of big pharma in the vaccine. I have no idea his personal views on the vaccine. It's a long time, Like what is a pothead. He's like dissident to mainstream like left culture, but also is
socially liberal. That's the perfect voter for our RFK junior who hates Joe Biden also, so I mean again, I don't think that's the vast majority of the country I do think it is x Millie.
I don't know what that looks like.
Always going to continue to run though, is a big question, because if he keeps stressing like I'm really tough on the border and I really love Israel, Like, there's certain arguments that he could make going forward where these numbers would stay the same, right, and you would take more from Trump people. But then there's other arguments he could make where all of a sudden that flips.
And you take more advice for him to be do exactly what it is was remember Chris what we played his ad It was just like we're being ripped apart.
I'm not perfect.
It's like, don't you hate parties in the media.
So a lot of people are like yes, and if you stay out of the specific, that's probably the best that he could possibly do. One other piece I want to get in here really quick is there was this news item that came out you mentioned Cornell West should be included on any of these polls, because if you've got RFK there, like, you're not getting an accurate picture if you're not also asking people about, well what about if Cornew.
West is on the ballot.
So there's this news item that came out that Harlan Crowe, who has now become infamous for his so's close association with Justin Thomas and the fact that he was funding all these vacations and all sorts of other things.
Clarence Thomas and his.
Name, just his name that'll stick with that you very true.
It is a very memorable name. It's like a movie name.
Anyway, he apparently has made a max ount donation to Cornell West presidential bid, thirty.
Three hundred dollars donation.
It was in August, weeks before they say West abandoned his bid for the Green Party nomination, so this was when he was still running with the Green Party, before he announced his independent bid. Apparently Crowe, who's called West, a self proclaimed non Marxist socialist and longtime professor at Princeton University, is a good friend. So that's the reason that he's giving. I mean, Ky, do you read into this like nefarious intent, Like we're using that you know, West up as a spoiler.
What do you think?
I'm not buying the friend thing. It's obviously to hurt Biden the whole idea. Absolutely, if he's running, isn't into it? Give him money then runs in independent. Hopefully he knocks up two three four percentage points, and then that would theoretically take more from Biden.
I think sure, it's ruthlessly pragmatic.
There's an interesting connection between the two, which is that Robbie George, also professor person, is really close with Cornell West and Robbie George is sort of a stalwart of the conservative legal movement that Harlan Crow has really helped create.
And so that would be my theory.
That theory, and now maybe it's also a little bit like, oh, we'll have some fun with that.
Sure, Yeah, Harlan is anti Trump. This guy's like pro Nikki Haley.
He like funds Jonah Goldberg.
I mean, these are not.
Tump's right, They're all going to fall in line with Darlan.
I genuinely don't think. So what do you think I would? I highly doubt that.
So let me me say I actually my initial.
Reaction was the same of your as yours, like, oh, of course, he's just like thinks that Cornell will be a spoiler, and I'm sure in the back of his mind that's probably part of it. Thirty three hundred dollars, though in the context of a billionaire and an in context, the presidential campaign is nothing. So if he was like funding a super pack, which with millions of dollars, that
would be one thing. But like a thirty three hundred dollars donation for him is like, I mean, it's literally chump change.
It means nothing.
Probably all he thought he could do while staying under the radar, right.
Because it's public and they're doing funding a super pac. That's actually what we are behind the right.
This headline turns a million if he funds a super pack. But but I think he will give more and I do. Look, the reason for my point is if you look at what happened with Hannity and RFK, I see this ruthless pragmatism among many people on the right.
And Hannity was boosting up RFK relentlessly.
When they thought this guy's gonna hurt Biden, and they were really intelligent about it, right, and then the second they thought, oh he might actually hurt Trump, they flipped on a dime.
And I feel like it's the same this guy, Oh yeah he said.
It, didn't say it, he said yeah, he's like I was boosting him when he heard Biden he's gonna hurd Trump.
I'm gonna go after him and at least the dogs of Hell. I think this is the same thing. I think this is the same thing. But that's how politics is.
Look.
Yeah, he's this guy smart. Okay, he knows what he's doing.
Maybe I don't. I don't know, Kyle.
I just think I think you're probably right. They probably it's some sort of personal connection. Here's what we'll find out. If he spends more money on more now than then, we'll watch. Yeah.
I look forward to being told I'm right.
You're getting used to that on this panel.
Huh ok.
All right, guys, thanks for dropping by.
Thank you guys, appreciate both shortly, all.
Right, guys, very excited to bring you some additional results from that focus group of Democratic base voters that we hosted with Jail.
Partners down in and around Atlanta.
Really interesting stuff here, and we just want to thank you guys again for enabling us to do this. As a thank you, I want to give you a little ten percent discount. Can put this up on the screen for annual memberships if you are able and you are interested. You know, one of the things that we have always tried to do here is as you know, mainstream cables falling part and failing and their ratings are way down.
Trying to build out a real independent ecosystem, and you guys are enabling us to do some of the things that mainstream media does, but obviously with an independent media perspective.
So thank you guys for that.
That's it, I mean, really, what it is is we wanted this to be unique. It would have been easy in the beginning to just focus on the core and just you know, people talking, but that's not differentiated. We keep trying to build out ad partnerships do things like this where you really can't get anywhere else, especially in an independent show.
So it means a lot to us.
And if he can help us build even more things like this, we've got the independent group that we also want to do. You can sign up Breakingpoints dot com. But with that, why don't we set up the first clip.
Let's get to the results.
So we already showed you how people were feeling about Joe Biden was a little complicated.
We're a little worried.
About the age, but we were affectionate for him and we don't want him to be challenged. We're all those sorts of things Trump hanging over all of it. So we also asked how they feel about the vice president. This is obviously incredibly critical since Joe Biden is at such an advanced age, so if he were unable to continue to serve, What do you think about Kamala Harris.
Let's take a listen.
Kamala Harris wat she's knowledgeable.
I did not feel like she lived up to the expectations because I was so excited when she became the vice president. I think she's a wonderful person. I don't think she's been given an opportunity to really shine and grow in her position, and I'm not impressed overall.
I think she's competent. Everything she has done has been domestically, so I don't think she's had much the opportunity to work in international affairs.
Intelligent, fierce, strong sense of right and wrong, and fearless.
I think she does a lot of backup for Biden. I think that she's in that air and that is where he makes those decisions, believe it or not, even though he's president. He confirms with her a lot and they make decisions together.
I do think she's experienced, but she also gets very nervous during interviews. I don't know whether it's insecurity or just nervousness that I sense sometimes, but I think she's hidden.
I think we will fail if she was president did because she's that active on a down low.
I don't even know why she ate my vice's birthday.
I don't really really know a lot about her.
I would come on hires be good president or by president.
I think she would be a capable good president. I really wish that there was some sort of initiative she could be in charge of that is seen by the general public. I don't think there's been a situation that Kamala Harris has been able to kind of show that she's a good leader.
I do not think she would be a good president. I don't get a strong sense of leadership from her. When I see her speak, I think she's somebody who knows how to speak. I just don't feel that I would have confidence in her as a leader.
I don't think if she wasn't able to do her job and wasn't capable, she would even be in that position. So they had to see something in her for her to get that position. Push came to shove and she had to do what she had to do, she would do.
It, and she beat Trump in the election.
I don't think so.
I think he would eat her lunch.
I hate to say it.
He'd tear her to shreds.
Put your hand up if you think she could beat Donald Trump in an election. Put your hand up if you think Kama House could beat Donald Trump.
Not an amazing yield, Not in a million years.
Says I love her in the front, she says, I think we fail if she's president. On the download, I don't even know why she's vice president. Only one person in the group, which we should say, I mean the emotions for mixt Some people are like, I like her, she's farce, she's competent. They must have seen something in her to put her in that position, et cetera, et cetera. But when it came down to it, only one person said that they thought that if she was the nominee, she would.
Be these her primary voters, not even independent voters. Independent voters, by all poling accounts, have an even lesser view of her.
So there you go. What's one eighth what's the fraction on that? I don't even know, but.
Percentage wise, that's a complete disaster. I also think that with these people who are the most disposed to be affective by institutionalism, identity, politics, media, and doctrination, even with all of that, they're like, no, I don't think that she could win.
I mean, what does that tell you.
I mean, it's just one of the worst political choices and historical choices that Biden has ever done, probably the single biggest mistake of his entire career. You could easily argue that if he'd chosen somebody who was better as a vice president, he could have done a handoff. People
would feel far more secure about his age. It fed into the worst stereotypes of like wokeism or whatever as part of his administration, and I think it validated some of the worst fears that people were skeptical of him. And it does show that it's genuinely a bad judgment on all these things.
And obviously you have a mixed race group there, and not well of them brought up like the importance of her historic trailblazing whatever. And some you know, the biggest critic they're Mary. You know, this is an older black woman I know who was saying not in a million years do I think that she could beat Trump, and I think we'd fail as she was president. I don't
even know why she's vice president. So I think it blows up some of their excuses from the Harris team that they're constantly leaking in the process of like, oh, the problem is just her race, her gender, like people don't take her seriously, and well, sexism and racism are very real things. But there's also something else going on here that I think you see reflected in this group.
And it was interesting to me that even the people who you know, had positive things to say about her, they had some sort of narrative about why she hadn't really been able to shine on the national stage. Like I think she's providing backup for Biden. She's more under the radar. They must have seen something in her.
She needs.
The one gentleman who said he did think she could beat Trump, he's like, they need to put something forward for her so she can really, you know, show off what she can do to the American public. So even the ones that had positive things to say about her, they had some sort of a story that they had to construct about why it hasn't really worked.
Out for her on the national stage.
Are all right, so we have one fun little exercise that James asked our focus group participants to do, which was to draw what animals they think would represent either Trump or Biden. Will see if you've got any real artists in the group.
Let's take a look.
I want you to draw two animals for me. On the left hand side, I want you to draw what animal would Joe Biden be? And on the right hand side you guessed it, guys, what animal would Donald Trump be? It doesn't have to be art.
I want you to do it.
You can also you can write the word under the drawing nice and big. I want you to hold it up and I want you to say who you've drawn and one quick reason why you've drawn them in that way.
Okay, I get Baden he's a lamb because you care about everybody else. And I get Trump as a tiger because you are a way trying to keep up stuff gone.
We need to put him in the zoop.
I have Biden as a dog because he's intelligent hes but he can also be tough.
And Trump is a snake.
Snake because he's a snake.
He's mean as a snake.
I said, Biden is a bit he's a teddy beer. And then I put Trump is a bad dog. Tell us wife reach because he's a teddy be because he's compassionate, he's kind, you know, he's one he's one of the people you just want to hug. And of course I put Trump is the bad dog, the one that he like a like a pit.
Is this girl want your eye?
I don't want to let go.
Biden has a kitten because he's docile. Donald is the horse's ass because he's an As.
For Biden, I had an owl because I think he's wise, and I also think an owl is not like the strongest thing, but the owl is trust ready. And then for Trump had a snake head fish. It's an invasius species in Florida. When they get caught, they kind of go crazy and they kind of they attack anything that's nearby, whether they want to eat it or not. And it's uh, it rereaks havoc on the wildlife report.
Biden is a German shepherd, but basically because their dog Commander. But I think he's loyal, you know. And then Trump the skunk because I think he stinks.
Bro Biden, I said a cat. I mean I had the cats I thought of the cat, So I mean, they're independent, they're loving. And for Trump, I know you said an animal, don'tnything that came to mind? It was a roach because nobody like roaches.
So there you go, sneakhad fish or Trump you know what I mean.
Bad dog?
Some of them are boomery horses.
Ass.
I'm like, come on, brother, come on, you can do.
Okay.
If I'm going to take anything away from this, not that you want to read too deeply into any of it, but the Trump ones tended to be sort of like fish, like tiger, snake whatever. The Biden ones seemed to were more about his like empathy, even though it's like it's a dog, it's because he's nice, it's loyal and well we'll set aside commander in his behavior.
Yeah, I was like, who wants to tell her about commander and the biting anyway?
Well, and someone actually said he's like a kitten, which I'm not sure that's as a president, you know, commander in chief. Even your supporters are like, you're a kitten. I don't know if that's really what I want, but I think I mean that is they always say that you vacillate between these extremes and American politics, like after you elect one president, then you go and elect their polar opposite. And I think you do kind of see that in those drawings in terms of the public impression
of their predominant qualities. You do see this like total dichotomy between how they're seeing these two figures.
No, I think you're right.
I mean, for I mean, I think for an ideal president, you want to be like I don't even know how this would fit as an animal, but the characteristic to me would be like dignified, like stately having command and control.
A male line isn't exactly.
What it is. It's a little bit cliche, but something like more akin to that. Whereas both of them clearly are not getting ones where that's what you would want as.
A lead, especially as like a stronger.
Leader that has both confidence warmth but also can lead at the same time.
Maybe maybe commander is not a bad because you've got the loyalty, but then also you can buye it when you need.
Now, because that just shows bad behavior and then you have a bad owner.
But I guess that's a whole other.
Discussion anyway, Thank you guys again for enabling this there is nothing like just hearing directly from actual voters how they're processing everything that's going on, and you know, and to see where it corresponds with and where it diverges from some of the public polling, and just get a little bit of the nuance of how people are actually looking at the political landscape.
Absolutely, I agree. Thank you guys. Again, We'll put the graphic up there just one more time. If you are able to help us out breakingpoints dot com ten percent off, help us build something that's even better. Let's do even more of these focus groups.
Guys.
It's really really inspiring that so many of you believe in the same mission that we do. It's been a great privilege for us. We will have breaking coverage for you over the weekend if necessary. Otherwise, we will see you all on Monday.
The red to Crimen
In the com