4/29/24: Cable Viewers Brainwashed On Israel, Jill Stein Arrested At Campus Protest, SCOTUS Blow To Trump Case, Howard Stern Tongue Bathes Biden, Trump Loses It On RFK Vaccine Stance, Biden Blocking Bibi Arrest Warrant, ADL Freaks On Ilhan, Kristi Noem Puppy Murder

so we'll break that down for you. We also have Trump now taking aim at RFK Junior after some polls which we covered here revealed that perhaps RFK Junior is taking more votes away from Trump, so he seems like he's more a little bit more nervous now. And RFK Junior also was on with Bill mar we'll show you a little bit of that.

We can go and put that up there on the screen, and you can sign up at breakingpoints dot com to support this, and just so everybody knows, like one of the reasons we're very proud of this poll is we tried to go after the things that a lot of mainstream media was either not covering or was not going after itself specifically with media coverage because it would indictment

of them specifically. So I think that we've partnered with JLP here to do a really good job is to how people view things based upon their news consumption, and that in and of itself is a major indictment. I think of a lot of things that the show stands again, so oh yeah, and support us. We would appreciate it.

down by age group. So something that's really going to jump on at you here is take a look at eighteen to twenty nine, fifty nine percent of young people say they're getting their news from TikTok, Instagram x or other social media fifty nine percent. The next closest category is podcasts in YouTube, but at seventeen percent, so huge drop off. Only fifteen percent say cable news, four percent say print media, and five percent say none of the above.

Then take a look at sixty five plus totally different dynamic fifty nine percent there say they're getting their news from cable news, only five percent from social media, only five percent from podcasts, nine percent from print media. And you can see the other age demographics. I mean, fifty to sixty four looks very similar to the sixty five plus fifty four percent, so a majority getting their news from cable news. To thirty to forty nine year old

demographic is a little more mixed. You still have a plurality at thirty seven percent getting their news or saying they're getting their news.

print media. I just want to reflect and say more of you all should be getting your news from podcasts and YouTube, apparently the lowest category for in all instances, but I mean, are just I think it's worth commenting on this piece specifically, which shows you if you compare the news habits of eighteen to twenty nine year olds versus those fifty plus, it's a whole different world, whole different landscape in terms of the type of information that they're taking in here.

fifty five years old and is not college educated. And the vast majority of those people fifty five, sixty five, seventy five plus who are very invested in the political system, they live in a completely different reality whenever it comes to money, whenever it comes to media. It's never been more evident, and I think in modern American history than

it is today. Everyone's like always kids these days. But the mono culture moment, and specifically monocultures of information from newspapers and that cable era and all of that basically from nineteen ninety two prior was very very different, where everyone was consuming the same media, but they had very different opinions about how they were consuming that. Here we are actually living in different realities, and that determination of

reality is downstream of all of our politics. It's how you see polls where in the majority of Republican voters will be against Ukraine AID, but very specifically sixty five plus, it's like fifty to fifty. So that's how you get eighty five percent of Republicans who then go in and support it same whenever it comes. Democrats even have fifty

percent of Democrats who can be against something. But if you go to the sixty five plus to where the people most engage with the political system and the people most who are actually in Congress itself, that's how you get what is it, ninety percent of Democrats who end up voting for Israel AIDS. So this, to me is the most important graph that we may have ever produced, because that is America as a picture.

how incredibly influential it still is. And this is part of why we still continue to cover what happens on cable news, because it's very impactful, especially in terms of that elite conversation and how our policymakers are making their decisions, and also how vastwaths of voters are processing information from

this conflict. So that's number one. Number two, I just want to say that famously, as we covered here, remember Nikki Haley had that quote about like the more time you spent on TikTok, you become eighteen percent more antisemitic or whatever. There's this assumption that the social media platforms are making people have a different view of the conflict. Now, I do think there is kind of a reinforcement cycle.

But the reason why a more pro Palestinian view of the world is wildly more popular, not just on TikTok, but on Twitter, on effectively any social media platform you could look at that has a broad audience is because young people started from a different place in this conflict, and so then social media company is being in the business of making money, guess what they're going to surface for you, and there are algorithms content that they think

matches things you've already expressed interest in. So I think the sort of causation is the exact opposite of the way that people in Washington are thinking about it. And obviously this ties into the whole reason why TikTok is actually in danger of being I mean, the legislation was passed, is very possible to be banned, is because they see, Okay, young people are on TikTok. Young people have a different

view of this conflict. We're blaming TikTok. But as I said, I think the causation goes in the exact opposite direction. All right, So bearing those numbers in mind, let's put the next question up on the screen here, which gives you a kind of overall picture of which group people are more sympathetic towards. The question here, which do you feel more sympathy with Israel or the Palestinians. So keep this up so I can explain this and people can

kind of process this information. So the yellow bars here are the sentiment of social media news consumers. The blue bars right next to that are podcasts in YouTube. Then the green bars are cable news, and the red bars are print media. So starting with the yellow bar, you can see that a very clear plurality thirty three percent leans towards having more sympathy with Palestinians versus Israeli. It's only twenty percent say Israeli, so thirty three versus twenty percent.

When you go to podcasts and YouTube, you can see that's the blue bar. Similar dynamic plurality twenty six percent says Palestinians versus twenty one percent says israel If you go to cable news, that dynamic totally flips. And similarly with print media, so for cable news is eighteen percent only lean towards Palestinians, and the plurality thirty four percent are more sympathetic with Israelis. With print media, it's twenty

percent Palestinians and forty two percent Israelis. And obviously you can see significant chunks in each group saying neither one or don't know. So it shows you, Sager the way, that there is a different sort of like innate sympathy, different different pluralities going in opposite directions here depending on what news media they're consuming.

All podcasts are right wing? RSS is out of control? Really, what comes becomes very clear to me is that any media which is non institutionalized and separate from big moneyed interests and or the corporate machine is by definition just going to be more attract an audience and be able to present information which is not as sanitized and thus in less sanitized information. You're going to have a more

honest view of the conflict. And I just have to underscore the reality question once again, what reality do you live in? Even people who are probably pro Israel and who are online as in on social media, listen to a podcast, they're even going to be more aware, let's say, of some of the arguments Crystal that you or I would raise about Israeli military conduct, Whereas if you are

on cable you don't even understand that those exist. Unless Fared Zakaria on Saturday, to his audience of three hundred and fifty thousand people, happens to do a seven minute segment about it. Right like just think about the disconsonants, you know, that has to exist there in that reality.

the word refugee camps. So that's the bubble and the filter that older Americans in particular are learning about this

conflict through. And so you can see, and this is going to be very consistent theme as we go through these numbers, the way that they're coming to very different conclusions from people who are getting their information who are seeing the IDEF tiktoking their war crimes, for example, who are seeing all of those horrors on a daily basis, which is much more readily available on social media, podcast YouTube. All right, let's put this next piece up on the screen,

very relevant to the college campus conversation question. Here is has anti Semitism increased? Okay, you've got a couple, you've got a number of options increased a lot, a little decreased, a little decreased, a lot, stayed the same, and don't know. So let's start at the top and focus in on this line that says, Okay, I believe anti semitism has increased a lot. You can see a significant divergence between

the yellow and blue bars at eighteen percent. Those are your social media and podcast news consumers and the cable news and print media audience. They say thirty one and thirty five percent that it has.

kind of, you know, different view. And obviously the emphasis has been much greater on cable news and print media. And I mean they've just gone all in on smearing anyone who's protesting for a ceasefire as an anti Semite.

So if that's the view of the world you're taking, if you're watching Morning Joe with Jonathan green Blatt from the ADL saying actually, these college campus protesters are all Iranian proxies for Hamas, then you can see how you end up with a little bit of a different emphasis on anti Semitism than perhaps on other platforms.

You're going to have forty five percent or sorry, forty five percent of podcasts, and then also forty one percent of TikTok and or Instagram users, Whereas if you go to the about right number or the not far enough number, you're going to see that it's much larger for print media and for cable news as opposed to the podcast and the TikTok.

Megan Kelly. It's not like there isn't a huge pro Israel segment of the population that is not listening to news podcasts. It is the fact that those podcasts, again, if you are interacting with Ben Shapiro, you're more likely from what I can see too in our data, to also watch maybe a breaking point segment. So even if you are pro Israel, and I've seen this, actually the pro Israel side that has to engage with some of the things that we will bring up here on the show.

They'll be like, yeah, yeah, but it's okay because I support it, or it's okay because war is terrible. It's not even mired necessarily in like a moralistic language. It's much more I guess, real politique in terms of their historical justification, which I mean, I don't no issue with that, in terms of at least be honest about who you are. Just don't throw your morality kind of in my face.

My only point is that even amongst you know, podcast users who let's be around us have been smeared as right wingers Joe Rogan and all that, even they are much more reticent, you know, to kind of describe Israel's actions has not gone far enough. Even if to some of people like Shapiro, who's one of the largest news podcasts in the entire country, may say that they are.

So the question here is overall, do you think the Biden administration is sending too much, too little, or about the right amount of aid to Israel? And once again you've got similar dynamic where if you are social media podcast you say, by larger numbers it's too much. Okay, you've got a plurality thirty five percent who says too much of social media users, forty seven percent very strong almost majority saying too much among podcasts and YouTube users.

And then you've got smaller numbers twenty eight and twenty nine percent for cable news and print media respectively. About right is the plurality choice for the more traditional media consumers and too little the highest number here. Once again, print media and cable news is a little bit of

an outlier. They are the it's still not a plurality by the way, that says too little, but nineteen percent as opposed to thirteen and eleven percent for the podcast and TikTok Instagram, social media sort of non establishment platform consumers. So you know, you can see a pretty sizable split in the way these groups are viewing the conflict, and again, you know, it's a complicated mix of correlation is not causation. You've got very different as we showed you before, age

demographics consuming news on these various platforms. Different age demographics were already coming at this conflict from a very different perspective, and then they're basically having a lot of their views sort of confirmed on their platforms of choice, and that leads to an increasing split in the way that these age demographics and news consumers are viewing the compr.

of ideological you know, opinion and disagreement. If you listen to multiple shows, or if you listen to our show, and so I think that it opens you up just intellectually in a different way. And again, you know, even too, for all of the talk of social media creates reality bubbles, I think that the biggest reality bubble that exists is the cable news environment has shown very very clearly. And I see this all the time in my real life.

I'm sure everybody does too. If you have older relatives or older Americans that you speak with and they ask you, usually they ask you about the dumbest, most likely inconsequential political event and be like did you see Trump said a bloodbath or something? You're like, dude, that was debunked like three months ago. Yeah, Like what are you talking about?

their plurality says it's about right. So maybe ease off the gas pedal there, DC lawmakers. Let's get to the very latest that is happening in terms of college campuses. We can put this up on the screen. This is from Ohio State University, which saw some of the most dramatic clashes with well, I shouldn't say clashes arrest peaceful protesters. They're warn't even any allocations of violence to my knowledge, at any of these universities we have up on the screen.

We've got Arizona State, We've got Indiana, Washington University, Northeastern University just says Austin. I guess that's ut Austin again, Ohio State University. So you can see the arrests escalated at Arizona State. If you pay attention to an upper left box there, that's actually frat boys who were apparently like collaborating with the cops to destroy tents, which is oursorry ASU. One of the most ASU things I've ever heard in my life. But you know, some of these

arrasts were quite violent. There were also reports at Ohio States Hour. Did you see this snipers? I did see that being placed on top of the buildings.

terms of short force, and B it didn't even work. Dude, Yeah, you got snuck up on.

In fact, I was kind of I was very pleasantly surprised to see that University of Mary Washington, which is very close to where I live in Fredericksburg, Virginia, is not a large school and it's not like it's a liberal arts college, but it's not like an elite Columbia type university. Apparently they had protests and there were arrests

that took place. You also had Virginia techs or I'm showing my Virginia bias, but you could see these protests are literally cross the country, and so that crackdown and the focus on the Columbia protesters, if it was meant to snuff out the flame and scare students out of protesting what they see as a genocide being committed with our tax dollars in the Gaza strip, it has had

the polar opposite reaction. And actually I saw something that was really quite beautiful, which is a number of Palestinians in Gaza staging a demonstration writing on their refugee displacement tense messages of solidarity and appreciation for the Columbia Diversity students in particular for standing up for them, which was kind of incredible and I'm sure very heartening for these students who are, you know, trying their best to figure

out how to make a difference in the world. Let's go ahead and go back to A eight, which shows you some of the aggressive tactics that are being used here. You can see this the elder woman Jill Stein, the white hair there being aggressive, like I would say, assaulted with a police bike there. She was arrested. Okay, you saw the interaction. She was arrested and charged with assault

of a police officer. Again, seventy three year old. Whatever you think of her, she is a presidential candidate, and the Green Party is you know, it's a significant organization, they're likely to have ballid access, and she's being treated

in this manner, Soger, It's completely outrageous. At the same time, speaking of outrageous, we have new bipartisan effort that was just launched in the House and can put this up on this pro Israel House Democrat and Republican plan to introduce a legislation creating federally sanctioned anti semitism monitors for select college campuses. This is who else, Ritchie Torres and

Republican also from New York, Mike Lawler. The bill would allow the Department of Education to send a third party anti semitism monitor to any college that receives federal funding, and to revoke that funding for colleges that don't comply. The monitor, which would be paid for by the school, would be charged with releasing a public quarterly report evaluating the progress that a college or university has made toward

combating anti semitism. Now, obviously I abhor anti semitism and any type of racism, but we also know the way that these people have consistently defined anti semitism as anything that basically they don't like when it comes to criticism of Israel. It's wrong think when it comes to Israel. So the idea of codifying this at a federal level.

university has made towards combating anti semitism. And what it would do is redefine anti semitism in the same way that previous resolutions of Congress have passed. Now, let's be very clear about that, because that actually directly conflates as previous governmental definitions of anti semitism exist, criticism of the

state of Israel with anti Semitism itself. And that is why I almost just refuse to fall for the canard at this point of like I have poor anti systemisms, like yeah, of course, but at a certain point, like I'm not even gonna play these people's games anymore, because if you're going to use that definition, then I'm not playing. It's like, at that point, I'm just gonna say I

believe very strongly in the First Amendment. What I would like to see is a First Amendment monitor which actually goes to each campus and revokes federal funding from anyone which is directly in violation of a Supreme Court definition for federal funding. That seems like a lot more reasonable to me. But of course they're not doing that. They're

actually moving into more censorious direction. And I would just say, again to any right wingers, I mean trying to make this point more recently, if Trump wins again, do you know how many college Republicans are going to be called anti Semitic or any of these other groups. Do you think they're not going to use this against other student groups that they don't want they're on campus, And even if they are anti Semitic, that is legally within the

bounds of the First Amendment, which I stand for. I know, I'm not saying it's a good thing. You know, I don't love seeing it march on campus. But I guess I've said this before. I've seen straight up like Christian nationalists psychos march on my campus when I was in college, and nobody really cared much at that time.

is controversial. It's for the speech that you know, in the case of the Palistine protesters, that challenges powers that be and the status quo.

being censored. Now you're jumping on board with a fit using the power of the federal government to quash legitimate criticism of US funding and involvement in a foreign conflict, Like what are what are we doing? It's it's such

complete insanity. And I guarantee you if it was if it was anything else, you know, if it was certainly like the trans bigotry monitor on campus, you would be you would be right there and listen to do the flip sid I'm sure there are people who would have supported the transbigotry monitor who are involved in the protest now are supportive of the protests, who have a.

have one hundred pace full protesters arrested on Saturday. I'm gonna show you just to tell you that this, you know, the way it happened is the way that I'm describing.

it is a fact. There's also substantial video evidence any suggestion that repulsive anti Semitic comments are sometimes acceptable, depending on the context is reprehensible. That language has no place on any university campus. Okay, but you didn't even arrest the dude who said killed the Jews. You rested the people who booed him, Like I mean, it's just it's

so preposterous. But this is very emblematic of a lot of what is on I'm not saying there aren't any bad concidents, and you know, things that you shouldn't say or I wouldn't say, or whatever.

as I think you should. I don't think people should be arrested for shouting quote unquote kill the Jews on a college campus, even if they were saying it in earnest and of the although, of course, and I will just just please apply it's not my law. I've stole it for many others. If something seems quote unquote too good to be true, it usually is. If your pro israel I saw Ted Cruz is putting this out there,

there's no ambiguity. This is what they're shouting. It's like, just have a moment of self reflection, dude, because I think about it too. Every time. It's the other way, you know, anytime some narrative just seems too convenient for the right, it's like perfectly on the nose. I'm like, you know, maybe could be a little bit something, and without fail, if you wait twenty four hours, it will usually fall apart. And everybody who spread it initially looks

like an idiot. You know that's it's almost certainly. And in these highly charged scenarios, people have every incentive in the world to make things up, to instigate. Think back to the swastika, you know, anecdote that I've re laid here. Yeah, back to the racism once. You know how many instances of quote unquote racism on college campuses. The girls they got bullshit.

and you know, in this case, to smear others. This has happened so many times. Agent provocateurs, we know that they exist. Just just be weary. But I'm just going to come back to almost our initial plot, Crystal, our initial block, which is, if you live on the Internet, and if you live in the world of just Smollett, and you know every instance that I just described, you

should you probably have this more baked in. But if you live in the cable world, how often do you hear like the Justy Smalllett thing dever send mec people even know that that turned out to be BS because they just stopped covering it, like the moment that it turned out to be fake. Maybe one or two segments same thing on the right wing? How many of these things that get played? I was just looking Laura Ingram apparently interviewed this woman that stabbed in the eye lady

three separate times on Fox News. Does Fox have a segment that mean you should? If you have any integrity, I would, you know, if we said something that wasn't true, I'd be like, hey, just everybody knows, you know, it turned out it was complete BS if it turned out to be you know, whichever way it goes, whether it's my narrative or not, I can't believe it. But you know how many people who watch Fox, They're not going to know to them stabbed in the eye as cannon at this point, that's the.

the you know, FBI in formant. It was trying to stir them up to like blow up buildings and other you know, and embrace more overt violence. So this is not It sounds conspiratorial, but these things are real and documented throughout history, including through very very recent history. So okay, So in the category of I think just desperate to be a victim, this next scenario, this video is just incredible.

I knew Zabur was gonna absolutely love this one. So this lady, which you know, I'm very loath to use the term Karen, but if it has ever applied, It certainly applies. Let's just say a woman in this instance, Okay, she's walking her dog. It comes upon she's a I think she's at Northeastern. Maybe she comes upon the you know, the protesters there, and she completely melts down. She calls nine to one one. They're just standing there. They're not

doing anything to her, nothing to her. She's not in sec She's saying, Star Golden, I'm in danger, and I'm a Jewish American. She's just literally standing there. She could leave at any time. But fortunately someone caught this whole thing on video. Just watch how this unfolds.

I do not understand. I don't know. There's just such a deep narcissism that runs in this country where everybody wants to be the victim and they just they they think though in the age of social media, that they're going to get away with it. It's just astounding. You know, this the victim hode complex. You need to walk into there and then call the police. I mean, this is another thing where we really should have more stringent fines and penalties for falsely calling nine to one one under

false pretenses or false allegations of assault. Because that is such bullshit.

in the first place. She was hoping something bad would happen to her, that she could, you know, call nine one one, get the cops to arrest these people who were doing absolutely nothing wrong, or herself getting you know, the who had Laura Ingram interviewed through Laura Ingram Interviews about how she was the subject of an anti Semitic

attack or what I like. That clearly is her goal, and so thank god someone caught it on camera because this is the sort of thing that it was just this woman recounting what happened.

he is actually being charged with. So we have two separate questions lines of questions from the conservative justices and the liberal justices. I will give it away to you before we even play them. It does appear that the conservative majority will side with Trump. But getting into some of the actual line of questioning is important to understand and tease out kind of what they're getting at for

the legal merits. Here is Justice Alito with a question on that official proceedings and whethersone could be undidted under an official act. Here's what it is.

to challenge at the time. I'm not suggesting today, but the idea that a decision that was made and ultimately endorsed by this Court, perhaps wrongly in the Kamatsu case, would support criminal prosecution under two forty one, which requires under United States versus Linear that the right have been made specific so that there is notice to the president. I don't think that would have been satisfied.

assassination of your political rival. How and what would that then be tested under this bounds of absolute immunity, that the Trump prosecution or the Trump Defense is arguing, let's take a lesson.

So this gets then to the question about that official act where they appears that the court is going to split the difference. Let's go and put this up there on the screen. What they are showing from the arguments is that they are likely to side with Trump on

some presidential immunity. What might mean by that is that they're they're going to narrow the indictment such that Jack Smith is going to have to go back and use some legal minutia to argue that much of the Trump false elector's schemes happened as in his personal capacity as president. The way that they're going to argue that actually does

comply with some of the facts, Crystal. It gets to, for example, some of his off the book's Oval office meetings which were not happening in his official capacity, We're happening as campaign capacity. Yeah, so they need to go back and basically narrow and tailor the indictment after this is issued to specify that this happened as campaign Trump

and not as President Trump. It gets into that question of official versus campaign and also not remember we're not talking here about the speech or even the actions of January sixth. It's often conflated. The actual indictment focuses on the false elector scheme specifically, and so they have to go back and tailor what is and is not an official act in terms of the indictment. Now, the reason any of this matters is because A it's narrowing the

definition of official act of the presidency. But BA procedurally, this is almost certainly going to delay the trial until after the November twenty twenty four election. At least according to the timelines that we've seen. Supreme Court still has to issue an opinion on this that Jacksmith would then have to go through all the procedural things that you

have to do. The Trump team throwing everything they can, So it does seem very likely now at this point that the only case that will come to trial before the November election, it's, you know, more likely than not, is this stupid Stormy Daniels case in New York City, which is astounding.

about how many of the acts that he's actually indicted for our quote unquote official acts and how many are private acts. And there was a lot of discussion and debate that happened in these hearings about how you distinguish between the two, because on its face, you might think that it's clear, but you very quickly come to realize that it's hard to draw the line in a lot of instances. And I think with regard to this January sixth indictment in particular, i'll read.

team conceded that accepting the bribe is p conduct. Robertson urged them to explain how the boundary between an official act and a private one would come into play. Prosecutors could bring charges against the former president for accepting a million dollars, Robert queried, or but they can't say what it's for. So how do you where do you draw that line? Can you say, Okay, this was for appointing investador? Is that off limits because that's an official act? So

it becomes quite murky. Justice Selena Kagan also took up this line of questioning.

But in terms of the consequence for this case, I mean, really is consequential for all future presidents, And you know, what they can do and what they feel entitled to do, and the way that they frame their potentially future illegal acts. So it's very consequential not just for this case but moving forward, but specifically for this case. If they do

what it looks like they're going to do. At the very least, it's going to be another significant delay because not only may Jack Smith have to taylor the indictment, but you're then very likely to have to go through a bunch of additional court rulings about where do you draw the line is this appropriate or is this not appropriate? And that could also have to go all the way

back up to the Supreme Court. So you know, the delay tactics from Trump on this particular case, which I would say, you know, putting aside the strength of the legal case, which I think, you know could be debated, but in terms of what people hate the most about Trump, this one is really kind of at the core. And it doesn't look like we're going to come anywhere close to any sort of resolution with this before election, is the bottom line?

absolute madness. Let's move on now to the next part. This is one that we just couldn't let slide. Howard Stern. This is honestly, deeply sad and almost emotional in a certain sense. Howard Stern, I mean, was the icon of the United States find you know, as the anti establishment. The FCC, you know, went after him for being loot or you know, cursing on the air. He signed his

deal with Sirius, he was totally uncensored. And then the last seven years or so we've seen a transformation of this former renegade basically into like a blue and on liberal. And I mean this has been coming now for quite

some time. But Howard Stern, who, let's all be honest, maybe more responsible for pop popularizing Trump than anybody else, used to have a standing segment where Trump would call in Milania two and the two of them would just like discuss like sex and weird, lewd stuff and they would get you know, everybody would Everybody loved it because Donald would go in with Howard, and there was very very popular segments there is now turned again into like

Trump is a fascist, and this culminates in this recent interview where President Biden, who has not done an interview with a major news outlet yet including The New York Times for his entire presidency, for print media. In terms of TV, it's been I think like several I think it's been more than a couple of months. Remember Chrystally famously skips out on the CBS interview for the Super Bowl. He has skipped multiple opportunities for major sit down interviews

that millions of Americans would watch. Well. He then decides to sit down for an hour long interview with Joe Biden. Now, in the past this might have actually been important, you know, Howard might have actually asked him one or two questions. Howard manages to sit with this man for an hour, make one piece of news where he offhand He's like, oh, are you going to debate Trump? And Biden's like, yeah, debate him at some point it doesn't even commit to

a thing. And then listen to the tongue bath that Howard gives his interviewee subject. This is again Howard Sterning a former renegade. Take a listen.

And I want to thank you for providing a calming influence, an organized administration post COVID, getting that vaccine out. I remember what the world was like at that point, getting NATO, getting us to feel comfortable standing up to putin the incredible large growth in the jobs, unemployment rate down. I'll give you your greatest hits, the lowest uninshored rate in history. Four out of five Americans are covered for less than ten dollars a month, knocking off a few isis leaders.

Cutting the emissions in half. I mean, you've always been an environmentalist, even the marijuana reform laws. Enough to sitting there and fighting that battle. Respect for Marriage Act. What the hell is with people with this gasee? Who cares if someone's gay? How is it affecting anybody?

of thousands of Palestonian children have been killed. We've all say that images of these babies being amputated with no anesthetic on a kitchen table with a butcher knife, And you're talk to me about this man's compassion, his compassion right now we're going to cover in a little bout he's intervening personally to make sure that bab Netal who was in charge with war crimes, and you're you're going to talk about his compassion and his decency.

action consequences of firing a black lesbian. That's so much of a joke that these people are. So it's like, you know, father of this country, the whole father of the country, mister decency. I mean, all of this really goes to the fact that his son is dead, which is obviously tragic and sad, but you know, let's be honest, like that's not a qualification for being president of the

United States. There's a lot of people in this country whose kids are dead and or can speak with some empathy or compassion or you know, use it as foundational

experience of their life. I just this is sickening to me on so many levels, both because of who Howard was and how he got his fame, how he really changed American culture, I think for the better, you know, opening up challenging a lot of these conceptions of censorious, like censorious or government organizations and standards and all that

was very constraining to speech. And we know that Howard thirty years ago, no matter, absolutely would not have stood for the current type of environment and all that that Biden has brought to the table. But for some reason, you know, his brain has just been completely broken. So it's sad that that again too, that's the only time of interview that Biden will sit for. How can you have this?

It just doesn't hold, especially if you're talking about you know, as our pole reflects people who are not getting their news from cable news or print media, but cable news in particular. The rest of the country is looking at what he is not just enabling but facilitating starvation, the complete siege, all of these things. I don't feel like this is a good, decent, compassionate man. So previously, I feel like some comments like this are the ones from

the White House correspond or whatever. They would have passed without a lot of commentary, because there were a lot of people who felt that way, who used to feel that way about Joe Biden, and that image is falling apart by the day.

causing injuries including death fifty two percent. Oh, if you look at the clinical trial studies, the actual studies that were done that were released of the Fireser vaccine, Moderna has not released it. If you look at the Fiser vaccine, there was there were twenty two thousand people in the placebit group, twenty two thousand people who got the actual vaccine, and the people who got the vaccine had a twenty three percent higher death rate from all causes at the end of that study.

time in a long time. Ratings challenged Bill Maher's really boring interview with RFK Junior RFK, only to find Junior is far more liberal than Mar and in fact far more liberal than anyone else running as a Democrat, including West and Stein. Yet despite this, he has no hope as a Democrat because they were able to use their typically fascist repression blah blah blah throw them out of the party like a dog. So now Junior's a so called independent, but he's not. He's a radical left wing

lunatic trying to have it all way. He says that no vaccine is safe and effective and then said I would never say I'm not anti vaccine. Where did that come from? Mar defended the vaccine, which Junior seemed to agree, Wow, and then told him his poll numbers of crash. No Republican can vote for this guy. Hashtag MAGA twenty twenty four.

No idea what Trump is trying to say there exactly crystal, But but I think what he can sense, at least correctly, is that a vaccine politics is disproportionately going to resonate with people who are right wing, and that therefore something like RFK Junior there citing those numbers which probably disproportionately going to be Republicans or Republican leaning voters, and Trump's not an idiot. He can read a poll, how many internal polls?

So I think he feels a little bit vulnerable. Not that this is going to be a huge wave of support from his group to RFK Junior's group, but I think he feels that this is an issue where he's a little bit vulnerable to losing some percentage points.

there is no vaccine that is safe and effective. Now, what he tries to claim is that he did say that some of this is the exact quote, some of the live virus vaccines are probably averting war problems than they're causing. But then he went on when he was pressed and said there is no vaccine that is safe and effective.

the idea of vaccine safety. So in any case, this is an area where Trump feels like RFK obviously codes more right wing, and I think he also is seeing some of the polling numbers and realizing this could actually be more of an issue for him than it is for Joe Biden, because not only do you have a couple of polls that show him pulling more from Trump, the one we covered last week, what was that Wall

Street jour NBC News that we covered last week? I believe the Wall Street Journal one before that also showed RFK Junior taking more from Trump. And then if you look at any of these polls, RFK Junior has very had approval ratings among Republicans and extremely trash approval ratings

among Democrats. So logic would indicate that that's probably going to be more of a problem for the Republican side, although you know, the fact he's Kennedy and all of these other factors are a little complicating, not to mention the fact that it remains a question how many else he's actually gonna end up.

and he continues to quote. His views on vaccines are fake. He says, I live with RFK Junior in New York. Watch him convince Cuomo to make environmental moves that were out right nasty. You know, he can go on. It would be dead either way. His views are vaccines are fake, as is everything else about his candidacy. Let the Democrats have RFK Junior. They deserve him, so it is interesting to see he's zooming in here.

sound unhinged. President Trump's rant against me is a barely coherent barrage of wild and inaccurate claims that should be best be resolved in the American tradition of presidential debate, President Trump, who has proven himself the most adapt debater in modern American history, should not be panicked to meet me on that stage. To preview my arguments, I will show how Trump betrayed the hopes of his most sincere followers. He promised to end the Ukraine War, then included with Johnson,

he led big farm. He led big farm on his correct bureaucrats run a rough shot over from his President promised to cut the deafsit, et cetera. He says, instead of lobbing poisonous bombs from the safety of his bunker. Let's hear President Trump defend his record to me mono I mono, by respectful congenial debate. So he's challenging Trump to a debate. Very unlikely that Trump will accept it, although one thing I will say it includes more likely

now Biden has agreed to some sort of debate. Trump of course, is chomping at the bit for a debate that because of this debate. Apparently the Biden people don't like the Commission on Presidential Debates either, so it could be that we could see the CPD fall apart and if it does, it would be I think more likely that RFK Junior may actually be included, maybe as a condition either by the Biden campaign or the Trump campaign, possibly to try and trip the other side up. If

we do see the overall debate infrastructure collapse. But I'm not one hundred percent sure how it will all shake.

a democratic process. So allow us to judge in real time what they say under pressure, how they respond to actually difficult questions, because now it's far too easy for these candidates. And RFK Junior, I mean he's sat with us, He sat for a number of difficult, cult challenging interviews, and I applout him for that. All of these candidates should have to do that. They should have to do that, and they should certainly have to get up on a debate stage and justify themselves in their.

Donald Trump. But it did make me a little bit hopeful that we might see one when he said that.

there were a number of reports across Israeli media. So according to those reports, the US is part of a quote last ditch diplomatic effort, in other words, threats to prevent the ICC from issuing arrest warrants against net Nyaho and other Israeli officials. The news site Walla, an analyst there writes Netanyahu is quote under unusual stress over the prospect of an arrest warrant against him another Israelis by the UN Tribunal in the HAGU.

Netnahu's latest public statement about the war said forthcoming decisions by the ICC could set a quote dangerous precedent, and he also said we will never stop defending ourselves. Whereas decisions of the court in the Hague will not affect Israel's actions, they would be a precedent threatening the soldiers and officials of any democracy fighting criminal terrorism and aggression.

There was also soccer a New York Times report this was the first one I'd seen in the New York Times that came out just yesterday evening about how imminent

these potential arrest warrants are. They said in that report from the New York Times they had some indication of what the arrest warrants may be specific to the Israeli officials could potentially be accused of preventing the delivery of humanitarian aid to the Gaza strip and pursuing an excessively harsh response to the Hamas led October seventh attacks on Israel.

According to some of the officials they spoke to the Israeli officials who are worried about the potential fallout from such a case, that they believe net Nyaho is among those who might be named. Is not clear who might be charged from Hamas or what crimes would be cited. So just to be clear for people, the US and Israel are not actually participants in the ICC. The ICC doesn't have its own like police force to come and arrest Bib net Nyaho. As much as I would personally

love to see that image. However, there are what one hundred and twenty four countries that are involved in the ICC, and any one of those countries would be obligated if they travel to those nations to arrest Bib or Yoev Gallant or any other officials who were potentially issued these

arrest warrants. So, you know, obviously, in terms of the international standing of Israel, having your prime minister having arrest warrant from the ICC out for war crimes against your prime minister is pretty significant development.

There have been various political problems that he has had. And look, while I am against the Ukraine Consensus, funding, the Ukraine War and all of that, I don't think anyone could deny that it's been bad for Russia in terms of its international standing, not necessarily their domestic economy. It hasn't led to their collapse, That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying it certainly has damaged them in the eyes of the world, and so similarly, I would say this is likely the same effect that this would have, especially since the US the Israel not signatories. I was a little curious about this Hamas warrants because I hadn't seen some of the argumentation around this. It said it was considering warrants for these leaders of hamasi As for charge.

I actually think just look again, in terms of the eyes of the world, it would make it a little bit more undeniable if they were to do it, And so if they did it would be at least politically, that would probably be the right thing to do if you charge him for October seventh, issue arrest warrants as well. Now, again let's be very clear, this body has zero enforcement mechanism.

There's a reason that Bushier, at the end of the day, was taken out by a coup in his own government, and that Putin similarly will remain the autocrat of Russia for as long as he lives and as he wants. Because it has no authority itself. It's simply kind of a rebuke from the international community. To the extent that that matters, difficult to say.

overwhelming annihilation throughout the Gaza driving one number. We're talking about college campus and whatever. So this popped up today. Two hundred schools have been targeted by Israel, just as one measure of how overwhelming and how much civilian infrastructure was just completely obliterated. Not to mention the forty thousand plus palestings who've been killed, to overwhelming majority of whom were innocent civilians. You know, some seventy percent were women

and children. So even if you assume all of the rest of the men were guilty terrorists, whatever, you still have overwhelming numbers who were innocent civilians. So, you know, it's discussed that the US would jump in here and try to throw their weight around to try to forestall these arrest warrants being issued. But you know why they do it because it's very uncomfortable for the US as well.

You know, we want to keep our cloak of supposed morality, and so if you've got the ICC out there issuing arrest warrant for your bestie bb net Yahoo, that's going to be uncomfortable. For the US as well, which has gone out of their way to deny that they see any evidence of war crimes.

in different context if it wasn't Israel. This is used from a propaganda standpoint to justify this entire state, the way that they operate across administrations outside of just bibing

net and Yahoo. So that's part of why these threats to the moral standing of Israel specifically are a particular problem for them, and why, at least reportedly maybe even though he knows he's not going to actually be arrested, why he's very concerned about this and putting a lot of pressure in holding emergency meetings to try to figure out how to deal with the fallout from what looks to be impending as soon as potentially this week arrest warrants. But we'll see if the US is able to thwart

any of those sort of consequences. We have some exclusive pulling that is highly relevant to this discussion of Israel's conduct in a Gaza strip, and we're taking a look at these specifically by partisanships. So how do Republicans, Democrats, and independence feel about Israeli military actions, you know, post October seventh. Let's put this first one up on the screen. So the question here is you know which of the following statements comes close.

huge plurality, near majority saying yes it's a genocide. If you look specifically at Joe Biden voters, by the way, within our poll, it is a majority. And then with Independence too, you have a plurality who say Israel is committing genocide thirty percent versus twenty three percent who say no, and forty seven percent who say they don't know.

of ICC arrest warrants. So the question here is which of these statements comes closest to your view. Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza, Israel has not committed war crimes in Gaza, and don't know. Pretty similar numbers here. Twenty seven percent of Republicans slightly hire say yes they've committed war crimes, forty one percent say no, thirty one percent say I don't know. With Democrats it is the

majority fifty two percent say yes. Only eighteen percent of Democrats say no. And you also have a plurality with independence thirty four to twenty two. And let me just put this last one up on the screen, saga, and get your reaction to all of these.

Thirty six percent say they don't know. With Independence, you've got another pluralities twenty six percent saying yes, should be charged with war crimes, only twenty percent say no, and fifty four percent say they do not know. So this shows you a pretty stark picture of where Americans are in terms of their public opinion of Israel and the way this war has been conducted, which, again, given the way people felt about Israel just a year ago, it's pretty dramatic shift.

the future. This is why I keep saying that things in the near term have not changed all that much, but things in the long term are significant, to the point where the relationship between the American people and Israel will never be the same, and the relationship of the international community Israel will specifically never be the same and probably more radically different than it is here in our nation.

What that polling is underscores to me is the radical shift that's going on amongst the Democrats, but significantly also if you do start to break it down by age, which we did amongst the eighteen to twenty five or to eighteen to twenty nine demographic, even when you self select for Republicans and others, you see shifts very very different away from the way that younger voters, younger Americans view their relationship with Israel as compared to the international

community and the sixty five plus. So as America ages up and a lot of the younger voters become middle class Americans or thirty to forty five year olds and others with more economic power, probably in general being more invested in the political system, there will be a significant change, and of course too in terms of the representatives of people in Congress who represent them.

don't know. With regards to bb specifically and whether he should be charged with war crimes, you once again have an overall plurality thirty two percent versus twenty six percent who say no, and the remainder say they don't know. So it is it is quite an extraordinary dramatic shift for you know, plurality of Americans to be saying, yes, we believe that this man who is the leader of Israel should be.

humanitarian law. Go on to the next piece for some of the details. Here, so they say, a joint submission from four bureaus Democracy, human Rights and Labor, Population, Refugees, Migration, Global Criminal Justice, and International Organization Affairs raised quote serious concerns over non compliance with international humanitarian law in the Israel's conduct of the Gaza War. The assessment from the four bureaus said Israel's assurances were quote neither credible nor reliable.

participated in this memo who diverged from that opinion. But Sager, this is important for a variety of reasons, but most specifically because it suggests that the State Department is all these shipments of weapons are in direct contravention of US law, and that Tony Blinken has on his desk information that indicates that he is specifically himself violating US law in order to continue shipping these weapons.

was pre October seventh and some of its conduct. They said they were going to do it, or they indicated they were going to do it, but then NETANYAHUO and the Speaker freaked out and has yet to materialize. But you know, it's not the end of that though, because if the law and all of that exists. It's either going to leak or it's going to go towards Congress and people can ask questions about that. But that would also require Congress asking the administration why it's not doing its job and.

war crimes. Next time you watch one of these enraging State Department briefings where they say they're looking into it and they don't know and they heard about that, but they're going to ask Israel about or whatever, just keep in mind Tony Blinkn has multiple reports from inside his own State Department telling him, yes, they are committing war crimes and they are just choosing to ignore that and violate US law in order to continue this onslaught and

atrocities against Palestinians. All right, there's a little flap between Congresswomen Ilhan Omar, who visited some of the student protesters, and ADL's Jonathan Greenblat that we wanted to go over for you. So first of all, let's take a listen to what congress Woman Omar had to say that caused this hole.

quote progenocide. It is gas leading, gaslighting to impute that Jewish people are somehow at fault for being harassed in menace with signs and logosts literally calling for their own extermination. It is abhorrent that a sitting member of Congress would slander a group of young people in such a cold and oh, oh really, this is how people get killed.

of the beholder. But I do think it is funny to me that and this is I've observed this too rhetorically, and I saw it in your debate on Piers Morgan. The problem that a lot of the pro Israel people have, like in that instance, is they are very willing to be like, oh, you got to smear these young kids. It's not a genocide. These kids are anti Semites, you know, they use like catch all language and moralistic language try

against their opponents. But in general, from what I have noticed, from Norm Finkel's to even the most extreme you know, pro Palestinian voices, at least in the relative mainstream and discourse, are always willing to be like, yes, I do condemn October seventh, I condemn anti Semitism. And part of the problem is that the pro Israel side is not willing to give the same even rhetorical clutch, I guess to their opponents, and it just makes them look like either

like double standard or sissy. Is like here, like you can't say that, you know, what is it from the river to the sea or whatever, or is genocidal and then turn around and then not condemn on your side exactly statements like kill the Arabs or level Gossa or whatever, because you do agree with that, and you know there's a certain you lose the morality whenever that is what you're advocating for. And I just want people to be honest. Michael Tracy said that recently. He's like, all I want

is people to be honest. But you can't sit there and be using terms like blood libel and going after kids and students on the one hand, and then on the other hand be upset when other people are going to do it straight back at you.

if you know all the ins and outs. Yeah, that's it's complex, it's a lot to know, but you can also very simply have a moral standard of killing innocent civilians is wrong. It was wrong when it happened on October seventh, and it's wrong when it happens when Israel's doing it. That isn't hard, it's not complex, and if you pull people, I think the overwhelming majority will agree with that sentiment. But you have to apply it across

the board. And when we've had months and months and months of the slaughter only happening on one.

In any case, hilarious fake freak out over ilhan Omar saying something that is correct, and also it is very consistent frankly, even if it's raised in a way that makes people uncomfortable with American principles, which is, listen, even if you have speech that is so abhorrent as for it to be pro genocide, even those people should be protected. Even they should be safe, even if they are saying something that is, you know, advocating for a crime against humanity,

even those individuals deserve to be safe. Now that sounds controversial, but it is a bedrock principle of America, something you know, that is incredibly dear to me and I think many other people in the nation. The other the last thing I'll say about green Blatz thing is like, you know, Jewish people are just like any other people, Like some are going to have good views, bad views, be good people,

bad people, et cetera. And the fact that they're Jewish doesn't take criticism like you still have to be able to criticize people. It doesn't doesn't mean like any sort of criticism is off the table, if so facto because they're Jewish. But that's exactly what he and Adl and many elite politicians, Richie Torres.

a wire hair pointer about fourteen months old. It was a female dog that quote had an aggressive personality who she was trying to train as a hunting dog. She took Cricket on a pheasant hunt with older dogs. Noam says she had hoped to come calm the young dog down and teach her how to behave Unfortunately, Cricket ruined the hunt, going out of her mind with excitement, chasing all those birds and having the time of her life

aka What Dogs Do. Nom then describes calling Cricket using an electric callar to attempt to bring her under control. She says that nothing worked. On the way home after the hunt, she stopped to talk to a local family. The dog escaped and attacked the family's chickens. She said she was simply untrainable, behavior like a trained assassin. When Noam finally grabbed Cricket, she says, the dog whipped around to bite me after she was after she was grabbed.

Through it all, she says, Cricket was just the picture of pure joy. She then writes, I hated that dog, dangerous to anyone she came into contact with, worse than worse than useless as a hunting dog. At that moment, I realized I had to put her down. It was not a pleasant job, but it had to be done. And after it was over, I realized another unpleasant job needed to be done. And she talks about killing a

nasty male goat that was also on their property. So basically what she describes here is murdering a fourteen month old dog that was acting like a dog. Now I've seen some justification for this, like whoa, you know? What do you look? The dogs are tools like everything else. Yeah, maybe in eighteen twenty five. You know today there are actually a ton of charities that are out there, animal rescues, etc.

That specifically take hunting dogs that didn't pass training. There's tons of I'm sure they exist in South Dakota too. And she's trying to play this off as some like hard scrabble living on the land thing. Again, let me just repeat, we are not on the frontier times. There is no reason to conduct yourself this way. It's completely psychotic, especially when you're bragging about it and trying to make yourself appear tough. This is what she This is her

defense after this all came out. We love animals, been tough decisions like this happened all the time on a farm. Sadly, we had to put down three horses a few weeks ago that had been in our family for twenty five years. If you want more real, honest and politically incorrect stories that'll have the media gasping, pre order no back. She's fundraising off this now, trying to sell more of her crappy copies of her book. Bragging about killing a fourteen

month old dog. I mean, it's totally psychotic. It's not like the dog was even sick.

She understood what these are very intelligent animals and for you to just like, you know, crully, think this is your only option and then the sickness of thinking this is going to like she wrote.

be put down. Given that cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them, I decided what I did. Now, keep in mind, we're only taking this lady's word for it. We have no idea if any of this even happened. What she's talking about is if somebody's dog goes and kills somebody else's chickens or property, and then even then there's a whole animal process that goes through whenever you

decide to put a dog down. It's one of the most extraordinary things you could do whenever it comes to for animals, like getting the state to order that a dog be put down after a variety of incidents. Various states have different laws, but she says, whether running the ranch or in politics, I have never passed on my responsibilities to anyone else to hand, even if it's hard and painful, I follow the law. I was being a responsible parent, dog owner, and neighbor. So I'll just reiterate

the original justification is very clear. She's like, I hated the dog and it didn't it didn't do what I wanted it to do. And I know multiple people actually who have rescued hunting dogs, people dogs who didn't pass hunting training or whatever, which I understand, you know, not every dog or whatever is cut out for it, but you know, we're not living on the frontier where you got to kill him for literally no reason. And she's bragging about it as if it somehow makes her, you know,

big and strong. You know, putting down a horse that's been horrifically injured, that's one thing that's sad. And you know, even then, you know there's conversations or whatever, but here there's not. There's no justification on it whatsoever. It's just I murdered this dog, and that makes me big and strong, and that's why you should buy my book and give me twenty dollars.

That's if he wants a woman, if he wants a black person just for media purposes, affirmative action candidate, it would be Tim Scott. If he's feeling really safe and he wants an ideological ally, I think he's gonna pick Jade Vans. All three of those things all depend on the polling whenever it comes right up to the convention. I think it's basically an equal shot for all three of those. But we'll see, Crystal, what do you take a look at well.

they deserved. Free Palestine protesters confronted these elites with their own hypocrisy and complicity and sanctioning horrifying atrocities against Palestinian civilians, chanting shame on you at these people who are at worst actively funding and supporting a genocide, and at the very least comfortable with celebrating those who are backing a genocide.

At one point, a giant Palestinian flag was actually unfurled from a window of the venue itself, the d C Hilton Hotel that has played host to this event for

many years. Protesters even staged a die in to honor the one hundred plus journalists who have been killed by the IDF in Gaza, was complete with blood spattered press vest visual reminder that while these so called journalists were putting on ball gowns in their luxury hotel suites, Palestinian journalists we're facing starvation, arrest, torture, and execution for the crime of doing their job. The message of these target

protests was right on tip target. Of all the in group spectacles in DC, none has become more grotesque or more emblematic of the utter bipartisan immorality of American elites

than the White House correspondence dinner. The idealized notion of this event is that for one evening, the press and the politicians they put aside the combative relationship meant to typify interactions between the powerful and the journalists who hold them to account, and two together recommit the bedrock importance of the First Amendment in a fierce independent press by taking comedic jabs at one another. Given the partisan toothlessness though of most of the press, and the raging hypocrisy

of everyone involved. In reality, the White House Correspondents Dinner is just a showcase of elite coziness, disconnect, and self congratulation. Now, this year's circus, though of privilege, reached a new low, occurring as it did, amidst the Washington improved genocide and Gazo, which has the distinction of being the deadliest and most dangerous conflict for journalists ever in history. In fact, it appears that on the very day of these festivities, two

more Palestinian journalists were killed by the IDF. This would be in addition to the one hundred and forty two members of the press who had already been killed by

the IDF and at least forty who had been arrested. Meanwhile, our great ally, the supposed only democracy in the Middle East, is promising to shut down media outlets like Al Jazeera for their coverage of Gaza and largely blocks the Western press from even covering this conflict from the ground at all, and Of course, as these politicians were patting themselves on the back for their brave commitment to the First Amendment, they were busy cheering on an authoritarian crackdown on college students.

Hundreds more students and some faculty were arrested over the weekend. At one event, officers assaulted seventy three year old Green Party candidate Jill Stein with a bicycle for the crime of protesting against US government support for a foreign government's atrocity filled war. While the politicians sent in the cops, their media allies ran cover by smearing the protesters as violent anti Semitic terrorists, platforming the ADLs Jonathan green Blatt

to call them Iranian proxies. And by the way, Julian, no Sange, He's still in prison now. None of this stopped attendees from their typical smug, self satisfied rituals and empty peons to freedom of speech principles that they clearly do not actually believe in.

elites feel at least a little bit of shame. It was zero shame to be found in that room. Here is Colin Yost closing out the night, slabbering all over Joe Biden for his supposed decency and the decency by extension of the entire establishment press corps. If you can stomach it, take a listen.

that for granted. So, mister President, I thank you for your decency on behalf of my grandfather, and I thank all of you, almost all of you, for your decency as well. I am very honored and grateful that you invited me here tonight.

so do you. In the age of disinformation, credible information that people can trust is more important than ever. And that makes you, and I mean it's from the bottom of heart, makes you more important than ever. So tonight I'd like to make it to to a free press, to an informed citizen room, to an American where a freedom and democracy endure. God bless America.