Ryan and Emily discuss Microsoft workers rebel against IDF support, Bibi blackmailed Bill Clinton, IceBlock founder's wife fired by Trump admin.
To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com
Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of this show.
Speaker 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 (00:33):
Microsoft workers who put this element up on the screen
have told their bosses at the company that they're no
longer going to work on Israeli tech now. Microsoft is
heavily involved, as drop site has reported, with Israel's genocide
and Gaza, providing enormous amounts of cloud computing and other technological.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
Support for the assault on Gaza.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
The amount of money that the industry the Israeli Ministry
of Defense has sent to Microsoft has massively increased since
October twenty twenty three, According to internal company.
Speaker 4 (01:11):
Documents that we reviewed.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
And reported on This is an escalation from Microsoft workers
who are now drawing a line and saying that they
will just simply not work on this account. Now that
doesn't mean that they Microsoft won't be able to find
workers inside the company who will do it, but the
publicity around it and the difficulty around it raises the
(01:36):
stakes for Western companies who are continuing to be so
intimately involved in what the world is now seeing of
not just people getting mowed down at aid distribution sites,
but dying in droves of starvation and amount nutrition.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
You think this as it's.
Speaker 5 (02:00):
At all, Yeah, I think it's been resonating.
Speaker 6 (02:05):
I mean, Crystal and I covered what happened with the
church and also the Christian village in the West Bank.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
The the Idea have just announced, by the way, that
they finished their review of their the bombing of the
church and.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
That it was an accident. It was an accident, so
that's all resolved.
Speaker 5 (02:20):
Good. Yeah, glad we got to the bottom of that one.
Speaker 6 (02:22):
But uh, it's that was a real shift, and I
think whenever a shift like that happens, you start to
see more focus on every sort of subsequent you know,
people take more seriously when they see It's.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
A good point because it just it you have a
new prism for how you're viewing what's going on right roads.
Speaker 4 (02:43):
Trust.
Speaker 6 (02:44):
So if everyone's telling you this is Pollywood and it's
all you know, staged fake, and that's your predisposition to
when you see these awful, awful images that those arguments
that had been sort of blocked you from taking seriously
the images and the claims of suffering, then you have
(03:07):
those arguments against that have so much less credibility. When
you have one experience like that, it changes, like yeah,
like you said, it's a new prism. And I've noticed
that in the last week, I think.
Speaker 3 (03:17):
And speaking of stage and faked, we didn't talk about
this a few days ago when it was released, but
it's it's a fast, fascinating development. The IDF put out
this extraordinary short propaganda film of them for forty three
seconds not shooting civilians. Let's roll this clip and then
(03:37):
and then discuss.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
If you're listening.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
What you're seeing, are you know, hundreds of hungry people
kind of mobbing an AID truck that's coming in through
northern Gaza and you're hearing commanders tell the soldier IDF soldiers.
Speaker 4 (03:56):
Don't shoot, don't shoot, And at least.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
Four times in this short clip they say don't shoot,
don't shoot, don't shoot, And then the people who did
not get shot kind of applaud the IDF for not
shooting them. This was then posted by the Israeli military
as evidence of their most moralness.
Speaker 5 (04:19):
So this is the IDEAF posted that video.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
IDF posted that video.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
It doesn't take a whole lot of deconstruction to start
to raise questions about it. It's like, Okay, congratulations, you
found forty three seconds of your folks not shooting unarmed
civilians who were seeking AID. What is going on with
your rules of engagement that officers had to repeatedly order
(04:45):
troops not to fire unarmed people, Like if I've been
critical of the US military my entire life, basically, but
there's no world in which US troops looking at a
group of people who are mobbing an AID truck and
(05:07):
kind of taking the flower off the AID truck would
have to be told not to shoot. None of the
soldiers there are under any risk whatsoever. Like it's clear
what the people want. The people want the food that's
on the truck. There would be no other army in
the world would think, oh, we should shoot at these people,
(05:29):
so that they had to keep saying, Hey, we're filming here, guys,
don't shoot, like we're doing a propaganda film here. Can
you please? Can you guys please not shoot the civilians.
It reminds me of the one that the GHF put
out several weeks ago, where it's a guy speaking to
camera for like seven seconds talking about how effectively they're
distributing aid and how there's no violence and this is
(05:53):
an amazing accomplishment, a tremendous success, is what Tammy Bruce,
a State department called it yesterday.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
At the very end of the clip, you.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
Hear gunfire from There's no Hamas anywhere near these things.
Speaker 4 (06:06):
That's why they're fifth.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
They're like fifteen kilometers away from any populated area. And
so it's like, and that's the take they posted, like
they couldn't even get a seven second clip where they
weren't shooting in the background. So this this was really
striking me. It made me think, like, so I was
I did the show yesterday, so I came, you know,
from out northwest DC down to the studio here that
(06:29):
also went home. I saw a lot of people on
my way in and my way out. I didn't shoot
any of them, none.
Speaker 5 (06:36):
The most moral television hosts in the real world.
Speaker 4 (06:39):
Yeah, I saw a bunch of people this morning.
Speaker 5 (06:42):
Some of them were hungry, probably.
Speaker 4 (06:45):
Probably not, maybe maybe a few were, like.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
To fine hungry.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
Yes, I didn't shoot.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
I have not shot anybody all day long, noble peace price,
and I don't think I will shoot anybody for the
rest of the day.
Speaker 6 (06:55):
All Right, I'm gonna come next week with a letter
nominating you for the no.
Speaker 3 (07:00):
I appreciate there's a lot of stiff competition this year. Yeah,
so my chances are not are not very good. So
this is the this is the state that they're in
with their with their propaganda. Here's forty three seconds in
which we didn't shoot unarmed people.
Speaker 4 (07:16):
Now, now a warning.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
If you're not following this closely, A lot of this
might be might be new to you and might be graphic,
and maybe you want to scroll through this if you
don't want.
Speaker 4 (07:26):
To see it.
Speaker 5 (07:27):
It is very graphic.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
But the the intensity of the violence is just exploding.
So we can put up put up C three here.
Speaker 4 (07:37):
This is all.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
This is all stuff within the last you know, twenty
four hours. There is this is a strike on a
home that killed fifteen U civilians, including.
Speaker 4 (07:51):
Enormous number, an enormous number of children.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
You've had an increasing number of strikes where you're seeing.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
The Yeah, you don't even want to look at that.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
You're seeing fetus is blown out of pregnant women's bodies.
These are toddlers who were born after October seventh, you know,
who have known nothing but this. Here's a man who
died of starvation. Ah, well, over one hundred people now
have died of starvation. And here's a clip that was
(08:23):
circulating just two guys just sitting out on the pier,
just bombed and killed just for sitting on the pier, and.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
That's it. And then on filming their own murders.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
So like, we keep hearing that they're getting closer and
closer to us, fees fire, but an enormous number, an
enormous number of the people and guys are now kind
of beyond the point of no return.
Speaker 4 (08:55):
A reporter on one where we need to post this.
You can see it on my Twitter feed if if
you want.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
A paramedic was was hit yesterday. I hope he's still alive.
He was alive as of yesterday according to medical sources.
And you can see him. So he's taken into the
hospital with getting getting an auction, and you compare his
picture to a picture of him from a couple of
years before. He's just shed so much weight. He's just
(09:21):
he's just skin and bone. And these are and the medics.
We're getting food much longer than the regular population. Only
in the last couple of days. At Nasser Hospital, for instance,
did the hospital staff stop getting food. The patients stopped
getting food a long time ago. Now it's it's basically
(09:44):
every person for themselves whatever, you know, whatever they could,
you know, whatever they can find. So it's just going
absolutely bananas now. Meanwhile, they cut off internet to darry Oballa,
which is the remaining kind of severe infrastructure left in Gaza.
It's actually where Abu Baker grew up and was from.
(10:05):
It's where his family is, and there's a lot of
where a lot of the UN and AID organizations are
our house. There's nowhere else for them to operate at
this point. So they've now launched an incursion into dary Bala.
They cut off internet to it. They're bom bombing the
hell out of it. Sayah Al KUDS, which is a
resistance faction put out as a statement that you can
(10:28):
put put up this next element that they've now lost
contact with Rome Breslovski, who is one of the twenty
one of the twenty remaining hostages assumed to be twenty
remaining hostages who are still alive. The you know, Almas
had warned and actually IDF commanders have have warned like
(10:51):
if we if we continue to assault these particular areas,
we're very worried that we're going to kill more hostages.
They've already killed an untold number uncount uncounted number at
this point, but a significant number of hostages. And so
now there's this reporting that, uh, they've lost contact with
with Rome. So uh, this is this is in the
(11:15):
context of Whitcoff heading to you know, there's reports that
he's going to be heading over there as they're trying
to finalize an agreement. There's uh are there's you know,
the negotiations heavily are around aid and how aid would
be distributed, because if this aid system continues, then the
death by starvation and the slaughter at all of these
(11:36):
aid distribution sides would continuing.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
And Hamas is saying we can't we can't agree to that.
Speaker 3 (11:41):
Yesterday, Tammy Bruce, this is an incredible moment of the
States part where he said this is a it's a
tremendous success, like the gods humanitarian Fauscion Foundation, aid distribution.
Speaker 5 (11:52):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
And one of the reporters like, well, the result of
the success is starvation. Like that's that's your that's your
definition of success. It's like.
Speaker 4 (12:02):
Like before people weren't dying of starvation. Now they are.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
And I'm not sure under what terms that counts as
a success.
Speaker 6 (12:11):
That the ceasefire timeline is interesting because it seems to
me like and you've covered this closely. I think we've
talked about it, that the escalation correlates the closer a
ceasefire appears to be politically, the closer the Trump administration
suggests they are to a ceasefire, like oneever wit Cough
is negotiating, it seems like you end up.
Speaker 4 (12:34):
It's like the empty the warehouses of bombs on. Yeah,
so I don't.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Hope hopefully we're going to get a reprieve to this soon,
but you know, too late for a lot of people.
So let's also take a trip down memory lane. This
is crazy the nineteen nineties, Benjamin Naho, Bill Clinton, and
Monica Lewinsky stick around this one. So, in a scandal
(12:58):
that has been largely lost to contemporary memory, Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netnah who was alleged to have blackmailed then
President Bill Clinton by revealing to him that Israel had
collected tapes of phone sex calls between the forty second
president and White House intern Monica Lewinsky. The story is
worth revisiting amid allegations that Jeffrey Epstein was involved in
(13:19):
a long running Israeli blackmail operation of his own. So
Clinton met with Netnaho in the Oval Office in February
nineteen ninety seven. Subsequently, according to testimony Lewinsky gave to
the Special Council's Office, Clinton secretary Betty Curry reached out
to Lewinsky to invite her to an Oval Office meeting,
telling her Clinton quote had something important to tell her
(13:40):
unquote it would turn out to be their final sexual encounter.
But Clinton also used the opportunity to tell her that
a quote foreign embassy had tapped his phone and recorded
their conversation. Lewinsky said Clinton did not specify which embassy,
though The meeting with Lewinsky came the month after his
meeting with net Yahoo. The special Prosecutor's report was far
(14:02):
more concerned with Lewinsky's claim of the sexual encounter that
day because it contradicted Clinton's claim that they had had
only one encounter that year, than they were with the
fact that a foreign government was spying on the President
and letting him know about it. The prosecutor was also
interested in Clinton's response, namely that he proposed cover stories,
these recover stories that the two could employ if they
(14:24):
were confronted with the tapes. Clinton suggested the pairs say
they knew they were under surveillance and the phone sex
was a quote put on for whoever was listening. It's
an awfully flimsy idea, but look, he was guilty. The
man did not have much to work with now. In April,
Netnyahuo and Clinton met again for a quote private visit
(14:44):
on a Saturday. Then in May nineteen ninety seven, Clinton
again had Curry invite Lewinsky to the White House. During
that visit, he broke up with her. Lewinsky testified the
next fall. So this is fall of nineteen ninety eight,
Clinton hosted Netnahu and Power sending leader Yaser Arafat for
a summit at Wye River, Maryland. Toward the end of
the summit, at seven am, after a long night of
(15:06):
final negotiations and handshakes, Nenyawho approached Clinton privately to demand
the release of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, long a
cause to leb of the Israeli far right. That's according
to reporting the time from The New York Times. Now
Netnah who brought up the sex tapes in the context
of the Pollard demand. According to subsequent reporting by Washington
(15:27):
Examiner editor Daniel harper in his book Clinton Inc. The
Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine, he writes, quote, not
wanting to directly threaten the powerful American President, a crucial
Israeli ally, Clinton was told that the Israeli government had
thrown the tapes away, but the very mention of them
was enough to constitute a form of blackmail. Halpern reported
(15:51):
the talks almost broke down as CIA chief George Tennant
told Clinton he would resign on the spot if Clinton
agreed to the terms. So instead, Clinton agreed to quote
review Pollard's case, He did not release him Pollard was
eventually freed in twenty fifteen under the Obama administration. Now,
on the last day of his first term, Trump pardoned
(16:12):
Pollard's handler back in Israel. Pollard is now an outspoken
supporter of extremist national security minister Ben Givier It's Amar
Ben Gavier and is called for the full ethnic cleansing
of Gaza. I don't know, Emily, what do you think?
What a Netna hotel? Bill Clinton? I'm so curious it's
another foreign embassy that this could be.
Speaker 6 (16:31):
So this is very casually in the book of Daniel Helper, right,
who is I.
Speaker 4 (16:36):
Mean, you probably see about him as a reporter.
Speaker 5 (16:38):
Well, I was even to ask you, I.
Speaker 6 (16:40):
Mean, he's his sort of right of Senator bush Era.
Speaker 5 (16:44):
I mean, I don't want to get this wrong, but that's.
Speaker 4 (16:46):
My doing a lot of these Clinton in style, yeah.
Speaker 6 (16:49):
Right, and then was covering foreign policy like during that
time period. I remember Daniel Helper a lot from the
kind of blogging years, if that makes sense, like the
books your blogging years.
Speaker 5 (17:00):
But this is very casually in the book.
Speaker 3 (17:03):
And there was there was another book it was called
Gideon Spies in ninety eight published in the UK that
reported the same thing that it was that there, that
that Yahoo that end that it was Israel that had
gotten these tapes because they basically whated. Like back then
it was probably pretty maybe even easier than it is now.
(17:25):
A lot of people were learning about this affair like
it was like it was everywhere before it was reported
by Drudge and then by Newsweek. It was the talk
of like elite Washington. That's how like you know, Linda
Tripp was telling book agents publishers.
Speaker 5 (17:44):
Yeah, Lucy and Goldberg.
Speaker 3 (17:45):
Yeah, Jonah Goldberg's mom, she's telling people and like.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
You know, actually, what's his name? George Conway?
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Right, he like he was who's now there Istance Democrat
Guy Kelly and Conway's ex husband, and and.
Speaker 4 (18:04):
Coulter and like this whole right wing world.
Speaker 6 (18:08):
Brett Kavanaugh was working with Ken Starr. George Conway was
in that group. Colter was defending Paula Jones and.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
Paula Jones lawyers like learned about Monica way early and
they so in other words, a lot of people in
Washington knew about the Monica affair while it was still ongoing.
So if you were a foreign embassy that that learned
this and it would not have been hard for israelin others, not.
Speaker 4 (18:37):
Just them, to learn about it.
Speaker 3 (18:39):
It would then not be hard for you to go
and tap Monica Wincy's phone. You don't you don't have
to tap the White House at that point. You just
get Monica's phone line.
Speaker 5 (18:48):
Which is way easier, of course.
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Right, yeah, and then your boom, You're going to pick up.
Speaker 4 (18:56):
All of these calls that continued to happen. How do
you like? How do you like Bill Clinton's cover story?
We knew that we were being.
Speaker 3 (19:04):
Surveilled by a foreign government, so we decided to do
fake sex tapes with an intern.
Speaker 6 (19:12):
I mean, I was gonna say, I think actually that
may so. First of all, I think it gives it
more credibility that it's casually in the book, and I
think Daniel Helper is like sort of broadly pretty pro Israel.
Speaker 5 (19:23):
I have to go back and look.
Speaker 6 (19:24):
But I think that's like sort of baked into a
lot of the coverage that Daniel Helper has done.
Speaker 5 (19:29):
But I think the fact that this.
Speaker 6 (19:31):
Is sort of casually just inserted into the narrative of
the book lends credibility to it, and people aren't challenging it.
It's the same thing with the alex Acosta quote that
Vicky Ward put in her story that barely raised an
eyebrow at the time, and Acrosta, there weren't all other
people from those meetings in the Senate coming out and
saying this never happened. So anyway, all that that's like
(19:54):
a bit of a tangent, but it also makes you
look differently on the way Clinton vociferously denied the affair,
because it's possible that they were really serious about this
defense for foreign policy.
Speaker 5 (20:10):
Reasons that they were.
Speaker 6 (20:14):
They had motives beyond just protecting Clinton, that they were
like also dealing with the potential foreign policy consequences of
this entire thing being known to an ally is crazy.
Speaker 3 (20:29):
By fall of ninety eight, when the Wide River things
happen Eastern Shore, I remember when that when that was
happening eastern Shore of Maryland, the world kind.
Speaker 4 (20:40):
Of the public knew about all of this.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
So like the value, the value of that blackmail by
then was much diminished by the fact that it was
everywhere already. And then you had you had the midterms
where Democrats overperformed despite all of this stuff, right, because
when did he when did it all break? That he
(21:02):
admitted it. I don't remember exactly what.
Speaker 6 (21:05):
Oh man, the like that he that's a good question.
The timeline is important in this context. But yeah, I
mean the whole thing this is August.
Speaker 3 (21:18):
Oh so he admitted in the grand jury testimony in
August nineteen ninety eight.
Speaker 5 (21:22):
But I don't think we knew that till ninety nine,
didn't we.
Speaker 3 (21:24):
No, But then he knew it was going to leak,
so they put it out immediately. Okay, yeah, I mean
so by the time that Yahoo at why River is
allegedly like blackmailing him with the tapes and telling him
that and he's and it's an interesting phrasing that that
he's alleged to have used, which is, hey, those tapes
(21:46):
I mentioned like, don't worry, we destroyed them.
Speaker 4 (21:49):
It's like, oh, sure you did.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
So, but it's a way of you know, mentioned bringing
them up. And of course I'm not threatening you. This
is crazy, right, I would never do such a thing.
Speaker 6 (22:00):
Well, it's kind of like it's actually kind of like
the Epstein Bill Gates email, which reportedly was you know,
it was about the woman that Bill Gates had an
affair with, like the professional poker player. I think she's
a professional poker player that Bill Gates had an affair with,
and Epstein basically sent Bill Gates an email being like, Hey,
I think he asked for like some type of payment
(22:24):
related to the not for like any sexual stuff, but
like just a scholarship something like that, just to let
Bill Gates know he knew about this woman with whom he.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Had an affair.
Speaker 4 (22:35):
Yes, exactly, you can't.
Speaker 6 (22:36):
And you know, is it a smoking gun. No, because
it's not Hey, I'm blackmailing you. I know you had
an affair, give me money for this, or it was
like he had some charitable thing he wanted money quote
unquote charitable thing he wanted Bill Gates to get money to.
Speaker 5 (22:52):
And so he's not saying blackmail. This is blackmail unless
you give me this money.
Speaker 4 (22:56):
He's just saying, hey, I know, I know, yeah, I
know about this thing.
Speaker 5 (23:00):
Many such cases, yeah, many such cases.
Speaker 4 (23:02):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
So and yeah, the part about the CIA is interesting too,
like because this was a bipartisan thing at the time
that the CIA and whether your Republican or Democrat were
and it was I think it was under Reagan that
they caught Pollard actually Jonathan Pollard's spy.
Speaker 4 (23:23):
They were absolutely.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
Committed to keeping him behind bars and not not releasing him.
And it was when when Obama led him out in
twenty fifteen, it was supposed like, you know, it's more
like parole. Like you, He's served like thirty years or whatever.
He's served like an enormous amount of sentence. Yeah, he's
still very active in politics. He's even he's even like
floated that he's going to run for Kannessen, you know,
(23:51):
under the Bengavie banner.
Speaker 6 (23:52):
Basically, what the It's just this, It is so crazy
how many like you can play six degrees of Monica
Lewinsky with the politics at any given moment, or six
degrees of like Clinton Lewinsky scandal at any given moment.
I mean, it's just it's it still affects so many
different things in so many ways.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Yeah, absolutely wild yep, really a moment. Yeah, crazy stuff, Yes, indeed.
All right, Next, we're going to talk to Carolyn Feinstein,
that's right, who was the wife of the guy who
made the ice blocker. She worked for the UH basically
the trustee office inside the Department of Justice overseeing bank
like look basically as a bankruptcy fraud staffer, and she
(24:38):
was canned by the Department of Justice due to her
connection with her husband's ice blocker app.
Speaker 4 (24:44):
Let's talk to her about this. One of the.
Speaker 3 (24:48):
Things that the White House is most upset about is
a new app called ice block which allows people to
report ice agent sightings and then if you have that app,
you're going to get an alert if you within five
miles of one of these sightings. One of the odd
consequences of their fury at this app is that they
figured out that the wife of the app developer, Carolyn Feinstein,
(25:12):
worked for a division of the Department of Justice, and
they promptly fired her. So Carolyn Feinstein is joining us
now to talk about this DAGA and this app. Carolyn,
thanks so much for joining us. Can you start out
by letting us know what were you doing for the
Department of Justice.
Speaker 7 (25:33):
Well, thank you for having me With the Department of Justice.
Speaker 8 (25:36):
I was with a small program called the US Trustee Program,
and I was an auditor for them, where we looked
at fraud and abuse in the bankruptcy system. So my
job was to look at cases and see if there
were any places where they were not following the bankruptcy
rules and follow up on that.
Speaker 6 (25:57):
Okay, and so help us understand a little bit the
timeline as it pertains to you leaving that job over
the last couple of weeks, so your husband develops the
ice block app. At one point you disclose that you're
getting death threats and the like to your employer, to
(26:18):
the Department of Justice, and this all culminates in you
being fired, being asked to leave.
Speaker 5 (26:25):
Tell us basically what happened.
Speaker 8 (26:27):
Sure, about three weeks ago, my husband, Joshua Aaron, was
dxed and they released our personal address.
Speaker 7 (26:36):
Confidential information.
Speaker 8 (26:38):
So I preemptively contacted the Department of Justice stating, hey,
there may be a threat here. I wanted to protect
the department as much as I could.
Speaker 7 (26:49):
And after that, this was just this.
Speaker 8 (26:53):
Past week, Laura Lumer ducted me individually on x and.
Speaker 7 (27:01):
That was on Wednesday or Thursday. By Thursday, Laura.
Speaker 8 (27:06):
Lumer, according to Tom Homan on a different news channel,
had contacted him and he had contacted the Department of
Justice about me. This was Friday then that I received
an email out of nowhere stating that my employment with
the Department of Justice was terminated, effective immediately.
Speaker 7 (27:30):
But here's the thing about that. I wasn't just terminated.
Speaker 8 (27:33):
I was targeted, and I was targeted because of Joshua's
involvement with the app.
Speaker 6 (27:39):
And as you say, it was the distinction between terminated
and targeted.
Speaker 8 (27:44):
Terminated could be for any reason under the sun that
is justifiable by the department or the government as a whole. Targeted,
in my opinion is that I was sought out to
be terminated because of the actions of my steps.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
And I think that that probably true. So let me
ask it this way. And I don't want to sound insensitive.
It seems like and I don't want to read into
your own mind, but from your from your husband's perspective,
Johshon's perspective, this this White House is utterly out of
control and is engaging in, you know, actions that are
(28:23):
deeply harmful to the community, such that he would design
this app to protect people against the agents of this
very government. If if that's and I believe I agree
with him, like I.
Speaker 4 (28:36):
Think that his analysis is correct.
Speaker 3 (28:38):
But if that's the analysis going to that same government
and saying, hey, FYI, my husband, you know, did this,
did this app, and now we're getting threats. Just wanted
to let you know so that you can be aware
of my work schedule, and perhaps do something to protect me.
U feels naive, like this is the government that is
(29:00):
doing the thing that your husband clearly believes is wrong
and evil, Like why, what would wouldn't you expect that
same government then to be like, oh, you're married to him,
well you're fired.
Speaker 8 (29:15):
I understand that sentiment, but I also have experienced and
strongly believe our government is full of incredible, dedicated people.
And when I worked for the US Trustee program, part
of our mission describes transparency. We advocate for transparency from debtors,
(29:36):
from creditors, from anyone involved. So as a part of
that program, I want to practice what I preach, and
so that's why I preemptively went to them. I also
knew that I could go to that program, and as
far as I was aware at the.
Speaker 7 (29:50):
Time these statements, that I was telling them they were
going to protect me.
Speaker 8 (29:54):
There may be different factions, different portions of the administration
that just things differently, But the people I've directly encountered
within the federal government as a whole have been dedicated,
just all around quality people. So no, I wouldn't have
expected that from the people I've encountered directly.
Speaker 5 (30:16):
And you also explain this.
Speaker 6 (30:18):
I think you have minority shares in the company that
holds the IP address for the app, and tell us
about just tell us to what extent you may have
had a financial stake in ice Block and then what
your communication was with the DOJ about that.
Speaker 7 (30:35):
So this brings up a good point.
Speaker 8 (30:38):
One thing I'd like to mention is that when I
received determination of a termination of employment letter, the reasons
in that letter stated lack of candor during an internal inquiry,
and that just in lay terms, is lying vio mission
or leaving something out. Those reasons differed from the prepared
(30:59):
statement Department of Justice released to the press, which included
describing my relationship to the company that you're stating a
minority share that had been previously disclosed to them, and
then it also insinuated that somehow that relationship endangered the
lives of ice officers and threatened law enforcement. So which
(31:23):
is it? Why was I fired? Because those are two
separate reasons.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
So yeah, basically, what the d DOJ is saying publicly
is that you didn't That's what they're alluding to, that
you didn't disclose that you had this minority share in
the LLC that operates this. So you're saying that you did,
and when did you disclose that to them?
Speaker 8 (31:43):
Right that I wouldn't be able to cite an exact date.
I can just say in the past it has been disclosed.
Speaker 3 (31:50):
And so so if they had said, okay, well you
did disclose it. Now you actually are a minority shareholder
of an app that is intended to disrupt law enforcement,
would that have been a justifiable reason for them to say, all,
you're fired.
Speaker 7 (32:14):
To begin with that minority share.
Speaker 8 (32:15):
By the way, part of my position with the US
Trustee was to investigate companies just to make sure everything's
on the up and up. And as you're probably familiar,
charters incorporation documents, that's a good twenty second search.
Speaker 7 (32:29):
With the Secretary of State.
Speaker 8 (32:31):
At any time, in addition to my prior disclosure, they
had the ability to check with the State of Texas
and pull those documents, say okay, here's the minority share
that was never concealed.
Speaker 7 (32:43):
As for.
Speaker 8 (32:46):
Equating that to endangering law enforcement, endangering the people that
are part of the government that I proudly worked for,
I would never put those individuals or those pro in danger,
nor did I have the ability to my work with
the US Trustee Department was absolutely separate from anything involving
(33:09):
immigration or immigration enforcement. I didn't have access to their files,
I didn't have knowledge of their operations.
Speaker 7 (33:17):
I had no way to be involved in that.
Speaker 6 (33:20):
And what is so like your general response, because this
is and you just made this point as well, you
said it is insulting to me because I dedicated myself
in my career to serving the people of the United States,
and now the DJ is claiming I was attempting to
harm some of them, and that's not true. There has
been some targeting of ICE agents. So what is your
response to the argument that an app like ice Block,
(33:42):
and being at least a minority shareholder in a company
that holds the iphs all of that, what is your
response to the argument that this does make it easier
for anybody who wants to harmon ice officer to harmon
ice officer.
Speaker 8 (33:56):
Well, just to reiterate, I am not involved with the
ice block app, but as a citizen, as someone who you.
Speaker 7 (34:04):
Know may encounter ice or other situations.
Speaker 8 (34:09):
This this ice Block app, as it's stated on their
website and in the app, the intent is to inform,
not obstruct the other applications that are similar like ways
could serve the same function. So the apps themselves do
not endanger anyone. People's actions, people's patients, and people's understanding
(34:35):
of what's going on with ICE operations is what could
change a situation.
Speaker 4 (34:41):
Is there any revenue coming from this app?
Speaker 7 (34:44):
Not a penny?
Speaker 8 (34:46):
Joshua Aaron does not want to profit from people's suffering,
so he does not accept any funds.
Speaker 7 (34:54):
For this app.
Speaker 4 (34:55):
How much does it cost to run?
Speaker 6 (34:56):
Like?
Speaker 4 (34:56):
Is it an app like this fairly simple?
Speaker 3 (34:58):
Or is there is it now so widely use that
there's some significant amount of kind of like cloud costs
or whatever else is associated with running something like this.
Speaker 4 (35:07):
Do you have any sense there.
Speaker 7 (35:09):
Are costs involved? But I don't know what they are.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
And do you regret like agreeing to be a minority
shareholder on it? I mean, like I said, I'm somebody
that thinks that this app is good and we're a
free country and if somebody wants to let their neighbor
know that they saw an ICE agent down the street,
they should be able to do that.
Speaker 4 (35:30):
But given what happened, was that a mistake?
Speaker 8 (35:34):
No? This company that I hold a minority interest in
was formed years ago, and the purpose of it was
actually to develop a healthcare application that's.
Speaker 7 (35:44):
Still in the works.
Speaker 8 (35:45):
When the ice clock app was developed and released, Apple
requires a developer account, and the company already had a
developer account with Apple, so that was used basically to
save costs and out of convenienced you.
Speaker 3 (36:00):
Did you know, not to cause a argument at home,
but did you know when God registered it that he
used the LLC that you were affiliated with?
Speaker 7 (36:12):
I believe I was aware of that.
Speaker 3 (36:15):
Yeah, okay, because my wife and I actually share an LLC,
and I could imagine me going and just setting something
up using it and her later being.
Speaker 4 (36:24):
Like, wait, you did what.
Speaker 5 (36:27):
I'm fired.
Speaker 7 (36:28):
You're probably familiar.
Speaker 3 (36:30):
Then.
Speaker 8 (36:30):
Part of the reason that I'd just taken ownership a
small piece of that company is should anything unfortunately happen
to Joshua, I have the ability to wind down operations,
to close up shop without you know, involving more paperworking courts.
Speaker 4 (36:45):
Right, Yeah, I mean that's basically what we've got going
on too. Yeah. But anyway, so.
Speaker 3 (36:53):
He probably told you you're not you don't quite remember.
Speaker 7 (36:57):
You are trying to start an argument?
Speaker 5 (36:59):
Is it's messy?
Speaker 4 (37:01):
I got it? Got it?
Speaker 3 (37:03):
Well, that argument already happened. If it happened, what's what's
next for you?
Speaker 7 (37:09):
Bigger and better things. I am just exploring what those
things will be right now.
Speaker 3 (37:15):
All right, Well, keep it, keep us updated. And the
app seems like it's gating and gating in popularity, so
I guess, and this probably only brings it more attention.
And you know, Lumer's lumor probably boosted it by doing that.
Speaker 4 (37:34):
I would think, what do you think.
Speaker 8 (37:36):
The last I heard, there were almost a million users,
So that really sounds like ever a crowdsourced app, it
can really be put to good use in the community.
Speaker 4 (37:45):
Right well, Carolyn, thanks so much for joining us. Really
appreciate it.
Speaker 7 (37:49):
Thank you for having me.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
Got it.
Speaker 3 (37:52):
Not the biggest deal here, But what do you think
did he tell her that he was using the family
I'll see.
Speaker 6 (38:00):
I'm more interested in when she told the Department of
Justice that she had a minority share in the LLBA.
Speaker 5 (38:06):
I think is a pretty big question.
Speaker 6 (38:08):
Not that I'm aspiring her either way, yeah, yeah, yeah.
And to be honest, like I think, at the end
of the day, if your boss, even if your boss
is wrong, if your boss says we think this app
is harming our ability to do our work. It seems
inevitable that that's going to happen.
Speaker 5 (38:27):
Now, whether the.
Speaker 6 (38:27):
App in and of itself is good or bad, I'm
honestly have two minds done. Pisco asked me the other
day about Alligator Alcatraz, and it's the same thing with
some of this stuff, Like, I'm up two minds about it,
because on the one hand, not having enough detention centers
is what created so much trafficking from cartels through Mexico
because we stopped detaining people while they were waiting asylum and.
Speaker 5 (38:50):
All of that same thing.
Speaker 6 (38:52):
These Ice guys walking around not identifying themselves, in playing clothes,
grabbing ramissa os turk off the street, like this stuff
is incredibly disturbing. Then you have to do some of
it because there are actually criminals. So it just I'm
sort of split on the app itself, but it seems
obvious that there was going to be a termination in
(39:13):
this case the.
Speaker 3 (39:14):
Other disturbing element. And before we go, we can put
up E two here. This is you know footage that's
gone you know megaviral of an Ice Ice detention center,
like you know, surreptitiously recorded people living for extremely long
stretches in these you know, this is not where somebody
goes for like an hour and then its processed somewhere else.
(39:35):
Like people are like living like basically on top of
each other inside of inside of these makeshift detention camps.
Speaker 6 (39:43):
And not having to do that under the Biden administration,
a Bomb administration, and first Trump administration, not having to
do that is what made so it's so attractive for
that time period that people would come over and claim
asylum because if you have to do that, you don't
have such a an e the opportunity, and first like
this affects people who have legitimate asylum claims, like the
(40:05):
Venezuelan barber who was fleeing communism and ended up in Seacott.
Speaker 5 (40:08):
Like it's it's it's messed up.
Speaker 3 (40:11):
A lot of countries, you know, managed to control their
immigration policies without resorting to that though, I mean, or
this alligator alcatraz Or.
Speaker 5 (40:19):
It's so like, I mean a lot of countries don't
have the volume that we have.
Speaker 6 (40:24):
But yeah, anyway, anyway, way, yeah, it's everything these days.
You can't we can't have nice things anymore in this country, right,
I guess not.
Speaker 5 (40:34):
We can't have competent anything.
Speaker 4 (40:36):
Anyway, good luck to Carolyn, Good luck to Marty.
Speaker 5 (40:41):
Marty was super interesting. You've known him a.
Speaker 3 (40:43):
While, yeah, going back to hof posts since, yes, since
before he was I think yeah, before he was put
in prison.
Speaker 5 (40:52):
Interesting.
Speaker 6 (40:52):
Yeah, well it was. It was super fascinating. So we'll
stay on that story, of course, and Ryan you back
this week. We're doing Friday.
Speaker 4 (41:00):
Uh, I'm if he.
Speaker 3 (41:02):
My wife's getting surgery related to getting report taken out,
so we'll just see when that surgery is.
Speaker 4 (41:09):
But I hope to hope to be able to join
Speaker 6 (41:11):
Played by your best Sosius to Ohazon, and we will
see you back here soon
Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of this show.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll 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 (00:33):
Microsoft workers who put this element up on the screen
have told their bosses at the company that they're no
longer going to work on Israeli tech now. Microsoft is
heavily involved, as drop site has reported, with Israel's genocide
and Gaza, providing enormous amounts of cloud computing and other technological.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
Support for the assault on Gaza.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
The amount of money that the industry the Israeli Ministry
of Defense has sent to Microsoft has massively increased since
October twenty twenty three, According to internal company.
Speaker 4 (01:11):
Documents that we reviewed.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
And reported on This is an escalation from Microsoft workers
who are now drawing a line and saying that they
will just simply not work on this account. Now that
doesn't mean that they Microsoft won't be able to find
workers inside the company who will do it, but the
publicity around it and the difficulty around it raises the
(01:36):
stakes for Western companies who are continuing to be so
intimately involved in what the world is now seeing of
not just people getting mowed down at aid distribution sites,
but dying in droves of starvation and amount nutrition.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
You think this as it's.
Speaker 5 (02:00):
At all, Yeah, I think it's been resonating.
Speaker 6 (02:05):
I mean, Crystal and I covered what happened with the
church and also the Christian village in the West Bank.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
The the Idea have just announced, by the way, that
they finished their review of their the bombing of the
church and.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
That it was an accident. It was an accident, so
that's all resolved.
Speaker 5 (02:20):
Good. Yeah, glad we got to the bottom of that one.
Speaker 6 (02:22):
But uh, it's that was a real shift, and I
think whenever a shift like that happens, you start to
see more focus on every sort of subsequent you know,
people take more seriously when they see It's.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
A good point because it just it you have a
new prism for how you're viewing what's going on right roads.
Speaker 4 (02:43):
Trust.
Speaker 6 (02:44):
So if everyone's telling you this is Pollywood and it's
all you know, staged fake, and that's your predisposition to
when you see these awful, awful images that those arguments
that had been sort of blocked you from taking seriously
the images and the claims of suffering, then you have
(03:07):
those arguments against that have so much less credibility. When
you have one experience like that, it changes, like yeah,
like you said, it's a new prism. And I've noticed
that in the last week, I think.
Speaker 3 (03:17):
And speaking of stage and faked, we didn't talk about
this a few days ago when it was released, but
it's it's a fast, fascinating development. The IDF put out
this extraordinary short propaganda film of them for forty three
seconds not shooting civilians. Let's roll this clip and then
(03:37):
and then discuss.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
If you're listening.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
What you're seeing, are you know, hundreds of hungry people
kind of mobbing an AID truck that's coming in through
northern Gaza and you're hearing commanders tell the soldier IDF soldiers.
Speaker 4 (03:56):
Don't shoot, don't shoot, And at least.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
Four times in this short clip they say don't shoot,
don't shoot, don't shoot, And then the people who did
not get shot kind of applaud the IDF for not
shooting them. This was then posted by the Israeli military
as evidence of their most moralness.
Speaker 5 (04:19):
So this is the IDEAF posted that video.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
IDF posted that video.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
It doesn't take a whole lot of deconstruction to start
to raise questions about it. It's like, Okay, congratulations, you
found forty three seconds of your folks not shooting unarmed
civilians who were seeking AID. What is going on with
your rules of engagement that officers had to repeatedly order
(04:45):
troops not to fire unarmed people, Like if I've been
critical of the US military my entire life, basically, but
there's no world in which US troops looking at a
group of people who are mobbing an AID truck and
(05:07):
kind of taking the flower off the AID truck would
have to be told not to shoot. None of the
soldiers there are under any risk whatsoever. Like it's clear
what the people want. The people want the food that's
on the truck. There would be no other army in
the world would think, oh, we should shoot at these people,
(05:29):
so that they had to keep saying, Hey, we're filming here, guys,
don't shoot, like we're doing a propaganda film here. Can
you please? Can you guys please not shoot the civilians.
It reminds me of the one that the GHF put
out several weeks ago, where it's a guy speaking to
camera for like seven seconds talking about how effectively they're
distributing aid and how there's no violence and this is
(05:53):
an amazing accomplishment, a tremendous success, is what Tammy Bruce,
a State department called it yesterday.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
At the very end of the clip, you.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
Hear gunfire from There's no Hamas anywhere near these things.
Speaker 4 (06:06):
That's why they're fifth.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
They're like fifteen kilometers away from any populated area. And
so it's like, and that's the take they posted, like
they couldn't even get a seven second clip where they
weren't shooting in the background. So this this was really
striking me. It made me think, like, so I was
I did the show yesterday, so I came, you know,
from out northwest DC down to the studio here that
(06:29):
also went home. I saw a lot of people on
my way in and my way out. I didn't shoot
any of them, none.
Speaker 5 (06:36):
The most moral television hosts in the real world.
Speaker 4 (06:39):
Yeah, I saw a bunch of people this morning.
Speaker 5 (06:42):
Some of them were hungry, probably.
Speaker 4 (06:45):
Probably not, maybe maybe a few were, like.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
To fine hungry.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
Yes, I didn't shoot.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
I have not shot anybody all day long, noble peace price,
and I don't think I will shoot anybody for the
rest of the day.
Speaker 6 (06:55):
All Right, I'm gonna come next week with a letter
nominating you for the no.
Speaker 3 (07:00):
I appreciate there's a lot of stiff competition this year. Yeah,
so my chances are not are not very good. So
this is the this is the state that they're in
with their with their propaganda. Here's forty three seconds in
which we didn't shoot unarmed people.
Speaker 4 (07:16):
Now, now a warning.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
If you're not following this closely, A lot of this
might be might be new to you and might be graphic,
and maybe you want to scroll through this if you
don't want.
Speaker 4 (07:26):
To see it.
Speaker 5 (07:27):
It is very graphic.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
But the the intensity of the violence is just exploding.
So we can put up put up C three here.
Speaker 4 (07:37):
This is all.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
This is all stuff within the last you know, twenty
four hours. There is this is a strike on a
home that killed fifteen U civilians, including.
Speaker 4 (07:51):
Enormous number, an enormous number of children.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
You've had an increasing number of strikes where you're seeing.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
The Yeah, you don't even want to look at that.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
You're seeing fetus is blown out of pregnant women's bodies.
These are toddlers who were born after October seventh, you know,
who have known nothing but this. Here's a man who
died of starvation. Ah, well, over one hundred people now
have died of starvation. And here's a clip that was
(08:23):
circulating just two guys just sitting out on the pier,
just bombed and killed just for sitting on the pier, and.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
That's it. And then on filming their own murders.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
So like, we keep hearing that they're getting closer and
closer to us, fees fire, but an enormous number, an
enormous number of the people and guys are now kind
of beyond the point of no return.
Speaker 4 (08:55):
A reporter on one where we need to post this.
You can see it on my Twitter feed if if
you want.
Speaker 3 (09:00):
A paramedic was was hit yesterday. I hope he's still alive.
He was alive as of yesterday according to medical sources.
And you can see him. So he's taken into the
hospital with getting getting an auction, and you compare his
picture to a picture of him from a couple of
years before. He's just shed so much weight. He's just
(09:21):
he's just skin and bone. And these are and the medics.
We're getting food much longer than the regular population. Only
in the last couple of days. At Nasser Hospital, for instance,
did the hospital staff stop getting food. The patients stopped
getting food a long time ago. Now it's it's basically
(09:44):
every person for themselves whatever, you know, whatever they could,
you know, whatever they can find. So it's just going
absolutely bananas now. Meanwhile, they cut off internet to darry Oballa,
which is the remaining kind of severe infrastructure left in Gaza.
It's actually where Abu Baker grew up and was from.
(10:05):
It's where his family is, and there's a lot of
where a lot of the UN and AID organizations are
our house. There's nowhere else for them to operate at
this point. So they've now launched an incursion into dary Bala.
They cut off internet to it. They're bom bombing the
hell out of it. Sayah Al KUDS, which is a
resistance faction put out as a statement that you can
(10:28):
put put up this next element that they've now lost
contact with Rome Breslovski, who is one of the twenty
one of the twenty remaining hostages assumed to be twenty
remaining hostages who are still alive. The you know, Almas
had warned and actually IDF commanders have have warned like
(10:51):
if we if we continue to assault these particular areas,
we're very worried that we're going to kill more hostages.
They've already killed an untold number uncount uncounted number at
this point, but a significant number of hostages. And so
now there's this reporting that, uh, they've lost contact with
with Rome. So uh, this is this is in the
(11:15):
context of Whitcoff heading to you know, there's reports that
he's going to be heading over there as they're trying
to finalize an agreement. There's uh are there's you know,
the negotiations heavily are around aid and how aid would
be distributed, because if this aid system continues, then the
death by starvation and the slaughter at all of these
(11:36):
aid distribution sides would continuing.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
And Hamas is saying we can't we can't agree to that.
Speaker 3 (11:41):
Yesterday, Tammy Bruce, this is an incredible moment of the
States part where he said this is a it's a
tremendous success, like the gods humanitarian Fauscion Foundation, aid distribution.
Speaker 5 (11:52):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
And one of the reporters like, well, the result of
the success is starvation. Like that's that's your that's your
definition of success. It's like.
Speaker 4 (12:02):
Like before people weren't dying of starvation. Now they are.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
And I'm not sure under what terms that counts as
a success.
Speaker 6 (12:11):
That the ceasefire timeline is interesting because it seems to
me like and you've covered this closely. I think we've
talked about it, that the escalation correlates the closer a
ceasefire appears to be politically, the closer the Trump administration
suggests they are to a ceasefire, like oneever wit Cough
is negotiating, it seems like you end up.
Speaker 4 (12:34):
It's like the empty the warehouses of bombs on. Yeah,
so I don't.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Hope hopefully we're going to get a reprieve to this soon,
but you know, too late for a lot of people.
So let's also take a trip down memory lane. This
is crazy the nineteen nineties, Benjamin Naho, Bill Clinton, and
Monica Lewinsky stick around this one. So, in a scandal
(12:58):
that has been largely lost to contemporary memory, Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netnah who was alleged to have blackmailed then
President Bill Clinton by revealing to him that Israel had
collected tapes of phone sex calls between the forty second
president and White House intern Monica Lewinsky. The story is
worth revisiting amid allegations that Jeffrey Epstein was involved in
(13:19):
a long running Israeli blackmail operation of his own. So
Clinton met with Netnaho in the Oval Office in February
nineteen ninety seven. Subsequently, according to testimony Lewinsky gave to
the Special Council's Office, Clinton secretary Betty Curry reached out
to Lewinsky to invite her to an Oval Office meeting,
telling her Clinton quote had something important to tell her
(13:40):
unquote it would turn out to be their final sexual encounter.
But Clinton also used the opportunity to tell her that
a quote foreign embassy had tapped his phone and recorded
their conversation. Lewinsky said Clinton did not specify which embassy,
though The meeting with Lewinsky came the month after his
meeting with net Yahoo. The special Prosecutor's report was far
(14:02):
more concerned with Lewinsky's claim of the sexual encounter that
day because it contradicted Clinton's claim that they had had
only one encounter that year, than they were with the
fact that a foreign government was spying on the President
and letting him know about it. The prosecutor was also
interested in Clinton's response, namely that he proposed cover stories,
these recover stories that the two could employ if they
(14:24):
were confronted with the tapes. Clinton suggested the pairs say
they knew they were under surveillance and the phone sex
was a quote put on for whoever was listening. It's
an awfully flimsy idea, but look, he was guilty. The
man did not have much to work with now. In April,
Netnyahuo and Clinton met again for a quote private visit
(14:44):
on a Saturday. Then in May nineteen ninety seven, Clinton
again had Curry invite Lewinsky to the White House. During
that visit, he broke up with her. Lewinsky testified the
next fall. So this is fall of nineteen ninety eight,
Clinton hosted Netnahu and Power sending leader Yaser Arafat for
a summit at Wye River, Maryland. Toward the end of
the summit, at seven am, after a long night of
(15:06):
final negotiations and handshakes, Nenyawho approached Clinton privately to demand
the release of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, long a
cause to leb of the Israeli far right. That's according
to reporting the time from The New York Times. Now
Netnah who brought up the sex tapes in the context
of the Pollard demand. According to subsequent reporting by Washington
(15:27):
Examiner editor Daniel harper in his book Clinton Inc. The
Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine, he writes, quote, not
wanting to directly threaten the powerful American President, a crucial
Israeli ally, Clinton was told that the Israeli government had
thrown the tapes away, but the very mention of them
was enough to constitute a form of blackmail. Halpern reported
(15:51):
the talks almost broke down as CIA chief George Tennant
told Clinton he would resign on the spot if Clinton
agreed to the terms. So instead, Clinton agreed to quote
review Pollard's case, He did not release him Pollard was
eventually freed in twenty fifteen under the Obama administration. Now,
on the last day of his first term, Trump pardoned
(16:12):
Pollard's handler back in Israel. Pollard is now an outspoken
supporter of extremist national security minister Ben Givier It's Amar
Ben Gavier and is called for the full ethnic cleansing
of Gaza. I don't know, Emily, what do you think?
What a Netna hotel? Bill Clinton? I'm so curious it's
another foreign embassy that this could be.
Speaker 6 (16:31):
So this is very casually in the book of Daniel Helper, right,
who is I.
Speaker 4 (16:36):
Mean, you probably see about him as a reporter.
Speaker 5 (16:38):
Well, I was even to ask you, I.
Speaker 6 (16:40):
Mean, he's his sort of right of Senator bush Era.
Speaker 5 (16:44):
I mean, I don't want to get this wrong, but that's.
Speaker 4 (16:46):
My doing a lot of these Clinton in style, yeah.
Speaker 6 (16:49):
Right, and then was covering foreign policy like during that
time period. I remember Daniel Helper a lot from the
kind of blogging years, if that makes sense, like the
books your blogging years.
Speaker 5 (17:00):
But this is very casually in the book.
Speaker 3 (17:03):
And there was there was another book it was called
Gideon Spies in ninety eight published in the UK that
reported the same thing that it was that there, that
that Yahoo that end that it was Israel that had
gotten these tapes because they basically whated. Like back then
it was probably pretty maybe even easier than it is now.
(17:25):
A lot of people were learning about this affair like
it was like it was everywhere before it was reported
by Drudge and then by Newsweek. It was the talk
of like elite Washington. That's how like you know, Linda
Tripp was telling book agents publishers.
Speaker 5 (17:44):
Yeah, Lucy and Goldberg.
Speaker 3 (17:45):
Yeah, Jonah Goldberg's mom, she's telling people and like.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
You know, actually, what's his name? George Conway?
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Right, he like he was who's now there Istance Democrat
Guy Kelly and Conway's ex husband, and and.
Speaker 4 (18:04):
Coulter and like this whole right wing world.
Speaker 6 (18:08):
Brett Kavanaugh was working with Ken Starr. George Conway was
in that group. Colter was defending Paula Jones and.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
Paula Jones lawyers like learned about Monica way early and
they so in other words, a lot of people in
Washington knew about the Monica affair while it was still ongoing.
So if you were a foreign embassy that that learned
this and it would not have been hard for israelin others, not.
Speaker 4 (18:37):
Just them, to learn about it.
Speaker 3 (18:39):
It would then not be hard for you to go
and tap Monica Wincy's phone. You don't you don't have
to tap the White House at that point. You just
get Monica's phone line.
Speaker 5 (18:48):
Which is way easier, of course.
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Right, yeah, and then your boom, You're going to pick up.
Speaker 4 (18:56):
All of these calls that continued to happen. How do
you like? How do you like Bill Clinton's cover story?
We knew that we were being.
Speaker 3 (19:04):
Surveilled by a foreign government, so we decided to do
fake sex tapes with an intern.
Speaker 6 (19:12):
I mean, I was gonna say, I think actually that
may so. First of all, I think it gives it
more credibility that it's casually in the book, and I
think Daniel Helper is like sort of broadly pretty pro Israel.
Speaker 5 (19:23):
I have to go back and look.
Speaker 6 (19:24):
But I think that's like sort of baked into a
lot of the coverage that Daniel Helper has done.
Speaker 5 (19:29):
But I think the fact that this.
Speaker 6 (19:31):
Is sort of casually just inserted into the narrative of
the book lends credibility to it, and people aren't challenging it.
It's the same thing with the alex Acosta quote that
Vicky Ward put in her story that barely raised an
eyebrow at the time, and Acrosta, there weren't all other
people from those meetings in the Senate coming out and
saying this never happened. So anyway, all that that's like
(19:54):
a bit of a tangent, but it also makes you
look differently on the way Clinton vociferously denied the affair,
because it's possible that they were really serious about this
defense for foreign policy.
Speaker 5 (20:10):
Reasons that they were.
Speaker 6 (20:14):
They had motives beyond just protecting Clinton, that they were
like also dealing with the potential foreign policy consequences of
this entire thing being known to an ally is crazy.
Speaker 3 (20:29):
By fall of ninety eight, when the Wide River things
happen Eastern Shore, I remember when that when that was
happening eastern Shore of Maryland, the world kind.
Speaker 4 (20:40):
Of the public knew about all of this.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
So like the value, the value of that blackmail by
then was much diminished by the fact that it was
everywhere already. And then you had you had the midterms
where Democrats overperformed despite all of this stuff, right, because
when did he when did it all break? That he
(21:02):
admitted it. I don't remember exactly what.
Speaker 6 (21:05):
Oh man, the like that he that's a good question.
The timeline is important in this context. But yeah, I
mean the whole thing this is August.
Speaker 3 (21:18):
Oh so he admitted in the grand jury testimony in
August nineteen ninety eight.
Speaker 5 (21:22):
But I don't think we knew that till ninety nine,
didn't we.
Speaker 3 (21:24):
No, But then he knew it was going to leak,
so they put it out immediately. Okay, yeah, I mean
so by the time that Yahoo at why River is
allegedly like blackmailing him with the tapes and telling him
that and he's and it's an interesting phrasing that that
he's alleged to have used, which is, hey, those tapes
(21:46):
I mentioned like, don't worry, we destroyed them.
Speaker 4 (21:49):
It's like, oh, sure you did.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
So, but it's a way of you know, mentioned bringing
them up. And of course I'm not threatening you. This
is crazy, right, I would never do such a thing.
Speaker 6 (22:00):
Well, it's kind of like it's actually kind of like
the Epstein Bill Gates email, which reportedly was you know,
it was about the woman that Bill Gates had an
affair with, like the professional poker player. I think she's
a professional poker player that Bill Gates had an affair with,
and Epstein basically sent Bill Gates an email being like, Hey,
I think he asked for like some type of payment
(22:24):
related to the not for like any sexual stuff, but
like just a scholarship something like that, just to let
Bill Gates know he knew about this woman with whom he.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Had an affair.
Speaker 4 (22:35):
Yes, exactly, you can't.
Speaker 6 (22:36):
And you know, is it a smoking gun. No, because
it's not Hey, I'm blackmailing you. I know you had
an affair, give me money for this, or it was
like he had some charitable thing he wanted money quote
unquote charitable thing he wanted Bill Gates to get money to.
Speaker 5 (22:52):
And so he's not saying blackmail. This is blackmail unless
you give me this money.
Speaker 4 (22:56):
He's just saying, hey, I know, I know, yeah, I
know about this thing.
Speaker 5 (23:00):
Many such cases, yeah, many such cases.
Speaker 4 (23:02):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
So and yeah, the part about the CIA is interesting too,
like because this was a bipartisan thing at the time
that the CIA and whether your Republican or Democrat were
and it was I think it was under Reagan that
they caught Pollard actually Jonathan Pollard's spy.
Speaker 4 (23:23):
They were absolutely.
Speaker 3 (23:27):
Committed to keeping him behind bars and not not releasing him.
And it was when when Obama led him out in
twenty fifteen, it was supposed like, you know, it's more
like parole. Like you, He's served like thirty years or whatever.
He's served like an enormous amount of sentence. Yeah, he's
still very active in politics. He's even he's even like
floated that he's going to run for Kannessen, you know,
(23:51):
under the Bengavie banner.
Speaker 6 (23:52):
Basically, what the It's just this, It is so crazy
how many like you can play six degrees of Monica
Lewinsky with the politics at any given moment, or six
degrees of like Clinton Lewinsky scandal at any given moment.
I mean, it's just it's it still affects so many
different things in so many ways.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Yeah, absolutely wild yep, really a moment. Yeah, crazy stuff, Yes, indeed.
All right, Next, we're going to talk to Carolyn Feinstein,
that's right, who was the wife of the guy who
made the ice blocker. She worked for the UH basically
the trustee office inside the Department of Justice overseeing bank
like look basically as a bankruptcy fraud staffer, and she
(24:38):
was canned by the Department of Justice due to her
connection with her husband's ice blocker app.
Speaker 4 (24:44):
Let's talk to her about this. One of the.
Speaker 3 (24:48):
Things that the White House is most upset about is
a new app called ice block which allows people to
report ice agent sightings and then if you have that app,
you're going to get an alert if you within five
miles of one of these sightings. One of the odd
consequences of their fury at this app is that they
figured out that the wife of the app developer, Carolyn Feinstein,
(25:12):
worked for a division of the Department of Justice, and
they promptly fired her. So Carolyn Feinstein is joining us
now to talk about this DAGA and this app. Carolyn,
thanks so much for joining us. Can you start out
by letting us know what were you doing for the
Department of Justice.
Speaker 7 (25:33):
Well, thank you for having me With the Department of Justice.
Speaker 8 (25:36):
I was with a small program called the US Trustee Program,
and I was an auditor for them, where we looked
at fraud and abuse in the bankruptcy system. So my
job was to look at cases and see if there
were any places where they were not following the bankruptcy
rules and follow up on that.
Speaker 6 (25:57):
Okay, and so help us understand a little bit the
timeline as it pertains to you leaving that job over
the last couple of weeks, so your husband develops the
ice block app. At one point you disclose that you're
getting death threats and the like to your employer, to
(26:18):
the Department of Justice, and this all culminates in you
being fired, being asked to leave.
Speaker 5 (26:25):
Tell us basically what happened.
Speaker 8 (26:27):
Sure, about three weeks ago, my husband, Joshua Aaron, was
dxed and they released our personal address.
Speaker 7 (26:36):
Confidential information.
Speaker 8 (26:38):
So I preemptively contacted the Department of Justice stating, hey,
there may be a threat here. I wanted to protect
the department as much as I could.
Speaker 7 (26:49):
And after that, this was just this.
Speaker 8 (26:53):
Past week, Laura Lumer ducted me individually on x and.
Speaker 7 (27:01):
That was on Wednesday or Thursday. By Thursday, Laura.
Speaker 8 (27:06):
Lumer, according to Tom Homan on a different news channel,
had contacted him and he had contacted the Department of
Justice about me. This was Friday then that I received
an email out of nowhere stating that my employment with
the Department of Justice was terminated, effective immediately.
Speaker 7 (27:30):
But here's the thing about that. I wasn't just terminated.
Speaker 8 (27:33):
I was targeted, and I was targeted because of Joshua's
involvement with the app.
Speaker 6 (27:39):
And as you say, it was the distinction between terminated
and targeted.
Speaker 8 (27:44):
Terminated could be for any reason under the sun that
is justifiable by the department or the government as a whole. Targeted,
in my opinion is that I was sought out to
be terminated because of the actions of my steps.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
And I think that that probably true. So let me
ask it this way. And I don't want to sound insensitive.
It seems like and I don't want to read into
your own mind, but from your from your husband's perspective,
Johshon's perspective, this this White House is utterly out of
control and is engaging in, you know, actions that are
(28:23):
deeply harmful to the community, such that he would design
this app to protect people against the agents of this
very government. If if that's and I believe I agree
with him, like I.
Speaker 4 (28:36):
Think that his analysis is correct.
Speaker 3 (28:38):
But if that's the analysis going to that same government
and saying, hey, FYI, my husband, you know, did this,
did this app, and now we're getting threats. Just wanted
to let you know so that you can be aware
of my work schedule, and perhaps do something to protect me.
U feels naive, like this is the government that is
(29:00):
doing the thing that your husband clearly believes is wrong
and evil, Like why, what would wouldn't you expect that
same government then to be like, oh, you're married to him,
well you're fired.
Speaker 8 (29:15):
I understand that sentiment, but I also have experienced and
strongly believe our government is full of incredible, dedicated people.
And when I worked for the US Trustee program, part
of our mission describes transparency. We advocate for transparency from debtors,
(29:36):
from creditors, from anyone involved. So as a part of
that program, I want to practice what I preach, and
so that's why I preemptively went to them. I also
knew that I could go to that program, and as
far as I was aware at the.
Speaker 7 (29:50):
Time these statements, that I was telling them they were
going to protect me.
Speaker 8 (29:54):
There may be different factions, different portions of the administration
that just things differently, But the people I've directly encountered
within the federal government as a whole have been dedicated,
just all around quality people. So no, I wouldn't have
expected that from the people I've encountered directly.
Speaker 5 (30:16):
And you also explain this.
Speaker 6 (30:18):
I think you have minority shares in the company that
holds the IP address for the app, and tell us
about just tell us to what extent you may have
had a financial stake in ice Block and then what
your communication was with the DOJ about that.
Speaker 7 (30:35):
So this brings up a good point.
Speaker 8 (30:38):
One thing I'd like to mention is that when I
received determination of a termination of employment letter, the reasons
in that letter stated lack of candor during an internal inquiry,
and that just in lay terms, is lying vio mission
or leaving something out. Those reasons differed from the prepared
(30:59):
statement Department of Justice released to the press, which included
describing my relationship to the company that you're stating a
minority share that had been previously disclosed to them, and
then it also insinuated that somehow that relationship endangered the
lives of ice officers and threatened law enforcement. So which
(31:23):
is it? Why was I fired? Because those are two
separate reasons.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
So yeah, basically, what the d DOJ is saying publicly
is that you didn't That's what they're alluding to, that
you didn't disclose that you had this minority share in
the LLC that operates this. So you're saying that you did,
and when did you disclose that to them?
Speaker 8 (31:43):
Right that I wouldn't be able to cite an exact date.
I can just say in the past it has been disclosed.
Speaker 3 (31:50):
And so so if they had said, okay, well you
did disclose it. Now you actually are a minority shareholder
of an app that is intended to disrupt law enforcement,
would that have been a justifiable reason for them to say, all,
you're fired.
Speaker 7 (32:14):
To begin with that minority share.
Speaker 8 (32:15):
By the way, part of my position with the US
Trustee was to investigate companies just to make sure everything's
on the up and up. And as you're probably familiar,
charters incorporation documents, that's a good twenty second search.
Speaker 7 (32:29):
With the Secretary of State.
Speaker 8 (32:31):
At any time, in addition to my prior disclosure, they
had the ability to check with the State of Texas
and pull those documents, say okay, here's the minority share
that was never concealed.
Speaker 7 (32:43):
As for.
Speaker 8 (32:46):
Equating that to endangering law enforcement, endangering the people that
are part of the government that I proudly worked for,
I would never put those individuals or those pro in danger,
nor did I have the ability to my work with
the US Trustee Department was absolutely separate from anything involving
(33:09):
immigration or immigration enforcement. I didn't have access to their files,
I didn't have knowledge of their operations.
Speaker 7 (33:17):
I had no way to be involved in that.
Speaker 6 (33:20):
And what is so like your general response, because this
is and you just made this point as well, you
said it is insulting to me because I dedicated myself
in my career to serving the people of the United States,
and now the DJ is claiming I was attempting to
harm some of them, and that's not true. There has
been some targeting of ICE agents. So what is your
response to the argument that an app like ice Block,
(33:42):
and being at least a minority shareholder in a company
that holds the iphs all of that, what is your
response to the argument that this does make it easier
for anybody who wants to harmon ice officer to harmon
ice officer.
Speaker 8 (33:56):
Well, just to reiterate, I am not involved with the
ice block app, but as a citizen, as someone who you.
Speaker 7 (34:04):
Know may encounter ice or other situations.
Speaker 8 (34:09):
This this ice Block app, as it's stated on their
website and in the app, the intent is to inform,
not obstruct the other applications that are similar like ways
could serve the same function. So the apps themselves do
not endanger anyone. People's actions, people's patients, and people's understanding
(34:35):
of what's going on with ICE operations is what could
change a situation.
Speaker 4 (34:41):
Is there any revenue coming from this app?
Speaker 7 (34:44):
Not a penny?
Speaker 8 (34:46):
Joshua Aaron does not want to profit from people's suffering,
so he does not accept any funds.
Speaker 7 (34:54):
For this app.
Speaker 4 (34:55):
How much does it cost to run?
Speaker 6 (34:56):
Like?
Speaker 4 (34:56):
Is it an app like this fairly simple?
Speaker 3 (34:58):
Or is there is it now so widely use that
there's some significant amount of kind of like cloud costs
or whatever else is associated with running something like this.
Speaker 4 (35:07):
Do you have any sense there.
Speaker 7 (35:09):
Are costs involved? But I don't know what they are.
Speaker 3 (35:12):
And do you regret like agreeing to be a minority
shareholder on it? I mean, like I said, I'm somebody
that thinks that this app is good and we're a
free country and if somebody wants to let their neighbor
know that they saw an ICE agent down the street,
they should be able to do that.
Speaker 4 (35:30):
But given what happened, was that a mistake?
Speaker 8 (35:34):
No? This company that I hold a minority interest in
was formed years ago, and the purpose of it was
actually to develop a healthcare application that's.
Speaker 7 (35:44):
Still in the works.
Speaker 8 (35:45):
When the ice clock app was developed and released, Apple
requires a developer account, and the company already had a
developer account with Apple, so that was used basically to
save costs and out of convenienced you.
Speaker 3 (36:00):
Did you know, not to cause a argument at home,
but did you know when God registered it that he
used the LLC that you were affiliated with?
Speaker 7 (36:12):
I believe I was aware of that.
Speaker 3 (36:15):
Yeah, okay, because my wife and I actually share an LLC,
and I could imagine me going and just setting something
up using it and her later being.
Speaker 4 (36:24):
Like, wait, you did what.
Speaker 5 (36:27):
I'm fired.
Speaker 7 (36:28):
You're probably familiar.
Speaker 3 (36:30):
Then.
Speaker 8 (36:30):
Part of the reason that I'd just taken ownership a
small piece of that company is should anything unfortunately happen
to Joshua, I have the ability to wind down operations,
to close up shop without you know, involving more paperworking courts.
Speaker 4 (36:45):
Right, Yeah, I mean that's basically what we've got going
on too. Yeah. But anyway, so.
Speaker 3 (36:53):
He probably told you you're not you don't quite remember.
Speaker 7 (36:57):
You are trying to start an argument?
Speaker 5 (36:59):
Is it's messy?
Speaker 4 (37:01):
I got it? Got it?
Speaker 3 (37:03):
Well, that argument already happened. If it happened, what's what's
next for you?
Speaker 7 (37:09):
Bigger and better things. I am just exploring what those
things will be right now.
Speaker 3 (37:15):
All right, Well, keep it, keep us updated. And the
app seems like it's gating and gating in popularity, so
I guess, and this probably only brings it more attention.
And you know, Lumer's lumor probably boosted it by doing that.
Speaker 4 (37:34):
I would think, what do you think.
Speaker 8 (37:36):
The last I heard, there were almost a million users,
So that really sounds like ever a crowdsourced app, it
can really be put to good use in the community.
Speaker 4 (37:45):
Right well, Carolyn, thanks so much for joining us. Really
appreciate it.
Speaker 7 (37:49):
Thank you for having me.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
Got it.
Speaker 3 (37:52):
Not the biggest deal here, But what do you think
did he tell her that he was using the family
I'll see.
Speaker 6 (38:00):
I'm more interested in when she told the Department of
Justice that she had a minority share in the LLBA.
Speaker 5 (38:06):
I think is a pretty big question.
Speaker 6 (38:08):
Not that I'm aspiring her either way, yeah, yeah, yeah.
And to be honest, like I think, at the end
of the day, if your boss, even if your boss
is wrong, if your boss says we think this app
is harming our ability to do our work. It seems
inevitable that that's going to happen.
Speaker 5 (38:27):
Now, whether the.
Speaker 6 (38:27):
App in and of itself is good or bad, I'm
honestly have two minds done. Pisco asked me the other
day about Alligator Alcatraz, and it's the same thing with
some of this stuff, Like, I'm up two minds about it,
because on the one hand, not having enough detention centers
is what created so much trafficking from cartels through Mexico
because we stopped detaining people while they were waiting asylum and.
Speaker 5 (38:50):
All of that same thing.
Speaker 6 (38:52):
These Ice guys walking around not identifying themselves, in playing clothes,
grabbing ramissa os turk off the street, like this stuff
is incredibly disturbing. Then you have to do some of
it because there are actually criminals. So it just I'm
sort of split on the app itself, but it seems
obvious that there was going to be a termination in
(39:13):
this case the.
Speaker 3 (39:14):
Other disturbing element. And before we go, we can put
up E two here. This is you know footage that's
gone you know megaviral of an Ice Ice detention center,
like you know, surreptitiously recorded people living for extremely long
stretches in these you know, this is not where somebody
goes for like an hour and then its processed somewhere else.
(39:35):
Like people are like living like basically on top of
each other inside of inside of these makeshift detention camps.
Speaker 6 (39:43):
And not having to do that under the Biden administration,
a Bomb administration, and first Trump administration, not having to
do that is what made so it's so attractive for
that time period that people would come over and claim
asylum because if you have to do that, you don't
have such a an e the opportunity, and first like
this affects people who have legitimate asylum claims, like the
(40:05):
Venezuelan barber who was fleeing communism and ended up in Seacott.
Speaker 5 (40:08):
Like it's it's it's messed up.
Speaker 3 (40:11):
A lot of countries, you know, managed to control their
immigration policies without resorting to that though, I mean, or
this alligator alcatraz Or.
Speaker 5 (40:19):
It's so like, I mean a lot of countries don't
have the volume that we have.
Speaker 6 (40:24):
But yeah, anyway, anyway, way, yeah, it's everything these days.
You can't we can't have nice things anymore in this country, right,
I guess not.
Speaker 5 (40:34):
We can't have competent anything.
Speaker 4 (40:36):
Anyway, good luck to Carolyn, Good luck to Marty.
Speaker 5 (40:41):
Marty was super interesting. You've known him a.
Speaker 3 (40:43):
While, yeah, going back to hof posts since, yes, since
before he was I think yeah, before he was put
in prison.
Speaker 5 (40:52):
Interesting.
Speaker 6 (40:52):
Yeah, well it was. It was super fascinating. So we'll
stay on that story, of course, and Ryan you back
this week. We're doing Friday.
Speaker 4 (41:00):
Uh, I'm if he.
Speaker 3 (41:02):
My wife's getting surgery related to getting report taken out,
so we'll just see when that surgery is.
Speaker 4 (41:09):
But I hope to hope to be able to join
Speaker 6 (41:11):
Played by your best Sosius to Ohazon, and we will
see you back here soon
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.