Ryan and Emily discuss soybean farmers screwed by Milei bailout, Netanyahu salivates on Iran war, Candace Owens leaked Kirk texts confirmed, Douglas Murray caught writing draft speech for Israeli official.
Eugenia Muzio: https://x.com/eugemuzio
Negar Mortazavi: https://x.com/NegarMortazavi
To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com
Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
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 the 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 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):
In a moment, we're going to be joined by Argentine
reporter u Hennia Musium from Perfield, a news outlet down
at Argentina, who's broken some significant news on this American
bailout of Argentina at the expense of American farmers, and
in particular the role of hedge funder Rob sa Trone
in lobbying Treasury Secretary Scott Bess and himself a former
(00:54):
hedge funder, in enacting that bailout. But first we wanted
to check in on our Urgentinian president Javier and Mele
see how he's responding to this bailout.
Speaker 4 (01:12):
Okay, I'm right there, we go.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
It's great, all right to give a little bit of context.
If you haven't been following our reporting on this, Let's
roll D three to show that show show the kind
of different reaction that American farmers are having to this bailout.
Speaker 5 (01:25):
Well, the stop gap needs to come because they've kind
of painted the farmer in a corner. I mean, I don'
want trade, not a I need a market. I need
a place to sell this stuff. I can work hard
enough and make a product if you give me someplace
to sell it. I don't take care of myself. But
they've painted us in a corner with this China deal
and China mind no solowy beans. I mean, they've tore
(01:49):
a market in half. I mean, if you take you
the four years prior to Trump's first terror form, the
average price of a bushel of slowy beans is twelve
dollars and fifty four cents. The average price for the
four years dearing Trump's first terrafor is nine dollars and
thirty nine cents. That's one hundred and sixty three dollars
an acre swing to the minus the next four years
(02:10):
after the tariffor the average price is thirteen dollars and
fifty nine cents. That's a two hundred and eighteen dollars
up swim. Now we're back to ten dollars and twenty
one cents. I think the board is today. My local
elevators nine dollars and seventy nine cents. So I'm at
one hundred and seventy two dollars an acre loss. I mean,
you can't the farmer can't continue to produce a crop
(02:31):
below the cost of production. And that's where we're at,
and we don't have anywhere to sell it. We're in
a taraford with China, We're in a terraffor with everybody else.
I mean, where do they want me to market this stuff?
Speaker 4 (02:41):
All right?
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Joining us now is Johanne Muzio, reporter from Argentina who's
been doing a lot of work in this case. And
so for people not following along, So the Trump administration
started at second trade war with China. China responded by
telling the United States, but we're not buying any of
your soybeans. Most of the soybeans that the United States
grows go to China. That's a huge problem for American farmers.
(03:05):
The two main competitors to the United States are when
it comes to soybeans are Brazil and Argentina. Brazil selling
enormous amounts of soybeans over to China. Argentina is struggling
economically big time. All of a sudden, they get a
lifeline from Treasury Secretary Scott Besson in the form of
twenty billion dollar bail out. Immediately, the Argentina and government
(03:27):
cuts its export taxes and then they sell enormous amounts
of soybeans to China at a much discounted price, infuriating
American farmers. But it turns out, according to reporting down
in Argentina, that was that American hedge funds played a
significant role in this. So you, Henny, can you tell
us a little bit about Rob Satrone and the role
(03:49):
more generally of hedge funds in helping to bring about
this kind of catastrophic situation for everybody.
Speaker 6 (03:57):
Well, hello to everyone. Yes, that that policy that Minister
Ris Kaputo taken on. I think it was like a
desperate policy because Argentina was passing through like a week
with a lot of financial expectations because we have elections
(04:18):
going on October twenty six, and in Argentina, elections are
always like they move along a lot of things, and
in economy most of so I think it was a
desperate policy from Minister Kauto because he needed liquidity in
(04:38):
the market. Because the pressure for the dollar, our exchange rate,
it's very very strong. So in Argentina, when the dollar
comes up, then our prices comes up, and the inflation,
it's like the inflation, it's a thing here. So yes,
(05:00):
Rosie Tron I know he is, he known with Kabuto.
He he knows also Scott Besant he buys bones from
Argandina before all this and all of this stuff that
is going on, it seems like is it I don't know.
(05:22):
It may be a financial advantage from some hedgephones. So
here in Argentina we are expecting the bailouts. We are
expecting news because our minister with Kabuto is now there
in Washington, he's been there for six days. That it's
a lot for a country. It isn't in a financial crisis,
(05:45):
our crisis. We have an economic crisis, like very soon
economic crisis. But now we are passing through like financial
crisis because we have a debt a little sorry, a
big debt in January we hold out, so it's like
(06:05):
four billion dollars and Argentine extraine for reserves are very
very low, even in negative rates. I would say if
there's not for ims also dollars. So I think it
was a desperate movement from Aventina and then and the
(06:29):
the people that are around Kaputo and also Scott Beson
took advantage of it.
Speaker 7 (06:37):
So let's watch a little bit of rob strone. This
is going to be D two and we'll get your reaction.
Speaker 8 (06:43):
Well, I think there's special times every five or ten
years where there's a really spectacular trade and investment that
we then will concentrate in a meaningful way. Twenty thirteen
a dollar a yen, we made over a billion dollars
long dollar yen. And in fact, you know, we discussed
the quite a bit with George and I kind of
vince George and Scott Besson at the time to go
big in that. And you know, Scott says I'm responsible
(07:04):
for seventy five percent of his bones at sorrows kind
of jokingly.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
Over that time.
Speaker 7 (07:08):
It was on the Goldman Sachs podcast, Actually did you
want to happen?
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Yeah, just just in case people aren't following along there
and you can pick up on this. So Setrona is
saying that Scott Besson for the George Soros Fund, he
and he and Bessent collectively went in together and pulled
off a trade on the end, the same type of
currency play that he's doing with Argentina where he made
(07:33):
a billion dollars like in a day, which we can
get into the way that that kind of currency trading,
you know, extracts wealth off the backs of irregular people.
So he and his friend Bessent, they are on record
as having done this kind of currency play before, and
so now he is back in Argentina making the same
(07:55):
currency play, but now his friend is the Treasury secretary
and bails him out of a bad trade. Like what
have you found? What have you discovered about this? And
how are people in Argentina reacting to this? Because in
some ways this bailout probably while it helps to Trono,
(08:16):
also helps Argentina to stave off a bit of a
financial crisis. So maybe so this kind of this level
of corruption is like they're like, okay, well fine, help
us out. Here, So, yeah, what's been the response and
when what have you found?
Speaker 6 (08:28):
Well, I think people didn't respond to this rop Citron
currency trade because I think they are like more occupy
in their own economic crisis here. The economic crisis is
is a thing I think. I mean, salary is a.
Speaker 9 (08:48):
Very low jobs.
Speaker 6 (08:50):
We have like a high level of unemplopment. So I
don't think like the regular people did have like an
impact of this. Yes, the markets, the markets are talking
about this, but this is not new for Argandina. We
have a lot of corruption crisis. Maybe maybe you heard
(09:13):
about effect the the candidate of Pansa, which is the
party of the government that had that that had to
that had links with with Narco traffic, So maybe that
that's the thing that is going on here and what's
(09:37):
on news, but not rock Citron. And it's a peculiar
because we are talking about a parency crisis, a financial crisis,
an economic crisis, and a friend of the Secretary of
the Tertiary Secretary of the United States, the one that
it's going to give the bailouts to to Argndina, had
(09:59):
a friend that already run a currently situate twice with
Japan and may Okay know so, but has no impact
in my grant people I was I was saying markets
are going to or maybe already thinking about it, but not.
Speaker 9 (10:24):
A big movement.
Speaker 7 (10:26):
Well, in your last question for me is could you
tell us more about the political situation facing Melee right now?
You mentioned the desperation in Argentina. Why is there that
sense of desperation, What sort of political situation does mean
I find himself in right now? And why would it
be important for the United States continue supporting who they
(10:46):
see as an ally and sort of an ally that
finds himself maybe in some political trouble in the case
of Melee.
Speaker 6 (10:55):
Okay, yes, Well, in Argentina eccentuates. It's very important. As
I said, our extense rate determines inflation, and in April
we have IMF twenty billion also, and that twenty billion
was used to maintain our extensi rate low because low
(11:20):
exchange in Argentina it means we have no inflation or
it's like a fact, a very important fact for inflation.
So there was interventions in markets I mean a central bank,
I mean Argentine treasury, and then we are in They
(11:43):
didn't do monetary policy to keep our vessels, our currency up.
So now we are here in this situation that the
pressure in the markets are extremely high because we are
we are going to an election in October twenty six
(12:06):
and the day passed, and when when you get closely
to the to the elections, the pressure is also high.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
So on that point, when when Scott bessen't bailed out
Argentina or announced that he was going to do it,
he specifically said he wanted to do it in order
to help me lay in the upcoming elections, which he
said would then bring in more foreign capital into Argentina.
How does how do Argentinians feel about the US just
(12:39):
saying out loud that we're trying to, you know, buy
me lay the upcoming election.
Speaker 6 (12:45):
Yes, the thing that is going on right now is
that we don't have news about how it's going to
to help United States to Argentina. We know that it's
a sub negotiation of twenty billion, but that's it. I mean,
there's no details, there's no period of time that we
(13:09):
are going to receive the money. It's not a money,
it's it's a credit line.
Speaker 9 (13:15):
It's a swap between central banks.
Speaker 6 (13:19):
But now the thing is that we are expecting news
like details and the details are not coming, so that
the nerviews, the market time nervous, and they passed, and
Minister Kabuto is still it's still in Washington.
Speaker 9 (13:40):
So we are expecting the news.
Speaker 6 (13:44):
And if there's no news in between the next days,
there will be bad news.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
Yes. Interesting.
Speaker 7 (13:53):
Well, HENNYA, thank you so much for coming on and
breaking this down. People can check out your reporting over
Perphil But thank you.
Speaker 6 (14:00):
Thank you, thank you.
Speaker 7 (14:01):
It was a pleasure.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
So a new report in the Israeli outlet how Retz,
which is based on research done by Citizen Lab we
can put up E two here finds an incredible astro
turfed network of basically bots operating on social media with
what appeared to be two primary goals. The first is
(14:25):
convincing the world that the Iranian people desperately crave the
return of the Shah, and in particular in the form
of Rezapalavi, who appears to have actually basically no constituency
anywhere either outside of Iran or in it, but the
Israeli bought accounts, genuinely producing some sense among policymakers that
(14:47):
he might actually be a thing. And then, separately and relatedly,
they played an active role during the Twelve Day War
in creating basically fake news inside of Iran that was
then picked up by Western outlets as actually having occurred,
being the real behavior of actual Iranians inside during the war.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
So to talk about that is Nagar.
Speaker 3 (15:10):
Mortazabi, who is a who was a policy analyst with
the what's it called Center for International Policy?
Speaker 4 (15:17):
Is that right? Yes, the old old school kind of.
Speaker 3 (15:22):
Institutions, skeptical of American intervention abroad. Thank you so much
for joining us, really appreciate it. So so walk us through,
walk us through some of this report and we have.
Oh and before we get to that, it's I think
it's important to set the context here that we might
be looking at war like any day now. Nenyah who
(15:44):
sat down with Ben Shapiro just this week and effectively,
you know, if anybody was concerned, if anybody thought that, meyb,
we're gonna get a break from you know, Israeli statement
rattling towards Iran, they were, they were disappointed.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
So let's roll a little bit of Ben Shapiro and.
Speaker 10 (16:00):
People probably don't believe it right that no, we're far away, right, No,
you're not. Iran is developing now ballistic missiles that are
intercontinental ballistic missiles for eight thousand kilometer range, what does
that mean? They add another three thousand kilometers and they've
got under their gun, under their atomic guns in New
(16:22):
York City, in Target, Washington, Boston, Miami, Mari Lago. Okay,
so that is a very great danger. You don't want
to be under the nuclear gun of these people who
are not necessarily rational and you chant death to America.
Speaker 4 (16:39):
All right, So nigger, what can you tell us about this?
Speaker 3 (16:42):
What our rets and citizen lab uncovered here when it
comes to this AstroTurf Operation sull Ran.
Speaker 11 (16:49):
Just to give some background, what we saw is Benjamin
Aataniaho basically trying to manufacture con said for a US
war on Iran, which is something he's been trying to
do for over tie years. Very publicly, he's talked about
it in US Congress. Behind the scenes, he's been trying
to push a sort of boots.
Speaker 12 (17:07):
On the ground regime change type war that the US
did in Iraq, also in Iran. The problem is the
American public is not supportive of another regime change, big war, endless.
Speaker 9 (17:18):
War in the Middle East.
Speaker 11 (17:20):
And also one big question people Americans and others ask
is what if the regime falls, what's next?
Speaker 9 (17:27):
What's the day after?
Speaker 12 (17:28):
I think Israeli to have found in razapah Levi sort
of the product or that answer for the day after
this is the person for the day after this is
the seemingly democratic western dressing. You know, a well suited
and well spoken person with good English that you want
to be ruling I wrong. The problem is the Iranians
(17:48):
don't really think that, and so that brings us to
sort of these disinformation AstroTurf ai generated fake campaigns. This
is actually something that's been going on for years since
the first and many of us around watchers have been
observing these massive, massive operations online. The problem is it's
very hard to get evidence to actually connect them to
(18:09):
the Israeli government because they cover up the tracks really well.
So this is one of the few, and it's not
the first one, but this is one of the few
investigative reports that actually shows the evidence connects. I believe
Haretz has insiders who have leadd some of this information
to them their investigative word and Citizen Lab has really
(18:30):
dug deep and looked at some of these accounts that
we're posting content.
Speaker 11 (18:34):
And I think one thing that maybe tipped off Citizen Lab.
Speaker 9 (18:37):
And really made this disturbing is that these accounts were
posting content that was prepared seemingly with a knowledge that.
Speaker 11 (18:46):
The Israelis are going what the Israeli army is going
to do in Iran, specifically the bombing of the Eving
prison in Tehran, so videos that had been produced fake
videos of the bombing of the prison were put at
very quickly after the actual prison was bombed, and the
citizen lap of conclusion is that this couldn't have been
(19:08):
done by an entity who didn't have knowledge, So this
is probably an entity, a contractor whoever is paid by
the government, who also had very intimate knowledge and relationship
with the IDEF and their operations, which makes us so
much more disturbing because so many prisoners and also civilians
died in that prisoner bombing of the prison.
Speaker 7 (19:27):
And when Ryan first drew my attention to the story,
my reaction was I always assumed this was an American
neo coon op. I mean, it's very clear that there
are interests who have backed Paula V for a long time,
but this day after point that you're making is really important.
So walk is a bit through the evidence that ties this.
I mean, I'm sure there are American neocons who support
(19:49):
this campaign, but walkers through the evidence in the way
that it goes directly to the Israeli government, as was
documented in the report.
Speaker 11 (19:58):
Absolutely so, just to actually your point, yes, there has
also been a neo con sort of push, including online
campaigns that.
Speaker 9 (20:06):
Have been promoting kala Vi four years especially.
Speaker 11 (20:09):
We saw the optic with the first during the first
Trump term was sort of the more pro war neo
con camp was trying to push for attacks for Warren
I Ran and at the same time promoting this person
as a viable sort of alternative to the regime. Well,
the evidence the heart supporting is mostly looking at how
(20:31):
these fake accounts and boughts controls are promoting rezap lev
and sort of showing a fake support a popular support
for him through online and they also connected to something
important he says in one of his trips to Israel.
This is also important to know. Rezapalavi has been making official,
seemingly state visits to Israel since two thousand, since about
(20:55):
two years ago, and in one of those trips people
ask him if he's really a viable, alternative or popular
in Iran, and he says, don't just believe what I said,
go and check social media. So these very popular accounts.
Speaker 9 (21:06):
That happened, yes, that have it.
Speaker 11 (21:09):
It's a it's a real connection. And so it's his account.
It's also his wife's account. We've seen in the past
few years that have really really been promoted, propped up
with advertisement, with sort of campaigns, and in one instance,
I believe his wife posted a video during the war,
a video of a graffiti on a wall in Tehran
(21:29):
that said in English that Israel continue bombing. Were with you,
as in the voice of the Iranian people with a
graffiti in English on a wall in Tehran, And.
Speaker 9 (21:41):
So that's the hardest reporting.
Speaker 11 (21:43):
Also seems to have insider sources, unnamed sources who have
verified this. I think the disturbance is also the fact
that they see Israeli tax money being spent not just
propping up this person sort of a foreign influence, foreign
influenced operation, but also the minister, the former intelligence minister
and now Science Minister Gila Gamlil, who has been promoting
(22:07):
Rezaval and has been really seems to be the point
person inside the Israeli government uh to be pushing him,
and these accounts not only promotedtality but then turn around
and also promoted her online, which seems to have disturbed
some people inside the government, basically saying, Okay, that's a
red line. You can use taxpayer money to sort of
manufacture fake support for yourself online. And the Citizen Law
(22:30):
Report has specifically looked at that incident of the bombing
of Ebbing Prison, where basically the online disinformation is very
much tied to not just offline violence, but an actual
war and bombing by an army, and they seem to
be two arms of the same entity or very much connected.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
And let's let's run through some of that, because it's
really fascinating. We can put up E four I think
this is a vo. This is this is what people
eventually figured out was an a I created. So this
is a This was posted within moments of the attack
on Evan prison, and the translation here as kids, did
(23:09):
you hear the sound of the explosion from Evan Prison?
Speaker 4 (23:12):
And a whole bunch of accounts.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
That are in this now known bot network we're posting
the same things, well did you hear that sound over
from the prison?
Speaker 4 (23:22):
Uh?
Speaker 3 (23:22):
And and BBC even ran a piece or somebody ran
a piece and it started circulating based on this video
of this explosion until people realized it was it was
a I. I think it was a BBC persian maybe that
figured out it was a I. If you can put
up E five, this is you know, very very similar.
Another one, Oh wow, what allowed explosion sound? I just
(23:45):
heard from the direction of the prison? You know, did
you did you hear it too?
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Kids? Did you hear the sound of the explosion from
Evan prison?
Speaker 11 (23:53):
In other attention to the hashtakes also the second Evan
must be Free. This is sort of a push to
get actual people physically rushing to Evan present a prison
and getting it free.
Speaker 9 (24:07):
And it was combined with sort.
Speaker 11 (24:09):
Of a fake messages that Evan is now free, the
doors are open and around it is safe for people
to go and rush. Of course nobody did, but this
was the aim of the campaign.
Speaker 4 (24:20):
Yes, and there is and maybe we can add these
in post.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
But there's some others that say they're very actively trying
to get people to go to the prison. They say,
I think the attack will end now, there is no
danger for the prisoner's families, kids, get ready, They just said,
there's no danger anymore. We can go see our loved ones. Kids,
hurry up, our loved ones have been free. These are
all different accounts. We can go see them and free them.
So they're telling the public, Okay, the bombing is over. Now,
(24:48):
let's all rush to this prison to try to break
people out. And Citizen Lab to its credit, and also
everybody watching this just came to the same conclusion. I'm like,
wait a minute, how do these support normal Iranians in
their apartments know that the bombing.
Speaker 4 (25:04):
Is over at the prison? Who are they?
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Who are they in touch with that told them that
the bombing is now over. So I think the running
people had enough you know, common sense to not be
you know, tricked by these accounts, which don't seem like
they got a whole lot of traction kind of internally,
and so they did not rush to the prison and
try to you know, free everybody. But the danger here
(25:29):
is it's it's probably and I'm curious for your take
on this. My says it's less about they didn't really
think they were going to do that.
Speaker 4 (25:36):
I think it's worth a shot trying.
Speaker 3 (25:37):
If this sparks some sort of protest inside Iron but
what they're really trying to do is trick Western journalists
and policy analysts into believing that that's the case, and
then produce that artificial narrative that then they hope somehow
can then devolve into reality on the on the ground.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
What's what's your sense of what the mission here was?
Speaker 9 (26:01):
Absolutely?
Speaker 11 (26:01):
Let me give you another example, Ryan, They bombed the
State TV.
Speaker 7 (26:06):
As also.
Speaker 4 (26:08):
Yes, Yes, and also hacked.
Speaker 11 (26:11):
The State TV and put out similar messages on State
TV basically saying, don't you remember how bad your regime is,
how repressive, don't you remember the protest?
Speaker 9 (26:20):
Time to rise up.
Speaker 11 (26:21):
I think one parallel goal which wasn't achieved by the
Israeli campaigns of bombing was that people will rise up
as they have before and they will overthrow the regime.
Speaker 9 (26:32):
And I think that's something.
Speaker 11 (26:33):
They probably private they have been selling and that this
would be the last sort of the regime is on
its last leg and they just need the final kick
to fall. And that also helped, you know, bringing the US,
this bigger power into a war. If you show them
that you own their.
Speaker 12 (26:50):
Runian skyes, you own Iran all land, you can bomb
them all you want, and the people are about to
rise up and take over this regime. That's also been
the rhetoric of sort of the radical opposition, that we.
Speaker 11 (27:00):
Will overthrow this regime. We just need a little bit
of help from the outsiders. That's also been the writer
of Rezapala. We just need a little bit of support.
South Africa wouldn't win without foreign support, Mandela wouldn't win
without international support, and.
Speaker 9 (27:12):
So there needs to be a little bit of international support.
Speaker 11 (27:15):
But Iranians will rise themselves.
Speaker 9 (27:17):
And we saw that the exact opposite. The Israeli bombings
first of all, created a.
Speaker 11 (27:21):
Rally around the flag in Iran, and also not one
person came to protests. And this is a government and
everything that's not very popular. We see protests after protests,
but when.
Speaker 9 (27:31):
Your homes, when your schools, when your roads are being
bombed by a foreign entity, that's really not the time
to go on a streat and protests. And that's exactly
what we saw by Iranians.
Speaker 11 (27:42):
And one other thing that bombing also showed people is
whoever wasn't clear eyed about whether Israel can have very
targeted surgical attacks only on regime officials, I think now
understand that there is no such thing and that you're
going to have over a thousand casualties, most of them civilians.
Even the military casualties, a lot of them were young
(28:03):
conscripts who were just serving a mandatory military service.
Speaker 7 (28:08):
It's like Guatemala in the nineteen fifties, broadcasting stuff over
the speakers, the revolutions happening.
Speaker 4 (28:14):
The revolutions happening.
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Yeah, just hoping to convince people that it's true.
Speaker 4 (28:17):
Ye, fall a little flat though.
Speaker 7 (28:20):
Yeah, Well, this is such helpful information. Thank you for
joining us, Thank you for having me.
Speaker 4 (28:27):
See you next time.
Speaker 7 (28:31):
The ugly fight over what Charlie Kirk said or did
not say in the days, weeks, and months leading up
to his assassination is raging on. Candice Owens released more
information from what she says are three sources who confirmed
something important to her. Let's go ahead and roll the clip.
Speaker 13 (28:50):
Three people told me off record. Two people who have
this in a written communication from Charlie. One who is
a turning point USA donor, and I would say very
much one of the white nights in this. The very
day before Charlie Kirk died, he expressed that he thought
(29:12):
he was going to be killed. He told these people,
I think they're going to kill me. Okay, he did
not express that to me. So I am telling you
this based off the testimony of free people. And I
am saying this because I hope that these people who
I think are good will be inspired to come forward
with that. And again, those conversations I had were off record.
I honor that if I say it's off record, it's
(29:33):
days off record. But I'm hoping that watching what I
am doing and feeling the energy that is rising across
the world for people who want to know what the
heck happened on nine to ten, that you know, they
will be brave and they will say, yeah, Charlie did
the day before he died think that he was going
to be killed, and maybe tell us who is they? Well,
(29:54):
for one cent for all, who is they? Who is
the day that he thought were going to kill him?
Speaker 7 (29:58):
Well on the question of who that they is? And
Ryan and I will break down a little bit what
off the record should mean as well. But the they
Info Wars reporter Harrison Smith posted, I'm not going to
name names, but I was told by someone close to
Charlie Kirk that Charlie thinks Israel will kill him if
he turns against them. That was over the summer.
Speaker 4 (30:16):
I think it was actually even better before he was killed.
Speaker 7 (30:18):
Yeah, it was. It was before Charlie Kirk was killed,
which probably wouldn't normally bring that up because again, even
with Candace in this case, there's no clear sourcing. It's
not as though, you know, even in like new independent media,
we do more I would say, vetting of claims than that.
But when you start to see more and more people
saying stuff like this, it starts to sound like it
(30:40):
actually really was the scuttle but in the circles around
Charlie Kirk Ryan.
Speaker 3 (30:46):
Which helps explain kind of some of the reaction in
real time. Now, just let I just want to be
totally clear here. Let's say that it's true that Charlie
Kirk did think that. That does not lead logically then
to the fact to the claim that they did it right,
right like that those are kind of disconnected things, but
it's important for understanding his legacy and the moment that
(31:09):
we're in.
Speaker 7 (31:09):
What was happening behind the scenes. Yeah, right, And I
just this is E eight. So this is one of
Charlie's close friends, Andrew Corvett, who's been continuing to hold
out the fort over at the Charlie Kirk Show and
talking a lot about trying to debunk some rumors and
confirm other claims. He went through these text messages that
(31:30):
Candace Owens released that showed Charlie Kirk basically doing, I've
had it up to here with these conservative Zionists argument.
He didn't say it that way, but you can see
pretty clearly from the text that Candas released, which people
were immediately saying, there's no way these are real. There's
no way these are real, showing Kirk's exasperation, utter exasperation
(31:52):
with being told what he can and cannot say about Israel.
These are within forty eight hours of him being assassinated.
Let's roll e eight.
Speaker 14 (32:01):
To address some of the things that have been going
around on public, namely about a text a group text
chain that has been made known and released by Candace OANs.
And I just want to dress it head on because
you know that was a text grab, a screen grab
that I had shared with people, so it is authentic.
Speaker 13 (32:23):
Take a look, so Charlie writes in this scroup chat,
just lost another huge Jewish donor two million a year
because we won't cancel Tucker I'm thinking of inviting Candace.
Somebody writes, oh, Charlie writes, Jewish donors play into all
of the stereotypes. I cannot and will not be bullied
(32:45):
like this, leaving me no choice but to leave the
pro Israel cause. And somebody writes, donor rights, please do
not invite Candace. That might feel good short term, but
it's not good long term in my opinion. Like all groups,
you're going to get a wide variety of opinions. That
nasty free will thing that God bestowed on us makes
life frustrating at times. After the dust subtles a bit, maybe,
(33:09):
So again, this is forty eight hours before Charlie was sassaity.
He was very clear and he's very explicit.
Speaker 7 (33:14):
So the Canvas Park came first, and then Colvett confirmed,
as you saw on that clip, those were indeed real
text messages. He said that's a screenshot actually that he
had shared.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
And so these twenty four hours killed.
Speaker 7 (33:26):
Within forty eight Yeah, So clearly these things are pinging
around because there were a lot of conversations in group chats,
and it's so ugly to even have to talk about
this because Charlie Kirk is not here. To explain. I mean,
in group chats there's sarcasm. It's all virtual. It's sarcasm,
you say different things. It's easy to imagine how things
(33:46):
can get taken out of context. I would say that's
a pretty clear statement from Charlie Kirk, but he's obviously
not here to explain. He did have that long interview
with Megan Kelly where he put a lot of this
in his own words. You don't even need to be
taking things from group chats necessarily to know that he
was deeply, deeply exasperated and that it seems that donor
(34:06):
references to Robert Shulman, who the reporting from Ex Bluementhal
has been confirmed about him publicly revoking that money from
Turning Point USA, falling out with Charlie, who considered him
they considered one to try one another, to be very close,
almost a mentor mentee relationship. So this was getting this
was clearly getting.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
Very nasty, and it shows the dynamic that we've seen
over and over where he says he says, quote, just
lost another huge Jewish donor two million dollars year. That's
Shilman two million dollars a year because we won't cancel Tucker,
I'm thinking of inviting Candace. That's the dynamic that we
see so often. Megan Kelly is betraying a little bittle
bit lately, where it's like if you and She'll say
(34:47):
this out lout, if you try to tell me what
I can and can't do, I'm going to go the
opposite direction. Right, you don't want me to have Tucker?
Oh yeah, how about Candace too? Yeah, just just to
like draw boundaries, be like, no, this is this is
my conference, this is my organization. I'm going to make
the decisions. And also I'm going to make the decisions.
(35:08):
And this is what he was saying to net Yahoo
and others. I'm going to make the decisions that I
actually think are better for Israel, Like he thought it
was better for Israel. Yeah, to have this aired out
in public, to sharpen your counterpoints against the narratives that exist,
rather than try to suppress them and pretend they don't exist.
Speaker 7 (35:29):
And that is what he said he tried to explain
to Nata Yahoo in the letter. He said, this is
the suppression is like absolutely, the appearance of speech depression,
the existence of speech depression.
Speaker 3 (35:39):
Is bad for you, right, right, You're not going to
win this way, right, it was his argument, and so yeah,
it has been fascinating to see this be the debate
rather than what I thought right afterwards when they found
out that the alleged shooters partner it's a trans person, like, oh, well,
we're going to get a month or six weeks, months
(36:02):
months of like you know, transhate, and instead this has
been more of the conversation.
Speaker 7 (36:10):
It's so ugly. I mean, it's just it's the amount
of I mean, if you think about the amount of
digital evidence of your thought process that you leave now
in twenty twenty five, if you're somebody who works in
politics and you're working this stuff out in you know,
he was clearly trying to keep everybody happy. I think
(36:31):
that's the big takeaway is that he was trying to
tell supports of Israel he was still on their side
and give them tough love. But then he was also
expressing privately how incredibly exasperated he was by all of this.
He did it publicly too, again on the Megan Kelly interviews.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
So just right, and you can imagine a guy who
made his entire career starting from when he's like eighteen
about debate and all of these. He has one hundred
and fifty million dollar organization that people are funding based
on his career as somebody who wants to air different sides.
Speaker 4 (37:07):
It'd be one thing if he ran.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
A pack and he invited Tucker Carlson to the conference,
then I think, if you're an APAC downer, you're like, no,
absolutely not, Like he does not tow our line, and
that's fine.
Speaker 4 (37:24):
You're an advocacy organization for a pack, like no, Tucker Carlson.
Totally fair, but.
Speaker 3 (37:32):
Turning, it's this, it's it's built on the idea of debate,
and so the idea that you're that you can't have
this debate, which is tearing the conservative movement apart, is
just anathma to his very being. And then, as he
explained on Megan Kelly, to then layer on top of
that a personal insult that you actually are anti Semitic.
Speaker 4 (37:57):
Was clearly driving him nuts.
Speaker 7 (38:00):
All the time he has spent advocating for Israel. It's
just the fact that people are still right now treating
his feelings like they were in some way illegitimate or
flirting with anti Semitism is it's so so disgusting, and
it's just ugly again that his or digital footprint is
(38:22):
being torn apart like this. It was. I mean, he
put this stuff pretty clearly in public at the time too.
But Sad said said, we.
Speaker 3 (38:32):
Have a new report over at drop Side News that
finds that David from, Douglas Murray, Seth Mandel, and pamla
Gross who is a CNN producer, all in various ways
we're working directly with the Israeli Ambassador to the United
Nations while also engaging journalistically with that same ambassador from
in particular while serving as an editor at the Atlantic
(38:57):
and a writer at Atlantic, where he still is. Send
an email two days apart to Ron Proser, who's the
Israeli ambassador one, asking him and we can put this
element up on the screen here, can I interview you
for short profile in The Atlantic about what it's like
to be Israeli Ambassador at UN That is a perfectly
(39:18):
normal email for a journalist to send to a subject
or a source.
Speaker 4 (39:24):
I'd like to write a profile.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
For you for The Atlantic, the journalistic news outlet, where
I write, would you be willing to participate in this interview?
Speaker 4 (39:32):
Wonderful stuff.
Speaker 3 (39:35):
Less usual is a separate email that he sent we
can put this one up on the screen.
Speaker 4 (39:42):
This is I can't even believe it.
Speaker 3 (39:45):
This is from saying that say that he and Seth
Mandel a lot going on here. You might want to
pause and read this you want, but that he and
Seth Mandel, who writes for Commentary, have been working on
the draft for a speech for the Israeli ambassador. This,
he says, this version was drafted by Seth Mandel of Commentary,
with whom I've been working. The top half is identical
(40:06):
to what you read previously. The bottom half is much
less pointed about US policy. Is this more in line
with your thinking? That's July thirty, first, twenty fourteen. This
is right after the twenty fourteen Gaza War. And so
then he includes a couple different versions.
Speaker 4 (40:22):
Of the speech.
Speaker 3 (40:24):
Later, Proser responds, and we can put this next element
up there.
Speaker 4 (40:28):
Thank you, David.
Speaker 3 (40:30):
I will look at it and get back to you.
So this was the target audience. Here's un Security Council.
You can look and see whether or not you think
from speech writing along with Mandel's up to snuff from
as you may or may not know, it was a
speech writer for George W. Bush before becoming the kind
(40:51):
of anti Trump resistance guy. He famously or infamously depending
on your perspective. Well, there's not many who take the
former anymore. Came up with the phrase access of evil.
Speaker 4 (41:01):
That's what he was known for.
Speaker 3 (41:02):
Access of evil, which somehow included Iran, Iraq, and North Korea,
who had none of which had anything to do with
each other.
Speaker 7 (41:11):
To our last segment, to the point of manufacturing consent
for the Iraq war.
Speaker 3 (41:15):
Right, and then the Iraq War brought in a Shia majority,
that is that linked up the country with Iran. But whatever,
So that's him.
Speaker 4 (41:25):
We've got.
Speaker 3 (41:26):
Also got mister Doug Murray, Douglas Murray, he writes to
Ron Proser as well, roughly like actually the same day
they're competing to write this speech.
Speaker 4 (41:39):
Very good to speak earlier.
Speaker 3 (41:40):
I am passing in here my first draft ideas. It's
probably slightly long, and it's possible I have put in
some more diplomatic things than needed, but I think I
have got in all the points discussed to be worked on.
Speaker 4 (41:52):
Doubtless. Can we do this in a British accident?
Speaker 3 (41:54):
We should, right, But let me know what your thoughts
are and I will give all the time I can
and to helping to get it right.
Speaker 4 (42:01):
All very best wishes as ever.
Speaker 3 (42:04):
Douglas ron Proser's speech draft.
Speaker 7 (42:08):
I don't think I've ever heard you do a British accent.
Speaker 4 (42:09):
I don't. I don't think I could actually do. I'm
you could do a very good one.
Speaker 3 (42:15):
So Murray, it gets worse, like you're like, Okay, this
is pretty bad journalists who are at the one hand
covering Israel Palestine.
Speaker 4 (42:25):
It's a giant war that just happened.
Speaker 3 (42:27):
At the same time, they're secretly writing drafts of speeches
for the Israelian past.
Speaker 4 (42:30):
But that's pretty bad.
Speaker 7 (42:31):
And were they taking money for it? Do we know?
Speaker 3 (42:33):
I highly doubt it volunteer, I would. I would suspect
that this is volunteer work. We could we could find out,
But like from doesn't need the money.
Speaker 4 (42:42):
I don't know about Murray.
Speaker 3 (42:44):
This feels more like work of conscience. Yes, uh so,
this is from the drop Side article. At the time,
Murray was also providing other services in support of Israel
and its military efforts. In November of that year, he
wrote to Proser to inform him that he had hosted
an event that raised over one million pounds for an
organization called the Association for the well Being of Israeli Soldiers.
(43:08):
That organization have been created to provide funds quote directly
to IDF soldiers and IDF units created in nineteen forty
two before the creation by David Ben Gurion. In twenty fifteen,
AWIS merge with another organization now called the Association for
Israel's Soldiers.
Speaker 4 (43:26):
And so Douglas Murray wrote to him.
Speaker 3 (43:29):
About how happy he was about how well the fundraiser
had gone, how much money that they had been able
to raise for the Israeli military. Now Murray has been
has never made a secret of his support for Israel,
but I don't think he's ever mentioned that he that
is up to and including writing speeches and raising money
(43:50):
for the military. We can get into Pamla Gross in
a moment and Seth Mandel, but what was your what
was your reaction.
Speaker 4 (43:59):
As you as you were reading through some of this stuff,
And do we have the have you been we have
that sid? Have you been to the crossing points now
when we lost that at all? I've never been. You've
never been. Well, am I not allowed to talk about
it now?
Speaker 7 (44:19):
You've never been. You know, these are people who are
critical of a lot of media ethics when it comes
to coverage of Israel. And that's what I think is
particularly frustrating to me. It's this is a fairly easy
thing to disclose, and actually if you were oh would be.
(44:43):
But if you're honest about it in the profile, well
in the profile, there's another question. But people know that
you're he.
Speaker 4 (44:49):
Wrote that profile.
Speaker 3 (44:50):
That wasn't just an idea like he wrote and published
a glowing profile.
Speaker 7 (44:54):
I have it up on my browser right now. I've
checked way back machine and the archive. There's absolutely no
disclosure in it, not even now. So to do that
if you're David Frum and not disclosed that you helped
with the speech is completely bananas. And for both of them,
they are openly massive supporters of Israel. That's like to
(45:17):
go further as somebody who's in the media and actually
work on a draft of a government speech and not
disclose it and then ever lecture anybody else about journalistic
ethics and coverage of Israel is I just think that
is tough to That's is that none of this is surprising.
It's just a tough pill to swallow. And I would
(45:37):
imagine The Atlantic, though it's edited by former IDF soldier
right now, Jeffrey Goldberg.
Speaker 4 (45:46):
Prison guard prison so right?
Speaker 3 (45:50):
Who we called Goldberg left of voicemail like the text
message today, did not get back.
Speaker 7 (45:55):
From nobody gave you a comment on us.
Speaker 3 (45:57):
From referred questions to Atlantic's PR department, which has not
gotten back to us. Adam Johnson pointed out on Twitter
that the same day, no, or maybe it's a week later.
Speaker 4 (46:11):
Oh, no, it's the same day.
Speaker 3 (46:13):
A week before this, From had accused The New York
Times of putting a fake photo of bloodied Palestinians on
their news coverage of the Gods of War. A week later,
the same day that he was writing the Israeli ambassador
a draft of sending him the draft of the speech,
(46:33):
he apologized. These images do appear authentic, he said, and
I should not have cast doubt on them. I apologize
especially to surrogate Panamerav of the New York Times, whose
work I impugned. So he apologized to the photographer, not
to these bloodied subjects of the photograph, who's suffering. He
(46:53):
called it a doubt still from this is the New
York Times. Still From defending his initial skepticism, arguing that
quote there was a long history in the Middle East
of the use of faked or misattributed photographs as tools
of propaganda, using that old line of isn't it interesting
that I got fooled by this? Do you want to
(47:13):
do the Pamela gross ones too, or do you want
anything else you want to add to that before we
go to Dell and Mandel is a hard course poor
I was like, yeah, again, finding Mandel in the browser's
emails was not very surprising.
Speaker 7 (47:24):
I don't think and he of this particularly like shocking,
but it is, I guess surprising, just from the perspective
that again, like as an opinion journalist, their opinion journalists,
they don't pretend to be like sor Sheila, the reporters
who are just although sometimes I think the rhetoric goes
in that direction. Because Murray famously was lecturing Dave Smith
for not going to Israel, which was a question of ethics.
(47:46):
He was saying, as somebody who talks about this kind
of implying that Smith was acting in the capacity of
a journalist or a media person, then you should you
should go to the place that you're talking about. So
as opinion journalist, I feel like it's really and I
don't know if you've dealt with this before, but it's
like a really it's easy to be like, well, I'm
open about what I think about this, so oh of
course I can take this money and do this thing.
(48:09):
But i'd like I learned from Tim Carney when I
was young. He has like a full disclosure on medium
every year of places that he takes money from. I
do the same thing. If it's like a conservative group,
then you give a speech for helping the government. That's
one thing, and most people don't even just close that,
even though I think they should. But that's one thing,
helping the fucking government of another coman.
Speaker 3 (48:29):
Which government's well you're covering Holy shit, Yeah, you can't
do that.
Speaker 7 (48:33):
That is like even that even by the standards of
like where journalism and opinion journalism, that is surprising.
Speaker 3 (48:40):
Yes, And everybody has seen the Douglas Murray clip in
his debate with Dave Smith on Joe Rogan where he
says you haven't been talking about the crossings. This puts
that whole thing in a whole new light because Douglas
Murray then says, I have a journalistic rule that I
do not talk about a place even in passing unless
(49:02):
I have visited it.
Speaker 4 (49:04):
That's his journalistic rule.
Speaker 3 (49:06):
A much more basic journalistic rule is that you avoid
conflicts of interest and that if some exist, you disclose them.
So when Murray's talking about having been to these crossings
he went with the IDF, he put on a jacket
that said press yes, which suggests that you are then
baked in the ethics of that of that craft, which
(49:31):
means that you are you are objective and independent. If
the IDF wants to send an IDF spokesperson to the crossing,
they can do that. He also had himself photographed in
the chair where Ya Sinwar was killed wearing his press jacket.
He did not disclose that he had raised money for
the IDF and that he had written speeches. And that's
(49:53):
what just what we know about, which is activists.
Speaker 7 (49:55):
And by the way, like raising money for the IDEF
is you're an activist on behalf of the cause and
then helping the guy. I mean that actually, even if
it's volunteer, it makes you sort of an agent of
the government.
Speaker 3 (50:05):
Right, So I would say, you don't actually get to
claim that you journalistically followed a journalistic rule, that that's
not journalism. That is a thing that you're doing. It
is collaboration with the Israeli government. Like if you are
drafting speeches for the ambassador, raising money for them, and
(50:27):
then getting, you know, taken on escorted trips to the crossings,
you don't get to then denounce somebody else who hasn't
done the same thing, Like he was trying to say
that he is a superior journalist and his opinions should
be taken more seriously because he had been to this crossing.
But now we know the full context of what brought
him to that crossing, secretly doing work for the government
(50:51):
and then going escorted by the government. Just because you
put on a flat jacket that says press doesn't make
you press. So yes, he was a physical there. Yes,
should we credit anything that he says? No, Right, we
can put up F six. So Pamela Gross is an
interesting character and she's no longer with CNN, but she
(51:14):
was a CNN booker, producer. And also, let's do our
disclosure here, married to Jimmy Finkelstein, who used to be
the owner of The Hill and the Hill owned Rising
while Emily and I were co hosts on Rising, So
(51:35):
Jimmy was we weren't. We weren't getting paychecks because we
were independent contractors, but he was signing our checks.
Speaker 7 (51:40):
He was trying to hire us too.
Speaker 3 (51:42):
Trying to hire us, and then he stole the thing
before that even happened, one way or the other. And
so Pamela gross so she was so the ambassador is
so wonderful to see you this fourth of July. Thank
you for joining us. Clearly Iron Dome is doing doing
the reck and saving lives. Please, dear friend, let's get
(52:02):
it finished. So she then enters into this long conversation
and we can put up F seven as well with
with Ron Proser about how she's going to raise money
for the Iron Dome. He writes, Dear Pamela, thank you
and Jimmy for a magical evening.
Speaker 4 (52:20):
You both are the perfect hosts.
Speaker 3 (52:23):
You and Jimmy are true assets to the State of Israel.
Speaker 4 (52:28):
Which.
Speaker 3 (52:30):
If you're a journalist, whether you're Israeli journalist or American
in Israeli journalists would not want to hear that from
an Israeli ambassador. You do not want to be told
as a journalist that you are a quote, true asset
to the State of Israel. You really don't that's not
what you want to hear. No, no, no, I'm an objective
(52:52):
journalist here, so it's okay. So maybe she's just Jimmy
Finkelstein's wife and like said, some fake job CNN. No,
not at all in the emails. Go read the full
story if you want all of Pamela's like crazy emails
back and forth with Ron Proser here. But f ten,
(53:15):
this is an email where she is reaching out to
book him, which is.
Speaker 4 (53:20):
Her job on CNN. Makes it easier actually to discuss, right.
Speaker 3 (53:25):
Yeah, I mean, hey, I'm raising money for your military.
Come on the show, Come on the show. It's just
it's too much. And it's one of these stories to
me that manages to both be utterly shocking and deeply
(53:46):
unsurprising at the exact same time. Like it really is
in the sweet spot of hitting both of those emotions,
like I'm still I'm shocked at this and yet utterly unsurprised.
Speaker 7 (53:58):
Yeah, it's shocked and not shock again simultaneously.
Speaker 3 (54:03):
Yea, I mean again, maybe in post we'll put a
little have you been clip?
Speaker 4 (54:08):
You've never been?
Speaker 7 (54:10):
This is like, this is the one of the biggest
problems in journalism right now, Like you are free. It's
most journalists cannot truly shelve their opinions. I know, like
a few who genuinely can do it. Maybe they don't
have maybe they're just like politically ambivalent. They definitely don't
care one direction or the other. It's just so few
people that can actually do that, and yet most journalists
(54:32):
still pretend that that's what they're doing. And even if
you're in the opinion side, like from and Murray, fine,
but actually acting or gross who I guess she wasn't
on the opinion side. She was just doing booking for CNN.
But you know that's just it's just so obviously over
the line, so obviously over the line. And the audacity
(54:52):
then to criticize other people's journalistic ethics tells you kind
of tells you a lot.
Speaker 3 (54:58):
Yeah, true, truly incredible. That's why I like this show.
Like we've got our opinions. I think my opinions are facts,
but I think they're correct.
Speaker 4 (55:08):
But you know what, my you know where I am,
but I'm not. I'm not writing speeches for anybody. No. Also,
where do these guys get the time?
Speaker 7 (55:14):
Seriously?
Speaker 3 (55:15):
Like my first restment, No, I don't have time to
write your speech, you writes me, don't you have a
whole office?
Speaker 7 (55:19):
Why we're from and Maury both drafting the same speech.
I don't understand that. Were they having them compete against
each other or was he just seeking everyone's advice.
Speaker 4 (55:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (55:28):
So one thing that politicians do, and they do this
a lot with donors, but they'll do it too with
journalists is pretended that they're interested in their ideas, like
what do you think, uh, you know, the effect of
the economy is going to be on the midterms, And
then and then the journalist or the donor or whoever
(55:50):
they're talking to feels like valued, like the thing that
they're saying. They're Wow, I'm speaking to this power person, right,
and so it changes the power dynamic. So you can
imagine this is just on steroids.
Speaker 4 (56:04):
Yeah, yep, where.
Speaker 3 (56:05):
Prothers like you guys are just such brilliant wordsmiths. Could
you draft some speeches for me? But that's when it
really crosses the line. And then they both should have
been like, well, no, of course I can't do that
unless I'm I'm happy to have a dinner with you
and we can talk about how awful Moss is and
how the world is all against Israel. Yeah, but we're not.
(56:25):
But I'm not gonna.
Speaker 4 (56:27):
Draft a speech for you.
Speaker 3 (56:28):
Like that's that's crossing lines that even I'm not willing
to do well.
Speaker 7 (56:32):
At the very least. I mean, so again, like you
shouldn't do a period. If you're going to do it,
you should then tell your audience and your readers that
you did it.
Speaker 3 (56:38):
Yeah, and then let people say, Okay, you know what,
this guy wrote speeches for the ambassador that he's now profiling.
But I know that he's supportive of Israel, and so
I already knew that anyway, So I'm going to read
the profile anyway. Yeah, then you've got the full knowledge
of it. Would have been even funnier if he was
(56:58):
like the main thing people say about prosers. His rhetorical
flare and his speech making ability is unparalleled, almost reminiscent
of some of George W.
Speaker 4 (57:11):
Bush's best speeches.
Speaker 7 (57:12):
Positively Fromian.
Speaker 4 (57:14):
People call him from Ian.
Speaker 7 (57:16):
How many people are saying, Oh goodness, all right, Ryan,
amazing amazing reporting there. Now we should mention before we
wrap for the day that Donald Trump has since we
started taping, actually put out a truth social post calling
for Brandon Johnson and Governor J. B. Pritsker to Democrats
(57:37):
obviously in Illinois to quote be in jail for failing
to protect ICE officers as a guy on a barstool.
So that's one thing. As the president of the United States,
that is a very different thing that he this is
the man with the powers of law enforcement, saying that
Brandon Johnson and JB. Pritzker should be in jail for
(57:58):
quote failing to protect ice.
Speaker 3 (58:00):
So also, can we poke at the logic train there
for a minute. According to Trump, Chicago police are incapable
of protecting the citizens of Chicago, which necessitates sending in
the National Guard, all these federal office federal agents. So
now Trump wants them to protect the citizens of Chicago.
(58:21):
And also all these helpless federal agents that he's throwing
into Chicago. Isn't the whole purpose of sending in this
the Feds that they're gonna protect the Chicago police, who
he said, are just you can't handle it. Also, Ice
is out here has been out here like making a
bunch of basically prank calls to nine one one.
Speaker 4 (58:42):
Have you seen this reporting?
Speaker 3 (58:44):
No, not yet that they keep calling nine to one
one saying somebody's scaling this fence. Somebody's doing this net
and and then they look at bodycam footage and the
same with the woman that they arrested and accused of
ramming them. Turn out it was the other way around.
Speaker 4 (58:58):
Like Ice keeps making stuff up up and so I.
Speaker 3 (59:01):
Think at some level the Chicago police are like fed
up with these with these clowns.
Speaker 7 (59:08):
Also, we're owning the politics of this. Donald Trump is
transforming JB. Pritzker, of all people, into a resistance hero.
The more he talks about it like this, The more
that he more that he talks about the situation like this,
he's giving JB. Pritzker. Maybe he's actually trying to do
it because he understands that JB. Pritzker is a poor
resistance hero for Dems. I don't think it's that forty chess.
I think he's just a saying things like Jbie Pritscrier
(59:29):
should be in jail. I don't I can't fathom what
the even like, what the charge that they cook up
would look like in this case, failing to protect Ice
as governor and as mayor. I don't even know what
that would potentially be. I can't think of it. Maybe
we'll ask rock. But yeah, well that's the thing.
Speaker 3 (59:49):
I'll block you if you do that. It's the warning
that everybody following me if you.
Speaker 7 (59:53):
If you ask dumb questions to groc, ask.
Speaker 3 (59:55):
Stupid questions to groc underneath my posts, you're blocked.
Speaker 7 (01:00:00):
You're blocked. You're blocked. Well, that that happened while we
were taping. Trump called for them to be imprisoned. So
I'm sure Sager and Crystal will have more on the
story tomorrow, but we wanted to make sure to bring
everyone that news as soon as we could, because boy,
is it wild. Thank you so much for tuning in.
Thank you for supporting us over at Breakingpoints dot com. Also,
(01:00:22):
if you can't get a premium sub for liking, commenting,
subscribing on YouTube, wherever you're getting your podcast, it helps
us so much. We appreciate it. Makes the second half
of the Friday show. By the way, if you're a
premium sub possible, we're having a lot of fun.
Speaker 3 (01:00:35):
We'll probably talk about Janet Mills on Friday. She's apparently
getting into the main election. If she won, if she
beat Susan Collins, she'd be a seventy nine year old
freshman senator.
Speaker 7 (01:00:44):
Good Lord, good Lord.
Speaker 4 (01:00:46):
Democrats maybe finally crack the code.
Speaker 7 (01:00:48):
Maybe we'll cover Katie Porter on Friday two.
Speaker 3 (01:00:50):
Sat too young when they were getting sworn in with
the democratic and experienced.
Speaker 7 (01:00:54):
Yes, we'll see everyone on Friday. Have a great day.
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 the 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 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):
In a moment, we're going to be joined by Argentine
reporter u Hennia Musium from Perfield, a news outlet down
at Argentina, who's broken some significant news on this American
bailout of Argentina at the expense of American farmers, and
in particular the role of hedge funder Rob sa Trone
in lobbying Treasury Secretary Scott Bess and himself a former
(00:54):
hedge funder, in enacting that bailout. But first we wanted
to check in on our Urgentinian president Javier and Mele
see how he's responding to this bailout.
Speaker 4 (01:12):
Okay, I'm right there, we go.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
It's great, all right to give a little bit of context.
If you haven't been following our reporting on this, Let's
roll D three to show that show show the kind
of different reaction that American farmers are having to this bailout.
Speaker 5 (01:25):
Well, the stop gap needs to come because they've kind
of painted the farmer in a corner. I mean, I don'
want trade, not a I need a market. I need
a place to sell this stuff. I can work hard
enough and make a product if you give me someplace
to sell it. I don't take care of myself. But
they've painted us in a corner with this China deal
and China mind no solowy beans. I mean, they've tore
(01:49):
a market in half. I mean, if you take you
the four years prior to Trump's first terror form, the
average price of a bushel of slowy beans is twelve
dollars and fifty four cents. The average price for the
four years dearing Trump's first terrafor is nine dollars and
thirty nine cents. That's one hundred and sixty three dollars
an acre swing to the minus the next four years
(02:10):
after the tariffor the average price is thirteen dollars and
fifty nine cents. That's a two hundred and eighteen dollars
up swim. Now we're back to ten dollars and twenty
one cents. I think the board is today. My local
elevators nine dollars and seventy nine cents. So I'm at
one hundred and seventy two dollars an acre loss. I mean,
you can't the farmer can't continue to produce a crop
(02:31):
below the cost of production. And that's where we're at,
and we don't have anywhere to sell it. We're in
a taraford with China, We're in a terraffor with everybody else.
I mean, where do they want me to market this stuff?
Speaker 4 (02:41):
All right?
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Joining us now is Johanne Muzio, reporter from Argentina who's
been doing a lot of work in this case. And
so for people not following along, So the Trump administration
started at second trade war with China. China responded by
telling the United States, but we're not buying any of
your soybeans. Most of the soybeans that the United States
grows go to China. That's a huge problem for American farmers.
(03:05):
The two main competitors to the United States are when
it comes to soybeans are Brazil and Argentina. Brazil selling
enormous amounts of soybeans over to China. Argentina is struggling
economically big time. All of a sudden, they get a
lifeline from Treasury Secretary Scott Besson in the form of
twenty billion dollar bail out. Immediately, the Argentina and government
(03:27):
cuts its export taxes and then they sell enormous amounts
of soybeans to China at a much discounted price, infuriating
American farmers. But it turns out, according to reporting down
in Argentina, that was that American hedge funds played a
significant role in this. So you, Henny, can you tell
us a little bit about Rob Satrone and the role
(03:49):
more generally of hedge funds in helping to bring about
this kind of catastrophic situation for everybody.
Speaker 6 (03:57):
Well, hello to everyone. Yes, that that policy that Minister
Ris Kaputo taken on. I think it was like a
desperate policy because Argentina was passing through like a week
with a lot of financial expectations because we have elections
(04:18):
going on October twenty six, and in Argentina, elections are
always like they move along a lot of things, and
in economy most of so I think it was a
desperate policy from Minister Kauto because he needed liquidity in
(04:38):
the market. Because the pressure for the dollar, our exchange rate,
it's very very strong. So in Argentina, when the dollar
comes up, then our prices comes up, and the inflation,
it's like the inflation, it's a thing here. So yes,
(05:00):
Rosie Tron I know he is, he known with Kabuto.
He he knows also Scott Besant he buys bones from
Argandina before all this and all of this stuff that
is going on, it seems like is it I don't know.
(05:22):
It may be a financial advantage from some hedgephones. So
here in Argentina we are expecting the bailouts. We are
expecting news because our minister with Kabuto is now there
in Washington, he's been there for six days. That it's
a lot for a country. It isn't in a financial crisis,
(05:45):
our crisis. We have an economic crisis, like very soon
economic crisis. But now we are passing through like financial
crisis because we have a debt a little sorry, a
big debt in January we hold out, so it's like
(06:05):
four billion dollars and Argentine extraine for reserves are very
very low, even in negative rates. I would say if
there's not for ims also dollars. So I think it
was a desperate movement from Aventina and then and the
(06:29):
the people that are around Kaputo and also Scott Beson
took advantage of it.
Speaker 7 (06:37):
So let's watch a little bit of rob strone. This
is going to be D two and we'll get your reaction.
Speaker 8 (06:43):
Well, I think there's special times every five or ten
years where there's a really spectacular trade and investment that
we then will concentrate in a meaningful way. Twenty thirteen
a dollar a yen, we made over a billion dollars
long dollar yen. And in fact, you know, we discussed
the quite a bit with George and I kind of
vince George and Scott Besson at the time to go
big in that. And you know, Scott says I'm responsible
(07:04):
for seventy five percent of his bones at sorrows kind
of jokingly.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
Over that time.
Speaker 7 (07:08):
It was on the Goldman Sachs podcast, Actually did you
want to happen?
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Yeah, just just in case people aren't following along there
and you can pick up on this. So Setrona is
saying that Scott Besson for the George Soros Fund, he
and he and Bessent collectively went in together and pulled
off a trade on the end, the same type of
currency play that he's doing with Argentina where he made
(07:33):
a billion dollars like in a day, which we can
get into the way that that kind of currency trading,
you know, extracts wealth off the backs of irregular people.
So he and his friend Bessent, they are on record
as having done this kind of currency play before, and
so now he is back in Argentina making the same
(07:55):
currency play, but now his friend is the Treasury secretary
and bails him out of a bad trade. Like what
have you found? What have you discovered about this? And
how are people in Argentina reacting to this? Because in
some ways this bailout probably while it helps to Trono,
(08:16):
also helps Argentina to stave off a bit of a
financial crisis. So maybe so this kind of this level
of corruption is like they're like, okay, well fine, help
us out. Here, So, yeah, what's been the response and
when what have you found?
Speaker 6 (08:28):
Well, I think people didn't respond to this rop Citron
currency trade because I think they are like more occupy
in their own economic crisis here. The economic crisis is
is a thing I think. I mean, salary is a.
Speaker 9 (08:48):
Very low jobs.
Speaker 6 (08:50):
We have like a high level of unemplopment. So I
don't think like the regular people did have like an
impact of this. Yes, the markets, the markets are talking
about this, but this is not new for Argandina. We
have a lot of corruption crisis. Maybe maybe you heard
(09:13):
about effect the the candidate of Pansa, which is the
party of the government that had that that had to
that had links with with Narco traffic, So maybe that
that's the thing that is going on here and what's
(09:37):
on news, but not rock Citron. And it's a peculiar
because we are talking about a parency crisis, a financial crisis,
an economic crisis, and a friend of the Secretary of
the Tertiary Secretary of the United States, the one that
it's going to give the bailouts to to Argndina, had
(09:59):
a friend that already run a currently situate twice with
Japan and may Okay know so, but has no impact
in my grant people I was I was saying markets
are going to or maybe already thinking about it, but not.
Speaker 9 (10:24):
A big movement.
Speaker 7 (10:26):
Well, in your last question for me is could you
tell us more about the political situation facing Melee right now?
You mentioned the desperation in Argentina. Why is there that
sense of desperation, What sort of political situation does mean
I find himself in right now? And why would it
be important for the United States continue supporting who they
(10:46):
see as an ally and sort of an ally that
finds himself maybe in some political trouble in the case
of Melee.
Speaker 6 (10:55):
Okay, yes, Well, in Argentina eccentuates. It's very important. As
I said, our extense rate determines inflation, and in April
we have IMF twenty billion also, and that twenty billion
was used to maintain our extensi rate low because low
(11:20):
exchange in Argentina it means we have no inflation or
it's like a fact, a very important fact for inflation.
So there was interventions in markets I mean a central bank,
I mean Argentine treasury, and then we are in They
(11:43):
didn't do monetary policy to keep our vessels, our currency up.
So now we are here in this situation that the
pressure in the markets are extremely high because we are
we are going to an election in October twenty six
(12:06):
and the day passed, and when when you get closely
to the to the elections, the pressure is also high.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
So on that point, when when Scott bessen't bailed out
Argentina or announced that he was going to do it,
he specifically said he wanted to do it in order
to help me lay in the upcoming elections, which he
said would then bring in more foreign capital into Argentina.
How does how do Argentinians feel about the US just
(12:39):
saying out loud that we're trying to, you know, buy
me lay the upcoming election.
Speaker 6 (12:45):
Yes, the thing that is going on right now is
that we don't have news about how it's going to
to help United States to Argentina. We know that it's
a sub negotiation of twenty billion, but that's it. I mean,
there's no details, there's no period of time that we
(13:09):
are going to receive the money. It's not a money,
it's it's a credit line.
Speaker 9 (13:15):
It's a swap between central banks.
Speaker 6 (13:19):
But now the thing is that we are expecting news
like details and the details are not coming, so that
the nerviews, the market time nervous, and they passed, and
Minister Kabuto is still it's still in Washington.
Speaker 9 (13:40):
So we are expecting the news.
Speaker 6 (13:44):
And if there's no news in between the next days,
there will be bad news.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
Yes. Interesting.
Speaker 7 (13:53):
Well, HENNYA, thank you so much for coming on and
breaking this down. People can check out your reporting over
Perphil But thank you.
Speaker 6 (14:00):
Thank you, thank you.
Speaker 7 (14:01):
It was a pleasure.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
So a new report in the Israeli outlet how Retz,
which is based on research done by Citizen Lab we
can put up E two here finds an incredible astro
turfed network of basically bots operating on social media with
what appeared to be two primary goals. The first is
(14:25):
convincing the world that the Iranian people desperately crave the
return of the Shah, and in particular in the form
of Rezapalavi, who appears to have actually basically no constituency
anywhere either outside of Iran or in it, but the
Israeli bought accounts, genuinely producing some sense among policymakers that
(14:47):
he might actually be a thing. And then, separately and relatedly,
they played an active role during the Twelve Day War
in creating basically fake news inside of Iran that was
then picked up by Western outlets as actually having occurred,
being the real behavior of actual Iranians inside during the war.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
So to talk about that is Nagar.
Speaker 3 (15:10):
Mortazabi, who is a who was a policy analyst with
the what's it called Center for International Policy?
Speaker 4 (15:17):
Is that right? Yes, the old old school kind of.
Speaker 3 (15:22):
Institutions, skeptical of American intervention abroad. Thank you so much
for joining us, really appreciate it. So so walk us through,
walk us through some of this report and we have.
Oh and before we get to that, it's I think
it's important to set the context here that we might
be looking at war like any day now. Nenyah who
(15:44):
sat down with Ben Shapiro just this week and effectively,
you know, if anybody was concerned, if anybody thought that, meyb,
we're gonna get a break from you know, Israeli statement
rattling towards Iran, they were, they were disappointed.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
So let's roll a little bit of Ben Shapiro and.
Speaker 10 (16:00):
People probably don't believe it right that no, we're far away, right, No,
you're not. Iran is developing now ballistic missiles that are
intercontinental ballistic missiles for eight thousand kilometer range, what does
that mean? They add another three thousand kilometers and they've
got under their gun, under their atomic guns in New
(16:22):
York City, in Target, Washington, Boston, Miami, Mari Lago. Okay,
so that is a very great danger. You don't want
to be under the nuclear gun of these people who
are not necessarily rational and you chant death to America.
Speaker 4 (16:39):
All right, So nigger, what can you tell us about this?
Speaker 3 (16:42):
What our rets and citizen lab uncovered here when it
comes to this AstroTurf Operation sull Ran.
Speaker 11 (16:49):
Just to give some background, what we saw is Benjamin
Aataniaho basically trying to manufacture con said for a US
war on Iran, which is something he's been trying to
do for over tie years. Very publicly, he's talked about
it in US Congress. Behind the scenes, he's been trying
to push a sort of boots.
Speaker 12 (17:07):
On the ground regime change type war that the US
did in Iraq, also in Iran. The problem is the
American public is not supportive of another regime change, big war, endless.
Speaker 9 (17:18):
War in the Middle East.
Speaker 11 (17:20):
And also one big question people Americans and others ask
is what if the regime falls, what's next?
Speaker 9 (17:27):
What's the day after?
Speaker 12 (17:28):
I think Israeli to have found in razapah Levi sort
of the product or that answer for the day after
this is the person for the day after this is
the seemingly democratic western dressing. You know, a well suited
and well spoken person with good English that you want
to be ruling I wrong. The problem is the Iranians
(17:48):
don't really think that, and so that brings us to
sort of these disinformation AstroTurf ai generated fake campaigns. This
is actually something that's been going on for years since
the first and many of us around watchers have been
observing these massive, massive operations online. The problem is it's
very hard to get evidence to actually connect them to
(18:09):
the Israeli government because they cover up the tracks really well.
So this is one of the few, and it's not
the first one, but this is one of the few
investigative reports that actually shows the evidence connects. I believe
Haretz has insiders who have leadd some of this information
to them their investigative word and Citizen Lab has really
(18:30):
dug deep and looked at some of these accounts that
we're posting content.
Speaker 11 (18:34):
And I think one thing that maybe tipped off Citizen Lab.
Speaker 9 (18:37):
And really made this disturbing is that these accounts were
posting content that was prepared seemingly with a knowledge that.
Speaker 11 (18:46):
The Israelis are going what the Israeli army is going
to do in Iran, specifically the bombing of the Eving
prison in Tehran, so videos that had been produced fake
videos of the bombing of the prison were put at
very quickly after the actual prison was bombed, and the
citizen lap of conclusion is that this couldn't have been
(19:08):
done by an entity who didn't have knowledge, So this
is probably an entity, a contractor whoever is paid by
the government, who also had very intimate knowledge and relationship
with the IDEF and their operations, which makes us so
much more disturbing because so many prisoners and also civilians
died in that prisoner bombing of the prison.
Speaker 7 (19:27):
And when Ryan first drew my attention to the story,
my reaction was I always assumed this was an American
neo coon op. I mean, it's very clear that there
are interests who have backed Paula V for a long time,
but this day after point that you're making is really important.
So walk is a bit through the evidence that ties this.
I mean, I'm sure there are American neocons who support
(19:49):
this campaign, but walkers through the evidence in the way
that it goes directly to the Israeli government, as was
documented in the report.
Speaker 11 (19:58):
Absolutely so, just to actually your point, yes, there has
also been a neo con sort of push, including online
campaigns that.
Speaker 9 (20:06):
Have been promoting kala Vi four years especially.
Speaker 11 (20:09):
We saw the optic with the first during the first
Trump term was sort of the more pro war neo
con camp was trying to push for attacks for Warren
I Ran and at the same time promoting this person
as a viable sort of alternative to the regime. Well,
the evidence the heart supporting is mostly looking at how
(20:31):
these fake accounts and boughts controls are promoting rezap lev
and sort of showing a fake support a popular support
for him through online and they also connected to something
important he says in one of his trips to Israel.
This is also important to know. Rezapalavi has been making official,
seemingly state visits to Israel since two thousand, since about
(20:55):
two years ago, and in one of those trips people
ask him if he's really a viable, alternative or popular
in Iran, and he says, don't just believe what I said,
go and check social media. So these very popular accounts.
Speaker 9 (21:06):
That happened, yes, that have it.
Speaker 11 (21:09):
It's a it's a real connection. And so it's his account.
It's also his wife's account. We've seen in the past
few years that have really really been promoted, propped up
with advertisement, with sort of campaigns, and in one instance,
I believe his wife posted a video during the war,
a video of a graffiti on a wall in Tehran
(21:29):
that said in English that Israel continue bombing. Were with you,
as in the voice of the Iranian people with a
graffiti in English on a wall in Tehran, And.
Speaker 9 (21:41):
So that's the hardest reporting.
Speaker 11 (21:43):
Also seems to have insider sources, unnamed sources who have
verified this. I think the disturbance is also the fact
that they see Israeli tax money being spent not just
propping up this person sort of a foreign influence, foreign
influenced operation, but also the minister, the former intelligence minister
and now Science Minister Gila Gamlil, who has been promoting
(22:07):
Rezaval and has been really seems to be the point
person inside the Israeli government uh to be pushing him,
and these accounts not only promotedtality but then turn around
and also promoted her online, which seems to have disturbed
some people inside the government, basically saying, Okay, that's a
red line. You can use taxpayer money to sort of
manufacture fake support for yourself online. And the Citizen Law
(22:30):
Report has specifically looked at that incident of the bombing
of Ebbing Prison, where basically the online disinformation is very
much tied to not just offline violence, but an actual
war and bombing by an army, and they seem to
be two arms of the same entity or very much connected.
Speaker 3 (22:47):
And let's let's run through some of that, because it's
really fascinating. We can put up E four I think
this is a vo. This is this is what people
eventually figured out was an a I created. So this
is a This was posted within moments of the attack
on Evan prison, and the translation here as kids, did
(23:09):
you hear the sound of the explosion from Evan Prison?
Speaker 4 (23:12):
And a whole bunch of accounts.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
That are in this now known bot network we're posting
the same things, well did you hear that sound over
from the prison?
Speaker 4 (23:22):
Uh?
Speaker 3 (23:22):
And and BBC even ran a piece or somebody ran
a piece and it started circulating based on this video
of this explosion until people realized it was it was
a I. I think it was a BBC persian maybe that
figured out it was a I. If you can put
up E five, this is you know, very very similar.
Another one, Oh wow, what allowed explosion sound? I just
(23:45):
heard from the direction of the prison? You know, did
you did you hear it too?
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Kids? Did you hear the sound of the explosion from
Evan prison?
Speaker 11 (23:53):
In other attention to the hashtakes also the second Evan
must be Free. This is sort of a push to
get actual people physically rushing to Evan present a prison
and getting it free.
Speaker 9 (24:07):
And it was combined with sort.
Speaker 11 (24:09):
Of a fake messages that Evan is now free, the
doors are open and around it is safe for people
to go and rush. Of course nobody did, but this
was the aim of the campaign.
Speaker 4 (24:20):
Yes, and there is and maybe we can add these
in post.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
But there's some others that say they're very actively trying
to get people to go to the prison. They say,
I think the attack will end now, there is no
danger for the prisoner's families, kids, get ready, They just said,
there's no danger anymore. We can go see our loved ones. Kids,
hurry up, our loved ones have been free. These are
all different accounts. We can go see them and free them.
So they're telling the public, Okay, the bombing is over. Now,
(24:48):
let's all rush to this prison to try to break
people out. And Citizen Lab to its credit, and also
everybody watching this just came to the same conclusion. I'm like,
wait a minute, how do these support normal Iranians in
their apartments know that the bombing.
Speaker 4 (25:04):
Is over at the prison? Who are they?
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Who are they in touch with that told them that
the bombing is now over. So I think the running
people had enough you know, common sense to not be
you know, tricked by these accounts, which don't seem like
they got a whole lot of traction kind of internally,
and so they did not rush to the prison and
try to you know, free everybody. But the danger here
(25:29):
is it's it's probably and I'm curious for your take
on this. My says it's less about they didn't really
think they were going to do that.
Speaker 4 (25:36):
I think it's worth a shot trying.
Speaker 3 (25:37):
If this sparks some sort of protest inside Iron but
what they're really trying to do is trick Western journalists
and policy analysts into believing that that's the case, and
then produce that artificial narrative that then they hope somehow
can then devolve into reality on the on the ground.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
What's what's your sense of what the mission here was?
Speaker 9 (26:01):
Absolutely?
Speaker 11 (26:01):
Let me give you another example, Ryan, They bombed the
State TV.
Speaker 7 (26:06):
As also.
Speaker 4 (26:08):
Yes, Yes, and also hacked.
Speaker 11 (26:11):
The State TV and put out similar messages on State
TV basically saying, don't you remember how bad your regime is,
how repressive, don't you remember the protest?
Speaker 9 (26:20):
Time to rise up.
Speaker 11 (26:21):
I think one parallel goal which wasn't achieved by the
Israeli campaigns of bombing was that people will rise up
as they have before and they will overthrow the regime.
Speaker 9 (26:32):
And I think that's something.
Speaker 11 (26:33):
They probably private they have been selling and that this
would be the last sort of the regime is on
its last leg and they just need the final kick
to fall. And that also helped, you know, bringing the US,
this bigger power into a war. If you show them
that you own their.
Speaker 12 (26:50):
Runian skyes, you own Iran all land, you can bomb
them all you want, and the people are about to
rise up and take over this regime. That's also been
the rhetoric of sort of the radical opposition, that we.
Speaker 11 (27:00):
Will overthrow this regime. We just need a little bit
of help from the outsiders. That's also been the writer
of Rezapala. We just need a little bit of support.
South Africa wouldn't win without foreign support, Mandela wouldn't win
without international support, and.
Speaker 9 (27:12):
So there needs to be a little bit of international support.
Speaker 11 (27:15):
But Iranians will rise themselves.
Speaker 9 (27:17):
And we saw that the exact opposite. The Israeli bombings
first of all, created a.
Speaker 11 (27:21):
Rally around the flag in Iran, and also not one
person came to protests. And this is a government and
everything that's not very popular. We see protests after protests,
but when.
Speaker 9 (27:31):
Your homes, when your schools, when your roads are being
bombed by a foreign entity, that's really not the time
to go on a streat and protests. And that's exactly
what we saw by Iranians.
Speaker 11 (27:42):
And one other thing that bombing also showed people is
whoever wasn't clear eyed about whether Israel can have very
targeted surgical attacks only on regime officials, I think now
understand that there is no such thing and that you're
going to have over a thousand casualties, most of them civilians.
Even the military casualties, a lot of them were young
(28:03):
conscripts who were just serving a mandatory military service.
Speaker 7 (28:08):
It's like Guatemala in the nineteen fifties, broadcasting stuff over
the speakers, the revolutions happening.
Speaker 4 (28:14):
The revolutions happening.
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Yeah, just hoping to convince people that it's true.
Speaker 4 (28:17):
Ye, fall a little flat though.
Speaker 7 (28:20):
Yeah, Well, this is such helpful information. Thank you for
joining us, Thank you for having me.
Speaker 4 (28:27):
See you next time.
Speaker 7 (28:31):
The ugly fight over what Charlie Kirk said or did
not say in the days, weeks, and months leading up
to his assassination is raging on. Candice Owens released more
information from what she says are three sources who confirmed
something important to her. Let's go ahead and roll the clip.
Speaker 13 (28:50):
Three people told me off record. Two people who have
this in a written communication from Charlie. One who is
a turning point USA donor, and I would say very
much one of the white nights in this. The very
day before Charlie Kirk died, he expressed that he thought
(29:12):
he was going to be killed. He told these people,
I think they're going to kill me. Okay, he did
not express that to me. So I am telling you
this based off the testimony of free people. And I
am saying this because I hope that these people who
I think are good will be inspired to come forward
with that. And again, those conversations I had were off record.
I honor that if I say it's off record, it's
(29:33):
days off record. But I'm hoping that watching what I
am doing and feeling the energy that is rising across
the world for people who want to know what the
heck happened on nine to ten, that you know, they
will be brave and they will say, yeah, Charlie did
the day before he died think that he was going
to be killed, and maybe tell us who is they? Well,
(29:54):
for one cent for all, who is they? Who is
the day that he thought were going to kill him?
Speaker 7 (29:58):
Well on the question of who that they is? And
Ryan and I will break down a little bit what
off the record should mean as well. But the they
Info Wars reporter Harrison Smith posted, I'm not going to
name names, but I was told by someone close to
Charlie Kirk that Charlie thinks Israel will kill him if
he turns against them. That was over the summer.
Speaker 4 (30:16):
I think it was actually even better before he was killed.
Speaker 7 (30:18):
Yeah, it was. It was before Charlie Kirk was killed,
which probably wouldn't normally bring that up because again, even
with Candace in this case, there's no clear sourcing. It's
not as though, you know, even in like new independent media,
we do more I would say, vetting of claims than that.
But when you start to see more and more people
saying stuff like this, it starts to sound like it
(30:40):
actually really was the scuttle but in the circles around
Charlie Kirk Ryan.
Speaker 3 (30:46):
Which helps explain kind of some of the reaction in
real time. Now, just let I just want to be
totally clear here. Let's say that it's true that Charlie
Kirk did think that. That does not lead logically then
to the fact to the claim that they did it right,
right like that those are kind of disconnected things, but
it's important for understanding his legacy and the moment that
(31:09):
we're in.
Speaker 7 (31:09):
What was happening behind the scenes. Yeah, right, And I
just this is E eight. So this is one of
Charlie's close friends, Andrew Corvett, who's been continuing to hold
out the fort over at the Charlie Kirk Show and
talking a lot about trying to debunk some rumors and
confirm other claims. He went through these text messages that
(31:30):
Candace Owens released that showed Charlie Kirk basically doing, I've
had it up to here with these conservative Zionists argument.
He didn't say it that way, but you can see
pretty clearly from the text that Candas released, which people
were immediately saying, there's no way these are real. There's
no way these are real, showing Kirk's exasperation, utter exasperation
(31:52):
with being told what he can and cannot say about Israel.
These are within forty eight hours of him being assassinated.
Let's roll e eight.
Speaker 14 (32:01):
To address some of the things that have been going
around on public, namely about a text a group text
chain that has been made known and released by Candace OANs.
And I just want to dress it head on because
you know that was a text grab, a screen grab
that I had shared with people, so it is authentic.
Speaker 13 (32:23):
Take a look, so Charlie writes in this scroup chat,
just lost another huge Jewish donor two million a year
because we won't cancel Tucker I'm thinking of inviting Candace.
Somebody writes, oh, Charlie writes, Jewish donors play into all
of the stereotypes. I cannot and will not be bullied
(32:45):
like this, leaving me no choice but to leave the
pro Israel cause. And somebody writes, donor rights, please do
not invite Candace. That might feel good short term, but
it's not good long term in my opinion. Like all groups,
you're going to get a wide variety of opinions. That
nasty free will thing that God bestowed on us makes
life frustrating at times. After the dust subtles a bit, maybe,
(33:09):
So again, this is forty eight hours before Charlie was sassaity.
He was very clear and he's very explicit.
Speaker 7 (33:14):
So the Canvas Park came first, and then Colvett confirmed,
as you saw on that clip, those were indeed real
text messages. He said that's a screenshot actually that he
had shared.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
And so these twenty four hours killed.
Speaker 7 (33:26):
Within forty eight Yeah, So clearly these things are pinging
around because there were a lot of conversations in group chats,
and it's so ugly to even have to talk about
this because Charlie Kirk is not here. To explain. I mean,
in group chats there's sarcasm. It's all virtual. It's sarcasm,
you say different things. It's easy to imagine how things
(33:46):
can get taken out of context. I would say that's
a pretty clear statement from Charlie Kirk, but he's obviously
not here to explain. He did have that long interview
with Megan Kelly where he put a lot of this
in his own words. You don't even need to be
taking things from group chats necessarily to know that he
was deeply, deeply exasperated and that it seems that donor
(34:06):
references to Robert Shulman, who the reporting from Ex Bluementhal
has been confirmed about him publicly revoking that money from
Turning Point USA, falling out with Charlie, who considered him
they considered one to try one another, to be very close,
almost a mentor mentee relationship. So this was getting this
was clearly getting.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
Very nasty, and it shows the dynamic that we've seen
over and over where he says he says, quote, just
lost another huge Jewish donor two million dollars year. That's
Shilman two million dollars a year because we won't cancel Tucker,
I'm thinking of inviting Candace. That's the dynamic that we
see so often. Megan Kelly is betraying a little bittle
bit lately, where it's like if you and She'll say
(34:47):
this out lout, if you try to tell me what
I can and can't do, I'm going to go the
opposite direction. Right, you don't want me to have Tucker?
Oh yeah, how about Candace too? Yeah, just just to
like draw boundaries, be like, no, this is this is
my conference, this is my organization. I'm going to make
the decisions. And also I'm going to make the decisions.
(35:08):
And this is what he was saying to net Yahoo
and others. I'm going to make the decisions that I
actually think are better for Israel, Like he thought it
was better for Israel. Yeah, to have this aired out
in public, to sharpen your counterpoints against the narratives that exist,
rather than try to suppress them and pretend they don't exist.
Speaker 7 (35:29):
And that is what he said he tried to explain
to Nata Yahoo in the letter. He said, this is
the suppression is like absolutely, the appearance of speech depression,
the existence of speech depression.
Speaker 3 (35:39):
Is bad for you, right, right, You're not going to
win this way, right, it was his argument, and so yeah,
it has been fascinating to see this be the debate
rather than what I thought right afterwards when they found
out that the alleged shooters partner it's a trans person, like, oh, well,
we're going to get a month or six weeks, months
(36:02):
months of like you know, transhate, and instead this has
been more of the conversation.
Speaker 7 (36:10):
It's so ugly. I mean, it's just it's the amount
of I mean, if you think about the amount of
digital evidence of your thought process that you leave now
in twenty twenty five, if you're somebody who works in
politics and you're working this stuff out in you know,
he was clearly trying to keep everybody happy. I think
(36:31):
that's the big takeaway is that he was trying to
tell supports of Israel he was still on their side
and give them tough love. But then he was also
expressing privately how incredibly exasperated he was by all of this.
He did it publicly too, again on the Megan Kelly interviews.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
So just right, and you can imagine a guy who
made his entire career starting from when he's like eighteen
about debate and all of these. He has one hundred
and fifty million dollar organization that people are funding based
on his career as somebody who wants to air different sides.
Speaker 4 (37:07):
It'd be one thing if he ran.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
A pack and he invited Tucker Carlson to the conference,
then I think, if you're an APAC downer, you're like, no,
absolutely not, Like he does not tow our line, and
that's fine.
Speaker 4 (37:24):
You're an advocacy organization for a pack, like no, Tucker Carlson.
Totally fair, but.
Speaker 3 (37:32):
Turning, it's this, it's it's built on the idea of debate,
and so the idea that you're that you can't have
this debate, which is tearing the conservative movement apart, is
just anathma to his very being. And then, as he
explained on Megan Kelly, to then layer on top of
that a personal insult that you actually are anti Semitic.
Speaker 4 (37:57):
Was clearly driving him nuts.
Speaker 7 (38:00):
All the time he has spent advocating for Israel. It's
just the fact that people are still right now treating
his feelings like they were in some way illegitimate or
flirting with anti Semitism is it's so so disgusting, and
it's just ugly again that his or digital footprint is
(38:22):
being torn apart like this. It was. I mean, he
put this stuff pretty clearly in public at the time too.
But Sad said said, we.
Speaker 3 (38:32):
Have a new report over at drop Side News that
finds that David from, Douglas Murray, Seth Mandel, and pamla
Gross who is a CNN producer, all in various ways
we're working directly with the Israeli Ambassador to the United
Nations while also engaging journalistically with that same ambassador from
in particular while serving as an editor at the Atlantic
(38:57):
and a writer at Atlantic, where he still is. Send
an email two days apart to Ron Proser, who's the
Israeli ambassador one, asking him and we can put this
element up on the screen here, can I interview you
for short profile in The Atlantic about what it's like
to be Israeli Ambassador at UN That is a perfectly
(39:18):
normal email for a journalist to send to a subject
or a source.
Speaker 4 (39:24):
I'd like to write a profile.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
For you for The Atlantic, the journalistic news outlet, where
I write, would you be willing to participate in this interview?
Speaker 4 (39:32):
Wonderful stuff.
Speaker 3 (39:35):
Less usual is a separate email that he sent we
can put this one up on the screen.
Speaker 4 (39:42):
This is I can't even believe it.
Speaker 3 (39:45):
This is from saying that say that he and Seth
Mandel a lot going on here. You might want to
pause and read this you want, but that he and
Seth Mandel, who writes for Commentary, have been working on
the draft for a speech for the Israeli ambassador. This,
he says, this version was drafted by Seth Mandel of Commentary,
with whom I've been working. The top half is identical
(40:06):
to what you read previously. The bottom half is much
less pointed about US policy. Is this more in line
with your thinking? That's July thirty, first, twenty fourteen. This
is right after the twenty fourteen Gaza War. And so
then he includes a couple different versions.
Speaker 4 (40:22):
Of the speech.
Speaker 3 (40:24):
Later, Proser responds, and we can put this next element
up there.
Speaker 4 (40:28):
Thank you, David.
Speaker 3 (40:30):
I will look at it and get back to you.
So this was the target audience. Here's un Security Council.
You can look and see whether or not you think
from speech writing along with Mandel's up to snuff from
as you may or may not know, it was a
speech writer for George W. Bush before becoming the kind
(40:51):
of anti Trump resistance guy. He famously or infamously depending
on your perspective. Well, there's not many who take the
former anymore. Came up with the phrase access of evil.
Speaker 4 (41:01):
That's what he was known for.
Speaker 3 (41:02):
Access of evil, which somehow included Iran, Iraq, and North Korea,
who had none of which had anything to do with
each other.
Speaker 7 (41:11):
To our last segment, to the point of manufacturing consent
for the Iraq war.
Speaker 3 (41:15):
Right, and then the Iraq War brought in a Shia majority,
that is that linked up the country with Iran. But whatever,
So that's him.
Speaker 4 (41:25):
We've got.
Speaker 3 (41:26):
Also got mister Doug Murray, Douglas Murray, he writes to
Ron Proser as well, roughly like actually the same day
they're competing to write this speech.
Speaker 4 (41:39):
Very good to speak earlier.
Speaker 3 (41:40):
I am passing in here my first draft ideas. It's
probably slightly long, and it's possible I have put in
some more diplomatic things than needed, but I think I
have got in all the points discussed to be worked on.
Speaker 4 (41:52):
Doubtless. Can we do this in a British accident?
Speaker 3 (41:54):
We should, right, But let me know what your thoughts
are and I will give all the time I can
and to helping to get it right.
Speaker 4 (42:01):
All very best wishes as ever.
Speaker 3 (42:04):
Douglas ron Proser's speech draft.
Speaker 7 (42:08):
I don't think I've ever heard you do a British accent.
Speaker 4 (42:09):
I don't. I don't think I could actually do. I'm
you could do a very good one.
Speaker 3 (42:15):
So Murray, it gets worse, like you're like, Okay, this
is pretty bad journalists who are at the one hand
covering Israel Palestine.
Speaker 4 (42:25):
It's a giant war that just happened.
Speaker 3 (42:27):
At the same time, they're secretly writing drafts of speeches
for the Israelian past.
Speaker 4 (42:30):
But that's pretty bad.
Speaker 7 (42:31):
And were they taking money for it? Do we know?
Speaker 3 (42:33):
I highly doubt it volunteer, I would. I would suspect
that this is volunteer work. We could we could find out,
But like from doesn't need the money.
Speaker 4 (42:42):
I don't know about Murray.
Speaker 3 (42:44):
This feels more like work of conscience. Yes, uh so,
this is from the drop Side article. At the time,
Murray was also providing other services in support of Israel
and its military efforts. In November of that year, he
wrote to Proser to inform him that he had hosted
an event that raised over one million pounds for an
organization called the Association for the well Being of Israeli Soldiers.
(43:08):
That organization have been created to provide funds quote directly
to IDF soldiers and IDF units created in nineteen forty
two before the creation by David Ben Gurion. In twenty fifteen,
AWIS merge with another organization now called the Association for
Israel's Soldiers.
Speaker 4 (43:26):
And so Douglas Murray wrote to him.
Speaker 3 (43:29):
About how happy he was about how well the fundraiser
had gone, how much money that they had been able
to raise for the Israeli military. Now Murray has been
has never made a secret of his support for Israel,
but I don't think he's ever mentioned that he that
is up to and including writing speeches and raising money
(43:50):
for the military. We can get into Pamla Gross in
a moment and Seth Mandel, but what was your what
was your reaction.
Speaker 4 (43:59):
As you as you were reading through some of this stuff,
And do we have the have you been we have
that sid? Have you been to the crossing points now
when we lost that at all? I've never been. You've
never been. Well, am I not allowed to talk about
it now?
Speaker 7 (44:19):
You've never been. You know, these are people who are
critical of a lot of media ethics when it comes
to coverage of Israel. And that's what I think is
particularly frustrating to me. It's this is a fairly easy
thing to disclose, and actually if you were oh would be.
(44:43):
But if you're honest about it in the profile, well
in the profile, there's another question. But people know that
you're he.
Speaker 4 (44:49):
Wrote that profile.
Speaker 3 (44:50):
That wasn't just an idea like he wrote and published
a glowing profile.
Speaker 7 (44:54):
I have it up on my browser right now. I've
checked way back machine and the archive. There's absolutely no
disclosure in it, not even now. So to do that
if you're David Frum and not disclosed that you helped
with the speech is completely bananas. And for both of them,
they are openly massive supporters of Israel. That's like to
(45:17):
go further as somebody who's in the media and actually
work on a draft of a government speech and not
disclose it and then ever lecture anybody else about journalistic
ethics and coverage of Israel is I just think that
is tough to That's is that none of this is surprising.
It's just a tough pill to swallow. And I would
(45:37):
imagine The Atlantic, though it's edited by former IDF soldier
right now, Jeffrey Goldberg.
Speaker 4 (45:46):
Prison guard prison so right?
Speaker 3 (45:50):
Who we called Goldberg left of voicemail like the text
message today, did not get back.
Speaker 7 (45:55):
From nobody gave you a comment on us.
Speaker 3 (45:57):
From referred questions to Atlantic's PR department, which has not
gotten back to us. Adam Johnson pointed out on Twitter
that the same day, no, or maybe it's a week later.
Speaker 4 (46:11):
Oh, no, it's the same day.
Speaker 3 (46:13):
A week before this, From had accused The New York
Times of putting a fake photo of bloodied Palestinians on
their news coverage of the Gods of War. A week later,
the same day that he was writing the Israeli ambassador
a draft of sending him the draft of the speech,
(46:33):
he apologized. These images do appear authentic, he said, and
I should not have cast doubt on them. I apologize
especially to surrogate Panamerav of the New York Times, whose
work I impugned. So he apologized to the photographer, not
to these bloodied subjects of the photograph, who's suffering. He
(46:53):
called it a doubt still from this is the New
York Times. Still From defending his initial skepticism, arguing that
quote there was a long history in the Middle East
of the use of faked or misattributed photographs as tools
of propaganda, using that old line of isn't it interesting
that I got fooled by this? Do you want to
(47:13):
do the Pamela gross ones too, or do you want
anything else you want to add to that before we
go to Dell and Mandel is a hard course poor
I was like, yeah, again, finding Mandel in the browser's
emails was not very surprising.
Speaker 7 (47:24):
I don't think and he of this particularly like shocking,
but it is, I guess surprising, just from the perspective
that again, like as an opinion journalist, their opinion journalists,
they don't pretend to be like sor Sheila, the reporters
who are just although sometimes I think the rhetoric goes
in that direction. Because Murray famously was lecturing Dave Smith
for not going to Israel, which was a question of ethics.
(47:46):
He was saying, as somebody who talks about this kind
of implying that Smith was acting in the capacity of
a journalist or a media person, then you should you
should go to the place that you're talking about. So
as opinion journalist, I feel like it's really and I
don't know if you've dealt with this before, but it's
like a really it's easy to be like, well, I'm
open about what I think about this, so oh of
course I can take this money and do this thing.
(48:09):
But i'd like I learned from Tim Carney when I
was young. He has like a full disclosure on medium
every year of places that he takes money from. I
do the same thing. If it's like a conservative group,
then you give a speech for helping the government. That's
one thing, and most people don't even just close that,
even though I think they should. But that's one thing,
helping the fucking government of another coman.
Speaker 3 (48:29):
Which government's well you're covering Holy shit, Yeah, you can't
do that.
Speaker 7 (48:33):
That is like even that even by the standards of
like where journalism and opinion journalism, that is surprising.
Speaker 3 (48:40):
Yes, And everybody has seen the Douglas Murray clip in
his debate with Dave Smith on Joe Rogan where he
says you haven't been talking about the crossings. This puts
that whole thing in a whole new light because Douglas
Murray then says, I have a journalistic rule that I
do not talk about a place even in passing unless
(49:02):
I have visited it.
Speaker 4 (49:04):
That's his journalistic rule.
Speaker 3 (49:06):
A much more basic journalistic rule is that you avoid
conflicts of interest and that if some exist, you disclose them.
So when Murray's talking about having been to these crossings
he went with the IDF, he put on a jacket
that said press yes, which suggests that you are then
baked in the ethics of that of that craft, which
(49:31):
means that you are you are objective and independent. If
the IDF wants to send an IDF spokesperson to the crossing,
they can do that. He also had himself photographed in
the chair where Ya Sinwar was killed wearing his press jacket.
He did not disclose that he had raised money for
the IDF and that he had written speeches. And that's
(49:53):
what just what we know about, which is activists.
Speaker 7 (49:55):
And by the way, like raising money for the IDEF
is you're an activist on behalf of the cause and
then helping the guy. I mean that actually, even if
it's volunteer, it makes you sort of an agent of
the government.
Speaker 3 (50:05):
Right, So I would say, you don't actually get to
claim that you journalistically followed a journalistic rule, that that's
not journalism. That is a thing that you're doing. It
is collaboration with the Israeli government. Like if you are
drafting speeches for the ambassador, raising money for them, and
(50:27):
then getting, you know, taken on escorted trips to the crossings,
you don't get to then denounce somebody else who hasn't
done the same thing, Like he was trying to say
that he is a superior journalist and his opinions should
be taken more seriously because he had been to this crossing.
But now we know the full context of what brought
him to that crossing, secretly doing work for the government
(50:51):
and then going escorted by the government. Just because you
put on a flat jacket that says press doesn't make
you press. So yes, he was a physical there. Yes,
should we credit anything that he says? No, Right, we
can put up F six. So Pamela Gross is an
interesting character and she's no longer with CNN, but she
(51:14):
was a CNN booker, producer. And also, let's do our
disclosure here, married to Jimmy Finkelstein, who used to be
the owner of The Hill and the Hill owned Rising
while Emily and I were co hosts on Rising, So
(51:35):
Jimmy was we weren't. We weren't getting paychecks because we
were independent contractors, but he was signing our checks.
Speaker 7 (51:40):
He was trying to hire us too.
Speaker 3 (51:42):
Trying to hire us, and then he stole the thing
before that even happened, one way or the other. And
so Pamela gross so she was so the ambassador is
so wonderful to see you this fourth of July. Thank
you for joining us. Clearly Iron Dome is doing doing
the reck and saving lives. Please, dear friend, let's get
(52:02):
it finished. So she then enters into this long conversation
and we can put up F seven as well with
with Ron Proser about how she's going to raise money
for the Iron Dome. He writes, Dear Pamela, thank you
and Jimmy for a magical evening.
Speaker 4 (52:20):
You both are the perfect hosts.
Speaker 3 (52:23):
You and Jimmy are true assets to the State of Israel.
Speaker 4 (52:28):
Which.
Speaker 3 (52:30):
If you're a journalist, whether you're Israeli journalist or American
in Israeli journalists would not want to hear that from
an Israeli ambassador. You do not want to be told
as a journalist that you are a quote, true asset
to the State of Israel. You really don't that's not
what you want to hear. No, no, no, I'm an objective
(52:52):
journalist here, so it's okay. So maybe she's just Jimmy
Finkelstein's wife and like said, some fake job CNN. No,
not at all in the emails. Go read the full
story if you want all of Pamela's like crazy emails
back and forth with Ron Proser here. But f ten,
(53:15):
this is an email where she is reaching out to
book him, which is.
Speaker 4 (53:20):
Her job on CNN. Makes it easier actually to discuss, right.
Speaker 3 (53:25):
Yeah, I mean, hey, I'm raising money for your military.
Come on the show, Come on the show. It's just
it's too much. And it's one of these stories to
me that manages to both be utterly shocking and deeply
(53:46):
unsurprising at the exact same time. Like it really is
in the sweet spot of hitting both of those emotions,
like I'm still I'm shocked at this and yet utterly unsurprised.
Speaker 7 (53:58):
Yeah, it's shocked and not shock again simultaneously.
Speaker 3 (54:03):
Yea, I mean again, maybe in post we'll put a
little have you been clip?
Speaker 4 (54:08):
You've never been?
Speaker 7 (54:10):
This is like, this is the one of the biggest
problems in journalism right now, Like you are free. It's
most journalists cannot truly shelve their opinions. I know, like
a few who genuinely can do it. Maybe they don't
have maybe they're just like politically ambivalent. They definitely don't
care one direction or the other. It's just so few
people that can actually do that, and yet most journalists
(54:32):
still pretend that that's what they're doing. And even if
you're in the opinion side, like from and Murray, fine,
but actually acting or gross who I guess she wasn't
on the opinion side. She was just doing booking for CNN.
But you know that's just it's just so obviously over
the line, so obviously over the line. And the audacity
(54:52):
then to criticize other people's journalistic ethics tells you kind
of tells you a lot.
Speaker 3 (54:58):
Yeah, true, truly incredible. That's why I like this show.
Like we've got our opinions. I think my opinions are facts,
but I think they're correct.
Speaker 4 (55:08):
But you know what, my you know where I am,
but I'm not. I'm not writing speeches for anybody. No. Also,
where do these guys get the time?
Speaker 7 (55:14):
Seriously?
Speaker 3 (55:15):
Like my first restment, No, I don't have time to
write your speech, you writes me, don't you have a
whole office?
Speaker 7 (55:19):
Why we're from and Maury both drafting the same speech.
I don't understand that. Were they having them compete against
each other or was he just seeking everyone's advice.
Speaker 4 (55:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (55:28):
So one thing that politicians do, and they do this
a lot with donors, but they'll do it too with
journalists is pretended that they're interested in their ideas, like
what do you think, uh, you know, the effect of
the economy is going to be on the midterms, And
then and then the journalist or the donor or whoever
(55:50):
they're talking to feels like valued, like the thing that
they're saying. They're Wow, I'm speaking to this power person, right,
and so it changes the power dynamic. So you can
imagine this is just on steroids.
Speaker 4 (56:04):
Yeah, yep, where.
Speaker 3 (56:05):
Prothers like you guys are just such brilliant wordsmiths. Could
you draft some speeches for me? But that's when it
really crosses the line. And then they both should have
been like, well, no, of course I can't do that
unless I'm I'm happy to have a dinner with you
and we can talk about how awful Moss is and
how the world is all against Israel. Yeah, but we're not.
(56:25):
But I'm not gonna.
Speaker 4 (56:27):
Draft a speech for you.
Speaker 3 (56:28):
Like that's that's crossing lines that even I'm not willing
to do well.
Speaker 7 (56:32):
At the very least. I mean, so again, like you
shouldn't do a period. If you're going to do it,
you should then tell your audience and your readers that
you did it.
Speaker 3 (56:38):
Yeah, and then let people say, Okay, you know what,
this guy wrote speeches for the ambassador that he's now profiling.
But I know that he's supportive of Israel, and so
I already knew that anyway, So I'm going to read
the profile anyway. Yeah, then you've got the full knowledge
of it. Would have been even funnier if he was
(56:58):
like the main thing people say about prosers. His rhetorical
flare and his speech making ability is unparalleled, almost reminiscent
of some of George W.
Speaker 4 (57:11):
Bush's best speeches.
Speaker 7 (57:12):
Positively Fromian.
Speaker 4 (57:14):
People call him from Ian.
Speaker 7 (57:16):
How many people are saying, Oh goodness, all right, Ryan,
amazing amazing reporting there. Now we should mention before we
wrap for the day that Donald Trump has since we
started taping, actually put out a truth social post calling
for Brandon Johnson and Governor J. B. Pritsker to Democrats
(57:37):
obviously in Illinois to quote be in jail for failing
to protect ICE officers as a guy on a barstool.
So that's one thing. As the president of the United States,
that is a very different thing that he this is
the man with the powers of law enforcement, saying that
Brandon Johnson and JB. Pritzker should be in jail for
(57:58):
quote failing to protect ice.
Speaker 3 (58:00):
So also, can we poke at the logic train there
for a minute. According to Trump, Chicago police are incapable
of protecting the citizens of Chicago, which necessitates sending in
the National Guard, all these federal office federal agents. So
now Trump wants them to protect the citizens of Chicago.
(58:21):
And also all these helpless federal agents that he's throwing
into Chicago. Isn't the whole purpose of sending in this
the Feds that they're gonna protect the Chicago police, who
he said, are just you can't handle it. Also, Ice
is out here has been out here like making a
bunch of basically prank calls to nine one one.
Speaker 4 (58:42):
Have you seen this reporting?
Speaker 3 (58:44):
No, not yet that they keep calling nine to one
one saying somebody's scaling this fence. Somebody's doing this net
and and then they look at bodycam footage and the
same with the woman that they arrested and accused of
ramming them. Turn out it was the other way around.
Speaker 4 (58:58):
Like Ice keeps making stuff up up and so I.
Speaker 3 (59:01):
Think at some level the Chicago police are like fed
up with these with these clowns.
Speaker 7 (59:08):
Also, we're owning the politics of this. Donald Trump is
transforming JB. Pritzker, of all people, into a resistance hero.
The more he talks about it like this, The more
that he more that he talks about the situation like this,
he's giving JB. Pritzker. Maybe he's actually trying to do
it because he understands that JB. Pritzker is a poor
resistance hero for Dems. I don't think it's that forty chess.
I think he's just a saying things like Jbie Pritscrier
(59:29):
should be in jail. I don't I can't fathom what
the even like, what the charge that they cook up
would look like in this case, failing to protect Ice
as governor and as mayor. I don't even know what
that would potentially be. I can't think of it. Maybe
we'll ask rock. But yeah, well that's the thing.
Speaker 3 (59:49):
I'll block you if you do that. It's the warning
that everybody following me if you.
Speaker 7 (59:53):
If you ask dumb questions to groc, ask.
Speaker 3 (59:55):
Stupid questions to groc underneath my posts, you're blocked.
Speaker 7 (01:00:00):
You're blocked. You're blocked. Well, that that happened while we
were taping. Trump called for them to be imprisoned. So
I'm sure Sager and Crystal will have more on the
story tomorrow, but we wanted to make sure to bring
everyone that news as soon as we could, because boy,
is it wild. Thank you so much for tuning in.
Thank you for supporting us over at Breakingpoints dot com. Also,
(01:00:22):
if you can't get a premium sub for liking, commenting,
subscribing on YouTube, wherever you're getting your podcast, it helps
us so much. We appreciate it. Makes the second half
of the Friday show. By the way, if you're a
premium sub possible, we're having a lot of fun.
Speaker 3 (01:00:35):
We'll probably talk about Janet Mills on Friday. She's apparently
getting into the main election. If she won, if she
beat Susan Collins, she'd be a seventy nine year old
freshman senator.
Speaker 7 (01:00:44):
Good Lord, good Lord.
Speaker 4 (01:00:46):
Democrats maybe finally crack the code.
Speaker 7 (01:00:48):
Maybe we'll cover Katie Porter on Friday two.
Speaker 3 (01:00:50):
Sat too young when they were getting sworn in with
the democratic and experienced.
Speaker 7 (01:00:54):
Yes, we'll see everyone on Friday. Have a great day.
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com