7/10/25: Jon Stewart Rips Jeffries, AIPAC Exposed By Wine Moms, Bibi Records With NELK, Amazon Sales Plunge

Krystal and Saagar discuss Jon Stewart rips Jeffries, AIPAC exposed by lib wine moms, Bibi records with NELK boys, Amazon prime day sales plunge.

 

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 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 (00:31):
So, in the wake of zornmm Donnie's Democratic primary victory,
you've got a number of establishment Democrats who're starting to
sweat a little bit about a potential primary challenge from
the left. Hakim Jeffries was asked about this possibility for
himself on CNN.

Speaker 3 (00:45):
Let's take a listen to what you have to say.

Speaker 4 (00:46):
I have no idea what these people are talking about.
We are going to continue to focus our efforts as
we did on the House floor and connection with Donald
Trump's One Big Ugly Bill on pushing back against the
extreme that has been unleashed on the American people. It
is Cleita Haas as members of the New York City
delegation that the problem is Donald Trump and House Republicans.

Speaker 1 (01:10):
You mean are being honest with you don't know why?
You know why they're targeting you?

Speaker 5 (01:14):
Oh no, I'm not. I know why they're targeting.

Speaker 1 (01:16):
You know why I don't.

Speaker 5 (01:17):
I don't care that they're targeting.

Speaker 1 (01:18):
So why don't you say it? You know why they're targeting.

Speaker 5 (01:20):
I think they're targeting because I'm pro Israel. That's one
hundred percent. That's the issue.

Speaker 2 (01:24):
So are you saying they're targeting you and all of
these other individuals you've got Clark, I.

Speaker 5 (01:28):
Think I have. I am specifically targeted because of my position.

Speaker 6 (01:32):
And by the way, he's been courageous on this issue,
and he's had a backbone, and he has stood up
to the Waco radicals and his party on this and he.

Speaker 1 (01:38):
Deserves all the credit in the World War.

Speaker 6 (01:40):
But that's why he's on the list because these people
have a burning hatred for Israel. It's one of their
main pieces of their platform, and that's why they put
him on the list.

Speaker 5 (01:47):
And it's terrible.

Speaker 2 (01:48):
So it started there with a Kim Jeffreys and then
to Richie trus who starts looking very uncomfortable as Scott
Jennings starts singing. And I mean, look, these people, they
shouldn't be afraid right now because the Democratic base in
a way I have never seen before. They are disgusted
with the Hakeem Jeffries of the world. And you know

(02:08):
what on Israel. Listen, most people are not going to
be voting on Israel and Gaza. However, this is beginning
to be a sort of like gatekeeping litmus test issue
within the Democratic primary base because it's an indication of
are you willing, are you going to fight, are you
willing to stand up for things that are different, are
you willing up to stand up against moneyed interests? And

(02:31):
do you have any like core principles that do have
basic humanity and any basic values that we can rely on.
So yes, the fact that Richie Torres, who represents one
of the poorer districts in the country, has spent so
much time fixated on supporting a foreign country rather than
trying to help out his own constituents in his own district, Yeah,

(02:52):
that is going to make you a target for a primary,
and I very much suspect that he is going to
face one. I think Hakeem Jeffries could as well, and
I think both of them could potentially be very vulnerable here,
specifically because of the way that the Democratic base has
shifted in their view of their own establishment leaders.

Speaker 1 (03:12):
Yeah, that's actually the important point. The important point is
that it's not about Israel per se, although you know,
Ryan put this very eloquently yesterday about Epstein, and I
think Israel has now become one of this if you
just repeat Epstein killed himself, or any sort of establishment thing,
people's baseline. It's not that they're voting on Epstein. They're like, yeah,
I don't trust this guy. They're like, this guy is captured.

(03:33):
And if you talk about Israel and our strongest allies,
the most moral army in the world, people are like,
I don't know about this. That's kind of how I
think it has become. Nobody's voting on it. They're just like,
that becomes an entree point through which you can assess
what people think about all of these other things. That's
why I would put it, and so to see ka
King Jeffries then also fumble it in just such an

(03:54):
immense way, both in terms of the ways handled the bill,
in the way that he handles the entire opposition to Trump,
in the way that the Democratic Party really wants. You
are absolutely ripe for a major takeover. The question is like,
what form does that take? I mean, I you can
correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't Jeffries like I mean,
most of these districts that are heavily Jerry Mander, It's

(04:15):
gonna be pretty tough, oh, to actually get yourself a
real primary that.

Speaker 3 (04:18):
No, you could get a real primary.

Speaker 1 (04:20):
Okay, I don't.

Speaker 2 (04:21):
I'm quite sure Richie Torres is I have to look
at Hikim Jeffries, Richie Torres's district in particular, zorn one right,
I think he won Kakiem Jeffrey's district as well, but
I'd have to double check on that one. I know
we won Dan Goldman's district, which is like a lower
Manhattan district as well. So I don't know if you
followed this, Richie Torres. Since Zoron's victory, man has he

(04:45):
done a one eighty? He stopped Israel posting. He'll only
occasionally now post about Israel, whereas previously was like every
other tweets about Israel. You know, he put up this
video that he quickly took down because I think it
was such an embarrassing copy, attempted copy of what's I
was doing, like the man on the street thing, and
he's just getting like ripped apart, so he deleted it.
He has gone to bat for Zorn in the context

(05:07):
of saying this, you know, these Islamophobic attacks on him
are unacceptable, So he definitely recognizes that he has an
issue and that he has a vulnerability.

Speaker 3 (05:19):
Haquem Jeffries.

Speaker 2 (05:20):
I mean, he's like so risless that it's astonishing. He
is the biggest black hole of charisma I think I've
ever seen in my entire life.

Speaker 3 (05:28):
I was watching his appearance on.

Speaker 2 (05:30):
The View the other day just to see if there
was like anything interesting there that we might want to cover.
And the way he talks, he does all these like
disconnected hand motions while he's talking that you can clearly
see some consultant with like this is the way to
like punch up your presentation, and you need to be
more you need to like, yeah, you need to unseen

(05:51):
or you need to use your hands, you need to
be more energetic, And it just comes off like he's
like a traffic cop or you know, trying just very robotic.
So for Richie Torres, the focus on Israel, He's right,
it's a problem for him. It is a problem when
you have a huge gulf of a disconnect between where
democratic leadership is and where the democratic base is on Israel.

Speaker 3 (06:14):
Yes, that's an issue for you, no doubt about it.

Speaker 2 (06:17):
For Hakim Jeffries, the fact that he has become a
figure of public mockery across the board with your most
normally possible liberal Democrats, for his inability and unwillingness to
fight Trump in any real meaningful way, and how absolutely
pathetic he's been in this moment, Yes, that makes him

(06:37):
vulnerable too. John Stewart actually was taking shots at him
over his like like insanely cringe pathetic posting around the
one big beautiful bill. Let's go ahead and take a
look at a little bit at what John Stewart had
to say.

Speaker 3 (06:50):
But at these Democrats still have Hakim Jeffries over the house.

Speaker 6 (06:53):
He's a younger leader and he decided not to answer
with words but with imagery.

Speaker 3 (07:00):
It came Jeffries on Instagram.

Speaker 1 (07:02):
He's got a baseball bat and he says, House Democrats
will keep the pressure on Trump's one big ugly bill.
King Jeffries answered with imagery. Imagery that sends a clear.

Speaker 3 (07:19):
Message to Republicans that it came Jeffries and the Democrats.

Speaker 1 (07:25):
Are waiting for their moms to pick them up from
t ball.

Speaker 3 (07:30):
Yeah, just absolutely pathetic.

Speaker 1 (07:32):
So here's the sneakers in that too, Oh my god. Yeah,
it's a blessing. Stop dressing like shit.

Speaker 2 (07:38):
Stear also made a good point of like, don't you
know that if you want to look intimidating, the angle
is from below so you look larger, not so it
shrinks you down at me.

Speaker 1 (07:46):
He doesn't even know all these basics. And apparently he's
been caught using face tune now multiple time. That is human.

Speaker 2 (07:51):
Oh he there was this picture he posted himself on
Instagram where he's like leaning up against the park bench
and you can see very obviously like the park bench
is all way be and manipulated from whatever they were
doing to like, I don't know, make his hips smaller.

Speaker 1 (08:04):
That was my friend Julie Grace.

Speaker 3 (08:06):
What are you doing?

Speaker 1 (08:07):
Julie Grace, who is a great reporter I recommend people
follow who spotted the face students, so shout out to her.
There's also this, this is really fun. Let's put this
next one up on the screen about you know, eyeing
him for a primary. And they respond, if Team Gentrification
wants a primary fight, our response will be forceful and unrelenting.

(08:31):
We will teach them and all of their incumbents a
painful lesson. So branding them Team Gentrification is I mean,
what is that exactly? It's like the way that they're
kind of trying to frame this as Zoron is just
like the rich white leftist candidate and they're like the
original residence of New York candidate. But I mean that

(08:51):
doesn't really fit with a lot of the data, you
know that has come out of the primary itself, especially
if he's was able to win your district. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (08:58):
No, no, that's exactly right. And I mean it's also
rich coming from HIKEM Jefferies, who takes of course money
from all kinds of like private equity and whatever that
are actually doing the gentrification, and from Hikiem Jeffries, who
has been a leader in the Democratic Party as it
has pivoted to be a richer, white college educated party
like that being the center of gravity within the Democratic Party.

(09:20):
Let's just see four up on the screen, just to
dig into some of these numbers. So, first of all, Zlauren, Now,
after all the ranked choice voting, he is now one
the largest number of primary votes for a Democratic candidate
in New York City of all time. Now it is
a little bit different because this ranked choice voting now
wasn't before blah blah blah, but that is still a
really significant accomplishment. You don't do that by just winning

(09:43):
what they call the Kami corridor. He made huge inroads
into some of the hardcore Quomo base. And now keep
us up on the screen. This is polling for if you,
you know, if all five candidates stay in the race
through the general, this is what it ultimately looks like.
And you've he's got Zoron winning you know, most every constituency.

(10:04):
You have him winning white voters, Black voters, Latino voters,
Asian voters. College educated Cuomo does beat him among non
college by about three points. But you can't look at
this and say, oh, this is just wealthy white people
gentrifiers like that is a preposterous way of you. He's
winning Latino voters by twenty one points and you know,
for all the there's been so much analysis about why

(10:24):
left wing candidates struggle with the like black Democratic base,
what you see from these numbers is, yeah, once you're
the Democratic nominee, this is a constituency that's primarily loyal
to the Democratic Party, they're buying large kind of vote
for you. So so in any case, any sort of
look at the data with you know, with an unbiased eye,
shows that this coalition was much broader than the way

(10:46):
certainly that Hikeem Jefferies is trying to portray it here
and who his base is at this point.

Speaker 3 (10:50):
Hiking Jefferies, I don't know.

Speaker 2 (10:53):
I mean, maybe people in his district have some feeling
about him that's different than the national narrative. I'm sure
it will not be easy to see him, but I'm
sure he has to be nervous, and you know, if
he has any sense whatsoever, he has to be nervous
because he truly is a primary target. And you know,
last thing here before we get to the the I've
had it, ladies. It's so crazy to me that you

(11:15):
have this guy, you have the Democratic Party doing all
this soul searching.

Speaker 3 (11:18):
Oh my god, how do.

Speaker 2 (11:19):
We like appeal to young people again, and how do
we get the bros back, and how do we get
excitement back into this party and make people trust us.

Speaker 3 (11:24):
Here comes Oran out of nowhere. People freaking love this guy.

Speaker 7 (11:27):
They love him.

Speaker 3 (11:28):
He's like he's a rock star.

Speaker 2 (11:29):
He's compelling, he understands the he's got a message that
clearly resonates with people, like hit the nail on the
head there. And then he also understands the medium of
the moment, like he is a sort of native TikToker
where you know, it's the vertical video and he's very
comfortable in that forum. And this is the way that
the public greets this guy on the street. At this point,
let's go in and play six.

Speaker 8 (11:50):
Yes, yes, that's he that's yes. Yeah, Yeah, we can
take one.

Speaker 1 (11:56):
I put it somebody that wants congratlation.

Speaker 8 (11:59):
Thank you, thank you, I guess, thank you, thank you,
thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. My man,
I appreciate you, thank you. Think she's coming.

Speaker 2 (12:23):
So here you have this guy who is a true star,
and the instinct of the Democratic Party establishment is like,
what can we do to destroy him?

Speaker 1 (12:30):
Yeah, I mean tells you so much about the party.
I see, I respect a renegade when they are there
and I can see and recognize somebody who's got genuinely
political talent. But you know, that's what makes him vulnerables,
because that's ultimately why he was there in the first place.
It does look a lot better for him than in
the initial days. I think he's gonna win. I don't.

(12:51):
I don't think he's I don't see I mean, Adams
is it's you know, it's possible that the only possible
people are.

Speaker 3 (12:59):
So deluded about Eric Adams.

Speaker 2 (13:01):
Eric Adams has a twenty percent of the in the
city of New York, is the lowest mayoral.

Speaker 3 (13:05):
Approval in the history of that city.

Speaker 2 (13:07):
Like even if, in fact, I actually think Cuomo is
probably the stronger candidate against Zoran if you are, you know,
in the Bill Ackman camp of like, let's clear on
the rest of the field, these guys all hate each other,
not they're not looking out to get out of the
way of one another in order to be able to win.
And Sliva was gonna pull his like eighteen percent or
whatever of the vote.

Speaker 3 (13:25):
I mean, I I don't know.

Speaker 2 (13:26):
It's it's certainly possible they'll be able to take him out.
But also if you look, Zorin has much higher favorability
than any of these other candidates too. He's getting all
the union backing at this point, like there is a
consolidation of sort of like those sorts of power bases
within the city behind him, which is also going to
make him very difficult to beat at this point.

Speaker 3 (13:48):
All right, let's go on, get.

Speaker 2 (13:49):
To the I've had it ladies who I am loving
so Emily educated me on what's the name of their
Bravo reality show, Sweet Home. So they came from the
Bravo world. Ay, Emily calls it was like this hicc
lib show.

Speaker 1 (14:02):
She absolutely here there Sweet Home, Oklahoma.

Speaker 2 (14:04):
Yeah, And they still live in Oklahoma and they now
do this political podcast. And I've sort of watched over
time as they have gone from just being like very
wine mom resistance to being sort of increasingly radicalized.

Speaker 3 (14:15):
And I think that they.

Speaker 2 (14:16):
Are representative of something that is happening in the Democratic
base that fits certainly in with what's going on with Zoron.
But watch them go in on the politicians who the
New York politicians who have not gotten behind Zoron and
then putting up they go to the APAC tracker and
they put up all the money that all of these

(14:36):
politicians are getting from a pack and you know, pointing
to that as the reason why they won't support Zoron. Mom, Donnie,
let's go and take a listen to this.

Speaker 7 (14:46):
Representative Laura Gillen ninety four nine hundred and five dollars,
Representative Adriano s bi Alat I'm butchering his last name
two hundred and two thousand, Representative Tom Swazi three hundred
and twelve thousand dollars, Representative Dan Goldman three hundred and

(15:08):
sixty six thousand dollars, Representative Gregory Meeks six hundred and
ninety thousand dollars, Representative Grace Mean six hundred and nineteen
thousand dollars, Senator Kirsten gillibrand almost a million dollars coming
in at nine hundred and ninety seven thousand dollars. And
I will remind you that she engaged in his lamophobic

(15:29):
attacks on this mayoral candidate and didn't defend Islamophobia. Yet
is so quick to call out anybody as being anti Semitic.
And that's the thing in this is that we can
speak out against the provocations in the war crimes of
the Israeli government, and they don't get to hold us
hostage and tell us we're anti Semitic. That's bullshit and

(15:51):
don't fall into that trap. Next up, Representative Richie Torres
one point five million dollars, Senator Chuck Shumer one point
seven million dollars came Jefferies one point seven million, Representative
George Latimer nineteen million dollars.

Speaker 2 (16:11):
So this is the kind of lady Sager who definitely
would have been a Hillary Clinton in the Bernie versus Hillary.

Speaker 3 (16:16):
Definitely would have been Hillary.

Speaker 2 (16:18):
The allegations of anti Semitism in a previous moment definitely
would have hald them where they, oh, we can't say that,
we can't talk about that whatever, and now here she
is like, this is bullshit, your weaponization of anti Semitism.
Here's Kirsten Gillibrand taking a million dollars from.

Speaker 3 (16:33):
A pack, like, screw all of these people.

Speaker 2 (16:35):
And I was telling you, I listened to actually this
whole episode of them talking about APAC and talking about Kim,
Jeffries and Zora and Mom Donnie, et cetera, and it
was really clear that the language around Israel and Palestine,
like they're not fluent in the language, and you know,
there's all these tripwires of how to talk about you know,
is it the idf ORSU, the IOF and the occupation,

(16:56):
like all this stuff right, the language and the vernacular
and the history, etc. And these are also the type
of people that, because they didn't feel like they were
experts on the conflict previously, would have just said it
must be complicate, I'm just going to stay out of it.
No more like she was perfectly willing to take a position,
call it out and say we're not standing for the
murder of these babies, and you all need to get

(17:16):
on board. And so I do see that as a
sort of sea change. And so while I don't want
to overstate how central this issue is, I actually do
think that it's becoming a very important dividing line in
the Democratic Party. It reminds me of back in the
days when gay marriage was still very much a live issue.
And maybe it wasn't the issue that everyone was voting on,

(17:37):
but for young Democrats in particular, it was like a
gatekeeping item.

Speaker 3 (17:40):
It was a litmus test item.

Speaker 2 (17:41):
If you weren't there on gay marriage, then they really
didn't want to hear the rest of what you had
to say, because that was an indication you're unprincipled, you
have no like, you have no political courage and willingness
to stand up on an issue that, yes, at this
moment is difficult, and it was a difficult issue at
the time. Gaza has become that issue in the Democratic
primary party. I do think it's going to be very
important in twenty twenty eight because you just can't persist

(18:05):
with such a massive gulf between where the Democratic base
is on something that is very emotional and visceral versus
where the Democratic leadership is. And so that's why I
think these ladies are a very important indication of the
radicalization the shift that has happened in the Democratic base
on this issue. But that, you know, then dovetails into well,
who then are is she aligning yourself?

Speaker 3 (18:24):
Zorn Mom, Donnie, you know, one.

Speaker 2 (18:26):
Of the furthest lest characters in the party on fighting Trump.
Who does someone like her end up aligning with It's Bernie,
it's AOC. It's she also would love like a Jasmine
Crocket people who are out there and who are fighting,
And so that's what's really profoundly different within the Democratic Party.

Speaker 1 (18:41):
Yeah, that's interesting. I hadn't thought about it that way.
I mean, I don't know though. And the gay marriage point,
though Obama ran in two thousand and eight, basically you know,
didn't take a position on gay marriage. I mean the
way that I would see it then in Israel is
somebody's just not pro Israel and tries to ride the
you know, everyone knew Obama was for up a gay marriage,
but he was like, oh, I'm not going to take
a position on it. Effectively at the time didn't really
come out, but it came out till twenty thirteen.

Speaker 2 (19:03):
The era I'm talking about is a little bit after that.
Oh okay, So like when I ran for Congress in
twenty ten, I came out for gay marriage, and I
was like, oh my god, like it was a big deal.
And you know, so twenty ten, twenty twelve, that's really
the era of politics that I'm talking about, where it
became this sort of like you know, was it was
a statement issue where it told you what side you

(19:23):
were on, whether you had any political courage or whether
you were just someone who was going to go along
with what was the.

Speaker 1 (19:27):
That I could see this, But I don't predict a
zoron type figure being the National Democratic candidate on Israel.
I just don't think that they're willing to go that far,
or maybe I'd have to go back and look exactly
at what he said. But I don't think that the
future Democratic nominee will say the words genocide, apartheid state.
They'll probably say something along the lines of what's happened.
There is a civilian catastrophe and we should re examine

(19:49):
our relationship with that. But you know, in terms of
the way the left discourses around this, I don't think
that's ever going to happen. But with this, you know,
also though rejecting the criticism of anti Semitism, I could
see that for sure. I definitely see something like that
happen with these women. Yeah, it's interesting in terms of
the way that the Israel relationship and all of that
is being re examined by the political base. And then,

(20:09):
you know, the only reason it's kind of an interesting
idea is to the extent of like how quote you
know she wants to fight on all of this. I'm
still a bit skeptical. I mean, I wasn't here whenever
you got didn't she do some trans thing with her
and Ram Emmanuel. So I'm like, well, you know, it's
like I'm still seeing a lot of these like toxic
cultural left elements with these like suburban wine moms. I

(20:30):
just don't think that's particularly like going to go anywhere.
I mean, it may be nice, you know, to go
viral online, but like, I don't see that, you know,
being resurrected as a major political issue or some sort
of litmus test, you know, like that in the future.
I don't disagree that you know, you shoul quote abandoning
principles or whatever should be happening on the stage, but
I don't see the same vernacular around the way that

(20:51):
she may want to talk about these types of things
being talked about on the democratic stage in the future.
So it's probably like a marriage of the two on Israel,
immigration and any cultural issues in the future people don't
want like naked abandonment, which is kind of what I
think you're talking about. But you know, not every democratic
stage is going to be raising their person on the
democratic stage and be raising their hand talking about decriminalized

(21:13):
border crossings again, which is what happened back in twenty
nineteen during that primary. So I'm not so sure yet.
She's a canary for me on the Israel issue, but like,
I don't think that's the path of the way things
are going to be going. That's just my realm. No, No,
on all issues. I think I'm saying we should not
look at her as like, like what I'm saying is
you should not look at the position that she's taking

(21:34):
on all issues. It's kind of the way things are
going to be going in the future. And that kind
of what explains how you can support somebody like Jasmine
Crockett and aocs like you don't actually have anything in common,
well except for fighting Trump.

Speaker 3 (21:44):
Thing is the fighting Trump and that's it.

Speaker 2 (21:46):
And that's also where something like you know, transgender issues,
where that comes in.

Speaker 1 (21:50):
That why that.

Speaker 2 (21:51):
Clip of her with Rama Manual, who's just such a
like low some piece of shit anyway, and he's like
very punishable, you know, regardless of how you sure where
you are and any Why that resonated so much was
not even so much about the particular issue. It was
her willingness to say, like, you're just like adopting a
Republican framing and this is bullshit and not to bend.

Speaker 3 (22:12):
And that's what's like the Democratic base.

Speaker 2 (22:14):
Previously it was all about oh, let's reach out, let's
have bipartisanship, and let's get along. That is over and
so I think that's more of what has been the
response to her, the response to Kim Jeffries, the response
to all of these like, you know, legacy Democratic establishment leaders,
and I actually think you're wrong on Israel Gaza, especially

(22:35):
because we're talking about, you know, a Democratic primary presidential
primary that's going to happen a couple of years in
the future. It already has become among the Democratic base,
very large majority believes this is the genocide. I can
guarantee you and when you have What was so important
about Zoron's victory in New York City is that he

(22:56):
supports BDS like he is anti scientist.

Speaker 3 (22:59):
He would not then to their like, well, just Israel
have a right to exist? Is a Jewish I needs
like as a state with equal rights. The fact you
could do that in.

Speaker 2 (23:07):
The city in this country that has not just the
largest Jewish population, but this is a very significant.

Speaker 3 (23:12):
Part of New York culture. You know, New York is
very culturally like Jewish.

Speaker 2 (23:17):
These are important institutions, and that he could do that
and get not only get away with it. I actually
think it ended up helping his campaign because people were
so disgusted with the way that Couloma tried to weaponize
anti Semitism. That is going to be a signal to
so many Democrats who are looking at how far they
can what they can say, how far they can go
on this issue. And if Ape's already against you, like

(23:39):
what are you going to? You know, what more can
you throw out these people? So I do think there
is going to be a sea change on this issue
in the Democratic Party because you cannot sustain a situation
where eighty percent of your base feels one way and
the over like all of the Democratic leaders basically feel
a totally different way.

Speaker 1 (23:56):
I'm willing. I'm totally willing to be wrong. Yeah, I
just think policy wise, I don't think you're going to
we're all that different. Like I think the policy is
going to be very different, But in terms of the
way that they talk about it, I do think they're
probably going to settle on some sort of middle ground issue.
I mean, even Zoron, like he doesn't talk genocide, like
even whenever he justifies BDS, he talks about it in
the terms of like equal rights. It seems more like

(24:16):
a moderate framing where if you're in the know, you're like,
oh shit, that's actually quite radical, at least for our
current political project. That's the way I could see it
becoming something at a major political level, which is undeniable.
I agree, to be clear, like I'm totally I think
that's a good thing. I wish that all politicians would
speak that way, but I think it would be more
politically accessible. And also why it made the attacks on

(24:38):
Zoron as anti semitic so preposterous, because if you talk
about it moderately and you're like, yeah, so state with
equal rights, people are like, well, I mean, what's wrong.

Speaker 3 (24:48):
Right now?

Speaker 1 (24:48):
Or BDS, It's like, yeah, you know, we should be
able to boycott or divest and not have laws on
the books for any country to anybody who we think
is I mean too human rights.

Speaker 2 (24:58):
He had a whole news cycle about his defensive globalized
the Intopotm, you know, like I mean, he did say
the things like he didn't center his campaign around that,
but because those were all the attacks that were incoming,
it became a very significant part of the.

Speaker 3 (25:11):
Cant you remember going on Colbert and like it now
that crazy.

Speaker 2 (25:15):
So in any case, let me just play you one
more clip of the I've had it ladies talking about
Hakeem Jeffrey is because I think this is interesting as
well again as a sign post of how disgusted the
normy liberal Democratic base is with their own leaders at
this point. This is very different from previous eras than
the Democratic Party.

Speaker 3 (25:33):
Let's take listen.

Speaker 7 (25:34):
First of all, he has addressed the rise of anti Semitism,
and it's not performative. It's very, very real, and he
understands that it's real. And he has the endorsement of
other Jewish politicians that aren't propagandized by a corrupt Israeli government.
This was your moment, Hakeem to also stand up against Islamophobia,
because here's the thing about human rights, you guys, you
don't get to cherry pick. If you're against anti Semitism,

(25:56):
then you have to be against Islamophobia, homophobia, racism, and
down the lad line also class warfare. And so this
kind of cherry picking because of who donates to Hawking Jeffries,
apa Apac donates to Hakik Jeffrees. The people who preach
against against anti Semitism should be joining Zorn Mondami and
standing up against the Islamophobic attacks on him. He has
not said anything disparaging about Jewish people. He stands with

(26:18):
them in solidarity. And this type of crap is so
disgusting to me, and it is cancer within the Democratic Party.
We lost these last two elections to an idiot because
of these centrist policies, and you're being behold into special interests,
and by god, it's not going to happen again.

Speaker 1 (26:33):
You can either be a.

Speaker 7 (26:33):
Part of the problem or a part of the solution
when we can clearly see with our eyes and clearly
here with our ears exactly what's happening with Israel and Gaza.
We're not fucking stupid. Your base is smarter, and y'all
are going to have to adapt or get the fuck out.

Speaker 1 (26:46):
I don't know. I love this, lady, I love I'll
confess I don't get it. You know it's not not
for me? Is the only way I would put it.

Speaker 3 (26:53):
What do you disagree with it?

Speaker 1 (26:54):
Though?

Speaker 3 (26:54):
She's going in she's cooking.

Speaker 1 (26:55):
Oh the Democrats lost Centrist Yes, yes, yeah, that's right.
It is a center policy to offer free medicare.

Speaker 3 (27:03):
They run around, but that was a brilliant and the runner.

Speaker 1 (27:07):
I mean, listen, I understand that's the nice leftist critique.

Speaker 2 (27:10):
Well true, MS ever doing better than when she was
talking about like price gouget and she was getting attacked
for price controls.

Speaker 1 (27:16):
We could cherry pick that as if we want to
ignore some of the border crossing stuff.

Speaker 2 (27:20):
That Ernie Sanders is the most popular politician in the country.

Speaker 1 (27:24):
Okay, again, we will see in the field. If a
Democrat were runs and wins on decriminalized border crossings and
amnesty for everybody and bringing Leah Thomas and all those
other people back, I will happily eat my words. I
do not think that's going to happen. You're adious if
you think that it is.

Speaker 2 (27:41):
But there's I mean, but that there's a difference between
economic and cultural like the reason.

Speaker 1 (27:46):
But you can't ignore that.

Speaker 3 (27:47):
The reason that Bernie.

Speaker 2 (27:48):
Is so popular and the reason Zoran is so popular,
the reason AOC's popularity is very high now at this
point is because they have focused in on these economic
issues and because they freaking stand for something.

Speaker 3 (27:59):
I mean, that's the thing is, like, I think so much.

Speaker 2 (28:01):
Of the issue by issue checklist is the wrong way
to look at politics.

Speaker 1 (28:06):
I don't.

Speaker 2 (28:06):
People liked Zoron because he stood for something and he
was willing to fight for it, even when it was
uncomfortable and even when it was like, oh my god,
you're gonna gettacked over that. And that's what Trump understood.
I mean, Trump wrin Trump is doing all kinds of
stuff that is so unpopular, ran all kinds of stuff
that is so unpopular, pardoning the j six rioters pulls
it like two percent, Yeah, but he why does.

Speaker 3 (28:27):
He get away with it? He gets away with.

Speaker 2 (28:29):
It because people get the feeling like, oh, he stands
for something. Now it's kind of bullshit because these whatever,
we could put that aside, but that's what is so
revolting about these like poll tested centrists, always the finger
in the air, always, everything's got to be focus grouped.
Everything is calculated and calibrated. That's what people are disgusted with.
And I think you know that's and that is the

(28:51):
centrist way. There was a Morning Joe clip where he
was asking Tom Swazi, who I'm actually trying to get
on the show, who I want to talk to? You
wrote an article on Wall Street Journal about Zoron, like
anti Zoron whatever. He was like how come none of
the centrists can be popular the way that Zoron and
AOC and Bernie can. And this is why it's not
even so much about exactly where they're on. They feel
like they stand for some same thing. With Jasmin Crockett,

(29:14):
who I have all kinds of policy issues, he feels
like she's actually.

Speaker 3 (29:16):
Willing to fight for something. And that's what I'm talking
about with them.

Speaker 1 (29:19):
I don't disagree with a word you said about that.
I just think it. I mean, we should not overread
it into being like, no, actually like trans swimmers or
whatever is popular.

Speaker 3 (29:29):
And I just think that ran on No.

Speaker 1 (29:31):
I agree, and that's smart, right. You know, mister Zoron,
who is wearing shl war kamis pointing his middle finger
up a Christopher Columbus in twenty twenty and mister Defund
the police put a suit on and stopped acting like
an idiot. And I think that's actually a smart takeaway
for a lot of future aspiring left politicians is being
a moron, you know, twitch poster or whatever and acting

(29:54):
like that is actually not the way to get elected. Now,
you can not disavow that. I think that's fine. You know,
most peop because then you look weak. But the emphasis
on issues is actually pretty important while it's still you know,
supposedly standing for something. And I just think misreading kind
of where that where that goes is an important probably
lesson for the left. Like you know, John Fetterman was

(30:16):
held up as this like left decided Look where that
all went? You know, this all this idea of like.

Speaker 2 (30:21):
Dirt bag is he's like a I mean, he's like
literally brain damage his ideology.

Speaker 1 (30:26):
Okay, but if it's the right, but they were. He
was celebrated for this like dirt bag identity, and it's like, no,
the most popular left politician in the country put a
suit on, acted like a normal guy, and spoke in
very accessible language, specifically around economic issues also while not
disavowing his ridiculous left pass. That's an important lesson, you know,
And I think that also fits with how renegade politicians

(30:49):
should actually look and act in the future. That's all
I'm saying. I'm just saying, with this uh woman or
you know, this whole what's left thing, I could see
how that could also be read in completely the wrong
by a lot of people who are trying to run
for office. When in my opinion. You know, Zoron by
looking and acting and speaking in a reasonable way, which

(31:10):
are in some ways called unreasonable policies, made it so
that he could become elected. I would also point out
to Bernie. I mean, Bernie believes some really crazy shit,
but he speaks in a different way and has always
worn a suit. He's the consummate politician, and that's an
important lesson. I would say AOC as well. The more
that she has acted like more of a consummate politician

(31:32):
and more of an elevated type figure, that has made
her more popular amongst a democratic base outside of the
original Choppo, trap House Left Eye. That's like acting like them,
in my opinion, is not the way to any sort
of electoral st.

Speaker 2 (31:45):
I think, I think I hear your point. I think
there's also a question of like what's authentic to you?
You know, like Bernie is very like in his suit
and rumpled his hair all over the like that is Bernie,
you know. And Zorn felt very authentic here. And I
think you're right that the fact that he he centered
his camp paining around affordability, which was clearly the right
thing to do, and made that the centerpiece when people

(32:05):
are freaking out about oh my god, free buses, and
you've got like seventy five percent of New Yorkers who
were like, yes, free buses, Yes, exactly, And so that
is absolutely my theory of politics is that's why you
should put those economic issues front and center, and because
that is actually the center of the country when you
look at where the pollon, when you look at what
people usually vote on, so you know, it's critically important

(32:30):
to have credibility on those issues. And I think people
felt like he did and would at least fight for.

Speaker 3 (32:34):
The things that he has.

Speaker 1 (32:34):
Yeah, I'm with I think he's a good lesson for
all renegade politicians. Actually, is that to dress up and
almost act more composed than your opponents. You know, when
somebody else is talking about anti semitism and you're sitting
there talking about New York City, you're wearing a suit,
you don't seem all that unreasonable. That's actually how you win.
That's the FDR story. I mean, if you really look
at a lot of the people who came up from behind,
like the way that they do it is specifically by

(32:56):
kind of outclassing the competition. And so yeah, I mean
I think it's a very important lesson for a lot
of people. I do think he's gonna win. And as
long as he stays on that, and if he actually
governs in any remotely way like that, as difficult as
it will be, I think he'll be quite successful. It's
a pity for Amy's not born in America.

Speaker 3 (33:12):
I know he'd be a great candidate.

Speaker 1 (33:14):
Yeah. I mean, if he had the one within six months,
he should have announced and he would have been able
to do it.

Speaker 2 (33:19):
But yeah, yeah, let's go and talk to Israel zo
or speak about Israel. BB nine now, who was in
town this week for the third time, apparently just favorite
foreign leader come to visit again, and he had asked
He did a couple of interviews, including apparently a sit
down with the note Boys what gets it out in

(33:40):
a moment, But he was asked this question, this kind
of interesting response about whether or not dealing with Trump
is different than dealing with Biden, given that both of
them were quite willing to fund and support of genocide.
Let's go ahead and take a listen to his response.

Speaker 9 (33:52):
Did it feel very different dealing with President Trump as
opposed to President Biden as well as the Democrats? Is
this a serious question. Yeah, it has been different. I
think everybody said that they wanted to prevent Iran from
getting nuclear weapons, but it's not what you say, would
you do, twould you do? And ultimately leaders are tested

(34:15):
by what they do.

Speaker 2 (34:17):
And at this point, I think it's fair to say
Trump has been different from Biden because he Bobe wanted
that attack on Iran under Biden and he got it
with Trump. So he has gotten more of what he
wanted at this point under Donald Trump, and which is
why he you know, nominated him for the Nobel Piece.

Speaker 1 (34:36):
Yes, definitely. Well, I mean it's all just a matter
of gradations, right like Biden basically backed into the Hilton
always said, you know, I disagree with him publicly privately,
but Bear hugged him in public. You know. Bbe at
the same time is trying to recapture you know, the
Trump basse and Maga, let's put this next one up
on the screen. Apparently we mentioned this. He chatted with

(34:56):
the Elk Boys again. I'm calling on the Nelk Boys
to release their episode immediately. We can't just be having
world leaders on and not release it. And also, you know,
hopefully asked him maybe an interesting question or two. I
actually do think this could be a problem for the
Milk Boys because if they just let Bebe come on
and blabber like, I think that would be a misreading
of of YouTube and of young Republicans. That's just me true,

(35:19):
that's my opinion.

Speaker 3 (35:19):
But they're probably going to just let him.

Speaker 1 (35:21):
No, That's what I'm saying.

Speaker 3 (35:22):
Yeah, obviously, right.

Speaker 2 (35:23):
I mean, I'm not a Milk Boys consumer.

Speaker 1 (35:25):
By the way, neither.

Speaker 2 (35:27):
But just to be clear, my understanding is they just
sort of shoot the ship.

Speaker 1 (35:30):
Yea.

Speaker 3 (35:31):
They have serial interviews.

Speaker 1 (35:32):
They had Trump on, you know, I remember like they
were one of the first people to ever have Trump on.
You talked for like three hours and stupid conversation. But
what they don't seem to understand is if you look
at every prominent right wing YouTube creator, the vast majority
are going to have a very different take on Israel
than a traditional GOP politician. I can think of two exceptions,

(35:56):
which are Ben Shapiro.

Speaker 3 (35:57):
That one popularity has fallen off.

Speaker 1 (36:00):
Well, i mean, look, he's still a big show. We
got to give it to him. He's one of the
top ten political podcasts. I'm not gonna sit here and
say he's a nobody, But he's got some competition, uh,
Dave Rubin, those two, that's basically.

Speaker 3 (36:10):
It popular fallen off one is pretty much.

Speaker 1 (36:14):
If you look at and if you look at the
biggest ones, Tucker Carlson, I was just there. He let
me go off on Israel. He basically agree with me
on everything. Candice. Uh, Tim Poole, I'm not Tim is complicated,
I guess on Israel. But he has people on or
at least who are critical. And uh so what I
would put in point as a rising force he's on.
But yeah, in the online is more of a Twitter

(36:37):
thing in my opinion. But yeah, I mean he's got
somewhat of an audience. But my point is like, if
you look at all of those things kind of together,
it points in a pretty clear direction. All the polling
backs this up. For young Republicans. If you look at
the so called podcast Bros and all that, look at
the avon, look at Chelt, look at Rogan, I mean
not pro it's real Tim Dillon. Right, So if you

(36:59):
look at the audience and kind of the way that
those people are all kind of trending, it's not in
the direction of having to shoot the shit. Happy Dad
conversation with Benjamin Netanyah, that's the way I would put it. Yeah,
And that's why it's a big mistake in my opinion,
if you don't, if you have him on and you
just kind of let him get away with something like that.
And in the context of Epstein too. Again, you know,

(37:22):
the Epstein story is a massive story online, massive It
was entree point for millions of people into politics, as
Ryan said, And if you don't ask him about something
like that, I just think, I just think you look
like a total joke. Now I'm pre judging. I should
make clear. If they do, I'd be happy to say it.
I'll play, you know with the clip here on the
show No Stiniel Singer praises and the rest of you guys.
But something tells me that, at the very least, even

(37:43):
if they did, they're probably not going to ask the
records of follow up. So they should. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (37:46):
I mean, here's the thing.

Speaker 2 (37:47):
It's like, it's not about like, oh, you shouldn't platform, No,
actually you should. I should interview any world leader, especially
one that has such a significant grip on our foreign policy. Absolutely,
But then it's okay, well, what do you do in
that conversation, and so yeah, if they approach it like
they have their other interviews where it's just like, oh,
we're going to like shoot the shit and basically like

(38:09):
normalize and humanize this genuine monster.

Speaker 3 (38:13):
I mean it is.

Speaker 2 (38:15):
You would be hard pressed to find a bigger absolute
villain in my lifetime than NETANYAHUO. And so I think
there in some you know, in some of these people's minds,
there's an inability to distinguish from being like edgy and
countercultural and going against cancel culture or whatever and giving

(38:39):
a platform to a genuine monster who is doing a
genocide every single day. Like so that's that's the piece
here that just to me, it speaks to such a
sick culture that this is even a possibility. We're going
to talk about this with regard to the Trump administration
sanctioning Francesco albanies of the UN for her exposing and

(39:00):
calling the carpet companies that are complicit in this genocide,
et cetera. We've lost the ability to distinguish just basic
right from wrong.

Speaker 3 (39:08):
That's what it feels like to me.

Speaker 2 (39:09):
And look again, I'll look if they hold them, you know,
be to the fire and went like Okay, I'll fine,
I'll be happy to say good job, guys, way to go.
But I do feel like we're just in this up
is down era, Where go ahead and put the D
three up on the screen.

Speaker 3 (39:27):
This is so sick to me.

Speaker 2 (39:29):
US issue sanctions against UN investigator probing abuses in Gaza.
So we've had franchiscalbanies on the show. She has a
special rappertoire from the UN for the West Bank and Gaza.
She has issued a number of reports about the ongoing
genocide there that have been incredibly important. Her most recent one,
I think was in some ways the most provocative, provocative because,

(39:50):
as I said before, she really called on the carpet
all of the companies that are profiting from this. I mean,
we're very familiar and very acquainted with the way in
which wars are profitable, and there are many individuals who
have become wildly rich off of war profiteering. Many of
them live within, you know, fifteen miles of where we
sit right now. I don't know that people have thought

(40:12):
as much about the way that this genocide is incredibly profitable.
And she talks about Palenteer, Locke, Martin, Google, Amazon, IBM,
Caterpillar supplying those bulldozers that we've seen, and so she
has really she she has really been one of the
most principled and courageous actors I think out of this

(40:33):
you know, entire conflict, and so to sanction that individual
because they dare in the specific reason is because of
her work exposing this and her support for the charges
against n Yahoo and YOUF Galant by the way, at
the at the International Criminal Court, it's just incredibly it's

(40:53):
incredibly sick and sager treat to PARSI was pointing out
that the same time we're sanctioning this person who is
genuinely trying to stand up for innocence in the world,
the US is giving a total pass to the guy
who was, you know, the Syrian leader and taking his
former you know, his terror organization off of the terror
lift and granting them sanctions, relief, et cetera. And so

(41:16):
this is one of the things that has been the
most sort of like I guess, spiritually disturbing to me
at this time is the vilification of people who are
trying to stand up for basic things like, hey, we
shouldn't be complicit and Ageno Siminus connects or on Mumdani
conversation as well, and the celebration of genuine and uplift
of like genuine terrorist racist monsters.

Speaker 1 (41:39):
Well, I would just look for me. And this is
the fundamental difference is to me, why are we sanctioning
somebody who is investigating Israel. It's like that's what the
full force of the US empire is being used at
this point to go after Francesca Albanese for issuing reports
about the Israeli government and then and or US companies.
I mean, that's fine, but it's one of those things

(41:59):
where it's preposterous in this particular time to go after
you know, the you. I mean, by the way, just
when people understand what US sanctions mean, it means you
can't do business with any bank that does business with
the United States. It's basically like being cut off from
the financial system. Is she an Italian national? Like that's
going to causse some serious issues like I don't even
know if you can have a bank account at some

(42:19):
of the places. You may not be able to credit card,
or you may not be able to a phone plan.
Like I'm talking just so people understand what it actually
means to be sanctioned by the United States, of America.
It's a very very serious thing. We're doing it basically
to protect somebody who is going after the Israeli government.
I mean, I like Francesco.

Speaker 2 (42:37):
As well, sure, you know, because yeah, but we're so involved.

Speaker 1 (42:41):
Okay, Fairy, I would just put it again as like
a priorities thing, for like, this is really what deserves
sanctions when again, you know, we're going to point out
the hypocrisy of US support here now for the israelly
backed al Qaeda leader in Syria, and just broadly, I mean,
it's about the priorities. So for example, you know, we're
recently suing Harvard University for more of these like anti

(43:06):
Semitism allegations. I actually have that. Can we put D
five please up on the screen. The Trump administration is
attacking Harvard's accreditation and a battle against the Ivy League school,
and it's specifically about the indifferent standard for the federal
discrimination law, basically saying that they had indifference to the
safety of Jewish students on campus. Why because they allowed
people to protest the state of Israel. That is about

(43:29):
a hijacking of the US legal system. The only reason why,
I mean, I just think a lot of the moralism
and all this stuff around this it doesn't hold up
because this is America, where a global empire. The Syria
thing is a perfect example. We often back dictators and
people who do horrible things around the world, like the
idea we're only going to be doing business or whatever
with moral countries. It's kind of ridiculous and preposterous. The

(43:50):
point then is to just have some sort of a
consistent standard about who we sanction or not. And it's
obvious here that our sanctions regime is being used as
a tool basically on behalf of a foreign country in
addition to our federal government. And I think that is
actually what is more of a bipart not biparson, but
it's an appeal that can really get two people, whereas
I mean, and again, you know, no offense to my

(44:11):
friends on the left, but it's like this constant like moralism,
Like people don't necessarily want to hear that whenever they
are people don't necessarily want to approach international relations that
way when it's obvious that it's not a realistic way
to conduct relations with the entirely disagree with it, because
I mean, that's the only thing that's popular on the left. No, no, no,
most people on the right are just upset that we're

(44:32):
so obsessed with Israel.

Speaker 3 (44:33):
No, but no, I don't think that's true.

Speaker 1 (44:35):
Do you think it's true.

Speaker 3 (44:36):
I mean, I think that's part of it.

Speaker 2 (44:37):
I think it's also partly like just like a strain
of recent anti Semitism, of the nickquenses of the world,
et cetera.

Speaker 3 (44:43):
It's true.

Speaker 2 (44:44):
I mean, you can't deny that that's an element of it.
But just let me but let me say, let me
say your reading of the American public.

Speaker 3 (44:52):
I think it's totally wrong.

Speaker 2 (44:53):
Because the reason that the polling on Israel has shifted
so dramatically is because even if the US government is
and has always been full of shit on any sort
of concern for human rights, American people were not fullish,
like they actually believed that we should be a force
for good in the world, like they actually think thought
of this country as like, you know, oh yeah, we

(45:15):
mess up, but in general, like we're the good guys.

Speaker 3 (45:18):
We're the good guys.

Speaker 2 (45:19):
And so what has profoundly changed the American public's conception
of Israel and of the Palestinians is seeing these atrocities
day after day after day where it's like, how can
it be our tax dollars, that our ship that are
being used for these bombs to murder babies. I'm agreeing women,

(45:41):
and it doesn't sound like you're What.

Speaker 1 (45:43):
I'm agreeing with is the complicit in terms of US
selling them the arms. If this was happening independently, I
actually don't think it would be nearly as big of
a thing here, because i mean, look, there's atrocities literally
all over the world, you know.

Speaker 2 (45:55):
But you're amazed you're talking about that as you know,
like it's the morals of it are just completely irrelevant
and saying that for most Americans that's completely I don't
think that's true at all. I think the morals are
incredibly central because it's so at odds with what people
want to believe about this country and the sense that

(46:16):
you know, in general, were like the good guys in
the world, and so yeah, I think the morality of
just like mass murder of women and children and complete destruction,
I think that is quite central to the way that
public opinion has formed.

Speaker 1 (46:31):
I'm not just what I'm trying to say is that
if it weren't for the US role in enabling it,
I don't think it would be nearly as central of
an issue here in the United States. And that's because
I know for a fact that there are literal atrocities
happening all over the world. And I would also caution
people this whole good guy narrative, that's what leads to Libya, Oh,
we got to go and protect some Libyan civilians. Yeah,
now we collapsed the government and Gadafi got killed. That's

(46:51):
what leads to Saddam Hussein is a bad guy. Like,
acting in that way is actually a terrible, terrible foreign policy.
That's what responsibility to protect and all of that is
built around it has led to some of the worst
humanitarian disasters actually in terms of the fallout of acting
on that way. So I would really caution people not
to go down that path.

Speaker 2 (47:10):
That's actually even indicative in and of itself of the
way that Americans think about these things. Because those like
good instincts of like we should stop the Russians invasion,
we should support women and girls in Afghanistan, we should
make sure the Iranian people could be free, or whatever,
those like deeply moral instincts are often weaponized to actually affect,

(47:33):
like create mass chaos carnage, death and suffering.

Speaker 3 (47:37):
You know, there's no doubt.

Speaker 2 (47:38):
That Afghanistan would be better if we never did any
in Iraq, you know, certainly Iran, absolutely, you know. And
so I think that actually speaks to the desire of
most Americans to be the good guy, to feel like, Okay,
we're a force generally, like a benevolent force in the
world and trying to be on the right side of

(47:59):
history and so right that can absolutely be weaponized here.
But I mean that is, that is very much at
the center of what has caused people to change their
views on Israel is just seeing the horror and wanting
it to stop, and not wanting to see in their
timeline every day another like blown up baby. That is,
you know, blood on our hands and every tax paracy.

Speaker 1 (48:20):
I agree. I just think that the outrage is from
me and just from what I've observed, comes down to
tax dollars and then the diplomatic cover of the full
force of the US Empire to enable this from happening.
But let me just give a hypothetical. If this were
happening without a single dollar of US support, then what
would it be, you know, I mean, like, what what
would the implication of that be it would lead to
what I just describe, what we're gonna bomb Israel to

(48:40):
talk about i'ld say, no, that's ridiculous, you know, like
that that's not something that most people should do. We
shouldn't do that on any country, because that could lead
you to the same Libya and type of discription that
the destruction that's happened in all these other places to
the extent here that the like the outrage from the
American people, which is correct in my opinion, is that
we're not only enabling, but we're actively providing cover for

(49:04):
supplying and in many cases encouraging something like this from happening.
So that's kind of I think that the nuance is
important there. And so you know, again ive point to
the right, like I think a huge portion of the
why the American right in particular has moved against this,
and I still think this is part of the left
critique of this as well, is look at the level

(49:25):
of obsession and money and government policy that our government
is being used on behalf of this foreign country which
also is enabling and committing these immoral acts on an
uncivilized nature. But it is not because it's not but
all of it kind of traces back to the level
of obsession and the support from US. It's not about

(49:45):
the individual act itself, except in some rare cases. There
are great humanitarians all over the world. Who are you know,
the Congo or South Sudan or Kosovo and all these
other things. But for example, if you go if we
were to look back to the Serbian intervention from NATO
that was done under the exact same terms it was.
It was a terrible, terrible idea, It didn't work, actually

(50:07):
led to pushing Russia away. I would give that as
a great example of why we should not get involved
if in particular, if the United States is staying out
of it. And yes, I understand that sounds callous, but
look at Ukraine, look at Libya, look at Kosovo, Look
I mean Costovo. I mean it's a disaster. Look at
what happened with Serbia, Look at Iraq, look at Afghanistan.
Nobody's better off because of the great, you know, moral

(50:30):
US Empire. So this is a caution from talking in
these types of terms, because I've also seen it be weaponized.
I don't know if you were here, but you know
I talked about how Eli Wisel's son went on Fox
News and used his father's legacy to say that we
should bomb Iran because he said, my father was always
very upset that the United States never bombed the you know,

(50:50):
the death camps, and that's why this genocidal regime America
has to come in and to Bite's like, whoa hold
on a second. You know, we can't be you know,
putting that type a standard in terms of in terms
of how the US should operate, and so I just
think defining the terms in terms of defining in terms
of US support, us protecting these people, also obviously blatantly

(51:12):
hypocritical on all of this and trying to have some
sort of consistent standard of look, we do what's good
for us, and you know, yes, there's tragedy all around
the world, but at the end of the day, we're
just going to pursue our own interest. That seems to
be the middle ground for a real American foreign policy
that most people can get behind.

Speaker 2 (51:28):
In the case of Israel specifically, that's also true that
they just would not be able to do what they're doing.

Speaker 1 (51:34):
With Yeah, that's also objectively correct, very true.

Speaker 2 (51:37):
I mean, they couldn't fight a weather fighting a war
in like six different fronts right now, Like you can't
do that. They are completely shielded from the consequences of
their actions because of us, And so yeah, I do
think Americans are much more deeply invested in this particular
cont Number one, because the horror is just you know,
I do think it is the worst atrocity that we have.

Speaker 3 (51:58):
Seen in our lifetimes.

Speaker 2 (52:00):
But number two, certainly because it's it's our bombs, it's
our dollars. We are we are the baddies, We are
the bad guys here, and I think that's why it's
so you know, deeply painful to so many people, and
why you've seen so much of a shift on the
you know, the sort of normy liberal Democrats and also
some especially among young people in the right.

Speaker 1 (52:20):
Yeah, and let that be a good lesson because that's
about the more how the most moral outcome can actually
come from saying no. So, for example, if we didn't
provide Israel all of the support, then they wouldn't do this,
and it actually would lead to a better out.

Speaker 2 (52:34):
You would have to run the region, you know, the
realities of themselves as a small nation and in this
region and trying to get along with your neighbors, and
you know, not piss everybody else.

Speaker 1 (52:42):
Get Africa and they've got a bunch of small nations, Yeah,
and they fight each other sometimes. Mostly they have decent
enough relations. Yeah, every once in a while war breaks out.
We don't go shipping weapons all around, you know, into
the region, and they figure it out for themselves. So
let them do that. There's nobody stopping. There will probably
be better relations between Israel Iran. There would probably be a
two state solution, especially if we push things are in

(53:04):
a more of a restraint minded direction, and that of
course would lead to a more moral outcome. That's all
I'm saying is just I can see I've seen this
road go way too far under Samantha Powers. The responsibility
to protect doctrine, and I do always worry about setting
some standard from the United States is having to be
the world's policeman for good, you know, abroad, And I've
seen that hijacked in a really in a horrible way

(53:27):
in the past. So I want people to like define
their terms around Gaza and Israel very specifically to make
sure that it's not hijacked by somebody, you know, sometime
in the future, because it can lead in a very
very dangerous direction.

Speaker 2 (53:38):
That's all I was trying to say, All right, let's
talk about Amazon.

Speaker 1 (53:43):
Yeah, let's let's do it. This is the final thing
that will end which is very important for our economy.
Let's put this up there on the screen. And Amazon
Prime Day sales are now off forty one percent on
the first day. Their brand advisor says, needless to say,
that's a little bit of a disaster there for the company.
But it's actually kind of an interesting story if we

(54:05):
think about what it means for e commerce tariffs and
also consumerism, which is unfortunately the backbone of the United
States economy. What they point out here is that Amazon
took a massive gamble this year by expanding Prime Day
summer sales to four days from two, betting that the
extension would give quote shoppers more time to navigate millions

(54:26):
of the deals on its sprawling store. But the stakes
right now, the results right now are grim. Raising the
stakes for the next couple of days. Online sales are
down some forty one percent compared to the start of
Prime Day just last year. Quote. The prolonged event has
encouraged shoppers to actually do more treasure hunting, meaning that
they're actually getting in some cases better deals for them

(54:49):
but not good for Amazon. Consumers are browsing and loading
up shopping carts but postpon pulling the trigger in case
better deals emerge. Shorter Prime Day sales actually generated more
urgency from shoppers who wish that they were worried they
were going to miss their discounts, and broadly it shows first,
it shows a couple of things. Number one is that
people you know, with the credit card balances, where they are,

(55:12):
with the spending in the problems in the economy and
all that, where they are right now, people are pulling
back a little bit. It also shows that people are
getting pretty desperate at a retail level to try and
push inventory out the door. There's no other explanation for
why they would expand Prime Day or whatever by four
days except for two days. So if you put those
two things together. While yes, we have some top line

(55:34):
numbers that look at you know, the job numbers look okay,
The inflation numbers they look okay. The stock market, I
think NASZAK yesterday hit an all time high mostly because
of Nvidia, which is now four trillion dollars market cap.
But underneath the surface all of those little things still
seem to look precarious in that direction, and especially if
we're speaking today as we did earlier about the tariffs

(55:55):
that are coming back into place from the Trump administration
and the level of uncertainty at a consumer level. So
it's the two track story of America where like, earnings
look good and video looks good, but then there's all
of these weird canaries that are around that kind of
demonstrate some caution for both the American consumer and American
business as to their actual health. And you know, by

(56:19):
the way, reminder at a fundamental level, like the housing
stuff is still a disaster. You know all of that too.

Speaker 2 (56:23):
Oh yeah, I mean, the affordability crisis continues the pace,
and it is very real and it is shaping all
of our politics here in other places around the world
as well.

Speaker 1 (56:32):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (56:33):
I thought one of the more telling.

Speaker 2 (56:34):
Statistics there was that people were loading up on the
sort of lower purchase price to get you know, Dondish
soap or whatever it is, and sort of stocking up
on that and not doing as much.

Speaker 3 (56:44):
Of the larger purchases.

Speaker 2 (56:45):
I thought was an interesting indicator there, and it does
track with you can put two up on the screen.
It does track with an overall slow down in online shopping,
So online shopping see's biggest slowdown in over a decade.
S Tariffs disrupt e commerce. This was a CNBC report
from just a couple of days ago. They described this

(57:06):
as the most disruptive period in more than a decade
as a result of Trump's trade war and Tariff's policy.
Online purchases for home delivery experience double digit year over
year declines across major categories, including office supplies down by
thirteen percentage points, sporting goods down twelve percentage points, cosmetics, furniture,
home furnishings, large electronics each falling by ten percentage points.

(57:28):
And this analyst says this is the first widespread pullback
in the online category growth in.

Speaker 3 (57:33):
Over a decade.

Speaker 2 (57:35):
Groceries were the only real exception to the negative trend.
So basically, since online shopping has become normalized, it's just
been growing and growing and growing and growing. You're over
here as more people switch from going to the store
to purchasing from Amazon or wherever else, And so to
see this pullback is quite a shift in trends. It

(57:57):
is quite notable, and then of course fits with the
Amazon on Prime data as again a warning sign that
people are kind of you know, if there's a purchase
they can put off, they're pushing it off into the future,
wait and see what happens, you know, sort of be
able to conserve their resources for in case there's an
eventuality in the future in which they're really going to
really going to need it.

Speaker 1 (58:17):
Yeah, and actually right now, you know, with this again,
it's always so difficult to tell. The travel numbers are
actually pretty good, which usually means people are doing well.
But actually, some of the stuff that I've seen is
that even with travel doing well, is a lot of
it is debt finance. There's a lot of it is
people putting stuff on credit cards. And unfortunately, you know,
these airline businesses are more credit card companies than they

(58:38):
are actual airline companies. Almost half the revenue comes from
credit cards and transactions. So it shows that, like that's
not the best indicator. Gas actually is doing quite well
as of right now, luckily despite the fact that we
had that Iran crisis. So there are indicators in almost
every direction. But I still think that affordability stuff and
canaries like this are important to look at for the

(59:00):
economic data. Don't remember, I don't forget that, you know.
I mean, Trump in some ways is correct about the
Federal Reserve. It's insane that the rates are continue to
be where they are, I mean, over six percent. I
was looking today the average mortgage I think for even
a seven fifty credit scores when it was like seven percent,
which is crazy high. I mean, and it's one of
those where actually a couple of years ago in what

(59:21):
was it twenty when did the rates spike twenty twenty two, Well,
a bunch of people bought houses in twenty twenty two
hoping to refinance at lower rates, and they believe that
the refi would come in maybe like one year or
two years or something like that. But they've been sitting
there chunking money away on a you know, six seven
percent mortgage now for like three years, which is I mean,

(59:42):
that's a ton of money in terms of the amount
of interest that you're paying to the bank. And so
a lot of these people who were hoping and kind
of betting on a rate cut in the future in
real estate are stuck basically with these huge mortgage payments.
They either have to sell at a loss or you know,
crunch in other ways. So anyway, those are all things
that like looking at being like I wonder, I just

(01:00:04):
always wonder like if and when this grand experiment is
ever going to pop. Like something about it just seems
crazy to me that the Nasdaq hit the all time eye.
I know yesterday, TSMC sales up forty percent, with semiconductors
and Vidia four trillion dollars market cap. I mean that
makes Nvidia more than like the entire United Kingdom stock
market put together, maybe even the European Union. Actually I'd

(01:00:25):
have to go back and look, but yeah, something about
it doesn't seem quite right, even with all this tariff uncertainty,
and there's always just seems to be like some small
thing that could push things over the edge. That's what
I'm what I'm personally worried about.

Speaker 2 (01:00:39):
The stock market seems particularly disconnected from reality.

Speaker 1 (01:00:42):
Yeah, it just doesn't seem right. You know, it does
not seem right to me right now.

Speaker 2 (01:00:46):
And apparently some of the indicators are that the large
institutional investors have pulled back from equities, but you have
retail that's very enthusiastic, and so that's part of what
has like propped up and continued the stock market growth,
and then if you look at like the dollar, for example,
or the treasury yield curve, you see a different story totally.
See sort of you know, consistent increase in the treasury

(01:01:08):
yield curve where you're having to basically pay higher interest
in order to convince people that they should hold treasury bonds,
and then you're seeing continued decline of the dollar again
and again and again. So some of the analysts I've
seen have said those may be the places to look
for more of an indication of what's really going on
versus the stock market, which seems just like disconnecting.

Speaker 1 (01:01:27):
You're right, you know, the retail thing is a very
interesting story because retail people are buying the dip or
buy the dip, right, we'll see, are buying into the market.
But actually a lot of institutional money are in money
market funds. I just thought charged today is like seven
trillion dollars sitting in a money market just you know,
collecting for five percent interests or whatever. So I mean,
you could read that two ways, which is that once

(01:01:48):
the rates go down, they'll start buying back in. But
I don't know, there's there's a lot of weird stuff
that is happening. We wanted to give you that update
in terms of the economy, but I think that's it
for today. Thank you, thanks so much for watching. We
appreciate you. We'll have a Friday show on for you
all tomorrow, so we'll see you then