All right, good morning, and welcome to the counters. This will be the last Counterpoints on a Wednesday before the election.
Was going to say exactly a week from right now as we are speaking, the election results.
Will be asleep. Hopefully.
Yeah, well I doubt it. The election results will be in. It doesn't mean we will know who the president is because that wasn't the case last time. There were really tight margins and it's looking very similar, if not even closer than it was in twenty twenty.
And happy Steve Bannon released from prison today.
Wow, that's a big deal.
I used to do his podcast this morning. Yeah, he's a free man. I have so many questions about his time in prison. Did he wear two prison outfits the way he wears two? For people don't know he wears two of the button down shirts.
And for the record, Bannon going to prison because he didn't respond to a subpoena. Right, There are other cases against Bannon, but the one he went to prison for is refusing to reply to a congressional subpoena over jelosty.
People don't do that, no, tons of people.
Yeah, that's as funny as the two jumpsuits is I guess the law firm.
Maybe not so much, but.
We're going to talk. We're going to talk about Kamala Harris's rally, which both Emily and I were at last night in Washington, d C. We're going to talk about garbage gate. Did Joe Biden say that all of Donald trumps supporters are an island or a pile of garbage or did he just misspeak? We will, we will parse that for you. We'll get to the bottom swing the election. So we need to get to the bottom of this.
Yeah. Absolutely. Then we'll be talking about Robert F. Kennedy.
Jun You're not getting off the ballot in some swing states, officially decided by the Supreme Court yesterday. So huge news really, even though it could only affect a few thousand ballots, it's still really big news.
We had Emily's friend Ryan Gerdusky booted off the the It was great, How how it started, How it's going. I'll be on CNN at eight pm. I have been banned from CNN. We'll also be talking to Amir.
To be fair.
Gardesky and I aren't exactly friends, but Ryan is eluding to a debate that we hosted with Zero Hedge Immigration that was a Robbie Swave suave versus Ryan Gerdusky and Jack Pisobic and the Libertarian presidential candidate.
It was just Melee.
I didn't think I could be shocked those Maga dudes talking about what they were going to do if they win the White House. Yeah wow, okay, ye. Interesting. Then we're going to have Amir Tibone, who is an Israeli journalist and author of the new book The Gates of Gaza. He has not just an incredible story from October seventh, he and his family lived in Nahal Oz, which is the kibbutz that is closest to Gaza. You may have actually heard something about his story about about a year ago,
absolutely gripping. We're going to talk to him just about about his book and also the like unfolding genocide that's going on in Gaza now, including some updates from northern Gaza, as well as my interaction yesterday with Matt Miller in the State Department press room. And then we've got Emily interviewed Eric Schmidt, Missouri Senator.
And more importantly friends with JD.
Vance probably Jdvan's closest friend in the Senate, so had him on undercurrents and asked him a little bit about whether Elon Musk undercuts the drain the swamp message and if he's worried actually, as Matt Stoler is about Trump telling this wonderful story and how the Google CEO keeps calling him to tell him the McDonald's.
Thing was the biggest.
Who knows whether or not that's actually true, but it was a good conversation about the realignment some insight into the campaign as we get closer to election day. So, speaking of which, Ryan, should we start with the A block here and the rally we were both at last night on the National Mall.
The Ellipse is that.
Part put does vo up here while going right.
You're gonna want to see this, and if you're listening, we'll describe it a little bit. But the Ellipse is the park that's directly south of the White House and Kamala Harris hosted a very well staged rally that ended.
Up drawing a massive, massive audience.
The sun was setting on a quite literally perfect fall day in Washington, amazing weather, and it stretched all the way back to the Washington Monument.
It's got sparser.
Towards the Washington monument, which is still an impressive feat because that's just a lot of a lot of ground to cover and to have it.
That tightly packed. RN, what did you make of the rally last night?
And it and they had a they had a handful of kind of regular people who would tell stories about uh, kid who you know, needs insulin and gets it cheaper because of Biden's uh and Congress under Biden, you know, cracking down and making insolent cheaper and that sort of thing. But in general, nobody else, Like there was no Joe Biden. There were no senators, there were no members of Congress,
there were no labor leaders. So it wasn't that sense of rolly just like, oh here's here's the vice president and that's it.
Uh.
The one takeaway we were talking about before the show started, she did her thing where she talked about how Trump got in the way of Democrats wanting to crack down on the border and this really tough immigration bill that they had negotiated with Republican immigrant immigration hawks, and the crowd is just like dead silent, like we don't want to hear this, and then she says, and of course, we are a nation of immigrants, and the crowd erupts
at that. So it was interesting to see that while the Democratic elites have done a complete one to eighty when it comes to immigration policy and the approach to immigrants on the border, that at least this kind of demographic of the Democratic base was like, no, no, no, we actually meant it when we said all are welcome here, Like we're not actually with you on this pivot that you've done.
So Kamala Harrison the parts of the speech.
She was billing this as a kind of democracy speech, billing it as her closing argument, and started off making a very direct parallel to January six. She said, right here where we're standing right now, Donald Trump, you know,
encourage her supporters to go down to the Capitol. And then she pivoted to the meat of the speech being way more about like you were saying, healthcare costs, childcare costs, inflation, home prices and all of that, and brought it back to these questions of democracy and everything at the end.
Literally as she was speaking, and we'll get to this, but as she was speaking, Joe Biden was on CNN like one hundred yards behind her making his like weird garbage comment about Trump supporters, we will parse that, don't fear. But that was happening at the same time as Kamala. Harris had this line where she said, I have it right here. The fact that someone disagrees with us doesn't make them the enemy within.
So talk about stepping on the messaging.
And that was a theme of the speech that you know, she's not gonna put her opponents in prison, She's going to give them a seat at the table. Otherwise, standard Kamala.
She's coming in with a to do list, to do.
List on Edie's list. There's a little bit of Kamala from last night.
We know who Donald Trump is. He is person who stood at this very spot nearly four years ago.
And sent an armed mob to.
The United States capital to overturn the will of the people in a free and fair election. And our democracy doesn't it doesn't require us to agree on everything. In fact, we like good arguments from time to time. Just think of your own family, right, It's not the American way to not have disagreements. We don't shy away from robust debate. Robust debate. Effect We like a good debate, don't we We like a good debate, and the fact that someone disagrees with us does not make them the enemy within.
They are family, neighbors, classmates, coworkers. They are fellow Americans, and as Americans, we rise and fall together.
So I think it's worth being very clear. And we were talking about this a little bit earlier. Kamala Harris being able to draw a massive crowd in Washington, d C. On a nice day is really not a sign that sort of we do the same thing with Trump rally sizes too. It's not a sign that she's necessarily going to win. That she just was able to draw a bunch of people from the Beltway whose livelihoods are connected to the federal bureaucracy that Donald Trump is threatening quite explicitly.
Lots of defense people, defense industry people out here. So it's not hugely impressive as a feat. But I thought they'd put it together very well.
Sure, well, except I don't. Oh, I guess you weren't inside the case. Then at the end they only had like one place to leave. Oh really, that's like they were afraid we're going to go sack capital or something. It took longer to get out and it was to get in.
They knew what you were up to.
They knew, what if I'm not on arrest, you need to let me go right.
You know, there was a pretty rowdy cohort of Palestinian activists who were outside the gates of the rally, and I caught on video a couple of times.
I mean, it got it.
Got tense because people were waiting in a really long line to get into the rally, and the Polstadian protesters did strategically a great job of setting up camp right in the high traffic areas, and so as people are waiting, they're shouting shame and are you okay with genocide, which is really riling up.
The Kamala bros.
As you can imagine, who starts saying like you're pro Trump, And you know, it was this interesting split screen of sort of people in their like dockers and barber jackets yelling at the Palestinian activists who had pictures of babies that have been you know, injured, killed in the war, and they're being yelled at by in some cases these just like pasty white I can say that because I'm pastry white, but these like pasty white rich.
Kids who just made them to vote for Kamala Harris, so it got they did a really good job.
If you could actually hear them all the way back at the Washington Monuments, like strategically. I heard that you could even hear them inside the rally from the press pen, so they were maybe.
Loud throughout the entire the entire rally. You could hear them.
They had bullhorns and were genuinely I think they genuinely did what they sought to do. But it was another great split screen because when I stood in the same spot as I stood on January six, I was watching and I was trying to compare what I was seeing. The most well off crowd I've ever seen at a rally ever. And that doesn't mean there weren't people who flew in private jets on January six, of course there were, but it was a much more.
Sort of hard scrabble crowd. And it was all.
With last night. It's people who live in d C. Or suburban Maryland or suburban Virginia.
Yeah.
I just thought it was a similar dynamic actually though with the Palestinian activist and you've probably seen this before, it was like scrappy people who weren't, you know, making these big paychecks. And getting shouted down by people who felt entitled to have everyone vote for Kamala Harris.
I didn't see it. Yeah, where I was, I didn't see any friction between the protesters and the I mean I saw some people saying, like, we agree with you. I saw that too, and I think they understood, like, there's not They're not gonna win an argument at that point anyway. Yeah, and they don't, and they probably actually do agree that. What they disagree with is they're like, well, yeah, we're just gonna we're just gonna swallow this and vote for this person anyway totally.
And then they're showing up at a rally.
Yeah, exactly. And so, uh, Trump was in the Lehigh Valley last night. My dad and my brother went to that rally actually just to check it out, just to check it out. But Kamala has a new act kind of targeting Trump people just making the rounds here. Let's roll that.
Your current, honey, in the one place in America where women still have a right to choose, you can vote any way you want and no one will ever.
Know did you make your right choice?
Share it in, honey, Remember what happens in the booth stays in the booth. Vote Harris Well, vote coming Good is responsible for the contents.
Of this ad. What'd you think of that?
You know, I think it's almost insulting to women. I see what they're doing. I think it's insulting to It's also like a huge l on mail in balloting, because that's a huge problem with mail in balloting is you potentially have someone like watching over your shoulder and or filling out the ballots for you and saying, oh, this is a I know how you're voting, ballots filled out,
put it in the mail, don't worry about it. But on top of it, it's just like I think a woman can like tell her husband she's not voting for Trump. I know that that does get tense in people's marriages. I understand that, but like, you don't need Julia Roberts to tell you it's okay to go against your husband.
Yeah, I wonder who that ad.
Is for suburban women right who are.
Already voting for Harrison, making them feel even better about it. Like maybe a comparison would be the way that Obama has been saying, if you're Muslim, how can you vote for the guy who did the Muslim band like, I
don't think that's actually aimed at Muslim voters. It's aimed at other people who might feel like, because of their solidarity with the Arab or Muslim American community, that they might not be able to vote for Kamala Harris, even though they themselves are like, well, you know, I prefer Kama over Trump. And it's regrettable what's going on in Gaza, but it's not really my main issue. But then if they feel a sense of solidarity with their friends in
the Muslim rabbit community, then they might with them. And I think what Obama was doing with that one line saying if you're Muslim, how can you vote with a Muslim band guy? It gives the non Muslims then this permission structure to say, yeah, you're right, that is crazy. I'm going to be an ally by voting against the Muslim band guy. So maybe this makes some suburban women feel better. Maybe maybe works.
I don't know.
We'll see. Yeah, I don't know anything.
I mean at this point, any tiny little demo you can pick off when you have a statistical dead heat, essentially is if that works on a couple thousand women, it may.
Be the difference.
So even though that seems unlikely, I guess they're throwing everything at the wall, getting Julia Roberts out there now, speaking of which we don't have to just go by crowd size or advertisement messaging. Let's take a listen here to Harry Enton, who gave a pretty interesting breakdown of where the polls are right now on CNN yesterday.
That's all we hear about, Oh, Donald Trump's going to out perform his polls. So I went back and checked out whether or not a par already outran the polls three presidential election cycles in a row in the key battleground states.
It's never happened.
It's never happened zero times, zero times since nineteen hundred and seventy two. So if the polls are going to underestimate Donald Trump once again, that would be historically unprecedented. Now, maybe you want to make the argument that Donald Trump himself is historically unprecedented. But what normally happens is the posters catch on, hey, we're underestimating, We're not taking into
account some part of the electorate. They make adjustments, And I think that helps to explain why we have never seen that the same party has been underestimated three times in a row in presidential elections, at least over the last.
Fifty two years.
And what do we see in twenty twenty two in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Well, it turns out that the average poll in those states actually underestimated Democrats by four points. It underestimated Democrats by four points. And I want to apply that to the electoral map, because if it turns out that the polls underestimate Donald Trump are underestimated the Democrats excuse me, like they did in twenty twenty two, what happens, Well, Kamala how ruins as sweet because she wins all these
great battleground states. She wins down in the Southeast, and she wins down in the Southwest, and she gets the three hundred and nineteen electro votes.
Okay, so that's actually some pretty interesting historical context there, Ryan, And another thing I wanted to add is my colleague at the Federalist, former colleague John Daniel Davidson, wrote a piece really interesting in terms of polling. It's not a piece about polling, but it's called the social stigma of being a Trump supporter is Gone, which I think is probably true.
On a national level. Maybe it's not true.
In everyone's marriage, but that actually, if we're trying to figure out whether this polling is accurate, a lot of that inaccuracy in the polling was attributed to the quote shy Trump voter phenomenon. So when even you have the Federalists saying they feel like the social stigma would be a Trump supporter is gone, I do wonder if we look back a week from now and see that that affected the polling.
Yeah, the Federalists would know, right, So it's true, and I think it's true, like people are for better or worse if they like Trump. They're more willing to say it now than they certainly I think in yeah, say October of twenty sixteen.
Totally. Yeah, absolutely.
Well, let's get to our next block because we have Shelby Talcott in studio and we're going to run down some Trump updates.
Stay tuned for them.
We're excited to be joined in studio by one of our favorite return guests, Shelby Talcott of Semaphore Semaphore shallby correct me on air, it's Semophour four.
I guess semaphore a lot, but I didn't come up with the name to be clear.
Okay, well we'll blame Ben. I've heard it both ways. So, Shelby, you are doing a lot of reporting on the Trump campaign and the vibe check and the Trump campaign with less than a week ago before election day.
Let's put b one up on the screen.
This is a tear sheet from Politico, just reporting a little bit on how the fallout from the Tony Hinchcliff joke about Puerto Rico is now quote spreading like wildfire in Pennsylvania. Now that may seem interesting to people outside Pennsylvania, who say, how could a joke about Puerto Ricans be
difference in Pennsylvania? But my understanding, Shelby, based on your reporting, is that the Trump campaign recognizes, with tight margins which we likely expect a week from now, the Puerto Rican demographic in swing states is big enough to really perhaps make a difference.
What are you hearing from them? Yeah, listen.
And I was surprised by how many Puerto Ricans are in Pennsylvania. In fact, I think the number was like half a million. But the big thing is that Donald Trump's campaign recognizes that this is essentially a tied race, and so anything that could swing some of these voters either against voting for Donald Trump or even getting off of the couch and deciding to vote for Kamala Harris
is notable. And what Kamala Harris's campaign has tried really hard to do, and Democrats have tried really hard to do with some success, is to tie that comedian's joke directly to Donald Trump, because of course it was at his rally, and that was not the only sort of controversial hot comment of the evening. You had the anti christ comment, you had some sort of other speakers who made these certain remarks that a lot of people were offended by. And so the campaign has really tried to
distance itself from this comedian's comment. And I talked to Donald Trump's political director James Blair yesterday and I asked him about this, and he argued that it's they're not concerned that it's going to affect the vote, because at the end of the day, Donald Trump himself did not say it, and they have disavowed the comment. But it's
clearly a concern. And you can tell that because the campaign typically doesn't even go so far as to disavow themselves from certain things, so when they do, it's notable.
And so I as I know, as I grew up partly in Allentown, was born there, and my dad and brother went to the Trump rally in Allentown last night, and I can tell you, yeah, Allentown and the entirely High VALI are is like half Puerto Rican or more, even from back when I was there. These are people who have been there for a very long time. I think the way that the comedian made the joke, he
connected it also to people Latino being here illegally. And I won't even get into like the crew joke that he told ahead of it, which has been going like wildfire to that one.
It's but also so the Puerto Ricans who heard that are like, how dare you?
We're Americans, what are you talking about?
And also they've been living here since the seventies in the Lehigh Valley.
And I think the big thing is these jokes maybe are fine for like a bar scenario or a comedy club tony, but we're a week and a half out from the presidential election and this is a political campaign. And when I talked to people on Donald Trump's team, They've conceded that, yeah, okay, this was a mistake. We probably shouldn't have had not only a comedian, but an edgy comedian at our political rally, because inevitably it's going to get tied to Donald Trump.
Of course.
Yeah, well, and they got a gift that they've been going absolutely wild with just in the last like twelve hours. We're recording this in the morning, and it happened around nine o'clock in the evening. Actually, as Kamala Harris was speaking, Joe Biden was on CNN and had this to say, Listen.
This is what Kama gets for not inviting him to the rally.
Exactly.
Let's roll be two or Puerto Rico, where I'm in my home state of Delaware. They're good, decent, honorable people. The only garbage I see float down there is his supporters is his demonizational scene is unconstable.
So this is a wild, right, wild frenzy because the Biden campaign is now doing cleanup and saying that Joe Biden said supporters with an apostrophe on the end of it, meaning the garbage was Trump supporter's possessive.
Garbinization, referring to the comedian like the singular.
Right, that it's possessive that it's like this is there, it belongs to them, not that they themselves are garbage, which is what the Trump campaign understandably because when you're listening to it, he said exactly, that is what he said, although media outlets have run with the Biden version of it and have actually like tried to explain why in wass don't these are gymnastics. I don't think would be
happening if the parties were reversed there. But Shelby, just take us through a little bit and everyone here can watch it. If you're watching this, we're gonna put B two A. Let's put this up on the screen. This is jd Vance's response. This started happening immediately. He started criticizing the media for media for cleaning up this is a Jonathan Lamuir story and in Politico and jd Vance criticized them almost immediately on X last night for writing in a way that he felt was doing cleanup for
the Biden campaign. And then he posted this one another morning. Her son who died of a fentyl overdose is not garbage. A truck driver who can't afford rising diesel prices is not garbage. A father who wants to afford groceries is not garbage. And we have one Trump tweet to put up. I guess a Trump truth. Maybe it was a tweet. Okay, he posted this on x as well.
Well, that's how you know he's feeling really good.
He's going to well, I'm running a campaign.
I'm running a campaign of positive solutions to save America. Kamala Harris is running a campaign of hate, etcetera, etcetera. Not on top of everything, Joe Biden calls our supporters garbage. Don't you can't lead America if you don't love the American people, Shelby, that tone is one.
I watched the entire rally. You were actually there.
I watched the whole thing from start to finish, and I wasn't on Twitter while I was watching it, so I wasn't sort of seeing the real time feedback. That was the messaging that Trump just put in that tweet. Somewhat amusingly, they were going for at the rally unity love, the party of peace, the candidate of peace. So they feel like they've gotten a real, like last minute gift here that actually could be they believe more effective than the deplorable moment was for Republicans.
Is that what you're hearing.
Yeah, last night, actually when I was texting people on Donald Trump's campaign, they kept comparing it to that Hillary Clinton deplorable's moment, And listen, this is a really big gift for the Donald Trump campaign. Simply whether it ends up influencing votes or not, who knows.
We're so close to the actual election day.
But what it does is.
It shifts the storyline from a pretty positive news cycle from Kamala Harris in the with the comedian situation, and so now everybody is focused on Joe Biden calling his calling Donald Trump supporters garbage. And again you can debate on what he meant. I think it's a little bit of spin from the White House. You can hear it when when you listen. But yeah, this is a really big gift, and they're not going to let this go.
I think you can expect to see it in last minute adds, in last minute you know, posts on social media. We're seeing it all over. They're not gonna they're not going to die down on this.
My own theory on it is that he was I think he was trying to say the only thing that's garbage is his supporters demonization of the American people. Because he then goes into the demonization. It seems like he's reading, but it's not. It's a lot of what it's politics. It doesn't matter what he meant to say.
And well, this is also who's the genius.
Who's the genius that's writing like a complicated script for this guy?
He can't.
This is the problem with having Joe Biden on the campaign trail. That's exactly why Kamala Harris has kept her distance from having Joe Biden on the campaign trail because they don't believe he helps her.
And we've seen that time and time again.
Yeah, this seems like something that the Trim campaign rightfully understands will help turn out, Like this is what gets your base to not stay home? Is Joe Biden calling your supporters of garbage literally at the moment that Kamala Harris is saying, nobody is the enemy within Yeah, et cetera. Let's roll this clip of John Stewart responding to the Tony Hinchcliff joke. This is B three and John Stewart had a surprising take actually on what happened.
Now obviously in retrospect, having a roast comedian come to a political rally a week before election day and roasting a key voting demographic. Probably not the best decision by the campaign politically, but to be fair, the guys really just doing what he does. I mean, here he is at the Tom Brady roast a few months ago.
The great Jeff Ross.
Ladies and gentlemen, Jeff is so Jewish he only watches football for.
The coin toss. Gronk, you look like.
The Nazi that kept burning himself on the ovens. Kevin is so small that when his ancestors picked cotton they called it deadlifting.
Yes, yes, of course, terrible boo. Yes, there's something wrong with me. I find that guy very funny. So I'm sorry, I don't know what to tell you. I mean, bringing him to a rally and have him not do roast jokes. I had to be like bringing Beyonce to a rally and.
Oh, okay, that was pretty good.
Shelby to a point.
We were having actually before we went to air, as we were chatting getting the mics on.
Those are funny jokes.
The Trump campaign seems to now be realizing they were funny jokes for a comedy set, and maybe as Trump is throwing together this genuinely I think interesting coalition of people at Madison Square Garden doctor Phil. He had everyone from doctor Phil to like hedge fund guys and Ilon Pogan was there.
It was a little bit of the RNC again.
But it's interesting because the Trump campaign is kind of operating on the fly. It's just a totally different world. So do you sense that this was you said this earlier, but maybe they realized that it kind of These things can be funny, but that doesn't mean that they're political campaign funny.
I think they've realized that there's a time and a place, and you know, nine however, nine ten days out from a presidential election where the polls are essentially tied and the both sides are going at each other pretty aggressively, already not the place to bring in a super edgy comedian who makes racially insensitive jokes.
Although if it ends up that Biden garbage comment, then it's like the hand of God.
Yeah, but cancels each other out or maybe the Biden thing becoming a bigger deal, because I do think again, you look back at twenty sixteen, the Hillary Clinton deplorable's comment that ended up being a huge deal at least.
The difference with Hillary is like she meant it, and she said exactly what she meant, whereas you know, what Biden said is in contrast and in conflict with what their whole messaging is.
But Biden's criticized Trump supporters in the well, so you dous sort of line up with like past things he says, whether he meant.
Do you remember some of the worst stuff he said, some blunt stuff he gave that.
Big speech in Philadelphia.
Remember it was the dark branded speech with the red lights behind him outside Independence Hall. Yeah, I mean, I think this actually speaks to something that Harris Biden camp is struggling with.
And I saw it at the Rattle last night.
It was like they can't side whether they think that Trump supporters are fascists or that they're just you.
Know, deserve a seat at the table and they're part of our family exactly.
Yeah, it is a.
Fine line, and I don't know how you can do it successfully and clearly this and the problem shows that they're they've struggled to do.
They're probably also legitimately ambivalent on the question, but they're not quite sure. Actually, yeah, they would stick a knife in them.
So Donald Trump then in Allentown in front of Ryan's family, started talking about how Democrats have quote already started cheating.
Let's rule this last clip here.
If you have a mail in ballot, get that damn ballot in pleaze immediately because.
Because they've already started cheating.
In Lancaster, they've cheated. We caught it with two thousand and six hundred. So Shelby, you've you've seen him so many times now is he just doing Trump impressions?
Now?
It feels like he's just doing his own.
Impression the mail in ballot.
Ionators, and he's like, that's even better, like it?
Yeah, Well, the thing when you when you go to a lot of these Trump rallies, a lot of them are similar. This is, you know, not a new speech. This specific allegation of courses is newer. But in general he talks a lot about the twenty twenty election. He talks a lot about uh, you know, he has a lot of claims.
Must be so happy to have new cheating and new election ringing to talk about.
Well, it's interesting too, because when I talked to James Blair, Trump's political director, I asked him one of the questions I asked him towards the end of the interview was what if in eight days from now, Kamala Haris wins, Like, what would the big thing be and what's your biggest concern? And on the biggest concern part, he started pointing to Pennsylvania and talking about exactly what Donald Trump was talking about last night, and so that was really interesting.
And then I sort of asked a follow up.
I said, you know, are you saying that if Kamala Harris wins, it's going to be because of voter interference? And he said, I'm not saying that. That's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying that in the days leading up to the election, we want a free and fair election. We want the rules to be followed and then let the chips fall where they may.
See.
This is so interesting because let's bring it full circle. It's like the Tony Hinchcliff set in that you don't it's the double edged short of Donald Trump. You do not get the benefits politically of trump Ism without this part of trump Ism. Meaning they can script a great Madison Square Garden rally and speech for Donald Trump, but because it's Donald Trump, they're still going to have the free wheeling and they're going to have the comedians and
the entertainers and the whole cogans like. They can script it as well as they want, but if it's if it's fundamentally Trump, if it's fundamentally Trumpy, it's still also going to have this. You can script something for Donald Trump, He's still going to talk about what he wants to talk about, and that's going to take you where it does.
His campaign has learned for a long time now to that they could do whatever they want and they can sort of guide Donald Trump. But at the end of the day, Donald Trump runs the campaign and part of their job is reacting to what Donald Trump may or may not say. And when I've been out on the campaign trail over the past year and a half, that's a big reason that some of these undecided voters are not so sure about Donald Trump because they don't love
when he goes off script. And so that's been something that the campaign has tried to sort of figure out, how do we get around that, how do we realize Donald Trump is going to be Donald Trump. Some people are going to love it, some people are going to be put off by it. How do we get some of those voters who are put off by it to still vote for him because they're, for example, more worried about the economy and jobs.
So what's the mood among kind of the Trump brass now October thirtieth, twenty twenty four. How are they feeling, How do they feel about the early vote, How do they feel about the polls and heading into election day?
The phrase I've heard used most often is cautiously optimistic. But it's really interesting because at the same time, I would say there's an equal amount of skepticism. Because for Donald Trump's campaign aids who have been here before, who have worked with him in twenty twenty and twenty sixteen, they've never been in this position where the polls are looking this good, and so they're almost like freaking out a little bit because they're like, what are we missing?
They're going over the data, they're going over their internals, they're exactly they're they're just like, they're suspicious.
Essentially, you seem this good.
Yeah, Well, so this confidence is matched with an equal amount of skepticism, and I thought, I think that's really notable.
But also they're.
Feeling good about the early vote.
Of course, there's a lot of you know, nuances with the early vote, and we're not really going to know where things fall until after the election. But they're they're really happy with the early vote, particularly because, of course, for years Donald Trump told his voters don't early vote, and so they're feeling really good that they have the numbers that they have in some of these states. They're
feeling good about the tide race. I think their internals are showing that Donald Trump is a little bit more ahead than the external numbers. But yeah, cautiously optimistic is the phrase I hear most often.
Can you stick around for a minute to talk Michigan Wisconsin? Sure? All right, then let's put c one up on the screen here. So our RFK RFK Junior tried tried to this kind of hail Mary attempt to the Supreme Court to try to get off the ballots in Michigan and Wisconsin. And because of the timing of him dropping out and endorsing President foreign President Trump, that meant that in some states he can't get his name off the ballot.
Uh.
You have to be pretty clueless at this point to not know that RFK has dropped out. So how much do you think that this could affect Michigan and Wisconsin, because I can see it a couple of different ways, And I'm curious what the campaign thinks if you've if you've heard from them on this. On the one hand, I think rf K Junior will get a decent number of votes, like in the thousands, maybe even the tens
of thousands in these states. But then the question is what would those people have done if his name was not on the ballot. They might have just written in Weed, or they might Bryan Graham, they might have voted for another third party or just left it blank. So people kind of automatically think, oh, well, he endorsed Trump, and they have voted for RFK Junior on their ballots. That means if he wasn't there, they would have automatically voted for Trump, And I think that's a leap that you
can't make. But I'm curious how obviously they care because they went to the Supreme Court. So how big of a handicap is this for Trump Michigan and Wisconsin.
I mean, I think it's an open question. Right, As you said, they clearly care because they tried to get his name removed but I remember months ago when Kennedy first got into the race, there was real debate over who he would hurt more. Donald Trump's campaign at one point had internal data that they would that he would hurt them more. And so I think that's important. And now as people heard from Kennedy Moore, I think, you know,
some of these he garnered more Republicans and Democrats. But I think there are a small number of people who might vote for Donald Trump or might stay home who we're backing Kennedy, And so any vote, I think any number in this presidential election when it's so close, if the public pulling is to be believed, can influence it.
And so I do think that Donald Trump's campaign is somewhat concerned about it doesn't help them, and I do expect that we'll probably see Kennedy out urging those voters in those states to vote for Donald Trump in the next few days.
Yeah. And you know, in politics, I think the biggest bias that you have, especially in media, is just working in media, and you are so disconnected from the mind of the average voter, who has a million different things
going on, may genuinely start tuning into the election. I mean We've been covering this every single day for over a year, but may genuinely start tuning into the election the day before they vote and looking like google Donald Trump versus Kamala Harris, immigration numbers, healthcare, all of those things, inflation, and are like looking at the charts and whatever. But there are also people who go in there aren't happy
with the candidates are voting for. Maybe they're going to vote for Tammy Baldwin Wisconsin, and they see Robert F. Kennedy Junior's names on the ballot, and they like Robert F. Kennedy Junior, and they don't like Donald Trump Kamala Harris.
Robert F.
Kennedy Junior was campaigning pretty hard against Donald Trump just about a year and a half ago. That stuff does happen. People really aren't happy with these two candidates. That's what he was originally campaigning on, in fact, So that stuff can make a big difference. When we looked to twenty sixteen when the margin in Michigan, do you remember exactly how many votes it was? It was such a tin thousand issues, so so small, So obviously it can make
a significant difference. Now, Shelby, another thing I'm curious about. Let's first roll this next thot. This is Robert F. Kennedy Junior talking about what he's been promised in a Trump administration.
The key that I think, you know, the President Trump has promised me is is control of the public health agencies, which are HHS and as sub agencies, CDC, FDA and IH and a few others, and then also the USDA, which is which you know, is key to making America healthy because we've got to get off of seed oils.
Shelby.
This is something I actually asked Senator Eric Schmid, who's a very good friend of Jade Vance on Undercurrents recently, what it's been like to marry the RFK Junior camp to the MAGA camp, bringing MAHA and MAGA together make America healthy.
So how are these two very disparate groups?
I mean, when I went to the Rescue of the Republic rally to report on it a few weeks ago, I literally saw barefoot hippies and MAGA evangelicals together like backslapping and having fun. But internally on the campaign side, how's everybody getting along in both of these like pretty different universes coming together.
I know that there are people on Donald Trump's campaign, who are huge fans of Kennedy, And to the point where I've heard, you know, he just talked about positions that Donald Trump has promised him. Whether or not he would get confirmed is an open question. You have American Collins on a help committee. They're not going to vote
to get Kennedy into any conformable position. But I've heard that Trump's campaign believes that it is worth the fight, and so if he were to win, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a fight and a debate over Kennedy being in a conformable position. But what's also notable is the Maha thing. As you noted, Donald Trump really never mentioned that before Kennedy got on board. But they've really embraced Kennedy's sort of obsession with public health and
with the obesity crisis and with childhood chronic illnesses. And that's what the campaign has added in the last few months upon bringing Kennedy on board, and they're really letting Kennedy sort of run that aspect of their campaign.
From my understanding, that's really interesting.
Actually, Yeah, from my perspective of heightening attention on all of those chronic problems is a wonderful thing. His solutions sometimes like kind of coming out. I'm not so sure about that.
Well, well, I think it's interesting about it.
It's like attention on it.
Just the idea of the like we all know Republican campaign operatives and we know Republican campaign consultants like really blue Blazer crowd. That changed a little bit when Trump got into the picture, but not entirely. And so to even have them to the point you just made like genuinely outsourcing some outreach to Robert F. Kennedy Junior and his motley band of hyder docks interesting eccentrics. That's actually a pretty crazy dynamic, I would imagine.
Yeah, And I think it just goes to show a how close this presidential race is. But be how the thinking inside Trump world has really changed. You have Tulca Gabbart also that they brought in, so you do have some of these folks that you know, in twenty sixteen it would have been it's still eyebrow raising, but in
twenty sixteen it would have probably been unheard of. I can't imagine that have happening and have being happened in twenty sixteen, and now you're seeing it with Tulca Gabbard, you're seeing with RFK Junior, You're seeing all of the sort of folks that never would have been involved in a Trump campaign are now involved in a Trump campaign, and they're not only involved, but there really are being embraced by Donald Trump's folks and his longtime aids.
While we've got you and we've mentioned Michigan, I'm curious how the campaign is interacting with the kind of Arab American and Muslim American vote that you had a rally recently, you know, where they had a decent number of Muslim speakers. Many American group has endorsed at Trump administration. This pack pack which is hilariously named Pakistani American Political Action Committee,
they endorsed Trump. Uh, I'm curious, like from internally, how do they how do they think about this kind of unexpected support that they're getting from that community and do they actually talk about what they would do when it comes to the approximate cause of this support, which is the genocide and Gaza. Do they talk ever? Do you ever hear like, oh, if we win, we actually have to do something about this question? And like what would they do or is it more like, we'll think about that later.
I think it's more And to be clear, this is not like my key focus, so I don't always ask about this. But when I do talk to the Trump campaign about the issues they are most focused on. This is not necessarily in the top three or four, because they look at what the majority of voters are worried about, and so what you hear them talking about publicly a lot is oftentimes what they're talking about privately, which is the economy, which is the borderslation exactly. But they're seeing
this as a gift. Again, They'll take whatever voters they can get. And so if all of these people are really frustrated at Kamala Harris for her non action or non comments and are willing to give Donald Trump a chance, they're totally fine with that.
Now whether or not.
If Donald Trump wins, that ends up with some sort of serious new legislation that they will like, I'm not totally.
Convinced, but it or does it even blunt? Like So meanwhile, like over a drops yesterday, we just reported on this thing Project Esther that the Heritage Foundation is putting out, which is basically saying we're going to try to round up and deport anybody who's like on a student visa or on any kind of visa and is protesting on behalf of Palestinian rights, and otherwise do a kind of massive, kind of legal and political campaign to dismantle any criticism of Israel.
So if they can connect it to like what's called by like we know how these designations work, Like, yeah, these dubious sort of sometimes dubious, sometimes serious connections to terrorism.
Right, so there'll be this pressure from that wing of the kind of right. But does the fact that he's up on stage with a bunch of Muslims change that at all or no?
My understanding is that this outrage campaign is being led by Tiffany Trump's father in law. Right, So these are literal family ties.
Yeah, yeah, they're families.
He's Lebanese, is that right? Yeah?
Whether it makes a difference, I don't know, Right, I don't know if any To be clear, I don't know if anything at this point race is going to make a significant difference. I think the vast majority of voters have already made up their minds. And for what it's worth, when Donald Trump's campaign is talking about some of those
persuadable voters this late in the race. You know again, James Blurry yesterday told me that what they're mostly focused on is a group of younger under fifty, mostly white, but still like a quarter of them are minorities, men, and so that's the group that they're viewing as the most persuadable for their campaign. So it's not necessarily Muslims,
it's not necessarily women. It is men under fifty, mostly white, but a solid number of them are black and Hispanic as well, and so that's where they see those persuadable voters a week out of the presidential race.
Well, Shelby, if you couldn't tell, we find your reporting very valuable that we kept going.
I'll ben that so I keep my job, shall we, Talga, thank you so much for stopping by and giving us some of your time on this very very busy week.
Anytime, all right, we'll be back with more soon.
Mega pundit Ryan or Dusky has gotten himself booted from c n N. Let's take a look at why and then we'll talk about where this came from. If you don't want to be cooled Nazis, stop doing.
More than table and people know by me, I never called you.
I mean, I'm not saying her saying.
I'm of the Pubestinians. I'm used to it.
Well, I hope your beaper doesn't go off. The thing is is that.
You should not know. You just said I should be kill No.
I did not say, let me talk about TV said.
Let me let me just.
Guys?
Are you.
Ryan?
That is completely apologies.
The first blow.
The Muslim guys should be blown up.
I apologize on TV.
Don't say, don't say then I apologize you literally, I thought.
You didn't think said.
Because what's funny is rudy he said, said you're a great guest to be here.
Nine ones today, and so.
This is where we're in there, this is America.
Forget the racism.
That's which I should die saying that.
He said, what does bea mean? Don't give me? Why did you say?
What did you mean by the beepa?
What did you mean?
You didn't?
You said, PA doesn't know at least have the guns to support your racist from.
This is why, this is why yesterday's rally was discussed.
Don't call us Nazis, but I'm gonna threaten the brown guys terrorist and kill.
Him because I didn't ever say Donald Trump was hitler, But do you know who sat on a stage, stood on a stage yesterday and said, I want to come to the Nazi rally. I don't have to make up words and call you something. You're saying it for youself and what you just said apologize, but I will tell you I don't accept that apology. And you didn't even say it's fine. That was disgusting. But I can be
offended when you don't even stay it to me. I'm not Puerto Rican, but I was offended by what he said yesterday, and I'm offended that the former president and potentially future president would allow it and go for twelve hours and not say I don't care because you know what, when Kala Harris put out statements about switching up opinions, it wasn't good enough.
For republic because you said it. So that don't get me to watch CNN. I'll be honest, tryan that was.
I'm a cluster.
Yeah, that was the.
Reality television version of political news that we've gone so far astray from but can be entertaining at the very least.
So then he they came back after the break without him there anymore. Let's go back to Abby Philip.
We're back here, and before we get started, I want to just address what happened in the last segment. First, I want to apologize to Medi Hassan for what was said at this table. It was completely unaccepteople when we get this discussion started, you'll see that Ryan is not at the table. There is a line that was crossed there and it's not acceptable to me. It's not acceptable to us at this network. We want discussion, We want people who disagree with each other to talk to each other.
But when you cross the line of a complete lack of civility, that is not going to happen here on this show. It's a heated time. We're in the middle of a political season. We are eight days from a presidential election. But we can have conversations about what is happening in this country without resorting to the lowest of the lowest kind of discourse. I want to address that, and I want to apologize to the viewers at home, because we want to be able to hear each other.
We want to be able to talk to each other, and we plan to do that in this next segment.
And you know what, maybe this is a side note but one point here, this is not a new dig. So several weeks ago and The National Review ran a political cartoon that had Rashida Talib with a pager kind of blown up on her deskh.
We talked about it at the time.
And we talked about at the time, and the way that CNN handled that was actually, instead of condemning that cartoon, they picked up on what Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessl said about the political cartoon, which was that she said, just like Rashida Talib should not be attacked over her religion, she should not accuse me of charging pro Palestinian protesters
simply because I'm Jewish. She just completely fabricated and manufactured something like that Rashida Tleeb had never said, and used that political cartoon as a way to kind of wedge her own grievance against Rashida Talib. And then CNN for days just covered Dana Nessil's charge and.
Then kind of didn't Dana bash come out and then kind of make a semi care action that wasn't a full yeah, because.
They had to eventually really say, actually, Rashida Tlive never said that, right, But and they kept saying, well, we reached out to Rashida to leave for clarifications, a clarification what shouldn't say that anyway? So it's interesting then see it on CNN's own air.
I mean, I think it is interesting because like we moderated a debate with Ryan for Zero had a couple of months ago.
It was on immigration, and that guy was unhinged.
It turned out similarly to that, he's had some moments on CNN recently and they kept bringing him back because he is super super maga, ultra maga as they say in the streets, and he is like totally tries to constantly be flipping the script and going full on offense no matter what, which CNN obviously thinks makes for engaging television. So even though he's ultra maga, to keep bringing him back and bringing him back, And in this case, I don't think there's any way he thought Meddi said that
he was pro Hamas. The idea that Meddi would go on TV.
That they did the page your attack on it's point.
The idea that Maddie would come on TV and just be like, listen, I'm pro Hamas on a CNN panel, nobody actually thought that. But what's interesting is Ryan apologized on air, probably because he wants to.
He wanted to keep going back on CNN, so.
He apologized on air, said that he thought he was pro Hamas, when actually what he means is that when he says he's pro Palestinian, Ryan believes that means you're pro Hamas, which is what the National Review cartoonist believes. That's like, you can make that argument. I don't agree with categorically making that argument, but a lot of people on the right actually do, and that's where that comes from.
The apology. The apology was pretty pitiful, but also I thought kind of instructive because you did watch him kind of start to grovel like on set, as if like he knew he was in trouble. He realized, oh, the thing I just said is not actually defensible and I can't and he's like this this is actually going to have conquences for me. Yeah, oh yeah, But the graveling apology was not gonna be the way to do it.
It reminds me of like, you know, you're about to get called to the principal's office and they're going to call your parents and you're.
Like, no, no, that's not I didn't mean it like that. That was me. It was me sarcastic.
Really, it really did feel like that. So yeah, I don't know if we'll be seeing him on CNN's hair.
No, I think he was totally banned that that said, for me, the reason that is, I mean is the joke is dumb, and then the the outrage is so insufferable too, And it's just like everyone not from me, I mean, I understand it was made directly to Meddi, but from Abbey Phillip, who then also posted a very self serious Instagram video about it. It's like, just get over it, like, let's let's move on.
It was a joke, right for seeing it. For Maddy fine, like it was directed to you, is that you get to take offense. But yes, CNN you invited this guy on what they were doing because he does this kind of thing. Yes, you're upset that he went a little bit over the line because.
It made you look bad, not because you went on.
The one drawing is weird lines where like this other insane stuff that he's saying is okay, but this insane thing is not is not okay.
You either want the clash of ideas or you don't.
And you either want people to like, actually, like that's the thing. You want people to actually be revealing what they really think. And there Ryan revealed what he really thought, and I get CNN needing to say, we have to assert some boundaries.
Whatever. They can do that if they want a business.
On the other hand, it's just the I just find the moral sanctimony from them afterwards to be a little insufferable.
I don't know if you saw this thread, but a former Rising producer had an interesting thread. Did you see this one? I did see this one for people who missed it. He was making the point that it's difficult to book non crazy right wing people.
Yeah, I don't know which.
Is which is not entirely untrue because like so many people who are on the right and are like hardcore supporters of Trump also either in the past or currently have like Richard Spencer associations, which doesn't which I think Ryan Gardusky does. I didn't look into that or and or have said other things where you're like, oh, that's like beyond the pale. It's hard to find like since we have moved the pale so far, it's hard to find people who are representative of that pale, but not
beyond what we consider to be beyond it. So't you didn't like that bread or what?
But yeah, I thought the tho it was kind of bullshit, honestly, because I mean, there are plenty of times where it would have been hard to book someone who didn't think Donald Trump was a full blown Russian asset who was, but.
They don't, they don't care about that. Well, that's what I'm said within the pale.
But that's what I'm saying, like or who thought that? You know?
I mean, I could go into all kinds of different issues I'm thinking particularly of like.
I'm accepting, I'm basically accepting see, and it's premise.
Right, which the threat is not the threat is saying that it's there's a specific and unique problem on the right, which I don't disagree. I mean, I don't disagree that there are problems on obviously of booking people who are willing to defend both.
Political parties, because I think we.
Agree that both political parties have some incredibly deep and serious problems. But to act as though it's unique to the right, I disagree with that. I think it's I think it's problem like across the board, I just don't accept. I mean, I think Trump is his own thing. But if anything, I think a lot of the sort of professional pundits on the right are like not even representative
of the right. So it does mean that there's room for more crazy people than to come in and go through the gates and be like, well, I'm representative of a real voter because I'm pro Trump, when you know that's a lot of Republican voters are not super hardcore mega They just kind of tolerate Trump, whereas a lot of the punditry absolutely detests Trump and is you know, pro Pentagon with every breath they have, and is pro J. P.
Morgan with every breath they have. So it just to me, it just doesn't reflect what I see.
But what I guess the way to put it would be that over the last like fifteen twenty years, as you've had the kind of the Great Awokening and the rise of identity politics and a focus on equity as kind of a shared narrative that CNNMSNBC, The Times, the kind of establishment pricess said, look, we're turning the page on the Jim Crow era. We're moving into an era of equity and people who are not willing to be
on board for that. Those are outside the boundaries. You can say whatever you want about Russia or whatever else that's within that's within healthy civil debate, but outside of civil debate as any you know, it became eventually if you were opposed to marriage equality, like a lot that would almost be kind of now it looks like they're kind of pushing, like letting those people back in a little,
but they were drawing that boundary. And within the Trump world a lot more, you know, lots of his kind of high level, high profile supporters would be outside the bounds of that reasonable what they just what they just what they considered to be civil discourse.
Well, and if you're not going to let Tom Cotton publish an essay in the pages of the New York Times, then you're either going to be left with insane people or people who don't represent actual Republican voters.
So Tom Cotton example is a good one. Yeah.
Yeah, So I just like don't have a lot of sympathy for that worldview because it just to me is there's so many problems with it.
But I mean that you're Druski is out there and CNN was just asking for it.
The magic component of the like if you're a genuine, true believer in Donald Trump, I think that does legitimately present certain problems if you like accept some of the twenty twenty election stuff in a way that's not you know, like how jd Vance talks about the tech interference and
the Zuckerberg interference in an election. If you take that like almost defensive of Trump platform being Sidney Powell and Himmember else Rudy at the time, I think that does present legitimate problems in the same way I think there are legitimate problems for people who fully defend Russia.
Gate and all that stuff.
So anyway, those are my thoughts.
All right, Well up next Amir to Bone, author of the new book, The Gates of Gaza. Stick around for that. Joining us now from Israel is journal how Retz journalist Amir Tabone, author of the new book, and we can put up e two here, The Gates of Gaza, which is part memoir, part history of Israel, part history of Israel Palestine. Terrific book. Amir, thank you so much for joining us, really appreciate it.
Thank you for having me.
Yeah, and just to set the context for people. I don't know if if you even remember this, it was so long ago. If we can put up E four here, This is an old magazine that I co founded called huff Post Highline U. Amir wrote this, this really great profile of the relationship between Benjamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama and how it really collapsed in acrimony over the course of his of his presidency. And if you squint there you can see contributed reporting by Ryan grimm Uh.
Indeed, yeah, so Amir and I worked on that, on that story together, and a few few collaborations afterwards. I always followed your your work from Israel.
Amir is one of the best sourced reporters kind of in the political space over there. And I still remember waking up on Saturday, October seventh, and because we are but I guess six hours or so, you know, I had so much had unfolded while while we slept in
the United States. One of the first things that I saw on social media was that you and your family, you know, had been trapped in this safe house, in not safehouse, safe room in nahl Oz, which is the kibbutz which is closest to the border of Gaza and I can only imagine how many times you've you've told this story by this point a year later, and the book is heavily you know, weaves this story through. But for viewers who are unfamiliar with it, can you just
tell them what is what is nahal Os? And you know what briefly, what was like? What was October seventh like? And people should really read the book and get the full story, but I wanted people to have the context for this conversation.
Well, thanks for the opportunity to discuss it. And as much as it's not easy to talk about it again and again, I also feel it's an obligation I have. So Nahalos is a small Israeli community. You can think of it as a village or a very small town, located within the internationally recognized borders of Israel, right across the border from the Gaza Strict. It's home to about four hundred and fifty people, including my family, me, my wife, and our two young daughters. We have a four year
old and a two year old. And this community was attacked by Hamas on October seven, as part of that widespread Haramas invasion into Israel. On that Saturday morning, within our community. Out of four hundred and fifty people, fifteen were murdered on that day. That would be three and a half percent of the total population. So try to think of a small town, a village, or a neighborhood in the US losing three and a half percent of the population in one day. That's basically what happened in Ahalos.
Seven people were kidnapped from the Kibuts and out of them, five were released alive in late November, after more than fifty days held by Flamas thanks to the hostage deal orchestrated at the time by President Biden. There are still two hostages from our community, fathers of young children friends of mine, mariem Iran and Sachidan, who are in the
hands of Hamas. And my family survived that day, and I tell in the book the story of how and what happened, and how we were forced to remain in this little room in complete darkness, no electricity, no food, with the two girls at the time three and a half and two years old, for the entire day, basically and to keep them quiet so that the terrorists who were firing in our living room will not hear us.
Quite a story, and like you said, Ryan, what I tried to do in the book is to tell that story, but also the history that preceded it, and in my analysis, led to the history of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians and the relationships across the two sides of the Israel Gaza border.
Yeah, and I have the book open in front of me right now. It's really gripping.
There are a lot of people who purport to speak for the victims on October seventh, people who.
Lived through the horrors that you live through.
How different and even just the people who've been rescued as hostages for example, as you mentioned, you're in touch with people. In fact, you are one of the survivors of October seventh. How different do you feel the conversation has been among people who survived that day versus sort of the broader media discourse.
And that's such a smart question. And I think that anybody who has lived through an event will often feel that the media coverage of the event is a bit weird. And I've been hearing that for years as a journalist
writing about many different things. I've also covered wars in Ukraine and Syria and the Court region and This is not necessarily a criticism, but a comment that I've heard from people over the years that when you are actually part of a story, the weight portraying the media, even if it's the greatest reporting and the most professional and
accurate description, it sometimes feels just a little off. And I think that when I talk to my neighbors, my friends who survived this attack, or when I talk to friends who lost their loved ones on that day, who had people from their family kidnapped into Gaza, there's just some kind of an understanding between the people who went through this that it's very, very hard to summarize in articles or television segments. And I felt like the book was my attempt to also bring that story in more words.
It's not a very long book, but still, you know, it offers more space than a regular newspaper article to describe the events, the emotions, and also the aftermath and the scars that had lived on all the people who were the things.
And so another thing that struck me about October seventh and the Victims was the way that so you can explain more of the kind of political details around the political kind of texture around this, but a lot of the people in your community and the and a lot of the other kidbut seem in the surrounding area are kind of left wing, liberal leaning people who are supportive of Palestinian rights, of Palestinian dignity, opposed to in general the occupation and would like to see a two state solution,
both sides living side by side. Some of them are were active in, you know, in activism within Gaza, like taking patient you know, because if you're in Gaza and you have a life threatening illness or health compliction, you need the permission you know, of Israel authorities to travel outside of it. And so some would like would go in and help bring people out. Some of those people ended up being either taken hostage or victims of this.
And so it's not as if somebody who has right wing like terrible politics deserves to you know, be killed as a civilian or taken hostage. But there's something extra kind of poignant about people who are you know, kind of sympathetic to the pal steating cause being and who are deeply hostile to net Yahoo government being the victims of of net Nyah whose failure down in the South.
And then I was as I was thinking that through and I'm curious for your answer to this, why do those types of people live there in the first place, like so close to this kind of constant reminder of the horrifying reality of the occupation and this and this siege, Like how did that happen?
Yeah? I know this is one of the complexities of Israeli politics and society and how it is wildly different in many ways than the politics and the culture of the United States. And just to give perhaps a name and a face to this discussion before I get into the politics of it, you can think as an example of vv and Silver, very famous peace activist from baire He Botes, fifteen minutes from natal Oz, you know, not
from my home. And she was one of the founders of an organization called Women Wage Peace, which was fighting against the occupation in favor better relations between Israel and the Palestinians and of attempting to help bring about peace
in the region. And she was murdered on October seven, Bifamas, women who devoted her life really to promoting peace between Israels and Palestinians, and eventually was murdered by these terrises in her house in Kiboard's Dailey Now, if you know, we take her as an example, you can ask Ran, well, why would a person who has devoted their life really to the purpose of peace decide to live in this border community that, to many Israelis is a signal of
the need for security and protecting the border from the enemies on the other side. But you know, a way that is unique to this conflict and to the geography of this land, The two things to an Israeli would actually really make sense because communities like national o's, like the re like a keybots Nils, which was also attacked on that day and had the highest number of casualties
people were murdered or kidnapped. These were communities that were built on the Israeli side of the border, not within the Gather Strip, not on disputed land that Israel took
after the Sixth Day War. And these are not communities that were built out of some desire to, you know, basically strip the Palestinians off their rights, but actually out of the belief that Israel needs to have a border and that on the other side of that border you can have an independent Palestinian state that we can have peaceful relations with, just like the US has a border with Canada, and France today has a border with Germany,
although that's a very very relaxed border. Maybe one day the very Palestinian border will be the same and we won't even need a passport to move between the countries. I don't foresee that very soon and be an ambition for the future, and so for the people living there, it actually made sense. This ideological zionist really that's the word to use, belief in the importance of strong, secure
borders for the state of Israel. And at the same time, I believe in the necessity of peace and dignity and the good life for the people on the other side, because without that we are doomed to come instant cycles of war.
And you talked you talk in the book about the decision to move down there from Tel Aviv in twenty fourteen, and just around the time as we're doing the reporting for that piece, and you talk about how there was this several month long invasion war in twenty fourteen, and a laws was evacuated during that because it's under constant shelling, and as people thought that the war was approaching a ceasefire, people had been away for so long that they were
impatient to return. One family came back early a shell, landed in no laws, exploded, went through trapped and went through a window and killed, I believe, a four year old child who became the face of the kind of the tragedy of that war across across Israel and led to then a number of families leaving that community. And then later you just you know, later that year, you
decide you're gonna you're gonna move in. And what struck me and probably you too as you were writing this, I'm curious, was that this is that this was a horrifying tragedy that captivated the attention of the entire country while dozens of children were killed yesterday in Gaza kind of namelessly, not namelessly to the families of those in Gaza. But we're not leading the press coverage with them here in the United States. This is one we can tell, Yeah,
we're not it's not it's not international attention. Uh, And we're approaching probably in Gaza a similar percentage. You talked about three and a half percent of the community being killed. The death rate in Gaza may maybe that at this point of the two million people we were talking before you join here about how because this is still going on, nobody has really had a chance to kind of process
what has happened because we're still living through it. So how do you square in your mind the horrific tragedies that you've lived through and that you've witnessed and square them with the kind of exponentially greater scale just a mile away.
So I'll divide this into three levels. Perhaps First of all, there is the emotional left and putting aside the politics and the justifications that Israel had for the war. And to be frank, I supported the war in the beginning after October seven because I really felt Israel had no choice but to retaliate militarily, very strongly to what Ramas did. But I'll get to that in a second. On the emotional level, it's terrible, it's horrendous, it's an immense tragedy.
It's heartbreaking, and you know, I can go on and on with the words, but you know, the pictures themselves, I think speak longer than anything. And by the way, I've visited many times since October seven, we don't live there at the moment. The keyboats cannot really be inhabited by families with children. But whenever I go there, I see the destruction on the other side Becausehalo is so close to Gaza that you can really see with your eyes the destruction on the other side of the border.
And you know, I'm not happy about it. I don't find anything to celebrate about it. I think it's heartbreaking, and I understand also that it will have repercussions for the future because now the Gaza strip is home to more than two million people who are living among this
epic destruction. On the logical level, I do understand that after October seven, Israel had to go to war against Tamas because what Ramas did on that day, you know, massacre of civilians, a breach the border, and the kidnaping of more than two hundred people, that was not something Israel could just say, well, okay, it happened, and now we're moving on, you know, fresh page. We can debate
whether the war should now continue or not. I'm on the camp that says the most urgent thing to do right now is a deal to end the war and release the hostages. And I've been writing this for months, actually, I've been writing this for months in Haharet and I've been speaking about it in other platforms. I really think the urgency ending killing and the suffering, and bringing back our hostages to Israel and allowing the beginning of a process to rebuild, reconstruct, you know, fix the damages on
both the border is really really urgent. That's the best I can say about it. And then I think on the third level, this is the geopolitical level, I think we need a plan to rise from this disaster, because if we spend now all of our time debating who had it worse and who committed bigger crimes, there are no winners in that debate, and it doesn't really lead us to a place where people in Gaza and in
Israel can get over this disastrous, horrendous, ongoing event. What we really need is a plan for the day after. We need to finish the war, release the hostages, and then start thinking about the day after, what do we do to improve the reality in Gaza and in Israel and to make sure that something like this never happens again.
And honestly, right now, that's my biggest concern, apart from the again urgency, stopping the kil bringing back the hostages, including my two friends, my biggest long through concern is we don't really have any kind of plan or what comes next and how we avoid this situation repeating itself in a year or two or three down the road.
And Rand, do you want to cue up this clip of you talking to Matt Miller at the State Department briefing yesterday about the UA Sure Israel, Yeah.
We get your reaction to this, so we can roll the mercenaries plan. Yeah, well it's part of the mercenaries plan. Yeah, or it appears to be we roll this side from the State Department yesterday earlier on how the letter that you guys sent in mid October tod Israel mentions the suggest that they not pass the unreband right above that in that same letter, at bullet point three of the three bullet points says that is what should also end isolation of northern Gaza by reaffirming that there will be
no Israeli government policy of forced evacuations of civilians from northern to southern Gaza. Sure humanitarian organizations have continuous access to northern Gaza through northern crossings and from southern Gaza. Obviously, the thirty days isn't up, but two weeks ago the situation in Northern Gaza was bad. Like today, it's utterly dystopian. The opposite of making progress has happened there. Somebody mentioned the one hundred and nine civilians killed in this residential
building is part of this forced evacuation. So it seems like neither of those two things have happened, and in fact they've gone the opposite direction. Do you need the thirty days to make an assessment on it? At least that bullet.
So we have made clear that the situation in Northern Gaza, which is what that bullet refers to, needs to change. And Secretary Blincoln made clear directly to the Prime Minister last week that the situation in Northern Gaza needs to change.
That we need to see.
Everyone in Northern Gaza, every civilian in Northern Gaza, have access to food and water and other humanitarian assistants. And we're going and continue to make that clear.
You started with the RSF and the most recent Wark crimes. UAE is one of the strongest backers of the RSF.
You guys are very tight with the UAE. Why can't the US pressure of the UAE to put a stop to this.
We have made we have made clear to every country in the region, every country around the world, that no country should do anything to prolong this conflict, including providing arms to either of the warring parties.
It just seems like countries in that region just aren't interested, like the kind of maybe they listen, but they just don't follow the advice that works.
Like every country, every country makes its own decisions on a host of foreign policy issues. But I can tell you that the thing that the Secretary heard time and time again is we were in the region last week, is that partner after partner welcomed our engagement because we are the only ones who could play this critical role of trying to in conflicts in goz It.
So about two weeks ago there was this big letter from the Secretary Austin and Secretary Blink and really laying down the gauntlet. These are the things that we really must see or there are going to be consequences. And two of them that I mentioned there in the State farm yon one, do not ban on RA and do not do a force evacuation of northern Gaza. In the two weeks sense they banned on Ra and they did
a forced evacuation of the north. Can you tell us from like from the Israeli government perspective, how do they why do they keep doing this? Like what happened to the US, That the US isn't kind of calling the shots anymore here? Or is the US okay with this?
First of all, I'll say about UNRA that this is bigger than the US because on the UNRA legislation, Israel has also heard from other allies, the UK, Germany, Arab countries that we have close relationship with everybody advocated against
this legislation and the government ignored it. Regarding the forced evacuation in northern Gaza, here, I have to say, I do think Biden did get something with that warning, because the punpulation that was removed from the area of Jebalia, which is north of Gada City, was not pushed south of the Netsam corridor, which is today the main dividing
line between northern and southern Gaza. And there is this plan advocated by the far right elements of the Natania government to push the population from northern Gaza thross that specific corridor that rode into southern Gaza. That has not happened, and I do think the letter by the Secretari has had an impact because the population moved a little south, but still within the boundaries of what we would call northern Gaza. So that's just, you know, to put the
difference between the two things. And now on the big picture, Ryan, I'll tell you honestly, I think that Natania at some point during the war, I would say around December January, decided to take a bit, and the bat was on
Donald Trump winning the election in the United States. He told himself, I will now suffer through a year of you know, condes, all kinds of you know, messaging, and they'll tell me that I'm doing terrible things, you know, and Blinking will call, and Biden will call, and pay Department will call me out in the briefings, and maybe they'll hold some weapons at some point, which they did
for two months before invasion of Rafiles. But at the end of the day, their fear of losing the election to Trump will allow me to get away with a lot of things, and eventually, if he will win, I could get away with even more. I think this is the bit that he played. You'll know next week if it actually worked out for him.
So what does that mean?
Then?
What let's say is bad is wrong and Kamala wins. What does that mean for his strategy going forward?
I believe if Kamana Harris wins the US election, Antaniell's government will collapse within a matter of very few months. In order to remain in power, Nataniel needs to do two things. First of all, it's important for the view understand how different Israeli politics is than American politics. Right in your politics, we have an election four years, somebody gets elected president and unless they are impeached or they die, they will serve out their term. In Israel, we have
coalition politics. We have a multi party system, and the Prime Minister is very powerful, but at the same time can lose power any second if the parties that basically make up his coalition decide they no longer align with him. Netaniao's survival in power after October seven relies on two political forces within his coalition, the ultra religious far right and what we call the ultra Orthodox, which is another
very very religious segment of the Jewish population. Both of these parties have very specific interests and demands from Nataniel that require him ultimately to do two things. Number one is to build settlements Ina. This is the demand of
the far right elements of his coalition. Number two is to significantly weaken the democratic guard rails within Israel, like the Supreme Court and all the other mechanisms that really separate Israel from the other countries in the region, making it the only democracy in the Middle East, as we like to pride ourselves, and you may recall and the viewers may recall that before October seven, for an entire year, the biggest news story out of Israel was the attempt
by Nathaniel's coalition to weaken Israel's democratic institutions and provide much more power to themselves to the government. If Kamala Harris wins the election, both of these things would simply not happen. He will not be able to build settlements in Gaza because the US will put a glaring red line on that, and there will be no more elections to take into consideration, and the fear of being tough on Israel and then losing middle of the road voters
for Trump that will be out the window. Settlements in Gaza will simply not happen, and she will be able to use leverage to stop that. In ways that I think Biden has been hesitant or fearful of doing because of the election. And the same goes for crushing the democratic institutions inside Israel, which is really necessary for these ultra religious parties because they want to reshape the country.
So I think that from his point of view, he knows pretty much that if she wins, his coalition collapse. He will not be able to fulfill the demands of his partners. If Trump wins, Honestly, it's anyone's bet what will happen. I mean, the guy so unexpected, so unstable, has a history of specific on the Israeli issue, by the way of you know, saying one thing and then saying the opposite and doing you know, I mean, everything
is up in the air. But I do believe that Nataniel thinks he can get away with a lot more with Trump and that he can fall to him the settlements in Gaza as condos on the beach, which it will be anything. But but you know, think about Trump and that Trump really, yeah, I really wouldn't care if Israel became more like Russia and less like the Western democracy that it wants to be. He wouldn't shed a tear right. So that's Nathaniel's gamble basically, And.
So if Kamala wins and Yao's government does collapse subsequently, what what what political forces are ready to be able to replace it?
Like?
What comes next if that happens is a is Do those two forces in the far right have enough other access to power? Or would there be some type of center right your Lapede situation?
What what?
What?
What replaces him?
It would not be replaced by a left wing progressive government, I can tell you it's a left wing Israeli. This is not realistic right now, not at all. But I do believe there could be a center right government that would be more like the government we had in Israel for about a year year and a half after Nathaniel lost power in twenty twenty one and before his comeback
in late twenty twenty two. It was a centrist government that had a moderate right wing element and moderate left wing element, and it was in terms of policy much more let's say, perfol and certainly on internal issues, much less provocative and extreme. And I do believe that a coalition like that could rise to power again in Israel, and it will not include Nataniel himself or the far right ultra religious elements that he relies on to have power. It could, by the way, include once again a party
representing segment of the Arab Muslim population in Israel. I mean that previous government we had about two years ago. It was historical in one sense that there was a cooperation there between right wing centrist, left wing parties and also one party representing Arab Muslim citizens of Israel. And even after the shocks of Goober seven in the war, I can still see that configuration returning. But you know,
all of this is hypothetical. First of all, we have to see what happens in your election, and then we get to a point where Israel also has an election.
We still don't have confirmation about anyone would that post that yahoo government move toward ending the war? I think the war it seems like the support tell me if I'm wrong. Support for the continuing the war seems almost universal. Not universal, but close to it.
Yeah, it's complicated. I think most Israelis, if you just ask them right now, do you agree to stop the war, they will say no. But if you ask them, do you agree to stop the war in return for a deal that brings us back all the hostages? Palling in Israel shows an overwhelming majority for this position. We're talking.
Some polls have it in the high fifties, others in the sixties, and I've even seen in the seven things in terms of percentage of our population that would say, okay, you know, regardless of the fact that there are still terrorists in Gaza. Course, I mean, look what's happening there, but regardless of the fact that there's still a threat to Israel from other enemies in the north, in the East.
We have one hundred hostages there and if we don't bring them back soon, they are all going to die, and we will not even be able to locate some of their graves because the people who help them are also dying in the world. So when you present it like that, you actually have a majority the Israeli society that will say, okay, for a deal that brings us back to hostages, we are willing to stop this war. The problem is that for Natanielle, stopping the war basically
means losing power. If he stops the war, the far right elements in his coalition immediately bring down the government, and it's heartbreaking and enraging. But in making the choice between his own political survival and the fate of the hostages. He has made his choice, and it's not the patriotic Zionist, you know, Israeli loving choice that I would expect the leader of this country to make and to you know, to prioritize the lives of our hostages.
Well, we'll see how it goes. And Amir would love to have you back on keeping something one of the best sourced reporters I think in in Israeli politics, and the book is called The Gates of Gaza. Whether you agree or disagree, wherever you sit on the spectrum, I think it's it's not only is a gripping read, but it's you know, I think you've come away, you know, understanding more about the situation.
Absolutely.
Thank you so much, guys for having me really appreciate it well.
On Undercurrents this week, around the Undercurrents YouTube channel, I hosted Senator Eric Schmidt for a conversation about the election, just to do a sort of mood check similar to what we did with Shelby earlier in the show. But Schmidt is a personal friend of jd Vance. They were called by CNN or Schmidt was called by CNN arguably his closest friend in the Senate. They were both entering around the same time and similar ages. So Schmid's been
campaigning with JD. Vance, and I wanted to throw a couple of questions of him about what's happening behind the
scenes of the campaign. And one question I had was, just, you know, the closing message of the Drain the Swamp movement in twenty twenty four taking place at Madison Square Garden with a billionaire like Elon Musk, with Lutnik, so somebody who's a Titan of Wall Street, lots of wealthy celebrities, and so I wanted to ask the under Schmidt if he thinks that that risks undermining the drain the Swamp, anti establishment central message of the Trump campaign.
Here's what he had to say.
I do want to say, though, from the standpoint of someone kind of on the populist right, I wonder that's where I'm coming from. I wonder if you think that Donald Trump's kind of drained the swamp message, is it all undermined in the minds of voter when you're trotting out celebrities, billionaires from Silicon Valley? And also, I think it was Howard Latnik Wall Street kind of CEO. Does
that hurt the drain the swamp message? Does it? Were you as somebody who has come to this from a position of a sort of an anti establishment position when it comes to the economy as well, is there anything to that?
I don't think so. I think it's bringing new people into the fold. I mean one of the markers of the movement over the last whatever six seventy eight, almost ten years now is that new people have entered the process right. They're frustrated with things that have happened. It system hasn't worked for them. So to the extent you've got like Elon Musk, who I think he's voted Democrat most of his life or at least recently, He's seen the excesses of the left. He's seen what they really
want to do. And I think that more than even r D or Red Jersey or Blue Jersey in some ways, where we're at now is kind of this permanent Washington Democrat allies in the media and Democrats themselves as this sort of alliance, this establishment alliance versus the disruptors, the people who want to see real change. And I think that that bodes well, in this election cycle, that's seen as an election cycle, and Trump's viewed by it like a two to one margin.
Okay, but remember the case Missouri v.
Biden that was kicked off by Eric Schmidt when he was the Attorney General of Missouri, which was pushing against censorship obviously, and when it was changed into a bigger case of Supreme Court ended up losing.
Just in the last term.
Donald Trump has been talking about his conversations with Google CEO, who is allegedly, according to Trump, been calling to kind of butter him up, and Matt Stoler, friend of the program, has been saying, this is a worrying sign for mega populists. Let's listen to Eric Smith responding to a question about that. Trump also keeps mentioning the story about how the CEO of Google has called him a couple of times to say that his McDonald's trip was like through the roof
on Google. They haven't seen searchas like that forever. And some on the left have said, is this a sign that you know there's Trump is warming up towards Google, that Google is warming up towards Trump. Some people have said that with the Washington Post non endorsement as well that Jeff Bezos, you didn't want to frustrate Donald Trump. You're kind of one of the anti trust guys. You've really helped the Republican Party get tougher on big tech in particular.
Does any of that worry you?
Do you worry that Donald Trump would go soft on big tech in another administration? Or is this sort of like what you said before, it's a bigger tent and a new coalition.
Yeah, I wouldn't be too concerned about that. I think that, you know, some of those big tech giants ought to be a little bit concerned because their behavior has been exposed. You mentioned kind of my role in that. When I was Attorney general in Missouri. We brought that Missouri Versus Biden censorship lawsuit that exposed even before the Twitter files. This is before Elon Musk bought Twitter. It was further
amplified by the Twitter files. But what we've found in the discovery in that case, this is back in twenty twenty two, was shocking. I mean, you had direct communications between high ranking Biden administration officials with you know, vice presidents and these organizations that could control content. Take this down, Okay, we'll do it.
What else can we do.
I think kind of COVID exposed a lot of these excesses. People were shut down, they were shut out, they were trying to be silenced, you know, the kind of counterculture tendency that a young person might have to be a contrarian. Look, the Democrats have adopted this position, along with some of the biggest companies in the history of the world, to kind of shut down and silence people. And you hear Elin Must talk about it. JD talks about it in others.
But I certainly saw that firsthand in that lawsuit. So I'm not sure what their game plan is afterwards. But to the extent they're working with government or abusing their own rules to shut people down, they ought to be concerned because we ought to have some reforms in that regard.
So nothing super explosive there, Ryan, But I do think some of these questions about Donald Trump's closing message and involving you know, talking about getting buttered up by the Google CEO and covorting with one of the most powerful men, if made me the most powerful man in the entire world, a massive government contractor somebody who's benefited from a lot of taxpayer subsidies like Elon Musk has. It's a tention
for sure and his messaging. And the other thing Schmid said is that it feels quote more like twenty sixteen than twenty twenty to him on the ground, he feels like this campaign is going in the right direction for Trump at the right time, with about a week to go. And that's similar to what Shelby said she's hearing from the Trump camp internally. They're quote cautiously optimistic, is what she reported here earlier in the show. So they don't seem to be worried that it's backfiring.
But I don't know.
I feel like I feel like Trump has just dropped a lot of the economic populism. Yes that Jade Vance kind of likes. Like the best example was, to me, the the speech he gave where his campaign advertised that he's going to he's going to go out and he's going to talk about how he's going to defend SOLL security, He's going to defend Medicare, is actually going to expand Medicare, is even going to make the Affordable Care Act better.
He's going to do tariffs, He's going to like you know, crack down on people are ripping us off with our trade deficit. That was the theme of the speech, and it was written and he read it from a teleprompter, but he would pause on the teleprompter every now and then to do a riff on the Laura details of victims of crime by illegal immigrants. And when he would pause there he pause for half an hour and just and just go in on that point, that point, that issue,
and he would become animated. You could tell like this is the thing that was really getting him excited, and he and he felt like the crowd was with him on this one. And then he'd get back to you know, and I'll bring down your copays and and I'll you know, I'm also going to go after big Pharma and I'm gonna.
It Actually reminds me of the Hairs campaign a way we talked about earlier, that they get really animated when they're talking about how Trump is a fascist, and then they kind of like, we'll get into the meat and potatoes too, you know, like everyone is really i mean, it's understandable, right, Like everyone feels like this is an existential moment, and so they get really caught up in those particular arguments.
Yeah, and my yeah, my right right wing populism can either be like this economic nationalistic part of it that you know, Steve Bannon has talked about, like yeah, or it can be the other Steve Bannon element, which is just going after the other. Uh, and it feels like that they're they're they're leading into the other.
Well, there's a Leninist component to what Steve Bannon wants to do in the kind of heightened contradiction sense, meaning you have to otherize people and then you open the
gates to economic populism and economic revolution. Which is an interesting way to look at it because the risk is obviously that you otherise people, open up the gates, and then you just don't do any of the economic stuff because the corporate capture is so strong in Washington, and I mean, the Trump campaign is signaling that might genuinely
be the dynamic if he has another administration. Because to your point, was he still talks about his potential two hundred percent tariff, like that's what he said at Madison Square Garden on certain items they're trying to revive American manufacturing.
You hear him talk about that stuff.
But Stolar actually went back and looked at his speeches from twenty sixteen and compared them to a speeches to twenty twenty four, and you can see pretty clearly when he pulls out excerpts that the economic policy, the economic populism of twenty sixteen is muted this time around. It is just not a central feature of the messaging like it was in twenty sixteen.
Right and Democrats were always dismissive of it, would joke that economic anxiety doesn't have anything to do with why people are supporting Trump. And then it's actually just you know, code for racism and bigotry and xenophobia. But now they you don't even get the code. He's pulled out. He's stripped out the code. It's just the straight xenophobia.
Well, I mean there's still it's still some some of that is still there.
It's just he's not it's stuff there. It's a question as to what enough. That's what I think was interesting about the Eric Schmith thing is like the question is what do they do? Like is the messaging indicative of something that would happen differently? And Schmid has talked about his potential attorney general, so for him not getting any
of these questions. I mean, I thought it was important just to hear what he would say to that question, because nobody's asking those questions from the sort of conservative point of view, like are you abandoning what MAGA was supposed to be about On the economic front, it's just constantly taking Trump's bait and asking questions about culture war and blah blah blah. But they're not feeling the heat about what their voters might want to actually see them do if they take office.
And he's, as you.
Mentioned, the billionaires would rather they talk about immigrants.
If you're outsourcing a department to Elon Musk, who has a million conflicts of interest, come on, there's some legitimate questions to be raised there.
All right, So Friday show will be an actual show and it's exciting. Friday. We will will have Crystalin Saga as well.
We are kindly hosting Friday before the election. We're kindly hosting a real show.
We extended an invitation of Crystalin Sager out of the kindness of our own hearts and said, hey, you guys were doing.
The show us.
You guys want to come on, get their take, get some exposure. It would be good to like, get them in front of people here. People want to hear what they have to say.
I'm sure if you want to hear that, they'll be back here tomorrow morning.
That's right.
But that's our Friday show, and we've got all kinds of fun election coverage show next week. So Breaking Points dot com if you want to become a premium subscriber and support the show otherwise, we'll see you back here on Friday, all right, See that