7/17/26: Trump's Wild Elections Speech, Tucker Praises Democrats On Israel Vote, Embarrassing Biden Book Tour

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

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

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

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

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

Speaker 3 (00:30):
Hello, it is Friday, July seventeenth, here at Breaking Points Fridays.
Uh oh, it's me and Emily. Emily, how are you.

Speaker 4 (00:40):
Goovn You're doing the Sager thing where you scream at
the beginning of the show, which the people love, so
if it's.

Speaker 5 (00:45):
Working, go for it.

Speaker 3 (00:47):
I was screaming all last night at the TV when
we're watching that beautiful, that beautiful Trump speech. Sorry, the
rest of the Friday host they had a Taco Bell
party without us, and so it's just us here today.

Speaker 5 (01:02):
Be much more likely to be the other way around
to be fair.

Speaker 3 (01:05):
Yeah, well, you know what, we're more Del Taco, aren't we.
We're Del Taco conservatives. So you know, never once have
I had Del Taco. I'm ashamed to say, wow, tried
their cheeseburger. But anyways, we've got quite a that's my
order at Del Taco. We've got quite a show today.
Setting aside the fast food anomalies, Trump gave a riveting
speech that saved democracy in the nation. We're going to

(01:28):
get into that with Shelby Talcott from Semaphore in just
a minute. We also have some high tea testosterone directives
from Pete Hegseth. Got some more strikes in Iran with
the US and Iran trading strikes over control of the Strait,
and what else do we have? Oh, we might get

(01:49):
into a little bit of Biden towards the end. But wow, Emily,
we stayed up last night to cover Trump's big speech.
His big announcement, which essentially correct me if I'm wrong,
was that the election was stolen by in twenty twenty
by China.

Speaker 5 (02:09):
Well he was a little more.

Speaker 4 (02:12):
For example, in playbook this morning, you could sense Politico's playbook.
You could sense his aids breathing a sigh of relief
because they didn't know how much he would be riffing
and how much he would stick to the carefully constructed script.

Speaker 5 (02:23):
And Shelby can tell us more about this, but.

Speaker 4 (02:26):
I think it was probably restrained, a restrained version of Trump,
still though, arguing there was a vast international conspiracy to
tamper with American elections starting in twenty twenty. He talks
about how Maduro sought to change vote vote tallies in Venezuela.

Speaker 5 (02:45):
That was one of his big points. It was not
about the United States.

Speaker 4 (02:47):
It was supposed to kind of augment his point about
how these electronic voting machines can be tampered with, and
his argument was that Maduro had tried to do it.
His argument then was also that China had tried to
interfere on behalf of Joe Biden in twenty twenty, and
that the FBI slow walked by the way, if they
were doing that in twenty twenty, it would have been
under Donald Trump's first administration, But anyway, that the FBI

(03:11):
slow walked an investigation into Michigan Democrats trying to have
some type of voter interference scheme, he said the CIA,
or he said the deep state tried to cover up
China's election interference, and immediately dumped a bunch of documents.

Speaker 5 (03:28):
Like Griffin, I went.

Speaker 4 (03:29):
To the White House website as the speech was happening,
and there were zip files on the website. They created
a website for the speech, and there were four points,
and every single one of them came with its own
zip batch of documents which people have been piecing through.
Some are rather amusing, some are a bit more serious.

(03:51):
But he's trying to create this idea that there is
some vast international conspiracy that the American deep state and
the media is in on to hurt him at the
ballot box, and that elections are insecure. And he did
a big plug for the Save America Act, of course,
at the end of the speech. So my read on
it is that just politically, you have a president who

(04:14):
is his frustration is clearly boiling over and Griffin. On
a production level, you rarely see such an l from Trump,
like the staging was off. And why am I mentioning that,
because again, I think it just speaks to him being
beyond frustrated and starting to spiral a bit like inflation

(04:37):
is really stubborn because of the Iran War in some
sense because of the Iran War. Obviously, the Iran War
has been intractable for him, stubborn, dare is say, And
his numbers are showing it, and clearly he's frustrated. Plus
he can't get Congress to pass his signature piece of legislation,
so it felt like he was frustrated. You joked before

(04:58):
we came on air that it was it was giving
Joe Brandon.

Speaker 3 (05:03):
It was in real time, Yeah, it was.

Speaker 5 (05:06):
It was giving Brandon a little bit.

Speaker 4 (05:08):
Like the lighting was really harsh, the mic was so hot,
like it made him sound really hoarse, and it made
him sound just weird. And the stage was off kilter,
like you had this gold curtain covering most of the backdrop.
Yet you can see it here, it's not in this clip.
I think Fox zoomed in on the shot. I was
watching it on the White House feed, and the White

(05:29):
House feed you you got the white wall behind it,
so it was off center.

Speaker 5 (05:33):
Oh so, anyway, let's tick a list here.

Speaker 3 (05:35):
That's probably the biggest crime YEP.

Speaker 6 (05:37):
And these government strategy against the United States was focused
on undermining domestic confidence in the US president. They wanted
to just make you sound like your president wasn't so hot. Actually,
your president has done a great job, and they did
everything possible to do exactly that.

Speaker 3 (05:57):
China was trying to make him not hot when he
is very much hot. Yeah, this was so boring, I
have to say, just incredibly boring. And you know, you
went to the website. I went to the website when
he'd ound it, and it was very Obamacare because it
said temporarily shut down. The website was not active when
he first mentioned it. He mentioned quite a few websites too. Actually,

(06:19):
but yeah, we're supposed to go to a website and
learn it all. And I guess we'll get in more
to this with Shelby. But I didn't see anything in
these documents that actually ascertained his claims at all.

Speaker 4 (06:32):
Did you my quick Well, so my quick read on
it is that there's probably a kernel truth in a
couple of things, like, for example, we do know that
from Peter Struck to whomever else, there were people inside
of the FBI and the CIA, like the CIA was
organizing signatures for that fifty one former intelligence agent's letter
that got leaked to Natasha bertrand dot Politico saying the

(06:52):
Hunterrebreddon laptop was fake. So obviously there were people who
were using their like intel positions to undermine Trump, and
that happened during his first presidency. So it wouldn't be
insane to me if the Presidential Daily Briefing memos that
he released, which are highly redacted, so I don't think
they're conclusive at all, But if those were reflective of
some real effort to keep intel about Chinese election interference

(07:15):
away from him, okay, wouldn't surprise me if that had happened,
And it also wouldn't surprise me, like the stuff about
the Michigan voter registration thing wouldn't surprise me. We saw
that happening in weird ways in twenty twenty across the country,
but that doesn't amount to a vast international conspiracy to
install Joe Biden into office. So the scale and scope

(07:35):
of it, I think are the big question, is what
I would say. So I think we should bring in
Shelby to tell us how people inside of the White
House are reacting to this.

Speaker 5 (07:45):
Shall we talk out of semaphore? It joins us.

Speaker 4 (07:48):
Now, thank you Shelby for being here and for staying
up late to cover the speech last night, so that
you could cover it, of course for.

Speaker 5 (07:53):
Your own publication, but also here on breaking.

Speaker 7 (07:55):
Points more importantly for breaking points.

Speaker 4 (07:58):
Yes, yes, sorry, Ben, But let's get into the reaction
I've seen so far, some of the kind of Beltway
rags as we call them in the biz, Shelby saying
that the White House is breathing a little bit of
a sigh of relief right now because people didn't know
to what extent Trump would be riffing in his big

(08:19):
primetime address last night.

Speaker 5 (08:20):
It looks like he's stuck pretty closely to the script.
But I don't know.

Speaker 4 (08:25):
Can you give us what you're hearing from your sources
about what the expectation for the speech was, and then
the reaction to the reality.

Speaker 8 (08:33):
So Republicans writ large, I think we're really nervous ahead
of this speech because, as we know, the President has
been focused for years on the twenty twenty election. We're
getting into the midterms. There was a real concern that
if the President came up last night and said the
twenty twenty election was stolen, YadA, YadA, YadA, that that was.

Speaker 7 (08:54):
Going to really set them back.

Speaker 8 (08:56):
And so I actually think for a lot of Republican lawmaker,
this speech could have gone a lot worse. He did
really stick to the script, you know. John Solomon told
reporters afterwards at the White House that every single word
of this was reviewed by the CIA, So the administration
was taking sort of the legal aspect of this, I

(09:17):
think pretty seriously. And it's notable that the President didn't
go off script, because I mean, this is maybe the
first the third time ever of it he has stayed
on script, and so that's really unusual and I think
speaks to just kind of how focused the administration was
on what they can say and what they can't say.

Speaker 3 (09:40):
So what were the big takeaways? Because from my layman's experience,
it seemed like he was insisting that China in some
way affected the twenty twenty election. But then the documents
revealed on the website, according to multiple alets, don't really
say that. What do these documents posted on the website
actually say.

Speaker 8 (10:00):
Yeah, So there were several documents, and I think the
big takeaway for me is that, you know, when you
heard the president's speech, he was sort of I think
insinuating a lot more than the actual documents say. So
the documents do do note this sort of push from China, but.

Speaker 7 (10:18):
We've also known that for a really long time.

Speaker 8 (10:20):
The administration knew that during the first term, like that
wasn't necessarily new, and they didn't go so far as
to say China did affect the twenty twenty election, right.
And then there was the Venezuela aspect, which I thought
was really interesting, where the President was talking about this
alleged plot by the Maduro regime to influence Venezuelan elections

(10:41):
and the Trump administration believes that that has sort of
vulnerabilities for the US elections. But again, the actual documents
that the administration posted don't necessarily back that up.

Speaker 7 (10:54):
They don't go as far as the president was going.

Speaker 8 (10:56):
And so for me, the takeaway was that the president
sees a lot of these documents as sort of proof
of his twenty twenty stolen election claims, but the actual
documents don't go as far as the president is going.
But what I also thought was really interesting from the
actual speech is we've heard Trump directly say the twenty

(11:20):
twenty election was stolen, et cetera four years now, and
I thought he was much more couched in his analysis,
and you could see how the administration was trying to
frame this as this is all about looking forward, this
is all about election integrity, even as all the documents
that were being released we're talking about past elections.

Speaker 3 (11:40):
And specifically on that timeline. Emily before we I just
have one more follow up on this. So China, according
to Trump, not these documents, China steals the election in
twenty twenty. But then now that they've accessed and are
successfully hacking our elections and they allowed Biden to win,
So what is the But then they allowed Trump to

(12:02):
win again in twenty twenty four, So what's the logic there?

Speaker 7 (12:06):
Yeah?

Speaker 8 (12:06):
I think that that's an example of sort of the
president looking at maybe one specific aspect and coming to
a conclusion that the documents don't necessarily conclude, and then
kind of just ignoring the rest in his mind, you
know what I mean.

Speaker 4 (12:23):
Yeah, And that does appear like what it's looking like
to me so far as is a question of scale
that he wants to allege. There's this vast international conspiracy
and what the document show is probably some modest attempts
that aren't entirely surprising to the intelligence world. And there's
this DHS review we should talk about as well. Trump

(12:45):
says his Department of Homeland Security did a big review
of voter registration rules and found I think it was
like two hundred and seventy eight thousand non citizens had
been registered to vote in California, New Jersey, Nevada, and Pennsylvania.

Speaker 5 (12:59):
The states are already pushing back on that.

Speaker 4 (13:01):
But Griffin, I want to see if we could just
roll some tape here, a couple of the clips, let's
go with.

Speaker 5 (13:07):
Let's go with the Vote's clip here.

Speaker 6 (13:09):
Put together, these disclosers reveal an election system so broken
and so vulnerable that no one can possibly defend it.

Speaker 5 (13:18):
It is not defensible, Okay.

Speaker 4 (13:21):
And let's also, then, Griffin, play the Venezuela clip, just
so folks get a taste of what was happening.

Speaker 5 (13:26):
At one point, Shlby, he blamed, the media will get it.

Speaker 6 (13:28):
People question whether it could actually be possible to electronically
manipulate vote totals or change election results on these terrible machines.
Today we are releasing documents that show the CIA obtained
reporting of a specific plot to do a big number

(13:48):
in favor of the corrupt Maduro regime in Venezuela. And
that's exactly what happened, conspiring to digitally rig their own countries'
elections in twenty twenty, and that's.

Speaker 3 (14:02):
What they did.

Speaker 6 (14:03):
This reporting included precise details about methods to regime develop
to digitally alter vote totals and ways that could not
be detected even with an audit.

Speaker 3 (14:16):
No matter how deep they went.

Speaker 6 (14:19):
This intelligence underscores why we must take urgent action to
ensure that our own system can never ever be hacked
or compromised like it was in the past. The fourth
set of doctors.

Speaker 4 (14:32):
So that's really interesting the way he finished the last
point there shell be because it's obviously giving Rudy Giuliani
and Sidney Powell, but he's very much different. He's much
more restrained obviously than they were. But in this big
speech he's talking about I mean, I think he might
have even started with this point about how it was
proven by Maduro allegedly that you could tap into the

(14:55):
electronic voting machines, which is that he was changing the
MAMDUA was trying to change vote tallies electronically, and Trump
at the very end there said it's been proven that
it can happen, and then he very carefully says, you know,
we know our elections have been corrupted, So is this
an effort to kind of walk the line between the
twenty twenty wildness and what our intelligence actually shows. Is

(15:20):
any of this from Maduro possibly now that he's been
imprisoned in the Southern District of New York, there have
been conversations about or Delsa Rodriguez obviously, who is now
basically the being told what to do by Secretary of
Rubio per reporting like that's a that seemed like maybe
the riskiest part of the speech.

Speaker 8 (15:38):
Yeah, And I think that this is my understanding, is
that this came from sort of a CIA discovery, not
necessarily as trum Madurero himself post arrest. Of course, I'm
sure that they're talking to Maduro and maybe we'll learn more,
and I'm sure that they have asked him about this
because Trump is so focused on it. But I did
think that that length which that he used was really interesting,

(16:02):
and I think it just goes back to my earlier
point of this was.

Speaker 7 (16:06):
A very carefully reviewed speech.

Speaker 8 (16:08):
And I remember talking to Trump administration officials when they
were on the campaign trail, and they were a lot
of them sort of understood that they weren't going to
be able to get Trump to stop focusing on the
twenty twenty election, but hoped that he would. And so
there has been sort of this year's long acknowledgment among
at least some of the administration officials that this is

(16:29):
not necessarily the best thing for the president to focus on,
but we can't get him to not focus on it,
so let's try to figure out a way to work
around it. And I think this is sort of the
first time that you're seeing that they've actually been able
to get him to kind of walk around the twenty

(16:50):
twenty stolen election claims instead of, you know, hurtling straight
through it.

Speaker 3 (16:54):
Okay, so it's kind of like a participation trophy that
he's getting here. That's nice. He'll also talk about the
Save Act? Can we ask can we talk about the
Save Act for a second here? He mentioned that quite
a few times, and you know, that's to you know,
secure our elections ahead of the midterms. But kind of
feels like the midterms are already here, that if they

(17:14):
even passed this Save Act, it would probably not be
implemented in time for the midterms. How is he thinking
about all of that, and our Republicans like hoping that
he also kind of drops that, and what's the popularity
amongst the GOP in terms of this Save Act.

Speaker 8 (17:33):
Republicans are past the point I think of hoping that
he's going to drop it, because he very clearly isn't.

Speaker 7 (17:39):
And this for people.

Speaker 8 (17:40):
Who don't know, The Save Act has been a focus
of the presidents for a few months now, and he's
actually held up other legislation, bipartisan legislation, in order to
try to get it passed. And so this is something
that he has been sort of acutely, acutely focused on,
regardless of the fact that lawmakers have come to him

(18:01):
and said, we don't have the votes to be able
to do this. And so ostensibly I think that this
speech was an effort to get Republicans to pass the
Save Act, because the president's thinking was, I'm going to
present all of this evidence to show that our elections
allegedly aren't secure enough, and that will change some of

(18:22):
these lawmakers' minds, and then this piece of legislation that I.

Speaker 7 (18:27):
Want will get past.

Speaker 8 (18:28):
That was sort of the whole background reasoning behind this
primetime address.

Speaker 7 (18:33):
I don't know that it's going to work right.

Speaker 8 (18:35):
We talked to a lot of Republicans beforehand, we talked
to republicans afterwards. I think people are pretty set in
their beliefs at this point about the Save Act, and
there's no path right now to breaking a filibuster in
the Senate either, which the President has called for.

Speaker 4 (18:51):
Well and Shelby, I'm sure you saw this Daily Call
report at the time that John Throun, in a closed
door meeting of Senate Republicans basically said in multiple sources
that there are some senators who just hate Trump so
much that they will refuse to support to Save America Act.
And the reason I put this up on the screen
is that I'm curious for your take on the genesis

(19:11):
of this speech, Like, is this something that is rooted
in Trump's frustrations with Senate Republicans about the Save Act?
Is this him genuinely concerned about the midterm elections, which
he's also said he doesn't care about and he's not
on the ballot, So is this him trying to claw
his way out of where the numbers have gone over

(19:33):
the course of the Iran war. Gas price is still
hanging pretty high, could go higher because the MoU blew up, basically, like.

Speaker 5 (19:41):
What was this coming from.

Speaker 4 (19:43):
Why did this have to happen last night, Why did
he decide to make it a primetime address? What was
the thinking as best as you can tell, behind it.

Speaker 8 (19:51):
So the big reason why it's happening now, I will say,
is because the President appointed Acting Director of National Intelligence
Bill a few weeks ago, and one of his directives
from the President.

Speaker 7 (20:04):
Was, I want you to go in there.

Speaker 8 (20:05):
I want you to declassify all of this stuff from
past elections regarding election integrity. And so that was a
direct directive for Bill Poulty, and so he went in
and on day one started trying to do that.

Speaker 7 (20:19):
And so that's I think the timeline.

Speaker 8 (20:22):
Wise why you're seeing it all of a sudden, sort
of seemingly randomly come up. But I also think that
the president thinking on this is he wants to pass
the Save America Act first and foremost, and I think
it's less about the midterms, which he has grown to
care about more than he did a few months ago,

(20:44):
and more about his focus.

Speaker 7 (20:47):
His continued focus on the twenty twenty election.

Speaker 3 (20:53):
Interesting what signals that he is caring more about the
mid terms now? I mean he's been quite rambunctious with
this Iran war and that that seems to not be
going well, the economy, gas prices. What was the moment
that signaled to you that he's actually cared or worried
about the midterms.

Speaker 8 (21:13):
Now, I get that sense from people who are close
to him inside and outside the administration, who have admitted
to me in prior months that he is not as
focused as they would like him to be on the midterms.
And so they have argued that they've seen a little
bit of a shift, And I say a little bit.
It's not like he is that is the only focus

(21:34):
focused on right He's still very much focused on his legacy.
He's still very much focused on foreign policy, despite lawmakers
urging him to just ignore all of that and talk
about the economy and try to get gas prices down.
But I think that they have They sense that over
the past few months he's had some wins and that

(21:54):
has gotten him more interested in the midterms than he
was prior. I think originally his thinking was, and he
said this out loud, was well, you know, every time
if a Republican is in office, we do poorly in
the midterms. Democrat is in office, they do poorly in
the midterms, so he was kind of like, what's the point?

(22:15):
And I think that the advisors close to him who
care really a lot about the midterms have been able
to convince him at least a little bit that it
is actually important.

Speaker 4 (22:26):
And Shelby, finally he implicated NBC and I think ABC
News in some plot and threatened to revoke their licenses,
or at least he said they should have their licenses,
because they did at one point and right at one point,
by the way, or I should say overall, it did
seem like the speech was a bit low energy, and
it did feel kind of off kilter for a man

(22:48):
like Trump that, like love him or hate him, his
skill is television. He schedules his primetime address, and it
just felt weird for Trump, but that we shouldn't downplay.
I guess the severity of what he was alleging and
the directions he did go in at certain points talking
about potentially revoking media licenses. It's the threat that he's
made over the last ten years. But Shelby, why are

(23:09):
you complicit in this? And why do you hate America?

Speaker 3 (23:12):
You know, right? Question?

Speaker 7 (23:14):
Yeah, I'm trying to get out of here.

Speaker 5 (23:17):
L this Y, No, we will not do that.

Speaker 4 (23:22):
But how serious was that moment and is that also
reflecting anything? I guess it's probably not new. He's been
doing this over the last ten years, but I don't know.
To me, he just seemed really frustrated, more so than
usual in that speech lesson.

Speaker 8 (23:35):
Yeah, it's not new, but also this term you have
seen him actually act on some of these threats against
media companies and against media individuals. So I would take
it pretty seriously because this is something that he has
grown increasingly frustrated about. As much as he has this
sort of relationship with the press where he'll answer our
calls and he'll you know, attacker reporter and then talk

(23:59):
to them in private and act like nothing's wrong, he
has grown really really frustrated overall with the media.

Speaker 7 (24:09):
And you've seen that.

Speaker 8 (24:10):
You've seen that in how he has directed the DOJ
to go after reporters. You've seen that in the way
that Brendan Carr is operating on that side of things.
And so I would take that threat seriously. And I
do think that there is a growing frustration from him
because he feels like nobody is taking these claims seriously.

(24:34):
That really, he's one of the only people that is
still focused on it.

Speaker 3 (24:39):
Well, so it's very lonely at the top. And I'm
speaking of media companies not taking it seriously. Box News
was very very careful in their reporting of this speech.
I think they're still feeling the sting of the dominion lawsuits,
you know. I think they hear election integrity and they
feel trauma, trauma triggers from that. So Box News, I

(25:00):
don't know if you've caught any of their coverage, but
they were very very careful to say that even they
cannot confirm any of the allegations in the speech or
reaction to.

Speaker 8 (25:09):
That, it doesn't surprise me after the lawsuit, and I
think that's the reason why a lot of the networks
were reluctant to air it live, because you knew that
it was going to be about elections, and you just
don't know what the president is going to say, and
he does have a track record of saying things that
aren't backed up by the information that we have, and

(25:34):
so I think a lot of the networks took this
as a precaution. I'm sure that they talked to their
lawyers who said, listen, this is just not worth. It
will air portions of it after the fact, we'll talk
about it, et cetera. But Fox is in an interesting position,
right because they are a conservative leading news outlet that
the president watches a lot.

Speaker 7 (25:54):
But I thought it was really.

Speaker 8 (25:56):
Telling that they were so careful in how they were
describing his allegations and noting that they were not able
to independently verify it.

Speaker 7 (26:07):
That is that came straight from the lawyers, I'm sure.

Speaker 3 (26:10):
And finally meant, oh, sorry, go for it.

Speaker 5 (26:13):
Go for it, Griffin.

Speaker 3 (26:14):
I was just gonna say. Emily also mentioned that he
was off kilter, but that's because he didn't have his
favorite teleprompter operator.

Speaker 5 (26:22):
Noah, Yeah, possibly, this is what I was gonna say.
I I'm finiking a new guy.

Speaker 7 (26:28):
That it will go for a time.

Speaker 4 (26:30):
So, so this teleprompter operator who has now been implicated
in a Calshi trading situation and they're trying to maybe
get like a settlement where he just says he won't
do it again and pays restitution.

Speaker 5 (26:41):
He'd been with Trump for what ten years, Shelby.

Speaker 4 (26:44):
So you can you can tell us now he had
a new guy doing the prompter last night.

Speaker 8 (26:48):
Yeah, So Caroline Levitt confirmed that the individual who was
the subject of this investigation, who was placing bets, and
I think he got like a hund one thousand dollars,
which I don't know if that's worth ruining your entire
life over.

Speaker 7 (27:07):
That's the question for another day.

Speaker 8 (27:09):
She confirmed that he is on unpaid administrative leaves and
so he was not operating the teleprompter last night.

Speaker 4 (27:17):
Well, the clips that we've shown so far, this has
absolutely nothing to do with anything. But the clips that
we shown so far were zoomed in by the networks.
I think we were showing Fox clips and what you
saw on the White House feed was different.

Speaker 5 (27:28):
It was completely off center.

Speaker 4 (27:30):
And it's got to be nice at the end, Yes,
and Shelby, It's just again, it's a small thing.

Speaker 5 (27:35):
It means absolutely nothing.

Speaker 3 (27:36):
You care.

Speaker 4 (27:39):
I'm just saying for Trump, that's weird, Like he never
lets that stuff happens.

Speaker 8 (27:44):
It is really interesting because, as we all know, Trump
is a performer at heart. He did television for years,
and over the years people have talked about how obsessed
he is with how things look. If he talks about
his administration officials being out of central casting, he likes

(28:05):
how people look. He will sit down before an interview,
and there's clips of him out there. There'll be there'll
be a water next to him, and he'll say, no, no,
let's put this on this side. And then he'll say, okay,
let's move it back.

Speaker 4 (28:18):
He knows down to the lighting like he actually will
control the lighting. He'll say the lighting should be like this,
let like and you should have it on this number
this warmth, Like he actually is that detailed us.

Speaker 8 (28:27):
He saw him at the recent he recently was interviewed
by NBC and it was like downpouring rain and whatever
structure they were in I think was like entirely metal,
and he was so frustrated.

Speaker 7 (28:39):
By the noise of the rain he ended the interview.

Speaker 8 (28:44):
And I think that was part of the reason why
was because there were like all these technical logistical issues
and for him that like doesn't compute and vascinating.

Speaker 3 (28:54):
This teleprompter guy he went down for like making like
one hundred grand, which I shouldn't be a lot more
than that. If you're know the worst coming up like
these are somehow very conservative bets to me. You know,
I think if the speeches are going to continue to
be this boring and lethargic, bring that guy back. Let's
get the old guy back in there. Okay, let's have

(29:15):
some fun. Let's have some fun. Shall be any final thoughts?
That's it for me, all right, thanks for joining us.
Where can people find your work? Obviously semaphore and where
can people find you online?

Speaker 8 (29:29):
I am on X I still almost said Twitter at
Shelby Talcott and then I post on my Instagram, which
is just sb Talcott.

Speaker 3 (29:40):
Very nice. Everyone one of the best follow Shelby and uh,
we'll of course see you soon for potentially more election
integrity or whatever else happens this year with the midterms.
Thank you, We'll see you soon. Thanks well. One Tucker
Carlson was not impressed with the speech. Maybe this was

(30:03):
taped before the speech, but one Tucker Carlson went on
a podcast and said, God, bless the Democrats. Let's take
a list.

Speaker 9 (30:11):
I'm so thankful and we were saved by the Democrats.
Don't often say that, but it's true in this case.
Ten years from now, no member of Congress is going
to vote to appropriate money to the IDF because by
that point we'll know exactly what they did in Gauza.
What they're trying to do is codify this and take
that decision from a public democratic form, the Congress, the
lawmaking body, and move it to the Pentagon Procurement Office,

(30:34):
which is totally opaque.

Speaker 3 (30:36):
Right.

Speaker 9 (30:36):
So, and that's why bbe' is like, oh, you know, really,
we think we should get off.

Speaker 3 (30:39):
Us military aid.

Speaker 9 (30:40):
No, you're trying to make it permanent in a way
people won't proceed. With O'Connor, for example, we don't agree
on much, but we strongly agree on this. Well, I'm
still an outlier on the right and you guys are too.
But on the left, I know from going through airports
two days ago there this is a huge issue on

(31:00):
the left, and God blessed them for making it that
against the wishes of their leaders. By the way, Chuck
Schumer doesn't want to talk about this, but a lot
of Democratic voters do. And I just think representatives watching
those three races in New York City, those primaries where
Mandannie got behind three Democratic Socialists and they all.

Speaker 3 (31:20):
Beat incumbents, like, wow, how'd that happen? Israel? That's how
it happened.

Speaker 4 (31:24):
So that was him on with the American Conservative definitely taped,
not with the speech, but that was him on with
Harry Berger American conservative guys.

Speaker 5 (31:33):
They have a podcast and Griffin.

Speaker 3 (31:35):
The conservative guy's last name is Berger. That's awesome.

Speaker 5 (31:39):
He's Glenn's old producer.

Speaker 4 (31:41):
Yeah, he probably wouldn't call himself conservative, but he does
work attack anyway. So that's Tucker saying actually something that
reminds me of when he apologized Griffin for supporting Trump
after the Around War was launched. It saying that he
regrets it and has guilt over it. So not entirely surprising,
but probably we'll send Tucker into another controversy, spy a

(32:05):
spiral on the right for saying, God bless the Democrats.
But you know, meanwhile, let's actually just talk a bit
about developments in the Iran War because right now as
we're recording this, uh the According to CBS News, Iran's
Revolutionary Guard claimed a new series of strikes targeting US
military facilities across the Middle East on Friday.

Speaker 5 (32:26):
I'll just put it up on the screen.

Speaker 4 (32:29):
They say that spaces on Syria, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain, and
Jordan and Syria. They claim to have sent quote large
numbers of criminal American forces to their deads. We don't
have any updates about that so far. On Friday, from
the American military ship crews are on the strade of
horror moves, CBS says are unwilling to make the risky
trips to the strade of Hormus because of the breakdown
of the ceasefire.

Speaker 5 (32:50):
They said they've gone back.

Speaker 4 (32:51):
This is they're quoting the CEO of a Greek maritime
risk management company who said, quote, we've gone back to
the worst case scenario.

Speaker 5 (33:00):
Is willing to move.

Speaker 4 (33:02):
The US military said it completed a six consecutive night
of strike's early Friday, hitting quote dozens of Iranian military targets.
So again, Griffin, if you're Tucker Carlson, you probably do
have a lot of.

Speaker 5 (33:14):
Guilt at this point.

Speaker 4 (33:15):
This is the one thing you had been advocating over
and over again against. And then even when some people
on the right thought Trump had struck what felt like
a durable MoU with the Iranians, it pretty quickly fell
back into the escalation trap territory.

Speaker 3 (33:32):
Yeah. So, I mean Tucker is reacting to this vote
to fund aid to Israel that the largest amount of
Democrats ever voted against, even people that you know, people
like Rep. Adam Smith, Who are you know about Zionists
who now see the writing on the wall. Now it

(33:55):
still did pass, but I mean it was a sea
change to see people like Pelosi even see where the
winds are blowing, which I think makes you know if Pelosi,
who is you know, on her way out, can see
where the wind's blowing. But we still have people like
a King, jeffries and Chuck Schumer, the people that are
supposed to be like around for longer, They're still going

(34:16):
to die on this hill. I think is quite stunning,
to be honest with you. What is Catherine Clark.

Speaker 4 (34:23):
Yeah, Kevin Clark is the number two Democrat in the
House of Representatives, not somebody seen as like a squad
adjacent person in any way whatsoever. So to see that
the number two House Democrat wouldn't even go along with
Jeffries on that is really powerful. And to Tucker's point,
he said he discovered this in an airport, I think

(34:45):
he probably knew this long before. But Griffin, this has become,
and you know this the animating force behind the twenty
twenty six primary season for Democrats.

Speaker 5 (34:54):
It is where the energy is.

Speaker 4 (34:56):
It is the central litmus test for Democratic candidates, even
to the point where candidates who in the case of
Scott Wiener simply didn't say they believe it was a
genocide quickly enough, are getting shouted out of a Pride parade,
Pride event because again, like he was just too late
to it.

Speaker 5 (35:15):
That's how central of a litmus test it is.

Speaker 4 (35:17):
And for Hakim Jefferies to not pick up on that,
to still vote the way that he did, I don't know,
maybe he's just trying to run out the clock.

Speaker 5 (35:25):
It's crazy.

Speaker 3 (35:27):
Yeah, And it's like, you know, I think the lines
that I hear from the more centrist liberals is just
like why is everyone still talking about Israel? Like why
can't we care about this or that? And it's like, well,
they're dumping like forty million dollars into races across the country,
Like it's they have made it impossible to ignore. I

(35:50):
would love to have to get to stop talking about
Israel and APAC. You know, we have to talk about
it every week because they are central players, not only
in the war that was started that's raising all the
prices in our economy, but in our basic democratic process
all across the country. So you know, we would love

(36:11):
it to stop talking about them. But there's also this question,
you know, like where does like in your opinion, Emily,
like Tucker's where's Tucker's like base operate? Because if you
look at like MAGA base polling on the they still
support the war. So is is Tucker's audience now MAGA

(36:31):
Is it just young barstool conservatives and then some like
disaffected Democrats. You know, I know that Jank Yuger at
the TYT has been trying to make this sort of
this MAGA left alliance or what have you. But it
really seems like, based on this vote that just occurred

(36:52):
that now Tucker is saying, God bless them for that.
The real route to checking Israel is not with the
report publican party. It's with the Democratic.

Speaker 5 (37:01):
Part at least for now.

Speaker 4 (37:05):
I mean, that's one thing Republicans are underestimating is how
much the public opinion has shifted, particularly with Republicans under
the age of thirty. So that doesn't necessarily mean there's
a change coming imminently. It just means that their position
is probably unsustainable depending on again, like we're in the
middle of Ron is claiming that they killed a bunch
of American soldiers and our military is denying that today.

Speaker 5 (37:28):
But if that happens, this into the future.

Speaker 4 (37:31):
It's clearly not going to be a viable position for Republicans.
But the question is there's still plenty of boomers voting Republican.
It's not as polarized with gen X Republicans. The question
is what happens when does it become When do millennials
and Z voters hit critical mass in the Republican voting block.

Speaker 5 (37:51):
So I get that.

Speaker 4 (37:53):
So I think for now it clearly is from the Democrats.
And you have people like Thomas Massey, who are you know,
as he talked about on breaking Points this week with Rocana,
trying to buck the trend a bit, But they're still
in the minority. And that's where I think Tucker's audience,
to get back to your question comes from. Is Yes,
MAGA is overwhelmingly still behind Trump on the Iran War.

(38:14):
MAGA is favorable towards Israel, but there has been some
peeling away of people from MAGA. It's not a lot,
it's a slim minority. Those are the people I think
that are listening to Tucker. Along with the record number
of Americans who identify as independent that we've seen.

Speaker 5 (38:30):
I think it was Gallop that had that polling.

Speaker 4 (38:32):
So I think it's people who are more and more
identifying not even as Democrats or Republicans, but as independents.
And then also the people who peeled away from MAGA
because they thought the one thing Trump would never do
is stirt war in Iran, which I think it's doesn't
make a lot of sense to think Trump would not
start a war in Iran. But here he was last
night talking about how we are winning big in Iran.

Speaker 6 (38:55):
We are likewise winning big in Iran, and you will
see the fruits of that labor very very shortly. America
is back and doing really well.

Speaker 3 (39:06):
We're back and doing really well, and I did meanwhile,
I wanted a flag. There's been some dust ups with
lots of boats in the straight. US Central Command posted
that American forces have redirect three commercial vessels trying to
run the blockade, disabled one that didn't comply, and boarded
one to ensure full compliance. And I think they have

(39:30):
some images here that they threw up of boarding ships.
And I do think that this did spook the Iranians
a little bit because they're one, for lack of a
better word, Trump card is control of this straight and
it does seem like as we are resuming hostilities, that
we're trying to make a bigger show that we are

(39:51):
controlling the straight and taking away that card from the Iranians,
which I think means that the Iranians have said they're
going to have to escalate. It does feel to me
like the Iranians are really scared of sort of a
like a like a media story of them actually blowing
up like big commercial ships. They've kind of pulled back

(40:13):
and like restrained themselves from a big slide show of
images where they seem like the bad guys where they're
where they're taking down a bunch of ships in the Strait.
But it does seem like with efforts like this that
they're going to have to potentially do that. What do
you make of that, Moy That's.

Speaker 4 (40:28):
An interesting point because obviously Trump is at a hard
time rallying like the international community around the Iran Warren.
I think it's not necessarily because you know, some of
some American allies wouldn't support, especially like more neo conservative
folks in those governments wouldn't support a robust military action

(40:48):
against Iran. It's probably just because of the way Trump
has executed it. Even the fact that we're talking about
the Strait of Hormoz right now shows why some of
those allies probably have not rallied around Trump. It's just
that wore Mouse was open and the traffic was flowing freely.
I mean, the prices in other countries are way more
dramatic if you think that they've been bad here. In
places like Australia, they're dealing with this on another level entirely,

(41:12):
and they have been over the course of the war.

Speaker 5 (41:16):
So I could see.

Speaker 4 (41:18):
How Iran wouldn't necessarily want to give members of the
international community, who might be American allies, reason to change
the way they see the war and to maybe be
more supportive. So it could be coming from something like that.
But I also think it's worth noting this is Senator
Tommy Taberville who was on I think this is Newsmax

(41:41):
recently saying this is just in the last twenty four
hours quote. I'm all for President Trump and what he does.
He knows a lot more about it than we do.
I don't think we would put ground troops in Iran now.
Ground troops on carg Island is different because it is
a way from mainland Iran, and I have seen more
of a drum beat Griffin towards potential action on carg
Island just in the last couple of days. So that's

(42:04):
leaves us back in the escalation trap territory. And even
the fact that this is the straight of hor Moves,
which was open, I just like, it's so ridiculous to
even be talking about it, because it's not him saying
we are winning big in Iran. It makes literally no
sense whatsoever because by that standard, we had won so

(42:28):
resoundingly before the war, because the war moves was open
and ships were flowing freely through it.

Speaker 3 (42:35):
I am fully tired of the winning here. And it
does seem like we are in that escalation trap, in
that loop. Trump has mentioned We've done forever wars in
the past. Vietnam took nineteen years, you know, all round Afghanistan.
But you know, Vietnam was not able to halt the
global economy, which which then you know, it questions whether

(42:58):
like can actually go on forever. I mean, we could
do it for a little bit stop refuel again, I guess,
but it does seem to be just structurally so different
that I don't think we can continue this and continue
to put these strains on the economy with any kind
of political future for the Republicans, well, I.

Speaker 5 (43:20):
Just don't think the American people.

Speaker 4 (43:21):
I mean, Vietnam was so different because most of the
public was bought into this idea for a long time
until we lost so many people in that war. The
public was nuclear warfare was fresh on everybody's mind, literally
people diving under desks to do nuclear drills, and the
public was much more brought into this idea that the

(43:41):
Soviet Union and containment or let's just say the Soviet
Union was a really serious foil to the Western system
and you had that buy in for containment type policies
and things like the war in Vietnam, where people were
genuinely afraid that there was a serious, kinetic, constant threat
of nuclear retaliation from the Soviet Union and like a

(44:03):
mass casualty, potentially apocalyptic event at any given moment. And
there's nothing like that right now from people related to
a run which doesn't even unlike the Soviet Union at
the time, does not have nuclear weapons, and so that's
it's much higher harder for the president to if he's
looking back at Vietnam for the politics of this, which

(44:25):
some conservatives do, because they look at how Nixon handled it.
Now there's a big Nixon renaissance on the right, and say,
you know, you had the silent majority, you have the
hippie backlash and all those sorts of things. It's not
even close in terms of the politics though, Like it's
not at all in anywhere near what that was. So
if Trump is looking back on Vietnam as like an

(44:47):
constructive parallel for a potential long conflict with Iran.

Speaker 5 (44:52):
Good luck.

Speaker 3 (44:55):
So thankfully we have a new strategic solution to change
the momentum of the war because it seems like too
many of our soldiers are low te Now I've been
saying this for a long time, Emily, every day I'm
really happy that the Secretary of War Pete Hegseith came
out and he's changing all that.

Speaker 10 (45:15):
At the Department of War, we have the most elite
warriors on the face of the earth. Every single day,
you are pushed to your absolute physical and mental limits
to master the freaking points and you can hand your
all and you give it. But while we invest heavily
in our weapons systems, platforms and gear, our most decisive

(45:37):
tactical advantage will always be the individual war fire.

Speaker 3 (45:42):
We have a sacred duty.

Speaker 10 (45:43):
To maintain that advantage, which is why we must constantly
look for new ways to optimize your performance, your resilience,
and your long term.

Speaker 3 (45:52):
Health and to meet that commitment.

Speaker 10 (45:54):
Today, I'm authorizing a new screening program for testosterone deficiency
for our service members, ensuring you have the right testosterone
levels to operate at your absolute best, because it's well
established science that as we age, testosterone levels often naturally drop.

(46:15):
Under the supervision of our world class medical professionals, war
fighters age thirty and older are going to be tested
annually as part of their periodic health assessment. It's a
health assessment that happens every year. We're just adding this test.
Those under thirty can voluntarily choose to get the test
as well.

Speaker 3 (46:33):
Okay, good, it is recommended.

Speaker 10 (46:36):
It's entirely your choice to receive testosterone replacement therapy.

Speaker 3 (46:41):
All right, So we're going to get everyone on testosterone.
How do you feel about that, moy?

Speaker 5 (46:47):
Is this a breaking points policy?

Speaker 4 (46:49):
Will this also be implemented for our teams that we
can also operate.

Speaker 5 (46:54):
I'm not saying that the women.

Speaker 4 (46:56):
I don't want to single out any sex, but so
that the maybe the men on the show could operate
at their highest level.

Speaker 3 (47:04):
I've been giving the men estrogen, which I which I thought,
you know what would help you know Ryan's coffee I have.
I have Sager specialty brand of coffee or whatever. You know.
This also leads I think we're probably all for this.

Speaker 4 (47:21):
By the way, I wish Saga were here because he
would probably fully endorse this from sectary heg seth.

Speaker 3 (47:26):
Yes, everyone should get a tatosterone and a pack is
in which I'm sure they already already have. Now this
kind of also leads to a flyover that occurred that
was getting some uh some comments. Have you seen this
fly over? Emily?

Speaker 5 (47:48):
So it was July. I think I saw this if you're.

Speaker 3 (47:52):
Just listening to the podcast, We've got a US Navy
jet fighter flying feet uh above a beach of onlookers
here that maybe this was the first guy to get
on some tea here. He was just.

Speaker 4 (48:10):
High t flying. Well, actually, Griffin, this reminded me go ahead.

Speaker 3 (48:14):
Are you are you? Are you a fan of this?
Are you does this? Is this patriotic? Uh near near
collisions with with crowds of people. I gotta still image here.
I also want to pull up while you react to it.

Speaker 4 (48:26):
Oh yeah, let's let's that's incredible. I mean, listen, that's
impressive flying. It's a dangerous that's impressive flying. Yeah, you know,
the flyowers just don't really ever do it for me.

Speaker 5 (48:37):
I think it's a meal versus female thing. Probably.

Speaker 4 (48:40):
I know, men get really excited about the planes going fast.

Speaker 3 (48:46):
I love it, and I want to. I want to
one up it. I want to say, you know, let's all,
let's let's let's not just flyovers. I want to do driveovers.
I want to lay down in the street and have
the tanks roll over me. You know, I want to.
I want to.

Speaker 5 (48:58):
I would like that.

Speaker 4 (49:00):
Well, on a serious note, did you catch the point
where he's talking about as you age or just ostering
goes down. It reminded me of people probably remember back
in March the Army and looking at an ABC news
headline quote extends maximum recruitment age to forty two, allowing
older recruits to join. So might actually be reacting to

(49:21):
the fact that for in order to meet recruitment targets.

Speaker 5 (49:26):
I would imagine that's why they extended the age.

Speaker 4 (49:29):
It does make I don't want to mock it too much,
So that's a jump from thirty five years old to
forty two. That happened during two thousand and six, that
was the Iraq War. But then they brought it back
down to thirty five. According to this ABC News report,
Marines capped at twenty eight.

Speaker 5 (49:48):
I think, listen, it doesn't.

Speaker 4 (49:49):
It's not entirely crazy, as people are just like maximizing longevity,
living longer, those sorts of things that you would bump
it up to forty two.

Speaker 5 (49:58):
The average forty two year old who would be.

Speaker 4 (50:01):
Interested in joining the army right now, that is to say,
self selecting group of people, is probably healthier than they
were I don't know forty years ago, just based on
what your biological ages.

Speaker 5 (50:13):
I don't know.

Speaker 4 (50:13):
There's a lot of unhealthy Americans out there, of course,
But anyway, maybe this is what it's about, is they
have an older group of people joining the army now,
and you can screen yourself for testosterone.

Speaker 3 (50:28):
I want to meet the forty two year old that's
signing up to get involved. That would be a very
interesting breaking points interview. Someone was very happy about the
disosterone news though, and one Jesse Waters on Fox, let's
hear what he has. You lose your endurance muscle mass.
So yeah, I want these guys on it. But you
know what's gonna happen. The guys that don't need it

(50:51):
are gonna take it to triple boost, right, and then
they're gonna get out there and women on base. You
guys better be careful. Port calls women in Asia. You
better be careful because these guys are going to be animals.
You better watch out.

Speaker 5 (51:09):
You should have, yeah, but I don't know if I
would have.

Speaker 3 (51:14):
All right, so.

Speaker 4 (51:17):
Fox watch out in Asia, which, by the way, from
Jesse Waters, who is admitted to having an affair with
his producer.

Speaker 5 (51:29):
This man knows high tea behavior, so.

Speaker 3 (51:33):
Well, yeah, maybe maybe uh you know, uh so high
T that he.

Speaker 4 (51:37):
Tried to have a fistfight with Ryan Groom, that that
was a that was a low T.

Speaker 3 (51:41):
That was probably pre testosterone because I think he got
his ass kicked.

Speaker 5 (51:45):
I know Ryan.

Speaker 4 (51:47):
Ryan should be the one lecturing us about tests.

Speaker 3 (51:53):
I would love to see uh Ryan on some tissosterone
instead of what he normally does, which is micro does
so but maybe we can all microdose a little tea.
But uh maybe maybe leave the pork call women alone
if we can, if we can avoid it or we'll
have to go back to.

Speaker 4 (52:12):
My take on this is that it seems like it
might be a perfectly reasonable thing to do, but it
seems rather telling that they decided to make a big
public show of this with a message from Hegseth, like
a direct to camera announcement.

Speaker 5 (52:29):
Bragging about it.

Speaker 4 (52:30):
Like I could see that there's probably possibly some medical
rationale for doing this, but Hegseth doing this like direct
to camera, big rollout of it is somewhat amusing.

Speaker 3 (52:44):
All right, well, let's turn our attention to another high
tea individual. Of course, I'm speaking about Joe Biden, who
is out with a new book about his times and travels.
Let's take a lesson.

Speaker 11 (53:04):
Since that's the presidency. I've had a lot of people
ask me, Joe, what have you been doing. I'm spending
a lot of time with my family. I'm dealing with
the cancer diagnosis, and I've been getting treatment and it's
been going really well.

Speaker 3 (53:20):
Oh goodness.

Speaker 5 (53:23):
I want to take all.

Speaker 11 (53:24):
Those offer their prayers and support and well wishes who
spent the world to me and to Jill. I've written
a book about my time as president. It's called Promised
Me America. It's coming on November. It's available for pre order.

Speaker 3 (53:40):
Now, all right, Well, it goes on for another minute
thirty that I will not subject people to. But let
me just say, like, so he's like he's going through
a cancer treatment, but he was going to be president again.
And you know this is an edited thing that he
probably got multiple takes and is still slurring through it.
I mean, what an incredible I guess, just an ego

(54:05):
that he's still willing to walk out there when I
think the majority of the Democratic Party wants to never
hear from him again.

Speaker 5 (54:13):
It's amazing.

Speaker 4 (54:14):
And the book, actually, now that you say that it's
worth mentioning, is coming out I think November seventeenth, so
it's coming out after the mid terms, which Jill Biden
did not have the courtesy to wait for Jill Biden
to drop that book what was it last month? And
has been on a disastrous media tour. Do you have
the clip Griffin of It's horrible? Horrible?

Speaker 5 (54:34):
Crystal said this in our group chat yesterday.

Speaker 4 (54:36):
I was watching it and thought that I was actually
physically going to have some type of allergic reaction.

Speaker 5 (54:42):
This is ninety second why.

Speaker 4 (54:45):
A weird moment at the end of a Jill Biden
book talk with Whoopi Goldberg. If you're listening to this
there on stage at ninety second, why Biden himself is
in the crowd and they are clapping and turning to him.

Speaker 3 (55:09):
All right, so lots of applause. He's wandering, he's sauntering
up slowly, all right, all right?

Speaker 12 (55:22):
Oh, Joe has a question like you couldn't ask it later?
Who you love most of the whole world? Whoopie, And
so I'm going to do the last No, I love

(55:49):
you most, Joe?

Speaker 3 (55:51):
Why is that?

Speaker 4 (55:52):
It?

Speaker 12 (55:52):
Is that the answer he wanted? Yeah?

Speaker 7 (55:57):
Overwhelming?

Speaker 12 (55:58):
Well that's what keeps him on his two it's never
one sure, I always keep him guessing.

Speaker 7 (56:03):
Is that not true?

Speaker 3 (56:06):
He's doing the Sign of the Cross, which would I
thought you? I thought you'd like that, Emily.

Speaker 13 (56:11):
This thing I have to say is please remind people
to pick up now.

Speaker 3 (56:18):
I know it's his book, So whoop He's trying to
reassert control over the stage. But Joe has not laughed.
Joe is frozen at the front ear but look up.

Speaker 4 (56:27):
Oh yeah, gooks, it looks they were all on a
racial slurt.

Speaker 3 (56:33):
Wait, really I missed that. Let's go back well to
pick up.

Speaker 13 (56:38):
Now I know it's his books, but look up.

Speaker 4 (56:40):
Oh yeah, gooks, it looks like gooks.

Speaker 3 (56:45):
What what is going on? Jill? You're not you're not senile?
Like what is that? It's infectious? Maybe, yes, you're right, but.

Speaker 13 (56:56):
I'm going to remind them, but I'm to remind people
to pick up books on your way out. The name
of the book is the View from the East Wing.
And that concludes our conversation. Thank you.

Speaker 3 (57:12):
Okay, So now they hug, and now Joe is still
there and he's trying to get some more words in
and then I'm going to have to lower the uh.
So they're trying to play him off Oscar music style
and he's putting his finger up, sir. So now they

(57:40):
hand him a mic.

Speaker 11 (57:42):
Book which comes out.

Speaker 12 (57:47):
I have to remind him this is my event.

Speaker 11 (57:54):
The only thing Jill does better than right.

Speaker 3 (57:56):
She's a beautiful woman. Wow.

Speaker 5 (58:03):
I always say that about Crystal.

Speaker 3 (58:06):
As you wander around the stage.

Speaker 5 (58:09):
We only think Crystal's betterise beautiful.

Speaker 3 (58:12):
One, beautiful woman, incredible. That's the if. That's the one
thing she's right about. It's that it's terrible. Yeah, these
people don't understand that everyone hates them. Now, I mean,
I guess, I mean, like maybe the people in that
room are fine or whatever, but I mean it's like
Jill Biden, the Jill, not Joe, is such a villain,

(58:36):
like the fact that this is like some level of
elder abuse that she was trying to drag him through.
I mean, this guy can't operate a car much less
like a golf cart. And she wanted this guy to
be in office for another four years so she could
what like do more rearrangement of the Rose Garden, like

(58:57):
what like it's it's it was just so slimy and evil.
But I guess you got to sell your books, got
to get your book sales out there. But well, I
cannot imagine him doing four more years in office.

Speaker 4 (59:12):
Yeah, it's great to never lose sight of that. And
you probably remember when it was Favreau on Pod Save
a couple of months back was talking about how it's
not as though people are going to the polls and saying,
I refuse to vote Democrat because I don't trust the
Democratic Party that told me Joe Biden was fine and
should be president and then you know, prevented us from
having a real primary after he had to drop out

(59:33):
in the debate, but it's something that lingers in people's
heads and probably is a huge barrier for them to
voting Democrat in the future. And now Republicans will have
a similar problem with Trump probably where people just don't
necessarily trust all of the folks around Trump if they're
running for If Jade Vance is running for office and
there's a general election and he's the Republican nominee, Trump

(59:56):
is at fifty six percent on popularity ability, I should say,
in the real coup politics average right now. So it's
not like it's just a Democrat problem. But when you
see videos like this, I think it does remind people
of how much enabling, complicity and just evil there was
surrounding Biden.

Speaker 5 (01:00:12):
The media's unwillingness to publish tough stories until like the
very last minute. It's just crazy. It's absolutely crazy.

Speaker 4 (01:00:20):
And yes, the White House was threatening people, bullying the
press and trying to conceal this, and they couldn't at
you a certain point, they couldn't keep a lid on it.
But to see it now and think that he could
be the sitting president of the United States is just Yeah,
it's a reminder of how I think You're right, Joe
Biden ends up looking truly despicable because she's out there

(01:00:43):
hockey in her book. Her husband's the president, the former president,
and they're making him like sit and they clearly don't
want to deal with him. When he wants to say something,
they're making it like sit in the audience. He doesn't
want to he doesn't want to just sit in the audience.
He wants to say something. He wants to promote his
own book, and they're like, get out of here, get
out of here.

Speaker 5 (01:01:03):
This is the Jill Show.

Speaker 3 (01:01:05):
Yeah. I mean, I think like a smart Democratic party
would get rid of her completely, like I think they should.
I mean, I don't know, no one's gonna read these books.
They're just gonna fill up warehouses somewhere.

Speaker 5 (01:01:17):
Would she refuse to do events like that? Ninety second?
Why should refused to do events like that?

Speaker 3 (01:01:21):
Yeah? I mean, it's it's absolutely absurd. And I just
wanted us to just take a trip down memory lane
to when things could have been changed, when there could
have been a pivot. Jill Biden stuck her nails in
even deeper into probably my favorite quote of the twenty
twenty four election that you knew all the facts. You

(01:01:43):
answered every question. This is after Biden's disastrous debate. Let's
drop it, Jo, You.

Speaker 12 (01:01:51):
Did such a great job. You answered every question.

Speaker 3 (01:01:54):
You knew all that.

Speaker 12 (01:02:00):
That crowd, what.

Speaker 3 (01:02:01):
Did truck do?

Speaker 8 (01:02:03):
Live?

Speaker 4 (01:02:06):
So she writes about this in her book and says
she believes that Biden was having her husband at one
point during the debate when he crashes out and says
we'd be back.

Speaker 5 (01:02:17):
She says she.

Speaker 4 (01:02:17):
Thought he was having a stroke and then went on
stage afterwards and says, you did a great job, you
do all the facts, and talks about in the book
what was I supposed to do?

Speaker 5 (01:02:27):
What was I No, don't do the event afterwards, cancel
the event.

Speaker 4 (01:02:30):
If you thought your husband had a stroke, get him
to a hospital.

Speaker 3 (01:02:35):
Ma'am, Yeah, she said. She she said, like, uh, it
was a stroke. But imagine he did really well if
it was a stroke, right, that's pretty good.

Speaker 5 (01:02:45):
That's a good point. That's a good point.

Speaker 4 (01:02:47):
Actually, if anything, she was just being honest because he
did know all the facts and answered every question despite
having a stroke, which is something to celebrate.

Speaker 3 (01:02:56):
Yes, And I guess that takes us like full circle
from what you know, felt like Trump in some stage
of the brandoning, decaying process. I think he's Trump is
just more at the lethargic kind of sleepy Joe I
would say stage. We're not at the wandering stage with
Trump as much. But wow, we truly do have some

(01:03:17):
of the oldest politicians that have ever spoken to or
been alive. I mean, it is truly embarrassing. So I
think we will leave.

Speaker 5 (01:03:29):
Well, you said alive, but we don't. We're not.

Speaker 3 (01:03:32):
We're not fully sure about that.

Speaker 4 (01:03:34):
The there's a man right now who is in control
of a committee that does defense appropriations as we are
funding the warren Ukraine and are now basically at war
in Iran who there's serious debate about whether or not
he's alive, and that would be Mitch McConnell. So while
you said they're alive, I just wanted to add that, uh,
that clarification, Griffin, it's up at unclear.

Speaker 3 (01:03:56):
You know, I appreciate that flag, and actually in context,
I have a lot more respect for Mitch McConnell because
he's not trying to speak, he's not trying to put
out a book. He you know, he doesn't know all
the facts. He's not going to answer every question exactly
that's classy. I respect that, you know, like we don't.

Speaker 5 (01:04:14):
Finally, his politician, and I don't have.

Speaker 3 (01:04:16):
To deal with his wife. His wife just immediately just
disappeared to China.

Speaker 4 (01:04:22):
She well the story, she was in China and didn't
think she had to come back, even though we now
know the nine to one one call is that he
was unresponsive and ZPR was being performed.

Speaker 5 (01:04:30):
It just didn't warrant or returning from a trip.

Speaker 4 (01:04:32):
To China where she was meeting with some of Shedin
Ping's top allies.

Speaker 5 (01:04:37):
So good stuff, Thank you, Elaine Chow.

Speaker 3 (01:04:39):
The love story of a lifetime. Well, I think that's
going to do it for this segment. All right, let's
answer some questions from the Breaking Points members. Of course,
you can submit one yourself if you become a member
of Breakingpoints dot com and we try to read them
on Fridays. Let's start with, well, he guess Kevin would

(01:05:01):
Emily consider giving a breakdown of Wisconsin's upcoming elections. Now,
I've been tracking one Francesca Hong DSA, another DSA candidate,
another crazy communist who is running for governor of Wisconsin.
What do you think her chances are?

Speaker 4 (01:05:19):
Well, I think they're probably not terrible. If we're talking
about the primary, I think it's it's possible she wins
the primary. Wisconsin, I think people forget is one of
the kind of traditional social bastions in modern American history.
So it's not like completely insane that a socialist in

(01:05:40):
Wisconsin would have some chance in a general election that
obviously gets a lot tougher, But we should, Griffin, I think,
zoom in on that race. It's I want to say,
it's the week after the Michigan primary, so it'll be
front and center in the weeks ahead. But it's definitely
an interesting Democratic primary to watch, just because you have

(01:06:02):
a state like Wisconsin with a history of socialism, with
a lot of the problems that DSA folks are talking about.
And bear in mind, Bernie trounced Tiller Clinton in Wisconsin,
like it was not even close in the primary in
twenty sixteen, So not crazy that Francesca Hong. I just
don't I don't know, like i'll we should have a run, obviously,

(01:06:25):
I think, so okay, good, Yeah, I'm on the right,
so my perspective is deeply skeptical, but we'll see what happens.
I was driving through because well, I mean not just
the DSA thing. I probably have more in common with
some DSA folks on particular issues than I do with
some Republicans on particular issues, but also a bunch more differences.

(01:06:47):
But still I'm driving through rural Wisconsin. I was driving
through Royal, Wisconsin on Tuesday, and the amount of Trump
signs still significant. I drove past one that was like
homemade big sign on the highway and it said King
Trump twenty twenty eight, King Trump twenty twenty eight.

Speaker 3 (01:07:08):
I love that homemade. Incredible because one.

Speaker 5 (01:07:12):
Of those in LA put it outside your apartment.

Speaker 3 (01:07:14):
Yeah. Absolutely, I would get it completely evicted. I would
have to. I would have to get Spencer Pratt to
protect me on that one. Who is Spencer Pratt? You
know he's like he's fully, He's fully. He tried to
be a little like Maga light, but now he's like full,
He's full like Maga. How do you how do you
feel that Spencer Pratt right now as a sore loser

(01:07:37):
but now kind of like social media pundit.

Speaker 5 (01:07:41):
I think Spencer Pratt is still really interesting. Probably so Trump.

Speaker 4 (01:07:44):
We didn't even mention this earlier in the show, but
Trump brought up the Pratt race in his speech last night.
And this is where the election stuff is kind of
frustrated from my perspective, because it's just indisputably true. I
was arguing with some people on my Instagram about the
is its disputably true that when.

Speaker 5 (01:08:05):
It wasn't the DMS it.

Speaker 4 (01:08:06):
Was in the comments Actually that it is indisputably true
when you have this pattern where votes come in on
election night, Nitthia Ramen is crying the margin is massive,
and then over the course of the week it changes. Yes,
I understand fully the reason that happens male and well
that's fair. But I understand fully the reason that happens
it is going to make people think crazy shit's happening

(01:08:29):
in the background no matter what. And I think the
same thing is true with the electronic voting machines. They
just make people feel weird. And so there are real
questions like if you look across the board, people's trust
and institutions obviously is down, but trust in elections is down,
and it's not just Republicans, And so I do think
there is room for us to come to, like some

(01:08:51):
solutions about how to do this better. But it makes
me so frustrated when Trump, I think, praise on you know,
this is what he did in like went in super
crazy directions and prayed on people's legitimate concerns about for example,
Mark Zuckerberg coming in pouring all this money into like
dem areas disproportionately to Republican ones.

Speaker 5 (01:09:12):
That's a real thing. That is like an.

Speaker 4 (01:09:14):
Actual billionaire coming in and trying to shift the election
in ways that make people uncomfortable.

Speaker 5 (01:09:18):
But then you just end up with this silly stuff.

Speaker 4 (01:09:21):
But you're actually in La Griffin, So I'm kind of
curious for what your take is on Prat right now.
I think just let me tee this stuff by saying
his new War Foundation is explicitly yeah, it's explicitly going
to be acting in a journalistic capacity. And my theory
of that case is smart new media politicians realize, like mom,

(01:09:42):
Donnie did that bringing new information to voters. Remember his
food kiosk actually as a food truck video right during
his campaign. Yes, it was him bringing new information on
social media. That's what does well on social media is
like I am exposing so thing, And I think that's
what Pratt is like actually kind of doing right now

(01:10:03):
in ways that dams are not prepared for unless their
mom Donnie piled.

Speaker 3 (01:10:07):
Yeah. But the but the the thing about Pratt that
was like sort of like confusing and frustrating, like he
doesn't really know where he's running, Because I do think
that Pratt was probably charismatic and forceful enough to peel
off some normy liberals like I talked to a few
normy liberals who even think that something was like funky

(01:10:30):
with the election or or what have you, that it
was odd that Pratt was up and down. Now, in reality,
it would be insane for the the Kami Karen bass
to rig Karen Bassura, for her to rig the polls
so that Nithya, who's much more likely to beat her

(01:10:52):
in a one on one than Pratt, like she want
she wanted Pratt to be in the top two with her,
So it would be insane for her to rig the
election to knock out Pratt from the top two general.
So it just doesn't make sense on a on a
stolen election strategy.

Speaker 4 (01:11:07):
Well unless it was a Nythia thing that's like that
would be his rebuttal I'm not saying it was.

Speaker 5 (01:11:11):
Obviously you can see where people would be like.

Speaker 3 (01:11:15):
Nity can't tie your shoes. She can't even cut a video.
She's gonna steal the elections. I mean, I'm sorry, Like,
like that's also, uh, you know, I think complimenting Nythia
a little too much. But with the with the Pratt thing,
it's like he he did have a shot at it,
but in the last two weeks before the election, he's

(01:11:36):
like in New York City, he's going on Gutfeld and
Fox News. Yeah, what a mistake. Like he should have
been going on Pod Save America. He should be talking
to fucking Alana Glazer. He should be he should be
trying to talk to Amy Poehler, you know, about whatever
whatever the funck happens on Amy polar podcast. But I

(01:11:56):
mean maybe that maybe they wouldn't have let him on.
I think Pod Save to let him on. So I
just think it's it was a total mistake strategically for
him in how he played it. So I kind of
I lost with little respect that I had for him,
and and and I'm like, where's the reality show? I

(01:12:17):
want the reality show now, I guess. But you think
he's going to be doing sort of a vertical new
media thing where he just like whinds and complains because
I don't think there's any political future for him in California,
especially as he seems to post loss be kind of
pulling off the mask and even being more clearly right
wing than before.

Speaker 4 (01:12:36):
So that's a good point that if he's going to
go full Maga, he becomes less viable in California, because
he was insistent during the election that he was running
as an independent. He's registered for biblegam but he's running
as an independent, running as an independent, and there are
a lot of voters in like cal you go Inland,
in California, it gets much redder pretty quickly than like

(01:12:57):
It's there's less people obviously, but it does change, and
it's just a kind of different state the further inland
you go versus the coast.

Speaker 5 (01:13:05):
So there's something there.

Speaker 4 (01:13:08):
I mean, there's something there for a person who does
a good job at like meeting the moment, as I
think Pratt did during the election. But to your point,
if that's the trajectory long term, it probably does make
him less viable. On the other hand, I do think
if he starts going back to the roots of the

(01:13:28):
Pratt campaign several months ago, where he's like going into
skid row and being like, why is this getting bigger?

Speaker 5 (01:13:33):
What are they doing to dogs?

Speaker 4 (01:13:36):
That stuff can be powerful, but if it's combined with
full maga, it's certainly not going to be viable.

Speaker 5 (01:13:42):
I think that's right, Griffin.

Speaker 3 (01:13:44):
We do need to save the skid Row dogs. That's
actually how I first experienced the Pratt campaign is I
was helping volunteering at skid Row, and I had no
idea that all the people at skid Row were like,
we're like rhydoids because we were talking about the dogs
and that's why we need Spencer Pratt. I was like, oh,
what really you were?

Speaker 4 (01:14:02):
You were out there harvesting ballots for Nancia Rahman and
skid Row.

Speaker 3 (01:14:07):
I was, I was, I was, I was. I was
taking a hit off the crack pipe. I was signing
people up. It was incredible.

Speaker 5 (01:14:14):
But were you out there helping puppies because you do that?

Speaker 3 (01:14:17):
Yeah, I mean it.

Speaker 10 (01:14:18):
It is.

Speaker 3 (01:14:18):
It is terrible down there, and and when I tell
people about it, they treat me like I'm a crazy
Fox News Alex Jones host when I talk about the
horrible things that happened down there, but they are really happening.
And that was Pratt's That was like Pratt's power in
a sense to to talk about some of the things
that we that are happening that are real, and you

(01:14:41):
know that the that the city and in certain ways
is falling apart.

Speaker 4 (01:14:45):
So that was the group that's mostly responsible, at least
from an outside like organization perspective, nonprofit perspective, for pushing
and gain a function research and undermine the credibility of
Anthony Fauci is called white waste, and it's we've had
them on the show before. It's like in Moost people
who used to be with PTA and said, we think

(01:15:06):
we can get Republican voters to support ending animal testing
even if they don't have like a super moral peda
style ethical objection to it because it's like wasteful government spending.
But during the pandemic they used that and actually had
like a major priority on the beagles accomplished because they said,

(01:15:26):
we're going to work with Republicans And now you see
a lot of Republicans like Nancy Mace and others being like,
actually this is terrible. Like they they worked with the
Maha movement and sometimes you can get shit done that way.

Speaker 3 (01:15:37):
Why do conservatives own the animal issue that? Why do
you think that is they they like new. Is that new?
They seem to be like ahead of the game on that,
Like obviously there was there was that beagle rescue that
was not political. It wasn't like a rhdeoid thing. But
but I do see like the Conservatives is it because
it's like an easy moral issue for them to talk
about when they feel like they don't have a lot

(01:15:58):
of other moral issues to and on. I don't know
where it's coming from, but it does seem like they
care a little bit about more about dogs than homeless
people and then and their rights and experiences on the streets.
But I'll take what I can get as a dog lover.
I guess I don't know.

Speaker 4 (01:16:15):
I thought it was interesting how Pratt was pretty he
did a good job of breaking the Republican what's the
best way to put it. We've now spent so much
time on Spinster Pratt, but like he didn't do a
good job, but he did a good job of not
falling into the trap of how Republicans typically talk about
homemost populations and atticts.

Speaker 5 (01:16:36):
In the streets. Like he did a pretty good job.

Speaker 4 (01:16:38):
I think of framing it as like this isn't good
for anybody including them, and the dogs were like a
gateway drug. To that point, I feel like where you
just say, like nobody is thriving in this situation. Yeah,
but yeah, your point about how it's an easy moral
victory is well taken.

Speaker 3 (01:16:54):
So let's get away from Pratt for a second. I'm
sure he'll be rearing his head again in future AMAS.
This is from this person doesn't have a name, just
called subscriber. Would you call Jeremy Skayhill's session with Roe
Conna an interview or an inquisition? For what it's worth,
it sure felt like an inquisition to me. I thought
it was horrible. Emily you've seen the clips.

Speaker 7 (01:17:18):
Well.

Speaker 4 (01:17:19):
Tybee wrote a post yesterday Let's go laying into Ryan
and Jeremy. He criticized Brian for petting his dog during
the interview. But that was Ryan's cat, I believe, not
Ryan's dog. But that was a criticism, yeah.

Speaker 5 (01:17:35):
Really critical.

Speaker 4 (01:17:36):
He was really critical of Jeremy for being I think
he would probably say performative and not looking to get
a real answer out of Roe, but just looking to
make a point and make an argument more than elicit
an answer.

Speaker 5 (01:17:51):
I actually disagree with that.

Speaker 4 (01:17:54):
My take on it is that Jeremy comes from his
position where he genuinely believes what he's saying, and his
frustration with Roe. I'm very curious what you make at
this Griffin. His frustration with Rocana is that he's come
out here and positioned himself as a champion of the
Palestinian cause. But from Jeremy's perspective, as somebody who's been

(01:18:15):
like in those trenches for a long time, he's saying,
nobody is going to push Rocana to be consistent. And
I agree more with Roe on his position than I
agree with Jeremy's position. But I actually thought that was
a fairly courageous line of questioning, and I thought he
was trying to get a real answer out of Rocana

(01:18:37):
about whether.

Speaker 5 (01:18:39):
The quote armed resistance.

Speaker 4 (01:18:41):
Of Hamas had any legitimate military or could make any
claim to legitimate military action on October seventh.

Speaker 5 (01:18:49):
Now, obviously that was a terrorist attack.

Speaker 4 (01:18:52):
Jeremy was saying that it started as an attack on
military institutions. Seems to me like it was a planned
terrorist attack. But I thought from Jeremy's perspective, he was
pushing Kanna to be consistent, and I do think he
was trying to get him to say yes or no genuinely,
So I totally disagreed. I thought it was if you

(01:19:13):
have Jeremy's worldview and you're looking at Rokanna become the
sort of champion of the Palestinian cause in the American Congress,
then asking whether there is any legitimate room for an
armed resistance against the Israeli government seems like a legitimate

(01:19:34):
line of questioning if that's your worldview. So I totally agree.
I disagreed with the criticisms of it. I don't know,
but I'm curious what you thought.

Speaker 3 (01:19:42):
Yeah, I guess if Roe was like, well, you can
attack the military bases, but then when you attack the
music festival or whatever, that's when it becomes a terrorist
attack or something. I do think it's interesting that for
the last two years, the litmus test has been is
is it a genocide? Which broke Rona has said, But

(01:20:03):
now now we're going to go to was October seventh justified?
Which I think is very interesting and really, you know
what what Weather wrote wherever he was, he was saying,
he was justifying the the October seventh, you know, Alcosom
flood against the military bases, taking down the fences, and

(01:20:25):
what have you.

Speaker 4 (01:20:27):
Well, that narrowly, and this is where I think it was,
like I would argue about this with Jeremy, but like
I think he was saying, is there he was using
that example of from his perspective, the early attacks being
on military targets, and he was just narrowing it down
to that and trying to say, is that acceptable at
any level whatsoever?

Speaker 5 (01:20:47):
And I thought that, like seeing Roe's.

Speaker 4 (01:20:49):
Answer was genuinely valuable, and even Jeremy's critics seem to
have thought it was valuable because they've used it to
explain how Row from their perspective of his worlds you
falls apart when pressed on that particular question. Now I
don't agree with that, but he wasn't saying like do
you justify a tax on the music festival?

Speaker 5 (01:21:10):
You're saying, is there any legitimate military like I don't know.
I think he was using an example to make that.

Speaker 3 (01:21:17):
Point, Yeah, which I think, of course, which I think,
of course there is if you're if you're being occupied
by a foreign power. I think these are actual like
laws like laws of war, that you are allowed to
engage in military actions against an occupying force, an illegal
occupying force. What would you say to that.

Speaker 4 (01:21:39):
I was thinking about this over the course of the week,
and I think that's part of what the problem is
for Palestinians who are in Gaza and want the or
want a solution to the problem. It's like your option
right now is Hamas, which is terroristic, and you don't

(01:22:01):
have like sort of a what's the best way to
put it, non terroristic, more legitimate.

Speaker 5 (01:22:10):
Representation?

Speaker 3 (01:22:11):
Sure, I mean, and it was said in the and
it was said in the interview. Oh more, Rose said
I'm more Doctor King than Malcolm X or what have you.
But well, I try. I mean, they tried the Doctor
King route, and you know, they did the March of Return.
They all got shot in the kneecap. That's also mentioned
in the interview. So yeah, so at what point, at
what point then do you have you exhausted all options

(01:22:34):
or what have you? I mean, I think rosemen really brave,
uh braver than most Democrats on this. And I also
respect that Roe is willing to just kind of sit
there and like, you know, duke it out and fight
it out. I think like most politicians are not going
to do that, and I think that they that they
should because you know, regardless of Rose answer you there's

(01:22:55):
some respect there right to to to go through that interview.
And also I guess like, because I don't have anything
super smart to say, I wanted to I wanted to
mention what Ryan kind of said in the post interview
once Roe was gone. He made this comment about Lincoln
that when Lincoln was when when Lincoln was running, when

(01:23:16):
Lincoln was president, he was never saying the things that
the abolitionists would say, sort of the most far left abolitionists,
things that every I think American today would feel like,
is the normal base reality segregation is wrong, you know
that that we need racial justice.

Speaker 5 (01:23:37):
And he wasn't saying Barley Constitution go full John Brown.

Speaker 3 (01:23:40):
Yeah, yeah, he wasn't. He wasn't saying any of that stuff.
But he was, you know, behind the scenes, working with
you know, abolitionists and organizers and all that stuff to
create a coalition that included the most far left abolitionists
and more of the at the time, more of the
kind of the weaker liberal positions on this. And so

(01:24:02):
I thought that was an interesting point too. And I
do think that is that is somewhere where row can
kind of fit.

Speaker 13 (01:24:09):
Well.

Speaker 4 (01:24:10):
Yeah, and he does come from the tradition, like he
mentioned of Gandhi, like his grandfather I believe was an
associate of Gandhi.

Speaker 5 (01:24:18):
And that's where I come down too.

Speaker 4 (01:24:20):
I think it's part of the problem with the IDF
is that you end up justifying mass civilian deaths for
a particular goal, and you're going in a really bad direction.
And that is obviously obviously a massive problem if you're
genuinely trying to justify October seventh or any other terrorist
activities from Hamas, and it sucks if you're a Palestinian

(01:24:44):
who doesn't want to see that happening too israeally civilians either,
and you're in this position where they're like basically between
a rock and a hard place. It's something, of course,
that every political movement has dealt with. The point about
Malcolm X, the point about if you think about like
the anti abortion movement, which I consider myself a part of,
they historically in the last thirty years have dealt with

(01:25:04):
this question. It's not really something people talk about now,
but you know, they were saying, if you genuinely believe
that thousands of babies are being slaughtered every single day,
then that's why people were saying well, let's go ahead
and fire bomb abortion clinics. Not good, it's not good.
It's not the right answer. But it's not unique to

(01:25:25):
one political movement or another. The question of like, what
justifies is that the protection of human life is a
real one.

Speaker 3 (01:25:36):
Yes, so I think we've come down on it was
an inquisition, but a just inquisition by Jeremy sk Hill.

Speaker 5 (01:25:45):
It was an inquisition.

Speaker 3 (01:25:48):
Not all inquisitions are bad. They're not all made the same.
All right, let's do one last one now. This is
an amalgamation of multiple multiple comments here. So everyone's asking
about Eric. So we had an interview with Donovan McKinney,
who's running for Congress in Michigan. Jake Mogul asked, will

(01:26:12):
we be getting more from the Wednesday host? Eric loved
his style and how he really stepped up for the
team covering Emily's family emergency and Ryan being a nose show. Yes,
So I'll give a little bit behind the scenes here.
When we bring people in remotely, they are a zoom call,
and the zoom window had Eric at the bottom under

(01:26:38):
Ryan because Eric is our studio manager that runs the control.
So Eric's name was on the zoom call, which confused
Donovan and made him think that was Eric. So it's
not Donovan's fault. It is my fault. That has now
been changed and now just says breaking points.

Speaker 4 (01:26:55):
But and by the way, that doesn't mean he's not
a real breaking points for and because if that happens
and you're maybe nervous and you're doing a media hit
and you want to make sure you get it right
in your mind in those high pressure moments, it can
go to weird places like you can suddenly be oh, okay,
so I'll just I'll do what's on the screen, or like,
am I wrong? You feel like you're being gaslt You're like,

(01:27:17):
it's a Eric.

Speaker 5 (01:27:18):
I know that's Ryan, but it's as Eric.

Speaker 3 (01:27:22):
Yeah, he's a big Ryan fan. So I think I
think that was that was that was my fault. But
then it Ryan. I told Ryan after you got to
correct him. At some point you gotta say something, and
I say, and we told Ryan after the interview, and
he goes, oh, really, he didn't even notice. So if
Ryan didn't notice, then you know, I think, Okay.

Speaker 4 (01:27:43):
So this is actually more funny behind the scenes because
so I was back in Wisconsin from my grandfather's funeral
and travel got super messed up because it was in
the middle of like basically nowhere, and so we're scrambling
to make this happen, which is why I was coming
to everybody from the Milwaukee Airport. But I'm getting the
show messages as I'm going through security, and I'm getting

(01:28:07):
random notes from Griffin saying like, no, we need to
end this before there's another.

Speaker 5 (01:28:13):
Eric correct him. I'm like, what the fuck is happening.

Speaker 3 (01:28:18):
We're still We're gonna work. That's awesome, And finally we'll
end with a really fun one from Benjamin krabs. Ryan,
can you address allegations you're distantly related to the Gilgo
Beach killer Rex Hureman. You look early similar. I'm gonna

(01:28:38):
throw this up on screen. This does not look like Ryan.

Speaker 5 (01:28:42):
No, it does not.

Speaker 4 (01:28:43):
But people think that Ryan looks like Tate Reeves, who
I could say, does look a little bit like the
Gilgo Beach Killer. This is so Ryan Ryan. Yeah, put
this up. Ryan owns this. He posts this on X
all the time. I think it's unflattering comparison because I
don't think it's I think I think Ryan's got some

(01:29:05):
some real riz on Tate Reeves. But Ryan owns this comparison.
I think it's the hair and the glasses when Ryan
was doing Rising did look like this.

Speaker 3 (01:29:13):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:29:13):
That the hair and makeup woman at Rising when we
were co hosting there definitely gave Ryan the Tate Reeves.

Speaker 3 (01:29:20):
Wow. Well for for audio only listeners, Tate Reeves looks
like if Ryan was not on ozem pic and high tea,
this is a low t.

Speaker 4 (01:29:37):
He's the Republican was the Republican governor of Mississippi.

Speaker 3 (01:29:40):
So all right, well, I think on that note, that's
going to do it for us on this Friday show.
It was a Griffin and Emily show. We really we
barely made it, but we did. We are here and uh,
I think we did. Okay.

Speaker 5 (01:29:53):
I thought we did. Okay, I'd give us a five
out of ten. I thought we.

Speaker 4 (01:29:56):
I was going to suggest we do a review of
the new Army Hammer films Citizen Vigilante, Oh.

Speaker 3 (01:30:03):
An Ouie Bowl flick, So look forward to that potentially
as a weekend clip sometime. Have you seen those clips?
They're terrible, They're so bad.

Speaker 5 (01:30:13):
Oh my gosh, they's so bad.

Speaker 3 (01:30:15):
The funniest part of all of it is that Armie
Hammer says he cried when watching the footage. It's like, bro, like,
how are you surprised you shot the footage?

Speaker 4 (01:30:25):
You're the one thing I didn't cover this on after Party.
I was all over that leak to puck news from Army.
Give me, I cried, such bug.

Speaker 3 (01:30:35):
Give me back on after party. We got to talk
about it, all right, guys, everyone, enjoy your weekend and
we'll see you back on Monday with a far more
traditional Breaking Points program. And we'll see you all later.
Bye bye,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Betrayal Weekly

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

.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;}7/17/26: Trump's Wild Elections Speech, Tucker Praises Democrats On Israel Vote, Embarrassing Biden Book Tour

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;}Betrayal Weekly

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

7/17/26: Trump's Wild Elections Speech, Tucker Praises Democrats On Israel Vote, Embarrassing Biden Book Tour

Betrayal Weekly