Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.
We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio ad staff give you, guys, the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody, Happy Tuesday. We have a great show for everybody's day. But with some sad news.
What do we have to maakere Yeah, there is a lot going on today. We're going to cover this breaking news out of Baltimore where a major bridge collapsed after being struck by a cargo ship. We'll tell you everything we know about that. Sadly, there are expected casualties. Will give you all of the details and some absolutely shocking video that is coming out this morning, so we've.
Got that for you.
We also have the fallout after the US allowed a UN Security Council vote to go through which backed sort of cease fire. There's recriminations from these Raley side. The US side is now going around promising that this really doesn't mean anything at all, so we'll tell you all about that. We also have a very interesting interview from Donald Trump with an Israeli outlet about how he would handle the US Israel relationship and what he thinks of
the way that Israel has conducted itself. Perhaps some surprising comments there, very trumpy in comments.
Let's just say that.
He also had a big day in court yesterday, one big win in terms of that massive bond amount getting knocked down. But he also now has an official criminal trial date on the calendar, so that is incredibly significant. We also learned yesterday that Boeing CEO is going to step down at the end of this year. It's part
of a larger leadership shakeup. We had the chance to talk to Matt Stoller, who was tracked the Boeing fiasco and their sort of downward spiral for years now, so we got some really great in depth information from him. You definitely want to stick around for that. We also had breaking yesterday apparently Diddy Sean Combs his house in Miami and his house in California both rated by the Feds yesterday. A lot going on now. This is in
connection with a sex trafficking investigation. We have not heard officially who is the target of that investigation, but given all of the allegations that are out there surrounding mister Combs, you can guess who is probably the target.
And Soccer is.
Taking a look at a new piece on podcaster Andrew Huberman, he is not happy about the way that this turned out.
I got a lot of details for people. We'll get into it and put my bias up front here with pod and in the monologue he's guy's a friend, so you know, definitely I'm biased in my presentation, but I'm going to do my best to bring it to everybody.
All right, So we want to begin with that tragic news out of Baltimore. Let's go ahead and put this up on the screen, so a major thoroughfare. This is the Francis Scott Key Bridge on six ' ninety five, just outside of Baltimore, collapsing after a large cargo ship runs into it.
If you watch this video closely, you can.
See what appears to be that ship losing power multiple times, it looks like two times.
Before hitting this bridge.
Of course, there's going to be an investigation to find out exactly what happened here, but this is a significant roadway. You can also see trucks and vehicles traversing the bridge. Expectation, as far as we know at this point is at least seven cars fell into this frigid water. We've also seen some reports there were potentially construction workers on this bridge as well. They are treating it as a mass
casualty incident. Obviously a tragic, horrifying scene unfolding there. In addition, we know this was actually the first thirty minutes of a twenty seven day journey that this cargo ship was just embarking upon. We can put another image up on the screen here showing you that aftermath, as the sun is just beginning to come up. There, I mean, this entire truss bridge collapsing. I saw one person saying, this is one of the largest spans of this particular type
of bridge in the world. So you can imagine, you know, the number of vehicles that may have been on this bridge. You know, this happening overnight. You can only imagine if this had happened during rush hour. Terrifying scene. Sager, and we also have a few details we can give you. Let's put this up on the screen from the Wall Street Journal. So they say Baltimore Bridge collapses after being
hit by ships, sending vehicles into the river. And as I mentioned, you know, there is an expectation that there could be casualties here right now, around twenty people and multiple cars they are saying are likely to have fallen in the water. As far as we know, everybody who was on board the ship is actually okay and Soccer.
They say they're going to be cooperating fully with the investigation into what occurred here, but also authorities in Baltimore saying there is no indication that this was intentional or this was terrorism. It appears upon first glance. Will wait for the full investigation, but to have been a horrific technical mishap.
A lot of questions though around this ship. So this is the Dolli. It's a Singaporean flagged vessel. As you said, it was departing Baltimore for Sri Lanka, supposed to arrive there on April twenty second, one thousand feet long, and it was contracted byk mirsk said that they had fully owned all of the cargo that was on board. Some interesting details actually previously had it been involved in a mishap, it said in a mishap previously where they did not
see any major damage. But the thing is Crystal is the relatively new vessel. The ship was built in twenty fifteen by Hyundai Industries, so I mean this is a pretty reputable corporation with a good engineering background. So there's going to be a lot of questions here. Yeah, this one was earlier this year, and two story earlier that year.
Following twenty sixteen, the ship was involved in an incident where it hit a stone wall at the port of Antwerp, which is sayed minor damage at the time, but nobody was injured. So there is quite a bit of regulatory
stuff that's going to kick in now. In a similar way the NTSB handles flight crash like, we're going to have to see whether the pilots on board were acting propuarly, procedure was taking place, whether there was a mechanical failure that was avoidable, whether this was a maintenance issue before it had left port. But clearly we can infer a couple of things. It had just left port, so we really need to examine what exactly led up to this. I mean, this is a major transportation catastrophe here in
the US. We were both talking beforehand. I don't know how many times you and I have both been on this show. Oh absolutely, anybody who lives in the DMV has been on the bridge at least a couple of times, or you know, driven driven.
Obstually Kyle's plan and drives to New York today very likely would have been over this bridge if it wasn't for you know, the fact obviously it closed and catastrophically collapsed. But you know this is not only right there near the port, this is also close to the Baltimore Airport. This is one of the major thoroughfares if you're going from DC to New York or New York to DC, this is one of the major routes that you take because you sort of bypass that downtown Baltimore city traffic
and take this kind of outer loop around downtown. So you know, this is going to cause catastrophic transportation issues for quite a while while this is dealt with, while the investigation unfolds, and you know, obviously will take quite a while to reconstruct this bridge, which seeing it just collapse like that, I mean, it's shocking. So our hearts go out to the people who you know, have lost loved ones in this horrific incident. Obviously, we don't have
all the details of how many people there is. Rescue effort underway, so you know, we pray that there could be some survivors, but a very very dire situation unfolding and you know, truly a shocking thing to behold.
Sad it's a horrible incident. It's a you know, city that was already This is probably the last thing they needed. This is going to be a lot of questions here about cargo shipping and all that. But in the immediate aftermath, it's cold water and it's just a nightmare situation, just driving along doing your job. A lot of these guys apparently were construction workers who are included working in the middle of the night and the next thing, you know, bridge below you just blows out.
This entire thing unimaginable. Yeah, literal nightmare stuff there.
So hoping praying for everybody who's involved.
Absolutely, let's go ahead and get to the very latest with regard to our relationship with Israel. So, as Ryan and doctor Parsi brought to you yesterday, the US decided to abstain yesterday in the UN and allow sort of
ceasefire resolution to go through. Previously, the US has vetoed three different ceasefire resolutions, So the fact that we abstained and allowed this through did appear appear to be a shift in terms of our policy and what we are willing to do, at least through diplomatic channels in order to try to pressure Israel to come to some sort of a deal and end their outrageous assault on the Gaza strip. Let's go ahead and we can show you as this vote went down.
Put this up on the screen.
The result of the voting is US for US votes in favor, zero vote against, one abstention. The draft resolution has to be adopted a volution twenty seven twenty eight since A twenty.
Four, So that's the actual vote going down.
And immediately there were a few questions. Number one, how is Israel going to react? And number two, is this just another version of pr messaging shift from the US or is this going to be backed up by some actual policy changes. We now can answer both of those questions, So let's start with Israel's response. They freaked out, put this up on the screen through an absolute tantrum, Bibi nan Yaho canceled the meetings of this delegation that was
supposed to come here and meet with Biden officials. Specifically, they were supposed to be meeting about alternative plans with regard to Rafa and the looming invasion.
There.
I'll read you a little bit from this piece, so they say. Minutes before the vote, Natanya, who claimed the resolution did not condition the ceasefire call on the release of hostages and threatened to cancel the rougher meanings if the US didn't use its veto.
That's really not even accurate.
I mean, the resolution does in fact call for the release of hostages, but that was the way he wanted to spin it. After the US abstained, UN Ambassador Linda Thomas Greenfield offered assurances the resolution meant the seasefire must come as part of a hostage deal. This explanation apparently did not reassure Netnyahu, who swiftly announced the cancelation of
that delegation. We also have some reporting on bringing you a little bit that US officials were apparently perplexed and confused by this and feel like he is just using this moment for his own domestic political benefits, so put a pin in that. More on that later, but let's talk a little bit also about the US response. Did
this actually represent some sort of a shift. Is this going to come this Security Council resolution with some sort of pressure to actually get Israel to stop doing the atrocities and starvation of the Gaza strip and actually come to some sort of a what they said in the Steal lasting ceasefire agreement. Well, according to Matt Lee, no, it does not represent a shift at our position. It comes with no pressure. It is effectively per us meaningless.
Let's take listen to this exchange, and so what.
Do you expect now that happen as a result of the passage of this resolution. So I think you expect that Israel is going to announce a cease fire.
I do not.
Is that so if you expect that Hamas is going to release hostages?
So I'm glad you get you mentioned that, because one of the things that we have objected to for some time is that most of the people that call for a cease fire, we believe are calling for Israel to unilaterally stop operations and not calling for Hamas to agree to cease fire where they would release hostages.
Well, I think it goes so it could so that the wait wait wait wait wait wait no, but.
The resolution today is is an non binding resolution.
So what's the point? Why? Why?
Why?
Why did you abstain? Why didn't you veto?
We didn't veto because we thought the language and it was consistent with something that the language as it relates to the ceasefire and release of hostage was consistent with the long stand United States position.
So you don't believe anything is going to happen as a result of the passage.
Of this So I think that separate and apart from this resolution, we have active, ongoing negotiations to try to achieve what this resolution calls for, which is the uh AN immediate ceasefire and the release of hostages.
I don't know.
I can't say that this impact this resolution is going to have any impact on those negotiations. But those negotiations are ongoing. They've been ongoing over the weekend and they've made progress.
So I don't expect you to answer this now, but to me, you just stick this in your pocket. If that's the case, what the hell is the point of the UN or the UN Security Council.
So we think it plays an important.
Role, even though absolutely nothing every and that you're going to get what you would like to see, not out of the UN, but out of discussions.
So we believe it's important that the UN speak and the UN Security Council speak on matters of international security. It's why we've been engaged in this process, why we thought we were going to have a successful vote on Friday that Russia and China unfortunately and quite cynically vetoed. But I do believe that ultimately, if we were able to achieve a cease fire and the release of hostages is going to come not through a UN process, but through the process with which we've been engaged.
Yes, in Doha, what the hell is even the point of the UN? Let me just say, God bless Matt Lee. This exchange was extraordinary. And let me pick up on one piece in particular because immediately not only Matt Miller, but Linda Thomas Greenfield and others washed through the mics to say, oh, well, this resolution is non binding, so it really doesn't mean anything at all. Our positions the same, and HAW hasn't changed, etctera, et cetera. This is just
making stuff up. UN Security Council resolutions are binding, so they're just inventing new international law to pretend to the world themselves, Israel whatever, that this is inconsequential. And because they have taken the position that it is inconsequential and that it literally means nothing, causing Matt Lee to ask, what the hell is even the point of the UN?
Why did you even freakin do this? Why should we care, revealing that it actually does mean nothing in their eyes, and it's not going to come with any change in policy, any pressure with regard to Israel, and is just one more example of their BS propaganda ass covering moves that really don't come with any sort of substantive policy difference to try to effectuate a different policy direction.
Well, i mean, look, all of this is symbolic, and that's part of why it's so annoying to watch this whole charade play out. The Israelis treat it as if it's a real change in policy. They're not stupid, and they know that's not the case. The same thing happened from twenty sixteen when Barack Obama, at the end of his presidency, allowed a UN resolution to go through, which is critical of the settlement policy. Did anything change in the settlement policy? Crystal? Okay, so what do we learn
about that? Second though, is that the Biden administration is doing their absolute best to get as many headlines as possible to make it appear as if they have rhetorically changed anything, while policy on the ground remains exactly the same.
The problem though, is that in some ways, you know, the Israelis are not wrong in that they have even ground somebody like Biden to the point where even whenever you're going to ship them as many weapons as possible, that they have to try and distance themselves from your actions. And this is where, symbolically, I mean, what we've really been warning about from the beginning is listen, you can do what you want, but you are really suffering in the eyes of the world. And this is just further
evidence of that. And that's also why they're pulling out all the stops. We have this, for example, a tried and true friend now in this conflict, the Israeli minister Ben It's amen Ben Gavie it up there please on the screen. He says that the Security Council decision proves that the United Nations is anti Semitic and its secretary General is anti Semitic, and it encourages Hamas. I mean,
everything is anti Semitic and or encouraging to Hamas. But I mean, I just think that the way that we can look at this is that it is both symbolically a problem from Israel I think in the long run, but in the short term there has been and this is why it was so critical to play that Matt Lee clip. There is no change in official US policy and that is the actual takeaway that our audience needs to hear today.
Yeah, and I have more on that in a moment. Let me show you the Hamas response to this. Let's put this up on the screen. So, in a surprising statement, this person of Pines Hamas welcomed the unsc's decision called for its immediate implementation. Hamas also firm their readiness to engage in a prisoner exchange process leading to the release of detainees held by both sides. So that was their reaction to this. And put the next one up on this just more to the point about Israel's reaction here.
So a bunch of US officials leak to Axios's baroque revide that they think BB is intentionally provoking a crisis for his own domestic benefit. A US official said the White House was perplexed by what it sees as an overreaction by Netanyaho because in their mind, they're like, we haven't changed our policy. This is all just some bullshit pr stunt, So why are you freaking out? Like we're not cutting off weapons, We're not doing anything different, So why are you freaking out?
The official said. The White House is puzzled.
The Prime Minister rejected the US interpretation of the UN resolution, decided to air his differences with the Biden administration and public and tell the US what its policy is when the US is already stating its policy, which is different from what Netanyahu is saying.
Quote, all of that is self defeating.
The Prime Minister could have chosen a different course to align with the US on the meaning of this resolution. He chose not to, apparently for political purposes. So they're saying here basically that the freak out is for show for our domestic Israeli political consumption, that it looks good for him to seem to be standing up to the US and being angry about the UN Security Council resolution, even as these officials went out of their way to
assure him that literally nothing is actually changing. So to your point about it being theater like this is proof positive of exactly that.
And to really hit this home, I want especially again what's actually happening, let's put this please up on the screen, is that the US at the exact same time, actually found within the State Department that Israel is in compliance with the Biden demand of international law and humanitarian aid. The State Department has said, quote, we have not found Israel to be in violation either when it comes to the conduct of the war or the provision of humanitarian assistance.
This was made crystal. They had up until May eighth to provide Congress with that report on its compliance after the demand was currently happening. And the key point of saying that they have not found it is that that then all allows them to continue the weapons shipments and to continue to fulfill the weapons wish lists that are currently here. So may very careful about just accepting whatever is supposedly a change in policy at the United Nations at the brass tax level in terms of weapons that
will continue to flow. The US State Department certifies that these weapons are being used in the international laws of war, and the humanitarian aid is being allowed into the Gaza strip.
I expected this, and it still was absolutely enraging to me because you literally had last week sectuary of Saint Toni Blncoln saying that one hundred percent of the population is facing acute food deficiencies.
Okay, he said, this is the.
First time we've ever seen an entire population suffer from this level of food deprivation. And then not even a week later, you and the State Department turn around and certify, Oh, there's no problem with humanitarian eight.
No, they're not blucky. You do you think we're stupid?
Do you think we can't see the images coming out the absolute desperation as people clamor for anything they can get their hands on, eating weeds, drinking water that is unsafe, unsanitary, making them sick making at best at best, using feed that is meant for animals to try to put together, you know, something that they could possibly sustain themselves on the entire populations at.
One hundred percent.
You've never seen this before, and yet you're going to certify that, Oh, no, they're not blocking humanitarian aid. This certification came on the very same day that the UN released a report saying, yes, it does look like genocide based on Israel's actions, based on not just the number of people that have been killed, but the total annihilation of civilian life, based on Hey, we just saw it, not just in Gaza, but we saw the largest land grab in the West Bank that we seen in thirty years,
as we covered yesterday. And with all of this going on, you're going to sartify, no, they're following international law.
Bullshit.
We just saw the drone footage of them targeting unarmed civilians who were just walking by in Conunis and they hit them, and when they're crawling and scrambling for their lives, going back in and hitting them again with zero justification, And you're going to certify now now we think it's it's all fine, They're a riding by international law. Your own base, fifty percent majority think that this is a genocide.
We have polling that will show you in a moment about the way that your own voters view this conflict, and how much the US public, Democrats, Republicans, Independence, how wary they are are providing additional military assistance to Israel at this moment, and You're going to go against all of that. You're going to go against what a number of Senate Democrats have said, including Chris van Holland, who's no frickin rat.
You're going to go against that.
You're going to go against what every human rights organization, including a number of Israeli human rights organizations, have said about what's unfolding on the ground. You're going to go against your own words a week ago, where you were talking about how the whole population is being starved to death. It's just it's outrageous. It's absolutely outrageous. And so if there was any inkling of hope that perhaps this abstention, remember they didn't even.
Vote for it, but they allowed the resolution.
To pass their Security Council, that this represented some sort of shift in terms of this administration's support for an ongoing genocide in the Gaza strip.
If you had any inkling of hope.
That that was the case, this is your answer, definitively, conclusively. They have not shifted or budged one single inch. They have changed their messaging for their own domestic political consumption. And it is all a game, it is all theater to them. BBE is playing off of it doing what he needs to do to try to stay in power, and Biden is changing his messaging and his rhetoric thinking that is going to fool all of us into thinking that there has been some actual change in policy.
And it is total and complete bullshit. Matt Miller got.
Asked about this yesterday whether they still think that, you know, Unrich should be defunded, and asked about whether Israel is blocking humanitarian aid.
Let's take a listen to how he responded, do.
You still believe is it still the US assessment that Israel is not using food or assistant as a tool of fool.
So we have not made an assessment or drawn the conclusion that they are in violation of international humanitarian law when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance into Gaza.
We have not made an assessment. I mean, Sager, what do you make of that language? That's such like, you know, a non answer here, because they really can't come out and say no, they're not blocking aid because it's so manifestly obvious to anyone who's paying attention, So they just say, well, we haven't made that assessment.
Yeah, I mean, they're just living in their own house of cards now at this point, because they've constructed their entire policy such that they're trying to have the language of humanitarianism and compliance with international law, in compliance with US law, frankly, and then also to try and assuage some of the concerns of what is just patently obvious
to any even neutral observer now at this point. So I just see it as really collapsing within its own like tortured logic, which frankly, that's really been the case now for the Biden administration for quite some time. And echo what you said. God bless Matt Lee and all the other State Department reporters are on Ryan Graham as well, who have been a great question because it all collapses, you know, on it's with the most basic level of scrutiny.
And that's really what we're seeing with this guy. Even this MSNBC training is is not coming out all that useful for him in this time.
You know.
I just I think about these people, Matt Miller, kareem jump here, like I knew her, we were at AMSNBC together. She comes down of this like lefty anti war activist background, and I'm just like, how did you justify this.
To yourself because Trump is bad and they work for Biden, and Biden is not Trump. I genuinely think that's it.
Was there a moment, you know, was there a decision point where it was like, I can either advance my career or I can hold to some sort of principle here, and the career path was chosen. And then you find yourself in front of a podium justifying a genocide, like.
Does it happen little by little?
Is there one sort of seminal moment that sends you inexorably in that direction?
I think about that because it's it's crazy to.
Me to say, I'm sure Matt Miller, I don't really know him, but I know him from you know, his MSMEBC days and whatever. I'm sure he saw himself as this like moral liberal, progressive type. And now look at you standing up there and saying, oh, well, we haven't assessed whether or not they're blocking humanitarian age justifying carrying water for all of this these we don't even know how. I mean, you know, the number is about thirty thousand people.
We really don't know. We don't know, we don't know how many people buried under the rubble. We don't know what this is going to do to every single child in the Gaza strip for the rest of their lives. Entire thing destroyed, and you're still standing there carrying water, doing whatever you need to do for that day's propaganda agenda. It's utterly disgusting and these people are complete and utter monsters.
Let's move on to how the public feels about this war, which is quite dissonant, especially the Democratic base, from how the elite elected officials have been supporting this war.
Put this up on the screen.
So we've got a whole bunch of pulling from Pew Research Center. You've got Dems and lean Dems basically split on yes, no, or don't know on whether Hamas's reasons for fighting Israel are valid, regardless of how acceptable respondent views October seventh.
So there's a difference here.
Right, you have overwhelming sentiment against thinking that October seventh was acceptable. Right, There's very few in the Democratic Party, in the Republican Party anywhere that say, hey, October seventh was acceptable. The question is do you think that the reason that Hamas is fighting is valid?
And you've got in.
The Democrats and lean Democrats, you've got thirty eight saying invalid, thirty four valid and twenty eight not sure. And you can see here there's a significant partisan divide. You can also see, you know, their significant generational divide, which is, you know, kind of a consistent theme across a lot of this polling. Let's go ahead and put this next piece up on the screen because I think this is
really critical. So you have this question, is the way that Israel is fighting this war with hamas acceptable and in the Democratic Party with Democrats and lean Democrats, a majority fifty two percent say it is unacceptable, Only twenty two percent say that it is acceptable, and another twenty
six percent say that it's not sure. That they're not sure, So Sager, this one really demonstrates how at ad the Biden administration is with their own base of voters, and how differently those voters are viewing what is happening here.
Yeah, can we go to the next one please and put it up there on the screen because a lot of the breakdowns are actually very important. It says Americans are divided over whether Biden is striking the right balance, and quote percent who say Joe Biden is favoring Israeli is too much amongst Democrats, that's a full thirty four percent, striking the right balance is twenty nine percent, not sure thirty three percent, and favoring Palestinians too much you have
three percent. So I think really what you are seeing here is a major and consolidated shift. The next one also seems very very important to me, which is about the US military aid, because again you know you have in there you the number on lean Democrats, and you see that the majority are not really in favor of sending aid to Israel and or or not sure, but you also see I think some major changes kind of in the overall view of the US electorate on Israel.
And I think that's actually what's most important. It's not just about Democrats. We're talking here about military aid to what was previously one of the most popular countries, you know, in the entire United States, and when we look at some of that loss and some of that breakdown, I think that that has been a societal wide shift for which Israel is really going I think to pay the consequences.
A lot of that started with BB's speech, you know, before Congress, with Obama back in twenty fifteen, but this has really made it so that I think Israel has now basically allied itself with an explicit political party in the US, and we're about to get to that too with Trump, where Trump can be all over the map on policy, is probably going to be very very pro Israel.
That said, you know, that's a very very bad strategic way to align yourself because previously they really did have a lot more bipartisan consensus than I think where we're headed right now. I think ten fifteen years from now, the current status quo is unimaginable. Yeah, with the current.
Amount of well, Trump makes some interesting comments about that, but because you're you're gonna they're just the most Trumpian comments on the subject you can possibly imagine. You know, there was also a real commentary if you dig into this data on the media coverage, because first of all, only about half of US adults could even correctly answer the question of whether Israelis or Palestinians had suffered more deaths.
Think about that, only half.
Of the US public thought that they could answer that question correctly. They did not know that the toll on the Palestinian side has been multiples of times greater. And then they also tracked so the people who said they weren't sure and didn't know which side had suffered more casualties and more deaths, they had a very different opinion
of this conflict. They were much more in general sort of pro Israel and subject, you know, like likely susceptible to accept the Israeli propaganda, the Biden administration propaganda with regards to what's happening here. So I'll give you some of those numbers. They say, those that were aware that more Palestinians have died are about twice as likely to say Biden is favoring Israeli's too much as to say
he's favoring the Palestinians too much. Among those who do not know that more Palestinians have died, you have fifteen percent saying Biden is favoring the Palestinians too much, and only nine percent say that he's favoring the Israelis too much. By sixty nine to sixteen, Those who know that more Palestinians have died favor the US providing humanitarian aid, but those who don't know the balance of casualties, only twenty nine percent favor providing aid and twenty three percent oppose it.
So I mean There's a few things to say here.
First of all, you can see why they're so upset about TikTok and why this has, you know, really reignited this whole conversation about and a lot of political momentum around banning TikTok, because it breaks up some of the consistent propaganda that you get across mainstream media outlets to the you know, that is so fulsome that most Americans don't even know the very basic numbers around which side has suffered more casualties, and that dramatically impacts the way
that they're viewing this conflict.
I thought that was really no worthy.
I thought it was noteworthy. But I'm going to say, I don't know if it's just TikTok. You know, I don't spend any time. I don't literally don't even have TikTok. But I'm on the internet, you know, I'm on Twitter. I think that's it's not just TikTok. That's what I mean. It's being on the internet.
They think TikTok is sort of like weekly.
I don't just you know that said. I mean, I go on my Instagram reels and even there I get served up. You know, some palastinian content or whatever. I follow a couple of guys, people who are like military analysts and others who are relatively dispassionate. More So, I would just say, if you are not consuming mainstream media, which is the vast majority of people under the age
of fifty five, you are. I mean, this is a key theme of our show, right, you are living literally in an entirely different world than if you're just getting everything served up on CNN or MSNBC. I also think some of it comes down to moral weight. I mean, this is something we balance here on our show in
terms of programming and all that. But if you do spend any time Crystal looking at the vast majority of coverage that these people spend their time on, like the Trump trial and the im minutia of Stormy Daniels or MSNBC yesterday, every single hour of their show issued a segment including Rachel maddout, dedicated to speaking out against Ron and McDaniel, like that's what they think is important, and it almost gaslights like boomers and other people in this
country and too thinking you're like, yeah, you know what, these are the trend setting issues of our day. I mean, here's again look, I get it. It is a bet they're going against Nicole Wallace right exactly. Now the reason, you know, for today, we can lead our show here with Israel, which I don't see a lot of people in cable or other doings because we're like, wow, this is a breakdown in the US Israeli relationship. At the
same time exposes a lot of stuff. It was major headline news, you know, all across Washington, and I just don't see a lot of seriousness in the way that they have coverage. So it's a there's a fulsome conversation where I still come down on the people of the young actually know what's up, because they really they have better prioritization of what's really important and what's not than the people who are the so called program.
Absolutely the case, and there's it's not an accident that they fall back to their like you know, I'm not saying these things are like not important, what's going on with Trump?
Right, We're going to come back.
To right, But they fall back to that because that's very easy and very safe for them.
Exactly.
No one's losing their job over at MSNBC by saying Trump is bad or Trump is a criminal or whatever. But you could ask Mehdi Hassan how it went for him at MSNBC when he was not only critical of Israel but also was willing to really aggressively challenge Israeli spokespeople who would come on his show. Guess what, you don't have a job there anymore. Now you can read into that what you will. But he's not the first either, asked Mark Lamont Hill how that went for him over at CNN.
True, So these people are not stupid.
Their career is they want to keep their job, they want to keep their platform. They can justify that in their minds. However they want, you know, well, at least I can be here and say a little bit of something about something true and something real and something important. And if I'm gone, then you know, the next person may not even do that. But they understand what line they need to walk and where the safe spaces for
them in terms of their career. And so all of the incentives are in the opposite of direction of actually covering this conflict in a way just that is factual and honest as what is actually happening on the ground. And so as a result of that, you end up with a population where a majority do not even know the basic fact that Palestinians have suffered multiples more losses during this conflict than Israelis, and you end up with the views that boomers have in this conflict, and you
can see consistently the generational conflict. The one other things Sager that I thought was really interesting noteworthy is they asked about how people felt, and these are all Americans, right about the Israeli government approved disapprove the religious group that had the highest approval rating for the net Nyahu government, You're going to.
Guess evangelical absolutely, of course.
Way higher than Jewish Americans. They had much higherupprow rating of bb Neatna, Who's government. So I thought that was an interesting note from this poll.
If you ever get if you are ever on a plane to Tel Aviv, you're going to find it's going to be like a ten to one ratio of church groups to actual Jews who are going to Israel.
So that's where the strongest support is. That's the bedrocker.
That's actually where the Israeli government and Israeli groups spend a lot of money cultivating that because they know, you know how powerful that is.
Look at the House speaker.
Exactly, it works, Yeah, right, the investments correct, it's not wrong.
First thing he did when it became speaker, he passed a resolution for Israel called.
Bbnatna who, et cetera.
And it's you know, partly I wouldn't just say partly, it's almost wholly because of his ideological relation.
Well, I remember walking around Jerusalem and just seeing you know, you see like all of these church groups literally everywhere I was. I mean, you heard American English almost everywhere you went, and it really hit home for me. I was like, Wow, this is a real, like well funded operation that's happening out here. And it's only opened my eyes ever since.
Yes, Donald Trump gave an interview to a right wing leaning Israeli news outlet.
He was at Mar A Lago.
Let's take a listen to a little bit of what he had to say, and then we'll read you some of the additional quotes that weren't included in the video portion.
Take a lesson.
They would have never done that because they knew there would have been very big consequences.
All right.
That being said, you have to finish up your war. You have to finish it up. You got to get it done, and I'm sure you'll do that, and we got to get to peace. You can't have this going on. And I will say, Israel has to be very careful because you're losing a lot of the world, You're losing a lot of support. You have to finish up. You have to get the job done, and you have to get onto peace. You have to get onto a normal
life for Israel and for everybody else here. They say, if I ran for if I ran for office in Israel, i get ninety eight percent of the vote. I'm not Jewish, and yet Israel to me is very important. That's why I did. Goal on heights. Goal on heights is worth trillions of dollars. Trillions of dollars.
Okay. He goes on, by the way, to say, what are you.
Talking about with the goal on heights?
I don't even know.
But he goes on to say, like I asked, my ambassador, give me a history lesson. Make it five minutes or less, he said, And then based on that five minute conversation, he did whatever this thing is with the goal on he that.
He did recognize the goal on heids.
Okay, got that, Yeah.
But of course, in his way, he's like, it's worth trillion with the real estate value of the land, very much.
Echos Kushner's comments right about how Gossa look at this amazing waterfront property for development. Isn't this fantastic? Like the way these people think is really something else. Obviously people picked up on the fact that he says here multiple times he said this throughout the interview. You have to finish up, you have to get the job done, and you have to get to peace. So he'll say things like that. Then he'll also say things that are just
wholly like, well, of course I'll be great. I'll give you everything that you want. And we know from the last time that he was in office he did exactly that. He did give them everything that they wanted, everything that they asked for the Abraham Accords. You know, we're part of the context that Hamas says was what motivated them
to commit their atrocities and attacks on October seventh. Does not to justify Hima's actions, as just to explain to you the way that they were thinking about this and how they felt that their back was up against the wall because this normalization of relations was happening. That made them feel like the whole world is moving on and they're forgetting about us, and we're losing any sort of window to do anything at all. So Trump, you know, says his typical thing about oh, this never would have
happened under me, blah blah blah. I think that's nonsense. First of all, you can't prove a counterfactional. But second of all, his administration was a key part of creating this context, and that was continued by the Biden administration. They were pushing for normalization with Saudi Arabia.
So both of.
These administrations and many more besides complicit in creating the context for October seventh.
Yeah.
I have the thing about Trump, though, is he can't help but strike to at least some directional truth. And that's what I really found in some of these comments. Let's put it up there on the screen. Of course, the Israeli outlet didn't cut the video of this, but we do have the text quote, if you were president, how would you counter the wave of anti Semitism in the wake of war's outbreaks? He says, well, that's because you fought back, and I think Israel made a very
big mistake. I wanted to call and say, don't do it. These photos and shots, I mean moving shots of bombs being dropped into buildings in Gaza, and I said, oh, that's a terrible portrait. It's a very bad picture for the world. The world is seeing this every night. I would watch buildings pour down on people. I would say it was given by the Defense ministry, and Sue said, whoever's providing that is a bad image. And the Israeli
newscaster says, but terrorists are hiding in those buildings. He says, go and do what you have to do. But you don't do that. And I think that's one of the reasons there has been a lot of kickback if people didn't see that. Every single night, I've watched every single one of those, and I think Israel wanted to show it's tough, but sometimes you shouldn't be doing that.
So this one, do what you have to do, but you don't do that.
This is the most revealing. Look, this is my always my big defense to Trump. He at least can smell where things are in the media, and he has an uncanny ability through his like pr perception of the world, to be like, Look, on a policy level, you know, I support you guys, He's like, but don't do that, maybe you know, in his own very Trumpian way, but do what you'd have to do, but don't do that. I thought about calling him, say don't do it. It's
a very bad picture to the world. I mean, this is the like the savant ish aspect of Trump's character where you can't see any other Republican ever saying anything like that because they have to stay within a consistent prism. But for him, he's like, I can see that this is going to be a real problem for me. So it's not that politically he's positioning himself differently, but he's almost offering messaging advice. I would also say, he said, what did he say? I think they've made a bus mistake.
They shouldn't do it. It's like people were like, oh my gosh, is Trump calling for an unconditional easquire without the release of hostages in Israel. That's certainly one way you could actually read it, which is the hilarious thing about him and the way that he can put himself.
That is part of Trump and what is like, you know, incredible and maddening about him is you could read into these comments basically anything that you want because the comment of like, oh, you have to finish the job. I mean, that sounds really horrifying them, and he's like, you have to get to peace. The piece that this right wing outlet picked up on was like, you'd be crazy not to do what Israel did after October seventh, and that's what they use for their headline because that's what fits
what they wanted to hear from this conversation. There was another piece that I wanted to read you, and he does throughout this whole interview, which I encourage you to read because it is interesting. He keeps coming back to, you know, the assault on Gaza and the buildings pouring down on people, as he said, is like a PR problem for Israel. You heard him say, like you're losing
all this support around the world. You know, you shouldn't do that, et cetera, etc. He keeps coming back to it as like a messaging and PR problem, not like a reality problem for Israel. But he got asked about the Chuck Schumer comments calling for a new government to be elected after the war is over, and let me reach you this because he gets into the Israel lobby and it's again one of these things that like, you can't imagine really any other Republican politician exactly saying these
particular things. So he says, I think it's a terrible thing to do with regard to Schumer because it takes all of your momentum away because they watched and they watched the government, they watch the people what's going on. It shows great division in the United States. You have to have support, and you don't have the support you used to have. Some fifteen years ago, Israel had the strongest lobby. If you were a politician, you couldn't say anything bad about Israel. That would be like the end
of your political career. Today it's almost the opposite, not true, but anyway, put that aside, I'm never seen you have AOC plus three these lunatics. Frankly goes on like random rave about AOC and Rashida Tuli. Then he goes on to say, and fifteen years ago that would have been unthinkable to be doing that. So Israel has to get Israel has to get better with the promotional and with
the public relations because right now they're in ruin. They're being hurt very badly, I think in a public relations sense.
So anyway, some opinions.
Offered there about the importance and strength of the Israel lobby from mister Trump.
He knows, right, this is what I mean about it.
Well, and that's the thing is he just is looking out for I don't think Trump is ideological about Israel. I think it's purely transactional.
Right.
You know, he got a lot of money from Sheldon Nodelson last time around their other influential donors who for whom this is a really key issue. He sees where the Republican Party is and it's like, all right, well this is just where I'm going to be. But to your point, there's I think two other pieces going on. First of all, he has a personal grievance with nan Yahoo because he accepted the legitimacy of Joe Biden's.
Election, says one of the first. That's right, Yeah, so he.
Has a personal grievance with Naaniaho. And second of all, I think you're right that he sniffs out you know that Joe Biden has a real problem on this issue with regard.
To his base.
So he feels like if I can even gesture it, like we need to end this.
This is too much.
There needs to be a piece that that can help to drive that divide in the Democratic Party.
But you know, I mean I.
Also think I was even as these comments were all over the map, and like I said, I think you can kind of take from them whatever you want. To the extent that Nan Yahu was thinking, you know, I just need to keep this going, and Donald Trump's going to get elected and he's just gonna let me do whatever I want. You have to at least call into question whether that would actually be the case based on these comments that.
Bass no loyalty, is no ideology, And this was a major problem during the administration. We never knew what we were going to get. On the one hand, we're pulling out Afghanistan. The other hand, we're hiring John Bolton, So which is it right? You know, so we never really know. I really didn't care about policy, But what he does care about is bad headline. And there are several moments I'll never really forget from interviewing and meeting Trump. But
I can't go into too much detail. But there was one instance where we're insinuating something that would have caused him a bad headline, and he freaked out at a personal level that I had never seen him react before, and it was really in some of those moments kind of covering him up close, that you could just see like,
this is what makes him tick. And so to the extent that he's quote unquote loyal to Israel, it's like, yeah, maybe from a campaign perspective, but if he gets into office and you're bb and you said the wrong thing about Biden, or if he can sense that this is going to be bad for him politically, he's going to cut you loose no matter what. And that's why I think you are correct. I mean, the Trump is simply
the master of saying everything to everyone. That's part of the reason why he is as successful as he is. That's why people often articulate his meandering rhetoric that is all over the place. But I've often found it's actually a major strength for him because his supporters can see be like no, no, no, he's the candidate of peace, or he's a candidate of strength. Neo cons and you know, isolationists alike can find whatever they want in some of his rhetoric, and I think that's how he's going to
continue on this issue. He'll never come down as stridently as a Tom Cotton or any of these other folk because he doesn't believe it. He really doesn't well.
And in that way, I mean Biden is deeply ideal.
He is very ideological. I think Deathe's.
Locked in ideological pro Israel Zionists on this issue, which is why he's been willing to I mean, he's risking his entire reelect over this issue. If you just look at the numbers, how important this has become for young voters, for Arab America, for Muslim Americans, for Black Americans. I mean, there is the core of the Democratic base is there.
There is a significant.
Portion that is deeply distraught over what is happening and what this president is not just sitting back and watching happen, but is shipping the weapons for and supporting diplomatically and you know, enabling in every way that he possis can't So he is actually willing to risk Trump getting re elected for his ideological zeal and commitment on the issue. Trump is just purely transactional. Now within the Republican Party context,
it has always been the case. I shouldn't say always, because actually if you go back to George H. W. Bush and Reagan, they were definitely better on this issue than Joe Biden and willing to stand up to Israel in certain instances, but in the modern Republican Party context, that transactional math has always landed you on the side of let me just do you know whatever Israel wants, let me back them at every turn, et cetera.
I don't really expect that to be.
Different, but you know, it's classic Trump just to embody, the way that he can say two things basically at once. You know, he says, go and do what you have to do, but you don't do that. So which is it? Do you do what you have to do from their perspective or do you not do that? And again, you can kind of read into that whatever you want to read into that. I actually when I that, I just burst out laughing because it is so classic classic Trump.
It's like Trump AI. If you asked Trump AI to respond to this question, that's what they'd say.
I just realized Trump AI is almost literally impossible because he's so all over the map. You could never program that level of randomness into Trump's Trump is always going to have a job, and he's also really old, so he probably won't live to see it. All right, let's move on to the legal front regarding mister Trump, There's been some major developments on the money side. A huge victory for him yesterday and Court, let's go and put
this up there on the screen. Court has agreed to pause that collection of the four hundred million dollar judgment against Trump if he is able to put up a one hundred and seventy five million dollar bond within ten days. Quote. If Trump does it, it will then stop the on collection and prevent the state from seizing presumptive assets while
he appeals. The appeals Court has also halted other aspects of the trial judges ruling that had barred Trump and his son Eric and Don Junior from serving in corporate leadership from years, so they will retain leadership over their current business assets. Quote. In all, the order was a significant victory for Trump as he defends the real estate empire that vaulted him into public life, and it came just after Letitia James was expected to then initiate the
effort to collect the judgment. So Crystal a much more manageable amount of money at one hundred and seventy five million dollars, especially whenever you combine it with some of the windfall that he's just received in his Truth Social IPO that is expected. Actually, Trump just yesterday, if everybody wants to know, officially cracked the top five hundred richest Americans with his network, getting six billion dollars according to Forbes magazine. So he's actually richer than ever today. Then
he was previously expected one hundred and seventy five million. Previously, you and I had discussed he had a line on a possible one hundred million dollar bond, So he was able to get a bond, and he could come up with some seventy five million dollars, then he might be able to stave off of this. That's him. He still has got ten more days. But this is a far far cry from the bankruptcy in the asset seizure which we all expected previously.
For sure.
For Trump's part, he insisted on truth Social back on Friday that he does have almost five hundred million dollars in cash. He wants to be able to use some of that on his presidential run, which is nonsense. Even in twenty sixteen, remember those he promised to put a bunch of his own cash in his presidential campaign never came anywhere. Close to what he said he was going to do. But he's saying that, you know, the judge doesn't want me taking cash out to use it for
the campaign. So that's why the half a billion dollars was assessed. So anyway, he's he's sticking to the line, Oh, I actually have the money, is not really a problem, but I just don't really want to use it for this regard. So we'll see what happens here in terms of yeah, I mean, it's still a lot of money, but he probably can more easily come up with us one.
That's the irony if you had half a billion dollars in cash here, freaking idiot, even no financial advisor whatever to do that. Imagine if that segment about of your net worth was a liquid cash. That's incredibly foolish from a financial perspective. But he's so concerned with the bravado and the appearance that he has to pretend that that is the case. Let's go to the next part. This
is also very very important. The New York hush money case now officially has a trial date set for April fifteenth, also known as tax Day, coincidentally, tearing quote into the presidential Foreign president's lawyers for what he said were unfounded claims that the hush money case had been tainted by
prosecutorial conduct. The judge now officially set the case, despite defense's calls to continue the delay and to throw it out entirely from a last minute document dump, so they say, barring now perhaps another delay, which is on the horizon, the presumptive Republican nominee will be on trial as a criminal defendant in just three weeks. And the trial, though, is of course going around the Stormy Daniels hush money case payment, a very novel legal interpretation under New York
state law hasn't happened before. Even if convicted Crystal, it's very likely to go to appeals and actually, you know, set some standard as to whether this was even allowed. Uh, definitely the weakest of all of the criminal cases against Trump. But of course, anytime you find yourself in the jaws of the criminal justice system, it's not great.
Yeah, And I mean it is a Tawdrey yeah situation. Sure, if it wasn't Trump, this would be a career ender for pretty much any politician, right, I mean it's kind of like John Edwards esque.
Yeah, you know, but which Edwards was. Edwards was not a billionaire playboy, but he he was like supposedly.
I mean, I'm just saying that Trump gets away with shit that nobody else of course, Yeah, but I mean it's destroyed, destroyed John Edwards political career.
It was over.
That was it.
Even though jury ultimately you know what they identify.
I think it was either a mistrial or are they yeah.
They he didn't wasn't found guilty. Something happened in the trial. I don't remember exactly, but anyway, he wasn't found guilty. But I mean, it is that type of like Tawdrey sordid cover we were up using campaign funds, etc. So, you know, just to play devil's advocate here, I don't want to discount that this could actually be potentially impactful for the public and to you know, offer that side of the case. We can put this up on the
screen for whatever reason. Biden does seem to be having a little bit of a polling bounce right now, so he for the first time in quite a while, has now surged past Trump in the This is the Economist average of polls. So we've got Biden at forty five, Trump at forty four. I just saw some swing state polling this morning that actually looked decent for Biden, had
him tied in a few key swing states. We haven't been seeing that for a little while, so there's enough of a trend now that it does seem like he's getting a little bit of a bounce. There's a variety of reasons that could be the case. One it could be that people were so impressed with his incredible.
State of a Union performance.
Can you tell him being a little sarcastic here that they But I genuinely think he outperformed the very very very low expectations of like can you walk up to the stage and like not have a visible health event while you're delivering the speech. He did that, and so it could be That's part of why I do think it's possible that. Another reason is potentially that, you know, the Trump legal issues have been more in the news and more front and center, and that would be taking
a toll on Trump. So I just want to hold out the possibility that even though this trial is seen as like the lesser of all of the various criminal charges that he's facing, the details are in some ways the most and are relatable. They're the most scandalous, you know, And just the idea of him being a criminal defendant and being in front of a jury and the case being made and all these allegations being put against him, it could have a public impact. I don't want to totally dismiss that out.
Let's not dismiss it. You're right, and let's be fair that Trump's you know, personality and stop the steal and the madness and all of that. It had a huge impact in twenty twenty two. Yeah, so we can't discount. That's the reason I'm willing to discount this one a little bit is this is so baked into the original twenty twenty thesis and didn't have any impact then. I mean, when I think Stormy Daniels, what am I thinking? Michael Abnatti freaking CNN and all the other media madness that
we had to live through. I would say was washed for everybody involved. Now, when I'm thinking January sixth, criminal tryal, I'm thinking a very different story. When I'm thinking criminal documents, I'm thinking a different story, Georgia, I'm thinking of different story. So I think there are gradations within this this one in particular, I think it's so baked in. Stormy Daniels
had her moment, you know, Avanati had his moment. This is all people know, everything there is to know about this case already, and the whole case Crystal was made prior to the twenty twenty election, Michael Cohen pleading guilty, et cetera. That's the only reason on this one specifically, I'm saying I don't think so as much.
Maybe I'm genuinely fifty fifty because.
The other possibility is that just that normally reaction of like there you are facing criminal, like you're a potential criminal, right, yeah, felon you charged you? Okay, they don't you know, the no legal application or whatever. They're looking at this and like, you know, this was a messed up situation, you handled it in a disgusting way and probably in a legal way as well. And now your ass has been dragged in front of a trial jury to answer these criminal charges.
So I could see it just there's.
Also just that Trump has benefited I think from the fact that he has been for a while he was a little bit.
On the back burner in terms of a public person.
He wasn't in people's faces every single day, and so there was an ability for some of the memories of what it's like with Trump, what he's all about, all these various scandals and things from the past, and so for people to have a reminder of that, of his character, of this just messiness that constantly surrounds him, it can't be a good thing for him. You know, I certainly don't think if you're thinking that, oh, this is going to in or to his benefit with the general public
in order to benefit with Republican base. Fine, but he's already won the Republican nomination with the general public, I don't think it's going to be a benefit for him.
And I could.
Easily see it being an actual somewhat of an issue for him. And I'm just talking about, you know, maybe a few points in the polls which could make the difference.
So who knows. Very gotcha unfold?
All right, So, we did have a pre recorded segment that we did with Matt Stoler yesterday about the Boeing CEO stepping down and so some of the problems they're getting into it. Matt gave us some really really insightful analysis.
So let's take a listen to that, all right, guys, we have some big breaking news with regard to Boeing. This, of course in the wake of major safety issues and huge questions, especially surrounding the death of a Boeing whistleblower. Can put this up on the screen from CNN. So Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun is going to step down. This is part of a larger shakeup of the company's leadership. Apparently Boeing's chairman and the head of the commercial airplane
unit are also leaving. The CEO will not be out immediately, but he is planning to leave what they describe as the beleaguered company by the.
End of the year.
And just so happens, we have a great guy here to talk about all of this. Matt Stoler is the author of Goliath. He also works at the American Economic Liberties Project and writes at the Substack Big and he is here to react to this news.
Great to have you met, Thanks, thanks for having me.
Yeah.
Of course, so are Boeing's problems overall. But they fixed.
It's fixed. It's great.
No, I mean, there's a lot to say about this, but Boeing has a history of having their CEOs resign and being like, oh, you know, everything is fixed. So I think this happened in like two thousand and three, It's happened at other you know, and also high level executives. Oh we're caught for bribery, like whoa, whoops, because they have a big defense unity. They just what they do is they if you are the one who gets caught, then they will then you'll say, resign, will pay you.
Off and you go away.
But the rule at Boeing is don't get caught, not like let's hit your stumps, right, So it's it's also he's not resigning. He's going to stay there until twenty you know, for the rest of the year. Yeah, which is it's you know, it's it's March. Like that's a lot of that's like a baby, right, that's a whole bit. I mean like go away, right, like it can't either your take responsibility for it and you resign tomorrow or you're not. And like this is it's like classic you know,
halfassing it right. No, Boeing needs to be nationalized. It is a disaster. It's not a viable enterprise right now. They're not making safe planes.
Take us back to how this all happens. So everything January five, The door plug blows off seven thirty seven Max nine. David Calhoun specifically was brought in to fix the problems of the updated software system that leads to the death of some five hundred people previously. That's his
entire plan. But what really gets revealed is like the rot of Boeing itself, which you've done a lot of work, right, So give us the backstory about the you know about airline deregulation, Boeing financialization, spinning off Spirit error Systems, which coincidentally is now involved you know here, and now they're buying it back. Well, how the hell did this happen?
Yeah, so Boeing was a crown jewel of American air engineering. Right, It's one of the best companies we've ever created. So to understand how it got ruined, you have to start with the customers. So the airlines. Boeing has a big defense arm that's always been corrupt and terrible. But this is a company that they designed the B fifty two in like a weekend. They made amazing flying machines. They also were always disciplined by competition. Okay, but in the
nineteen seventies we decided to deregulate airlines. And what's important about airline deregulation is that before deregulation, airlines were public utilities, and so if you had cost right as an airline, the government would say, all right, you have a certain amount of cost, we're going to say you make ten percent on that right. And that's just the way it works,
and so there's no incentive to skimp. There's no incentive skimp on customer like service, on flights, on anything you serve people's stake, you make a ten percent profit on that. So there are problems with the public utility model because it leads to inflating costs, but you're never incentivized to screw people over, screw workers over because.
You make less money.
Deregulation flipped that, and deregulation said, now we're going to move to a system where you're just trying to take cost out to make things more efficient.
So what happens, well, they break their.
Unions, they start to screw their customers, they find all sorts of ways to do junk fees. They're not actually more profitable, like airlines periodically have to be built out, but they cut service to lots of regional cities, so the air grade is different today than it used to be. But they also start negotiation negotiating much more aggressively with aerospace producers like Boeing, and Boeing starts to change the
way that they that they price. So, for example, Boeing said, when they developed the seven three seven Max, will give you a rebate of a million dollars if you have to change the way you train pilots. So they one of the reasons the reason that they screwed up the seven three seven Max design is because they were like, we don't want to change all the airport infrastructure. We don't want to have to train on We're going to tell all our clients they don't have to get their
pilots retrained on new hardware. This is going to be the same thing. But of course it was designed poorly because the engines were too big for the body of the airplane. Now one of the so the airline deregulation was part of a whole financialization of the American economy. So in the nineteen nineties it finally slams into Boeing, and there's only one other commercial aerospace maker by the nineteen nineties aside for Boeing, that's McDonald douglas, and the
government says, we love efficiency and we love monopolies. And Boeing is a super high tech, awesome company run by very sophisticated people. They make the best stuff in the world. Very similar to Apple, very similar to Google, very similar to Amazon. So they said, you know what, by McDonald douglas's commercial aerospace unit, even though that will clearly reduce competition, it will create a domestic monopoly and the only other
competitor will be Airbus. So the government pushed Boeing do this. Boeing didn't need a lot of pushing. Boeing also pushed the government to let them do it, and when that happened, Boeing flipped and financialized. So this was this was this a clin administration. So this is nineteen ninety six, ninety seven, ninety.
Eight, right, it's like peak nineties. Yeah, it's like you know, yeah, like Mockerine is on the stage, yeh.
The you know, Jennifer Anderston haircut, yeah, thing right, Yeah, that's right. And so Boeing merges with McDonald douglas. There's no more domestic competition. So if you're an aerospace engineer, you don't like Boeing too bad, nowhere else to work. If you're a supplier and you're supplying bowing too bad, nowhere else, like you have one option maybe too right, and you know Aeros Airbus it's European right, so they
take forever to do things. I'm and no, I mean today, if you want to get a jet from Airbus, it's twenty twenty seven or twenty twenty eight until you can deliver because there's so much demand.
So okay, So.
What starts to happen in almost immediately when the mergers, when the merger happens is there's a fight between the NBA Wienies, the being counters and the engineers.
And the engineers have always had a lot.
Of power at Boeing because they go to the NBA whenies and they say, give us a bunch of money, we'll design a cool plane.
And it always worked before, so usually they said yes.
But in nineteen ninety six seven eight, they were like, no, we are now going.
To offshore things.
We are going to do things in a completely different way, and we're going to you know, you guys are no longer an advantage for the company. You're a cost center. These are the engineering people, right, the workers, the people that make the planes and have the embedded knowledge to actually construct these things. And so they go after them, and the end the being counters win and they start to cut safety, they start to you know, there's the first strike of the engineers. Ever like it was a
white collar union. There was more like a debating society or a club. And then they actually go on strike in the in the early two thousands. And the first plane that's built with the new outsourcing model is the seventy to seven Dreamliner.
It's sort of a disaster. Yeah, Boeing moves.
Yeah, Boeing moves their headquarters from Seattle to Chicago so they don't have to be near the people they're laying off. They move a lot of work to South Carolina because it's because it's non union. And now they move their headquarters to DC because for lobbying purposes, and so it just gradually and the seventy seven max is that was the culmination where they decided to make explicitly unsafe, bad engineering decisions for financial reasons. And they haven't really fixed it.
I mean, the software patch is better, but that needs to be completely re engineered, and that's why they also didn't fix any of the I mean the door blowout with Alaska Air.
That's not some big engineering thing.
That's just like the dudes just didn't put these crews in right, Like that's like, that's like very very bad, right, just they were not doing quality checks.
So it's embarrassing.
But also that whole culture that was put in there in the nineties of being counters who are super hostile to safety, to consumers, to customers, to workers.
They need to be removed. They need to be pulled out of that institution.
I think it needs to be nationalized and the company needs to be restructured. Otherwise, we have all of these planes that are Boeing planes and people are terrified to fly on.
Them, as they should be, and that I mean, how many billions of dollars we build these people out right? I mean that's what people would be like, Oh, you're messing with private enterprise. I'm like, okay, but you know how many fifty billion, one hundred billion just in the last decade or so if we go back to to the two thousand and one is probably even more a term number of taxpayer dollars that we've used to prop up the Boeing company.
Yeah yeah. In the Cares Act right during the during the pandemic, they put a twenty five billion dollar line item for like it was not They.
Didn't say Boeing. They were like for a national security aerospace company that rhymes with shmowing.
Yeah, and you know, and then they didn't have to take the money because they could just borrow money at preferential interes states because everyone knew, okay, Boeing is.
A federal taking care of Yeah.
Yeah, so you can't you can't even measure it right because everybody you know Boeing is too big to fail. It's it's essentially a government. When I say nationalized, I don't mean you know, we need to take it over
like we it is, we own it. I mean we've been backstopping it for a long time as you owe it, so like we should just formally take it over, restructure it, probably break it up so that you know, you have the defense arm and then maybe you create a couple of civilian aerospace makers, reintroduce some competition, and that's that's the way that you definancialize this industry.
How does the FAA fit into this picture where their failures there as well. Is that also part of this deregulatory train t.
Yeah, so so it's a great question. So this gets to like a question of political economy. Right prior to deregulation, because costs are not a problem but a benefit, they didn't want to get. They didn't want to gut their regulators. Regulators were fine if regulators imposed costs on them. Cool, that's just more money, right, that's another ten percent a profit.
Right after deregulation, all of a sudden, the airline industry and Boeing and the aerospace makers are lobbing to gut the FAA, and so you see this systemic reduction in funding and ultimately Boeing is they they're doing voluntary like self regulation because there just aren't even enough inspectors. And the political economy, there's no political support to actually regulate
the industry, either the airlines or Boeing. Now under Trump, and this was a real embarrassment to the FAA and to frankly, the America when the Max crashed right for the second time. America is renowned for having the best aviation regulators in the world. People followed us, right because we were really good.
And care about safety.
Trump was the last.
This was I think a under Trump, America was the last country to ground the MAX, which was awful.
I mean there, it was just awful.
Right and under Biden, and I'm not a Biden partisan. There are a lot of parts of the bidenmistration that have been really problematic. But the FAA, first of all, has the first has a full time administrator. It's always been acting because they never send an never bothered confirmator. They actually have one, and they've been very aggressive. They've put caps on the number of planes Bowing can produce, which hits their cash flow, which hurts.
It hurts.
They have inspectors on the ground actually looking at the safety systems. They're being very aggressive. They also are thinking of putting a cap on the growth of United Airlines, which is super aggressive because of safety problems there. And so what you're seeing is actual governance from the FAA and the Department of Transportation.
It's not enough, and.
We have to restructure the political economy of the whole industry, but it is something, and that is more than we've had in a really long time.
And lastly, Matt, what did you make of these specifics of the whistleblower who was found dead in the middle of his deposition. But what did you make of the specifics of the allegations he was making about Boeing and what they had to lose with this individual who by all accounts was very credible, who was billing the tea about their production, especially in South Carolina.
Yeah, I mean what I from what I understand, I mean, he was saying things that were pretty extraordinary about the particularly the seventy seven Dreamliner, and you know, things like how they would the managers would like steal defective parts from the closet where they kept them, saying don't use these parts.
They would steal them and then put them on the planes.
So like, you know, stuff like that, and it was very you know, they had he had been a whistleblower for seven years, but the stuff that he had been he was deposed that day that he died was pretty incendiary and he was going to do more. And so you know, look, I'm not saying that Boeing killed him, right, Like it's weird that he would be found dead, but they totally killed him.
Like why are.
You covering your asposes?
I mean, yeah, I'm just kidding, but I'm not kidding.
Well, there's there needs to be a fullsome investigation and Boeing out a lot to lose from this man's allegations.
Yeah, I mean, look, they don't deserve the benefit of the doubt. That's like, the bottom line here is that they clearly the company. You know, there were when the first Max crashed, Okay, that's a tragedy, but then they knew, right, the board knew that there were safety issues and they didn't do anything about it, and then the second one crash. So this is a company willing to kill people, right, we know that.
I don't.
You know, obviously I have no idea what happened, right, But like by all accounts, the guy was not suicidal. He told friends, you know, if I die, it's not suicide. And like, I think the most telling thing is that his last meal was Taco Bell, and no one's last meal Taco Bell.
So like, I don't if.
I agree with that that analysis, I'm.
Not going to stand for that. I like Taco Bell too much. Well, that said, I think your point is taken is that, look, this is a company again that was criminally negligent, that avoided criminal charges. By the skin of their teeth last time around. There's a lot of people with a lot to lose on this when there's no reason for the DOJ not to give that, you know, not to give throw the book at him at least
this time around. And so man has been making very credible allegations, well very inconvenient timing.
You know, for them, really very fortunate for them that he's taken out of the picture. I'll just say that, Matt, thank you so much.
Great to have you, appreciate it, apsure you.
Thanks for having me.
Yeah, our pleasure.
Major news yesterday federal authorities reading the homes of Sean P. Diddy Combs. Let's go and put some of this up there on the screen. So here we have video from the sky of Los Angeles where you have Homeland Security investigators dragging individuals outside of a home that was that was linked to mister Shawn Combs. You can see that
there are investigators that are on site. They appear to be both executing a search warrant and searching all throughout the house or evidence for what appears to be tied to a sexual misconduct investigation, even possibly involving minors with the most noteworthy part of this crystal is that they were simultaneous raids, both on homes in Los Angeles and in Florida. In Miami, there was video that appeared to show federal investigators and authorities on some of his personal
assets like boats and others. There's also been a video that has now surfaced of showing mister Combs at the Miami Airport just like kind of pacing aimlessly. He has not yet been arrested by federal authorities and they haven't really issued any details such and so forth. But a lot of this just comes on the heels of what have been stunning allegations against mister Combs. Let's go and put this up there on the screen from the Los Angeles Times. They do a decent job here of writing
up some of the recent shakeups that have happened. Quote. Four separate plaintiffs have now filed civil lawsuits against Combs in the last month, accusing him of rape, sex trafficking, a minor assault, and a litany of other alleged abuses, imperiling his empire and sending shockwaves through the music industry. These include his former girlfriend Cassandra Ventura known as Cassie accusing him of rape and forcing her to have sex with male prostitutes in front of him, along with repeated
physical assault. Mister Combs actually settled that suit. You have another woman who is accusing Combs in a suit of drugging and raping her in nineteen ninety one, recording the attack and then distributing that footage without her consent. A third woman filed a third suit in which she claimed that Combs and Guy singer Aaron Hall sexually assaulted her, and the most recent suit says that Combs and former Bad Boy label president Harve Pierre gang raped and sex
trafficked a seventeen year old girl. Pierre said in a statement the allegations were discussing false and a desperate attempt for financial game. To be clear, Combs is denied all of this. But you know, anytime that the FEDS are raising two of your houses in connection with an investigation like this, it's clearly that there is something serious going on latest that we.
Know on the raids of both the Miami and the California homes. A Homeland Security investigation spokesperson said the raid was executed as part of a quote ongoing investigation. Law enforcement sources told ABC News that the search warrant was being executed in La. Combs's sons were detained outside the home, as is customery in such circumstances, and then released without charges.
We have an official statement, they say.
Earlier today, Homeland Security Investigations New York executed law enforcement actions as part of an ongoing investigation with assistance from HSI LA, HSI Miami, and our local law enforcement partners. We will provide for their information as it becomes available, and law enforcement sources also said to ABC News the searches are being carried out as part of a federal investigation led by the Southern District of New York into
alleged human trafficking. No criminal charges, though, have been filed in the investigation. So that's the most of what we know about what's going going on here.
But you know, this all started with Diddy.
There had been rumors about him on different like hip hop podcasts and whatever, but this all really went mainstream when Cassie filed her suit against him, alleging years of psychological, physical, and sexual abuse. Just to give you some of her allegations, she accused him of rape and for forcing her to have sex with male prostitutes in front of him, along
with repeated physical assaults. She claimed that in twenty twelve, Combs told her that he was going to blow up the car of rap artist Kid Cutty, suspecting that Cassie and Cutty were dating. The suit alleges that around that time, Kid Cutty's car did in fact explode in the driveway, and Cutty told the New York Times quote, this is all true. In twenty fifteen, this is a different There were a variety of allegations against him, alleging physical assaults too,
throughout his career. I was actually as I went through the timeline, I was sort of shocked. I didn't realize the number of actual physical assault allegations against him. Cassie
also alleged years of physical, psychological, and emotional abuse. She claims Combs forced her to purchase and take illegal drugs like cocaine, ketamine, and ecstasy that he filmed her as he forced her to participate in sex with male sex workers in multiple cities for his own voyeuristic pleasure in a practice he called freak offs, and that he beat her on many occasions in retaliation for talking to other men,
often with witnesses present. Some of the gruesome details of what Cassie alleged included that she was suffering severe memory loss, potentially from these routine alleged beatings from Diddy, and that he was so controlling that even when she sought medical help for that memory loss, again potentially resulting from these beatings, he got the x rays, he.
Controlled the medical records. That was the level of.
Total control he had over her, according to Cassie. Immediately after the charges come out, they settle. And this was the context we were talking before of that New York Survivor's Law. This is the law that was put through that gave basically a temporary window for any sort of sexual assault claims where the statute of limitations had expired. It allowed people to bring those claims in the context of a civil suit.
So that was the.
Context for actually a number of these claims against Ditty.
And as I said.
Before, there are a range of allegations against him, and as you mentioned, Sager, the most recent one having to do with allegations of sex trafficking a minor. So we can all guess that this investigation likely has to do with some of the allegations against him, and just to reiterate, he denies all of this and says that none of it happened.
He denies everything. Yeah, I mean, we'll take it for what it's worth. I think the timeline, though, is pretty damning, and we can put that on the screen please from NPR. I encourage people to go through and read this. Look, I don't wasn't all that familiar, I guess with all
of this details here about mister Combs. But when we're going back, you know, he started his music industry career here in nineteen ninety and according to this twenty twenty three suit, he actually in nineteen ninety to nineteen ninety one, then allegedly began to sexually assault this victim and a friend after a music industry event, where he beat her several days later, whenever he was confronted again in nineteen ninety one, immediately after beginning this, according to that lawsuit,
allegedly drugs, sexual assault, videotapes nineteen year old after going on a date with him. Then you continue down the line. Nineteen ninety six, comes is found guilty of criminal mischief for threatening a photographer from the New York Posts with a gun. Then you see. In nineteen ninety nine, he has arrested charge with two felonies second degree assault criminal mischief in the beating of a record executive and two bodyguards who beat them with their fists, a telephone, a
champagne bottle. He publicly apologized, he asked for the charges to be dismissed. He reportedly then paid the individual some five hundred thousand dollars in assault charges were dropped. It's like we continue down this road, Crystal, and every five years or so we see a pop up of a
gun charge, a violence charge, an allegation. But it does seem to be that everything began a real crescendo with his cementing of social status through his all white party in the Hampton's, through networking and using his power, his influence, his money, just surround himself with some of these sycophans and to allegedly, you know, conduct, have some of the horrible conduct that is detailed here. You really just read like a timeline of somebody going completely out of control.
Well, he became, I mean, this is an iconic figure, yeah, right in his own right in terms of being an artist. He became not only like a hip hop mogul, but also this sort of cultural mogul with you know, clothing line and all you know, an alcohol line and all
sorts of other business deals. So he was is larger than life, and you know, that's part of what can allow this sort of culture to persist, because people feel that their whole career, their you know, entire paycheck, their entire life is dependent on staying quiet, on going along to get along and not unearthing these you know, longtime
allegations against him. And so you know, Cassie is really the one who through that New York Survivor's Law, she really broke the seal on again a lot of rumors and there were certain things, as you mentioned, that were in the public record in terms of charges and things that he was found guilty of, but she really opened the door for these other you know, allegations to be launched.
And it does make me think, you know, I was, I was a little unsure about the New York Survivor's Law, but in this context, like it does make me feel like this this made a lot of sense and did provide a window for justice for a lot of people who you know, back twenty thirty years ago, you probably felt like, especially when you're going up against a powerful person, you have no chance, like there's absolutely no chance that you can bring these allegations and be met with anything
other than having your entire life completely destroyed and no one taking you seriously, and so providing this window where people could once again come forward. First of all, you know, the times have changed somewhat, but also it did he is also not quite the towering figure that he once was. Still incredibly wealthy, incredibly powerful, all of those sorts of things, but maybe not quite at the pinnacle that he used to be, and so that provides the opening for these
incredibly serious charges to be made against him. So, you know, that's what we know at this point. We'll see where the investigation leads.
Oh, welcome the investigation. I think it's good. I think there's a lot of famous people who've been hanging out with him, I mean, succording to some of the allegations out there. I mean it was like a Signamo laer Epstein type situation. They've got Prince Harry now who's been
named in a lawsuit. You've got a lot of celebrities, you got politicians and others, I mean socially he was a major and towering figure of New York and in Hampton's La Society Miami, you know, hanging out with the all these people, and I mean, this type of behavior does not happen in a vacuum. And in fact, these type of people who exhibit this type of behavior often enjoy and get off in flaunting it in other people's face. So it's like, well, how many people out there really
knew about what was going on? Almost every single instance. You know, it was part of the power that you could get away with stuff like this. Yeah, continue to track.
That between this and have you watched Quiet on set yet?
I haven't watched it yet. It's four parts, which I did not realize. I thought it was a single one.
They're each Yeah, you know, like fifty minutes or something. Okay, you're gonna get through it quickly on double speed.
But you know, it's just made me really reflect on it. Seems like in literally every corner of the entertainment industry, you have some sort of like Harvey Weinstein.
Especially in the nineties, especially in the nineties when everything was so centrally powerful.
Absolutely, that's true, Yeah, that's probably, that's probably very true. But because you have this dynamic of you know, you have so many people who are desperate for these slots. You have these massive power imbalance. Is you have a lot of people who are very vulnerable, who may not have a lot of money, who are just you know, depending on you, desperately hoping for their chance.
They think this is their one opportunity.
It leads to them, you know, let me stay quiet, Let me put up with these things that I think are unacceptable because I have to, because you know, I'm dependent on this and other people are dependent on me, et cetera. And it does create a climate that is very rife for abuse. You see it also with the R.
Kelly.
Yeah, I mean similar, similar type of allegations you know here of that level of control, of control of partner's control of the psychological abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, mental abuse, et cetera. Very similar type dynamics between these these cases as well. So anyway, we'll watch and see what unfolds. But if any fraction of the allegations against him are true, I hope that his ass pays for it.
Well.
Especially the Feds here are now involved, and that shows you the seriousness with their taking that sex trafficking charge because that is as moving people across state lines for purposes, especially including minors. So definitely hope that.
Justice is done here, Tager, what you're looking at?
Well, before I get started, I want to get a few things out of the way. First, is I'm biased in the story I'm about to cover doctor Andrew Huberman. He's a personal friend to the point We've exchanged text, phone calls, we've met in person. A lot of my anger around this is of seeing my friend smeared. But I'm also going to try and fuse my personal outrage, add an injustice to a friend with some journalistic rigor, and expose what I believe to be a genuine hit
job that has bigger cultural implications. Let's start with the smear job itself. New York Magazine, which is a subsidiary of Vox Media, published a front page story on Monday morning titled Falling for Doctor Huberman The private and public seductions of the world's biggest pop neuroscientists. Now, you might expect the story to detail perhaps some health lies or bad advice possibly that was proven from the most popular health podcast in the world. And you open up that story,
you find eight thousand words. After reading them all, you will come away with this information doctor Andrew Huberman, who is unmarried, engaged in simultaneous relationships with up to six women according to his ex girlfriends and lovers. I'm not kidding, and if you want, you can read the entire piece for yourself. Is exhaustively details a lead up of how Huberman has self admitted to therapy and a tough childhood.
Then immediately begins to parse in detail these scurrilous allegations of his ex girlfriends, who apparently have formed their own group chat to try and take him down. What is crazier is what I then found out by asking those
behind the scenes. Now, according to those familiar with New York Magazine's of original reach out to doctor Huberman, the vibe started out quite a bit different the New York Magazine's original email, which I obtained, and is so unbelievable that I was given permission to read a few quotes
for you here on the show is. In August of twenty twenty three, New York Magazine reporter Carrie Howley emailed saying, quote, I am writing in the hopes that one of my big stories this year might be the phenomenon of doctor Andrew Huberman. When my editor suggested I look into it him, I basically shot him down. It didn't seem like the kind of thing I would be into. I listened to
a single episode. Predictably, months later, I'm fully addicted and devoted, she adds, continues due to some of the episodes that deal with stress, I'm taking care of my mental health. It was almost like I couldn't engage or become interested until doctor Huberman made it all profoundly concrete and chemical. I know I'm far from the only person to have experienced this change. She adds a few more buttery things about how much she loved the podcast, and she said
and got no reply. Now the story should have died there, right, No, no, no, no. Suddenly the Huberman love affair turned into something very different. Months later, Those familiar say that Huberman's colleagues, his family, and his friends from high school began to be inundated with emails from New York Magazine requesting anonymous information on doctor Huberman. One of the emails reads as follows, subject line off the record conversation with New York mag email
text quote. In the interest of transparency, there have been serious allegations made about Andrew as well as the academic work that he is up to these days. Now, hold on the second, what serious allegations that he was not faithful to his girlfriend? Why is that pertinent to speak to his colleagues about? And what about his work at Stanford? What are you talking about here? It turns out nothing.
Despite the author's best efforts to smear Andrew Huberman's work at Stanford and presenting him with some no show at his own lab, insinuating that something was afoot because of its transition, Stanford itself stood up for him in the piece, saying his lab was fully operational. Nothing she was insinuating was true. As for these quote serious allegations, again, literally it is from his personal life. And where did these
allegations come from? Well, it doesn't take a genius to see that the sources of the story are jilted lovers of Andrew Huberman's And it appears, based upon my conversations again with those familiar, that the reporter was able to make contact with them by literally trolling for negative comments on Reddit threads and Instagram comments. So the timeline is basically this, She asked for a profile and pretended to be a fan. He said no or basically didn't reply.
Then she connects with these jilted lovers, leaving anonymous comments on the Internet. Then those claims, including incorrect ones about his work at Stanford, are presented to colleagues, friends, and family of Huberman's, including his own father, to react to. Any positive comments attesting to his character were not included in the story. The full allegations of the women were printed with complete credibility, even though many have exhibited some
pretty crazy behavior in their retaliation against him. So those are the specifics of how this all came to be. But let me just put this aside right now and just say this. Let's say every word of it is true, every last word. What is the relevance of any of this? Not once in this story did they ever dispute a single word that Andrew Huberman ever said on his podcast.
Not once did they prove that he is less than he says he is, including the fact that Stanford University publicly confirms that he remains not only a professor, but one who continues to publish research and teach students at this university. Not once were they able to prove misinformation, malinformation, whatever you want to call it. This is not a story. It is a character assassination of yes who a man who is my friend, but a man who I believe
has changed millions of lives for the better. Andrew Huberman does not tell you to do anything. He gives you information that you can research and check for yourself. He gives you protocols like look in the sun in the morning if you want to sleep better, avoid alcohol, and by and large, to try and live a healthier lifestyle. Or he will interview a world renowned scholar on the subject, and he will draw out information that might be relevant
to you if he want it to be. As far as I'm concerned, that's the only thing that's relevant about him. And if they could find anything he said regarding that which is wrong or was malicious, I'm all years and I wouldn't doing anything like this. They didn't. That's why I'm doing this monologue, because this was an attempt, for some reason or the other to take him down for just simply being the most popular health podcaster in the world.
He doesn't have to rely on mainstream media to get this information, and I guess that alone is his crime. For which he has now been sentenced and convicted in the court of public opinion by New York Magazine. It is not right and if you ever benefited from his advice, you should share this with people you know so the actual truth gets out there. Crystal.
And if you want to hear my reaction to Sagres's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at breakingpoints dot com. All right, we have one more important story we wanted to get to. We can go and put this up on the screen. Julian Assange has staved off extradition to the US, at least for now.
This is breaking news just this morning. This according to a UK court. Let me read you a little bit of this.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has fended off the threat of immediate extradition to the US after the High Court in London asked the US for more assurances. US authority say Assange fifty two, put lives at risk by publishing secret military documents and have four years been seeking his extradition on espionage charges. Put aside the US nonsense story there.
At a two day hearing last month, Assange sought permission to appeal the UK's twenty twenty two approval of his extradition, arguing the case against him was politically motivated and that he would not face a fair trial. In a ruling Tuesday, a panel of two judges said that Assange, an Australian citizen, would not be extradited immediately, and gave the US three weeks to give a series of assurances about Assange's First Amendment rights and that he would not receive the death penalty.
The US fails to give these, Assagne would be allowed to appeal his extradition at a hearing in May. They go on to say the ruling potentially offers Assange an extraordinary lifeline in a year's long saga that saw him shoot to global prominence for revealing to CNN what he described to CNN what I think anyone would describe as war crimes. So you know, saga. Listen, it's a victory for Assange. He gets to live to fight another day.
Of course, we should not lose sight of the fact that he continues to be held in detention at grave risk to his health, which according to his family, has severely deteriorated, and his legal prospects are still in complete. Limbo just to remind everybody, the Obama Biden administration had decided they could not charge Julie Assange without implicating core First Amendment rights, and in particular without implicating outlets like The New York Times. The Trump administration took a more
aggressive approach. They even had reportedly Mike Pompeo and others were even floating plans for, Hey, maybe we should just assassinate this guy outright, which is complete insanity. That did not get nearly enough attention, by the way, from the US press, which supposedly cares so much about press freedom. Right,
So Trump administration begins this prosecution. The Biden administration now has continued that prosecution and are seeking his extradition from the UK, where he has been held now for years, for seven years actually before that was hold up as a political refugee at the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK capital. So he's been five years in London's Bellmarsh Prison and
before that's seven years in the Ecuadorian embassy. I mean, it's just insanity that is unfolding, and the reason we always want to update and keep an eye on it is not only because of the personal ramifications for Julian Assange, his young family, his brother and father who we've we've met and interviewed here on the show. He loves, appreciates him.
This is a human being first and foremost, but also because of the way that this tramples on First Amendment rights and especially rights to publish information that implicates powerful people. And you know, as of now Collateral Marto, which got referenced, you know, in the show here yesterday with regard to the similarities to drone footage that came out of the Israel's assault on Gaza, incredibly impactful. But the individuals who
were in collateral murder they never face charges. And Julian Assange, for releasing that information that was in the benefit of the public interest of exposing what was happening, has been locked up now four years, persecuted four years, and his life, according to his family, is literally on the line.
Yeah, his family's been saying that here and anywhere else that you could find them. It's been fourteen years. Previously, did you mention this Crystal about the guilty plea previous or have you read those details, or if his family had explored possibly going through that, if this had gone through, but that's still very unfortunate because it sets the legal precedent for the prosecutorial direction of actual journalistic crimes. This was news that broke several days ago, and it does remain.
It appears their backup plan, and it's one which would allow him to plead guilty and possibly either have time served or spend some five years behind bars and then eventually be released. But given what we and we know at a personal level of his mental state, given what his family has told us, including here in the studio, the guy needs to be let out almost immediately. Yeah, and you know the case needs to be dropped against him, but don't expect anything like that to happen.
The Australian government agrees.
Yeah, we had the there's two Australian MP's on our show who were from different sides of the aisle who talked about that.
Yeah, they're calling for his release, so in any case, you know, they've the US has got a few weeks to make these assurances and then we'll see what happens after that, if he's going to be able to have a full hearing appealing for extradition in May, or whether they decide at that point. Okay, the extradition process could move forward, and then we'll see what happens from there, but wanted to make sure to give you all the very latest in this very important case.
Yeah, there you go. All right, Thank you guys so much for watching. We appreciate you. We'll see you all later