12/19/25: "PROTECT HER!" New Trump Epstein Bombshell, Brown MIT Killer Found, AIPAC Tracker FIRED

The BP Team looks at the latest Trump Epstein bombshells from Drop Site News, the Brown/MIT Killer found dead, and Corey and Casey from TrackAIPAC join us again to talk about some upcoming races and how Casey was fired from his job.

TrackAIPACCasey: https://x.com/trackcaseyk 

Corey: https://x.com/CMArchibald

TrackAIPAC: https://www.trackaipac.com/

 

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.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.

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

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

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

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

Speaker 2 (00:30):
Good morning, everybody, Happy Friday, Happy Friday Friday.

Speaker 3 (00:34):
How you doing pretty good.

Speaker 2 (00:35):
I've been debating whether to throw on the Santa hat
or not.

Speaker 3 (00:39):
I might do it later.

Speaker 2 (00:40):
The topic is content is a little series at the
top of the show, so I'm not sure I want
to be Santa hat it out here to talk about this.

Speaker 4 (00:46):
I hadn't bet that that would be jarring. Crystal, I
think you made the right call.

Speaker 2 (00:50):
That's that's always my hesitation. Like with the Halloween costumes
and stuff too. It's like, you know, last year we
did it, and I did ray Gun, which was fun
and people really liked it. And I don't remember what
we covered today but that day. But I don't think
there's anything like too crazy serious. But yeah, it just
feels very off if you're wearing some like goofy costume
and then you're covering like, you know, a mass murder

(01:11):
or whatever or Epstein, pedophiles, et cetera.

Speaker 3 (01:15):
So in any case, Jeffrey Epstein feels wrong. It feels
really wrong, doesn't feel right.

Speaker 2 (01:23):
Yeah, So anyway, but we do have major updates in
terms of what we now know. Apparently, according to the government,
is the killer who shot the two students actually shot
in a number more than that. The killed two students
at Brown University and then traveled some fifty five miles
and murdered a professor at his home at MIT. It

(01:44):
was apparently the same guy he's now been found dead
killed himself inside of a storage unit. And let me
go ahead and see if I can pull up this
New York Times article that just gives us like a
rundown of what happened here. Also, interestingly, just off the top,
apparently the tip that really blew the case open came
from Reddit, and it was like, a yeah, it was

(02:05):
not only Reddit. I think it was someone who was
homeless and sleeps in the basement of one of the
Brown University buildings. Saw this guy acting bizarrely, had an
interaction with him in the bathroom. Was like, this guy's
dressed weird, he's acting weird. He's acting weird around this car.
Followed him a little bit and asked him like, dude,
what are you up to? So anyway, that appears to

(02:26):
be the tip that blew the thing open. So in
any case, let me read from you for you a
little bit. Here they say a man's suspective carrying out
a pair of deadly attacks, one at Brown University that
killed two students and wounded nine more on another that
killed an MIT professor's home found Deadness Steorage unit in
New Hampshire on Thursday. The suspect's death, which the police
said was from a self inflicted gunshot wound, ended a

(02:47):
five day search that began on Brown's campus and Providence,
Rhode Island. Case book captivated and rattled New England as
investigators pieced together grainy surveillance footage and feared another burst
of violence. The search stretched across state lines, ultimately hinge
on witness interviews and providence, including a Reddit user, along
with records from a car rental agency in Boston and
search warrant in Salem, New Hampshire. Nothing can really fully

(03:09):
bring closure to the lives that have been shadow of
the past week. This may allow our community to move forward.
So law enforcement officials identified the suspect as Claudio Manuel
Nevez Valente, forty eight years old, a former Brown student
who was recently enrolled at the university more than two
decades ago. Last known address was in Miami. Investigators still

(03:34):
not sure what the motive was behind the attacks. This
talks more about the anonymous tip, and then this gives
us a little bit more on the suspect. So he
had studied physics as a grad student Brown in the
early two thousands. He's from Portugal. Became a permanent resident
of the US in twenty seventeen through a diversity visa lottery.

(03:54):
The Trump administration is now seized on that fact to
say that they're shutting down the entire diversity visa lottery,
which is, you know, something we could discuss more. They
believe he studied at the same school as the professor
that he murdered, so in Lisbon. So they studied at
the school at the same time in Lisbon, so the
two might have known each other. Details of their relationship

(04:16):
remain unclear and still completely unclear what the motive was
for the you know, the mass shooting at Brown University.

Speaker 4 (04:24):
So studied has been together. I believe it's studying in
Lisbon together even before Brown. So, yes, that's right, Yeah,
which is exactly extremely bizarre connection.

Speaker 2 (04:36):
Yeah, I mean, the whole thing is is very strange,
and you know, I guess you know, given that we
the public rushes to view these things for through whatever
like partisan or political lens. On the one side, you've
got he's an immigrant. On the other side, he's a
white guy, so from Portugal. The diversity lottery aspect of this,

(04:57):
you know, I was reading more about it. There's there's
kind of an irony here. Actually put in place, the
precursor program to it was specifically aimed at getting more
Irish immigrants into the US because after the nineteen sixty
five changes where there were no more like country quotas,
there was a sense that European countries and Eastern European

(05:17):
countries were being disadvantaged in terms of bringing in immigrants,
and so it was actually some of the more kind
of like white nativist types that introduced this program because
they wanted more white immigrants. And then over the years,
as you had more of a diaspora from some of
those European countries, you know, Irish in particular, then they

(05:40):
sort of phased out of being really eligible for this program.
They could use the family reunification and the chain migration
aspects inherent in our immigration policy. And so that vis
a lottery still has a significant portion of Europeans who
come in through it, but it has skewed more towards
African countries, and it's it's meant to be for countries

(06:01):
that don't historically have a lot of immigrants coming to
the US.

Speaker 3 (06:04):
Is basically the idea behind it.

Speaker 5 (06:06):
Yeah, the other irony of the nineteen sixty five law
is that it was really geared toward the ninety seat fire.
They had this nostalgia for you know, Ellis Island and
all the Italians and Irish and Europeans who were coming in,
and so in sixty five they're like, all right, let's
let's open it back up and let more Europeans in
because they're you know, those are our those are our
white brothers over there, and they didn't want to come

(06:30):
like things were good in Europe, and American policymakers were
just kind of stunned.

Speaker 6 (06:35):
Like what do you mean.

Speaker 5 (06:36):
I thought we thought everybody wanted to come to the
United States of America. It's like the greatest place on Earth.
And instead, like you said, other countries filled the filled
those quotas, leading to then some efforts to correct it.
Be like, hold on, we got to get the hue
a little bit lighter. Come on, what's going on here
with this immigration policy?

Speaker 2 (06:55):
Yes, so this one that was put in place originally
to once again lightened the skin color of the people
that came in over time now has shifted in its
proportions as well.

Speaker 4 (07:08):
I think another interesting aspect of the story is the
frustration locally in Providence and on the Brown University campus.
So I wanted to roll this clip of part of
the press conference last night. There were two press conferences.
There was one in Boston and then there was one
in Providence. This is the Providence press conference, and you
just hear the frustration bubbling up.

Speaker 7 (07:30):
Than from NBC ten, I want to go back to
the question I asked you Saturday night when I first
arrived on the scene.

Speaker 8 (07:37):
There were no cameras in this building, and law enforcements,
some that are standing up behind you have said if
Brown had cameras in that part of the building, we
would have gotten this guy.

Speaker 4 (07:49):
And I just want to pause there and mention that's
not a small part of the story because allegedly the
suspect is then killed again.

Speaker 7 (07:58):
And it may have stopped swirling action.

Speaker 4 (08:02):
Can you ask that question for me?

Speaker 9 (08:03):
Well, I don't think we have said the locations of
cameras at Brown.

Speaker 7 (08:08):
We have because why would they car agency.

Speaker 9 (08:12):
We have twelve hundred cameras at Brown, but not in
that building. We have some in that building. It's a
large complex, and I think what you would see is
the video evidence in this case. From my perspective, I'm
not a law enforcement agent, has been incredibly helpful. The
moving of the person around the neighborhood. Those video images

(08:32):
they helped craft this case. So I think video was important.
And as the Attorney General explained at a recent press conference,
this individual was not spending his time on the Brown campus.
He came into a building on the edge of the
campus he left, he was in the neighborhoods. The investigation
focused on the neighborhoods. The video was there and that

(08:54):
was really really instrumental in crafting the case.

Speaker 7 (08:57):
But you can ask them, yes, video played a big
role in this case.

Speaker 8 (09:06):
The neighbors video, the rental car video, but not the
video in the building that he walked in freely, both before.

Speaker 7 (09:13):
When he got in a confrontation and when he came
back in decided to kill people. You didn't have cameras
in that building. Just say it so you can give
us over it. And my next question, yeah.

Speaker 9 (09:29):
You know, I I think we need to look back.
We'll look at everything that is done. But I do
not think a lack of cameras in that building it
had anything to do with what happened.

Speaker 4 (09:39):
We can stop it there. But yeah, you can see.
That's the president of Brown under intense scrutiny also for
coming out after this originally happened and saying basically, we
think everybody should feel safe. That has infuriated the community
as well, because now we know again allegedly the suspect

(10:00):
did kind of go along with the theory saga had
floated about a potential unabomb or something in that ballpark
targeting campuses, and obviously it seems to have happened again
at MIT.

Speaker 2 (10:15):
I mean that I understand the sentiment as being expressed there.
I will also say that like that sentiment, I feel like,
is how we've ended up with a mass surveillance state
where there are cameras every day and we're all being
tricked totally, like, you know, like, oh my god, we
need even more camera like building that wasn't under surveillance
twenty four to seven and facial recognition and listen, the

(10:36):
public will agree with that person.

Speaker 3 (10:38):
You know, there will be.

Speaker 2 (10:39):
An instinct of like, yes we have to you know,
and yes, install them metal detectors and we got to
make sure, you know, you're scanning their retinas as they're
coming in or whatever. And so that is how you
end up with the situation we are in where basically
you cannot really live your life without being under mass
surveillance from from the government. The other thing that I'll
say is, you know, disconnector from that is I'm very

(11:02):
curious to see where the conspiratorial minds go with this,
because now you have very unclear motive.

Speaker 3 (11:10):
What the hell was going on here.

Speaker 2 (11:12):
This one guy that the professor that he murdered, was
doing extraordinarily important breakthrough work with regard to nuclear fusion
technology and so and now this guy's dead, so we'll
never know, He'll never be able to tell us what
he was thinking, or who he might have targeted next
or whatever. So just brace yourself, for I'm sure there's

(11:34):
going to be a lot of and look, I understand
because I myself am like, what the hell's going on here?

Speaker 3 (11:39):
Too?

Speaker 2 (11:40):
And of course you should always be skeptical of government claims, etc.
But I just I am sure that we're going to
be in for a lot of a lot of speculation
about what was really going on underneath the surface here
and whether this is really the guy and all that
kind of stuff.

Speaker 4 (11:54):
Yeah, and just a quick note, say, you cameras do
not solve everything. Like almost every inch of New York's
city is surveilled, and Luigi Mangioni was able to get
to what Pennsylvania New York City has this partnership with Microsoft.
There's like a lawsuit over it right now. Or they're
doing like constant biometrics from cameras that are all over

(12:14):
the city. So it doesn't solve everything. I think it's
interesting that I do think that this subplot is interesting
on the campus where there's mismanagement, because I wonder then
to what extent it's going to bleed over to Mit.
Not that the MIT professor was not on campus, was
at his own apartment in Brookline, but a seriously scary

(12:37):
situation in New England for several days. And now that
the man was found, the suspectors found dead, they're not
being clear about potential motives so far. There's plenty of
time for that, obviously to come out, but it also
leaves wide open the possibility that motivation remains a mystery.
Hopefully that's not the case. Hopefully it's clear cut and

(12:58):
we have information that comes up that makes it really
clear what was going on. But it is I mean,
when we were talking earlier about these connections that go
back literally to Lisbon in the late nineties and then
Brown in the early two thousands, you have, in the
case of the professor who was killed, a like leading
nuclear scientist. You have the vice president of the College

(13:19):
Republicans at Brown. It's all very it's I genuinely hope
that there's clear cut motive information out there because it's
it is like fodder for conspiracy theories.

Speaker 2 (13:31):
As you said, personal, well and Ran did you see
Israel jumped in to say, oh, we think iron did it?

Speaker 5 (13:37):
Yes, they were They were yes, because yeah, a nuclear
science is getting killed and they're like oh, and it's
like no, you know what, like you're the only country
actually that is just freely killing scientists and bragging about
it like you're projecting onto others. That's this level of
barbarity that that that did, certainly in this case, did

(13:58):
not exist. And when it comes to the uh, the
celebration of mass surveillance, it's interesting to note that the
three high profile shooters over the last year have been
caught by people. Whether you know, Luigi was caught by
a person at the McDonald's like, hey, it looks like Luigi.
Tyler Robinson if you believe he's a shooter there was

(14:22):
turned in by his family who were like, oh, that
looks like Tyler. And this guy caught by the Reddit
user who who just saw him suspiciously walking through the
Brown campus and followed him and then told police like
so that's that's old school.

Speaker 6 (14:38):
So, you know, social policing, the community.

Speaker 5 (14:42):
Rising to the occasion and saying this is this is
who it was, and then the police having that information
and then tracking it down from there.

Speaker 2 (14:50):
I mean it's kind of a mix, right though, because
the reason that Luigi and Tyler in particular were caught
is because we had those camera images, whereas with this one,
it actually truly was just this like reddit guy, like,
this guy's acting really weird without even seeing I think
the photos are the or the videos.

Speaker 6 (15:07):
But yeah, but I mean como yeah.

Speaker 10 (15:11):
Well two.

Speaker 4 (15:13):
And also that I think that's an important point because
with Tyler Robinson and potentially in this case, you have
to ask whether law enforcement, including the FBI, would have
been able to nab the suspect had someone not stepped
up and seen something or done something. I think that's
particularly true in the Tyler Robinson case when you have

(15:35):
his family doing the enormously difficult thing of turning him in.
Does is he in custody if that doesn't happen, or
does law enforcement, you know, in a reasonable time frame
track him down that It's it's sort of saves the uh,
saves the bacon of law enforcement to an extent to.

Speaker 2 (15:56):
Yeah, pulling back cash once again, wasn't wasn't looking great
on this one.

Speaker 3 (15:59):
And the other thing.

Speaker 2 (16:00):
The last thing I want to say about this is
you had people who were saying with confidence, like, oh,
we think this particular guy and named this one kid
around university student and you know, his name went everywhere,
large accounts sharing this guy's name and his photo and
digging into everything about him, and he had nothing to

(16:20):
do with this. They were also saying, Lori Lumer and
others were oh, they shouted Allahu akbar before they know, No,
actually they didn't. The killer did not do that. Apparently
he was made some weird barking noises before he opened fire.
People make shit up and they dos people and like
ruin their lives based on, you know, a hunch, based

(16:42):
on like, oh, their social media profile looks like this,
and my political valance makes me think that it must
be must be a Muslim person who's like that. And
then they'll just casually ruin somebody's life. And we've seen
this happen multiple times. When they were still searching for
Tyler Robinson, we didn't have a killer of Charlie Kirk
doing the same ship with a bunch of different people.

Speaker 3 (17:02):
I'm one of our own fans of our show wrote
and said, please tell people.

Speaker 2 (17:05):
To stop doing this. So please, I beg you not
that anyone's going to listen. Stop doing this because you
destroy people's lives and private people.

Speaker 3 (17:13):
Like this will be the only thing, you know.

Speaker 2 (17:15):
The biggest thing about them on the internet is that
you know, people thought they they killed this high they
were involved in this high profile murder. So I just
I just find the whole the whole thing really disgusting,
the baseless accusations and always again designed to fit some
person into whatever political narrative they want to push with

(17:35):
regard to the killing. All Right, so we've got today
is Epstein Files Release Day.

Speaker 3 (17:43):
Ryan's got a big.

Speaker 4 (17:45):
Files release day to both of you.

Speaker 2 (17:48):
Indeed, this is put on the Santa Hat soh Rocanna
and Thomas Massey partners together and Marjorie Taylor Green had
a bit of a bipartisan push and enough Republicans coming
on to the discharge petition to force a vote on this.
President Trump sort of back down, realizing he was in

(18:08):
a corner with this signed this law that says, you
know you have to now release these files or else
there will you will actually be in violation of the law,
so the deadline is today. You also had a number
of federal judges come in who were involved in the
various like Glaine Maxwell and Epstein cases both in Florida,
and then what was that in New York? Anyway, say,

(18:29):
you know, we we agree that these materials, now that
the law has been passed, need to be released. So
we know that material will be included, and every be
in Congress conveniently decided they would leave town early, so
they're not They're gonna be totally out of dodge and
make sure they're nowhere near whenever what comes out comes out.
So Ryan, what are you you know, what do you

(18:50):
think we should expect? Since you are I mean you
probably the foremost journalists on this at this point in
the country.

Speaker 3 (18:56):
Julie K.

Speaker 2 (18:57):
Brown, a few other Jason Leopold maas, of course, what
do you think we should be looking for in this release?

Speaker 6 (19:03):
And that's kind of you.

Speaker 5 (19:05):
I wouldn't put myself there that so many journalists have
been doing so much work on this, including Whitney Web
for you know, for so long.

Speaker 6 (19:14):
You know, we've we've got we're relying.

Speaker 5 (19:15):
On this the Troncias stuff that's out and you know, Uh,
so I think that there could be interesting stuff out
of the grand jury testimony like that, could you know
there could be some serious breadcrumbs there if people are
wondering about the timing, the Trump's capitulation was very cleverly timed,

(19:36):
like he because there's a thirty day timing, and so
either it was luck or he recognized like oh, or
his team recognized like if we do it right now
and signing in the law now, the thirty days will
land on the Friday before Christmas. So let's let's just
let's just we're gonna lose this anyway, better to lose

(19:59):
it now. Because so much of history, what we remember
of history revolves around how big a deal a story
was when it happened. And if a story just kind
of gets muzzled when it happens like it, it's really
difficult then to unearth it later as a major kind
of quote unquote historical moment. It's like, why you know,

(20:21):
some scandals are iran contrance. Some scandals are just kind
of nobody's ever heard of them.

Speaker 4 (20:26):
I was thinking about the subs night too, because the
shutdown is what prevented the bill from being the discharge
petition from going through, and so it does. I mean,
I don't know if it would be strategically, it would
make sense that it was intentional, But also I wonder
if it was just dumb luck because they came back
from the shutdown and immediately the discharge petition which they

(20:46):
were worried about, went through. They knew that was going
to happen. But if that's luck, that is some incredible luck.
Because you're totally right, Ryan, it'll ination too.

Speaker 5 (20:55):
But yeah, and yeah, maybe they'll wait till five.

Speaker 10 (20:59):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
I don't know if you can bury news though in
the way that you used to be able to, because
everybody's so it's not the same. The Friday news dump
isn't what it used to be.

Speaker 4 (21:07):
And if anything, now that you have Christmas is on
a Thursday this year, a lot of people are going
to have a slow couple of weeks. Now you have
like online sleuths who are going to make sure the
story has legs because people have a little bit of
extra time on their hands over the next couple of weeks.

Speaker 3 (21:24):
True.

Speaker 5 (21:24):
Yeah, and Democrats yesterday put out some new photos that
you know, Dy'd obtained. They got more with Chomsky, just
very depressing stuff. Showing how much he was pealing around
with him and Ahood, Barack even and Bannon.

Speaker 2 (21:42):
Also some weird ass like Lolita quotes on people's feet
and body parts.

Speaker 3 (21:48):
Do you guys see that? Yeah, so I can pull
these up. Creepy, Yeah, very creepy.

Speaker 2 (21:54):
And you've also had The New York Times now deciding
to get in the game with a couple of significant pieces,
but one in particular. Yeah, there's the Lolita Lolita quotes
on various body parts.

Speaker 3 (22:07):
So that's just really normal stuff.

Speaker 2 (22:10):
But the New York Times dug into his financing, and
I know, Ryan you had some thoughts about that, but
they also dug into specifically the relationship with Trump. And
maybe I can pull up some of the quotes here.
I know Jasper Nathaniel had pulled some of the key
quotes from this. But you know, I mean, this won't
be a surprise to any of us, because we know

(22:32):
that Trump and Epstein have this very you know, significant relationship.
But there were some details here that were for sure new.
So one of the things is a an Epstein employee
from the era, recalled mister Trump, would occasionally send over
modeling cards for mister Epstein to peruse like a menu.
And the Trump modeling agency has long been one of

(22:55):
the like major red flags because these modeling agencies, including
you know, I mean Epstein got close to Lex Wexner
and he has Victoria's secret and that's the whole thing.
But you know, Trump was very close to John Casablancas
and sort of looked up to him as a role model.
His modeling agency was maybe the most infamous and notorious
for exploiting young girls, and he himself for exploiting young girls.

(23:18):
And so the you know, the modeling agencies have been
used as a front for effectively human trafficking, and that's
a documented phenomenon.

Speaker 3 (23:26):
So that's obviously disturbing piece of information.

Speaker 2 (23:29):
There, You've got this gross detail where Trump would love to,
you know, they'd love to like publicly brag about their exploits,
put themselves on speaker phones, so whoever was in the
room had to uncomfortably listen to whatever their like sexual exploits.
Apparently they called each other all the time to share
this sort of information. This One woman says she remembers
one call in the mid nineties in which the two

(23:50):
men discussed how much pubacare a particular woman had and
whether there was enough for mister Epstein to fluss his
teeth with. On another of these calls, mister Trump told
mister Epstein about having sex with another woman on a
pool table. This one is very disturbing. One of the
fourteen year old models who was brought to mar A

(24:11):
Lagos one of these parties event type things, says she
ran into Trump's then wife, Marla Mables. According to her,
she says, during a trip to the bathroom, they ran
into mister Trump's new wife and they had met earlier.
Miss Maples classed her hands. Miss Coleman recalled, looks you're
in the eye. So this is the mother of the
fourteen year old model and says, whatever you do, do

(24:31):
not let her around any of these men, and especially
my husband.

Speaker 3 (24:35):
Protect her.

Speaker 2 (24:36):
Now, Marla Maples denies that that that she said that
and that that quote occurred. But in any case, some
new new details there about the depth and nature of
the Trump Epstein relationship, and I think gives some insight
into why Trump was very, very not excited about any
of this information coming to light.

Speaker 5 (24:57):
And remember Trump, miss teen USA. In order he's this
is from his own testimony, in order for him to
be able to creep into the locker room and look
at the nude teens, like young teens like that.

Speaker 6 (25:15):
He said this on he said this publicly publicly.

Speaker 5 (25:20):
Yeah, so there's no question that aside from the gross
stuff he said like about his own daughter likes he's
a gross.

Speaker 2 (25:30):
Put into this modeling industry by the way, which if
you know, you know know what he knew is a
real interesting choice.

Speaker 6 (25:37):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (25:37):
And and there's that quote he gave to I guess
was Vanity Fair or somebody where he said, yeah, Jeffrey
Epstein likes him young, So like, yeah, all of this
is but yeah, probably not surprising to people that he's
as much of a creep.

Speaker 2 (25:52):
I think it's surprising to some people in a sense
with the young girls apparently. And I mean, you know,
I mean this was always the glaring, like glaring blind
spot for MAGA when they were very focused on Epstein
and revealing you know, the connections with the elite circles,
and it's like, you guys do know that this man

(26:12):
was like Besti's with Donald Trump for a decade.

Speaker 3 (26:15):
You don't think there's going to be anything there. You
don't think there's going to be anything there.

Speaker 2 (26:19):
So in any case, of course, you know what true
what Trump would say, Oh go ahead, m.

Speaker 4 (26:24):
Well, I was just to say it goes back to
the origins of MAGA, which is that Donald Trump was
standing up on the stage and saying, I alone can
fix it, for example, because I know the system. Uh,
the same thing with the Clintons.

Speaker 6 (26:36):
Like fourteen USA, I can fix the problem.

Speaker 4 (26:39):
It was his whole but that but that goes into
this just a runner point is that he pitched himself
to MAGA as somebody who was and created MAGA as
somebody who was the billionaire against the other billionaires. He
was part of the billionaire system, but he was going
to uh sort of disrupt it from the inside. And
it is it is you know important. Then every time

(27:01):
he does anything but disrupt the billionaire system from the inside,
anytime he protects the billionaire system, anytime he's sort of
revealed to be part of that system, I think it
does you guys talked about earlier this week, Eve and
Soger did a segment on Harry Enton looking at this
pole result showing twenty twenty four Trump supporters. Strong support

(27:23):
from Trump is down from sixty six percent to fifty percent,
not super surprising, but at the same time it does
I think lead you know, Erica Kirk and endorse JD.
Vance yesterday at Turning Points big conference. That genuinely is surprising,
not that she would endorse him, but that she would
endorse him this early. And so there's it's setting a

(27:45):
tone for what the Republican Party with the kind of
populist wing of the Republican Party MAGA, is supposed to
do going forward. If you're JD Vance, you should be
looking at those numbers sixty six percent to fifty percent
and thinking very hard about them because of things like this.

Speaker 6 (28:01):
And now if you want not that JD.

Speaker 4 (28:04):
Like obviously JD is connected to Teal and all of
those people. So I'm just saying, like, the politics of it,
I think are kind of interesting.

Speaker 5 (28:10):
Now when it comes to Emily and I talked about
this a little bit on the show Wednesday when we
talked about the New York Times story, and I promised
or I pledged that we would try to have our
story out by Friday, and we did get it out.
The timing of the New York Times piece was helpful
to us, I think, because we had been reporting around
a lot of the same kind of period of time

(28:33):
that they said that they uncovered the and put to
bed the questions about like where he made his money
and whether or not he had intelligence connections, not making
any sense throughout the entire piece. Let me put this up,
I would highly recommend reading this piece. It's it's also
just fascinating as just a piece of kind of alternative

(28:56):
like espionage history, because it's fair to think of Epstein
almost as like the Forest Gump of the spy world,
like when it comes to Iran Contra. He's just everywhere.
And I highlighted this one paragraph from the New York

(29:16):
Times piece here where they write Jeffrey Epstein had been
spending extravagantly, and despite his lofty compensation at bear Stearns
and his work for Douglas Lease, he found himself strapped,
even occasionally bouncing rent checks. Back in New York, he
joined forces with John Stanley Pottinger, a lawyer who had
recently left a senior post in the Justice Department. Epstein, Pottinger,

(29:38):
and Pottinger's brother rented a penthouse office in the Hotel
San Mauritz on Central Park South. The broker Joanna Cutler
told us that Epstein initially stiffed her on the commission.
And so this is an example of some of the
really impressive kind of shoe leather reporting that The Times
did for this piece to track down all these details,

(29:58):
Like they got Johanna Cutler on the phone and and
got her to tell them, you know, that he's stiffed
her on the commission and confirmed this this Uh, this
arrangement in the penthouse. But as we argue and the piece,
if they had looked in the other direction, looked upwards,
they would have in this In this paragraph itself found

(30:20):
two details worth exploring. One that Douglas Lease is himself
an arms trafficker, and we talk about his his connection
to the Iran Contra scandal, which was it's called Iran Contra,
but right in the middle of it is Israel because
the United States was barred from shipping weapons to Iran.

(30:42):
And so the arrangement that we created was that Israel
would send weapons to Iran, which is comical if you
think about it, since they're but so Israel would ship
weapons to Iran. Uh Iran would then pay, would would
put money to the slush fund that Simon Perez uh
Barack and on Koshogi were organizing and then.

Speaker 4 (31:07):
By the way, Trump by yacht, yes, this is Koshogi's uh,
this is Jamal Kashogi's uncle in fact.

Speaker 5 (31:18):
And then the US would then backfill the weapons to Israel,
so so we weren't giving weapons to Ron, We're giving
them to Israel.

Speaker 6 (31:26):
We would then use and then.

Speaker 5 (31:30):
HESBLA then would release some hostages, American hostages that were
being held, and we would use the money to illegally
finance the conscious because Congress had said you can't finance
this this this uh, you know, this insurgency against the
Nicaragua leftist government, and so the Reagan administration used the
proceeds to put them there. Now, Stanley Pottinger was a

(31:53):
lawyer who was like heavily involved in the Iran Contra scandal,
helping to set up the flows of money, and so
they have so The Times found Epstein literally in business
with an Iran contra lawyer at the time that the
thing is unfolding, and Douglas Lease, who was also involved

(32:14):
with it, and he was and he was associates with Koshogi.

Speaker 6 (32:19):
But go ahead, well, I was.

Speaker 4 (32:21):
Just gonna say so Trump's NSA starting in twenty nineteen
was Matthew Pottinger, who is the son of John Stanley Pottinger,
which is when Roe Connor now describes the Epstein class.
Here's an example of the Epstein class. Doesn't mean anyone's
necessarily implicated in this massive blackmail, right, It just means
that it's all being pulled from the same small pool

(32:43):
of people who are part of this like tightly knit network.

Speaker 5 (32:47):
But Pottinger, in his defense, actually he died recently, but
he represented a bunch of Epstein victims.

Speaker 6 (32:55):
I think he whatever his tea.

Speaker 4 (33:00):
Although some people may be very suspicious of that because
it could look like controlled opposition.

Speaker 5 (33:06):
Might be He's an interesting guy. He was almost ousted
from the Nixon administration as part of the Saturday Night massacre,
and he was like packing up his stuff, and then
at the last minute the massacre was kind of stopped,
so he kept his job. He also in this New
York Times oh Bit, it says that he figured out

(33:27):
who Deep Throat was as part of this grand jury process.

Speaker 6 (33:32):
He kept that secret.

Speaker 5 (33:34):
He then he then made a fortune in real estate
in the eighties, and real estate. I'm not saying that
he used around contra funds, but real estate was a
major way that Iran Contra funds were laundered. Then he
became a novelist, best selling novelist, and he's according to
his time Spy thrill it hasn't been published yet. And

(33:57):
then he and then he represented the Epstein victim. So like,
what a an arc. Yeah, that that guy's life took.
But then so you have all of this, the Epstein,
Epstein being close with all of these different Iran Contra figures.
After the lid gets blown on Iran Contra, the CIA's airlines,
Southern air Transport, that was involved in this weapons shipments

(34:21):
and drug running.

Speaker 6 (34:23):
Has to lay low for a while. And what we
report here.

Speaker 5 (34:26):
Whitney Webb has written about this as well, but we
have some new details from a journalist in Ohio who
covered this at the time. Jeffrey Epstein brought Southern air Transport,
the CIA's front company airline, to Columbus, Ohio. They ship
moved the headquarters from Miami to Columbus, Ohio to start
trafficking lingerie and fast fashion.

Speaker 4 (34:47):
For less wet trafficking.

Speaker 5 (34:50):
So and as one friend responded last night, it's like, well,
this is something decent that Epstein did for the world.
So instead of trafficking drugs and like guns for the CIA,
these planes for a couple of years were moving you know, you.

Speaker 3 (35:03):
Know, crappyumbshell, push up brass.

Speaker 6 (35:05):
Right Victoria's secret.

Speaker 5 (35:09):
So it's like, okay, maybe there's no Intel connections here
at all, but how on earth did this guy end
up bringing the CIA's airplanes to les Wexner, Like, Times
is going to have to do a little bit better
than just hand waving it away with With these kinds
of details out there, it's kind of kind of like
kind of suspicious activity to be involved in.

Speaker 2 (35:33):
It was very interesting to me how much The New
York Times wanted to say, like, oh, case closed, solve this,
figured it out, No Intel, cut ties, no blackmail, no nothing,
nothing to see here, and then did a bunch of
reporting that does not at all rule out those possibilities,
and in fact, it raises even more questions about them,
as your reporting points out.

Speaker 5 (35:53):
And we also make the point in the preamble of
the piece that in order to acquit him of all
of these like links to Intel and to say that
there was nothing interesting going on here, what they had
to do was craft this anti semitic.

Speaker 6 (36:07):
Caricature of the guy.

Speaker 5 (36:09):
Hm hmmm, just like in a genuinely offensive way, because
all they're left with is like, oh, he's just a
giant con artist. And you go through it and you're like,
this is actually like what are you doing here? But
it's almost like what's the Barry gold It's like a
version of the back Barry Goldwater quote you would say,

(36:30):
anti Semitism in defense of the liberty of Israel is
no viruce.

Speaker 3 (36:36):
A lot of people apparently view it that way.

Speaker 5 (36:39):
Yeah, yeah, just check that piece out.

Speaker 4 (36:44):
Yeah, read the piece, because it just completely if this
is all just a coincidence, it's the greatest coincidence of
all time.

Speaker 3 (36:55):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (36:56):
Well, and to I don't know, also to make the
claims that the Times did of like oh there's no
Intel connection, and to not even you know, not even
reference the reporting that you and others have done, I
think is also just very you know, very lazy, also
very condescending, you know, like you don't even exist.

Speaker 10 (37:11):
Right.

Speaker 5 (37:12):
We even got a we have a Times quote for
the piece because I put all this to them. They said, quote,
we report on facts that we are able to confirm,
not supposition.

Speaker 4 (37:22):
Well, what a bunch of these these are facts.

Speaker 6 (37:26):
Like these are these are facts. You're welcome to report
on them.

Speaker 5 (37:29):
If you can't, I don't know what to tell you.

Speaker 2 (37:35):
All right, guys, super excited to have this morning with
us Corey Archibald and Casey Kennedy, who are the co
founders of track Apak who recently went public stop being
anonymous on our show, which we.

Speaker 3 (37:47):
Were very privileged to have you guys there. Great to
see you both, Thank good morning.

Speaker 11 (37:51):
Thanks for having us.

Speaker 2 (37:52):
Yeah, So I wanted to talk to you guys again
because I feel like the question of a PAC funding
and overall position on Israel it's just become such a
central issue, in particular in Democratic primaries, although showing up
in some Republican primaries as well. So I wanted to
touch base with you guys about some of the races
that you see as being really significant, just in terms
of that funding question being a dividing line. But before

(38:14):
I jumped into that, I wanted to just ask you, so,
how how have things been going? How is it now,
you know, coming out and being public faces. I know
you guys have gotten a lot of scrutiny online. Casey,
I know you have been punished in terms of your career.
You lost your job for the work that you're doing,
so Casey, maybe start with you on how things are going.

Speaker 10 (38:35):
Yeah, it's definitely been a tumultuous month, to say the least.
Shortly after we did our initial interview with you, folks,
I did lose my job. That followed a dosing and
harassment campaign from accounts like stop Anti Semitism and that
whole network of Wow Israel troll accounts. Basically, they my

(38:55):
employer just didn't want to deal with that, so I'm
no longer with them. But on the bright side, the
silver lining is that's really just unleashed me and given
me all the time in the world to focus now
on this. What's up until now been a volunteer time
passion project for me. Now I can really focus on
it full time and work on a lot of things
that I've been pushing to the back burner, and I'm

(39:18):
excited for the opportunity to work on it even more.

Speaker 2 (39:21):
Did you expect when you came forward, did you expect
it would be a problem for your employer or did
that kind of come out of the blue for you.

Speaker 10 (39:28):
I was definitely unsure I was operating the account anonymously
for that exact reason. I just didn't want to risk it. Obviously,
wasn't informing them of like what I was doing during
my free time, and I thought that I might be
able to explain where I was coming from and maybe,
you know, work out a way to keep my job.

Speaker 11 (39:49):
But it all just ups pretty quickly.

Speaker 3 (39:52):
And it's crazy to me.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
I mean, all you do is put for publicly available information,
compile publicly available information.

Speaker 11 (39:58):
Yeah.

Speaker 10 (39:59):
Yeah, it's pretty awful that people can just make smears
and just really baseless claims and have that up in
somebody's livelihood.

Speaker 11 (40:06):
So I know I'm not the only one.

Speaker 10 (40:08):
I'll be okay. I have other means to make my living.
A lot of other people don't. And I think that's
a really important point that we have to keep pushing
in this narrative. You're seeing a lot of shift right
now happening and happening in the political spectrum. But it's
not only in the political spectrum that we need to
have this attention focused. It's regular people who are speaking

(40:29):
up who are also being executed and targeted.

Speaker 3 (40:33):
Yeah, Corey, how about you?

Speaker 4 (40:36):
Oh got it?

Speaker 12 (40:38):
No, As Casey said, it has definitely been a very
tumultuous month. I have not had the same kind of
impact in scrutiny that he has, although I've certainly had
people picking through my very online life that I have
lived for decades, and you know, congratulations, you uncovered things
that I post about constantly. Well done you, I guess,

(41:00):
But I guess people are supposed to. They want me
to be ashamed of who I am, and I'm not.
I'm proud of the work that I've done and what
we've been able to achieve through this project, And if anything,
those kinds of attacks and scrutinies just make us more
determined to keep doing what we're doing.

Speaker 2 (41:18):
All right, So let's turn to the topic at hand.
There's a ton of races that we could have picked
to focus on. But Corey, why don't you go ahead
and give us a little bit of a rundown of
a few of the democratic primaries that you're really watching
where the question of APAC funding has taken a sort
of central spotlight.

Speaker 3 (41:38):
Yeah, of course, Well, we are, as many people are.

Speaker 12 (41:42):
We are closely following and engaging with both races for
Corey Bush and her rematch against Wesley Bell, and Abdillel
said both of those races are important to us not
only because of who the candidates are, especially because of
who the candidates are and because of what they represent
and they are objectively the best choice in in those primaries,

(42:03):
but also I got a little personal connection to both
races in the sense that I worked very closely with
Corey Bush in her first two months for Congress, and
I took it very personally, the way that she was
attacked and smeared by a PAK. It was part of
the reason for the the inspiration for founding this pack
and for joining up with Casey and working on this project.

(42:25):
And then of course abdlals he's running against Hailey Stevens,
who is another another villain. APAG dumped truckloads of cash
into the race against Andy Levin to get her into office.
And so that's another one that I take up a personally,
and so for that reason, you know, those are those
are two races that are I think have the opportunity
once those two are are in, once Corey is restored

(42:48):
to Congress and once Abdullah's in the Senate, I think
they will have a significant impact on the direction of
democratic policy.

Speaker 3 (42:56):
And so those are very important races to us.

Speaker 12 (42:58):
But you know, they're also a number of other races
that we have we've supported.

Speaker 2 (43:03):
And sorry, just really quickly on Abdullah SiO, because there's
another significant contender in that race, Mallory McMorrow, and actually
haven't followed closely.

Speaker 3 (43:11):
What is she?

Speaker 2 (43:12):
What is she said or has she said anything with
regard to to APAC funding. What's your sense there?

Speaker 3 (43:19):
In casey, I'll let you take the stress.

Speaker 10 (43:21):
So Malarie McMorrow has been an interesting kind of case
study for how the needle has been moving on this
topic within the Democratic Party.

Speaker 6 (43:31):
I'll pull up my story while you're talking.

Speaker 10 (43:32):
Yeah, exactly, that you had a great piece on that.
She actually some supporters had kind of leaked to the
press that they had read a position paper that she
had submitted to a pro Israel organization, which we're pretty
sure based on reporting it all.

Speaker 11 (43:48):
Now, just leak it to the press and they gave
it to Graham dug it up. Is that how it
originally came to Okay, okay, Ryan at.

Speaker 13 (43:58):
The Press Michigan Sites and Ryan Graham broke that Malary
McMorrow had submitted a position paper to a pro Israel group,
which was an APAC confirmed at that time, right out the.

Speaker 5 (44:12):
Gate, it wasn't a so her her supporter said it
was a pack. I suspect that it was actually d
m f I Democratic Majority for Israel, and that the
supporter was using a pack as a shorthand because DMFI
is a shorthand, which is what we do.

Speaker 12 (44:31):
I mean, we we use a pack as kind of
a shorthand to refer to the whole lobby.

Speaker 3 (44:35):
But anyway, go ahead, I'm sorry.

Speaker 5 (44:37):
Yeah, yeah, so they saw an a position paper, but
I think it was d m FI.

Speaker 11 (44:42):
Yeah, okay, fair enough. Apac ally d m f I.

Speaker 10 (44:47):
She had submitted a position paper, and obviously that what
that position paper hasn't been made public, but we can
infer what was included in there based on the comments.

Speaker 6 (44:55):
Of those supporters outstanding.

Speaker 10 (44:57):
Yeah, yeah, they really gave her a lot of praise
for her strong pro Israel position. And we also found
out that she had taken a trip to Israel, which
we believe was with the American Israel Education Foundation is
APAX nonprofit arm.

Speaker 11 (45:12):
So that's definitely concerning.

Speaker 4 (45:13):
She has.

Speaker 10 (45:15):
Said that she agrees it could meet the definition of genocide,
but it's not the forthright conviction that we're looking for
in a candidate in this moment who we're really looking
down the moral clarity to take a bold stand and
not be kind of hedging their bets of where special
interests might come after them for speaking the truth.

Speaker 2 (45:34):
Yeah, that kind of feels like her vibe on a
range of issues on healthcare as well, she's tried to
kind of you know, yeah signal, Yeah, I love that
universal well here, but here's why we can't do it.

Speaker 10 (45:44):
Yeah, it feels like she's kind of threading a needle.
You can see she's sort of pinned between the progressive
lane that abdulah al Sayed is filling and the establishment
lane that Hailey Stevens is filling with the backing of APAX.
So that's another one where the split is going to
be interesting to see.

Speaker 11 (46:00):
I'm not sure right now how that's going.

Speaker 6 (46:02):
To play out.

Speaker 11 (46:02):
The polls have them pretty evenly matched.

Speaker 3 (46:05):
All three of them. Yeah, pretty close.

Speaker 10 (46:07):
Yeah, Yeah, there would be some interesting plays for sure
in that race.

Speaker 2 (46:11):
Ryan, maybe you should set up for us the Nita
Alam race because I know that's a versus Valerie Fushi,
which is another one that I know you've done a
lot of reporting on, and then we can get Corey
and Casey to weigh in on that one as well.

Speaker 5 (46:23):
Yeah, this race, this is a rematch of a race
from twenty twenty two. When Nita Alam announced her candidacy.
She was a county commissioner from Durham and she was
close if you remember, she was close friends with a
group of Muslim men who were a victim of a

(46:44):
hate crime. If it was this like horrific like national
story where several men were killed in Durham, and it
became like huge news, definitely in North Carolina, but even
around the country and around the world, and that inspired
her to get into to local office. So she ran
became accounting mission, then she ran for the House seat,

(47:08):
and then Value Fouchet came in with enormous amounts of backing,
not just from APAC but also from Crypto, and she
ended up only Nita Alam ended up only losing by
four points or something you guys might remember betterly four
thousand votes or very very very close race, even though
she was outspent absolutely massively. Now North Carolina has redrawn

(47:32):
the district and it's actually more favorable now to an alum.
If she would if this would have been the old district,
she actually probably would have won even given the massive
amount of crypto and APAC money being spent. As we
covered on breaking Points, Fouchet throughout the last couple of

(47:54):
years or has kind of turned against Israel. She's made
some critical comments and an interesting way and in the
back of her mind, and I was assumed, but definitely
in the back of my mind as she was doing
I was like, oh, I bet she assumes that it
is going to launch another challenge to her and sees
this as a massive political vulnerability because there's just so

(48:17):
much money on the table and either you guys can respond,
but while you do, I'll just put up this DMFI
put out yesterday. It's list of dozens of endorsements of
Democrats across the country, and Fouchet was not on there,
which is which is quite interesting because it either means

(48:40):
they're so frustrated that she distanced herself from them, you know,
anticipating this challenge, or they recognize that even rebranded as DMFI,
this pro Israel money is just too damaging in a
democratic primary to be public about.

Speaker 12 (49:00):
Yeah, I mean, I think Valor fusci Is is someone
who I have no idea.

Speaker 3 (49:07):
I actually learned this recently.

Speaker 4 (49:09):
I think it is Fushi. I used to say fouche also,
but I if.

Speaker 3 (49:13):
Well one of us is correct.

Speaker 6 (49:14):
When Crystal said fush, I was like, that might actually
be right.

Speaker 3 (49:18):
I just have only ever read it.

Speaker 6 (49:19):
So I'm.

Speaker 12 (49:22):
Yeah, I was actually corrected on it by someone from
North Carolina recently, so I'll take that as as gospel.
But I you know this is this isn't another interesting
case because you know, what we see happening with her,
I think is is representative of the work that we're
trying to achieve here. We want politicians to change their positions.
We want them to recognize that they are are creating

(49:43):
a political liability for themselves by by working with a
PACK and d M F I and so I. In
one sense, it's hard to know because I'm not inside
somebody's head, so I don't know exactly how genuine her
her shift is. But I would say that, paired with
her somewhat critical comments of the genocide in Gaza, I

(50:04):
think it does seem to be something of a genuine
change in her position. And to that, I'll say I've
spent a lot of twenty twenty five feeling, on one hand,
very like immensely relieved to see such a shift in
a lot of politicians and public figures and how they

(50:27):
view what's happening in Gaza and our role and our
complicity in it. But on the other hand, it's so
frustrating because a lot of people had to die for
you to learn that lesson, and it just feels like
she's a little late to the game. Like, I welcome
the change. I hope it's genuine. I feel that it's genuine.

(50:48):
You know, time will tell, but you know, if I
have to choose between someone who was late to the
game in that way on such a life or death matter,
I'll take the person who was on the right side
the whole time.

Speaker 2 (51:05):
And what are some of the other There were a
couple of other races that you guys had sent me
that were ones that I was less familiar with. One
is the congressional race that now Colin Alred has jumped
into in Texas after he withdrew from the Senate race.
Talk about a few of the races that are a
little bit more under the radar for people.

Speaker 10 (51:22):
Yeah, So now down in Texas, in the newly redistricted
thirty third district, there's a candidate that were supporting named
Zishan Hafeez. He is going to be running against in
the primary Colin Alred, who just dropped out of the
Texas Senate race to go run for a seat in
Congress in the House, and also Representative Julie Johnson, who's

(51:46):
currently representing the thirty second district, is going to be
campaigning in the thirty third district for twenty twenty six.
Julie Johnson is an active APAC backed Rep. She's only
taken in a little over forty thousand dollars from the
Israel lobby, but she votes in lockstep with them. Colin
Alred has accepted over six hundred and forty six thousand

(52:09):
dollars from pro Israel groups including APAC and DMFI in
the past, although it seems he did stop taking APAC
and DMFI money after the twenty twenty two cycle, but
again looking at his voting record, he was a pretty
reliable pro Israel vote in the House. So in this race,
we are supporting Zishan Hafiz. He's committed to rejecting APAK

(52:31):
and the Israel Lobby outright, and he's calling for overturning
Citizens United to get big money out of our politics.
He's never taken any corporate money. This is something that
he's made really foundational to in a central plank of
his campaign. And these are the kind of candidates that
we're looking to get involved with who really have the
backbone to stand up call of genocide to genocide and

(52:54):
do what they can in their capacity as a federal
representative to stop our complicity in this genocide.

Speaker 2 (53:02):
Yeah, that sounds like one where there's a very very
clear divide there.

Speaker 12 (53:06):
And if I could just jump in really quickly on
both of these two races that we just talked about,
you know, the North Carolina four race and the Texas
thirty three races are two primaries are coming up very soon.
March third is the primary for both both of these races.
We are less than ninety days away, and we're also
hit sound like fundraiser, but I am one. We are

(53:27):
coming up on the end of quarter. So you know,
if you're if you're sitting at home and you're looking
for Canadas to support, like, this is the moment to
pay attention. This is the moment to think about these
races because these are this is the point at which
we decide what the future of the Democratic Party is
going to look like no matter what Ken Martin decides
to bury and.

Speaker 2 (53:43):
Corey tell me a little bit, or Casey whoever's you know,
wants to jump on it about California seven and may
Vang go for that one?

Speaker 10 (53:50):
Casey, Yeah, So my Vang is challenging APAC backed Rep.
Doris Matsui. Doris Matsui is eighty one years old and
she's running for real election. She actually filled the seat
of her late husband, Bob Matsui, who died in Congress
back in two thousand and five. Doris Matsui is another
reliable pro is reel vote. She consistently ranks among the

(54:13):
most pro is Real votes in the Democratic Caucus and
she sends married a billionaire. So she is just really
out of touch with what we need in these times.
She's not bringing the fight to all the corruption and
the madness that we see going on in Washington, and
my Vang.

Speaker 11 (54:31):
Has stepped up.

Speaker 10 (54:31):
She's a I believe she's a city council member currently,
and she is outright rejecting APEC in the Israel lobby
corporate money, and she calls a genocide a genocide. She's
really bringing the pressure to Doris Matsui, who has previously
not spent a lot of time in the district. You'll
see her making her campaign stops now. You can tell
she's feeling the pressure. And this kind of young, exciting

(54:55):
candidate is another one that we're thrilled to see stepping
up into the ring.

Speaker 2 (55:00):
And then the last one you guys had sent me
and then we had some sort of broader, more general questions.
But was Cameron CAASKI who, Yeah, Kyle and actually just
interviewed him last week. He's running in the seat in
New York that's opened up by Jerry Nadler's retirement. Very
crowded primary. A bunch of people jumped into that one.
What makes Cameron stand out to you, guys?

Speaker 12 (55:21):
Yeah, so Cameron is I mean, for one, I've followed
his activism since the days of Parkland, and I've just
been so impressed with him as an activist and the
way that he consistently speaks so clearly on issues. He's
not afraid to take a stand, and he has certainly
demonstrated that in the short time that he's been running
this campaign. There's no other candidate in this race currently

(55:45):
that as you said, it's a very crowded primary, and
yet not a single one of them in a district
that heavily favored Zoran in the recent mayor election, not
a single one of them has come out very clearly
and made a stand about Israel committing a genocide, calling
for an arms embargo, or rejecting support from APAC and
the Israel lobby just generally. So he is the most

(56:06):
clear on this issue.

Speaker 3 (56:07):
And he I think he.

Speaker 12 (56:09):
Just represents such an important voice that I think would
would be a real game changer in Congress.

Speaker 2 (56:15):
Yeah, and for people who don't know he was there,
he survived the Parkland shooting. You know, he's seventeen years old.
He became an activist. He talks about, you know, starting
that organization sitting in his bedroom, and also has really
been through the ring. Are you know, the Alex Jones
and these people saying he's a crisis actor and all that.
You know, I don't know if it was Alex Jones specific,
I shouldn't say that, but there were right wing activists

(56:37):
saying that he was a crisis actor. And so he
has really been through the fire in terms of political activism,
and you know, I was really impressed with him when
I spoke with him last week as well.

Speaker 3 (56:48):
How much do you so?

Speaker 2 (56:49):
One of the questions I had for you guys that
I think we touched on before and you've kind of
touched on here as well, is politicians are starting to
get the memo of like, oh, I should say I'm
not I'm not going to take ape. You saw Gavin Newsom,
after initially just being like that's interesting, that's an interesting
question saying no, I'm not going to take any APAC money.
Although Ryan feels like he left himself a little wiggle
room there, but in any case, he clearly wanted to give.

Speaker 3 (57:11):
The impression exactly that was his answer.

Speaker 2 (57:14):
Milton came out, oh no, even after he had asked
a pack to support him.

Speaker 3 (57:18):
He's like, oh, I don't want anything to do with
these people.

Speaker 2 (57:21):
So what are the follow up questions that people should
be asking as it increasingly becomes clear that this is
a politically toxic position. But you know you're going to
have politicians who want to have their cake and eat
it too, want a signal to the base like oh, yeah, totally,
I'm with you guys. I'm against I'm not going to
say it's a genocide. But I'm against bad things, but
at the same time, they still want to be able

(57:42):
to get that money and that support from the Israel lobby.
So what are the follow up questions that people should
be asking?

Speaker 4 (57:48):
And can I just tack on to that quickly to
ask are there new other than like Newsome doing? I
don't know if anyone could pull off what Newsom did
quite like Newsom did, But are there new lines that
we're seeing be rolled out kind of to either mask
or hedge. Is there anything you people should be paying
attention to specifically? Yeah?

Speaker 3 (58:08):
Great question, Yeah, I think Okay, So do you want
to go first.

Speaker 10 (58:13):
Or I can you just I'll jump on Emily's point
real real quick there, just while I have it in
my mind, I would say standing against sending offensive weapons
to Israel is a big one for us. We're that's
that is what we see as hedging. A weapon is
a weapon, a bomb is a bomb. The more bombs
that you send to Israel, the more for self defense,

(58:35):
the more bombs they have to use for offense. So
that's definitely a line that we see as kind of
a red flag when we're assessing candidates, and we will
probe to find out more Corey, did you want to
jump on that.

Speaker 3 (58:48):
Up, Yeah, I think just to add on to that point.

Speaker 12 (58:50):
I mean, it's like Rashida Siliev has talked about this,
you know, she has said the words a weapon is
a weapon, and others have made the point that even
if we even if we take at face value, even
if we just accepts as truth, what is stated that
the weapons that we provide for what are supposed to
be defensive purposes are only used in that capacity. Well,

(59:11):
certainly it frees up military resources for them to be
able to focus on not only committing genocide and Gaza,
but also attacking you know, their neighbors and and creating
you know, hostilities in all parts of the region. So
I think the only thing that sends a message because
so much of our of so much of the support

(59:31):
that goes into the the Israeli military comes from US,
US aid, the only way to send a message that
we are no longer on board with with what you're
doing is to say you're cut off, and and that's
that's the line that needs to be drawn. So we're
not going to hedge and split hairs on what's an
offensive and what's a defensive weapon, either when there is

(59:53):
there There are very clear US laws that state that
if that if someone is receiving US military aid and
they are committing war crimes, which Israel very clearly has
in multiple ways, then we are supposed to cut off
the supply of aid.

Speaker 4 (01:00:09):
That that is.

Speaker 12 (01:00:10):
That's that's our own laws that we're violating when we,
you know, try to split hairs and say what's defensive
and what's offensive.

Speaker 5 (01:00:20):
How do you guys count the money that shows up
when it says like forty thousand dollars from pro Israel groups?

Speaker 6 (01:00:28):
Like, is that a pack? So it's going to be
CANVM fire?

Speaker 5 (01:00:34):
Is it also people who have previously given to a
pack Like what's the So.

Speaker 10 (01:00:38):
Up until now it has been money from pro Israel,
any pro Israel pack. So there's like a whole slate
beyond a pack and d M five of these smaller
groups that within the Israel lobby ecosystem. We've got a
full spreadsheet of them on our website. But basically we
take those pack IDs and then just we run an fecort,

(01:01:00):
So we pull it from the Federal Election Commission and
it just aggregates the data of how much has gone
through the pack to the candidate. That can also include
like conduit contributions, so like a PAC will bundle all
the donor money through their website or through their portal
and them to the candidate. So that's where those numbers.

(01:01:21):
We also track the independent expenditures, So if a pack
or any of their allies are spending independently to run
ads or any other campaign activity on behalf of the
candidate or to attack their opponent, will also add that
into the candidate's lobby total.

Speaker 12 (01:01:37):
Yeah, that has a lot to do with why Wesley
Bells and George Latimer's totals are so high because a
lot of them was the independent expenditure.

Speaker 3 (01:01:43):
Oh my gosh, they hope we are money come in
for them. But we are expanding on that.

Speaker 12 (01:01:48):
So as I think we mentioned the last time we
saw you guys that you know, a pack is starting
to change tactics.

Speaker 3 (01:01:55):
They've always kind of done this.

Speaker 12 (01:01:57):
They've always created these these like seek donation portals where
where you know, donors can just go straight they get
a you know, a link straight to a person's donation
page where they can donate without having to like have
the label a pack attached to it. But we see,
you know there's been reporting recently about how they are
increasing use of that tactic, and we expect that they will.

(01:02:18):
And so one of the things that we're doing with
as we ramp up and we're we're working to expand
our teams, we're going to be expanding our data capabilities
so that we can more carefully track these large donors
that are you know, very closely affiliated with a pack.
They're consistent APACK donors, and they're also funneling like you'll
see like big money drops that happen, you know, in

(01:02:38):
a coordinated fashion, and so we want to be able
to track and report on that more accurately so that
we can reflect the genuine total that's coming into these
these reports.

Speaker 5 (01:02:48):
Yeah, you would think it would be something that that
ll MS could even help with, you know. In other words,
if you've got let's say you've got a donor who
has given you know, more than five thousand dollars over
the last several cycles to a to a pack or
to d MFI, so you know that that's like, that's
like an APAC donor, and then you see them maxing

(01:03:09):
out to a candidate, and then on that same day
you see ten other people max out to that candidate
like right, you couldn't. You couldn't say that's one hundred
percent a PAC money, but you could be like this
is yeah, exactly, It's very likely this was this was coordinated.
This was either a fundraiser or an email that went

(01:03:30):
out to this group.

Speaker 3 (01:03:31):
Yeah, yes, there's the hallmarks.

Speaker 6 (01:03:33):
Of yes, yes, there's the hallmarks of real information.

Speaker 2 (01:03:41):
This is actually a good segue to ask you, guys,
how can people support your work because you are continuing
to expand and as you said, this is this is
really you know, crunch time in terms of these democratic primaries,
but also, as I said, it's a relevant issue in
increasing on the Republican side as well.

Speaker 4 (01:03:57):
Yeah.

Speaker 12 (01:03:58):
So, for example, if you are interested in supporting any
of the races that we just talked about and supporting
our work in amplifying those races, a great place to
go is to TRACKAPAC dot com slash endorsements. That will
take you to page that has all of our endorsed
candidates on it that you that we just discussed, and
each one of them links to a tandem donate page

(01:04:20):
where you can split a contribution between between our organization
and that campaign directly. Those tandem forms really are something
like they can.

Speaker 3 (01:04:30):
Raise a lot.

Speaker 12 (01:04:30):
I think we raised what was it over twenty thousand
dollars for aften Bay on our Herd tandem form just
in the last few weeks lead up to that special election.
So you know this, this is a really powerful tool
to amplify the grassroots effect. And it not only puts
money directly into those campaigns that could really use those boosts,
but it also amplifies what we're able to do in

(01:04:52):
support of them on the IE side.

Speaker 5 (01:04:55):
Man, as you guys, as you guys grow, there's going
to be more scrutiny on you. And because you guys
are talking specifically about you know, campaign finance and and spending,
it's it's going to be increasingly important probably to be
way way more transparent than a normal organization is with

(01:05:15):
the spending. So would you guys commit to some sort
of independent audit or something that that tracks track, track
apac so that people who are like giving money like,
because you're going to have people in this world who
are like, no, no, these are just grifters who are
like cashing in because FEC reports are very confusing and

(01:05:36):
you see money moving in and moving out and it's
very easy for people to just screenshot and be like, hmm,
what's going on here, and then it discredits everything that's
going on. So have you thought about how you're going
to use some level of transparency to counteract what is like,
like I can guarantee that's coming if it hasn't.

Speaker 3 (01:05:54):
All, we're already seeing some of that.

Speaker 12 (01:05:56):
I mean, there's there's been some critics from the left
that just say, oh, you're just drifting. I mean, as
you said, the FEC reports are are out there, it's
publicly available data. It can be hard to parse. Absolutely,
We've always been very conservative in our spending, so like
we've been building up our war chest to be able
to put as much as we can. In fact, until
very very recently, Casey and I weren't even taking a

(01:06:18):
salary from the pack, so you know, we've been very
conservative in that way that we just really wanted to build.

Speaker 3 (01:06:24):
Up our resources. I mean, in terms of transparencies.

Speaker 12 (01:06:27):
People can always ask us any question that they have
about the FEC report. That's you know, I don't think
that we've had a discussion about any specific transparency project internally.

Speaker 6 (01:06:38):
All right, something to think about, sure, of.

Speaker 2 (01:06:40):
Course, all Right, guys, Well, thank you so much for
taking the time. I know it is hectic and crazy
and you have a lot going on, so really appreciate
your work and really appreciate your.

Speaker 3 (01:06:50):
Time with us this morning.

Speaker 11 (01:06:51):
Thank you so much.

Speaker 3 (01:06:53):
Yeah, it's our pleasure.

Speaker 11 (01:06:54):
Happy holidays you guys.

Speaker 3 (01:06:56):
Doo. That was great, thank you, thank you.

Speaker 4 (01:07:00):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:07:01):
All right, guys, well let's go ahead and wrap up
the free show here, got a bunch of interesting stuff
we're going to get you in the premium half, in
particular this TPUSA conference, Ben Shapiro coming it, Megan Kelly
and Tucker Carlston and Tucker responds, and Tucker's calling out
the islamophobe. So that's a spicy one. And Emily, you

(01:07:22):
mentioned Erica Kirk endorsed jd Vance at this that part
I missed actually last night.

Speaker 4 (01:07:27):
Yeah, it was late last night.

Speaker 3 (01:07:29):
So she's not on board for Trump twenty twenty eight, not.

Speaker 4 (01:07:32):
On board like Dershowitz.

Speaker 2 (01:07:34):
But also I was going to say, Mary Maddilson again
to the anti Semitic caricature, you guys are doing yourselves
no favors.

Speaker 4 (01:07:41):
And then so yeah, so the Erica Kirk endorsement wasn't
just hurt was she said, turning point USA is going
to work on behalf of JD. So already a lot
of infrastructure behind him.

Speaker 3 (01:07:54):
Rubio Marco artist it.

Speaker 4 (01:07:56):
When Rubio obviously was quoted in the Vantasy Fair piece
this week saying he's not run if JD runs. So
Erica Kirk in that endorsement said that she said, we'll
support my husband's friend JD vance and so it's it's
quite an interesting, quite an interesting development.

Speaker 2 (01:08:14):
Yeah, especially after that that photo that people paid a
lot of attention to with the hands and the hair
and the hands on the hips and whatever, also makes
it makes it noteworthy. But there's a lot of yeah,
I mean put it, I don't know, whatever. We don't
have to get into Erica Kirk discourse, not in the
free half anyway. If you want more Erica Kirk discourse,
you gotta pay for it.

Speaker 3 (01:08:34):
People.

Speaker 2 (01:08:35):
We also have The Baker wrote an interesting up ed
about you know, what really makes you an American? Really
pushing back against like the anti Indian hate in particular,
but also the sort of like you know, Nick fuontezification
of the Republican Party. Curious about you guys thoughts on
that there was a big Compact magazine piece about the

(01:08:55):
quote unquote lost generation of millennial men focusing on the
media in industry during the woke era that I would
think Ryan would have some particular insights into so bunch
of stif.

Speaker 4 (01:09:07):
So there's politics behind it too.

Speaker 2 (01:09:10):
Ah, yes, for sure, so bunch of stuff to get
to in the premium portion. If you guys want to
join us over there, join us at Breakingpoints dot Com,
become a premius subscriber. We will probably end up doing
a breaking news segment tomorrow about whatever comes out from
the Epstein Files. We have some great content that all
of us put together, you know, over the past week

(01:09:31):
or two, to be posting over the holiday break. We'll also,
you know, if there's big breaking news, well one of
the other of us will get it together and get
to a camera and break down what's going on to
the best of our ability. But outside of that, guys,
Happy holidays to all of you. I hope everybody has
a RESTful and nice time with family with loved ones
and appreciates the you know, the beauties of the season.

(01:09:54):
And certainly I appreciate Ryan and Emily appreciate you guys,
appreciate what we're able to do here as well.

Speaker 4 (01:09:59):
Yeah all you guys and love all of the viewers.
Appreciate it so much.

Speaker 3 (01:10:04):
All right, y'all, see you in the premium half.