10/1/25: Gov Shuts Down, Portland Invasion, Hegseth Slams Fat Generals. Venezuela Coup & MORE!

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.

Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of this show.

Speaker 1 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.

Speaker 1 (00:25):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com.

Speaker 3 (00:33):
All right, good morning, and welcome to brain Points. We
have a government shut down.

Speaker 4 (00:37):
That's right, walk into the government shupdown.

Speaker 3 (00:39):
With our colleagues over the ditch this Irish news outlet.
We've been tracking US and global weapons shipments to Israel
and so now with the government shutdown, those could be
in serious jeopardy, right, I.

Speaker 5 (00:51):
Mean no essential i'm es central services are in I'm joking.

Speaker 6 (00:55):
Webon remain. Weapons will continue to flow.

Speaker 5 (00:57):
Yes until morale improoves, Yes, yes they will.

Speaker 3 (01:02):
So midnight twelve oh one, government shutdown, So This will
be this our first one since what eighteen twenty nineteen
when Trump wanted some border wall money back when he
wasn't just moving actually, and then he lost that and
then just took the money anyway, and since then he'd
been like, oh, I can just do whatever I want.

Speaker 5 (01:22):
That is really the big distinction between other shutdowns in
this one. So we'll get to that break down all
of the details. We actually have Democrat Jeff Merkley joining
the show to give the Democrats perspective on the shutdown.
Then we have Representative Ben Klein of Virginia, a member
of the House Freedom Caucus, coming in to give the
Republican perspective on the shutdown. So we will have all

(01:42):
of our bases covered as we discuss rightward. I think
is actually going to be a pretty long haul.

Speaker 6 (01:47):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:47):
I think so too, because yes, and we can talk
about this more when we get to it. But yeah,
I don't think either side really has much incentive to
get moving over At the Pentagon, Donald Trump and Pete
Haigseth spent many millions of dollars flying in a bunch
of fat generals, as Pete Hegseeth put it, and ordered
them to do physical therapy fat for now and not

(02:10):
be such whimps.

Speaker 6 (02:11):
Be better war fighters.

Speaker 3 (02:15):
Classic mid level offics are just cranky about is everything
just yelling at a bunch of generals. Meanwhile, they're ramping
up hostilities with Venezuela with Iran.

Speaker 5 (02:29):
Big New New York Times report on the intentions in Venezuela.
And also we had a little bit of movement on
the Iran situation yesterday, so we're going to dig into
the details of that. Right the flotilla, there's some interesting
developments there.

Speaker 3 (02:45):
The most interesting development is that there were not really
major developments overnight. They were expecting to get intercepted. They're
at a place about maybe they're at about eighty nautical
miles at this point from Gaza, by which point all
previous flotillas have been have been rated. They have not
yet been We're in regular touch with Alex Culson, drop
site reporter who's on that flotilla.

Speaker 6 (03:06):
Will also have updates about the state of.

Speaker 3 (03:09):
The Palestinian response to the Trump Netna who offer yesterday excellent.

Speaker 5 (03:16):
And finally, we will be drivened by our new friends
at the Grain Markets Podcast.

Speaker 6 (03:21):
Grain Markets Podcast, Love them.

Speaker 5 (03:22):
Yeah, this soybean fight you have to hear about. It's
challenging the right in a lot of different ways. The
Argentinian bailout is pitting, as Matt Stuler puts it, two
of Trump's key constituencies, hedge funds and soybean farmers against
one another. So important fight, obviously for the American economy,
but also for the politics of what's happening.

Speaker 4 (03:43):
In the conservative movement.

Speaker 6 (03:44):
Yes, indeed, all right, let's get.

Speaker 5 (03:45):
To the government shut down. This happened at twelve oh one. Predictably,
the impasse was reached. Any efforts to seriously come to
an agreement yesterday, especially after the Monday talks fell apart,
those efforts were obviously doomed last night. There's sort of
some theater happening, but there's a little hope right now,

(04:07):
I would say for immediate resolution. On the political side,
a shutdown, Ryan, we were talking about this just as
we introduced the show is probably good for the grassroots
of both parties, and that's probably why we think this
is going to be kind of a long haul shutdown.

Speaker 6 (04:23):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (04:24):
So on from the Democratic side, they have demanded so
during the pandemic, there was an expansion of Obamacare subsidy benefits.
So twenty million people who are on the exchanges started
seeing their eye popping monthly costs for their premiums, and
Obamacare go down to something quite reasonable. And that was

(04:47):
actually when Ezra Klein and other people were selling Obamacare
at the beginning, and people like me were saying, this
is terrible, it sucks, like this should be much better.
They would say, get it in place and then continue
to improve it. Because if you have, you know, genuinely
fully subsidized, almost fully subsized healthcare through these exchanges, and

(05:07):
you get fired, you get laid off, and you can
then move into those exchanges, that's genuinely night and day
compared to the barbaric system that we had for most
of my life, which was if you got fired and
let's say you have cancer like your sol like, you
cannot get new insurance because now you have this pre

(05:28):
existing condition and so the insurers don't have to take you.
And if you can get anything, that's ungodly expensive. Obamacare
changed it so no, you cannot discriminate against people for
having pre existing conditions.

Speaker 6 (05:39):
But it's going to be kind of expensive. And it's
called the Affordable Care Act, but it's not.

Speaker 5 (05:43):
Really affordable, the affordable, but.

Speaker 3 (05:47):
Then during the pandemic they changed that and made it
genuinely affordable, like we have a relatively humane system in
place at this point. Republicans took that out in the
Big Beautiful Bill to pay for more coal subsidies, tax
breaks for corporations and the rich, and so that expires

(06:10):
at the end of this year. Democrats looked around, decided
what do we want to what do we want to
demand in order to go along with this government staying open,
and they settled on these healthcare subsidies. Now, Republicans, why
do they feel like this is in their interests?

Speaker 5 (06:28):
So, because this is what Democrats have chosen to focus
on healthcare and we have. We're going to bring Marjorie
Taylor Green a post from.

Speaker 4 (06:35):
Her into this. In just one moment.

Speaker 5 (06:37):
I'm going to read from the Wall Street Journal that
summarizes the Republican perspective. They say, quote, Democrats are trying
to reverse all health policy changes enacted by the GOP's
tax law, including provisions that limited federal funding for immigrant
health care. Democrats are seeking more than a trillion altogether
in healthcare funds, including for the ACA subsidies and medicaid
over ten years are unauthorized immigrants eligible for ACA subsidies

(06:59):
and medicaid. The Journal goes on to say migrants in
the country illegally aren't eligible to enroll in the ACA marketplace,
which you probably have heard Democrats pointing out in the
last few days. They say the GOP's new tax law
the journals signed by Trump in July, revoked eligibility from
quote lawfully present immigrants, so that would include refugees and
what truly were millions of asylum seekers who came into

(07:21):
the country under the Biden administration are backlogged in the system,
so that would also include some visa holders. According to
the Journal, democrats proposal would restore their eligibility. So for Republicans,
they feel like that's a gift, and it's probably telling
Ryan that Republicans latched onto that rather than ten years ago.

(07:41):
The battle of the decade was Obamacare itself. Right, Republicans
aren't even fighting over the Obamacare stedge. I mean, fiscal
hawks obviously are, but they're overwhelmingly focusing on the eligibility
for the quote lawfully present immigrants, right.

Speaker 6 (08:00):
Which they refer to in their talking points as illegal immigrants.

Speaker 5 (08:03):
Which is actually a distinction with a huge difference, and
this has been I think a problem with a lot
of the Republican arguments on the Biden immigration wave. These
are in many cases not people who are in the
country illegally. They may be people who entered the country
illegally and then claimed asylum, which means that you're allowed
to claim asylum. It ends up, you know, you might

(08:26):
cross through a wall and then go to across the wall,
cross through a barrier or the border, and go to
border patrol.

Speaker 4 (08:33):
Right away and make this asylum claim.

Speaker 5 (08:35):
But the problem, and this is a tangent, but it's
useful in this case, is that the Biden administration did
was massively expand, from a conservative perspective, massively expand the
legal pathways.

Speaker 4 (08:47):
This was the entire argument.

Speaker 5 (08:49):
So yes, in many cases, in most cases, as we
discuss these subsidies, these are for people who are here legally.

Speaker 4 (08:57):
You just don't think they should be here.

Speaker 3 (08:59):
Right exactly, Yeah, boil down the right wing argument, correct
me if I'm being on fair hair. But they would say,
Democrats say, but they're not here illegally, and Republicans say, yeah,
but they should be illegal, which.

Speaker 5 (09:11):
Is again which is a massive distinction because the Biden administration,
and this actually in a sort of normal debate setting
would be helpful to the Republican argument because the Biden
administration didn't go through Congress, expanded the pathways through just
executive the executive branch basically, and that's what their argument
was for the four years of the Biden administration. That's

(09:32):
what Republicans were saying was wrong.

Speaker 4 (09:34):
So these are people who.

Speaker 5 (09:35):
Are technically here legally in probably almost all cases if
they're taking the insurance here.

Speaker 3 (09:41):
And I would love to hear Trump try to say
that somebody disrespected Congress. This hasn't been collaborative enough in
the governing approach.

Speaker 5 (09:50):
Speaking of Congress and speaking of Donald Trump, we have
some sound from lawmakers just yesterday.

Speaker 4 (09:57):
Let's go ahead and roll eight two.

Speaker 7 (10:00):
I'm not shutting it down.

Speaker 8 (10:00):
We don't want it to shut down because we have
the greatest period of time ever. I tell you, we
have seventeen trillion dollars being invested. So the last person
that once they shut down is us. Now, with that
being said, we can do things during the shutdown that
are irreversible, that are bad for them and irreversible by them,
like cutting vast numbers of people out, cutting things that

(10:21):
they like, cutting programs that they like, and you know,
you all.

Speaker 6 (10:25):
Know Russell vote.

Speaker 9 (10:26):
He's become very popular.

Speaker 8 (10:28):
Recently because he can trim the budget to a level
that you couldn't do any other way. So they're taking
a risk by having a shutdown. Because of the shutdown,
we can do things medically and other ways, including benefits.
We can cut large numbers of people out. We don't
want to do that, but we don't want fraud, waste,

(10:49):
and abuse.

Speaker 6 (10:49):
We've rolling the greatest hits on our social mediaa.

Speaker 10 (10:52):
I'm just saying that the point about giving people who
are here illegally healthcare is not exactly what is in
their poduce.

Speaker 11 (10:58):
It is one hundred percent.

Speaker 10 (11:00):
Who have legal status, and you're just going to ring
on who's eligible. I looked at it actually because I
was curious about your argument.

Speaker 11 (11:06):
You should study the CBO's analysis that they've just put
out a few weeks.

Speaker 10 (11:08):
Yeah, I saw that one point two milling people. You're
basically arguing about who has legal status, people who are seeking.

Speaker 4 (11:14):
Refuge here or no.

Speaker 11 (11:15):
I'm making sure that we are making sure in our
provisions that we sign in a law have ensured that
healthcare benefits go only to eligible US citizens. Chuck Sheri's
proposed law, federal law was not being enforced.

Speaker 6 (11:27):
That's the whole point.

Speaker 11 (11:28):
We had to fine tune that so that we could
strengthen the health care program.

Speaker 6 (11:31):
That's what we did.

Speaker 10 (11:32):
A response to Republicans like Health Speaker Mike Johnson and
others who say the subsidies don't expire until the end
of December. We have time to negotiate on those and
we could find some common ground, well.

Speaker 12 (11:41):
For a thought common ground. Really, they have had months
and for the first time in modern history, they have
not sat down what has always happened. It's a majority.
You he talks about how third communications they worked with
the Democrats. It's true because the Democrats in that case
sat down with them. So what you need is a
bipartisan solution. But these guys have said it's my way

(12:03):
or the highway. This is the way it's going to be.
And that is kind of what Trump is is about.
That's not authoritarian tendency that we're seeing in America right now.

Speaker 10 (12:11):
So are you telling me you're willing to vote no
every time?

Speaker 4 (12:14):
Leader?

Speaker 12 (12:15):
I am not good to allow let me be clear.
All right, you can quote me honest and quote be honest.
We say, in Vermot, to the cows come home. I
will not let tens of thousands of fellow Americans die
because they're thrown off of healthcare.

Speaker 5 (12:28):
I love saying you could quote me on this while
you're on camera. But Ryan, that Bernie energy is exactly
what Hakim Jeffreys lacks.

Speaker 3 (12:35):
Yeah, he also got on the line. He said, as
we say in Vermont, until the cows come home. As
we say, we'll give him that because Vermont has a
lot of cows. Sure come on, Like everybody says, as.

Speaker 6 (12:47):
Casks, he can't.

Speaker 4 (12:48):
He can't claim that.

Speaker 3 (12:50):
But like I said, special exemption from Vermont. They got
an awful lot of cows. So fine, we'll let them
have that other separately. If you'd have told me ten
years ago, I'd be looking at the guy getting shut
down by Donald Trump with RFK Junior and doctor Oz
standing behind him.

Speaker 6 (13:05):
Yep, like what is where did we go wrong? What happened?

Speaker 4 (13:08):
You would think you were tripping?

Speaker 6 (13:10):
What is going on here?

Speaker 3 (13:11):
Yes, doctor Oz chuckling about russ vote in the back there.
So and so that's the key point though the substance
here is Russ. Vote is the mastermind of Project twenty
twenty five. He is one of them, a key thought leader. Absolutely, yeah,
when it comes. He was the omb director under Trump one.

(13:31):
He he dulled dulled his hatchet just by you know,
slashing through everything he possibly could, learned a lot of lessons,
spent the next four years sharpening that thing. And now
he's back there and he knows what he's doing, and
he believes, and we could get into the laws or whatever,
what's the point, because that's besides the point. In a

(13:52):
political area era where power is everything, he believes that
in a government shut down, he can just roy the
government much faster.

Speaker 4 (14:01):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (14:02):
I have an article pulled up actually from you mentioned
the sharpening of the hatchet. This is from Eric Titzel,
who's the executive director of the Center for Renewing America.
Very much like Movement Conservative, but the Center for Renewing
America is where Russ was before going back into the
White House. And Eric writes, until this year, conservatives have
opposed crs. They wanted to use the annual appropriations process

(14:22):
to cut spending and eliminate woke, wasteful, and weaponized federal
programs eliminate annual deficit spending and reduced the national debt.
Then goes on to say, however, President Trump and his
Director of Omb Russfolte, came into office in January twenty
twenty five with a plan to revive lawful authorities of
the president in spending that had long lay dormant, namely
the powers of impoundment and recision. And if you've been

(14:43):
watching this show for the last several months, you know
that we've covered their claiming of the impoundment and recision powers.
Impoundment disagreement on empowerment goes back to Nixon, the Rust vote,
and the Trump administration have an ideological belief that is
obviously also convene for the sake of power. But it
is an ideological belief that is powers that should line

(15:04):
in the hands of the executive. And so Eric goes
on to say, in short, these powers allow the president
to decline to spend money that Congress has appropriated, sending
it back to the treasury. This means that conservatives in
Congress no longer bear the sole weight of cutting spending.
The president can do it too. Suddenly, a cr that
merely keeps funding flat from previous years is both a
cut in real terms with inflation and nominally and an

(15:24):
opportunity for the president to make additional cuts. And let
me read one more line. Eric says, that's juicy. But
here's where it gets even better. If there is a
government shut down due to a lapsing congressional authorization, the
president and his team, led by Russ Bolt must decide
how to prioritize whatever federal revenues are received. So Eric
compares that to a family managing their household budget and says,
the president decides whether to pay the credit card.

Speaker 4 (15:46):
Bill or cut the cable.

Speaker 5 (15:48):
Only the options are keeping national parks open or funding
research for transgender hormone therapy in mice. But that's on
the table right now, as are potentially mass.

Speaker 4 (15:57):
Layoffs, right, which is weird.

Speaker 5 (16:00):
Democrats were genuinely fearful of what would happen with the shutdown.
Ryan at the same time though that in their corner politically,
they're being asked to blank check the Trump administration.

Speaker 11 (16:14):
Right.

Speaker 3 (16:14):
Yeah, Democrats are in a tough spot because they will
because they're mostly out of power. Their base wants them
to fight. They're sick of the sternly awarded letters. They
don't have a lot of power, and they don't have
any if. I think if Democrats had charisma and a
message that they were regularly delivering on television and on

(16:38):
social media, Democrats would then forgive them for doing nothing.
In Washington, we're like, look, okay, they're inspiring, they have
a message, they're rallying the country against what's being done.
They're not remotely doing that. They got Hakeem Jeffreys and
Chuck Schumer embarrassing. Democrats are embarrassed by their leadership. Yeah,

(17:00):
so then they're like, well, then do something like shut
the government down. So you've got Indivisible and these other
grassroots organizations that are pressuring Democrats like you show us
you have some spine, but absent a message and any
charismatic leadership, it's just kind of like, just do something
in order to just do something. And then meanwhile, Republicans,

(17:23):
I feel like, actually want a government shut down so
that Russ Vogue can do this thing absolutely that he
wants to do further savage the government. And I think
Democrats in Washington are like, well, long term, strategically, this
is bad idea because it's going to lead to a
lot of people getting fired and the government getting destroyed.

Speaker 6 (17:43):
But we kind of have to do it because our
base wants us to do something.

Speaker 5 (17:45):
Because the hates us. Yeah, and they're not wrong, because
this is like how came Jefferies versus Bernie Sanders is
like the stark contrast there tells you what you need
to know. Hakim Jeffries, I don't know, Ryan, I'm curious
what you make of this. I just think his Schumer
or Schumer, and he's sort of a creature of Washington.

(18:07):
But Hakim Jefferies tries really hard to seem like something else.
He tries really hard to feel like he's a grassroots
populist almost in his presentation of leadership talking points, but
it really seems to like it falls flat. Maybe we
can roll this Trump meme. You may have caught this
is a four. We can't play the music, but you
can see this on your screen. Trump tweeted out again

(18:30):
another meme on Hakim Jefferies. Another joke on Hakim Jeffries. Yeah,
this is a vo we can play it while I'm
talking here. So Trump posted this again. It's a clip
of Hakim Jefferies on MSNBC talking about how Trump putting
the sombrero and mustache and mariachi garb on Hakim Jeffries

(18:52):
is racist as he's saying that Trump posts a video
that puts the sombrero and mustache and has Trump playing
mariachi music in the background, and Ryan, I know it's.

Speaker 6 (19:03):
Is that racist? I mean it's insensitive.

Speaker 4 (19:07):
I don't know.

Speaker 6 (19:09):
To Aquem Jefferies is not Mexican.

Speaker 4 (19:11):
No, he's not Mexican.

Speaker 6 (19:13):
And it wasn't like it's childish, it's juvenile.

Speaker 5 (19:16):
I was just gonna say, yeah, I know that this
is Donald Trump's boomer meaning, but that tells you something
about how pathetic Kaqim Jefferies is.

Speaker 3 (19:24):
It is an interesting contest between two parties who are
in different worlds. And Trump seems to believe that the
world that he's creating and then occupying is the one
where power is going to reside in a country and
in a world in which people are fed up with
the old system, whereas Kim Jefferies is just clinging to

(19:49):
some type of bygone values and even referenced and I
might have even been in that interview. All of a
sudden they're in this Oval office, meaning on a bunch
of like Maga twenty twenty eight.

Speaker 6 (19:59):
Hats yeah, just show up on the coffee table and.

Speaker 5 (20:01):
The White House takes pictures and puts them out.

Speaker 3 (20:03):
Yeah, which and Jeffries says that he said to jd Vance,
are you okay with this? And he says the Jady
Vance said no comment, uh, which is Jeffery's like reaching
back for some type of comedy and civility right up
and implying then to the audience that jd Vance secretly

(20:27):
pines for that as well and probably does maybe.

Speaker 5 (20:31):
Yeah. I mean, I don't know, but like, how came
Jefferies wasting any breath? Calling a meme from Trump racist
during this shutdown fight when they have the political gift
of talking about healthcare is insane to me, And it's
just so indicative of where their heads are at, like

(20:51):
he should be.

Speaker 6 (20:52):
It's just I sympathize with him, because man, Trump is
a lunatic. What are you supposed to do to say that?

Speaker 3 (20:59):
It's like Trump pull, let's say, pulls up to the
meeting in a clown car, and you're not supposed to
point out that he and Jade Vance and all these
other clowns are stumbling out of a clown car like
it's hard.

Speaker 6 (21:11):
I get why you should stay focused on the healthcare,
but it's like he's in a clown car. Does everybody
see it? Does everybody else see You?

Speaker 5 (21:18):
Just don't have to call a concord racist, because then
it becomes an entirely like he should know this media ecosystem,
and he should know that voter, like many of his
own voters, are sick of these invocations of racism when
they feel like their material world is crumbling in front
of them. Healthcare prices are about to go up and
are going up actually, so I just think it's crazy

(21:39):
for him to waste a breath on it. And on
the other side of that, Marjorie Taylor Green Let's put
up a three has some criticism for her own party.

Speaker 4 (21:47):
This is She posted this yesterday.

Speaker 5 (21:49):
The squad me the fifth cod member. Americans are getting
crushed by health insurance with monthly payments of fifteen hundred,
seventeen hundred and over two thousand dollars per month. Instead
of a revolving or foreign government leaders to the White House,
I'd like to see health insurance CEOs in there getting
chewed out on live television. Health insurance is out of control,

(22:11):
so that was again posted the day before the government
shut down after the day after, and Netanyahu was at
the White House and Ryan, she's cooking.

Speaker 13 (22:20):
She is.

Speaker 3 (22:20):
If I had unlimited amount of time, my next book
I think.

Speaker 6 (22:24):
Would just have to be about MTG.

Speaker 3 (22:26):
She's what a fascinating good idea archide she's taken, and
she is correct. Monthly payments of fifteen dred seventy two
thousand per month when the subsidies go away are going
to be a bloody nose to a middle class that
is already suffering under the weight of everything going up.

(22:47):
Groceries are up like fifty percent or something over year
over year. It's insane, like and people know, like, wait,
how much am I paying for just two bags of groceries?
And then and then at the same time, the insult
to the injury of your coffee is four dollars extra
because of tariffs, because Trump is trying to encourage a
domestic coffee production industry.

Speaker 6 (23:09):
Where are we going to plant coke? Where were we going
to plant How are we going to get coffee in
the United States?

Speaker 4 (23:14):
No, seriously, how are you gonna do that?

Speaker 6 (23:16):
Greenhouses?

Speaker 14 (23:16):
M hm?

Speaker 6 (23:18):
And I think it's got to be drier than that.

Speaker 3 (23:19):
So and like like, what do you like, why are
we just because he doesn't understand things like you have
to pay more at the grocery store, and then right,
who rolls in and out for the fourth time? And
then yeah, who rolls in and out of the oval office?
So MTG's like, how about we bringing the insurance CEOs now?

Speaker 6 (23:41):
Yeah, good crack down, go MTG.

Speaker 5 (23:44):
And to answer her rhetorical question of why not, it's
because they're all big donors. And the same goes uh
for Democrats, by the way, and the reason part of
what we're dealing with Affordable Care Act wise is that
the bill was this hulking mess that had all kinds
of it was in some ways this compromise between and

(24:05):
in some ways ran an understandable compromise between industry here
recovering this at the time between industry and the sort
of idealism of Obama about bringing healthcare prices down. But
the compromise with industry in a lot of different ways,
and that's not completely what we're dealing with now is
not completely downstream from that.

Speaker 4 (24:24):
But for Marjorie.

Speaker 5 (24:25):
Tayler Green, I think to be jumping in and criticizing
Republicans for Healthcare for mean obvious blind spot. Republicans for
a decade campaigned on healthcare, did nothing about it, and
now never even talk about it unless it's in reference
to what they say are quite illegal immigrants just covered.
But it's just a massive blind spot that is maybe

(24:46):
one of the biggest holes and sources of anxiety in
the average Americans daily budget.

Speaker 4 (24:51):
And they've got nothing.

Speaker 3 (24:52):
Yeah, and just briefly want to keep people updated on
the fight over electricity bills, So we could put up
a five new research from Bloomberg here showing that as
you suspect like that your intuition is correct, in areas
you know, where there have been data centers built, electricity

(25:13):
costs as much as two hundred and sixty seven percent
more than it did five years ago. That's a near quadrupling.
Like that's insane, and it's only going it's only getting
worse as they continue to build these and as both
parties are you know, supportive of these big tech sweetheart

(25:36):
deals that basically require rate payers, you know, consumers to
subsidize the production of these AI and these data centers,
and do not ask Rock about that because then you're
just you're you think it's free. Every time you ask

(25:57):
him if this is true, you're you're paying stop.

Speaker 5 (26:01):
Yeah, thanks to everybody for their other questions.

Speaker 3 (26:05):
Although I don't want to, Yeah, I don't want to
encourage it. Like the whole carbon footprint was a neoliberal
like ridiculous attempt to make something that is system wide
a personal responsibility question. The same thing with recycling, which
is fake. I was just almost entirely fake. So I

(26:27):
don't want to like shame people for using AI or
or grock or whatever. As if you have some like
grock footprint, yes, and then if you use less rock
that your electric bill will go down because it's a systematic.

Speaker 4 (26:39):
Problem, as if you have any agent.

Speaker 3 (26:41):
But also stop with this voting or should you should
just stop because it's like an insult to all of
our intelligence.

Speaker 5 (26:47):
Just to wrap a bowe and everything We've alluded to
a bit why this is probably in both parties political interests,
even if it's not in the American people's interests to
have a shut down government. But for both parties coming
to an impasse on this, I don't they just don't
have many incentives. Democrats are reportedly hopeful right now that

(27:07):
actually Donald Trump is the one who will come to
the table on the ACA subsidies or the ACA expansion,
because he's someone who wants to be able to say,
I gave you your healthcare cheaper, I gave you your
health care. I fixed the problem with your healthcare. Now
you can thank me for the healthcare because of the
shutdown aversion or ending the shutdown. I Donald Trump ended
the shutdown. So I think we can expect this to

(27:29):
go on for a long time. That they're probably correct
that that's their best bet at this point, because Donald
Trump can basically tell congressional Republicans what to do and
they'll follow him, no question about it. But they'll if
they let it go on for a few days at least,
they'll already start being that they'll already start experimenting with
some of these long term cuts that they want to do,

(27:49):
and finally ran This is a point that we haven't
talked about, but it's what most of the media coverage
is focused on.

Speaker 4 (27:54):
I'm thankful that.

Speaker 5 (27:55):
This isn't what most of our coverage is focused on
because it's kind of a secondary story. But in prior shutdowns,
there's just this finger pointing game that gets played in
the media, everyone's seeing it as a Republicans fault, as
a Democrats fault. And when we were reading the op
ed earlier about Russ's vote, saying, well, previously Republicans have
opposed these crs and have opposed, you know, all the

(28:19):
way that we're funding the government. Well, there are arguments
that you can there are always there's always a partisan
argument for who actually shut down the government. Republicans can say, well,
Democrats wouldn't come to the table, and Democrats can say, well,
Republicans are the ones.

Speaker 4 (28:32):
Who won't give us the votes.

Speaker 5 (28:33):
This time, it's the Democrats who will not give Republicans
the vote, and Rand Paul they need seven because Rand
Paul is out.

Speaker 4 (28:40):
So I'm curious if we'll be able to look.

Speaker 5 (28:43):
Back on the media covers at this one as an
instructive example as to who gets the blame when they're
not giving the votes.

Speaker 3 (28:48):
We'll see and these are called process arguments. Yes, and
the public does not care about process, and parties in
general also do not care about process. They invent concerns
about process to justify whatever their substantial or political demand is.
So nobody should really waste much time thinking about that
last thing on this, we have a little scoop. Attorney

(29:11):
General Pam Bondi just before five o'clock last night sent
out a memo to the Departner of Justice which we
obtained and which one of the attorneys they are sent
to me flagging it as a flagrant what they call
a Hatch Act violation, which was a law that is
still on the books, which was a lot but does
not actually get enforced anymore, which says that the federal government,

(29:34):
you know, cannot be used for partisan political purposes.

Speaker 6 (29:37):
That's illegal.

Speaker 3 (29:38):
Yesterday, if you went to hud dot gov during the day,
it gave you a giant banner that said, sorry that
you're coming here, but radical Democrats have ruined the world.
Still there, go to hud dock up so that the
memo she sent out.

Speaker 6 (29:56):
As Attorney General Bondi.

Speaker 3 (29:57):
Unfortunately, Democrats are blocked bing this CR in the US
Senate due to unrelated policy demands. If congressional Democrats maintain
their current posture and refuse to pass a clean CR
to keep the government funded before twelve am on Octi,
her first federal appropriate funding will lapse to apartment has
contingency plans in place, et cetera.

Speaker 6 (30:17):
This is the kind of thing.

Speaker 3 (30:18):
That would have been a five alarm scandal even just
ten years ago. Now the full politicization of the federal
government has has taken hold, as it's just weaved into
this otherwise bureaucratic sounding memo sent to thousands of lawyers.

Speaker 4 (30:39):
Yeah, like they it's an extra.

Speaker 6 (30:41):
Bol Yeah, yeah, what does she care? Anyway?

Speaker 5 (30:44):
Well, let's go ahead, Ryan and bring in a Presentative
Benklin of Virginia, who will be followed by Senator Jeff Merkley.

Speaker 3 (30:50):
You brought in client is a freedom caucus, right freedom caucus,
So tell us what.

Speaker 6 (30:54):
The right flank of the House is thinking.

Speaker 5 (30:57):
Well, and that's especially interesting giving the Marjorie Tayler Green
she's not in the freedom car Saymore's. She's still roughly
freedom based, yes, and she criticizes them a lot now,
But you know, to have a kind of populist perspective
on a healthcare fight is always I think useful, especially
since it's been such a blind spot for Republicans. So
we're going to talk to Representative Clin in Virginia, and
then we're going to bring in Senator Jeff Merkley, who

(31:20):
can I think give us some insight into how prominent Democrats.

Speaker 4 (31:23):
Are thinking about them.

Speaker 3 (31:24):
Yeah, and Merkley, first elected in eight represents Oregon, so
we'll ask them about the the federal war that Trumps
declared on Oregon yesterday as well. Plus he was that
he and Chris van Holland were actually they tried to
go to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation sites pretty recently, so
we can ask ask Merkley about that too.

Speaker 5 (31:44):
And just before we toss to them, they're just the
real world consequences of a shutdown. It's many four million
federal plays I'm reading, yes, those reading for ABC right now.
But people have been through it now they sort of
know what to expect. So that includes some service member
could go without a paycheck. That actually includes some of
the National Guard people who are deployed to places like Washington, DC,

(32:06):
potentially to Chicago or Memphis. Hundreds of thousands, including airport
security officers, air traffic controllers, and certain members of the
military will be deemed essential workers and told to come
to work anyway.

Speaker 6 (32:14):
So I have a.

Speaker 4 (32:15):
Flight, you don't have to worry too much.

Speaker 5 (32:17):
Except last time when there was a shutdown, you just
get a lot more call outs of TSA people who
are calling in sick because they.

Speaker 4 (32:23):
Don't know whether they're going to get paid.

Speaker 5 (32:25):
If this lasts particularly long, national parks could close, the
Swithsonian could.

Speaker 4 (32:30):
It's staying up until Monday so far.

Speaker 3 (32:33):
And apparently, like in the Bureau of Labor Statistics, for instance,
apparently about roughly one person is deemed essential, which means
if this goes on for a long time, the already
somewhat unreliable data that we're getting out of the BLS
will become that much more unreliable because you don't have
time because you need the workers to be collecting the
data on a daily basis. Otherwise you are flying blind

(32:57):
in the economy. So stuff like that too.

Speaker 5 (32:59):
Well, see and broke this morning that BLS nominee EJ
and Tony's nomination has been withdrawing.

Speaker 6 (33:04):
Right, they'll find some other Votso.

Speaker 4 (33:07):
All right, let's get to it.

Speaker 5 (33:12):
We're joined now by Congressman Ben Klein, Republican representing Virginia's
sixth district. Congressman, thank you so much for joining us.

Speaker 13 (33:19):
Good to be with you.

Speaker 5 (33:21):
Okay, so you are a member of the Freedom Caucus
and somebody who used to be pretty close with Freedom Caucus.
World is RUSS vote. And I'm curious, Congressman, if you
could talk to us a little bit about how this shutdown,
how Republicans are looking at the possibilities of the shutdown,
empowering from their perspective, the RUSS vote and Donald trump

(33:41):
efforts to actually make significant cuts while the government is
shut down, to go on impoundment recisions and potentially even
layoffs of federal workers. Is is that a significant part
of the plan that people could expect to see in
the coming days.

Speaker 14 (33:56):
Well, the administration has its priorities. Our priority in the
House and in the Senate with Republicans are to get
the government back on track. This is we passed regular
order continuing resolutions to keep government running. We've done our job.
The Senate is trying to I mean, the Democrats are
trying to attach extraneous provisions. But we will hopefully be

(34:20):
back up and running. And you know, in the meantime,
if the administration is going to pursue their priorities of
streamlining government, you know, then I think that's something Republicans
are generally in favor of. We hope that they are
targeted and that they are in areas where we need streamlining.

(34:41):
But you know, I think that Russ Vote has done
a fantastic job as OMB director, and I think we
look for him to make decisions that are going to
help improve improve efficiency and reduce bureaucracy.

Speaker 3 (34:56):
And so the Big Beautiful Bill, which Democrats are kind
of making this shutdown fight about, included significant tax cuts
tilted towards the wealthy, and to pay for some of that,
there were significant cuts to Medicaid and then to Obamacare subsidies,
which Democrats say, and I think there's actually a lot

(35:16):
of datata back this up is going to be really
brutal for hospitals, in particular in rural America. Are you
seeing any pressure from your constituents who were concerned about
hospital hospital closures?

Speaker 14 (35:30):
Well, my district voted for President Trump, voted for the
Trump Agenda, voted for Republican control in the House and
in the Senate. So you know, what we are doing
is delivering on the agenda that the voters voted for.
And so when we passed the Big Beautiful Bill, we
passed included language that would eliminate waste fraud abuse in

(35:52):
Medicaid by putting in place common sense work requirements, by
streamlining snap benefits to make sure that they're not duplication,
that there's not people who shouldn't be on food stamps
getting food stamps. All of that is the Democrats are
seeking to roll back the election of last November and
say it didn't really happen. Our agenda is the agenda

(36:14):
that people voted for and want. So we want more bureaucracy,
more waste, fraud and abuse, and more excess spending on
pet projects like healthcare funding in California for illegal immigrants.

Speaker 5 (36:25):
Well, yeah, I was just going to ask, so if
Democrats dropped, and that's seems right now to be a
big if. If Democrats dropped, they're part of these negotiations
that would apply to the quote lawfully present immigrants, which
could include people who came over and claimed asylum even
if they crossed illegally and then claimed asylum. If they
dropped that part of this, do you think there would

(36:47):
be a pathway to an agreement to reopening the government
if they just got rid of Would Republicans come to
the table if they just got rid of the tax care,
the healthcare. I'm sorry for people who are are not
US citizens.

Speaker 14 (37:03):
You know, that's not the only problem with the Democrats demands.
It is one of the most egregious. But the health
insurance subsidies. Let's remember, Obamacare broke the health insurance marketplace
so that all the health insurance policies are now out
of reach for low income and middle income earners. And

(37:24):
so to actually afford these Obamacare policies, Democrats have put
in place subsidies and want to keep the money trained
going to the insurance companies. Republicans don't think we should
be subsidizing insurance companies with forty million dollars forty billion
dollars excuse me, in additional money to pad their balance sheets.

(37:46):
So we need to put more competition in the marketplace,
put more low cost health insurance options for working families.
That's how we're going to address the problems that started long,
long ago.

Speaker 6 (37:59):
And putting it in to a.

Speaker 14 (38:00):
Continuing resolution just is malpractice on the part of the Democrats.
We can talk about ways to reform healthcare once we
get the government back up and running, but we have
to do that first.

Speaker 5 (38:11):
Well, so erin if you don't mind, I just wanted
to read this post from Congressman your colleague Marjorie Taylor Green,
who said yesterday on Twitter, Americans are getting crashed by
health insurance with monthly payments at fifteen hundred, seventeen hundred
and two thousand dollars per month instead of a revolving
door foreign government leader. So the White House probably referring
to Benjaminattiyaho there. I'd like to see health insurance CEOs
in there getting chewed out on live television.

Speaker 4 (38:33):
Health insurance is out of control.

Speaker 5 (38:34):
And I thought that post was really interesting because it
reflects the sentiment that I could hear maybe people in
your district or just average Trump voters who might see
their premiums spike saying, yes, we all agree that we
should fix the healthcare system, but it's you're asking me
to wait for a massive political project that might or

(38:55):
might not ever happen because of the state of Congress.
Doesn't that I mean, how would you address somebody who says,
I'm being raked over the calls every month. I can't
afford this as is out of control. Please just do something.
I can't wait for Republicans to undo ACA with some
grand solution in the future.

Speaker 14 (39:14):
Yeah, Republicans agree, which is why we oppose what the
Democrats want to attach to the CR, which is such
a rollback that millionaires and billionaires are going to qualify
for these subsidies that they currently receive.

Speaker 9 (39:30):
That's outrageous.

Speaker 14 (39:32):
And as to the healthcare locations, the hospitals and other
healthcare facilities, those are going to be benefiting from the
fifty billion that is in the Big Beautiful Bill that
goes to rural healthcare, and that's something that Democrats want repealed.
They want all of Big Beautiful Bill repealed, including fifty
billion for rural health care, including putting back in place

(39:56):
tax subsidies extended for millionaires and billionaires. Make any sense,
it shows the lack of focus on the Democrats part.
We have three Democrats, two Democrats and an independent who
voted with Republicans last night for the Continuing Resolution for
a clean CR. So it's clear that they're breaking and
we just need to keep the pressure on and hopefully

(40:17):
they'll come around and vote for a clean CR and
then we can talk about how to resolve the spending
for the next fiscal year.

Speaker 3 (40:23):
Let's talk about that fifty billion dollar number, though, so
Republicans in the Big Beautiful Bill cut about a trillion
dollars from Medicaid Medicare and the Affordable Care Act, the
ACA Obamaca.

Speaker 6 (40:35):
Cutting waste, rudden abuse, exactly right.

Speaker 3 (40:37):
So let's because we have a wasteful we have a
wasteful system, and a lot of it goes to health
insurance executives, a lot of private equity executives who own
a lot of our providers. Let's say that even half,
let's say half of that trillion dollars is just siphoned
off by profiteers. I don't think it's I don't think

(40:59):
it's five hundred billion, but let's just say, let's just
say it is probably closer as I say two hundred billion.
Let's say, so that means five hundred billion dollars is
being stripped out of the healthcare system. Money that's not
going to go now to providers and to community healthcare systms.

Speaker 6 (41:13):
I was looking it up.

Speaker 3 (41:15):
Lee County Community Hospital is in your district, is saying
that it might close. So you've got a conservatively, you
have a five hundred billion dollar gaping hole blown in
the healthcare industry. Buy this bill, and Republicans, because they
understood the political risks of that, came back in with
a fifty billion dollar kind of backstop. So I hope

(41:37):
for your constituent's sake that Lee County Community Hospital does
manage to win the fight in the snakepit to get
that money from that fifty billion dollar pot. But don't
the numbers just not add up there? Like if you're
taking five hundred to a trillion out but only putting
fifty billion back in, aren't we going to see some
significant bankruptcies among hospitals and providers.

Speaker 14 (42:02):
Well, Lee County is not in my district, but we
do have a lot of rural hospitals in my district.
And what they are saying is that, yes, that because
we expanded Medicaid to cover working adults, that putting in
place work requirements is going to put the responsibility on
them to actually qualify for Medicaid and stay qualified for Medicaid.

(42:27):
And then the increased reporting requirements is going to again
put it on them and on the hospitals to make
sure that only those who are qualified are going to
receive Medicaid.

Speaker 9 (42:40):
So these common.

Speaker 14 (42:41):
Sense measures are going to make sure that more money
is available for rural hospitals. And then you add on
the fifty billion that's going to flow back only to
rural hospitals. You know, rural hospitals really only use about
five percent of Medicaid funding and for them to actually
get this directed money without the big hospitals and the

(43:03):
big competition for those funds. Since it's just going to
rural hospitals, you're going to see them benefit directly, and
hopefully our constituents in rural areas will too.

Speaker 5 (43:14):
Last question for me, Congressman, is just how far are
our House Republicans willing to push this? And maybe you
haven't said into the Senate side and President Trump as well,
but consensus here in Washington is that this is a
shutdown will probably, I mean, it may even challenge the
record long shutdown from President Trump's first administration because of
what the incentives look like for both parties here. And

(43:37):
I tend to, even as rarely as I agree with
the Washington consensus, that does feel right to me this time.
So what's your take, I mean, how far are House
Republicans willing to hold out? If Democrats don't add their
votes in the Senate side.

Speaker 14 (43:53):
If Democrats weren't in existence in the Senate, we would
have a continuing resolution. It would be a big business,
you know, continuing in the federal government because Democrats are
refusing to provide those seven votes. That's why we have
a shutdown. So it's on them to come back to
the table. Three have come back, we need four more.

(44:16):
I anticipate that by the time we get back to
Washington next week after the Jewish holiday and after the weekend,
we are going to be ready and the Democrats will
probably be ready to get this thing resolved and open
the government back up again.

Speaker 3 (44:33):
Emily and I were talking earlier in the program about
how it's interesting that Republicans now when they're opposing these
Obamacare subsidies, have done it in the context of whether
or not the money the subsidies are going to illegal
illegal immigrants, rather than kind of challenging the subsidies ideologically

(44:54):
as they did for many years.

Speaker 6 (44:56):
Does that I know it.

Speaker 3 (44:57):
Freedom Caucus is pretty still squarely against the types of subsidies.
But are you noticing an ideological shift among Republicans that they're,
in a populist sense more open to these government subsidies
and and that's why they're looking for this angle, Well,
they might they might accidentally benefit illegal immigrants, so that's

(45:19):
why we're against them. But for Americans, citizens, we're okay
with it, no.

Speaker 14 (45:22):
I think for multiple reasons. You see Republicans explaining to
the American people why these subsidies distort the marketplace and
are wrong for healthcare, and maybe a temporary solution for
folks right now, but long term, the money that is
being asked for will go directly into the pockets of
insurance executives that'll keep premiums high, and they won't provide

(45:46):
any kind of relief for working families. We have to
long term solve the problem that Obamacare broke when it
destroyed our health insurance system. But short term, we do
have to address high health insurance costs, but we have
to do it without making sure that millionaires and billionaires
benefit from these subsidies. And the Democrats that's what they want,

(46:08):
and that's what they're holding the government hostage to get
an extension of these subsidies to every income earner, including
illegal immigrants, and taking away fifty billion for rural health care.
It doesn't make any sense, and I'm hoping that Democrats
come to their senses and reopen the government soon.

Speaker 5 (46:26):
Congressman Klein, thank you so much for joining us here
on breaking points this morning.

Speaker 4 (46:31):
We appreciate it.

Speaker 5 (46:32):
Thanks guys, thank you.

Speaker 3 (46:36):
Joining us now is Senator Jeff Murkley, Democrat of Oregon,
to talk about the Democratic posture when it comes to
the shutdown and also update us on his recent trip
over to the Gazi human attempt to visit the GADS
Humanitarian Foundation. Senator Markley, thanks so much for joining us.

Speaker 15 (46:56):
Good to be with you.

Speaker 3 (46:57):
So, when it came to the Democratic decision making on
how to confront Republicans on this shutdown, how was it
that party leaders wound up settling on kind of healthcare
subsidies as the thing that you were going to make
this fight about.

Speaker 15 (47:16):
Well, if you compare March fifteenth and Shakespeare said we
wear the eydes of March, and now here we are
a number of months later, what has happened in the
intervening period, Well, the big factor was passing what we
refer to as the Big Ugly Betrayal Bill. That what

(47:37):
did it do? I love its savaged Americans healthcare. And
that factor is coming due here in the coming months,
because in November, people will be signing up for healthcare
again and they'll be discovering double digit increases. In many cases,

(47:58):
they'll be paying twice what they paid the previous year,
and in some cases families in organ will be paying
eight to twenty five thousand dollars more and they simply
won't be able to afford it. You go without, you
go without health insurance, you don't go to the doctor.
Health conditions get worse when you do go. You go
to the most expensive version emergency room, and you can't

(48:18):
pay the bills you don't have insurance. Then the revenues
decrease for our clinics in our hospitals, many of which
are already on edge. And so Republicans are shutting down
the government in order to cut health care. And why
did they do this to fund tax breaks for billionaires?

Speaker 13 (48:33):
Wow?

Speaker 15 (48:34):
I mean this is a families lose, billionaires win direction
and health care touches every family in America.

Speaker 5 (48:43):
Are Democrats willing to come to the table on the
key issue that Republicans have been talking about, which is
healthcare for non citizens. It's for people who are lawfully present.
Republicans are saying illegal immigrants. The truth of that is,
as people who are like lawfully present, may have claimed
asylum in the big wave of migration that we saw
over the last few years, so if Democrats are willing to,

(49:04):
I'm curious under our Democrats willing to come to the
table and drop healthcare that would cover non citizens for
the sake of getting the government back open for US citizens.

Speaker 15 (49:14):
Listen, the re combanis are engaged in a big line
because no one who is here undocumented is eligible for Medicare.
No one who is here a document is eligible for Medicare.
And so that big lie is an effort to distract
from what they did, which was to savagely cut health

(49:36):
care for working Americans and struggling Americans across This is spectrum.
This is this bill that they passed was rolling out
the red carpet for billionaires and rolling out the red
tape for struggling families who are trying to get on
their feet. And so the vision that is different here

(49:58):
is that we want to make America work for everyone
to be able to succeed. And I must say, the
reason we call this often their bill and ugly betrayal
is because President Trump campaigned on helping families. But then
when you saw in the rotunda he's being sworn in
and I'm about twenty feet away from him, a second

(50:22):
rowback and who's standing behind him. Not champions for health
care or housing, or education, or good paying jobs, or
investment in infrastructure, or equality of opportunity or making our
planet healthier, none of that. No, No, it's billionaires. Day
One of his administration was dedicated to making billionaires even

(50:44):
wealthier and doing so at the expense of everyone else.
And it wasn't just cutting healthcare. In their bill, was
cutting child nutrition, and it was creating thirty trillion in
additional debt over thirty years why to fund tax breaks
for billionaires. So certainly when you get in the room,
there's going to be a lot of discussions over details.
But that's the key is Republicans said, we are not

(51:05):
even going to talk to you the president when he
was non president back in twenty thirteen. So the president
has a responsibility to bring everyone together. If there is
a shutdown, it's on the president's head. So this is
Trump's Republican shutdown. But he wasn't willing now he's president,
he wasn't willing to meet with our team until essentially
we're you know, we're approaching midnight, if you will, and

(51:28):
he instructed the Speaker of the House, you don't talk
to Democrats either, and the majority leader in the Senate
didn't talk to Democrats. In other words, it was like, okay, well,
let's talk about this, because we are not going to
just say that this horrific assault on families in America
is okay. We're not going to say it's okay. We

(51:49):
are not going to support that. Come talk to us,
and they were unwilling to do so.

Speaker 3 (51:54):
So in a moment, we're going to be talking about
Trump and Pete Hagg's death. Appearing at the Pentagon yesterday,
and while there, Trump talked about how, you know, he
wants the military to start using American cities as training grounds,
and he has said that he's going to send or
I guess is sending the military into into Portland. As

(52:14):
a senator from Oregon, what what have you seen so far?
And you know, how are you know, how how do
you respond to Trump's proposition here?

Speaker 1 (52:24):
Yeah?

Speaker 15 (52:25):
A week ago Thursday, he announced He's going to quote
do a number on Portland. He said, I'm going to
have the Secretary of War deploy the troops and I'm
going to authorize him to use full force. We're going
to do a number on Portland. So we held a
press conference, and I called it the don't take the

(52:45):
bait press conference, and we had all the local leaders,
the mayor, our congressional delegation, the local city council members,
don't take debate. What the President is up to is
he wants to create riots in Portland, and so by
sending an influx of federalized troops while he's hoping there

(53:08):
will be conflict, and then conflict justifies more authoritarian power.
So understanding this, our reaction has to be don't take
the bigger and so this is the message we're giving
to people. Yes, protests, but don't protest by getting engaged
directly with any of these officers. Now, it turns out
that some things have developed and that instead of sending

(53:29):
a whole bunch of different forces from different organizations the
way he did in two thousand, right now what a
two thousand and twenty, what he's planning to do now
is to federalize a two hundred of our Oregon National
Guard send in leadership. So it basically decapitates the leadership
that's in Oregon and sends in separate leadership. They're going

(53:52):
to go through a couple days of training. There is
a hearing this rieting for a stay and why is
that state being considered Because the power that the president's using,
the authority who's using, is called Title Tien, and it
says the president can send in troops when there is
an invasion or a rebellion. And this is very important

(54:16):
because our founders were terrified of a standing army. They
had seen dictators create an authoritarian state by using the
power of an army, so they didn't want a standing army,
they didn't trust it. And then one hundred and fifty
years ago, we had a general agreement that troops and
it's called paskomotatas law, that troops would never be used

(54:36):
inside our cities, this exception being an invasion or rebellion.
So I'm hoping that we'll hear from the district judge
an injunction saying there's nothing that qualifies as an invasion
or a rebellion. I went past the ICE head quarters,
which is what Trump is focused on, a couple times
this last week, and I saw three women standing out

(54:57):
with signs that had flowers on them, And are you
kidding me? That's a rebellion. That's called an American protest,
that's called freedom of speech. That's called freedom of assembly.
That's is American as apple pie. There have been a
few conflicts kind of like the equivalent of a bar
fight over the last couple of months, but well within
the ability of local please to tackle nothing that would

(55:19):
constitute a rebellion. Think about a rebellion. What's a rebellion
Like civil war, that's a rebellion. Shaney's rebellion, that's the
founding of our republic. That was a rebellion where you
had a mob seeking to tackle a local armory and
grab guns. But so we feel what Trump is doing
is very much out of the authoritarian playbook, extremely dangerous.

(55:41):
And then he followed up, as you mentioned, by talking
to the generals yesterday morning and he says, you know,
first of all, it's a loyalty test. You all don't
like what I'm doing, leave the room, but you will
be you probably lose your rank. Okay, So loyalty to
the Constitution is the oath they took. But Trump wants loyalty.
The President's very dangerous. They said, a group, you are
probably going to be in charge of this strategy of

(56:04):
sending troops to cities and making it a training ground,
a training ground for what for how troops are deployed
across America. Folks have been coming to my town halls
and saying, and I've done thirty six of them this year, saying,
we are really worried that the president is going to
create some emergency power. Is going to say as emergency power,

(56:25):
it's going to postpone elections. People are going to basically
protest against that, and it's going to send in the troops.
Is this what he's planning? Is this train so that
troops will be prepared to go into cities. Once you
go across this threshold and you do it repeatedly, it
becomes easier and easier to repeat the precedent. I think
this is an extraordinarily dangerous moment for us, with authoritarian

(56:48):
president who's violating the Constitution left and right, and now
talking about developing a habit of putting the military into
our cities.

Speaker 5 (56:58):
If we take Trump out of the pure for a moment,
what do you think needs to happen in Portland? I'm
curious about that. You can correct me. I mean, there
have been obvious, as you just mentioned, instances of political
violence in Portland, more than less than I should say
social bar fights, for example, but bar fights maybe with
some political animus behind them. So does what has to

(57:23):
happen in Portland? And I asked that as somebody who
doesn't like the expansion of government power, particularly law enforcement,
particularly domestically. But is it possible that there's like this
giant opening for Trump to seize on disorder in Portland
as Democrats have let political violence fester in some cases
in the city.

Speaker 15 (57:43):
There's been very little violence in Portland. If you walked
through Portland, you would just go This is a city
on the rebound of the sixty five largest cities in America.
Had the biggest decrease in murder rates year over year
twenty percent. In fact, it was cut in half. It
had one of the largest twenty percent and violent crimes.
You see, the city has been rebuilding from COVID, rebuilding

(58:05):
from the twenty twenty conflicts with Trump and his first administrations.
Things that have been closed down or starting to open
back up. The it's we we see the impact of
of course, homelessness and drug use, and those impacts are
less visible now as programs are ramped up to provide

(58:25):
alternatives and assistance. New Portland's been on the rebound, you
would not recognize it as looking anything like what Trump
is described. And if you have a few people who
want to create disturbances and they've been coming late at
night and throwing some stones, been a very small number,
that's where the local police arrest them, and that's a
local police function. You throw a stone into federal building,

(58:49):
you put off a fireworks abed at a local, local building,
even if it's not an ice building, any building that's
a that's a local police response. So there's nothing here
that comes close to justifying federalization of the National Guard
or sending me in troops of any kind.

Speaker 3 (59:07):
And we don't have much time left, but I did
want to just get your quick perspective on your trip
over toward the guys of Humanitarian Foundations sites over there.
One of the few American non mercenaries was able to
get close. You know, how close were you able to
get and what was your interaction with kind of GHF

(59:27):
officials and what was your what was your takeaway as
you and Senator Chris van Holland had made a trip
there and.

Speaker 15 (59:34):
The truth was much broader than it is trying to
get into go although that was a goal we were
turned down by the Israeli authorities. We then arranged to
participate in a Jordaining overflight where they dropped a humanitarian aid.
Israeli's canceled the flight. I mean, we were in Jordan
with the C one thirty cargo planes all all getting

(59:55):
ready to take off, and Israel canceled the flights. They
didn't apparently want an American observing Gaza from the air.
But then we were able to go to the border
at Rafa Gate, where we'd also been in January of
twenty twenty four. But this time we were able to
go through the transition area between Egypt and Gaza because
the gates shut down, and at the far end we

(01:00:17):
were able to climb an outside fire escape to the
roof of a three story building, stand on the ledge
and look out over Gaza and just see or all
over Goza, but over the city of Rafa, and just
see everything reduced to rubble. It's one thing to see
the satellite photos. It's another thing to stand there and
just see it that every building blown up. This was

(01:00:39):
It was stunning because it was just such visible evidence
of the strategy, a twofold strategy of ethnic cleansing. The
first strategy was destroy all the homes, not just that
they're empty and the city's been emptied out and their's
shell holes are got no everything blown up so you
can't return. And the second strategy of deprivation probation of

(01:01:00):
food and clean water and medicine. And now we have
a famine for the most vulnerable populations inside of Gaza.
We have horrendous impact on children. Can you imagine two
years of bombs following your family members dying. You've moved
five or six or sometimes ten, ten times. No place

(01:01:21):
is safe, no school can be held. Malnutrition rolls into famine,
and it's just it's the International workers a worst hellhole
in the world. As a result of this strategy designed
to drive people out of Gaza, that was very powerful.

(01:01:44):
We met with so many groups. We met with the
families of the hostages. We met with soldiers who had
served in Gossip. We met with International workers who had
been inside. We met with World Food Program workers who
had been inside. We learned about all the strategies to
block the regular delivery of food that are constantly being
used to extend this famine. What the same values that

(01:02:08):
made me a passionate supporter for Israel are the same
values that say what the net Yahoo government is doing
is horrifically wrong. It's a violation of international law, it's
a violation of every humanitarian or religious creed. It is
just horrific. And America is complicit because of our close relationship,

(01:02:29):
and we haven't used that close relationship to say hell
no to the strategy of ethnic clinsic.

Speaker 3 (01:02:36):
And for people who don't know, Rafa is a city
that dates back to the second at least the second
millennium BC. You know, Alexander the Great was there continuously
occupied basically for.

Speaker 6 (01:02:50):
Something like four thousand years. What was it?

Speaker 3 (01:02:54):
What was it like to see this one of the
most ancient cities on the planet, which is reduced to
non existence.

Speaker 15 (01:03:04):
You know, you couldn't recognize anything because it's all just rubble.
So you see no signs of You couldn't make out
if you will, oh, where was something that was ancient significant?
It's all just rubble. But what really struck me was
to recognize that six months earlier a million people were
in that city, and just as in Gaza City, a

(01:03:29):
few months ago a million people were in Gaza City,
and now Gaza City is being raised and blown up
in the same fashion. If this proceeds, you will find
that you have two million people crowded into a small
area on the very southwest corner of Gaza, which is
Gaza is already a very small place, and where are

(01:03:50):
they going to go? The goal is to make life
so miserable that they will self deport. It's American Government's
called it voluntary departure. Nothing voluntary when you're being started
to death and indiscriminately bombed. So this is not all
that's going wrong. You have on the West Bank another strategy,

(01:04:13):
which is that green light has been given for settlers
to engage in massive harassment of Palestinian villages, cutting the
villagers off from their olive orchards, cutting them off from
their vineyards, cutting them off from their springs or their wells,
proceeding to run a livestock right up and to and
off and through these villages, and then assaulting the villagers

(01:04:35):
when they leave the village itself to check on their
lands or so forth. And that also is to drive
everyone out of area sea, basically a de facto takeover
of the West Bank. That is wrong as well. Nineteen

(01:04:58):
forty seven vision was two nations.

Speaker 9 (01:05:02):
For the two people.

Speaker 15 (01:05:04):
The world supported and endorsed and made happen the Israeli nation,
but we never solidified a Palestinian state. This is why
I introduced a resolution, the first of its kind, saying
to the President of the United States, we should be
recognizing a Palestinian state. The failure to do so has

(01:05:27):
been a festering wound that's contributed to the cycle of
violence in the Middle East. And I was pleased that
I other the senators joined me. So ten senators did
something that hasn't been done before, and that is to
speak up and say we've made a mistake. Whether it
was through Camp David at Oslo and all time since,
we never actually recognized the legitimacy of a Palestinian state,

(01:05:49):
and it's time to make that happen. I do want
to say that in the peace plan the President just
put forward, there's a lot of elements that are the
best step I've seen this administration make towards a fast,
hopefully a fast cease fire and the start of something
new and better. We need a ceasefire, We need a

(01:06:11):
massive influx humanitarian return of all the hostages. We needed
to break this ethnic cleansing strategy. It's better for Israel
to break that strategy, It's better for the Palestinians. But
let's build on a ceasefire to create a prosperous, peaceful

(01:06:33):
future rather than have this haunting cycle of violence infect
the decades to come.

Speaker 6 (01:06:39):
And we'll talk.

Speaker 3 (01:06:40):
We'll talk more about that plan later in the program.
Up next, we'll be talking about Trump and Pete Hesett
at the Pentagon. Now, Senator Jeff Markley, thank you so
much for joining us.

Speaker 6 (01:06:50):
Really appreciate it.

Speaker 15 (01:06:51):
A pleasure to be with you. Ryan and Emily, take care.

Speaker 4 (01:06:54):
Thank you.

Speaker 13 (01:06:58):
Well.

Speaker 5 (01:06:58):
Last week you met have been worried, as even some
people from home that I grew up with were texting
me if I had any idea about what this mysterious meeting,
this gathering of generals at the Pentagon was all about.
You may have been concerned that we were going to
war a secretary of war as we are now calling it.
I think Grian that moniker is more accurate. Anyway, He

(01:07:19):
left in news consumers and military leaders fairly uncomfortable after
he abruptly announced that they were planning this massive meeting
of generals from around the world. Flew everybody in here
to d C where we had it into war? Was
it this grand pr exercise you guessed that we talked
about on last Friday show.

Speaker 4 (01:07:37):
What it could be?

Speaker 5 (01:07:38):
I speculated if it was war, maybe it was in
our own hemisphere. We'll get to that in just a
moment actually towards the end of the show, what we
could be seeing in our own hemisphere.

Speaker 3 (01:07:47):
But it was my source at the time. Remember, he
said this is just a giant trump. He was like,
stupid exercise.

Speaker 4 (01:07:53):
He nailed it.

Speaker 6 (01:07:54):
He did nail it.

Speaker 3 (01:07:55):
And my life is filled with regrets, of course, but
one of them is that I had multip sources over
the last seven months telling me Hexeth keeps saying he
wants to change this to the Department of War.

Speaker 4 (01:08:06):
Oh my gosh, you ignored it.

Speaker 3 (01:08:07):
And I was like, that's too stupid to report. I
believe I'm not saying I don't believe you, but make
me look like a yeah float that he's talking about
that actually did it.

Speaker 6 (01:08:19):
He did it.

Speaker 4 (01:08:19):
He did it.

Speaker 5 (01:08:21):
So War Secretaryapy, You're gonna want to see some of
these clips because what heseth that basically was gather everyone
for a pep talk that doubled as him making different
points about like DEI stuff and also rules of war.

(01:08:41):
We're going to get into that in just a moment
as well, and also a photo op for the military
to you know, sort of like the parade that happened
in the summer, look on the global stage and nationally
like it's putting its best foot forward, which I won't
deny is I actually think that's important, but this was
this is something else. Let's go ahead and roll our

(01:09:02):
first clip here.

Speaker 16 (01:09:04):
Very much value the impact of female troops. Our female
officers and n CEOs are the absolute best in the world.
But when it comes to any job that requires physical
power to perform in combat, those physical standards must be
high and gender neutral. If women can make it excellent.

(01:09:25):
If not, it is what it is. If that means
no women qualify for some combat jobs, so be it.
That is not the intent, but it could be the result,
so be it. This also means grooming standards, no more beards,
long hair, superficial individual expression. We're gonna cut our hair,

(01:09:46):
sha shave our beards, and adhere to standards. Because it's
like the broken windows theory of policing. It's like when
you let the small stuff go, the big stuff eventually goes,
so you have to address the small stuff. This is
on duty in the field and in the rear. If
you want a beard, you can join special forces. If not,
then chafe. We don't have a military full of Nordic pagans.

(01:10:11):
But unfortunately we have had leaders who either refuse to
call bs and enforce standards, or leaders who felt like.

Speaker 9 (01:10:17):
They were not allowed to enforce standards. Both are unacceptable.

Speaker 16 (01:10:24):
And that's why today, at my direction, the era of
unprofessional appearance is over. No more beardoze. It all starts
with physical fitness and appearance. If the Secretary of War
can do regular hard PT, so can every member of
our Joint Force. Frankly, it's tiring to look out at

(01:10:44):
combat formations or really any formation and see fat troops. Likewise,
it's completely unacceptable to see fat generals and admirals in
the halls of the Pentagon and leading commands around the
country in the world.

Speaker 9 (01:10:56):
It's a bad look.

Speaker 4 (01:10:57):
Every member of the Joint Force, at every rank is
required to take a PT test twice a year.

Speaker 5 (01:11:03):
I mean, he also said Ryan more seriously, quote we
unleash overwhelming and punishing violence on the enemy. We also
don't want to fight with stupid rules of engagement. We
untie the hands of our warfighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunting,
and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically
correct and overbearing rules of engagement. Exith has been a
supporter of people who have been accused of violating laws

(01:11:24):
related to war crimes.

Speaker 6 (01:11:25):
He was a big advocate for US Eddie Gallagher.

Speaker 4 (01:11:28):
Right, not accused.

Speaker 6 (01:11:29):
He was openly an advocate war criminal, like an convicted
war criminal who all of his.

Speaker 3 (01:11:36):
Comrades called a complete sociopath who stabbing and shooting people
like innocent civilians. And so like if your if your
bar is Eddie Gallagher, then you are lifting and removing
what so many people take pride in when it comes

(01:11:56):
to the US military, which is a this this idea
that do you actually do protect civilian lives?

Speaker 4 (01:12:04):
What did you think of this line?

Speaker 6 (01:12:06):
And that's what separates the US military.

Speaker 3 (01:12:09):
Obviously I'm my criticism in the US military, But like
that that is a sacred belief that people have, and
he's saying forget that.

Speaker 6 (01:12:16):
So he's sraight away.

Speaker 5 (01:12:17):
Quote the new compass heading is clear out with the
carell is the Mackenzie's and the Millies and in with
the stock Stales, the Schwartz cops, Schwartz coughs, and the patents.

Speaker 4 (01:12:26):
Did you catch that one?

Speaker 3 (01:12:27):
Yeah, Paton, you know, famously got in trouble for like,
you know, slapping a private I think in Italy, right,
and during that campaign.

Speaker 6 (01:12:41):
Yeah, so yes, he's.

Speaker 9 (01:12:43):
I was.

Speaker 6 (01:12:44):
I was when he was talking.

Speaker 3 (01:12:45):
I was like, wait a minute, is he coming after
the special Forces here? Because the guys with the tattoos
and the beards are in the Special Forces.

Speaker 6 (01:12:53):
And then then he carves them out right, like what
are we doing here?

Speaker 5 (01:12:56):
Well, he says, you can go to a Special Forces
if you want your beard. Trump also joined the gathering
as well, let's go ahead and roll be two.

Speaker 13 (01:13:05):
We should use some of these dangerous cities as training
grounds for our military National Guard. But military, because we're
going into Chicago versus that's a big city with an
incompetent governor. Stupid governor. Stupid I thought would be met
with fury on the left. But they're sort of giving up.
I must be honest with you. They've had it. They've

(01:13:27):
had it with Trump. I really thought that we were
going to have to sort of fight it through. There's
been no fight. There's been no fight.

Speaker 17 (01:13:34):
Don't laugh, don't live if you're not allowed to do that,
You know what, Just have a good time. And if
you want to applaud, you applaud. And if you want
to do anything you want, you can do anything you want.
If you don't like what I'm saying, you can leave
the room. Of course, there goes your rank, there goes
your future. And I'm not a fan of some of
the ships you do.

Speaker 7 (01:13:52):
I'm a very esthetic person, and I don't like some
of the ships you're doing esthetically.

Speaker 13 (01:13:57):
They say, oh, it's stealth.

Speaker 7 (01:13:58):
They said, it's not so an ugly ship is not
necessary in order to say your stealth.

Speaker 5 (01:14:07):
Where you're missing is ridle Guys, this guy unbelievable. Take
a look at this picture. Let's put this element up
on the screen.

Speaker 4 (01:14:15):
This is B three.

Speaker 5 (01:14:16):
Doug Mills and the New York Times snapped a picture
of military leaders after Trump's speech, looking ashen stone faced.

Speaker 4 (01:14:25):
Any other descriptions come.

Speaker 6 (01:14:26):
To mind, Ryan, you know, questioning their life choices, nonplussed.

Speaker 4 (01:14:31):
Yes, you know, it was at least we're not going
to war.

Speaker 6 (01:14:40):
It was not a war meeting.

Speaker 5 (01:14:41):
It was not we probably are still going to war,
but we didn't announce some type of like major World
War three operation yesterday. So that's the silver lining, I guess.

Speaker 6 (01:14:49):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:14:49):
Trump like talking about we're going to make major American
cities training grounds for the American military, Like that's just
an incredible place for us to be as as a country.
Like if if you said that that was what Trump
was planning to do, uh you a year ago, you
would be accused of cite inciting violence against Republicans for

(01:15:11):
blaspheming their their their good patriotic name m and here
he is.

Speaker 6 (01:15:15):
No, that's that's actually what we're going to do.

Speaker 4 (01:15:18):
Let's put P. Four up on the screen.

Speaker 5 (01:15:19):
This is about a report in the Daily Mail. This
is Daily Beast covering the Daily Mail. That Daily Mail
report is suggesting that Pete Hegseth, according to Leek's, has
been especially paranoid after Charlie Kirk's death, which is completely understandable,
I think, but that he and his wife are at
least he means to be sort of even deeper in

(01:15:40):
trench mentality. And you know, it's a it's a tabloid
story I think worth keeping in mind. You know, we've
we've seen the rebranding as Department of War, which I
think happened actually right before Charlie k Charlie Kirk died,
maybe the day that Charlie Kirk died, if not a couple.

Speaker 4 (01:15:56):
Of days before.

Speaker 5 (01:15:58):
But also this new this high profile meeting, and tensions
in Venezuela are heating up. So you know, the leaks
aren't good either. The leaks are going to fuel that
sense of paranoid. If this makes it into the Daily
Mail in a medicense, that's going to make the.

Speaker 4 (01:16:14):
Secretary of War Ryan even more paranoid.

Speaker 13 (01:16:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:16:18):
And then so Pentagon insiders tell of explosive tantrums and
erratic behavior, quote crawling out of his skin what the
Daily Mail and people were saying like, oh, it sounds
like he's on the sauce again, That's not how I
read it. I read it as this is a dry drunk,
you know who is going through basically untreated with withdrawal.

Speaker 6 (01:16:42):
Like if you are.

Speaker 3 (01:16:45):
A serious alcoholic and you just go cold turkey. This,
this type of crawling out of your skin behavior can
be a thing. Somebody was saying that he was seen
drinking a bud light at a football game or something,
but I don't know, maybe that doesn't even count.

Speaker 4 (01:17:01):
I don't know.

Speaker 5 (01:17:02):
I mean, I think, honestly, like, put all of everything
that's been reported about Pete Haig Seth, which I'm pretty skeptical.
I've met Pete Heg Sath a couple of times. I
don't necessarily think that he has a drinking problem right now,
But put all of that aside, because I'm sure there
are people who have different stories or whatever. But I mean,

(01:17:25):
I guess a lot of them were from the past.
Either way, I's to say what happened to Charlie Kirk,
we covered it at the time. The ramifications we're not
even talking about a Charlie Kirk related story here, but
the ramifications on the right are going to be significant
in ways that aren't always obvious. And some of that
might be just stoking intense paranoia about personal security in

(01:17:49):
ways that can push people in dangerous directions. I think, Ryan,
I mean, because when you're paranoid, a lot of paranoid
becomes irrational.

Speaker 4 (01:17:56):
It can start an irrational place.

Speaker 5 (01:17:58):
I think it's rational for public figures right now to
be paranoid after the colbuted assassination of somebody. So yes,
but that can have consequences just on a personal psychological level.

Speaker 4 (01:18:10):
So I don't know if that's what's going on.

Speaker 6 (01:18:13):
But this.

Speaker 5 (01:18:15):
Meeting, I guess I'm just grateful was not some major
war announcement.

Speaker 4 (01:18:20):
And that's a low.

Speaker 6 (01:18:21):
Bar perhaps, and we'll get to that later in the show.

Speaker 5 (01:18:23):
Yes, that might not be announced. It might just happen.
It's sure as hell won't be voted on.

Speaker 6 (01:18:28):
No, it won't.

Speaker 5 (01:18:29):
If you thought the Congress needed to take us to war,
oh boy.

Speaker 4 (01:18:33):
You've been proven wrong.

Speaker 5 (01:18:34):
Right, let's go ahead and get to the flotilla.

Speaker 3 (01:18:37):
So we had planned to make this segment about the
potential interception of the some moood flotilla that is heading
to Gaza that was expected to come overnight.

Speaker 6 (01:18:48):
Because the flotilla has now entered.

Speaker 3 (01:18:51):
The nautical mileage space at which each flotilla before them
has been intercepted by Israeli navy. Still smooth sailing, fascinating literally, yeah,
smooth sailing. Well, I think rough seats, but otherwise smooth
sailing headed towards the Gaza. Short So we will keep
you updated as as that as that unfolds. But instead,

(01:19:12):
let's let's talk about what else we were going to
talk about. In this segment which is updates on uh
the Trump Netna who take it or leave it offer
that he made to the Palestinians, but also uh, it's
incredible developments when it comes to the kind of propaganda side.
So recently you had net Ya who meeting with a

(01:19:35):
bunch of influencers, which you know, and he said, like,
the way that we're going to respond to the the
problems that Israel's message images facing worldwide is we're going
to have our influencers go out there and make the
case on TikTok. And he also said the most important
thing to do is to purchase TikTok like that was
his that was his word. And Larry Ellison, a close

(01:19:57):
ally of Israel through Oracle, is indeed doing that.

Speaker 6 (01:20:01):
But so incredible discovery. It's in a FERI.

Speaker 3 (01:20:04):
Filing by Quincy Institute researcher Nick Cleveland Stout and put
this CE one up on the screen. New document reveals
is really government paying a cohort of fourteen to eighteen
social media influencers between six one hundred dollars and seven thousand,
three hundred dollars per post.

Speaker 4 (01:20:25):
The show is now fully in supportive of Israel.

Speaker 5 (01:20:28):
Or coverage rule only be supportive of Israel seven thousand
dollars a post every time we post about it.

Speaker 3 (01:20:33):
So if we do, let's say, if we do a
fifteen minute segment that's slabbering about Israel, and then we
cut it up into fifteen different clips, can we cash
seven thousand each?

Speaker 4 (01:20:47):
Really need a lot of money on the table?

Speaker 3 (01:20:48):
That is big money, that is that is a lot
of money. So we don't yet know the identities of
these fourteen to eighteen on social media, and we.

Speaker 4 (01:20:57):
Can guest we can certainly be a fun game.

Speaker 6 (01:20:59):
At some of the game show.

Speaker 3 (01:21:00):
I think on a week ago, Brionna Wu announced that
she'd be going to TikTok to start doing pro Israel content.
I don't know if she's getting paid or not, but interesting, I.

Speaker 5 (01:21:10):
Guess the pro Israel influencers, it's.

Speaker 6 (01:21:12):
Like interesting timing amazing.

Speaker 3 (01:21:15):
Seven thousand dollars per post to and so we've seen
some of the I don't know if it's these are
the influencers getting paid, but we've seen you know you
you see a lot of posts that have started to circulate.

Speaker 6 (01:21:31):
I'm curious for your take on this. I think that they.

Speaker 3 (01:21:33):
Are now they have endless amounts of money and also
drop site.

Speaker 6 (01:21:38):
As dropsite reported.

Speaker 3 (01:21:42):
Citing hot retes, Actually the Israel just approved another forty
million dollar boost to their global propaganda budget. This is
on top of one hundred and fifty million dollar increase
over what they had already been doing. Twenty four million
dollars of that is for quote, global influence campaigns, and
six teen million dollars is to finance international delegations visiting Israel.

(01:22:06):
So these are the whether it's lawmakers or or influencers.
They they fund your trip flights, you know, from New
York to Tel Aviv, nice hotels, good you know, free
food and drinks, travel like your entire trip is paid for.

(01:22:26):
They send you know, good looking IDF soldiers around with you.
It's like this the sold shtick.

Speaker 4 (01:22:32):
Type of soldiers.

Speaker 3 (01:22:32):
Yeah, nature exactly, Yes, BMI is appropriate that Hexeth would
be not ashamed, no beards and try to give them
a good time. And then they go back and and
and they have warm, warm feelings and they have and
they meet people who dangle you know.

Speaker 6 (01:22:49):
Future opportunities.

Speaker 3 (01:22:51):
This this is much more direct, like here's seven thousand
dollars say something nice about us on TikTok and then
then they have the problem of but nobody wants to
hear that, so so they then they take over TikTok
and juice the algorithm so that you have to hear
it like it's just going to show up in your
for you page.

Speaker 4 (01:23:10):
Well that's an important point.

Speaker 6 (01:23:12):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (01:23:12):
So this is something that Nick Cleveland Staut reports over
at Quincy, which is I actually think getting under reported.
This is coming from Brad par Scale also.

Speaker 6 (01:23:25):
And m Trump campaign manager, right.

Speaker 5 (01:23:27):
And part of this is also about I'm trying to
find the exact part where Nick mentions this, but part
of it is also about gaming chat, GPT and AI
search engine. It's it's like specifically in what Nick reports
on he has a new this is this is what
it is. So he did a follow up and it's

(01:23:48):
outlines the Brad par Scale of it all. And brad
par Scale is also, uh, this is this is coming
to Salem Media Group. Did you did you catch this
part of it? So, oh, clock Tower, that's par Scales group.
Well integrate it's pro Israel messaging into Salem Media Network
property is a conservative Christian media group that boasts a

(01:24:08):
vast radio network and produces high high profile shows such
as Hugh Hewett, Larry Elder, Right View with Lara Trump
and April, the Conservative Media Network and no stal Trup
Junior and Lar Trump, a significant stakeholders in the new company.
Salem Media Network, did not respond to a question clarifying
whether it would be compensated by clock Tower for promoting
messages on behalf of Israel or how these messages would
be integrated. That is American media, right, That's that is
actually some like conservative news outlets that could be then

(01:24:31):
infiltrated by paid, paid propaganda. There's a difference, and that's
not a distinction without a difference. Propaganda is propaganda. Yes,
when people are actually getting paid by a foreign government
to do propaganda in the sensible news outlets, that's a
completely different ballgame.

Speaker 3 (01:24:46):
Yeah, so follow the money here, So well, I guess
the money starts in the United States, so it is
American tax paya money. But so then we stobsidize Israel.
Israel uses the money then to send to Brad par Scale,
the Trump campaign manager, sure, who then gives it to
Lara Trump and other people, presumably in order to foist

(01:25:07):
Israeli propaganda into these media properties. Because CHATCHPT is trained
to believe that these media properties have some level of
reliability and substance to them.

Speaker 6 (01:25:20):
Chat GPT is probably told, you.

Speaker 3 (01:25:22):
Know, don't just you know, scrape things from government propaganda
websites and then believe it to be the case, like, yeah,
it's more reliable to trust news sources rather than direct propaganda.
So you so you pay to have the propaganda then
smothered into the news properties, these right wing news properties,

(01:25:45):
and then chat GPT absorbs it into its code. And
then when you ask chat GPT, you know, is Israel good,
chat GPT responds based on the raw material that it's
producing from these from these news shows, which then also
can they have. Then they then they have Wikipedia armies

(01:26:05):
that then try to edit Wikipedia articles sourcing to these
news shows that they have fought internally inside Wikipedia to
get labeled as credible news sources. And then you tilt
Wikipedia and then and Wikipedia becomes raw material for chat
EPT and other ai as well too, because within a
few years, everyone's understanding of reality will be shaped by

(01:26:29):
whatever these ais tell them is the reality. So there's
this massive arms race to shape what that reality is
going to look like.

Speaker 5 (01:26:37):
And by the way, This happened right after Nick mentions this.
We probably mentioned this on the show. But the s
KDK Knickerbocker campaign to run a bot farm for the
Israeli Narrative Social.

Speaker 6 (01:26:49):
Statue Group thing that we reported on, Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:26:52):
Right, yeah exactly. So this is coming.

Speaker 5 (01:26:54):
Lest you think it is is just conservative media that's
being infiltrated, Democrats are taking money to infiltrate social media
with these narratives as well.

Speaker 3 (01:27:05):
And is Man No, And it can't happen a moment
too soon for Israel because let's take a look at
the trash that they're currently putting out.

Speaker 6 (01:27:13):
We put up C two.

Speaker 3 (01:27:15):
So Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs yes yesterday put out
this post saying exposed official Hamas documents and that's when
everybody is like, oh my god, official MAMAS dockets.

Speaker 6 (01:27:29):
Yeah sure, found.

Speaker 3 (01:27:30):
In the Gaza strip now revealed for the first time.
Turns out they tried to reveal these exact same documents
in June and they think we all forgot about it.
Prove Hamas's direct involvement in the funding and execution of
this some mood flotilla to Gaza.

Speaker 6 (01:27:48):
Huge news if true.

Speaker 3 (01:27:49):
You then poke a little bit further into it and
turns out none of this is remotely true. But they
write Hamas documents that were discovered in the Gaza Strip
and are being revealed for the first time, again not true,
show a direct link between the flotilla leaders and the
Hamas terrorist organization. The way they try to put this together,
they say the Palestinian Conference for Palestinans Abroad was established

(01:28:11):
in twenty eighteen and functions as Hamas's representative body abroad,
operating de facto as Hamas embassies. The organization operates under
the pretense of civilian cover, is responsible on behalf of
Hamas for mobilizing actions against Israel. Then it says first
official Hamas document was found in the God Strip, a
letter from twenty twenty one, signed by head of the

(01:28:32):
Hamas Political bureau Ismael Hania, directly and explicitly calling on
the PCPA chairman for unity. So let's pretend, and I
posted this on Twitter and said this should be a
critical thinking test for students in a class on propaganda.
So let's pretend for a second that all of this,
everything that they're saying within the four corners of this

(01:28:54):
is true. Huge, gigantic if But let's just pretend. Let's
say they have a letter from Hania, who they assassinated
in t Ryan in his bedroom, that is calling on
the PCPA chairman for unity in twenty twenty one. So here,
put on your critical thinking hat. If Haneya has to
ask the PCPA for unity, does Hamas run the PCPA.

Speaker 6 (01:29:20):
Think that went through?

Speaker 3 (01:29:22):
If they're not happy with whatever the PCPA is doing,
why are they out there asking for unit separately?

Speaker 6 (01:29:29):
This is twenty twenty one.

Speaker 3 (01:29:31):
Was this samood flotilla class organized in twenty twenty one?

Speaker 9 (01:29:38):
Anyway?

Speaker 5 (01:29:39):
So if you're just listening to this year, missing Ryan's
facial expression.

Speaker 3 (01:29:43):
So anyway, Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs is in desperate
need of help. So this this forty million dollar boost,
it couldn't come a moment too soon. And good lord,
these fourteen to eighteen TikTokers are going to have their
work cutout for them. Can you imagine being fed this stuff?
Be like, all right, for seven thousand dollars, make a
post about how this is true. And let's imagine for

(01:30:07):
a second that you have critical thinking skills and you
read this and you're like, oh my god, that like
this is what you're going with. And I haven't even
mentioned yet that they put up some documents. They put
up some photos with Greta and then circle the guy
in red. The guy in red is George Galloway, who's
a British citizen in former yeah and former member of parliament,

(01:30:32):
who in Israel's defense, is pretty like Hesbel and Hamas sympathetic.
He will take like he look up any interviews with him.
He's fun to watch, very like articulate and passionate defender
of armed resistance to colonialism all.

Speaker 6 (01:30:49):
Over the globe. But he's not the guy they're saying.

Speaker 4 (01:30:52):
He is right getting it wrong.

Speaker 3 (01:30:54):
You're getting it wrong here. And also it's George Galloway,
So what's your point. You found Greta in a picture
with George Galloway, this is your evidence. And again, like
I said, this is pretending that all of this is
actually authentic and true, which is which is a gigantic
if what what why it's serious is that this is

(01:31:16):
these are the kinds of things they do before they
take violent action against, in this instance, the flotilla to
try to say like, actually the flotilla is Hamas right,
and that's why we had to blow it out of
the water. Let's hope that this is not the case.
The pump ye who do yeah? So anyway, a quick

(01:31:37):
update as well on the that the the the savage
attacks on Palestinians inside Gaza. If you thought that they
were going to abate while while the final discussions around
the take it or leave it off or from Trump
and that ya who are being considered you, you would

(01:31:57):
be wrong. We put up this next element up on
the screen. There was another double tap strike, this one
in Gaza City's Alsa two neighborhood, where they hit a
school and then waited until paramedics and civil defense whose
job it is to get people out of the rubble,
showed up at the site and then hit it again.
If you want more details on you know, what's been

(01:32:20):
going on in the last forty eight hours, I would
just suggest you sign up for Dropsit Daily. There's our
new morning newsletter which really goes into into detail what's
going on there. And then when it comes to the negotiations,
two pieces of two pieces of news there if you
can put up C four. Trump was asked how much

(01:32:41):
time does amasqu get and he said three or four days.
Al Jazeera now reporting that officials from Cutzer, Egypt, and
Turkey met in Doha on Tuesday with the Hamas negotiating
delegation to go over the twenty point ceasefire plan. Hamas
said it will still with quote with great responsibility, which

(01:33:02):
is you know that's that's that's not an outright rejection,
and I do think they're under enormous pressure to say
yes to this and we can put up CEE five.

Speaker 6 (01:33:14):
Palist Islama Jahad, which.

Speaker 3 (01:33:16):
Is kind of the second largest resistance faction in the coalition,
initially came out with a pretty blunt not rejection but
condemnation of it. I think nobody wants to say that
this is going to be good because if it does
go into place, Palistins will be living with the consequences
of it for years to come. And don't they don't

(01:33:37):
want there to say to endorse it. But that's different
than trying to find a way to accept it. And
so a p I J spokesperson is out again kind
of condemning it, but also saying that you know, they
want Palestinian unity and they want the Palestini authority to
agree to it.

Speaker 6 (01:33:57):
This is a kind of hold hands and jump type
of statement.

Speaker 3 (01:34:00):
So you can read it here, very critical of it,
and they're trying to get the Arab countries.

Speaker 6 (01:34:08):
They say, if Arabs have a real role, they must
pressure Trump to adopt their statement. Because the.

Speaker 3 (01:34:16):
Twenty one point plan that the Arab leaders agreed to
became a twenty point significantly edited plan after they met
with nen Yahu. They're saying, can we at least go
back to that initial one. I doubt they'll be able
to do that, So they have a couple of days
before they respond. But I've asked a bunch of different
Palestinians and Gaza their what their take is on this,

(01:34:39):
and to a person, they say, like, we just want
to stand, like it doesn't this terrible deal, but we
just want to stand under any circumstances, under any condition.
People are just people are starving to death and living
in intents if they're lucky, like it's it's actually pretty
hard to get a tent, let alone food and water

(01:35:01):
and access to medical care.

Speaker 6 (01:35:02):
So people just want this to stop. And so I
think you're so.

Speaker 3 (01:35:06):
I think the Hamas will come back with some type
of yes, with some tweaks, right, with some tweaks, and
we'll see if Yah who uses the attempt to get
some tweaks to then just restart the war.

Speaker 5 (01:35:17):
It's all yeah, and it's very possible. Obviously, as you
guys have reported that, it was a giant pretext because
Donald Trump and Netyah who I was there I was
at the press conference, made a point of emphasizing we
could do this the easy way or the hard way,
and that Neta Yahu will be able to as they said,
Israel will be able to take care of the rest itself.

Speaker 4 (01:35:37):
So not an unfair reading of the agreement they worked on.

Speaker 3 (01:35:43):
So meanwhile, let's get to the soy apocalypse hitting American farmers.
So last week, the Treasury Department announced a twenty billion
dollar bailout of the chainsaw wielding Argentinian libertarian president Javier Milai,
which actually turned out to be a backdoor bailout of

(01:36:05):
American hedge funds and China. Meanwhile, it is driving soybean
farmers in the United States absolutely mad.

Speaker 6 (01:36:15):
Let's roll JD.

Speaker 3 (01:36:17):
Schulton, a lawmaker from Iowa, talking about the effect of
this trade war on soybean farmers in Iowa.

Speaker 18 (01:36:24):
Trump's illegal terrorists have single handedly destroyed the US soybean
market as of yesterday, the price of soybeans is about
nine dollars and thirty four cents here in Iowa. The
cost of production is anywhere from eleven dollars to eleven
dollars and fifty cents. So per bushel of soybeans, it's
about a two dollars loss. And when you add the
fact that it's about fifty bushels and an acre of

(01:36:46):
soybeans here, you can do the math to see how
bad things are. Historically, sixty percent of Iowa soybeans have
gone to China. With Trump's trade wars from its first administration,
the US has become an unreliable supplier. So instead of
the soybeans going to China, it's soybeans from South America,
like places like Brazil and Argentina. That leads to more

(01:37:07):
grains going to be left in the bin, which means
to oversupply, which means still lower prices. So here's what
we need to do. We need to demand trade, not aid.
Farmers don't want to bail out, they want markets. The
second thing we need to do is push for competition
both on the market side and especially on the input
side with seed and fertilizer costs.

Speaker 3 (01:37:25):
So that's Jadie Schulton and Iowa Democratic lawmaker is actually
a former Minor League pitcher. Really yeah, and he's a
big antitrust guy. But you don't have to take it
from the populist left Chuck Grassley if you want to
call him a populist. Linnet Now Iowa senator had one
of his classic no punctuation random caps tweets where he

(01:37:46):
says farmers very upset about Argentina selling soybeans to China
right after USA bailout. Still zero USA soybeans sold to China. Meanwhile,
China is still hitting USA with twenty percent retaliates tariff
need China trade deal now, farmers need markets to boost
farm economy. He still uses number two because he doesn't

(01:38:06):
know that you can actually just tweet past the one.
I probably didn't know about the one forty character limit.
So basically what's going on is that, as JD. Schulton said, there,
China buys more than half of Iowa's soybeans every year.
In twenty seventeen and eighteen, Trump started a trade war

(01:38:26):
with China, and China retaliated by at the time building
relationships with a bunch of Brazilian soy farmers. What They
also did is they started investing in Brazil. Because Brazil
didn't have the infrastructure and the export technology and the
on site storage to really meet Chinese demand, then't and

(01:38:47):
they don't have the economic base.

Speaker 6 (01:38:48):
To do it on their own.

Speaker 3 (01:38:49):
So China was like, oh, United States is going to
play games, Well, why don't we invest in Brazil and
make it so that they are a more stable partner.
So now Brazilian soybean production since twenties eighteen, when Trump
first started his trade war with China, has almost doubled.
So Brazil now can feed China a lot more effectively

(01:39:09):
than they could nearly ten years ago when Trump started this.

Speaker 6 (01:39:12):
Argentina is the other big player.

Speaker 5 (01:39:14):
Which, by the way, that is a preview of what
could potentially come ten years after this current trade We're
on different issues, not even just soybee exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:39:20):
Yes, we think that with this trade war that we're
positioning America for this renaissance. In fact, we're just encouraging
other countries to figure out ways of existing without.

Speaker 5 (01:39:32):
Us, which is I mean, there are circumstances where that
may be fine.

Speaker 6 (01:39:38):
But in this case, you're a soybean farmer.

Speaker 5 (01:39:40):
You're soybeing right, exactly, And I think it speaks to
the level of strategy that's actually at play, as opposed
to just like slapping crazy numbers out there or on
different countries, slapping these numbers on there. But like, there
was obviously not a lot of thought about what was

(01:40:00):
happening with Argentina and soybeans. When the bailout happened, it
was hedge fund guys are freaking out, and we, like Mela,
it wasn't what are they going to turn around and
do with soybeans in China? And I think that's actually
an important insight.

Speaker 4 (01:40:13):
Into the process.

Speaker 6 (01:40:14):
Yeah, yeah, exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:40:15):
And in a moment we'll be joined by Joe Vastlovic
from the Grain Markets and Other Stuff podcasts, which I
love that they describe themselves as the biggest grain market
podcast in the world on the planet Earth.

Speaker 6 (01:40:26):
I love it. Got to love that.

Speaker 3 (01:40:28):
So they'll talk to us about what the effects have
been on the grain market. But yes, the hedge funds
and Scott bess at former hedge fund guy are you
ever a former hedge fund guy? Exactly, Hedge American hedge funds.
When Melay was elected, we're like, oh, this is great,
We're going long on Argentina because Mela is going to
do the thing we love. He's going to brutalize the

(01:40:51):
unions and the poor, and it's got the government spending
and as a result, foreign capital is going to flow
into Argentina and the economy is going to grow. So
they all their chips in on Argentina doing great. Instead,
what everybody else predicted is what happened. The economy further
deteriorated and fell apart. And so now these hedge funds
were looking at huge losses on their stupid bets. Turns

(01:41:14):
out they were smart because they got the economics wrong,
but they got the politics right. And Bessent is coming
in and bailing out all of these hedge funds. Now now,
at the same time that Argentina is getting this twenty
billion dollar bailout, they announced that they are cutting their
export tariffs.

Speaker 6 (01:41:34):
For soybeans, which.

Speaker 3 (01:41:36):
Slashes the cost of soybeans, and China instantly buys enormous
amounts of.

Speaker 6 (01:41:43):
Argentinian soybeans.

Speaker 3 (01:41:45):
But don't take it from me, because you know who
wants to believe me, So Agriculture Secretary brook rollins Trump's
ag secretary texts, so got Vessent and somebody named JAG.
And we know this because a photographer. I think it's
Jeffrey Goldberg.

Speaker 4 (01:42:06):
He is in the chats.

Speaker 3 (01:42:07):
He's still getting in the chats, probably Jamison Greer, the
US trade representative.

Speaker 6 (01:42:13):
That would make a lot of sense.

Speaker 3 (01:42:16):
But making sense it's not always what drives these things.
So let's just pretend it's Jeffrey Goldber. I actually texted
Jeffrey Goldberg yesterday. I was like, look, you're still in
these chats. He did not respond, so maybe he is.
So anyway, she texts Scott Besant and JG, which we
assume is Greer, and so she writes and so this

(01:42:37):
is best getting lit up in the meeting and letting
somebody photograph.

Speaker 5 (01:42:41):
An Associated Press photographer got a snap on the phone.

Speaker 6 (01:42:44):
So the text says, I'm getting more intel.

Speaker 3 (01:42:46):
This is Brooke to bet j G. I'm getting more intel.
But this is highly unfortunate. We bailed out Argentina yesterday.
Parentheses besten so just to him so that James Ingreed
doesn't catch any or Jeffrey Goldberg doesn't catch strays in
this text message chain. And in return, the Argentines removed
their export tariffs on grains reducing their price and sold

(01:43:08):
a bunch of soybeans to China at a time when
we would normally be selling to China. Soy price is
dropping further because of it. This gives China more leverage
on us on a plane. But Scott, I can call
you when I land.

Speaker 4 (01:43:23):
Did nobody think about this at the reetorda question?

Speaker 6 (01:43:26):
No, clearly nobody thought because they don't care.

Speaker 3 (01:43:29):
The hedge fund guys were looking at losses and Melay
and Bessont said in his public statement when he made
the bailout that the reason he was doing it is
that Malay has an upcoming important election. Yes, and he
wants Malay to win the election because then that will
bring more investment into Argentina. So he is out loud
saying that the United States is using American taxpayer money

(01:43:51):
to intervene in Argentina's election, saying it out loud.

Speaker 5 (01:43:55):
And to undermine than American soybean farmers. We have a
lot of different I have a lot of questions for
our guests about Matt Stohler's analysis of this and what
the Trump administration is doing to help, like maybe assuage
concerns of farmers and people in the egg industry overall.
But that is the text message is such a great

(01:44:15):
insight into the illusion of grand strategy.

Speaker 3 (01:44:19):
Right, and again, geopolitical, would you call it very unfortunate,
highly unfortunate?

Speaker 6 (01:44:24):
The geopolitically, it's not like a flood.

Speaker 5 (01:44:26):
Right, Argentina is from the Trump administration's perspective geopolitically and
a very important ally when you have Venezuela, when you
have Colombia and what are perceived of like anti American administrations,
especially like as we've covered before, the pink wave taking
over some of those countries. They want to keep Argentina happy,

(01:44:50):
obviously because they want to have that what do we
even call it, like a bastion of pro American ally
ship a big country in the middle of South America.
So geopolitically, you see where they're coming from, like why
they're doing what they're doing. But obviously they didn't even
Argentina would take the bailout if the condition was soybean like,

(01:45:14):
if the condition was not selling, it was not undercutting
Americans screw us.

Speaker 4 (01:45:18):
Yes, they would take the bailout.

Speaker 3 (01:45:20):
We didn't even think to ask them not to screw
us because we don't care. But also, can you imagine
if Democrats had this type of solidarity instead of viciousness
towards South and Central America. If Biden had offered a
twenty billion dollar line of credit to instead of sanctioning Nicaragua,

(01:45:40):
Venezuela and Cuba, you would not have had the migration crisis.
Like Biden drove the migration crisis with his policies towards
Central America, Venezuela and Cuba, which then helped bring Trump.

Speaker 6 (01:45:56):
Back to power.

Speaker 3 (01:45:58):
If they had done something like this instead, people would
still be in their homes, in their neighborhoods in Cuba
and Venezuela and Nicaragua elsewhere anyway, So let's bring in
Joe from the Grain Market podcast and get some details
on how this is playing out. Joining us now is
Joe Vaklovic from the Grain Markets and Other Stuff podcast.

(01:46:20):
Joe reached out yesterday saying he'd seen some of my
coverage I guess on TikTok or wherever. I don't think
we had covered it here yet, and offered to provide
some of you know, his expertise, because this is this
is really your area. So Joe, you know, thanks so
much for being here. Really appreciate it.

Speaker 19 (01:46:37):
Yeah, I'm happy to be here. I'm a big fan
of the show. I've been watching Breaking Points since the
very beginning.

Speaker 6 (01:46:41):
I love it, love it.

Speaker 3 (01:46:43):
So I don't know if you were able to see
the beginning of the show, but you've seen, you know
my shtick on this already. Tell us like, what what
what is the effect of Trump's trade wark generally so
far on And we'll start at that high level on
the American soybean market.

Speaker 19 (01:47:01):
If we want to do high level, I'd like to
backtrack a little bit just to give you kind of
an overview of what's going on the US farm economy
as it relates to our big cash crops, corn and
soybeans and the farmers that grow those crops. We are
in now, what I would argue is the third year
of a farm economy recession. A lot of this goes
back to COVID and the inflation that occurred in the

(01:47:22):
post COVID environment. So we know that everything on the
planet repriced in the years following COVID, right, we know
that to be true. The government number CPI would all
indicate that that is true. The very same thing has
happened to farm inputs the things that farmers have to
buy to grow their crops, whether it's seed, fertilizer, machinery,
all of those things are up. Corn production costs jump

(01:47:44):
twenty six percent from twenty twenty one to twenty twenty two.
So we're in the backdrop here of this big inflation event.
A lot of that is just generalized inflation. A lot
of it's because the government through billions and billions of
dollars at farmers during and following COVID.

Speaker 9 (01:47:59):
So you've got all that, and.

Speaker 6 (01:48:00):
It's a low margin business, right if you're a court farmer.

Speaker 19 (01:48:03):
Historically always a low margin business, highly cyclical. You go
through years where your break even to negative in terms
of profit margins, and then you go through a couple
of boom years. We had a couple of boom years.
Twenty twenty one and twenty twenty two were really good. Remember,
we've been through this tradeing trade war thing before, and
the last go around was rough.

Speaker 9 (01:48:20):
Eighteen nineteen were rough.

Speaker 19 (01:48:22):
China signs the Phase one trade deal in twenty twenty
and they did, as a matter of fact, come in
and they bought a whole bunch of US corn and
a whole bunch of US soybeans in late twenty twenty
into twenty one and into twenty two, and everything that
happened in twenty twenty two was crazy. We had Russia, Ukraine,
big commodity price blow up, and everything just fell apart
after that, mainly because we just we had big production.

(01:48:43):
We had good weather in the US, we had good
weather in Brazil, and these markets, the commodity markets that
we deal with, they're generally speaking their weather derivatives. If
the weather's good, the prices go down. For the weather's bad,
the prices go up. So that's the backdrop. The trade
war with China is icing on the cake here in
terms of of the pharma to me and how bad
it is and how much money farmers are going to lose.
Last year, China accounted for nineteen percent of all demand

(01:49:08):
for soybeans grown in the United States. About fifty five
percent of it is our beans that we crushed domestically.
There's about forty ish percent that's exports. And of that
forty percent, China's, you know, roughly half of it. Basically
part of my math if it's not perfect, but China
is a big soybean buyer, or was. Now we're into
a new marketing year. Farmers in the US have begun
soybean harvest. China has not bought a single bushel of

(01:49:31):
US soybeans for current marketing your delivery, and therein lies
the problem.

Speaker 5 (01:49:36):
Now, talk to us about how significant what happened with
Argentina in the last couple of days is for soybe
I mean, everyone on the surface looks at that, it's
like this is this is insane. This bailout is insane.
What Argentina does is insane. But how significant is it
from the perspective of soybean farmers.

Speaker 19 (01:49:53):
Optically it's an absolute disaster for the Trump administration. It
looks it looks very, very very bad. So the twenty
billion dollars in question, it hasn't happened yet, and it's
supposed to be a swap line, meaning that we're going
to give Argentina twenty billion dollars, They're going to give
US twenty billion in pesos. We assume a whole bunch
of currency risk, but we get political influence in Argentina. Right,

(01:50:13):
So as this was happening, they were all like simultaneous events.
Argentina dropped its export tax on soybeans and corn, and
China came in and bought a whole bunch of like
forty cargoes of soybeans out of Argentina during that tax holiday.
It looks very bad optically fundamentally. You know, it's a
couple million metric tons of business that in all likelihood

(01:50:35):
would have gone to the United States almost certainly this
time of year, the time of year that we ship
the most soybeans out of the United States is immediately
post harvest, like call it October first through maybe mid January,
and after that the Brazilian crop comes online, China buys
from them. So it's a very bad look optically, and
it doesn't help in terms of dollars and cents either.

Speaker 3 (01:50:56):
Yeah, and you and I were talking briefly about this
last night, and that really struck me. So it's because
of the cycles of harvest Brazil and US different hemispheres,
so different harvest cycles, and so typically the fall we'd
be moving our soybeans to China. So if China can
make it through the fall into the winter when Brazil

(01:51:17):
really fully comes online, they might be able to wade
us out the whole time and buy nothing. Is that possible, Like,
is there enough Are there enough soybeans or in the
world for them to buy elsewhere through the fall?

Speaker 9 (01:51:33):
Yes, there are. What could happen though, is.

Speaker 19 (01:51:38):
China prefers to keep healthy stocks of soybeans on hand.
They don't want to draw down their stocks. Brazilian supplies
this time of year kind of become exhausted. They're already
through their big shipping window. China's bought a little bit
from Argentina. This is a debate in the grain industry
right now. Can China actually make it to the Brazilian
harvest without any US soybeans? And if so, what's the impact.

(01:51:58):
Are they going to draw down stocks? Are they going
to risk drawing downstocks? We don't know at this point.
I think it's safe to say that if China does
buy US soybeans, it's going to be in a reduced manner.
You got to keep this in mind. China is avoiding
US soybeans as its way of fighting the trade war.
China is imposing that the tariffs on its own soybean buyers.
Right so, if China wants to wave the tariffs and

(01:52:19):
say we're going to buy US soybeans and US soybeans
are cheap right now, just for so we're clear they're competitive.
They can do it, they just don't want to because
this is one of the few bullets that they have
to fight the trade war with the US now.

Speaker 5 (01:52:32):
Matt Stoller wrote on Sunday. He says there's another set
of announcements in which quote Trump sought to mollify as
frustrated farmer based. Trump said he wants to use tariff
revenue to bail out farmers. Stiller says it's possible, but
could require Democrats and Congress to go along. Trump is
also bragging about new international trade deals, so China is
conspicuously absent, and he is trying to bring down interest rates,

(01:52:52):
which will help farmers. Also, another announcement was that the
Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke role Ins and Anti Trust chief
Gilts later announced they would be looking at the rising
cost of crop inputs like seeds, chemicals, fertilizers, and machinery.
So there's three different things there. Really, what do you
make of that kind of slate of potential Trump administration
actions to try to mollify, as Stoler says, farmers.

Speaker 19 (01:53:17):
There is almost certainly going to be some sort of
farmer bailout. There was last time around, it was called MFP,
the Market Facilitation Program, And because of the trade war
that occurred in twenty eighteen and twenty nineteen, the previous
Trump administration sent farmers tens of billions of dollars as
its way of making up for the last sales via
the trade war. In all likelihood, they're going to do

(01:53:38):
the same thing. Something's probably going to be announced here
in the coming weeks. And to be clear about what
this does and who likes it and who doesn't, a
lot of farmers are not a fan of this. To
go back to what I mentioned earlier, these payments that
go out directly to farmers have directly influenced the inflation
factors that I talked about earlier, high fertilizer prices, high

(01:53:58):
seed prices, high machinery prices. A lot of studies have
shown that the vast majority of these direct farm payments
don't really end up in the pockets of farmers. The
farmers are essentially a mechanism by which these payments flow
through back to the fertilizer companies and the seed dealers
and the machinery companies and the banks, those big corporations,

(01:54:20):
and these are the corporations that lobby for the farm payments.
It's not necessarily the farmers that are lobbying for the
farm payments or the farm groups. It's the people who
want their money back or want to continue to be
paid or continue to make money. That's a huge, huge
part of it that I don't think that the public
understands is that so much of this money is just
it's flow through money the farmers and mechanism so that
the big banks get their money back, the seed dealers,

(01:54:41):
the fertilizer that they want their money back, they want
to keep their stock prices high.

Speaker 9 (01:54:45):
That's a huge piece of this.

Speaker 3 (01:54:48):
Yeah, God forbid any of our companies suffer any penalty.
So if China does successfully stiff farm US, where else
can the US sell soybeans? Like, who out there in
the world is hungry enough for this amount of soybean harvest?

Speaker 9 (01:55:04):
Nobody.

Speaker 19 (01:55:05):
In terms of soybean importers, China is head and shoulders
above any other global importer. That being said, we have
had other global buyers step up and export sales to
this point for this marketing year, which just began a
month ago. Two non China destinations are elevated, but They're
just I don't think there's a scenario in which not

(01:55:26):
non China destinations make up the entirety of what China
won't buy.

Speaker 6 (01:55:30):
Put it that way, yeah, I could.

Speaker 3 (01:55:33):
I can imagine Trump, uh, you know, telling like Ghana
you want to you know, you better buy up a
bunch of our soybeans.

Speaker 19 (01:55:39):
Ghana is like one of Yeah, nobody else has the appetite.
I mean, China is just such a huge country.

Speaker 3 (01:55:44):
Yes, yeah, what about India, I mean they got a
lot of people they want some soybeans.

Speaker 19 (01:55:50):
I don't think so we're we may sell some corn
or some ethanol to India. They're they're in the midst
of a big ethanol push. I just I don't know.
I don't know exactly what the quantities are going to be.
As with all these trade deals, you know, I kind
of go back to the Phase one trade deal that
was signed.

Speaker 9 (01:56:06):
In twenty twenty.

Speaker 19 (01:56:07):
It's like the trade deals are almost like ceremonial in
some way, shape or form, And really what happens is
the trade deal gets signed. It doesn't mean anything when
it's signed, I mean publicly or optically, Yeah it does,
But in terms of our markets are concerned, the market,
the soybean market, soybean traders, the guys trading soybeans with
big money, they're not going to care till we actually

(01:56:28):
see the export sales. In the case of the Phase
one trade deal was signed, I believe on January fifteenth
of twenty twenty. It wasn't until six or seven months
later that China came in and began to buy US
products aggressively. And they did, but it took a long time.
So I think that with these trade deals like we
saw the one with Taiwan announced a week and a
half ago, I mean, whatever, it's good press, but until

(01:56:49):
they come in and start doing the business and we
see an acceleration in the actual stuff that's being announced
by USDA, which is now shut down by the way,
but that's what we need to see.

Speaker 13 (01:57:00):
All right.

Speaker 3 (01:57:01):
So anyway, if you're watching this program and you need
a few billion tons of soybeans America is selling, we
are Joe Vaklovic with the grain markets and other stuff podcast.
Really really appreciate the inside here.

Speaker 9 (01:57:13):
Thank you, thanks guys.

Speaker 5 (01:57:14):
Secretary of State Marco Rubio is reportedly in the process
of a regime change effort against Nicholas Missuro. In Venezuela.
That's according to a long new report in the New
York Times. The military, according to this Times report, as
well as also readying operations on narco traffickers inside Venezuela.
So that's part of this big New York Times report.
I'm going to read a quote from it here. The

(01:57:36):
push by top aids to President Trump to remove Maduro
as the leader of Venezuela has intensified in recent days,
with administration officials discussing a broad campaign that would escalate
military pressure to try to force him out. US official
say it's being led by Marco Rubio, who is also
NSA by the way, and that comes into play a
little bit here too. Rubio argues that Maduro is an

(01:57:57):
illegitimate leader whoever sees the export of drugs stage, which
he says poses a.

Speaker 4 (01:58:01):
Quote imminent threat.

Speaker 5 (01:58:02):
But mister Rubio is shaping a more aggressive strategy using
intel provided by the CIA, the officials said, and the
Pentagon has built up a force of more than sixty
five hundred troops in the region. Another key part of
this article John Ratcliffe. So that's the head of the CIA,
and Stephen Miller, obviously the chief Domestic policy advisor close
to Donald Trump both support mister Rubio's approach. The officials

(01:58:22):
added again, according to the Times, the US military has
been planning potential military operations targeting drug trafficking suspects in
Venezuela as the next phase, although the White House has
not yet approved such a step. Current and former military
officials say there was actually another story I think it
was in the Washington Post rind just a couple of
days ago, about how there's disagreement between the Pentagon and

(01:58:44):
the White House regarding whether it's appropriate to start writing
a military operation in South America, and I think Mexico
as well was part of the disagreements. Just finally from
the Times, those operations would be aimed at interfering with
drug production and trafficking in Venezuela, as well as tightening
a vice around mister Maduro Trump admin officials is not
yet confirmed whether it be in such exchanges in the
White House.

Speaker 4 (01:59:04):
Did not provide a comment on the matter.

Speaker 5 (01:59:06):
So this is a big New York Times piece basically
reporting out ryan what we knew was happening, or what
we all suspected was happening. There have been leaks to
this effect, but this put it pretty clearly. I think
about what's happening inside.

Speaker 3 (01:59:20):
Yeah, and I'm surprised he's not going for Cuba in
this because the situation in Cuba, even though it doesn't
get anywhere near the attention that should, is catastrophic. You know,
people losing significant some significant amounts of weight, the outflow
of It's lost like a third of its population over

(01:59:41):
the last like five years or more. Crime is rising
like it's It feels like the embargo has with the
tightening sanctions, might actually finally do what it's been trying
to do, which is top of the government, and we'll
get a failed state.

Speaker 6 (02:00:00):
It's in its place.

Speaker 3 (02:00:01):
So for Rubio, you know, who has wanted nothing more
than to topple that government his entire life, it's interesting
that he's doing kind.

Speaker 6 (02:00:10):
Of Venezuela first. Yeah, and at least is pushing.

Speaker 3 (02:00:15):
Some Democrats to start to come out publicly against regime
change in Venezuela.

Speaker 6 (02:00:20):
Representive Don Bayer.

Speaker 3 (02:00:22):
He posted Donald Trump's quote special military operation in Venezuela
is a terrible idea. He's going from murdering people on
boats without charges or due process to what sounds like
regime change by military force a president a quote president
of peace, doesn't start new, unwise and unnecessary wars. This
would be something that Democrats could you follow Buyer's lead
on and really push Trump on, because you know, outside

(02:00:46):
of South Florida, nobody voted for this, and half the
people in South Florida don't want this. It's just it's
like it's basically just doing just using the US military
to play act this counter revolution, that these that the
South Florida Cuban population is wanted for fifty plus years.

Speaker 5 (02:01:09):
Well, I mean, we have reminders that are still downstream
of the Cold War in our foreign policy every day
about how easily these types of operations can go wrong,
Iran being one of them. An ally of Venezuela is,
by the way, in Venezuela clearly of interest to the
United States. Venezuela's oil reserves are not unimportant in the
United States. It's interests in Venezuela, of course. And so

(02:01:30):
these are incredibly kinetic situations, risky situations, explosive situations. And
so if the US right now is ready in which
clearly I think it is, precision targeted strikes on narco
traffickers in Venezuela and by the way I read the
entire I think it was SDNY indictment of Maduro the
other day, and it's not insane, Like there are actually

(02:01:51):
some pretty credible connections between Maduro and cartel of the
Suns and of the last I mean, it's I think
it goes over like the last ten to fifteen years,
so some of it's going back pretty far. It's not
insane that Madua to to say that Maduro, as Rubio does,
it's not insane to say that Maduia Maduro may have
had something to do with narco trafficking.

Speaker 4 (02:02:12):
Again, he's the leader.

Speaker 6 (02:02:14):
Governments are involved with drug trafficking.

Speaker 5 (02:02:17):
So Ryan wrote a book, Yes, that's right, this is
super was it called the Superbrand on Drugs?

Speaker 6 (02:02:21):
This is your country on drugs, Your country on drugs.

Speaker 5 (02:02:23):
Yes, So anyway, it's not insane, an insane indictment, but
as a predicate for military operations, it's completely for military
operations that are let's just say, it would be a
bit of a stretch to call democratic because nobody's going
to vote on this. Of course, there's talk of actually
using the au MF Earlier was that it was one

(02:02:46):
of the Venezuelan boat strikes where people were throwing out
that maybe it was covered by the aum after you
remember that like the anti terrorists AAMF after nine to eleven. Yeah, so,
just the ways that this could go wrong, we have
had what fifty plus years to learn from and especially
as the rights started re exploring a lot of this

(02:03:07):
during the Biden administration and the first Trump administration about
how intelligence agencies are undergoing these regime change and propaganda
operations that then are anti democratic and trickle into you know,
as much as you may disagree with communism and see
the dangers of communism and understand, you know, as a conservative,

(02:03:28):
let's say that you share all of those perceptions as
I do. This is crazy, Yeah, this is crazy.

Speaker 3 (02:03:35):
If they were if I were the lawyer for the
Trump administration, the way I would tell them that you
could use the AUMF as to say, because AUF says baus,
you can use force against like al Qaeda and people
involved in nine to eleven. I would say, Okay, here's
how you make the argument. The CIA helped to create
al Qaeda. The CIA helped to create a lot of

(02:03:57):
these drug trafficking operations, So therefore there's a connection between
the CIA and nine eleven and drug trafficking and the
AMF allows that's uh violence against anybody eleven And so
there you go.

Speaker 5 (02:04:13):
I was gonna say that's insane, but that is not insane.
What's insane is the actual case that you made. That's real.
It's like actually completely.

Speaker 3 (02:04:21):
Yeah, because it's all CIA operation. Yeah, they all are Yeah.

Speaker 5 (02:04:25):
And Dwelt John Ratcluff is reportedly on board.

Speaker 6 (02:04:28):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (02:04:29):
And then real quickly, the war war with Iran keeps
inching closer. Two interesting developments on that and put up
this next element. Uh Trump administration reached a deal with
Iran where they're sending a planeload of Iranian deportees. This
is not the thing that's pushing its closer to war.
Just kind of fascinating that like for the and and

(02:04:51):
I don't quite understand it for because the United States
has always said, oh, we will give asylum to these
Iranian dissidents, because because Iran is terrible and it's the
evil Mullahs, and anybody who stands up to the evil
Mulla's is a friend of the United States.

Speaker 6 (02:05:09):
So what's going on here?

Speaker 3 (02:05:10):
Why why are we like actually, nevermind go back to
the evil Mullas.

Speaker 4 (02:05:15):
Like, genuinely don't know, probably espionage charges.

Speaker 6 (02:05:19):
I don't think it's two way to do this seemed
just like standard migration situation.

Speaker 4 (02:05:26):
I don't know. I mean, maybe that's that's happened.

Speaker 6 (02:05:28):
We wouldn't send them back if there were spies.

Speaker 4 (02:05:31):
Wouldn't maybe send all of them back.

Speaker 6 (02:05:33):
But yeah, bizarre.

Speaker 3 (02:05:35):
But in another ominous development this ho Launch Media reported
yesterday that the so the French negotiations are ongoing around
these kind of snapback sanctions and the nuclear nuclear deal.
French apparently came to a deal with the Iranians that
would involve Iran basically giving everything up when it comes

(02:05:58):
to it's nuclear program again in exchange for some sanctions relief.
US came in and basically vetoed that and told Iran,
you know, stop enriching. You have to give us all
of the enriched uranium because in the past, like you
would store it somewhere, or you would give it to
Russia or wasn't like it wasn't you would give it

(02:06:19):
to the United States. So you have to give us
all of your enriched uranium. You have to stop your enrichment,
and in exchange, we will give you a delay of
like three months or six months or nine months of
these stat pack sanctions, so no sanctions relief, but just
a delay of some further sanctions.

Speaker 6 (02:06:37):
And the Iranian government was like, are wow, this is like.

Speaker 3 (02:06:42):
Insulting, it so absurd, And so the sense among people
watching this is like that this is just a pretext for.

Speaker 6 (02:06:52):
For more strikes coming pretty soon.

Speaker 5 (02:06:55):
Yes, and Iran, by the way, has a lot of
like oil property in Venezuela.

Speaker 4 (02:07:00):
And this goes back to what we're talking.

Speaker 5 (02:07:01):
About earlier in the show with Argentina and soybeans, just
in the last block about why Bessett might be so
interested in bailing out Argentina.

Speaker 3 (02:07:08):
So yeah, and if we wanted, if the US government
wanted prices to be lower for the American people, like
there are ways you could do it by not doing
needless wars, for instance with Venezuela and Iran, but that
getting prices down for the American.

Speaker 6 (02:07:27):
People is not remotely a priority.

Speaker 5 (02:07:30):
Apparently, Well that does it for us today, Ryan, big show,
big news cycle, shut down, news isn't going anywhere. Crystal
and Soccer will be back here tomorrow and we'll see
everyone on Friday. Indeed, all right, soe you guys then

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}10/1/25: Gov Shuts Down, Portland Invasion, Hegseth Slams Fat Generals. Venezuela Coup & MORE!

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

All Episodes

10/1/25: Gov Shuts Down, Portland Invasion, Hegseth Slams Fat Generals. Venezuela Coup & MORE!

Dateline NBC