Krystal and Saagar discuss Trump admits Israel corruption, Saagar cries over Trump's White House changes, Piers Morgan vs Candace Owens.
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 this show.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3 (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 2 (00:33):
Should we talk a little bit about the White House
Hanukah Party? Interesting some very interesting comments made here by
Trump himself and also by one of his primary backers
from the last campaign, Mary Maddison, also from his priority
campaigns as well.
Speaker 4 (00:47):
One of his top donors.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
She is very excited about giving him even more money
to run for an unconstitutional third term. Let's go ahead
and take a listen to what Trump had to say
about their relationship and what she had to say.
Speaker 5 (01:00):
Gave my campaign indirectly and directly two hundred and fifty million.
Speaker 6 (01:05):
She was number one.
Speaker 5 (01:08):
When somebody can give you two hundred and fifty million,
I think that we should give her the opportunity to
say hello and Miriam, make it quick, because two hundred
and fifty million is not what it used to be.
Speaker 6 (01:21):
Okay.
Speaker 7 (01:22):
Now I met the Alan Desho beach and you say
the legal thing about it four more years? And I said, Alan,
I agree with you, so we can do it. Think
about it.
Speaker 6 (01:36):
Where's Alan? And then this here?
Speaker 7 (01:37):
Oh he had the flights and.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
Think about a second.
Speaker 6 (01:50):
Yeah, she said, think about it. I'll give you another
two hundred and fifty million.
Speaker 4 (01:55):
Wow, So that's cool.
Speaker 1 (01:57):
Mary.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
I'm saying, hey, I give you another two hundred and
fifty million dollars if you run for a third term.
And throwing in there, dropping in the Alan Dershowitz Epstein
associate Alan Dershowitz mentioned as well, we can put d
one b up on the screen. Apparently Dershowitz wrote a
book about whether or not Trump can serve as a
(02:18):
third term Trump.
Speaker 4 (02:20):
You know, is talking to him about this.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
So you know how much money is enough? Brother?
Speaker 3 (02:25):
You know? I mean, I just don't get you're in
your what isn't in his late seventies. You're arguing with
vendors on Martha's Vineyard, Like what else do you need
in your life to be writing this boomer slop for
a bunch of people to be like, hell, how Alan
Dershowitz said Trump can run for a third term?
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Also, had anyone noticed that?
Speaker 3 (02:47):
She said she talked to Dershowitz in Israel about this.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
It's just a little too perfect. Okay, Yeah, it's just
too much.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
It's crazy how out in the open he is too
about like, yeah, she gave me a bunch of money,
so I guess we should let her say hello, you know, just.
Speaker 4 (03:01):
Making it very clear and open the way.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
That the cash for access game works. And of course,
I mean she's been incredibly important in terms of his
you know, his very.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Very positive towards Israel.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
He says he's, you know, the best president ever for Israel,
what his foreign policy there has been, And you know,
I wish you could just call this Dershowitz book, which
is titled literally titled could present President Trump constitutionally.
Speaker 4 (03:26):
Serve a third term? I wish you could call this
boomer slop.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
But like the President of the United States and Steep
Ban and some of his other advisors. I mean, they're
printing out Trump twenty twenty eight merch. This is a
live question, a real issue, and apparently Trump is interested
enough that he's actually exploring this with Dershowitz. So what
the Wall Street Journal says is that he received and
discussed a draft copy of a book by lawyer Alan
(03:49):
Dershowitz that studies whether Trump could constitutionally serve a third term.
In an interview Wednesday, Dershwitz said he told that Trump
the constitution was not clear on the issue, which I mean,
if you read the language, it seems pretty damn clear
on the issue. But and apparently, you know, Miriam's interpretation
was that Dershowitz was saying, oh, you could serve a
(04:10):
third term. In a meeting in the Oval office, Dershowitz
handed Trump draft the book, which is set to be
published next year. He said the book lays out a
host of scenarios in which an individual could serve a
third term. He said Trump told him he planned to
read the book and asked him about his conclusions on
serving The constitution bars anyone from being elected the White
House more than twice, I said, quote, it's not clear
if a president can become a third term president, and
(04:31):
it's not clear if it's permissible, said Dershowitz, who previously
served as a defense lawyer for the president. And he
went on to say he found it interesting as an
intellectual issue. Do I think he's going to run for
a third term? No, I don't think he will run
for a third term. Then what are we doing, Like,
why are you writing this book?
Speaker 4 (04:47):
And what about Why is he shaking your advice?
Speaker 2 (04:49):
And why are they printing out merchandise and why is
Miriam Maddison publicly bribing him with two hundred and fifty
million dollars to run again?
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Because it's all about a sink, which we will get
to soon.
Speaker 1 (04:58):
It's all about ego and all of that.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
But okay, to the extent, why is any of this
even interesting in the first place. People were circulating a
bunch of clips from twenty sixteen from Trump's original appeal
talking about how everybody on the stage was bought and
how he had bought those same politicians and that's why
nobody could buy him. And I mean, look, it's been
eight years for some of our gen Z audience, they
(05:20):
probably don't even remember that. But that was crazy. That
actually was crazy. That was part of the appeal. Now,
obviously you could point to various different things about how
he didn't operate that way in the first term or
during the second term, but like this level of rich guys,
just like openly trying to buy the government. Even in
the first term, it really was not like this, I
(05:42):
can tell you, like it was more understated, you could
report it et ceterable, Like this time it's way more
out in the open, like in a way that again,
if you're newer to politics, like you really don't get
how different this is from the first time around. I mean,
Trump at one point spent his own money during the
twenty sixteen campaign, right, it was a very different environment
this time around, Like the open feeling of selling out
(06:04):
like with crypto and oh my god, this morning his
media company merged with some nuclear fusion company. You're like,
what the fuck is happening?
Speaker 2 (06:12):
Yeah, or like his billions, don Junior's getting money, like
everybody is getting paid.
Speaker 4 (06:19):
It's part of what I mean.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
There are many reasons why, like his his rhetoric about
Somali fraud and whatever. One of the reasons why it
is so galling to me is I'm like, look, at
your regime, Like you guys are stealing everything that's not
nailed down. The whole thing is operated as a massive
multi billion dollar grift for you and your cronies. Like
that is the core ideology at the heart of this administration.
(06:43):
How and and your pardon power is being used. How
many grifters and con artists, white collar schemers have you
let off the hook? And by the way, rob they're
victims of ever seeing a dollar of restitutions. So like,
spare me. It's just disgusting. It's discussing, and you're right,
you know, it was pretty brazen in the first term,
(07:06):
but it was like people go and stay at his hotel.
Now I'm telling you, I'm going to cut you millions
of dollars directly into your crypto scam. So I'm going
to bring you a gold bar in the Oval office.
I mean, the level of brazen corruption is truly the
It is the worst we've ever had in this car.
There is no doubt about it. And not to say
like other politicians were perfect, blah blah blah.
Speaker 4 (07:28):
This is another level we have never seen before.
Speaker 3 (07:31):
It's never been out in the open where you just
brought like listen, donors have always been ambassadors. Donors have
always been at the White House Christmas Party. Nobody's ever
liked this lady gave me two hundred and fifty million,
so she lets her buy the mic. It just doesn't happen.
Think about being a special government and Pat, Yeah, I'm just.
Speaker 4 (07:47):
Gonna let you do whatever you want to.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
You gave me money, now go do whatever you want
to the government mister billionaire, richest man on the planet,
who has endless conflicts of interest. So from the jump,
it has just been you know, a complete like theft
of the public trust. It's absolute insanity. And so this is, yeah,
another display where you have you know, this person Mariam Maddelson.
(08:10):
Trump famously said he's not sure if she's more loyal
to the US or to Israel, and thinks that she
likes Israel better. And so this is the person who
you know, he's bragging about how much money she gave
him in the past and how much money she'll give
him a gut in the future if you desire to
run again.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
It's crazy.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Also, i'd never heard her speak before. I didn't realize
she had such an accent. I'm like wow, I'm like.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Okay, I got it.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
I mean, just look again, it's shocking, right if we
at the same time they want to talk about Muslims
or any of that. It's like you have a lady
given quarter bill to the president and you hear her
and you're like, what was.
Speaker 6 (08:41):
That, Miriam?
Speaker 1 (08:42):
Huh? Do you speak English properly?
Speaker 3 (08:44):
You're like, wow, okay, and you know you're openly advocating.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
For a for foreign countries interest. Pretty wild. Not the
only wild thing though, that came out of that one.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Let's put d two Mark Levin, the famous Fox News
host and anointing Trump the first Jewish president.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Let's take a listen, and I said, this is our
first Jewish president.
Speaker 6 (09:09):
Now he's the first Jewish president to serve two.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
Not consecutive president.
Speaker 6 (09:17):
Thank you for everything.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
Wow, I'm sure that will quiet the conspiracy theorist. I mean,
I don't know. It's just one of those where you
put it all together.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
It's just too naked, it's too out in the open,
and it's grotesque honestly, which we'll get to soon with
the Presidential Walk of Fame, et cetera. But there is
something about this which is so different from his original
conception as a politician that if you weren't there to
(09:49):
cover that, it's almost hard to tell you like how
shocking not shocking, like surprising, but like how shocking in
its public presentation it is and how I mean, Look,
I can't speak for Maga. I don't know, you know
what goes through these people's minds. I'm sure they can
rationalize everything, but at a certain point, it's just my
belief that you know, things like this.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
Maybe they won't make him think he's.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
A villain or any of that, but they're gonna be like,
h it makes me upset, or this is counter to
his public image. Now, well they still support him, probably okay,
but he's not running for the ballot. So in the future,
any politician who like like you're talking about the smili thing,
I think the small thing is disgusting in terms of
what they were doing.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
And I do think there's a lot of Dei and
a lot.
Speaker 3 (10:30):
Of other liberals don't want to talk about it because
of their race or their because of their religion. But
like you just said, I'm not going to hear it
from people who are openly selling partons in Ponzi's to
part to Ponzi schemers. I can't write. It would be ridiculous,
it would be hypocritical. And that's why when you see
it online and they're like, oh my god, these people
are defrault I'm like, guys, like, you know that your
president is also doing the same thing, and you don't
(10:51):
have shit to say about it, right, we can't hear
that from you. And hypocrisy is baked into politics. But
at a certain point, it's also about power. You know,
you're talking here about a bunch of Somali immigrants and
you're talking about the president of the United States. It's like,
it's just not the same, bro, and you can't be
you can't be talking about one if you don't have
the other. That's my belief people have for years. Trump
has got away with hypocrisy. But it's just my personal thing.
(11:14):
Like maybe it's just me, uh, but I do think
that something is kind of breaking with Trump and the
agelessins and the crypto stuff. I do think it's penetrating
in a way that it hasn't before. And I think
it's because it's more brazen than ever before. I'm telling you,
the first term was not like this. It was not
like operationally it was just very different and so out
in the open, the crypto stuff, the pardons and everything.
(11:36):
It's just completely counter to so much of what his
public image was in the past. And even during the campaign,
I've been talking about Biden and corruption and all that, Like,
thinking about Hunter Biden, it seems quaint.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
I meanintings, are you kidding me?
Speaker 1 (11:48):
Right? Which was bad? Like covered it? It was bad?
It was horrible. Yeah, this you're like if that was horrible?
Like do we have words for no words for that?
Speaker 2 (11:56):
Yeah, exactly, genuinely have no words and something else, I
have no words. It's important, Like it's really important to understand.
These people, Mark Levin, Miry Maddelson in particular, have been
very important in terms of Trump's foreign policy. Viza, the Israel,
and Gaza, in the entire Middle East. And they are delighted.
They are delighted with him. They think that he has
(12:17):
done a wonderful job. They're getting everything they want from
this administration. You can see that. I mean again, she's
willing a pony up another quarter bill in order to
get him back in the White House.
Speaker 4 (12:28):
A third time.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
And so you know, right now we're supposedly in this
quote unquote ceasefire. You've had so many Palestinians killed the ceasefire.
I don't know if Israel is abided by the seasfire
literally a single day. And at the same time you
have just absolute misery D three up on the screen.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
I've had these horrific storms. You know, it's winter there,
it's cold.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
You've had babies literally who are freezing to death, people
in these flooded you know, it's just horrible, Like, it's
just horrible. And you still have and of course Ryan
and drop Site have done some of the most important
reporting on this. You still have so much aid being blocked,
including you know, supplies that would at least help to
(13:12):
ease some of the suffering here as they struggle with this,
you know, this cold rain coming in and the misery
that all imagine living like this, like just imagine living
like especially after all that they have been through. So,
you know, Miriam and Mark Levin, they think that what
Trump has done here is just great.
Speaker 4 (13:31):
You're loving just according to their plan.
Speaker 3 (13:33):
Yeah, one hundred percent that I mean, that's genuinely what
they voted for. And you know what, they're the ones
who really got what they wanted. So okay, I guess
we really see who has the power. And it's also
the fact, I mean the level of defense that people
jump to for Miriam Adelson because she funds so many
of the congressmen on the Republican side here in the country.
(13:53):
They talk about how it's anti Semitic to worry about
dual citizens, like remember they attack Thomas mass and others.
It's like, guys, Trump himself literally said, I asked her
whether she cares more about Israel or America, and I
kind of think that we know the answer. It's like, literally,
he just says the quiet trope out loud, Yeah, that
they're not that they that they.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
Accuse you of anti Semitism.
Speaker 3 (14:14):
And he still worships her here at the Oval Office,
I mean at the White House. Isn't she a recipient
of the Medical Medal of Freedom too from the President?
Speaker 1 (14:22):
Like it's just so naked, so out in the open.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
Remember, And oh, I forgot to mention that that's part
of the reason why twenty sixteen, he literally attacked Sheldon
Agelson and Marco Rubio. He said, Sheldon Agelsen will give
Marco Rubio all the dollars that he wants to buy
him or something.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
Now look at that. He called him a puppet.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
Yeah, puppet, like a perfect puppet for perfect puppet.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
That for Sheldon Agolsen.
Speaker 3 (14:44):
Again, if you weren't around, then it's hard to describe,
like how different it is this time around.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
But yeah, there we go. All right, let's get to
the White House.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
As if things couldn't get any worse, and as if
I could not be more personally attacked by Donald Trump's
renovation of the White House is legalized rescheduling of marijuana,
which is very likely to happen today, potentially not taxing
gambling winning is helping out pornography companies. He has further
desecrated the People's House with new plaques underneath his so
(15:14):
called walk in a Hall of fame there on the
White House colonnade.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
Let's take a list look at some of these.
Speaker 3 (15:23):
This called the Presidential Walk of Fame, was conceived, built,
and dedicated by President Donald DE Trump as a tribute
to past president's good, bad, and somewhere in the middle,
who served our country and gave up so much in
so doing. The Presidential Walk of Fame will long live
as a testament and tribute to the greatness of America.
Dedicated on November five, twenty twenty five. I am personally asking,
(15:45):
no matter who it is that comes into the office
next year, we need a ritualistic burning on the road,
but in the newly restored rose garden. So first we
will plunder the concrete. We will take it, we will
dig it all up, we will replant the rose garden.
After the rose garden is there, we will ritualistically burn
(16:06):
these plaques and any other such desecrated signs that say
the Oval Office on the Oval Office or the presidential
chap the ballroom. We will dismantle brick by brick. We
need like Marxist Leninists to come in here, like Bolshevik
red guard.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
I sign up. I'll be ready. You can give me
a red guard, give me an armband. I'm ready to roll.
I'm all sure.
Speaker 3 (16:27):
We'll get the troops together, and we will you know,
by hand, you know, and our socialists, you know, like
the hammer and the sickle, will come together, no bulldozers.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
We will do it together.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
We will rise up together, and we will burn this
fucker to the ground whenever it comes to the ballroom. Now,
just to show you the plaque that we have here,
let's put this one up here on the screen. These
are the plaques that now accompany every president. You know,
he famously why the gold furnishings.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Above the pot? You know what I mean?
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Like the flames themselves are already offensive enough, but why
the gold above the said frame? Like?
Speaker 1 (17:04):
Why? So let's take a look at Let's read some
of these plaques, shall we?
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Which Trump apparently wrote himself, This is Obama's Barack Hussein
Obama was the first black president. Community or It's very
woke of Trump to capitalize black.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
Did you see that? Yes? Very woke?
Speaker 3 (17:20):
Yeah, Thankkenky, Resident Trump for sticking with the New York
Times post BLM style guide a community organizer. One term
senator from Illinois one of the most divisive political letters
in American history. As president, he passed the highly ineffective
Unaffordable Care Act, resulting in his party losing control of
both Houses of Congress the election of the largest House
(17:41):
Republican majority since nineteen forty six. He presided over a
stagnant economy, economy capitalized for no reason whatsoever, approved the
terrible Iran Duclear Deal, and signed the one sided Paris
Climate Accords, both of which were later terminated by President
Donald J.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Trump.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
Under Obama, the ISIS Caliphate spread across the Middle East,
a collapse into chaos. Russia invaded and took Crimea and
Ukraine crippled small businesses with crushing regulation.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Environment blah blah blah.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
Obama also spied on the twenty sixteen presidential campaign of
President Trump and presided over the what was that the
creation of the Russia Russia Russia hoax? The worst political
scandal in American history history capitalized, He handicapped success Hillary,
his hand picked successor, Assasid handicaps Well maybe Hilary Rodham
(18:29):
Clinton would then lose the presidency to Donald J.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
Trump.
Speaker 2 (18:33):
So it seems very neutral, very now historically accurate.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Let's say, even if it wasn't neutral, all right, could
we at least have it be written better, like, you know,
grammatically correct, maybe you know, just maybe a little bit
more dignified or something a little a little briefer, Yeah, briefer,
very lengthy, lots of run on sentences.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
Let's go to the next one.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
Rid of the character limit on Twitter. Here is continues
to bleed over here.
Speaker 3 (19:00):
Joe Biden, sleepy Joe Biden was by far the worst
president in American history. Taking confidence as a result. Look,
I hate Biden. I wouldn't even call the worst president
of American history. Was the result of the most corrupt
election ever seen in the United States. Oversaw a series
of unprecedented disasters that brought our nation. His politic policies
(19:22):
caused the highest inflation capitalized ever recorded, leading the US
dollar dollar capitalized to lose more than twenty percent of
its value in four years.
Speaker 1 (19:31):
His green new scam surrendered America.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Okay, I think everybody gets the idea for what we've
got there.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
He even gets into the debate.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
Yeah, gets into the debate, the famous debate. Put E
four up there on the screen if there was any
doubt whatsoever. White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt confirming quote,
the plaques are eloquently written descriptions of each president and
the legacy they left behind. As a student of history,
many were written directly by.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
The President himself. We know, we know, ma'am.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
Thank you for confirming that ballroom update for everybody out there,
Let's put this one up here on the screen. New
model that was displayed in President Trump's oval office, so
you can see the campus. So we've got the West Wing,
you know, there you go get the iconic White House. Really, whoa,
what is that monstrosity that's sitting there? Oh, that's the
ball Do you see how much bigger the ballroom is
(20:27):
than the White House.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
I'm scared to like get a new architect because the
original one was like I'm not doing.
Speaker 3 (20:34):
It's like, I'm not doing this. They actually started beefing.
For anybody wondering, the cost may now actually be four
hundred million. Let's go put that next one up there
on the screen. This is an increase I believe in
about one hundred and fifty million since the last time
that it had previously had been talked about. So yeah,
that's we're talking about four hundred million dollars, four hundred
(20:56):
million dollars for the ballroom being privately done or whatever
by these multi billionaires to desecrate the White House campus.
And unfortunately, this is a little Nimby cell for all
of you right now. Unfortunately, the White House campus and
a few other things under control of the president do
(21:16):
not have to go through any historical preservation or architectural review.
They're basically under the total purview of the executive. The
National Historical Preservation actually tried let's put this up here
on the screen that would have blocked the construction of
the ballroom, but ended up overruling them and denying the
motion in order to do so. This is shocking, and
(21:38):
actually we need to make sure that this never happens again.
After we dismantled the ball room, by the way, after
we dismandled the ballroom, we're going to say nobody can
ever touch it again. And then it actually used to
go through some architectural review. Now people may think that
this is some pet project and all of that, But
the reason why I think it's fun to include in
the show is what we learned about through those word
clouds and through polling. This shit resonates in a way
(21:59):
that I never thought that it would. And yeah, I
think there's a small seat conservatism that a lot of
people feel where they're like, oh, this is not about you.
This is not about like the White House is literally
not about you. And then whenever it comes to the
plaques making it it's not about overtly political, it's just
overtly Trump Like he's like, I am going to make
(22:20):
the colonade so petty, right, because what is yes, the pettiness,
which is a direct expression of Donald Trump. But what
those photos that come out of the Colonnade. It becomes
a place where everyone's photo.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
Who's taken there? You know, I have it's not about me.
Speaker 3 (22:36):
I'm seeing people who if the photos that are taken there,
it's about like that was at the White House, but
now it's about the Trump House, right from the Rose
Garden to the Colonnade to the goal to the Oval office.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
He's like, this is about me.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
And that's what I think is resonating in terms of
its takeover across the country. Call me a shit lib
and all that don't care, Like it's it's I don't
care whether it's Trump or anybody else. It's a monstras right,
Like That's the point that I think a lot of
people are resonating with is they can see this as
a direct obsession of the president while they feel like
(23:10):
they're you know, the economy is slipping away and that
this is your overall priority. So that's why, you know,
I'm pleasantly surprised to see that a lot.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
Of people care. A lot of people people care a
hell of a lot more than I thought.
Speaker 4 (23:22):
Yeah, it's interesting, it's very interesting.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
What breaks through to the Memoriason really gets you know,
like as its cultural moment. But in terms of the plaques, Listen,
it's one thing when you see this bullshit from him
on Twitter r Right, it's Twitter. Twitter is not sort
of inherently undignified. Right, We're talking about the White House here,
and now you're putting some Twitter esque or true Social
esque bullshit on an official plaque at.
Speaker 4 (23:46):
The White House.
Speaker 2 (23:47):
And it's so in his leg I mean, it's it
sounds and reads like he literally did post it on
True Social and now this is what you're doing to
the people's house. Yeah, it's so incredibly petty, it's so small,
it's so undignified for the office, and you know, I
think it just makes Americans feel like, what have we
come to? What have we come to that this is
(24:09):
what's going on in the White House with our president,
that this is the man who is leading, you know,
a country that many people see as the greatest on
earth and through their like American exceptionalist lens. So, yeah,
I do think these kind of things too. It's very like,
it's very visual, it's very visceral, all of that, and
it speaks, as you were saying, sober too, the fact
that like this is what he's spending his actual time
(24:31):
in brain share on and then meanwhile he's like rushing
through some bullshit speech about the economy because he really
doesn't give a shit and he thinks that everything is fine.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
Yeah, at least that's the way that comes off. I
mean there's no defense, okay. And this is why it's
like this needs to go period, Like we cannot have this,
and we need nimbism to fully come into effect and
be like nobody gets to touch the White House within
an insane architectural review process.
Speaker 1 (24:55):
Between can't handle this.
Speaker 4 (24:56):
Between that and the data centers becoming more.
Speaker 3 (24:59):
PRESI so the thing is nimby gets a knock and
I get it is that it is often weaponized by
the landowner class in San Francisco.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
The rich people want to ptect their property values.
Speaker 3 (25:09):
Fine, but the fundamental idea behind nimbi is people who
live somewhere get to control the shit.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
That happens in their neighborhood. And that's true.
Speaker 3 (25:18):
I mean it should be the most true for public resource.
We're not even talking about private land here. We're talking
about public land, like publicly owned, taxpayer funded land and
buildings which are not just iconic, belong to all of us.
That's the whole purpose. One of the things tragedies at,
unfortunately for the White House, is that people can't really
(25:40):
get that close to it anymore, you know, with nine
to eleven and Boston bombing and all that stuff.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Like I've watched it happen over the years.
Speaker 3 (25:46):
You used to be able to go up to the fence,
and now you can't even get close. And the more
that it becomes securitized and people get farther away from it,
you don't feel the connection that you deserve. In my opinion,
everybody should be able to go up to the fence
at the very least and take a picture, you know
if they want to, or easily be able to get
a tour, because the history is yours, it's not theirs.
That's the whole point, and I think that's what it inverts.
(26:08):
It's very sad, honestly. I was just looking at photos
yesterday from the East Wing. I was like, oh my god,
I can't.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
Believe this is gone. I can't believe it.
Speaker 3 (26:15):
And it's one of those where they have I think
they don't know what they're playing with. They really believed
that they could just do this and nobody would care.
And then when those photos started to come out of
the demolition and every I mean, those went very viral.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
Yeah, And because.
Speaker 4 (26:29):
Trump started to realize because he banned.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Yeah, because he banned photographs of the East Wing, he.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
Kind of started to get like, oh, this doesn't this
doesn't look great. I mean, now the thing that connects
to the story about him like exploring a third term,
because what you really think this guy is like building
this gigantic ballroom and he intends to just like step
aside peacefully when his term is over.
Speaker 4 (26:49):
Doesn't really feel like it, does it.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (26:54):
So we had a big meeting this week between Canis
Owens and Erica Kirk. Candace Man her her streams have
exploded in popularity, talk about things that have sort of
like broken containment. She has, you know, I mean, she's
created this whole true crime mystery series out of the
public assassination of her friend Charlie Kirk, and you know,
(27:16):
has been saying very you know, suggestive things about Erica Kirk,
very aggressive things about turning Point Usa, et cetera.
Speaker 4 (27:23):
There was originally supposed to be they wanted.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
To do a live stream with her and you know,
did it in kind of a shady way where she
couldn't make it on that day. And then they were like, oh,
she doesn't want to do it, and she said I'd
do it remotely whatever, So they scrapped that plan, and
Erica Kirk suggested after her you know, media tour in
her town hall and all of that, lets you and
I have a private meeting.
Speaker 4 (27:44):
So I'll show you in a minute.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
The candae Owen show after the Erica Kirk meeting, where
she kind of did back down from some of her
stuff and her audience was very not happy about that.
But after all of this, she also went on with
Peers Morgan where they argued about some of the conspiracy
theories that she has been floating and you know putting
forward on her show. Me give you a sense of
(28:08):
how that went. This is basically I did watch the
whole thing. This is basically kind of emblematic of the
entire hour where Peers is basically like, so what do
you actually think happened and what evidence do you.
Speaker 4 (28:19):
Have for it?
Speaker 2 (28:19):
And Candice just is you know, talking very fast and
kind of spinning her wheels the whole time. Let's take
a listen to F one.
Speaker 8 (28:24):
I want to get to the reality of what you're
actually saying. So when you say that somebody at Turning Point, USA,
Charlie's company was complicit in his murder?
Speaker 6 (28:34):
Who who was?
Speaker 9 (28:37):
I believe that there were multiple people at Turning Point
who are, as I have said many times my exact words,
aren't they are engaged in a cover up of what
happened to Charlie in that day.
Speaker 6 (28:48):
Now, but who was involved in his murder?
Speaker 1 (28:51):
I didn't say that they murdered Charlie.
Speaker 6 (28:53):
You said Turning Point were complicit in his murder.
Speaker 9 (28:56):
No, my exact sentence that I've said was that there
were people at Turning Point who are engaged in a
cover up.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
I believe thorally.
Speaker 6 (29:05):
You didn't say that. You said literally did say that.
Speaker 8 (29:08):
You said there were people at Turning Point complicit in
is murder.
Speaker 9 (29:12):
Okay, that's what you said when you and I were discussing.
That's why I said, let's go back. I was applying
the logic of a conspiracy to JFK. I said, Okay, JFK,
you have people that are complicit. Of course, if you
apply that logic, if there's a conspiracy, there's going to
be multiple people that are going to be complicit by
the time in order for a large stage murder. As
do I think someone at Turning Point pulled the trigger? No,
(29:33):
obviously I don't make so much anybody Turning Point?
Speaker 6 (29:36):
Did anybody Turning Point?
Speaker 8 (29:38):
Did anybody at Turning Point in your opinion, know that
Charlie Kirk was going to be murdered?
Speaker 9 (29:43):
There is specifically two people at Turning Point USA, and
I have communicated that information to Erica and justin strife
that I would not be surprised if they had for
knowledge of Charlie Kirk being assassinated. I'm not going to
name I am not going to name those people, okay,
because it's not right for me to name those people
until I know for a fact that.
Speaker 6 (30:04):
Did you give the names too? Did you give the
names to Erica?
Speaker 4 (30:07):
Yes, you did.
Speaker 8 (30:08):
I gave the names to Erka of two employees, current
employees at Turning Point, who you believe were involved in
the preparation for the murder of Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 6 (30:17):
Is that what you're saying.
Speaker 9 (30:18):
I told them that if if I were in your shoes, they.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
Would these would be two employees that I would look further.
Speaker 8 (30:24):
Into what evidence do you have that they had any
prior knowledge of the murder?
Speaker 9 (30:28):
Because I don't have concrete evidence is the reason why
I'm not naming them.
Speaker 8 (30:32):
So you're you're telling the widow that these two people
may have been involved in the murder.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
So this is basically how it went.
Speaker 2 (30:41):
You know, there's a lot of talk of Egyptian planes
and all the rest, the French Foreign Legion and all
of that, right, and I don't know this is it
actually like it's it feels very frivolous to talk about this,
but it actually is really important for a number of reasons.
Number one, she's created a lot of problems on the right,
for the right because after Charlie Kirk was first of all,
I mean they you know, they really were trying to
(31:02):
consolidate this, you know, this power grab. And look, they
have a storyline Tyler Robinson, he has the trans girlfriend,
he's radicalized, and then Candice comes in and through the
opening of the investigation is genuinely a mess, as apparently
every investigation Cash Hotel is even remotely involved with him.
Speaker 1 (31:21):
Round Shooter Staw on the Loop, they talked about that.
Speaker 4 (31:23):
The lead with the MIT shooter as well.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
I mean, there's like you see these images of FBI
agents just like shuffling around in the snow Danngino's I
mean it's just unbelievable, right, and he's flying around and doing.
Speaker 4 (31:34):
Podcasts with his girlfriend, etcetera.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
So the whole thing was the investigation was a mess
from the start, all sorts of mistakes in the handling
said he had a guy and they didn't have a guy.
You had that weirdness with the one guy who stood
up right away. You've got questions still about Okay, was
you know, did he really use the rifle they're claiming,
and was this really you know, the type of round
that he used, and all sorts of things that would
sort of naturally arise in this and then compounded by
(31:57):
the fact that you have this totally shamball like joke
of an FBI director. So Candice jumps in to fill
this void. And so instead of having this like you know,
consistent sort of conservative narrative in the way that conservative
media is usually very good at, like here's our line
and we're sticking to it. Instead, she's asking, you know,
asking all these questions and the Egyptian planes and like
(32:20):
going all in on all of it maybe it's Israel,
and maybe Egypt's involved, and maybe France is involved, and
maybe the administration, maybe Erica Kirks and maybe TPUSA was
directly involved. And so she has just created this absolute
mess for the right. And at the same time, I
think there's also a lot of jealousy. Frankly that her
streams are gigant, I mean truly gigantic, the audience that
(32:45):
she has gained off of speculation about the murder of
her friend. So now you've got this fight between her
and Timpoole, And it also comes at a time when
there is just you can't even keep track of who's
mad at whom and who's fighting with whom over all
sorts of like personality based even mostly or not some
of its policy based, with most of his personality based
(33:07):
beefs and grievances that are all coming to the surface.
Speaker 4 (33:09):
And she's really like a central actor in all of this.
Speaker 3 (33:12):
Oh it's great. I mean again, we can't overstate the reach.
She's got millions of subscribers on YouTube. She's doing more
in single live streams than we'll do in a day.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
Okay, Like she's big.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
We'll have currently like hundred thousand people watching her stream
and that is massive.
Speaker 6 (33:28):
It's gigantic.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
It's orders of magnitude bigger than most people can pull
who are in politics. Right, That's something that like some
big time streamers might be able to get in a
different circumstances.
Speaker 1 (33:39):
So, yeah, I mean the right wing thing. You're definitely correct.
Speaker 3 (33:41):
I also think what your description of true crime was
the best one. Yeah, And that's why, you know, there's
been all this discussion lately about Candice's female audience. It's like, well,
have you ever looked at the demographics of true crime? Like,
come on, guys, who do you think is watching Nancy
Grace or any of these other shows back in the day.
This is a long time kind of female obsess And
then you have Candae, who's the perfect messenger.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
You can't deny her talent.
Speaker 3 (34:04):
She's unbelievable, like charismatic, and her ability to convey when
she wants to, and she can just you know, she
looks directly into the camera, her fight like presentation, all
of that.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
She's very very powerful. I do think she'll also just
make some shit up. She'll just go for it.
Speaker 2 (34:20):
She will just make some shit up. That's do that
something came to her in a dream, and therefore it
must be true.
Speaker 3 (34:25):
This is what I was about to get to with
the independent media, like kind of Venezuela. Yesterday the phone lines,
people were going off the hook on Venezuela, and people
who don't know how to do reporting just roll with it.
This is not a knock on anti war because they're
actually do reporting, but everybody else just says shit. They'll
be like, oh, this is in this guys, like you
(34:47):
actually need to learn Maybe this is just because of
the background that we came up with. Facts are things
that you can verify. You can't just go off of
single sources. Single sources lie to you all the time.
I've gotten you know, I'm not even gonna go into
it in terms of Venezuela, but just in terms of
I hear stuff all the time.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
I don't report it here on the show because you can't.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
I only ever go and publish something or say something
definitively with this is what I've heard when I've heard
it from multiple people or people directly in the room
with somebody. And even then what you need to do
is follow up with like when you're gonna make explosive claims,
especially around private individuals, you have to make comment, you
have to give them a chance to respond, you have
(35:28):
to make sure that their side is presented. This is
just from a legal perspective in terms of like defamation law,
but beyond that, it's irresponsible. And as we all saw yesterday,
you can't just go out and claim off of single sources.
Venezuela's war is coming tonight like these are deeply consequentially
your warrants matter.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
I'll give you an example. On Iran. I had the
fact that we were gonna bomb Iran.
Speaker 3 (35:50):
I basically had it about three hours before that it happened,
but it wasn't one hundred percent sure, which is why
I never came and did it for breaking points and
I told all of you behind the scenes, was like, hey,
I'm here and it's a done deal, but for midnight Hammer.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
But you can't do that. And there's a reason.
Speaker 3 (36:06):
And what I think that a lot of these people are,
you know, playing in is first of all, are acting
like defamation a lot doesn't exist, which listen, people, you're
all going to find that one out the hard way.
Speaker 1 (36:16):
Good luck with that one.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
But second is that it's irresponsible because we all have
trust in audiences.
Speaker 1 (36:22):
You and I both know.
Speaker 3 (36:23):
If you know, I could have thrown caution into the
wind and done that video on Iran would have gotten
a lot.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
I'll give you another one.
Speaker 3 (36:29):
I had Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. I had
that an hour before it was reported. Still only single
source can't do it, Okay, just can't. And there's even
though I'm sure we could have made a lot of money.
We could have you know, gotten scoops and all that stuff.
It doesn't matter because the process is a process. You
don't throw it out the window. And unfortunately this is
not just Cannas, this is like an entire ecosystem is
(36:50):
you know, is just reporting or wildly speculating all of
these things in public. We like Cannice had trust with
a large audiences over Israel fairly. I think actually she
was one of the people who really was coming out
hard about the Israeli government about Gaza, So she gained
that dissident trust that you and I have to a
(37:11):
limited extent with also a lot of other people.
Speaker 1 (37:14):
And I understand the responsibility.
Speaker 3 (37:16):
That I have to those people, but I think taking
advantage of that not just for the Charlie Kirk thing.
But to wildly and ruthlessly just throw that out the
window for whatever you personally, you know, happen to have
a Sumson crusade is really bad.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
And I see this happen not just with.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
Cannas with so many other people who get addicted to
this shit on the internet. Right, reporting is real, standards
should be real. I'm not saying that there's some law
or anything around it outside of defamation law, which does exist,
but you know, we do have a responsibility and I
think that's something that you know, watching the TPUSA thing.
I mean again, look, you can you can ask all
(37:51):
the questions you want about thirty odds six bullet and
apparently everybody's a neck expert now whenever it comes to hunting,
Like I'll leave that to the forensic people at trial.
Tyler Robbinson's people can present that at trial. I'd love
to see what the ballistics experts and all that saying,
and we'll leave it to a jury of his peers
to decide whether that's legitimate. And I'm not saying nobody
has a right not to speculate or any of that,
(38:11):
But when you ruthlessly and recklessly just speculate as fact
and imply, let's say that people are involved in assassin
like this is real life shit.
Speaker 1 (38:23):
That's where I.
Speaker 3 (38:24):
Just think it's so irresponsible not to say not to
question the FBI. Always question the FBI always, But like not,
I'm not so great big defender of TPUSA. I'm not
going to speak at America Fest. I don't really care
what happens to them, to be honest with you, Yeah,
it's just like there are people's lives here who are
at stake and who work in the organization.
Speaker 1 (38:45):
But more importantly, it's.
Speaker 3 (38:46):
About the trust that we have because you know you
and I report on a lot of controversial and conspiratorial
stuff and I know the audience that that can attract,
but I will never take them down a road unless
I really not just believe it, but have it confirmed.
And so you have a lot of trust with people
out there over issues like It'd be a lot easier
(39:06):
if I could just be like, yeah, Epstein one hundred
percent worked for Israel. I mean kind of right, and
I'll get you the evidence for that. But I didn't
say it six months ago. I didn't have the evidence,
I didn't have the emails. Right with Ryan would have
been easier, would have made a shitload more money if
I just said, yeah, one hundred, but we don't do
that here, right, And even though it would be a
lot easier if we could, so, I like, I know
(39:27):
this is long winded, but like that's kind of my
biggest disappointment, not which is with Candice, but with this
entire ecosystem around just Charlie Kirk, because it's like he
was a real human being. There were other human beings involved.
There's a personal tragedy, a political project, also people working
over at TPUSA, and then there's also the element of
just you have a lot of trust with other people,
(39:48):
so put Brigeet Macron and all this other shit aside,
like to just flip back and forth on whether they
were involved or pulling the trigger or any of that.
We've just come a long way past cash Betel screwed
something up, And how many times we talked here about
the cash that grew up, about cash blocking Joe Kent
looking into foreign you know, into a foreign connection to
the assassination.
Speaker 1 (40:08):
I have no problem talking about that.
Speaker 3 (40:10):
It's when we start to get into the realm of transponders,
Egyptian planes, French Foreign Legion all that. You're like, I'm sorry,
like this is just I mean, look, it doesn't check out, period,
It really just does not check out. Like even the
Egyptian claim again, unfortunately for me, actually went and checked
what we're talking about here. I'm like, this is so
spurious and so like, this is so spurious to even
(40:31):
just be one hundred percent sure that it's Egyptian, but
then to draw that even further to Israel and all that.
We cannot do that with any real level of responsibility.
And it's only you know, we all have trust and
the background to be able to go and actually check
those things and to make sure that we can textualize
the facts without just throwing stuff out there.
Speaker 1 (40:50):
The tip line, for.
Speaker 3 (40:51):
Example, how do you know how many unreported tips that
I have, a lot of them are true or they
end up true. As I just told all of you
that I have, I don't with them because you can't
do it without any sort of background. It's irresponsible to
the craft and also to trust. And I've seen not
just her do that, but a lot of other people
do it. And unfortunately, you know, now it's this titillating
(41:13):
true crime murder mystery, right, which has gone so far
beyond what just happened.
Speaker 1 (41:18):
To Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (41:19):
I mean it's a it's on steroids, like to make
it bipartisan here, Yeah, I mean liberals really got excited
about Russia Gate and it became like a true crime
thing for them, right, and every night they tune into
Rachel Matta, what's the next shoe that's going to drop?
Who's the next play character in this you know, grand
scheme and mystery and you know, like with this murder
(41:40):
of Charlie Kirk, there were there were kernels of truth.
There was Trump campaign and Russia connection, like that was
the real thing. And what Candice has to work with is, yes,
the FBI did screw this up.
Speaker 4 (41:53):
Yes there are parts of this that continued to be weird.
Speaker 1 (41:56):
Right.
Speaker 2 (41:56):
I don't think it's crazy for people to listen to
the doctor saying like, oh, we had a neck of
steel and that's so, and be like, what are you
talking about? That sounds ridiculous? That's fine, right, But yes,
she and I don't even want to focus just on her.
We live in this like post truth environment and so
much from the President of the United States who just
(42:16):
says whatever the hell he feels like saying bearing no
relationship to reality to Elon Musk buying Twitter, and you
know the way he has his own like he also
is like Trump in just complete reality distortion, and that's
part of what he does. Now we've got all of
this AI slop in the mix where it's increasingly different,
difficult to tell fact from fiction. And you've also had
(42:40):
a sort of like conspiracy realignment into the right, like
that was part of actually RFK Junior coming into the
right helped to bring like the people used to be
like hippie vaccine anti vaxers into the right as well.
And so you've had this shift in coalitions where you
have a disproportionate number of people are really open to
this stuff, and you've had stop the steal to prime
(43:01):
of this yan all kinds of crazy COVID conspiracies that
prime for this as well. And so this is kind
of the logical endpoint, which is why you know, when
I see Timpoole and these other people like getting so
exercised about I'm like, you.
Speaker 4 (43:12):
Know, like you've you've done this shit too.
Speaker 2 (43:14):
You may not have gone quite as wild with the
Egyptian planes and Brigitte Macron.
Speaker 4 (43:18):
Has a dick or whatever.
Speaker 2 (43:19):
But you were happy to play in these waters when
it was good for you and when it was serving you.
And now she's taken it that next level and you're
pissed that she's sort of winning in this like conspiracy off.
But even for her, there's a limit. So let me
I'll skip ahead to the basically the Peers Morgan thing
(43:40):
is like they get into the Brigitet Macron Penis thing
if you're interested in that. She does make one point
that Soccer kind of referenced about, like, hey, Pierce, you're
gonna cut you. You know now that it's safe for
you to say things are bad in Gaza, You're able
to say it, and you know I was saying this
from the beginning. I would add that Candace herself was
extremely pro Israel until sickly October seventh, so she also
(44:02):
is kind of a newcomer to really seeing, you know,
the truth of Israel and what they've been up to.
But in any case, I think she is correct in
that that that did help gain her a lot of
trust and gained a lot of people a lot of
trust who were you know, who were there and have
been sounding the alarm about what is actually going on
in Gaza. But any case back to her right after
this Erica Kirk meeting and the brisk and dangers even
(44:25):
for her is after this meeting, she goes and does
her show and she promises like, Oh, I'm going to
tell you guys everything that happened, and I'm going to
you know, I'm going to expose like what this meeting
was all about. And first of all, she gives very
little detail about what actually happened in the meaning. Second
of all, she really seems to kind of back off
some of her harder line positions visa TPUSA in particular,
(44:48):
let's go and play F four. This was right towards
the top of her show, just after the Erica Kirk meeting.
Speaker 9 (44:54):
You guys were telling me not to drink water, so
I didn't drink water while I brought my own water,
but I didn't drink that water too.
Speaker 1 (45:00):
It was a lot. There's a lot going on, okay.
Speaker 9 (45:03):
And the conversation started with Justine Strife very sensibly saying
what are we looking to accomplish here? Like what is
the actual aim of this conversation? And he was pretty clear,
and Eric was very clear that they were sort of
most upset with what I obviously a bit of a
(45:24):
fever pitch. What I tweeted that it was a god
forsaking company and people should not give money to it.
And I have to own that that's aggressive, that is
actually aggressive. In the retrospect, I was very frustrated, and
I don't know, I just I felt like weren't getting
any answers and there were so many lies, and then
I was getting attacked for asking all meaningful questions that
(45:45):
it was within their capacity to answer. And I've told
you I definitely my problem in life is that I
can rise to anger very quickly.
Speaker 2 (45:54):
After this, you can hear, Okay, that was too far,
et cetera. And then you know, I watched most of
the rest of her show, and she doesn't really get
into much more about what was actually said in this meeting,
et cetera. So Yashar Ali, who's been watching the Candas
show and really been tracking the growth of it and
what it has meant, etc. He did analysis of the
comments on this stream and we can put some of
(46:17):
them up on the screen here, and he said they
were overwhelmingly negative. Tens of thousands of comments he said,
seventy four percent of them were negative. The dominant emotional
currents of the comments were betrayal and dissillusion and suspicion,
paranoid conspiracy thinking, anger and hostility, confusion, and cognitive cognitive dissonance.
He says, here's some of the comments. I think this
(46:39):
private meeting is going to cost Candace a lot. The
best part of this episode of the comments as they
validate my deflation. If they are still gathering evidence three
months later, why did they destroy the crime scene within
days of the incident, which is expressing skepticism about some
of what Candace said. Game over, Erica got what she wanted,
all the hard work and credibility to get truth and
justice for Charlie got shot, pun in ten and it's
(47:00):
sad day, very sad day.
Speaker 4 (47:01):
Disappointed.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
Wish Candace didn't take Erica's bait by doing this, and
so listen. I do actually think the Peers Borgan debate
may have helped to bring some of her audience back,
because then she gets to be in the position of
the supposed brave truth truthteller against the you know, stick
in the mud journalist. I mean, Pierce himself is like
a tabloid sensatials, but whatever.
Speaker 4 (47:23):
Without a side of the moment.
Speaker 2 (47:24):
I do think that kind of like helped her maybe
bring her audience back along. But you know, if they
start to waiver on, Oh, Candace has been compromised, Candace
got the call, Candace is no longer telling us the truth.
Guess what, someone else is gonna pop on and kill
that boy because there's an audience to be They're all there.
Speaker 3 (47:43):
Unfortunately, my YouTube algorithm keeps pushing me to this type
of shit. There's an entire ecosystem of orbiters who are
just grifting off of this. And you know, I mean, look,
I'm not I'm not for censorship and all that. It's
fine for all of this to exist. I just think
at the Candace level up, cause it's about if we
compare the trust and people like her who have been
(48:06):
doing this now for years, and you gain this real
connection with your audience, like when you disabuse that or
in your this case, what you're like admitting that you
were mad or something and that's why you went kind
of far. I'm sorry, Like you have a responsibilit I've
been mad plenty of times. It doesn't mean you violate
or try not to violate your own personal ethics. So
this is a kind of an independent media problem. Also,
(48:28):
you were talking about, you know, the RFK and all that. Yeah,
for bringing conspiracy, Think again, I actually don't think it's RFK.
Speaker 1 (48:35):
I think it was all stop the steal.
Speaker 3 (48:36):
I think stop the steal unleashed a love because think
about it, at that time, what happened would stop the
steal was Trump would not hear it from anybody else
except for people who would just tell him whatever he
wanted to hear. Sidney Powell knows that ultimately is what
truly engendered trust between Donald Trump and some of the
people around him. You had to be willing to say
(48:57):
this election was stolen.
Speaker 1 (48:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (48:58):
It also position to the base where many Republican Fox
News commentators and others who knew that this was not
true either had to endorse it, wink at it, or whatever.
That just allowed this space to open where of course
anybody is just going to take it as far as
humanly possible. You could try and wink at it, like
Josh Holly or any others, but like at the end
(49:19):
of the day, they had to say the election was
stolen by Venezuelan dominions. That was like original sin, kind
of ground zero that opened up this entire kind of
space and ultimately led people to just bring That's what
led people to live truly in a so called post
truth environment. Now, to your point, it's not like that
is a bipartisan phenomenon. Also in its own right, when
(49:42):
we think about Russia Gate and other things like, both
have their own types of conspiracies. I also think that
there's a big class element where at the end of
the day, Russiagate, which was definitely equally bullshit, was kind
of an elite version of what that looks like. Whereas
now when you're dealing with lower class and lower it
people who are shifting into the Republican coalition, especially as
(50:04):
things move around in terms of like who votes in
which direction, it's going to look a lot more like this. This.
It won't be all as dressed up and you know,
liberal elite conspiracies have uh they have academics involved, and
everything is trust up and it's made to be more respectable.
Lower IQ movements are going to look a lot more
(50:25):
like this. And so this is a consequence of some
of the shifting class dynamics that are here. So in
Richard Hannania's you know, low human capital theory. I think
he's totally vindicated. I think this is actually what it
looks like.
Speaker 2 (50:37):
I mean, I think there's a lot of like liberal
moms who watch Canvas too, though well, I mean I
think she really I don't know that this is just
like a right wingers watching phenomenon, you know. And again,
Yasher's been the one who's tracking this like it's pretty
it's pretty mainstream, because it's fun, because it's entertaining.
Speaker 1 (50:54):
I think there's a.
Speaker 4 (50:55):
Because she's entertaining.
Speaker 2 (50:56):
But you know, what you see is, like you said,
you'll have people who will wink at it, and they're
going to get an outflanked by the people who will
actually say it. And then the minute that they don't
say the thing the audience wants, then there'll be someone
else who will come in and who will say and
then or the other thing that happens is like you
ride that conspiracy as far as it goes, and then
people get bored and they move on to whatever the
(51:17):
next thing is, and you're kind of left to the side.
Now with Canvas, I think Cannas is very talented, right,
and you know, she's been able to you know, she
had her whole Brigitte Macarln thing she's done. You know,
this isn't her first her first moment in the sun,
but this is the height of her popularity and her
celebrity in terms of American culture. And you know, I
(51:39):
don't know, I don't know if it's if this is
the peak, but I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to
sustain as the conspiracies get more ridiculous, more elaborate, more
countries and players involved, and now you're having to deal
with the reality of like whatever actually happened in that
meeting with Eric Kirk, whether they had lawyers there and
(52:01):
were like, hey, listen, here's the facts.
Speaker 4 (52:03):
And if you keep saying this ship, then we're going
to have a problem.
Speaker 1 (52:05):
Definitely cold see that too.
Speaker 2 (52:06):
I mean, and maybe she doesn't have an issue with that.
Maybe she would like the policy of getting bothered her
that you know, the Macrons are suing her over her
like whole Brigitte Macron transvestigation things.
Speaker 3 (52:17):
I mean, we'll see though, because like no matter no
matter how much money you have, like at the end
of the day, the court system will catch up with you.
So we'll see all right, thank you guys so much
for watching. It was fun to end. I think on
that note, Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, happy Honikkah, et cetera
to everybody who is out there. We're going to miss
you all, and thank you for the greatest gift of all,
(52:38):
which is the ability to do this job, which is
for me all of you, so thank you, Thank you
all very much, and we'll see you all very soon.
Speaker 9 (53:00):
Yeah,
Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of this show.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3 (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 2 (00:33):
Should we talk a little bit about the White House
Hanukah Party? Interesting some very interesting comments made here by
Trump himself and also by one of his primary backers
from the last campaign, Mary Maddison, also from his priority
campaigns as well.
Speaker 4 (00:47):
One of his top donors.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
She is very excited about giving him even more money
to run for an unconstitutional third term. Let's go ahead
and take a listen to what Trump had to say
about their relationship and what she had to say.
Speaker 5 (01:00):
Gave my campaign indirectly and directly two hundred and fifty million.
Speaker 6 (01:05):
She was number one.
Speaker 5 (01:08):
When somebody can give you two hundred and fifty million,
I think that we should give her the opportunity to
say hello and Miriam, make it quick, because two hundred
and fifty million is not what it used to be.
Speaker 6 (01:21):
Okay.
Speaker 7 (01:22):
Now I met the Alan Desho beach and you say
the legal thing about it four more years? And I said, Alan,
I agree with you, so we can do it. Think
about it.
Speaker 6 (01:36):
Where's Alan? And then this here?
Speaker 7 (01:37):
Oh he had the flights and.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
Think about a second.
Speaker 6 (01:50):
Yeah, she said, think about it. I'll give you another
two hundred and fifty million.
Speaker 4 (01:55):
Wow, So that's cool.
Speaker 1 (01:57):
Mary.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
I'm saying, hey, I give you another two hundred and
fifty million dollars if you run for a third term.
And throwing in there, dropping in the Alan Dershowitz Epstein
associate Alan Dershowitz mentioned as well, we can put d
one b up on the screen. Apparently Dershowitz wrote a
book about whether or not Trump can serve as a
(02:18):
third term Trump.
Speaker 4 (02:20):
You know, is talking to him about this.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
So you know how much money is enough? Brother?
Speaker 3 (02:25):
You know? I mean, I just don't get you're in
your what isn't in his late seventies. You're arguing with
vendors on Martha's Vineyard, Like what else do you need
in your life to be writing this boomer slop for
a bunch of people to be like, hell, how Alan
Dershowitz said Trump can run for a third term?
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Also, had anyone noticed that?
Speaker 3 (02:47):
She said she talked to Dershowitz in Israel about this.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
It's just a little too perfect. Okay, Yeah, it's just
too much.
Speaker 2 (02:54):
It's crazy how out in the open he is too
about like, yeah, she gave me a bunch of money,
so I guess we should let her say hello, you know, just.
Speaker 4 (03:01):
Making it very clear and open the way.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
That the cash for access game works. And of course,
I mean she's been incredibly important in terms of his
you know, his very.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Very positive towards Israel.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
He says he's, you know, the best president ever for Israel,
what his foreign policy there has been, And you know,
I wish you could just call this Dershowitz book, which
is titled literally titled could present President Trump constitutionally.
Speaker 4 (03:26):
Serve a third term? I wish you could call this
boomer slop.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
But like the President of the United States and Steep
Ban and some of his other advisors. I mean, they're
printing out Trump twenty twenty eight merch. This is a
live question, a real issue, and apparently Trump is interested
enough that he's actually exploring this with Dershowitz. So what
the Wall Street Journal says is that he received and
discussed a draft copy of a book by lawyer Alan
(03:49):
Dershowitz that studies whether Trump could constitutionally serve a third term.
In an interview Wednesday, Dershwitz said he told that Trump
the constitution was not clear on the issue, which I mean,
if you read the language, it seems pretty damn clear
on the issue. But and apparently, you know, Miriam's interpretation
was that Dershowitz was saying, oh, you could serve a
(04:10):
third term. In a meeting in the Oval office, Dershowitz
handed Trump draft the book, which is set to be
published next year. He said the book lays out a
host of scenarios in which an individual could serve a
third term. He said Trump told him he planned to
read the book and asked him about his conclusions on
serving The constitution bars anyone from being elected the White
House more than twice, I said, quote, it's not clear
if a president can become a third term president, and
(04:31):
it's not clear if it's permissible, said Dershowitz, who previously
served as a defense lawyer for the president. And he
went on to say he found it interesting as an
intellectual issue. Do I think he's going to run for
a third term? No, I don't think he will run
for a third term. Then what are we doing, Like,
why are you writing this book?
Speaker 4 (04:47):
And what about Why is he shaking your advice?
Speaker 2 (04:49):
And why are they printing out merchandise and why is
Miriam Maddison publicly bribing him with two hundred and fifty
million dollars to run again?
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Because it's all about a sink, which we will get
to soon.
Speaker 1 (04:58):
It's all about ego and all of that.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
But okay, to the extent, why is any of this
even interesting in the first place. People were circulating a
bunch of clips from twenty sixteen from Trump's original appeal
talking about how everybody on the stage was bought and
how he had bought those same politicians and that's why
nobody could buy him. And I mean, look, it's been
eight years for some of our gen Z audience, they
(05:20):
probably don't even remember that. But that was crazy. That
actually was crazy. That was part of the appeal. Now,
obviously you could point to various different things about how
he didn't operate that way in the first term or
during the second term, but like this level of rich guys,
just like openly trying to buy the government. Even in
the first term, it really was not like this, I
(05:42):
can tell you, like it was more understated, you could
report it et ceterable, Like this time it's way more
out in the open, like in a way that again,
if you're newer to politics, like you really don't get
how different this is from the first time around. I mean,
Trump at one point spent his own money during the
twenty sixteen campaign, right, it was a very different environment
this time around, Like the open feeling of selling out
(06:04):
like with crypto and oh my god, this morning his
media company merged with some nuclear fusion company. You're like,
what the fuck is happening?
Speaker 2 (06:12):
Yeah, or like his billions, don Junior's getting money, like
everybody is getting paid.
Speaker 4 (06:19):
It's part of what I mean.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
There are many reasons why, like his his rhetoric about
Somali fraud and whatever. One of the reasons why it
is so galling to me is I'm like, look, at
your regime, Like you guys are stealing everything that's not
nailed down. The whole thing is operated as a massive
multi billion dollar grift for you and your cronies. Like
that is the core ideology at the heart of this administration.
(06:43):
How and and your pardon power is being used. How
many grifters and con artists, white collar schemers have you
let off the hook? And by the way, rob they're
victims of ever seeing a dollar of restitutions. So like,
spare me. It's just disgusting. It's discussing, and you're right,
you know, it was pretty brazen in the first term,
(07:06):
but it was like people go and stay at his hotel.
Now I'm telling you, I'm going to cut you millions
of dollars directly into your crypto scam. So I'm going
to bring you a gold bar in the Oval office.
I mean, the level of brazen corruption is truly the
It is the worst we've ever had in this car.
There is no doubt about it. And not to say
like other politicians were perfect, blah blah blah.
Speaker 4 (07:28):
This is another level we have never seen before.
Speaker 3 (07:31):
It's never been out in the open where you just
brought like listen, donors have always been ambassadors. Donors have
always been at the White House Christmas Party. Nobody's ever
liked this lady gave me two hundred and fifty million,
so she lets her buy the mic. It just doesn't happen.
Think about being a special government and Pat, Yeah, I'm just.
Speaker 4 (07:47):
Gonna let you do whatever you want to.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
You gave me money, now go do whatever you want
to the government mister billionaire, richest man on the planet,
who has endless conflicts of interest. So from the jump,
it has just been you know, a complete like theft
of the public trust. It's absolute insanity. And so this is, yeah,
another display where you have you know, this person Mariam Maddelson.
(08:10):
Trump famously said he's not sure if she's more loyal
to the US or to Israel, and thinks that she
likes Israel better. And so this is the person who
you know, he's bragging about how much money she gave
him in the past and how much money she'll give
him a gut in the future if you desire to
run again.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
It's crazy.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Also, i'd never heard her speak before. I didn't realize
she had such an accent. I'm like wow, I'm like.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Okay, I got it.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
I mean, just look again, it's shocking, right if we
at the same time they want to talk about Muslims
or any of that. It's like you have a lady
given quarter bill to the president and you hear her
and you're like, what was.
Speaker 6 (08:41):
That, Miriam?
Speaker 1 (08:42):
Huh? Do you speak English properly?
Speaker 3 (08:44):
You're like, wow, okay, and you know you're openly advocating.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
For a for foreign countries interest. Pretty wild. Not the
only wild thing though, that came out of that one.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Let's put d two Mark Levin, the famous Fox News
host and anointing Trump the first Jewish president.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Let's take a listen, and I said, this is our
first Jewish president.
Speaker 6 (09:09):
Now he's the first Jewish president to serve two.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
Not consecutive president.
Speaker 6 (09:17):
Thank you for everything.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
Wow, I'm sure that will quiet the conspiracy theorist. I mean,
I don't know. It's just one of those where you
put it all together.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
It's just too naked, it's too out in the open,
and it's grotesque honestly, which we'll get to soon with
the Presidential Walk of Fame, et cetera. But there is
something about this which is so different from his original
conception as a politician that if you weren't there to
(09:49):
cover that, it's almost hard to tell you like how
shocking not shocking, like surprising, but like how shocking in
its public presentation it is and how I mean, Look,
I can't speak for Maga. I don't know, you know
what goes through these people's minds. I'm sure they can
rationalize everything, but at a certain point, it's just my
belief that you know, things like this.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
Maybe they won't make him think he's.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
A villain or any of that, but they're gonna be like,
h it makes me upset, or this is counter to
his public image. Now, well they still support him, probably okay,
but he's not running for the ballot. So in the future,
any politician who like like you're talking about the smili thing,
I think the small thing is disgusting in terms of
what they were doing.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
And I do think there's a lot of Dei and
a lot.
Speaker 3 (10:30):
Of other liberals don't want to talk about it because
of their race or their because of their religion. But
like you just said, I'm not going to hear it
from people who are openly selling partons in Ponzi's to
part to Ponzi schemers. I can't write. It would be ridiculous,
it would be hypocritical. And that's why when you see
it online and they're like, oh my god, these people
are defrault I'm like, guys, like, you know that your
president is also doing the same thing, and you don't
(10:51):
have shit to say about it, right, we can't hear
that from you. And hypocrisy is baked into politics. But
at a certain point, it's also about power. You know,
you're talking here about a bunch of Somali immigrants and
you're talking about the president of the United States. It's like,
it's just not the same, bro, and you can't be
you can't be talking about one if you don't have
the other. That's my belief people have for years. Trump
has got away with hypocrisy. But it's just my personal thing.
(11:14):
Like maybe it's just me, uh, but I do think
that something is kind of breaking with Trump and the
agelessins and the crypto stuff. I do think it's penetrating
in a way that it hasn't before. And I think
it's because it's more brazen than ever before. I'm telling you,
the first term was not like this. It was not
like operationally it was just very different and so out
in the open, the crypto stuff, the pardons and everything.
(11:36):
It's just completely counter to so much of what his
public image was in the past. And even during the campaign,
I've been talking about Biden and corruption and all that, Like,
thinking about Hunter Biden, it seems quaint.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
I meanintings, are you kidding me?
Speaker 1 (11:48):
Right? Which was bad? Like covered it? It was bad?
It was horrible. Yeah, this you're like if that was horrible?
Like do we have words for no words for that?
Speaker 2 (11:56):
Yeah, exactly, genuinely have no words and something else, I
have no words. It's important, Like it's really important to understand.
These people, Mark Levin, Miry Maddelson in particular, have been
very important in terms of Trump's foreign policy. Viza, the Israel,
and Gaza, in the entire Middle East. And they are delighted.
They are delighted with him. They think that he has
(12:17):
done a wonderful job. They're getting everything they want from
this administration. You can see that. I mean again, she's
willing a pony up another quarter bill in order to
get him back in the White House.
Speaker 4 (12:28):
A third time.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
And so you know, right now we're supposedly in this
quote unquote ceasefire. You've had so many Palestinians killed the ceasefire.
I don't know if Israel is abided by the seasfire
literally a single day. And at the same time you
have just absolute misery D three up on the screen.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
I've had these horrific storms. You know, it's winter there,
it's cold.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
You've had babies literally who are freezing to death, people
in these flooded you know, it's just horrible, Like, it's
just horrible. And you still have and of course Ryan
and drop Site have done some of the most important
reporting on this. You still have so much aid being blocked,
including you know, supplies that would at least help to
(13:12):
ease some of the suffering here as they struggle with this,
you know, this cold rain coming in and the misery
that all imagine living like this, like just imagine living
like especially after all that they have been through. So,
you know, Miriam and Mark Levin, they think that what
Trump has done here is just great.
Speaker 4 (13:31):
You're loving just according to their plan.
Speaker 3 (13:33):
Yeah, one hundred percent that I mean, that's genuinely what
they voted for. And you know what, they're the ones
who really got what they wanted. So okay, I guess
we really see who has the power. And it's also
the fact, I mean the level of defense that people
jump to for Miriam Adelson because she funds so many
of the congressmen on the Republican side here in the country.
(13:53):
They talk about how it's anti Semitic to worry about
dual citizens, like remember they attack Thomas mass and others.
It's like, guys, Trump himself literally said, I asked her
whether she cares more about Israel or America, and I
kind of think that we know the answer. It's like, literally,
he just says the quiet trope out loud, Yeah, that
they're not that they that they.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
Accuse you of anti Semitism.
Speaker 3 (14:14):
And he still worships her here at the Oval Office,
I mean at the White House. Isn't she a recipient
of the Medical Medal of Freedom too from the President?
Speaker 1 (14:22):
Like it's just so naked, so out in the open.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
Remember, And oh, I forgot to mention that that's part
of the reason why twenty sixteen, he literally attacked Sheldon
Agelson and Marco Rubio. He said, Sheldon Agelsen will give
Marco Rubio all the dollars that he wants to buy
him or something.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
Now look at that. He called him a puppet.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
Yeah, puppet, like a perfect puppet for perfect puppet.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
That for Sheldon Agolsen.
Speaker 3 (14:44):
Again, if you weren't around, then it's hard to describe,
like how different it is this time around.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
But yeah, there we go. All right, let's get to
the White House.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
As if things couldn't get any worse, and as if
I could not be more personally attacked by Donald Trump's
renovation of the White House is legalized rescheduling of marijuana,
which is very likely to happen today, potentially not taxing
gambling winning is helping out pornography companies. He has further
desecrated the People's House with new plaques underneath his so
(15:14):
called walk in a Hall of fame there on the
White House colonnade.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
Let's take a list look at some of these.
Speaker 3 (15:23):
This called the Presidential Walk of Fame, was conceived, built,
and dedicated by President Donald DE Trump as a tribute
to past president's good, bad, and somewhere in the middle,
who served our country and gave up so much in
so doing. The Presidential Walk of Fame will long live
as a testament and tribute to the greatness of America.
Dedicated on November five, twenty twenty five. I am personally asking,
(15:45):
no matter who it is that comes into the office
next year, we need a ritualistic burning on the road,
but in the newly restored rose garden. So first we
will plunder the concrete. We will take it, we will
dig it all up, we will replant the rose garden.
After the rose garden is there, we will ritualistically burn
(16:06):
these plaques and any other such desecrated signs that say
the Oval Office on the Oval Office or the presidential
chap the ballroom. We will dismantle brick by brick. We
need like Marxist Leninists to come in here, like Bolshevik
red guard.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
I sign up. I'll be ready. You can give me
a red guard, give me an armband. I'm ready to roll.
I'm all sure.
Speaker 3 (16:27):
We'll get the troops together, and we will you know,
by hand, you know, and our socialists, you know, like
the hammer and the sickle, will come together, no bulldozers.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
We will do it together.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
We will rise up together, and we will burn this
fucker to the ground whenever it comes to the ballroom. Now,
just to show you the plaque that we have here,
let's put this one up here on the screen. These
are the plaques that now accompany every president. You know,
he famously why the gold furnishings.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Above the pot? You know what I mean?
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Like the flames themselves are already offensive enough, but why
the gold above the said frame? Like?
Speaker 1 (17:04):
Why? So let's take a look at Let's read some
of these plaques, shall we?
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Which Trump apparently wrote himself, This is Obama's Barack Hussein
Obama was the first black president. Community or It's very
woke of Trump to capitalize black.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
Did you see that? Yes? Very woke?
Speaker 3 (17:20):
Yeah, Thankkenky, Resident Trump for sticking with the New York
Times post BLM style guide a community organizer. One term
senator from Illinois one of the most divisive political letters
in American history. As president, he passed the highly ineffective
Unaffordable Care Act, resulting in his party losing control of
both Houses of Congress the election of the largest House
(17:41):
Republican majority since nineteen forty six. He presided over a
stagnant economy, economy capitalized for no reason whatsoever, approved the
terrible Iran Duclear Deal, and signed the one sided Paris
Climate Accords, both of which were later terminated by President
Donald J.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Trump.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
Under Obama, the ISIS Caliphate spread across the Middle East,
a collapse into chaos. Russia invaded and took Crimea and
Ukraine crippled small businesses with crushing regulation.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
Environment blah blah blah.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
Obama also spied on the twenty sixteen presidential campaign of
President Trump and presided over the what was that the
creation of the Russia Russia Russia hoax? The worst political
scandal in American history history capitalized, He handicapped success Hillary,
his hand picked successor, Assasid handicaps Well maybe Hilary Rodham
(18:29):
Clinton would then lose the presidency to Donald J.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
Trump.
Speaker 2 (18:33):
So it seems very neutral, very now historically accurate.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Let's say, even if it wasn't neutral, all right, could
we at least have it be written better, like, you know,
grammatically correct, maybe you know, just maybe a little bit
more dignified or something a little a little briefer, Yeah, briefer,
very lengthy, lots of run on sentences.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
Let's go to the next one.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
Rid of the character limit on Twitter. Here is continues
to bleed over here.
Speaker 3 (19:00):
Joe Biden, sleepy Joe Biden was by far the worst
president in American history. Taking confidence as a result. Look,
I hate Biden. I wouldn't even call the worst president
of American history. Was the result of the most corrupt
election ever seen in the United States. Oversaw a series
of unprecedented disasters that brought our nation. His politic policies
(19:22):
caused the highest inflation capitalized ever recorded, leading the US
dollar dollar capitalized to lose more than twenty percent of
its value in four years.
Speaker 1 (19:31):
His green new scam surrendered America.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Okay, I think everybody gets the idea for what we've
got there.
Speaker 4 (19:38):
He even gets into the debate.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
Yeah, gets into the debate, the famous debate. Put E
four up there on the screen if there was any
doubt whatsoever. White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt confirming quote,
the plaques are eloquently written descriptions of each president and
the legacy they left behind. As a student of history,
many were written directly by.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
The President himself. We know, we know, ma'am.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
Thank you for confirming that ballroom update for everybody out there,
Let's put this one up here on the screen. New
model that was displayed in President Trump's oval office, so
you can see the campus. So we've got the West Wing,
you know, there you go get the iconic White House. Really, whoa,
what is that monstrosity that's sitting there? Oh, that's the
ball Do you see how much bigger the ballroom is
(20:27):
than the White House.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
I'm scared to like get a new architect because the
original one was like I'm not doing.
Speaker 3 (20:34):
It's like, I'm not doing this. They actually started beefing.
For anybody wondering, the cost may now actually be four
hundred million. Let's go put that next one up there
on the screen. This is an increase I believe in
about one hundred and fifty million since the last time
that it had previously had been talked about. So yeah,
that's we're talking about four hundred million dollars, four hundred
(20:56):
million dollars for the ballroom being privately done or whatever
by these multi billionaires to desecrate the White House campus.
And unfortunately, this is a little Nimby cell for all
of you right now. Unfortunately, the White House campus and
a few other things under control of the president do
(21:16):
not have to go through any historical preservation or architectural review.
They're basically under the total purview of the executive. The
National Historical Preservation actually tried let's put this up here
on the screen that would have blocked the construction of
the ballroom, but ended up overruling them and denying the
motion in order to do so. This is shocking, and
(21:38):
actually we need to make sure that this never happens again.
After we dismantled the ball room, by the way, after
we dismandled the ballroom, we're going to say nobody can
ever touch it again. And then it actually used to
go through some architectural review. Now people may think that
this is some pet project and all of that, But
the reason why I think it's fun to include in
the show is what we learned about through those word
clouds and through polling. This shit resonates in a way
(21:59):
that I never thought that it would. And yeah, I
think there's a small seat conservatism that a lot of
people feel where they're like, oh, this is not about you.
This is not about like the White House is literally
not about you. And then whenever it comes to the
plaques making it it's not about overtly political, it's just
overtly Trump Like he's like, I am going to make
(22:20):
the colonade so petty, right, because what is yes, the pettiness,
which is a direct expression of Donald Trump. But what
those photos that come out of the Colonnade. It becomes
a place where everyone's photo.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
Who's taken there? You know, I have it's not about me.
Speaker 3 (22:36):
I'm seeing people who if the photos that are taken there,
it's about like that was at the White House, but
now it's about the Trump House, right from the Rose
Garden to the Colonnade to the goal to the Oval office.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
He's like, this is about me.
Speaker 3 (22:48):
And that's what I think is resonating in terms of
its takeover across the country. Call me a shit lib
and all that don't care, Like it's it's I don't
care whether it's Trump or anybody else. It's a monstras right,
Like That's the point that I think a lot of
people are resonating with is they can see this as
a direct obsession of the president while they feel like
(23:10):
they're you know, the economy is slipping away and that
this is your overall priority. So that's why, you know,
I'm pleasantly surprised to see that a lot.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
Of people care. A lot of people people care a
hell of a lot more than I thought.
Speaker 4 (23:22):
Yeah, it's interesting, it's very interesting.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
What breaks through to the Memoriason really gets you know,
like as its cultural moment. But in terms of the plaques, Listen,
it's one thing when you see this bullshit from him
on Twitter r Right, it's Twitter. Twitter is not sort
of inherently undignified. Right, We're talking about the White House here,
and now you're putting some Twitter esque or true Social
esque bullshit on an official plaque at.
Speaker 4 (23:46):
The White House.
Speaker 2 (23:47):
And it's so in his leg I mean, it's it
sounds and reads like he literally did post it on
True Social and now this is what you're doing to
the people's house. Yeah, it's so incredibly petty, it's so small,
it's so undignified for the office, and you know, I
think it just makes Americans feel like, what have we
come to? What have we come to that this is
(24:09):
what's going on in the White House with our president,
that this is the man who is leading, you know,
a country that many people see as the greatest on
earth and through their like American exceptionalist lens. So, yeah,
I do think these kind of things too. It's very like,
it's very visual, it's very visceral, all of that, and
it speaks, as you were saying, sober too, the fact
that like this is what he's spending his actual time
(24:31):
in brain share on and then meanwhile he's like rushing
through some bullshit speech about the economy because he really
doesn't give a shit and he thinks that everything is fine.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
Yeah, at least that's the way that comes off. I
mean there's no defense, okay. And this is why it's
like this needs to go period, Like we cannot have this,
and we need nimbism to fully come into effect and
be like nobody gets to touch the White House within
an insane architectural review process.
Speaker 1 (24:55):
Between can't handle this.
Speaker 4 (24:56):
Between that and the data centers becoming more.
Speaker 3 (24:59):
PRESI so the thing is nimby gets a knock and
I get it is that it is often weaponized by
the landowner class in San Francisco.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
The rich people want to ptect their property values.
Speaker 3 (25:09):
Fine, but the fundamental idea behind nimbi is people who
live somewhere get to control the shit.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
That happens in their neighborhood. And that's true.
Speaker 3 (25:18):
I mean it should be the most true for public resource.
We're not even talking about private land here. We're talking
about public land, like publicly owned, taxpayer funded land and
buildings which are not just iconic, belong to all of us.
That's the whole purpose. One of the things tragedies at,
unfortunately for the White House, is that people can't really
(25:40):
get that close to it anymore, you know, with nine
to eleven and Boston bombing and all that stuff.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Like I've watched it happen over the years.
Speaker 3 (25:46):
You used to be able to go up to the fence,
and now you can't even get close. And the more
that it becomes securitized and people get farther away from it,
you don't feel the connection that you deserve. In my opinion,
everybody should be able to go up to the fence
at the very least and take a picture, you know
if they want to, or easily be able to get
a tour, because the history is yours, it's not theirs.
That's the whole point, and I think that's what it inverts.
(26:08):
It's very sad, honestly. I was just looking at photos
yesterday from the East Wing. I was like, oh my god,
I can't.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
Believe this is gone. I can't believe it.
Speaker 3 (26:15):
And it's one of those where they have I think
they don't know what they're playing with. They really believed
that they could just do this and nobody would care.
And then when those photos started to come out of
the demolition and every I mean, those went very viral.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
Yeah, And because.
Speaker 4 (26:29):
Trump started to realize because he banned.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Yeah, because he banned photographs of the East Wing, he.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
Kind of started to get like, oh, this doesn't this
doesn't look great. I mean, now the thing that connects
to the story about him like exploring a third term,
because what you really think this guy is like building
this gigantic ballroom and he intends to just like step
aside peacefully when his term is over.
Speaker 4 (26:49):
Doesn't really feel like it, does it.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
That's right.
Speaker 2 (26:54):
So we had a big meeting this week between Canis
Owens and Erica Kirk. Candace Man her her streams have
exploded in popularity, talk about things that have sort of
like broken containment. She has, you know, I mean, she's
created this whole true crime mystery series out of the
public assassination of her friend Charlie Kirk, and you know,
(27:16):
has been saying very you know, suggestive things about Erica Kirk,
very aggressive things about turning Point Usa, et cetera.
Speaker 4 (27:23):
There was originally supposed to be they wanted.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
To do a live stream with her and you know,
did it in kind of a shady way where she
couldn't make it on that day. And then they were like, oh,
she doesn't want to do it, and she said I'd
do it remotely whatever, So they scrapped that plan, and
Erica Kirk suggested after her you know, media tour in
her town hall and all of that, lets you and
I have a private meeting.
Speaker 4 (27:44):
So I'll show you in a minute.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
The candae Owen show after the Erica Kirk meeting, where
she kind of did back down from some of her
stuff and her audience was very not happy about that.
But after all of this, she also went on with
Peers Morgan where they argued about some of the conspiracy
theories that she has been floating and you know putting
forward on her show. Me give you a sense of
(28:08):
how that went. This is basically I did watch the
whole thing. This is basically kind of emblematic of the
entire hour where Peers is basically like, so what do
you actually think happened and what evidence do you.
Speaker 4 (28:19):
Have for it?
Speaker 2 (28:19):
And Candice just is you know, talking very fast and
kind of spinning her wheels the whole time. Let's take
a listen to F one.
Speaker 8 (28:24):
I want to get to the reality of what you're
actually saying. So when you say that somebody at Turning Point, USA,
Charlie's company was complicit in his murder?
Speaker 6 (28:34):
Who who was?
Speaker 9 (28:37):
I believe that there were multiple people at Turning Point
who are, as I have said many times my exact words,
aren't they are engaged in a cover up of what
happened to Charlie in that day.
Speaker 6 (28:48):
Now, but who was involved in his murder?
Speaker 1 (28:51):
I didn't say that they murdered Charlie.
Speaker 6 (28:53):
You said Turning Point were complicit in his murder.
Speaker 9 (28:56):
No, my exact sentence that I've said was that there
were people at Turning Point who are engaged in a
cover up.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
I believe thorally.
Speaker 6 (29:05):
You didn't say that. You said literally did say that.
Speaker 8 (29:08):
You said there were people at Turning Point complicit in
is murder.
Speaker 9 (29:12):
Okay, that's what you said when you and I were discussing.
That's why I said, let's go back. I was applying
the logic of a conspiracy to JFK. I said, Okay, JFK,
you have people that are complicit. Of course, if you
apply that logic, if there's a conspiracy, there's going to
be multiple people that are going to be complicit by
the time in order for a large stage murder. As
do I think someone at Turning Point pulled the trigger? No,
(29:33):
obviously I don't make so much anybody Turning Point?
Speaker 6 (29:36):
Did anybody Turning Point?
Speaker 8 (29:38):
Did anybody at Turning Point in your opinion, know that
Charlie Kirk was going to be murdered?
Speaker 9 (29:43):
There is specifically two people at Turning Point USA, and
I have communicated that information to Erica and justin strife
that I would not be surprised if they had for
knowledge of Charlie Kirk being assassinated. I'm not going to
name I am not going to name those people, okay,
because it's not right for me to name those people
until I know for a fact that.
Speaker 6 (30:04):
Did you give the names too? Did you give the
names to Erica?
Speaker 4 (30:07):
Yes, you did.
Speaker 8 (30:08):
I gave the names to Erka of two employees, current
employees at Turning Point, who you believe were involved in
the preparation for the murder of Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 6 (30:17):
Is that what you're saying.
Speaker 9 (30:18):
I told them that if if I were in your shoes, they.
Speaker 1 (30:22):
Would these would be two employees that I would look further.
Speaker 8 (30:24):
Into what evidence do you have that they had any
prior knowledge of the murder?
Speaker 9 (30:28):
Because I don't have concrete evidence is the reason why
I'm not naming them.
Speaker 8 (30:32):
So you're you're telling the widow that these two people
may have been involved in the murder.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
So this is basically how it went.
Speaker 2 (30:41):
You know, there's a lot of talk of Egyptian planes
and all the rest, the French Foreign Legion and all
of that, right, and I don't know this is it
actually like it's it feels very frivolous to talk about this,
but it actually is really important for a number of reasons.
Number one, she's created a lot of problems on the right,
for the right because after Charlie Kirk was first of all,
I mean they you know, they really were trying to
(31:02):
consolidate this, you know, this power grab. And look, they
have a storyline Tyler Robinson, he has the trans girlfriend,
he's radicalized, and then Candice comes in and through the
opening of the investigation is genuinely a mess, as apparently
every investigation Cash Hotel is even remotely involved with him.
Speaker 1 (31:21):
Round Shooter Staw on the Loop, they talked about that.
Speaker 4 (31:23):
The lead with the MIT shooter as well.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
I mean, there's like you see these images of FBI
agents just like shuffling around in the snow Danngino's I
mean it's just unbelievable, right, and he's flying around and doing.
Speaker 4 (31:34):
Podcasts with his girlfriend, etcetera.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
So the whole thing was the investigation was a mess
from the start, all sorts of mistakes in the handling
said he had a guy and they didn't have a guy.
You had that weirdness with the one guy who stood
up right away. You've got questions still about Okay, was
you know, did he really use the rifle they're claiming,
and was this really you know, the type of round
that he used, and all sorts of things that would
sort of naturally arise in this and then compounded by
(31:57):
the fact that you have this totally shamball like joke
of an FBI director. So Candice jumps in to fill
this void. And so instead of having this like you know,
consistent sort of conservative narrative in the way that conservative
media is usually very good at, like here's our line
and we're sticking to it. Instead, she's asking, you know,
asking all these questions and the Egyptian planes and like
(32:20):
going all in on all of it maybe it's Israel,
and maybe Egypt's involved, and maybe France is involved, and
maybe the administration, maybe Erica Kirks and maybe TPUSA was
directly involved. And so she has just created this absolute
mess for the right. And at the same time, I
think there's also a lot of jealousy. Frankly that her
streams are gigant, I mean truly gigantic, the audience that
(32:45):
she has gained off of speculation about the murder of
her friend. So now you've got this fight between her
and Timpoole, And it also comes at a time when
there is just you can't even keep track of who's
mad at whom and who's fighting with whom over all
sorts of like personality based even mostly or not some
of its policy based, with most of his personality based
(33:07):
beefs and grievances that are all coming to the surface.
Speaker 4 (33:09):
And she's really like a central actor in all of this.
Speaker 3 (33:12):
Oh it's great. I mean again, we can't overstate the reach.
She's got millions of subscribers on YouTube. She's doing more
in single live streams than we'll do in a day.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
Okay, Like she's big.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
We'll have currently like hundred thousand people watching her stream
and that is massive.
Speaker 6 (33:28):
It's gigantic.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
It's orders of magnitude bigger than most people can pull
who are in politics. Right, That's something that like some
big time streamers might be able to get in a
different circumstances.
Speaker 1 (33:39):
So, yeah, I mean the right wing thing. You're definitely correct.
Speaker 3 (33:41):
I also think what your description of true crime was
the best one. Yeah, And that's why, you know, there's
been all this discussion lately about Candice's female audience. It's like, well,
have you ever looked at the demographics of true crime? Like,
come on, guys, who do you think is watching Nancy
Grace or any of these other shows back in the day.
This is a long time kind of female obsess And
then you have Candae, who's the perfect messenger.
Speaker 1 (34:03):
You can't deny her talent.
Speaker 3 (34:04):
She's unbelievable, like charismatic, and her ability to convey when
she wants to, and she can just you know, she
looks directly into the camera, her fight like presentation, all
of that.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
She's very very powerful. I do think she'll also just
make some shit up. She'll just go for it.
Speaker 2 (34:20):
She will just make some shit up. That's do that
something came to her in a dream, and therefore it
must be true.
Speaker 3 (34:25):
This is what I was about to get to with
the independent media, like kind of Venezuela. Yesterday the phone lines,
people were going off the hook on Venezuela, and people
who don't know how to do reporting just roll with it.
This is not a knock on anti war because they're
actually do reporting, but everybody else just says shit. They'll
be like, oh, this is in this guys, like you
(34:47):
actually need to learn Maybe this is just because of
the background that we came up with. Facts are things
that you can verify. You can't just go off of
single sources. Single sources lie to you all the time.
I've gotten you know, I'm not even gonna go into
it in terms of Venezuela, but just in terms of
I hear stuff all the time.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
I don't report it here on the show because you can't.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
I only ever go and publish something or say something
definitively with this is what I've heard when I've heard
it from multiple people or people directly in the room
with somebody. And even then what you need to do
is follow up with like when you're gonna make explosive claims,
especially around private individuals, you have to make comment, you
have to give them a chance to respond, you have
(35:28):
to make sure that their side is presented. This is
just from a legal perspective in terms of like defamation law,
but beyond that, it's irresponsible. And as we all saw yesterday,
you can't just go out and claim off of single sources.
Venezuela's war is coming tonight like these are deeply consequentially
your warrants matter.
Speaker 1 (35:45):
I'll give you an example. On Iran. I had the
fact that we were gonna bomb Iran.
Speaker 3 (35:50):
I basically had it about three hours before that it happened,
but it wasn't one hundred percent sure, which is why
I never came and did it for breaking points and
I told all of you behind the scenes, was like, hey,
I'm here and it's a done deal, but for midnight Hammer.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
But you can't do that. And there's a reason.
Speaker 3 (36:06):
And what I think that a lot of these people are,
you know, playing in is first of all, are acting
like defamation a lot doesn't exist, which listen, people, you're
all going to find that one out the hard way.
Speaker 1 (36:16):
Good luck with that one.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
But second is that it's irresponsible because we all have
trust in audiences.
Speaker 1 (36:22):
You and I both know.
Speaker 3 (36:23):
If you know, I could have thrown caution into the
wind and done that video on Iran would have gotten
a lot.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
I'll give you another one.
Speaker 3 (36:29):
I had Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. I had
that an hour before it was reported. Still only single
source can't do it, Okay, just can't. And there's even
though I'm sure we could have made a lot of money.
We could have you know, gotten scoops and all that stuff.
It doesn't matter because the process is a process. You
don't throw it out the window. And unfortunately this is
not just Cannas, this is like an entire ecosystem is
(36:50):
you know, is just reporting or wildly speculating all of
these things in public. We like Cannice had trust with
a large audiences over Israel fairly. I think actually she
was one of the people who really was coming out
hard about the Israeli government about Gaza, So she gained
that dissident trust that you and I have to a
(37:11):
limited extent with also a lot of other people.
Speaker 1 (37:14):
And I understand the responsibility.
Speaker 3 (37:16):
That I have to those people, but I think taking
advantage of that not just for the Charlie Kirk thing.
But to wildly and ruthlessly just throw that out the
window for whatever you personally, you know, happen to have
a Sumson crusade is really bad.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
And I see this happen not just with.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
Cannas with so many other people who get addicted to
this shit on the internet. Right, reporting is real, standards
should be real. I'm not saying that there's some law
or anything around it outside of defamation law, which does exist,
but you know, we do have a responsibility and I
think that's something that you know, watching the TPUSA thing.
I mean again, look, you can you can ask all
(37:51):
the questions you want about thirty odds six bullet and
apparently everybody's a neck expert now whenever it comes to hunting,
Like I'll leave that to the forensic people at trial.
Tyler Robbinson's people can present that at trial. I'd love
to see what the ballistics experts and all that saying,
and we'll leave it to a jury of his peers
to decide whether that's legitimate. And I'm not saying nobody
has a right not to speculate or any of that,
(38:11):
But when you ruthlessly and recklessly just speculate as fact
and imply, let's say that people are involved in assassin
like this is real life shit.
Speaker 1 (38:23):
That's where I.
Speaker 3 (38:24):
Just think it's so irresponsible not to say not to
question the FBI. Always question the FBI always, But like not,
I'm not so great big defender of TPUSA. I'm not
going to speak at America Fest. I don't really care
what happens to them, to be honest with you, Yeah,
it's just like there are people's lives here who are
at stake and who work in the organization.
Speaker 1 (38:45):
But more importantly, it's.
Speaker 3 (38:46):
About the trust that we have because you know you
and I report on a lot of controversial and conspiratorial
stuff and I know the audience that that can attract,
but I will never take them down a road unless
I really not just believe it, but have it confirmed.
And so you have a lot of trust with people
out there over issues like It'd be a lot easier
(39:06):
if I could just be like, yeah, Epstein one hundred
percent worked for Israel. I mean kind of right, and
I'll get you the evidence for that. But I didn't
say it six months ago. I didn't have the evidence,
I didn't have the emails. Right with Ryan would have
been easier, would have made a shitload more money if
I just said, yeah, one hundred, but we don't do
that here, right, And even though it would be a
lot easier if we could, so, I like, I know
(39:27):
this is long winded, but like that's kind of my
biggest disappointment, not which is with Candice, but with this
entire ecosystem around just Charlie Kirk, because it's like he
was a real human being. There were other human beings involved.
There's a personal tragedy, a political project, also people working
over at TPUSA, and then there's also the element of
just you have a lot of trust with other people,
(39:48):
so put Brigeet Macron and all this other shit aside,
like to just flip back and forth on whether they
were involved or pulling the trigger or any of that.
We've just come a long way past cash Betel screwed
something up, And how many times we talked here about
the cash that grew up, about cash blocking Joe Kent
looking into foreign you know, into a foreign connection to
the assassination.
Speaker 1 (40:08):
I have no problem talking about that.
Speaker 3 (40:10):
It's when we start to get into the realm of transponders,
Egyptian planes, French Foreign Legion all that. You're like, I'm sorry,
like this is just I mean, look, it doesn't check out, period,
It really just does not check out. Like even the
Egyptian claim again, unfortunately for me, actually went and checked
what we're talking about here. I'm like, this is so
spurious and so like, this is so spurious to even
(40:31):
just be one hundred percent sure that it's Egyptian, but
then to draw that even further to Israel and all that.
We cannot do that with any real level of responsibility.
And it's only you know, we all have trust and
the background to be able to go and actually check
those things and to make sure that we can textualize
the facts without just throwing stuff out there.
Speaker 1 (40:50):
The tip line, for.
Speaker 3 (40:51):
Example, how do you know how many unreported tips that
I have, a lot of them are true or they
end up true. As I just told all of you
that I have, I don't with them because you can't
do it without any sort of background. It's irresponsible to
the craft and also to trust. And I've seen not
just her do that, but a lot of other people
do it. And unfortunately, you know, now it's this titillating
(41:13):
true crime murder mystery, right, which has gone so far
beyond what just happened.
Speaker 1 (41:18):
To Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (41:19):
I mean it's a it's on steroids, like to make
it bipartisan here, Yeah, I mean liberals really got excited
about Russia Gate and it became like a true crime
thing for them, right, and every night they tune into
Rachel Matta, what's the next shoe that's going to drop?
Who's the next play character in this you know, grand
scheme and mystery and you know, like with this murder
(41:40):
of Charlie Kirk, there were there were kernels of truth.
There was Trump campaign and Russia connection, like that was
the real thing. And what Candice has to work with is, yes,
the FBI did screw this up.
Speaker 4 (41:53):
Yes there are parts of this that continued to be weird.
Speaker 1 (41:56):
Right.
Speaker 2 (41:56):
I don't think it's crazy for people to listen to
the doctor saying like, oh, we had a neck of
steel and that's so, and be like, what are you
talking about? That sounds ridiculous? That's fine, right, But yes,
she and I don't even want to focus just on her.
We live in this like post truth environment and so
much from the President of the United States who just
(42:16):
says whatever the hell he feels like saying bearing no
relationship to reality to Elon Musk buying Twitter, and you
know the way he has his own like he also
is like Trump in just complete reality distortion, and that's
part of what he does. Now we've got all of
this AI slop in the mix where it's increasingly different,
difficult to tell fact from fiction. And you've also had
(42:40):
a sort of like conspiracy realignment into the right, like
that was part of actually RFK Junior coming into the
right helped to bring like the people used to be
like hippie vaccine anti vaxers into the right as well.
And so you've had this shift in coalitions where you
have a disproportionate number of people are really open to
this stuff, and you've had stop the steal to prime
(43:01):
of this yan all kinds of crazy COVID conspiracies that
prime for this as well. And so this is kind
of the logical endpoint, which is why you know, when
I see Timpoole and these other people like getting so
exercised about I'm like, you.
Speaker 4 (43:12):
Know, like you've you've done this shit too.
Speaker 2 (43:14):
You may not have gone quite as wild with the
Egyptian planes and Brigitte Macron.
Speaker 4 (43:18):
Has a dick or whatever.
Speaker 2 (43:19):
But you were happy to play in these waters when
it was good for you and when it was serving you.
And now she's taken it that next level and you're
pissed that she's sort of winning in this like conspiracy off.
But even for her, there's a limit. So let me
I'll skip ahead to the basically the Peers Morgan thing
(43:40):
is like they get into the Brigitet Macron Penis thing
if you're interested in that. She does make one point
that Soccer kind of referenced about, like, hey, Pierce, you're
gonna cut you. You know now that it's safe for
you to say things are bad in Gaza, You're able
to say it, and you know I was saying this
from the beginning. I would add that Candace herself was
extremely pro Israel until sickly October seventh, so she also
(44:02):
is kind of a newcomer to really seeing, you know,
the truth of Israel and what they've been up to.
But in any case, I think she is correct in
that that that did help gain her a lot of
trust and gained a lot of people a lot of
trust who were you know, who were there and have
been sounding the alarm about what is actually going on
in Gaza. But any case back to her right after
this Erica Kirk meeting and the brisk and dangers even
(44:25):
for her is after this meeting, she goes and does
her show and she promises like, Oh, I'm going to
tell you guys everything that happened, and I'm going to
you know, I'm going to expose like what this meeting
was all about. And first of all, she gives very
little detail about what actually happened in the meaning. Second
of all, she really seems to kind of back off
some of her harder line positions visa TPUSA in particular,
(44:48):
let's go and play F four. This was right towards
the top of her show, just after the Erica Kirk meeting.
Speaker 9 (44:54):
You guys were telling me not to drink water, so
I didn't drink water while I brought my own water,
but I didn't drink that water too.
Speaker 1 (45:00):
It was a lot. There's a lot going on, okay.
Speaker 9 (45:03):
And the conversation started with Justine Strife very sensibly saying
what are we looking to accomplish here? Like what is
the actual aim of this conversation? And he was pretty clear,
and Eric was very clear that they were sort of
most upset with what I obviously a bit of a
(45:24):
fever pitch. What I tweeted that it was a god
forsaking company and people should not give money to it.
And I have to own that that's aggressive, that is
actually aggressive. In the retrospect, I was very frustrated, and
I don't know, I just I felt like weren't getting
any answers and there were so many lies, and then
I was getting attacked for asking all meaningful questions that
(45:45):
it was within their capacity to answer. And I've told
you I definitely my problem in life is that I
can rise to anger very quickly.
Speaker 2 (45:54):
After this, you can hear, Okay, that was too far,
et cetera. And then you know, I watched most of
the rest of her show, and she doesn't really get
into much more about what was actually said in this meeting,
et cetera. So Yashar Ali, who's been watching the Candas
show and really been tracking the growth of it and
what it has meant, etc. He did analysis of the
comments on this stream and we can put some of
(46:17):
them up on the screen here, and he said they
were overwhelmingly negative. Tens of thousands of comments he said,
seventy four percent of them were negative. The dominant emotional
currents of the comments were betrayal and dissillusion and suspicion,
paranoid conspiracy thinking, anger and hostility, confusion, and cognitive cognitive dissonance.
He says, here's some of the comments. I think this
(46:39):
private meeting is going to cost Candace a lot. The
best part of this episode of the comments as they
validate my deflation. If they are still gathering evidence three
months later, why did they destroy the crime scene within
days of the incident, which is expressing skepticism about some
of what Candace said. Game over, Erica got what she wanted,
all the hard work and credibility to get truth and
justice for Charlie got shot, pun in ten and it's
(47:00):
sad day, very sad day.
Speaker 4 (47:01):
Disappointed.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
Wish Candace didn't take Erica's bait by doing this, and
so listen. I do actually think the Peers Borgan debate
may have helped to bring some of her audience back,
because then she gets to be in the position of
the supposed brave truth truthteller against the you know, stick
in the mud journalist. I mean, Pierce himself is like
a tabloid sensatials, but whatever.
Speaker 4 (47:23):
Without a side of the moment.
Speaker 2 (47:24):
I do think that kind of like helped her maybe
bring her audience back along. But you know, if they
start to waiver on, Oh, Candace has been compromised, Candace
got the call, Candace is no longer telling us the truth.
Guess what, someone else is gonna pop on and kill
that boy because there's an audience to be They're all there.
Speaker 3 (47:43):
Unfortunately, my YouTube algorithm keeps pushing me to this type
of shit. There's an entire ecosystem of orbiters who are
just grifting off of this. And you know, I mean, look,
I'm not I'm not for censorship and all that. It's
fine for all of this to exist. I just think
at the Candace level up, cause it's about if we
compare the trust and people like her who have been
(48:06):
doing this now for years, and you gain this real
connection with your audience, like when you disabuse that or
in your this case, what you're like admitting that you
were mad or something and that's why you went kind
of far. I'm sorry, Like you have a responsibilit I've
been mad plenty of times. It doesn't mean you violate
or try not to violate your own personal ethics. So
this is a kind of an independent media problem. Also,
(48:28):
you were talking about, you know, the RFK and all that. Yeah,
for bringing conspiracy, Think again, I actually don't think it's RFK.
Speaker 1 (48:35):
I think it was all stop the steal.
Speaker 3 (48:36):
I think stop the steal unleashed a love because think
about it, at that time, what happened would stop the
steal was Trump would not hear it from anybody else
except for people who would just tell him whatever he
wanted to hear. Sidney Powell knows that ultimately is what
truly engendered trust between Donald Trump and some of the
people around him. You had to be willing to say
(48:57):
this election was stolen.
Speaker 1 (48:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (48:58):
It also position to the base where many Republican Fox
News commentators and others who knew that this was not
true either had to endorse it, wink at it, or whatever.
That just allowed this space to open where of course
anybody is just going to take it as far as
humanly possible. You could try and wink at it, like
Josh Holly or any others, but like at the end
(49:19):
of the day, they had to say the election was
stolen by Venezuelan dominions. That was like original sin, kind
of ground zero that opened up this entire kind of
space and ultimately led people to just bring That's what
led people to live truly in a so called post
truth environment. Now, to your point, it's not like that
is a bipartisan phenomenon. Also in its own right, when
(49:42):
we think about Russia Gate and other things like, both
have their own types of conspiracies. I also think that
there's a big class element where at the end of
the day, Russiagate, which was definitely equally bullshit, was kind
of an elite version of what that looks like. Whereas
now when you're dealing with lower class and lower it
people who are shifting into the Republican coalition, especially as
(50:04):
things move around in terms of like who votes in
which direction, it's going to look a lot more like this. This.
It won't be all as dressed up and you know,
liberal elite conspiracies have uh they have academics involved, and
everything is trust up and it's made to be more respectable.
Lower IQ movements are going to look a lot more
(50:25):
like this. And so this is a consequence of some
of the shifting class dynamics that are here. So in
Richard Hannania's you know, low human capital theory. I think
he's totally vindicated. I think this is actually what it
looks like.
Speaker 2 (50:37):
I mean, I think there's a lot of like liberal
moms who watch Canvas too, though well, I mean I
think she really I don't know that this is just
like a right wingers watching phenomenon, you know. And again,
Yasher's been the one who's tracking this like it's pretty
it's pretty mainstream, because it's fun, because it's entertaining.
Speaker 1 (50:54):
I think there's a.
Speaker 4 (50:55):
Because she's entertaining.
Speaker 2 (50:56):
But you know, what you see is, like you said,
you'll have people who will wink at it, and they're
going to get an outflanked by the people who will
actually say it. And then the minute that they don't
say the thing the audience wants, then there'll be someone
else who will come in and who will say and
then or the other thing that happens is like you
ride that conspiracy as far as it goes, and then
people get bored and they move on to whatever the
(51:17):
next thing is, and you're kind of left to the side.
Now with Canvas, I think Cannas is very talented, right,
and you know, she's been able to you know, she
had her whole Brigitte Macarln thing she's done. You know,
this isn't her first her first moment in the sun,
but this is the height of her popularity and her
celebrity in terms of American culture. And you know, I
(51:39):
don't know, I don't know if it's if this is
the peak, but I think it's becoming increasingly difficult to
sustain as the conspiracies get more ridiculous, more elaborate, more
countries and players involved, and now you're having to deal
with the reality of like whatever actually happened in that
meeting with Eric Kirk, whether they had lawyers there and
(52:01):
were like, hey, listen, here's the facts.
Speaker 4 (52:03):
And if you keep saying this ship, then we're going
to have a problem.
Speaker 1 (52:05):
Definitely cold see that too.
Speaker 2 (52:06):
I mean, and maybe she doesn't have an issue with that.
Maybe she would like the policy of getting bothered her
that you know, the Macrons are suing her over her
like whole Brigitte Macron transvestigation things.
Speaker 3 (52:17):
I mean, we'll see though, because like no matter no
matter how much money you have, like at the end
of the day, the court system will catch up with you.
So we'll see all right, thank you guys so much
for watching. It was fun to end. I think on
that note, Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, happy Honikkah, et cetera
to everybody who is out there. We're going to miss
you all, and thank you for the greatest gift of all,
(52:38):
which is the ability to do this job, which is
for me all of you, so thank you, Thank you
all very much, and we'll see you all very soon.
Speaker 9 (53:00):
Yeah,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
Betrayal: Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a brand new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack. And make sure to check out Seasons 1-4 of Betrayal, along with Betrayal Weekly Season 1.