6/13/25: ANALYSIS: Did Trump Let Israel Start WW3?

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

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

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

Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll 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 everyone, Welcome to Breaking Points. We have obviously
a lot to cover this morning, and very fortunate to
be joined by doctor tree To Parsi of the Quincy
Institute for Responsible state Craft here from the start to
break down what is happening with us, with Israel and
with Iran. Of course, this comes on the heels of
the Israelis launching an a legal, unprovoked, aggressive attack on Iran.

(00:52):
Iran now promising retaliation. We have some updates from President
Trump last night, Doctor Parsi. Before I get you in,
let me just go ahead and put this up on
the screen. In terms of the statement that he put out,
he says, I gave Iran a chance after chance to
make a deal. I told them in the strongest of words,
to just do it. But no matter how hard they tried,
no matter how close they got, they just couldn't get

(01:13):
it done. I told them it would be much worse
than anything they know anticipated or were told. That the
US would make the best and most lethal military equipment
anywhere in the world by far, and that Israel has
a lot of it with much more to come. They
know how to use it. Certain Iranian hardliners spoke bravely,
but they didn't know what was about to happen. They
are all dead now and it will only get worse.
There has already been great death and destruction, but there

(01:34):
is still time to make the slaughter. With the next
already planned attacks being even more brutal come to an end,
Aron must make a deal before there is nothing left
and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire.
No more death, no more destruction. Just do it before
it is too late. God blessed you also, doctor Parci
with that. If I can just get your reaction off

(01:54):
the top here of what Israel has done and what
we know about US involvement.

Speaker 3 (02:00):
So what the Israelis have done is to follow the
same playbook as they did in Lebanon, which is that
they went after the chain of command and the heads
of the various military installations as organizations in order to
essentially paralyze Hezbo law and disable it from being able
to respond. And once that has happened, then they went

(02:22):
all out and just destroyed as much as they could.
They did the same thing in Syria as well. Once
the Assauld government was gone. That's when these Radis really
started bombing the country to eliminate whatever military capabilities it
had left to ensure that regardless of who would come
into power in Syria afterwards, they would not be able
to pose a challenge to Israel for years to come.

(02:42):
That seems to be the same strategy the Iranian seems
to have complete and miscalculated, thinking that any strike would
go after economic targets, It would go after oil installations,
perhaps the nuclear program itself. I don't think they calculated
that it would go after individuals in this manner, or
perhaps they didn't think that the Israelis have the capability.

(03:02):
I think also they were lured by what clearly now
appears to have been a deception by the Trump administration
in which not a deception that I think at least
took place from the beginning, meaning eight or so weeks
ago when talk started, but a deception that started sometime
over this weekend, in which there was a signaling of
talks coming up, that he didn't want to see an attack,

(03:24):
which I think probably put the Iranians in the law
thinking that if anything happens, it will happen after Sunday's negotiations,
which probably won't take place right now, but instead the
plan was to go ahead much sooner than that. It
seems to have taken them by surprise.

Speaker 4 (03:41):
But I think also there's something very important here to mention.

Speaker 3 (03:44):
We've seen that they've been targeting apartment buildings similar to
what they have done in Beirut, what they have done
of course in Gaza, in a much much lower scale.
What we've seen is that over the course of the
last two years, but also before that, the Israelis have
run a campaign to essentially eliminate all of the norms
around the use of force that have been developed over time,

(04:05):
but particularly after the Second World War, to eliminate all
international law. Because what they're doing here is that they're
going after civilians and military officials. But they're doing so
not on the battlefield. They're not doing so in the barracks.
They're doing it in their homes when they're asleep, together
with their children and families, as well as scores of
other families in the same apartment building. If any other

(04:28):
country were to do this against the United States, meaning
that they would target even military officials, but outside of
the battlefield, outside of the barracks, but at their homes
together with their families, the United States would rightfully call
that acts of terrorism. But this is what Israel has normalized.
And I think again the Iranians may have underestimated how
far the Israelis were willing to go to break all

(04:50):
kinds of norms when it comes to warfare.

Speaker 2 (04:53):
I think that's such an important point, not only of course,
if our own military officers were assassinated in their homes. Certainly,
if Israeli political leadership or military officers were assassinated in
their homes, that would rightfully be recognized as a legal
assassinations terror. And yet This is just par for the

(05:13):
course with the way the Israelis are allowed to operate.
And I think it's exactly that impunity and that diplomatic
cover that US and broadly the West have offered Israel
that have led to this point of extreme escalation. Just
to further your point, I want to put up on
the screen here the New York Times report of what
exactly was struck, to the best of our knowledge at

(05:36):
this point, so they say that top Iranians were assassinated.
Mohammed Bagari, the commander in chief of the military, second
highest commander after the supring leader, was killed. Ali Shamkani,
leading politician who was overseeing the nuclear talks with the US,
also killed. Mister Kamani moved quickly to a point replacements,
aiming to avoid the appearance of leadership vacuum. In addition,
in targeting the Natan's nuclear site, Israel struck at the

(05:58):
beating heart of the Iranian nuclear program, they say. The
Israeli military said it caused significant damage at Natan's and
hit an underground compound housing centrifugees. Raphael Garsi, the chief
of the IAEA, said there were no indications of attacks
to other major Iranian nuclear sites. In addition, doctor Parci
understand that there were several nuclear scientists who were also

(06:19):
assassinated that you're understanding as well, and talked to us
about the significance of these targets and how detrimental they
will be to Iran and their ability to function as
a ongoing administration and also in order to retaliate.

Speaker 3 (06:39):
So, for instance, one of the people that they assassinated
was a professor at Tehran University, a professor of physics.

Speaker 4 (06:47):
His wife and child was also killed when they targeted
his apartment building.

Speaker 3 (06:51):
Unclear whether there were other people in other apartments in
the same building that were also killed, but the apartment
does pretty bad shape now. So these are the type
of things. And then when you take a look at
what the Europeans are saying, they're starting off by condemning
the Ivanian response, no condemnation whatsoever, what these Raelis have
done instead coming out saying that Israel has a right

(07:12):
to defend itself. So once again, even though the Israelis
themselves say that this was a preemptive strike, which in
and of itself is illegal, there is anticipatory self defense
and international law, but this is more of a preventive strike,
and there is no legality for that, and the Europeans
fully understand this. Nevertheless, they come out and call this
self defense. So it's the same playbook that we also

(07:34):
see from the West in the last two years. Whatever
the Israelis do, whatever impunity they have, and whatever impunity
they grab, it is granted by Western powers, which then
is dramatically reducing any moral standing that the West has
in the eyes of the rest of the world, regardless
of what the other.

Speaker 4 (07:51):
Countries may think of Iran.

Speaker 3 (07:53):
Now what this does to the program, First of all,
when these Raelies have already assassinated quite a few Ivanian scientists,
including the head of the atomic energy program before and
another one was now killed as well, that has not
had a dramatic change in the direction of the programming.
Has actually accelerated the program, but it has not taken

(08:14):
out their full capacity, because this is not a program
in which you take out a couple of people at
the top and it collapses. When it comes to the
chain of command, then it's more complicated because without a
chain of command, the military is paralyzed, at least momentarily
until it can regroup.

Speaker 4 (08:30):
In the case of.

Speaker 3 (08:30):
Hisbola, it never really managed to do so whether that
will be the case in Yvon or not remains to
be seen. But we have to keep in mind, if
I'm not mistaken, the number of actual Hebola individuals that
is or killed in its pager attack was I think
around four hundred and scores more that were completely innocent
that were either killed or wounded. But that's four hundred

(08:54):
out of an organization, not an entire state. Here, we're
talking about ten to twenty people in the chain of command.
Very important ultimately, of course, but the numbers I don't
think in any way, shape or form get to the
same numbers that you saw on has bullet case, which
was necessary in order to paralyze that organization, but at
a minimum.

Speaker 4 (09:13):
It will delay it.

Speaker 3 (09:14):
And I think this is part of the reason why
we haven't really seen much of an Ivanian response yet,
and perhaps it will prove to be that these Raelis
were so successful that Yvonians actually cannot fully launch such
a counter attime.

Speaker 2 (09:28):
President Trump has seemed to indicate in the true social
posts that I read that he thinks this will put
pressure on the Iranians to come to some sort of
a deal that seems insane to me. You know, I
think it seems much more likely we end up in
this escalatory spiral. Obviously, the US is already saying they
will protect Israel, as they have in the past, from

(09:50):
any potential Iranian retaliation. I'm sure the Iranians, as they understandably,
should see US as directly involved, even as you know
our mis Oh, they did this unilaterally. We had nothing
to do with it. We just knew it was going
to happen and didn't stand in the way effectively. So
in any case, what do you make of that rationale

(10:11):
from Trump that this illegal, unprovoked attack on Iran will
help bring them to the table to effectuate some sort
of diplomatic deal.

Speaker 3 (10:22):
So this is the argument these Raelis have been making too,
from saying either you or US or together in this case,
I think it was together attack that will soften the
Iranian position they will come begging for a deal or
in this case, begging for capitulation. Essentially, this is also
what they did in his first administration when they promised
him that economic sanctions and maximum pressure would be sufficient

(10:45):
to get the Yonians to come begging through a deal,
which of course proved not to be the case this
time around. If it follows the previous pattern, it will
see exactly what you just mentioned. It will be an escalation,
the Iranian position will harden. Would probably not be any
talks this coming Sunday, because one of the elements here
is that because Trump now is bragging about this and
really convincing the Runians that Trump not only was in

(11:06):
on it, Trump played a key role in the deception
to love the Runians into a false sense of security.
If that is the case, he engaged in that deception,
why would the Runians trust him now when he says,
if you just do X, Y and Z, we can
have a deal. So that even if Trump's logic is
that well, this will soften them and that automatically will

(11:27):
make them come and begging for a deal, it presumes
that there is a degree of confidence trust in Trump.
But whatever that may have been, because the Varnians were
at the table, at least there was some elemental trust
there may have been destroyed precisely because of the manner
that he is now bragging about having been a key
part of this deception.

Speaker 2 (11:49):
To your point, I mean, this was a post from
him hours before this strike. He says remain committed to
a diplomatic resolution to the raw nuclear deal. My hired
administration has been directed togotiate with Iran. They could be
a great country. They first must completely give up hopes
of obtaining a nuclear weapon. Thank you for your attention
to this matter. So we you know, first saw the

(12:09):
removal of some US personnel from the region, and you know,
had other indications that this strike was imminent. Then the
Trump administration seemed to downplay it and seemed to indicate that,
you know, we really want to go forward with these talks,
and we're committed to these talks this weekend. Is that
what you're referring to when you talk about the psychological
deception that the Trump regime was involved with here to

(12:33):
cover and confuse Iranians in advance of this attack.

Speaker 3 (12:38):
I believe. So I believe something changed at this meeting
at Camp David on Sunday in which Trump essentially adopted
the Israeli plan but then continue to talk about diplomacy,
continue to talk about the meeting on Sunday, which I
think led a lot of people, myself included, thinking that
if anything would happen, it would happen after Sunday, because

(12:59):
he had said that he didn't favor and Israeli strike
talks were ongoing. It made it look as if if
Nathaniel did strike, it would be an active defiance against Trump,
and while uh Nathaniel would love defying Biden, it got
no punishment for it. It was a question mark as
to whether Trump would be forgiving of them if there
actually was real defiance. But now it seems clear that

(13:19):
rather this was part of the deception in order to
make the Vinyans think that nothing would happen before someday,
and that may have taken them by surprise, but even
then it would it would be some criminal negligence by
the Iranians in the sense of even if you thought
an attack was going to come three days later.

Speaker 4 (13:36):
It seems like the Vinyance nevertheless, had very little readiness.

Speaker 2 (13:41):
What is your understanding of the tug of war that
has been going on within the Trump administration. You know,
he fired Mike Waltz. The public explanation for that was
that or else, at least what was leaked to the
press was that Waltz was too excited about, you know,
pulling us into a war and a con with Iran.
So he was turfed. There seems to have been some

(14:03):
other skirmishes going on between the more hawkish factions and
the more what you call America First factions who would
be perhaps more object more strenuously to this direction for
the country. So what is your understanding of what has
been going on internally and how the tug of war
ended up in this place of US greenlighting and potentially

(14:23):
being involved with these incredibly escalatory attacks which in some
ways go I mean, they go against the Trumprian rhetoric
of him being a pro peace candidate. They don't go
against some of the direct things he said. He had
said on the campaign trail, Yes, Israel should strike their
nuclear facilities, but certainly the projection was, oh, he's going
to be a pro peace candidate. He's not going to
get us involved in another Middle Eastern war at the

(14:45):
very least. So what do you know about that? Behind
the scenes.

Speaker 3 (14:50):
I think there has been a real struggle and in
real fight, and a fight in which those favoring this
approach actually has been losing out, including of course on Waltz,
but several other people in the NSC as well. But
what has happened now is a reminder that at the
end of the day, Trump is himself the decision maker,

(15:10):
and he may surround himself with more people that have
a restraint or the end of thinking and may not
have favored this. They may have argued against it at
the Camp David meeting, but nevertheless, Trump makes a decision
and once he makes that decision, all of them go
along with it, as of course was the case with
the Biden registration as well. At the end of the
day was we didn't see any senior people resigning from

(15:30):
the Biden administration over gods that we saw some mid
level of people doing so, but none of the people
that were actually at the decision making table. So I
do think that there has been a fight. But even
though that fight was going the direction of the restrainers
in a very significant way, it didn't make seem to
matter because once Trump was convinced by the is RAE leads,
that is the decision that is eventually ended up becoming policy.

Speaker 2 (15:54):
So what do you think happens now, What is the
most likely chain of events to occur, and what will
America's involvement be.

Speaker 3 (16:05):
So first, it remains to be seen whether the Vonians
will have the capacity to strike back hard, and if
they do so, that will change the picture potentially depending
on how a large that attack is, if they actually
has an effect. Right now, it does seem, of course,
that Israel is completely dominating the situation, and as a result,

(16:27):
Trump always wants to be on the side of the winner.
It feels even more attractive towards claiming responsibility for what
has happened now and taking credit for it.

Speaker 4 (16:36):
That may change and it may not change, and that's
one critical element.

Speaker 3 (16:39):
The other element, of course, is what happens on Sunday.
I don't think there's going to be any talks, but
I think part of the reason why Trump is tweeting
these things is essentially because he recognizes there's not going
to be talked, so he's giving the Vanians warnings publicly.
But again, in order even if capitulation was in the cars,
you needed to have some level of credibility to make

(17:00):
sure that the other side thought that if they capitulated X, Y,
and Z that had been promised by Trump would have it.
I think at this point it's going to be very
difficult to convince in anyone inside the Iranian system that
anything Trump says actually can be counted on and as
a result, the likelihood of capitulation is much much smaller,
which I think is exactly what these Raelis want because
it means that there will be some sort of an

(17:21):
ivony response, and then that increases the likelihood that these
Raelis manage to get Trump to jump in fully and
open the end of this world.

Speaker 2 (17:30):
Lastly, doctor Parson, and then I'll let you go, because
I know you're very busy today. But how does this
connect to Israel's genocidal onslaught in Gaza and more broadly
in Palestine. I know West Bank they've now instituted a
complete siege. They also had a compute complete communications block
out in Gaza. You have a broader regional context as

(17:51):
well in terms of their aggressive actions in the region.
So how did these things all connect?

Speaker 3 (17:56):
Well, these Radis are going to continue to do that
until someone stops them. United States has the capacity of
doing so, and so far under Biden and under Trump
chosen not to do that. I think what is also
perhaps missed in all of this is that next week
there is a big UN mandated conference at the UN
about the creation of a Palestinian state, led by France

(18:19):
Emmanuel Macron was supposed to attend, as well as the
Saudi Crown Prince. It remains to be seen whether that conference,
which many had criticized for various reasons, and there's definitely
points to criticize, but there's also there was also some
promise in that conference that things could actually move in
a new direction because we've been just in this twilight
zone of a completely dead OsO process but nothing to

(18:41):
replace it, which then just meant that everyone was stuck.
It had the potential of being able to start a
new arrangement that could lead to something, but that is
now going to be completely overshadowed by this new war
that Israel has started, and remains to be seen whether
Macron or nbs EMN will show up because this. I'm
not saying that this was a key calculation of these Raelis,

(19:02):
but one of the side effects is potentially that that
conference more or less ends up becoming Now.

Speaker 2 (19:07):
Yeah, and I saw Macron putting out some terrible statement
Israel has a right to defend itself, et cetera, et cetera.
So not hopeful science there. Ryan. We just have to
let doctor he could probably get in one question, Ryan,
before doctor Parcy has to run. But he's got to
see an end hit.

Speaker 5 (19:22):
He's got to get to okay, just real quickly? Then, Like,
was this was this all inevitable? Is this just the
inexorable logic of American empire? Like, despite all the kind
of public pressure towards non interventionism, despite the fact that
Trump built his political career and his campaign on ending

(19:45):
wars not starting new ones, is the logic of the
US foreign policy apparatus just such that this is what
it is write its face?

Speaker 3 (19:56):
Yeah, Well, I mean there's part of what you say
that I think I would agree with, but I would
say that this was inevitable. I think things could have changed,
evolved in a completely different direction. I think there were
some significant mistakes that the Trump administration did that put
themselves in a vulnerable position publicly because of the sensitivity
they had when it comes to comparing the deal they

(20:18):
were negotiating originally to how the Obama deal looked. And
I think after that you saw how they started shifting back.
If they had not gone out and said three sixty
seven in that interview that Witzkop did, I don't think
that opening for attacking them would have been as clear,
and as a result, could have shifted in a different direction.
I think there is one element of inevitability not for

(20:39):
this specific scenario, however, is that if we continue on
a grand strategy of global domination, liberal hegemony, then yes,
the United States will end up in wars all over
the world all the time. That is where we have
been for the last thirty years. Not One of the
key things that came with this administration was that there
were several individuals in it that really directed that ground strategy,

(21:01):
wanted to shift it. But I think what we have
seen now is that even their presence in the administration,
which was not the case in the previous administration, has
not made any shift towards a more restrained form pulse.

Speaker 4 (21:15):
He's stable. At any moment.

Speaker 3 (21:16):
Trump can still change his mind because it's all about Trump.
Whatever he sees to be is in his benefit, even
if it completely contradicts what he has said. With the
instincts of many of the people in the administration is
ultimately he is a decision maker. So the stability that
I think many people had hoped would come with many
of these other individuals in the top ranks of the administration.

Speaker 4 (21:37):
With the ounceting of Mike walls, etc. Has not materialized.

Speaker 2 (21:41):
Thanks Treda, Doctor Parci, thank you so much to see you.
Appreciate you.

Speaker 4 (21:46):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (21:49):
So Ryan. It sounds like doctor Parci is saying basically
like the oh, so you're just getting back in Obama's
deal provocation worked, which is so pathetic, Like it's beyond pathetic.
And I mean, I will say, like to your question
about was this inevitable, there's a part of me that also,
you know, feels similarly in a sense, because so much

(22:12):
of the Trump foreign policy is a continuation of the
worst aspects of the Biden foreign policy. But the original
negotiation of the TCGA under the Obama administration would indicate
that there was a possibility of another path.

Speaker 4 (22:27):
And yet you have you.

Speaker 2 (22:28):
Know, Trump decides he's going to get out of it
just because Obama did it, and so he has to
do the opposite. And his administration, first administration stacked with
a bunch of news. I mean, there's no dissenting voices
from that in his first administration. Then you have the
Biden administration come in. They should have gotten back in
the deal immediately, and that opening was there, and I

(22:49):
remember doing you know, multiple segments with doctor Parci talking
about this and the time is now and you yeah,
and there's going to be elections and a more hardline
administration is it's going to be more difficult to do.
And then of course once you have October seventh, like
that is dead and gone.

Speaker 5 (23:03):
Because you have two and a half years into the
almost exactly.

Speaker 2 (23:07):
Right, absolutely, and so now here we are. So you
know what I mean, what is your sense of what
unfold is here? Because it seems like the two pieces
were they, oh, you're getting back in Obama's nuclear deal
number one and number two. It looks like the Israelis
maybe convinced Trump that this illegal attack would somehow create

(23:32):
an opportunity for diplomacy in the same way that he
thought the you know, maximum pressure, like let's just like
crush them economically as much as possible in the first administration,
like that would create some possibility that was a failure
and this is clearly going to be a failure too.

Speaker 6 (23:46):
Right.

Speaker 5 (23:46):
And on the one hand, it almost doesn't matter like
what rationale Nenyawho was able to use to get him
to go along with it. It was whatever the argument was,
it worked and it appelled forward the logic of American empire,
and which is to just understand everything in terms of violence.

(24:08):
But it does seem as a matter of historical significance
that that may be possible. So and I talked about
this on the livestream last night that I had spoken
with an Iranian analyst who was like, our assessment here
is that somehow who convinced Trump that doing this will
actually make a deal more likely and better for the US.

(24:30):
And then it gets out of that called a sack
that Treeta Parsi talked about. You know, now he can
say he did a better deal. This is not the
Obama deal. How could it be the Obama deal? He
just dropped a bunch of bombs where Israel did with
his green light. And I thought that that was a
bit of a far fetched analysis when I first heard it.

(24:52):
But then Rubio's statement which came out saying we were
not you know, we're saying we're not involved in this
at all, do not attack us, seem to be trying
to leave some room open to like continued talks with Iran.
And then Trump's very explicitly says, all right, we hit you,
or Israel hit you with our weapons. All the people

(25:14):
I was dealing with are dead, all caps dead, but
now you can make a deal and save the rest
of you from not being dead. So it it does
seem like Trump believes that this was a step towards
a better deal, which is.

Speaker 7 (25:35):
Very is interesting. It's demented like it's.

Speaker 5 (25:40):
It does it does not, It does not understand uh
the Iranian uh kind of government and how you know,
how it's positioned like it doesn't. It didn't read the
you know, his own intelligence assessments, which have always said
Iran is not interested and is opposed, like Ron's leadership

(26:00):
is opposed to pursuing a nuclear weapon for the variety
of reasons. Here are the reasons. The only way they
would try to pursue a weapon is if their civilian
nuclear operations are targeted, then we believe then we assess
this is the US intelligence, Then we assess that they
would pursue a nuclear weapon. So according to that, I
don't know what's right or not. They were wrong on

(26:22):
WMD's maybe they're wrong on this, But according to that,
Iran now will be trying to pursue a nuclear weapon
and the US can just buy, wouldn't they yours?

Speaker 2 (26:34):
They would be in a much better position if they
had pursued a nuclear weapon instead of getting in the
deal originally with Obama. I mean, that's the cold, hard
facts of the matter. That's the incentive structure that the
US Empire has set up, whether it's a run around
the world. I mean, quite frankly, given Israel's genocidal fervor
and aggressive illegal actions not only in Iran but throughout

(26:56):
the entire region, feel more comfortable with Iran having a
new clear weapon then with Israel. I've mean, yeah, they
completely unhinged. I would love for you to talk more
about that because you guys cover this so closely at
drop site too. I know there's a siege that was
implemented now in the West Bank. I don't know if
Gaza communications are still cut off, but uh, Israel's really

(27:19):
they're really going for it right now. You know, they're
really going for final solution with regard to I don't
thinky even just think just Gaza, with all Palestinians. They're
going for greater Israel in terms of acquiring territory of
their neighbors. That the you know, hardcore fringe, formerly fringe
elements now mainstream elements, have long coveted and because of

(27:44):
every American administration allowing them to act with utter and
complete impunity, they've launched this wildly escalatory, reckless attack on Iran.
And I mean it's it's not a question whether we
get drawn in, Like we know, if Iran seeks to retaliate,
which they've already promised to do, we are going to

(28:04):
be there defending Israel. And Iran has also said that
they're going to directly retaliate against our service members who
are located throughout the region.

Speaker 7 (28:13):
Yeah, it's this short.

Speaker 5 (28:14):
Term thinking that they're just one more series of assassinations
is needed and then yeah, peace and justice will be
on the other side of that, right, And if you
truly believe that and a type of piece that is domination,
not we're not talking co existence here like the way

(28:36):
that you know, you have in say South America for
the you know, for the most part, those you know,
little skirmishes here and there, but most part South American
countries are not lobbing missiles at each other and invading
each other constantly and bombing each other.

Speaker 7 (28:50):
That's that's coexistence.

Speaker 5 (28:54):
Israel believes that kind of a piece through domination, you know,
what they call the piece through piece between the lines
and in the lamb, that piece that that piece is
just on the other side of this assassination, and then
the next assassination and the next one and the next one.
Which then if that logic, if you if you buy
that logic of killing a few children in the apartment

(29:18):
along with the myer GC general or the know, the
deputy chief of staff or the nuclear scientists or whoever
you have just killed. If you kill a few children,
you know, that's so that's an acceptable cost because on
the other side is this is heavenly like peace and

(29:39):
world of peace and justice through domination. But from their perspective,
And then you know, if you bomb an entire city
block to kill one person and hundreds die, that's also
an acceptable cost.

Speaker 7 (29:54):
It was.

Speaker 5 (29:56):
Kimmels, who's the first North Who's who's uh uh the
first North Korean president whatever you want to call him,
Dictator uh had a famous quote where he said, and
I think he might have been even paraphrasing maw where he's.

Speaker 7 (30:12):
Like, we are.

Speaker 5 (30:15):
Building a world of you know, workers paradise for an eternity.

Speaker 6 (30:23):
What is it?

Speaker 5 (30:24):
How do you compare if several million people are killed
to get there? Compare that to the billions of people
who will be liberated into this worker's paradise that we're creating.
So that's the law. That's that's the logic. And and
from a math if you want to take it from
a mathematical level, like okay, yeah, if you really are
going to create a paradise for billions of people for eternity,

(30:48):
then yeah, a few million people dying on the way there.

Speaker 7 (30:52):
Is an acceptable cost to pay.

Speaker 5 (30:55):
Of course, all we ever get is the the few
million people killed, right, And there's the only thing on
the other side of that is just more suffering and more.

Speaker 2 (31:05):
Death and more justification for why this time bullets are
going to accomplish the goal. And of course with Israel,
when you add into it, and I mean they use,
you know, biblical language all the time, when you add
that level, and and you layer on top of that
the constant posture as eternal victim, which I mean, this

(31:28):
is one of the films they pulled this up on
the screen. This is one of the things that is
so disturbing and disgusting to me is the wave of
American politicians. Here we have Lindsay Graham as one example,
game on pray for Israel. Wave of American politicians saying
pray for Israel after Israel just launched this illegal like

(31:49):
in any other context, right, if this is Russia, Ukraine,
we immediately okay, unprovoked, illegal attack in you know, as
long as it's an official bad guy nation of the US.
We see very clearly the implications of international law. And
yet we're supposed to be praying for the aggressive, genocidal
nation that has just illegally assassinated Iranian you know, political

(32:13):
leadership and scientists while they're at home, you know, with
their with their kids and with their families. I keep
thinking about the the uh murder of those two Israeli
embassy staffers here in d C. You know, by the
Israeli logic, that would be all fine and good, no
problem there. Look they're they're you know, affiliated with the government,

(32:36):
so fair, fair game. And of course in that context,
everyone see this. You can't do. This is not acceptable.
This is terrorism. But when it's the Israelis who do it,
it's celebrated. I mean the beeper attack, they celebrate that
like that was some glorious you know, accomplishment and something
to be praised and admired.

Speaker 6 (32:56):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (32:56):
And to take it even further, if the if the
she was on the other foot, not only could you
kill those embassy staffers, if they were surrounded by their grandparents,
their cousins, their friends. Yep, that would just be unfortunate.
But hey, but it's part of the game to give

(33:18):
to give a sense of speaking of the depend we.

Speaker 2 (33:21):
Should be praying for the dude who assassinated them. We
should be praying for them.

Speaker 7 (33:26):
Yeah, apparently right.

Speaker 5 (33:28):
And so speaking of that, to underline the depravity of
our of our politics, we put up this one statement
from this congresswoman, a Democratic congresswoman. Yes, I mean, I'm sorry.
She's the only Iranian American that is in Congress as
far as I'm almost.

Speaker 7 (33:45):
Certain about that.

Speaker 5 (33:46):
And if you remember, there was this under the radar
race in Arizona that went down to this based to
a recount and to court fights, and is a Democratic primary,
and the the the candidate that was backed by Democratic
Majority for Israel, kind of an apac shootout offshoot. She

(34:06):
got an enormous amount of support from DMFI and beat
a progressive challenger in this primary, and so she won.
So now she's in office. So only Iranian American in Congress.
He her statement is all about essentially supporting the attack

(34:31):
on Iran. You know, the Islamic Republic must never be
allowed to acquire nuclear weapons and the current brutal regime
must be replaced. Iranian people who have suffered far more
than for more than four decades at the hands of
the regime deserved democracy and freedom. I do not want
to see further regional escalation that could lead to US
military action.

Speaker 7 (34:50):
De escalation, how is imperative.

Speaker 2 (34:53):
I mean, this is the other thing, sorry to cut
you off. This is the other thing that utterly discussed
me is these people that posture like are doing the
Iranians of favor, right, but you know, attacking their country,
embombing their cities and their scientists like.

Speaker 1 (35:10):
That.

Speaker 2 (35:10):
I mean that in n Yahoo did the same thing
in his speech, which I know you and Maz covered
and went through last night, to posture, Oh this is
all for your own good. We're going to be greeted
as liberators. I mean, that's the that's the energy, that's
the vibe.

Speaker 7 (35:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (35:27):
I don't know how much you talked with Treat about it,
but it looks like over seventy killed and you know,
including you know, huge swaths of the top echelon of
the Iranian military and government, the top civilians.

Speaker 2 (35:43):
Including some of the people who are negotiating with their talks. Yeah,
which tells you. I mean, they did the same thing
in the context of, you know, when they were ongoing
ceasefire talks Israel and make a point of going on
whoever the top political leadership is, that's right, We're going
to go and assassinate them so that these talks can't
continue to go forward.

Speaker 8 (36:01):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (36:04):
And according to Trump though, they're gonna go you know,
no how He's got them right where he wants them.

Speaker 4 (36:08):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (36:09):
Well, the Iranians have already said the talks are off.
So as if that was any you know, anyone had
an eat.

Speaker 7 (36:15):
Doubt, we didn't. We didn't know.

Speaker 5 (36:16):
We needed to let you know that we're not showing
up on Sunday for these talks.

Speaker 7 (36:20):
But most of us have been killed.

Speaker 2 (36:23):
We're dead. Actually yeah, yeah, so we won't be there
because your great ally with your weapons and very likely
with your assistants, I mean definitely with those systems, like
who are we kidding?

Speaker 5 (36:38):
Maybe last point for me on this is like I
meet seagull and these and other you know, Israelis are
out kind of celebrating the cleverness and the strategic brilliance
of this like long running deception. The part that's missing
there is that the United States and Israel do not

(36:59):
need to to bomb a country like Iran into smitheries.
We have the military capacity to tell them, Hey, Thursday
at eleven thirty Eastern time, we are going to kill

(37:19):
your nuclear scientists were peculiar. Now, it may may be
difficult to pull off some of the assassinations with the
heads up, but in general, the US has the military
capacity to smash Iran like and could do it every
five years indefinitely, you know, as long as the US

(37:40):
remains this hegemonic power, which we're doing our best to
shed ourselves of that. But we don't need deception, like
Israel doesn't need deception.

Speaker 7 (37:51):
It has.

Speaker 5 (37:54):
A massive firepower advantage over Iran, and especially when the
US is included, it's just overwhelming. Like this idea that
like the US and Israel are some kind of plucky
underdogs that needed to be super clever to defeat this
gigantic military force is absurd on its face.

Speaker 2 (38:16):
Sager sends a DM that says Tel Aviv confirms their
pride parade today is canceled. So just update there, important
update there I was looking for. Let me pull up
this thing that was reposted from jd Vance something he
said a year ago, and get your reaction to this.
And then, by the way, guys, there's other big news.

(38:37):
I mean, this is monumental and blows everything else out
of the water, obviously in terms of US involvement and
where this all goes from here. There is other significant
news that we're going to cover as well. This senator
who was rustled to the ground and handcuffed, and there's
a court decision with regard to the deployment of the
National Guard. So a bunch of other things that we're
going to get to here as well. But just to

(38:59):
wrap up on that, ione Er would love to get
your reflections Ryan on something that jd Vance said a
year ago. He said, I'm very worried about Israel, worried
about it as a country because I think what's happened
the last couple months is revealed deep fishers in Israel's
support around the world. A more short term worry I
have with Israel, something analogous to what happened after nine
to eleven will happen.

Speaker 4 (39:18):
Right.

Speaker 2 (39:18):
You get all this bullshitting about how the deep state
misled Bush about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or
maybe Bush misled himself, or maybe Cheney misled him. There
are all these series you read about why we invaded Iraq,
But when you think back on it, the most important
reason we invaded i Roq was social psychology. Afghanistan was
too easy, September eleventh was too bad, and we needed
to fuck something else up. That was just like this

(39:38):
need to fuck something else up, and Afghanistan didn't satisfy
that need. And I worry about that with Israel. I
think the Hamas thing. Obviously, there are a lot of
civilians who have died, but Israel expects to lose more
troops going into this. I think they've had a more
successful military operation than they expected to. And if I
have a big fear for Israel right now, it's about
the same exact dynamic that they're going to need to
try to fuck something else up because the psychology impact

(39:59):
of October seventh was so so powerful. And I guess
what I would say to that. I mean, first of all,
the fact that you had these JD vans and these
supposedly non interventionist voices within the Trump administration didn't end
up mattering one bit. I think there was a prelude
to that when we saw inside the signal chats and

(40:20):
how quickly everyone who was supposed to be in the
non interventionist side just immediately folded. When Stephen Miller comes
in and is like big guy, says we Mom and
Yemen and they're like, okay, cool, go America USA. Here's
my American flag emoji, fifth pound, etc. Like that was
kind of, you know, an indication of where things are
going to head. But you know, in a sense, yes,

(40:41):
Israel has been able to bomb Gaza, to smithereens and
murder God only knows how many civilians. I just saw
a report yesterday that it maybe four hundred thousand Palestinians
and Gaza who were killed by Israel, but there are
no there is there's no amount of bombs that actually
solves their problem, like they still Hamas is still there,

(41:04):
Hamas is still in control. So in a sense, yes,
they're successful at blowing shit up, but in terms of
actually you know, creating some sort of lasting peace, they there.
It's an utter, incomplete failure.

Speaker 5 (41:20):
Yes, and I think that Jade Vance's fear is well
founded and born out here. The only thing I would
add is that if you remember, and some of our
younger audience won't, but those who lived through it can
never forget the feeling, the blood curdling rage that was
coursing through the American public after nine to eleven is

(41:43):
unlike anything that has happened before since. But presumably, you
know Pearl Harbor, I think if you read people talking
about the moments after that that was that was probably
maybe similar. Yeah, that faded after a period of a
couple months. Like you kind of remember, the Baltimore Sun

(42:05):
had an American flag they sent they sent an American
flag out to everyone in the newspaper and everyone put
the American flag cut out of the newspaper onto their window.
And as that newspaper was withering, like two months later,
people were kind of calming back down again, but there
was still enough energy for the politicians to use it
to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the

(42:27):
public blood had moved down to a simmer and then
back to room temperature. Israel's blood is still boiling. All
of thee you can read, you can read their posts,
or you can look at any poll and just squint
at it and be like, I'm sorry, they seventy nine

(42:48):
percent of people do say they would support what that's
important like, So that's the you know, you know, what
we were able to accomplish was just a few months
of blood boiling rage. What hour you know, imperial leaders
were able to accomplish imagine if they have gotten that
boil on the stove for We're now going into the

(43:09):
third you know, we're in the third year of this,
so that with no with no end in sight. So
this is anybody's guess. How that how this ends?

Speaker 2 (43:20):
So before we move on, I mean, how do you
think this ends? Like what happens now? What does this
look like?

Speaker 5 (43:28):
I mean a lot depends on you know what, you know,
how how Iran responds, what and what that response looks like?

Speaker 6 (43:38):
Is it.

Speaker 5 (43:40):
Do they you know, and how effectively they have been
neutered for now it does? It does seem like it
would heighten Israel's isolation, but a lot could change depending
on you know what what the Iranian response is.

Speaker 2 (43:58):
Yeah, responsible, Yeah, I mean, unfortunately, I'm not convinced that
it heightens Israel's isolation. In the short term, because all
of these Western countries, at least, you know, France, which
had been some of these European countries that had been
starting to make some noises about being unhappy what was
happening in Gaza. You know, France is down immediately with

(44:21):
the Israel has a right to defend itself blah blah
blah kind of a statement. So in a sense, because
Iran is such an official bad guy with Western nations,
you know, in a sense, I think these attacks shore
up Israel support in the West. You know, certainly with
the Trump administration, they're all on board with it. You'll

(44:42):
hear Marjorie Taylor Green will say something, but that'll be
about it. On the Republican side, mostly Rand Paul, Marjori
Taylor Green, you get a handful of voices, but mostly
they're going to be all in for this. They're going
to be all on board. The Mark Levin talking points
about how this is amazing and glorious and brilliant and
wonderful and going to be the greatest thing for all
of us, even as we hurtle towards you know, potential

(45:03):
massive regional war.

Speaker 5 (45:05):
And the other point Moz made, which is obvious but
worth underscoring last night is that Iran is ten times bigger,
and you know, you know, maybe they you know, uh
knocked backwards their ballistic missile production, but they're making fifty
missiles a month. They have a stockpile of three thousand.

(45:27):
A war of attrition between a country that is a
tenth of its size, it isn't necessarily going to go well,
even if you have long term you know, even if
you have the United States backing you to the hill
like long we're a mess, like and we're a mess,
like how long are we going to keep? Are we

(45:47):
going to really keep sending endless amounts? We're running out
of magnatum. I mean, we haven't make our own.

Speaker 7 (45:52):
We can't run our own.

Speaker 2 (45:53):
Make ours we I mean, how is our endless support
of Ukraine? Has that been enough for them to push
back Russia? Which is a country that I don't know,
is it ten times? It's probably about similar maths in
terms of you know, size differential.

Speaker 5 (46:05):
China had a delightful time testing all its China arms,
a lot of the Pakistani military and they had a
delightful time watching Pakistan, you know, go toe to toe
with India, with Chinese weapons.

Speaker 7 (46:18):
Uh. You know, I'm sure China be happy to keep this,
keep this uh absolutely.

Speaker 5 (46:26):
Running war going for the precise same logic that we
would love to keep the Ukraine War going to tie
up Russia and drain Instead of draining Russia, we helped,
you know, rebuild their industrial capacity, whereas we actually are
getting drained because we don't have the capacity to build anything.

Speaker 2 (46:46):
Yeah, China would love to continue to invest in their
society and developing research and you know, uh leap frogging.

Speaker 7 (46:54):
Paths and missiles, the high.

Speaker 2 (46:56):
Tech development and you know, use development for the ice
that the chart that you shared about how the bottom
fifty percent in China per capita is actually doing better
than the bottom fifty percent in this country. So they'd
love to continue in that direction while we get ourselves
tied up in another Yeah, yet another.

Speaker 5 (47:13):
The whole and the whole reason, the whole reason Obama
wanted to do the peace deal was his He and
all of like the blob, entire blob in Washington has
been saying, pivot to Asia, Pivot to Asia, Pivot to Asia, like,
wrap up this starting wars in the Middle East. It's
it's bad for us strategically, versus China. China agrees that

(47:33):
is good for them, bad for us. So we're going
to wrap that up. We're going to move over focus
over here. And I guess luckily for Asia that hasn't.
We haven't been able to educate ourselves because where we
decide to focus means that's where there's going to be
the most you know, killing and chaos. So, yeah, if

(47:54):
I were Asia and I heard that the country that
was just focused for the last fifty years on the
Middle East is now going to focus on us, like,
oh boy.

Speaker 2 (48:03):
Thanks, yeah, new Chinese century, this may seale the deal.
Truly really may seale the deal. Let's go ahead and
move to the story that would have been the top
news story and now seems kind of trivial in comparison,
but still important. We want to cover it, which is

(48:23):
this United States Senator from California, Alex Padia. He's the
one he got elected when Diane Feinstein died, Is that right, Ryan,
That's who, that's where when he gets elected. Yeah, So
what happens here is he's in la he is in
the federal building that has been the center of the
protests and all of the action, and where the national
guard have been hanging out and all of this sort

(48:45):
of stuff. So he's in the building for a briefing
about what is going on there, and he learns that
a couple doors down, Christinome is giving a press conference.
So he decides, I'm going to go in and I'm
going to watch this press conference, and I'm going to
try to assert myself and get a question answered, because,
by the way, I've been trying to get some answers
from Dajas and they completely stonewall and I don't get

(49:06):
anything from them. And so a scene unfolds where he
ends up getting forcibly removed by the whatever government thugs
happened to be there. I don't have their FBI or
what agency particular they're with, and then wrestle to the
ground and handcuffed. Truly extraordinary scenes. Let me go ahead
and play this is the I think this is the

(49:29):
fullest video that I've seen, so you can see exactly
what unfolded here.

Speaker 9 (49:38):
Hands up, hands up, I'm Senator Alex could be a
I have questions for the secretary because the fact of
the matter is half a dozen criminals on your on.

Speaker 10 (49:51):
Your on the ground, your back on your back.

Speaker 6 (50:06):
You right behind my back. Flat other other hand, there's
no recording loud. I didn't recording a loud, right, but

(50:29):
what I'm sorry, there's no recording. That's my boss has.

Speaker 10 (50:35):
Record.

Speaker 6 (50:37):
I'm not remember there's no recording. I understand that.

Speaker 2 (50:41):
No recording allowed on here by their public press conference, right.

Speaker 5 (50:45):
Outside the press conference. And yeah, I've seen it's that's
it's such a scary, scary footage and it's very it's
one of these classic police moves where you're giving the guy.
You're giving the guy contradictory information, and so many people
have been killed because one cop is yelling, you know,
put your hands up, and the other cop is yelling
don't move, yeah, and you'd come here, come there, and

(51:08):
the guy doesn't know what to do, and then they
just shoot him. In this case, they've got him down
on his knees and they're pushing him towards the ground
and also telling him to put his hands behind his.

Speaker 2 (51:20):
Back, behind his back, right.

Speaker 5 (51:21):
Which would very obviously lead his face to smash into
the floor, right. And so he says like old on,
let me let me get like stop, and so he
puts his hands down. Now they think he's like resisting
He's like, no, you just that was the only option
you gave him, and then they man handle him further.

Speaker 7 (51:39):
He'd get his hands behind his back.

Speaker 5 (51:41):
Apparently what Crystal, what they said, they they didn't realize
he was a senator. In the video, you hear him say,
I'm Senator Alex Padia, and I have a question about
he said violent criminals.

Speaker 2 (51:53):
They said he lunched towards her and did not identify himself.
And by the way, in the in the post on
Twitter where they say that they included the video and
in the first two seconds, you hear him say, I'm
Senator Alexpidihi from California. So I mean, it's just like
they they expect us to just accept their lives even

(52:17):
when they themselves are providing the evidence that their narrative
of what happened is blatantly false, like in the first
like two seconds of the video is provably false.

Speaker 5 (52:29):
That's become a new phenomenon I've noticed on social media
that and this is these are in government sources that
are doing this. You write, you write a statement and
then the video you put under it contradicts what you
just wrote and you but it doesn't matter. You're like
I'm just I'm just gonna say it. Sometimes misquote.

Speaker 2 (52:51):
Assume people won't watch the video, and so they'll just
take it for granted. I mean, it used to be
that they'd at least have the you know, the the
endity to falsely edit out the part that was inconvenient
for them and like put together some clip mishmash to
try to make it seem like it actually happened the
way they're saying it is. Now that I even bother
with that. They just lie in the post and just

(53:13):
hope that you don't actually watch the video, or if
you do, you're so partisan, brain addled that you can't
see through the fact that their post and the video
doesn't line up whatsoever.

Speaker 5 (53:24):
Yeah, maybe what they meant was we didn't believe that
he was a senator or they did. And this is
what they're doing, Like they don't care, like they they have.
They have a an unpopular agenda that they're that they're
planning to ram through and you're going to have to

(53:44):
do that through force.

Speaker 2 (53:48):
Well, and you have already you know, you had the
sort of chaos that unfolded in Newark when Mayor Ross
Baraka was there with several members of Congress, and they
they go to the members of Congress were at this
facility as a federal facility the city, by the way,
re Juxas says, it's not permitted properly, like they're in

(54:09):
court over the presence of this facility at all. So
it's disputed. To start with, there's members of Congress who
are there to provide oversight, which they have the legal
right to do based on a law that was passed
I think during Trump's first administration. And then the mayor
is there as well, trying to also gain access. They
tell him okay, well you can't go in, so he leaves,
and then they arrest him, and it leads to there's

(54:30):
protesters onside. LA's chaotic scene and now not only they
arrest him, then ultimately they say we can't really charge you.
They drop the charges because there's no they're there with
regard to him, but they've now charged one of the
congresswomen who was there, represided to MacIvor is that her name, Lamonica?
I think that's right, and with charges that could result

(54:53):
in seventeen years in prison. So you know, when you ask, okay,
well was this intention? Did they just not believe that
he's the United States senator because his skin tone wasn't
the right hue or for whatever reason. You know, you
have to think about it in the context of everything
else that they're doing, which is brazen lee you know,

(55:14):
strong man authoritarian, fascist tactics. You have the National Guard deployed,
you have the freaking Marines deployed, Like this is insanity
for some pretty run of the mill protests that spanned
a few city blocks. Okay, they're threatening the deployment of
troops acted duty military troops in cities across the country.

Speaker 7 (55:37):
True, true, Yeah, shifts and giggles like yeah.

Speaker 2 (55:41):
Trump is throwing himself a birthday party military parade, and
he says any protesters there will be met with force.
Not violent protesters, not rioters. Protesters will be met with force. So,
you know, if it was a different administration that did
not have all of this track record of things that
are happening, I'm just talking about the last week. Those

(56:03):
are things that all happened this week. If it was
a different administration, maybe because maybe it was a mix up,
maybe they really didn't think it was a senator. Maybe
you know, they you know, the FBI or whoever was
there guarding her. Maybe they really did think that this
was some sort of a public safety threat, even though
again you're inside of a federal building wherever you could
search for weapons before you even go in. Maybe, but

(56:24):
there is no reason to give these people any benefit
of the doubt when this is part and parcel and
entirely consistent with the authoritarian strong man tactics that they've
been deploying again and again and again. I have the

(56:44):
statement from Senator of Padilla, his explanation of what he
was trying to accomplish and how this all went down.
Let's go ahead and take a listen to him, and
then I can put up the DHS statement as well
to give their side of the story.

Speaker 8 (56:58):
Good After everybody of center out, you guys have some questions,
I'm going to read a brief statement. I will not
be taking questions, but allow me to read my statements.
I'm here in Los Angeles today, and I was here
in the Federal building in the conference room awaiting a
scheduled briefing from federal officials as part of my responsibility

(57:24):
as a senator to provide oversight and accountability. While I
was waiting for the briefing, with General Guillot, I learned
that Secretary of None was having a press conference a
couple of words down the hall. Since the beginning of

(57:48):
the year, but especially over the course of the last
over the course of recent weeks, I several of my
colleagues have been asking the Apartment of Home od Security
for more information and more answers on their increasingly extreme
immigration enforcement actions. And we've gotten little to no information

(58:14):
in response to our inquiries. And so I came to
the press conference to hear what she had to say,
to see if I could learn any new additional information.

Speaker 6 (58:27):
And at one point I had.

Speaker 8 (58:29):
A question, and I'm emphasized, just as we emphasized the
right for people to peacefully protest and to stand up
for their First Amendment rights, for our fundamental rights. I
was there peacefully. At one point I had a question,
and so I began to ask a question. I was

(58:50):
almost immediately forcibly removed from the room. I was forced
to the ground, and I was handcuffed. I was not arrested,
I was not detained. I will say this, if this
is how this administration responds to a senator with a question,

(59:15):
If this is how the Department of Homeland Security responds
to a senator with a question, you can only imagine what.

Speaker 11 (59:25):
They're doing to farm workers, to cooks, to day labors
out in the Los Angeles community and throughout California and
throughout the country.

Speaker 8 (59:39):
We will hold this administration accountable and we'll have more
to say. We'll have more to say in the coming days.

Speaker 2 (59:52):
I think that last point is the most important one, Ryan, Like,
if this is how you're treating the US senator, just
imagine if you're a defenseless, nobody farm worker, dai labor mom,
student who dares to ride it up at like, just
imagine the way that people who don't have the ability
to go in front of a camera and tell their story.

(01:00:14):
Just imagine how they're being treated.

Speaker 5 (01:00:19):
Yeah, it's it's really well said. And you know, we
don't have to totally imagine. There are the reports that
are coming out of the way that migrants and attention
are being treated.

Speaker 2 (01:00:34):
Well, and some of it is Apparently even Trump felt
the need to put on a statement saying like Steven
m's going too far effectively, although he then quickly walked that.

Speaker 7 (01:00:44):
Back, right.

Speaker 5 (01:00:45):
You know, he was saying yes because it was going
after the farm workers and hotel employees.

Speaker 7 (01:00:54):
And you know, I.

Speaker 5 (01:00:55):
Think Trump probably if you act, actually got him in
an honest moment, doesn't have a problem with does doesn't
want to round up everybody that works on farms and
in hotels. I think that's probably pretty obvious. I think
probably most of his you know, probably a lot of

(01:01:18):
workers at his properties would get round up.

Speaker 7 (01:01:22):
Yep.

Speaker 5 (01:01:23):
So that seemed more like an honest moment, whereas the
rest of it is kind of dishonest. But yeah, at
the conditions that they're keeping people in no food, no
water for long stretches, very very long stretches, keeping people
in pitch dark.

Speaker 2 (01:01:36):
That's part of what sparked these protests. They were keeping
in the federal building in the basement. They were holding
immigrants that they that they detain, including you know, families
with limited in spaces that are not meant to be
you know, detention facilities, so very limited food, limited water, light,
pitch black. Lights went off I think at five pm,

(01:01:58):
and then you're just sitting there and pitch black. They're
talking about family kids. I mean, yeah, that was part
of what sparked the protests in LA to begin with that,
and then the you know, the roundups at home depot
and this one garment manufacturer as well were what kicked
off these protests. And then, according to the reporting from

(01:02:18):
the LA Times, protests start off, you know, just obviously
upset but peaceful, and then the cops start throwing you know,
spring to your gas and throwing flash bang grenades, and
that's when you know, the more violent behavior kicks off.
This is often the case started by the cops. I
wanted to show you this is the DHS statement that

(01:02:39):
we're referring to before center of Padilla shows disrespectful political
theater again, Christy, No, I'm talking about political theater. Be
so for real right now anyway, and interrupted a live
press conference without identifying himself. That's the part that's like
in this video right here he identifies himself or having
a Senate Security pin on. As he lunged towards Secretary

(01:02:59):
Nome Padia was told repeatedly to back away, did not
comply with officers repeated commands. That gets to what you
were saying, Ryan about how they give these conflicting commands,
that that's impossible to comply with. Secret Service thought he
was an attacker. Officers acted appropriately. Secretary of Noam met
with Senator Padea after and held a fifteen minute meeting.
And you know, it's interesting, like I think that this

(01:03:21):
is I think the footage is very disturbing. I think
people should be upset and disturbed by it. It's also
interesting Ryan the things that really get to democratic elected officials.
They've been kind of quiet about the military being unleashed
against US citizens in LA. They've been kind of quiet

(01:03:43):
about Trump green lighting Israel starting World War three. They
have not been quiet about one of their colleagues getting
arrested in this manner. And again, I don't want to
downplay it, but it is just interesting to me that
suddenly this is the thing that they were like, oh shit,
this hits close to home. They did a you know,
they I think Schumer immediately, you know, made some statement

(01:04:05):
on the floor. They did a march to Senatra Foon's office.
They've you know, certainly all been putting out statements, et cetera.
Like they are very exercised. They're getting up off their
asses for this one.

Speaker 5 (01:04:17):
And as Dave Dan pointed out, when Schumer took to
the floor and asked unanimous consent for a moment to
make to make that comment. What he was interrupting was
a bipartisan you know, uh tongue bath for the crypto
industry's like Schumer was in the middle of empowering all

(01:04:38):
of the crypto allies of the Trump administration when he
when he took a moment to condemn them for man
handling Padilla.

Speaker 2 (01:04:47):
Two perfect too perfect and crypto speech over.

Speaker 7 (01:04:51):
We can go back to the crypto.

Speaker 2 (01:04:53):
Right, I go back over to like letting scammers fleece
the American people and enrich are correct in the white
and to destabilize the global financial system. Let's get back
to that bipartisan work that we were doing previously. Yeah,
so it says a lot, doesn't it. Yeah, let me
go ahead and show you this piece which is so understandably,

(01:05:18):
most of the attention is focused on the DIA, what
he's doing, the arrests, you know, and being rustled to
the ground, et cetera, by the way, charge him or anything.
So that's good at least, which I would not have
put past them whatsoever. I guess even they realized that
might be a bridge too far. But it's worth taking
a listen to what Christy Noam was actually saying in

(01:05:39):
that press conference. So let me go ahead and pull
this up. I'll read the caption and we can actually
play the sound as well. But this person, Jason Kirk,
is pointing out before they dragged out Padilla, Noam said,
we are staying here in La to liberate the city
from the socialists and the burden some leadership that the

(01:05:59):
guy and this mayor have placed on this country. And
he opines accurately, so sounds close to declaring a regime
change attempt on millions of Americans here. You can go
ahead and listen to her deliver those lines.

Speaker 12 (01:06:12):
Dane, and increase our operations in this city. We are
not going away. We are staying here to liberate the
city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this
governor and that this mayor have placed on this country
and what they have tried to insert.

Speaker 4 (01:06:30):
Into this city.

Speaker 12 (01:06:31):
So I want to say thank you to every single
person that has been able to do this.

Speaker 2 (01:06:37):
Also I want to talk, so there you go. That's
the moment she's interrupted is when she's announcing effectively a
regime change operation in La, which, as far as I know,
I mean, this has been quiet for a couple of days.
Now they don't even have enough like they're there to
get their riot porn images to play on a loop
and Fox News, which is why I guess they were
playing these images from Las Vegas which were just protesters

(01:07:00):
like standing there facing off with the cops.

Speaker 5 (01:07:03):
Yeah, it's interesting that they aren't aren't even getting kind
of the war that they wanted the right they see,
they provoked some you know way mow car burning, sent
in the National Guard, then then sent in the Marines.
I think hoping that they would get like another George
Floyd uh moment where you know, people pour out into

(01:07:26):
the streets of every city and like they're not you know,
they're going to be continue to be protest, but they're
not getting And maybe maybe it's so transparent that that
it's what they want that a lot of people are
just like, I'm not gonna I'm not going to give
you what you want.

Speaker 2 (01:07:48):
What do you think of We've got these no Kings,
no King protests that are happening, uh this weekend. These
were pre planned Trump, as I referenced before, said protest,
any protesters of his military parade are going to be
met with force. Uh you know, what do you what
do you expect unfold there. What do you think the
significance is. I have to say, I think the branding

(01:08:09):
is good, like fits with certainly, Yeah, fits with the
moment certainly, and plays into like you know, there was
all this criticism of like the Mexican flags. This is
a deeply American sentiment. Listen, this is America. We don't
have kings. So I think everybody can give them the
the opjects seal of approval on this one.

Speaker 5 (01:08:32):
And they're not going to be in Washington, d C.
You know, some some people may organically protest Trump's it's
like a two block parade that he's having. But in general,
the protests, the process organizers have said, let's, you know,
protest everywhere except.

Speaker 7 (01:08:48):
Washington, d C.

Speaker 5 (01:08:49):
They don't want, you know, they don't want the conflict
with the military there.

Speaker 7 (01:08:56):
It could be it could be quite.

Speaker 5 (01:08:58):
Large, you know. I you know, if you know, if
you're watching this video, let us know down in the comments,
like but if you're going But I my sense is
that you could get enormous numbers of people coming out
in the streets.

Speaker 2 (01:09:16):
I mean, the Trump administration is certainly giving them lots
of incentive to go out right now just in this week,
you know, provoking a large and emotional response, understandably, So
I thought this was interesting. You know, in terms of
the polling that we've seen so far, we've got a
Washington Post pull on immigration enforcement. Let me put this

(01:09:38):
up on the screen. I also saw when we would
put up in just a second about the way the
like places where his approval rating have declined the times
during his administration. So you've got de approve of the
trumpet how Trump is handling immigration enforcement, including deportations. According
to this bowl, take it for what it is worth,
disapprove is now fifty two percent. So even on this

(01:09:59):
issue that's supposed to be his best issue, fifty two
percent disapproved, thirty seven percent approve, and twelve percent are unsure.
Do you support or oppose the protest in LA against
federal government's immigration enforcement opposes forty percent, Support is thirty
nine percent, pretty you know, much along partisan lines oftentimes, Ryan,
I feel like people don't like protesters, even when they

(01:10:20):
support the things that they.

Speaker 5 (01:10:21):
Are protests, especially if they especially if they see cars burning, right, yeah,
once they see flames, people are like, eh.

Speaker 2 (01:10:29):
I'm out, yeah, completely, let me just hold on, Let
me give me a second and let me pull up
this other poll that I just saw this morning. Someone
had marked up where Trump's approval rating had fallen off
most quickly, and it was like, here we go. It
was like when the Trump administration defied the court on

(01:10:53):
Kilmara Brego Garcia. And right now there's been a significant
decline over the past last week. So you've got the
Trump administration defies Supreme Court on a Brego Garcia. You
can see that his approval, you know, is, let's see
approval declines, and then he was actually building back up

(01:11:13):
here and then he deploys the National Guard in Los
Angeles and it falls again. Now you know, you could say, Okay,
maybe these polls are maybe there's not enough polling, maybe
these poles aren't correct, etc. But I've seen enough at
this point, certainly on the kilmar A Brego Garcia piece, Ryan,

(01:11:33):
that I am quite convinced that fight was really bad
for the Trump administration. And I think we know that,
especially at this point, because he backed down and brought
him back and realized that between the court pressure and
the public pressure, this was not going well for him.
And I think you see some similar indications of that
with regard to the deploying of the National Guard in

(01:11:55):
la I mean, first of all, like you said, he's
not getting the scenes that he wanted out of that
and thought be so great. But the fact that he
put out that post yesterday, which I can pull up
here in a second, where he's basically like, oh, we
don't want hard working people being pulled down of the
country or sent out of the country, and the you know,
for the farmers and for the hotel workers, et cetera.

(01:12:15):
That also was an indication to me that he did
not feel like this aggressive, visible crackdown that Stephen Miller
demanded where he said, stop going after the criminals and
go to the home depots in the seven eleven, that
he didn't feel like the optics of this were working
out for him in the way that Stephen Miller had projected.

Speaker 5 (01:12:33):
Right, He's he and Steven Miller are different. Stephen Miller
is a revolutionary who has an ideological vision for the
revolution that he's trying to carry out. Yeah, it's exactly
what Trump says, right.

Speaker 2 (01:12:48):
I mean, Stephen Miller is a white nationalist. He thinks
that anyone is brown, you're illegitimately and not just by
the way, undocumented immigrants, Like, that's what all of these
efforts to rescind legal status to hundreds of thousands of immigrants,
that's what that's about. So it's not about illegal immigrants.

(01:13:09):
They're taking legal immigrants and making them illegal so they
can have pretext to support as many people as possible.
And then you also had you know, this strange I
guess not that strange moment from a bunch of right
wing influencers like Charlie Kirk and I think is Jack
Pisoba and a camera. There's one other where they all
started putting out the same message about how we need
zero migration in from what they described as third world countries,

(01:13:33):
like just making it as plain as possible that you know,
we want a white ethno state, and so if you
come from a country where we deem you know, the
melanin shade to not be correct, then you are no
longer allowed to come here.

Speaker 5 (01:13:49):
Right, And we need to double the number of medical
schools and nursing schools, which we should do anyway, but
they have no plan to do that.

Speaker 2 (01:13:57):
No, of course, not yeah, of course not yeah, what
did you I mean, what did you have that same
political read of the Trump Post, and then he also
made some comments about the farmers and the hotel workers
that he sort of felt like, this isn't really going
that great because the polling. Also, if you ask people, Okay,
do you want to deport violent criminals, They're like absolutely.

(01:14:19):
If you ask them, do you want to deport day
laborers at home depot who have been here for years
and have no criminal record, it is overwhelming the level
of opposition. I'm talking like seventy five percent or like
why the hell would you do that?

Speaker 5 (01:14:33):
Yeah, And I think not just that Trump's to Trump's credit,
he is always on the phone, like he and he's
and talks to not just on the and not just
with rich people. It's usually rich people on the phone,
but you know, he authentically talks to a lot of
people as he goes around the world, like it's one

(01:14:53):
of it's his effort to stay you know, in touch
with public opinion. And I'm sure that he was hearing
from you know, farm you know, owners of large farms,
ranch owners like others who and other you know, hotel
types who were like having their businesses ruined by ice.

(01:15:15):
And also and it's not just that, like the the
level of fear that they have struck into the immigrant
community is off the charts, like it's which is intentional,
but it means that even if you don't get an
Ice RAYD, you just have a lot of people just

(01:15:35):
like not showing up right, showing up less. I'm sure
that some non trivial number are are self deporting.

Speaker 2 (01:15:47):
Uh.

Speaker 5 (01:15:47):
And so people who rely on those workers aren't are
then calling Trump and saying, bro, like what are you doing?
And from Trusper scifety, he's liked Stephen were doing? Man,
what about the criminals? Like, you know, they ran for
years on how many murderers and rapists are running free?

(01:16:12):
And you know it's embarrassing to them that they can't
find them because because they manufactured.

Speaker 2 (01:16:17):
Them, because they don't.

Speaker 7 (01:16:18):
It's a storyline right right.

Speaker 2 (01:16:21):
And I think that's a big part of why they
want this show of force, like rolling up with in
a military you know, vehicle with a whole pay LANX,
partly of militarized officers, partly plain clothes ice thugs with
their face covered. Because if you have that level of
show of force, it makes it feel like you're apprehending

(01:16:41):
a criminal, even when you're just going after some guy
who rises some flyers, as was the case in one instance,
or you know, a dad who has no criminal record,
or people even who've been doing exactly what they were
supposed to do and going through the asylum process. But
if you roll in with that kind of equipment, people
just sort of assume like, oh, well, they must be

(01:17:03):
going after some real super bad guy, violent criminal if
you're coming in with that kind of you know, that
kind of equipment and that kind of approach, using all
these resources to go after just some random like mom
who's not done anything wrong. But we know that's the
case because we know when they sent they use military
planes to fly migrants down to Guantanamo Bay, they had

(01:17:26):
no criminal record. Most of them had no criminal records,
or they had like you know, Jay walked effectively the
people they sent a seacott vast majority of them no
criminal record. And so so I think that's part of
trying to create the perception since the reality that they
had projected does not actually exist. Yep, all right, we'll

(01:17:47):
go ahead and wrap the free portion of the show. Now, guys,
this is the last day for the am I right
about this. I think the promo ends today or at
end of yesterday. I'm not sure. In any case, sign
up today's.

Speaker 7 (01:17:59):
Last day, Get it today, hurry up.

Speaker 2 (01:18:01):
BP free, go do it now Breakingpoints dot Com. Free
month trial. You get all the things Ryan doesn't have
to read him zads. You guys know the pitch. So
all right, we're going to go and end this portion now.
For premium subscribers, we've got a court decision with regards
to National Guard and Marines that's really important. I think
we'll take a look at Zoron's beard situation just to

(01:18:22):
have at least something that's fun in the show, and
then we'll take a few questions as well. So we'll
go ahead and get to that now. All right, guys,
Two quick things. Number one, by popular demand, we are
bringing back the monthly subscription.

Speaker 12 (01:18:34):
Number two.

Speaker 2 (01:18:35):
You can get a month free Ryan by putting in
that promo code bpfree at Breakingpoints dot Com.

Speaker 5 (01:18:40):
Yeah, and I think the most important reason to become
a premium subscriber is just as an active support for
the show. It helps us do what we're doing. But
if you're curious what the benefits are of doing it,
take the free month and you'll see you get the amas,
You get the second half the Friday show. You get
the full show emailed to you earlier. It makes your

(01:19:01):
life much better. Do it for a month at breakingpoints
dot com. BP free is a promo code, and if
after a month your life isn't dramatically improved, you can
just cancel.

Speaker 7 (01:19:12):
If it is, it's just ten bucks a month.

Speaker 2 (01:19:14):
There you go.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Bobby Bones Show

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}6/13/25: ANALYSIS: Did Trump Let Israel Start WW3?

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Bobby Bones Show

All Episodes

6/13/25: ANALYSIS: Did Trump Let Israel Start WW3?

Stuff You Should Know