7/25/2025: BREAKING: Ghislaine Meets DOJ For Potential Epstein PARDON as Gaza STARVES

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):
Welcome everyone to our Friday show, joined today by producer Griffin. Griffin,
thanks for jumping on the stream.

Speaker 4 (00:37):
Yes, hello. The inmates are now running the asylum here
on the Friday Show Breaking Points, and the asylum cameras
are missing a couple minutes. So if I disappear, I
was not depressed, I was not suicidal, check into Emily.

Speaker 3 (00:54):
You forget. The guards are also sleep.

Speaker 4 (00:57):
The guards are sleep the cell doors. Who knows what
seal I'm in, But we're here. We're excited. We've got
a huge show for you. Guys, this morning, what do
we got Yes.

Speaker 3 (01:09):
Yeah, So this morning we have just a flurry of
new Epstein details that have come out in the last
twenty four hours, both in the Wall Street Journal, the
New York Times, and some new video clips from Republicans
weighing in on what's going on with Galline Maxwell. We
have details on Gallaine Maxwell's conversations with a Deputy Attorney

(01:29):
General Todd Blant yesterday, so you're not going to want
to miss that. We are also going to dive into
what seems to be a broken dam when it comes
to the hunger situation in Gaza and the American media's
coverage of it and the American rights ability to reckon
with exactly what's happening over there. So lots and lots

(01:51):
of details, lots of coverage to analyze and break down. Now,
as a reminder, these Friday shows we pay well the
second half of premium subscribe, and that's a way for
us to go behind the paywall and talking greater depth,
even longer about some interesting topics. So, for example, I

(02:11):
was on the what will likely be infamous tour of
the Federal Reserve Building yesterday as part of the White
House press pool where Donald Trumps yes and yes they
were and they donned hard hats and had some intimate moments.
But also I got a question into Trump about why

(02:33):
he doesn't just fire Jerome Pile. Jerome Powell is wrecking
the economy. So we will go behind the scenes on
all of that. And we have an interesting new clip
of Joe Rogan weighing in on Hunter Biden and maybe
the potential political future of Hunter Biden, which is something
that Griffin has been supporting for a long time. Griffin
is a long time Hunter. You bought the dip on Hunter.

Speaker 4 (02:59):
I bought the dip early, and you know, I've always
been you know, people call me a Biden dead ender,
but I was like, no, but not for Joe. It's
Hunter all the way. So I'm really excited for the
upcoming uh Rogan Hunter episode because I'm excited to learn
about all sorts of new drugs that I can create
from home because I'm tired of buying them from guys.

(03:20):
So really excited about all that. And we got a
little bit of South Park and to decide if we'll
play that in the first half or the second half,
based on if Paramount will demonetize us for playing them.
So we'll kind of play that by ear, but we
don't have to merge.

Speaker 3 (03:35):
We don't have to merge with with paramount. Uh So
we're okay, actually just going yeah, we don't have to
suck up to them at all. But actually Donald Trump react.
We also have Trump reacting to south Park. So official White.

Speaker 4 (03:51):
House statements, Official White House statements to south Park. We
are so back, Trey and Matt Patriots, Patriots. Let's get
to the first patriot, Bill Clinton.

Speaker 3 (04:04):
Let's do it, Bill Clinton. This is interesting for a
number of different reasons, and maybe Griffin, you can pull
this up by break it down a little bit. So
the Wall Street Journal last week, you may remember, I
think it was even last Thursday. So again, ahead of
our preparation for the Friday Show, the Wall Street Journal
dropped this big story about how Donald Trump wrote a

(04:25):
strange letter slash poem in a birthday book for Jeffrey
Epstein's fiftieth birthday that was organized by Gallaine Maxwell. And
the journal did not publish this picture that was like
a sketch of a naked woman's body and then text
inside of it, which was a poem. Everyone knows about
this by now journal dumps it last week Trump administration says, hey,

(04:50):
you haven't given it to us. You haven't given the
picture to us, And people who are skeptical said the
same thing, like, it is a little weird that they
didn't publish the picture itself. If they have the picture,
published the picture it too.

Speaker 4 (05:03):
It was too sexy, too sexy to print.

Speaker 3 (05:06):
Too sexy to print, too sexy to print. That's yeah,
that's Tailor's all this time. But that was It was
a little strange when that first happened. But but the
Trump administration challenged the journal to produce it, and now
it appears that what the journal is doing is basically

(05:28):
I don't know if a warning shots is the right
way to put it, because I don't think there's any
sort of like intentional strategic warning. But they're publishing more
and more details from the book, including this latest detail,
which is that Bill Clinton had a letter in the
birthday book and this is from the Times. They confirmed it.

(05:48):
They have this picture of it and again a very
very nice letter from Bill Clinton. Griffin. Can you make
out the text on that?

Speaker 4 (05:56):
So this one, to me is this is a Gislaine
or a Clinton one's.

Speaker 3 (06:02):
You can that is I think you're right. That is
the Galain note.

Speaker 4 (06:11):
That's the Gallayne one. Let's see if we got the
other one here?

Speaker 3 (06:14):
Yeah, you can. You can see at the bottom. But
so here's the Clinton text of the letter, so that
nobody has to try to read cursive.

Speaker 4 (06:23):
Yeah, pull that up.

Speaker 3 (06:24):
It's reassuring, isn't it to have lasted as long across
all the years of learning and knowing adventures and in
brackets the Wall Street Journal says ineligible word and also
to have your childlike curiosity, the drive to make a difference,
and the solace of friends. Griffin, what are you making?

Speaker 4 (06:43):
Wow? Another friendship? I would say not as romantic as
the Trump note. This one felt a little bit more
like a collegial right, you know. This one didn't really
feel as flowery in the language, I mean, unfortunate. There's
stuff like childlike, which is just not something that you

(07:03):
want to see in a letter to a pedophile. That's
not great. But it didn't seem to have as many
sort of knowing kind of hints or nudges. But yes,
Clinton was on Jeffrey Epstein's flight what thirty million times
and a big elephant in the room probably a reason
why the Democrats have not jumped as hard as they

(07:26):
could on this story. I mean I have seen, like Nancy,
they're jumping.

Speaker 3 (07:30):
Pretty hard you think, so, oh yeah, I mean I
think they're I just think they're doing it incompetently. Like
Hockeen Jefferies the other day saying, say, oh my gosh.
He was he was trying to dunk on Republicans over
Epstein and said something like, yet this is not something
that Democrats were ever focused on the process of dunking

(07:53):
on Republicans. He was like, yeah, we just kind of
said the quiet part out loud, which is not a
good It's not a good dunk. It's not a clean dunk.

Speaker 4 (08:03):
Keen Jeffries on every subject just seems to be like
wildly like offline or something. He just like, I haven't
heard about that. I'm gonna look into that, like that's
what used to do, Okay, so it's vintage. Yeah, So
I don't know, like now we're getting into Clinton stuff.

(08:23):
I do think that, like you know, this kind of
stuff does help the Wall Street Journal because they're showing
it's not just all about Trump. They've got letters from
all sorts of people like, which I think makes the
reality of this book seem more real. What's your sense
of it? Does this validate the existence of the book more?

Speaker 3 (08:42):
Yeah? Well, yes, this is they have so much in
this story. So they have Leon Black, they have a
note for Leon Black. And I have to say, part
of what's just so weird about these letters it is
how I mean Clinton talking about the solace of friends,
like what's song was provided to him by Jeffrey Epstein
in two thousand and three. I would I would love

(09:04):
to know, and I would love to know the adventures
that he says he's had long he's had with Jeffrey Epstein.
But the way that all of these men are writing
such flowery, like the intimate, seeming notes to their buddy,
it just goes to show. I mean, some of it

(09:26):
is probably sucking up because they want donations. For example,
this is Leon Black blonde, red or brunette, spread out
geographically with this net of fish, jeff Snow, the Old
Man and the Sea. It was signed love and Kisses, Leon,
Love and Kisses.

Speaker 4 (09:48):
I mean, the worst part for me is the hair
colors up top. That's that's just yeah. And these these
I mean, you know, there's a lot of a lot
of a lot of funny stuff around the hand lane
and the fumbles and the cover up, but we can't
always forget like in between the laughs. This is like
one of the most disgusting like bring it's like, uh,

(10:09):
you know, an alleged pedophile ring of like an elites.
It's it's one of the worst things you can do
as a person. And just to see them kind of
like gloat kind of openly and kind of you know,
kind of be proud almost of this like open secret
is Yeah, it's just frankly really disgusting. So yeah, I mean,
what's what's so is your take? Do you think this

(10:31):
book is like fully real?

Speaker 5 (10:32):
Now?

Speaker 4 (10:32):
Because I think it's fully real, I still think that
they should release the whole thing, Like we should see
the cover of it. We should see the full book,
you know.

Speaker 3 (10:42):
So here's here's where we might not or here's where
we get clues about what the journal actually has its
hands on. So we should also mention Peter Mandelsson, who
is the ambassador, the UK ambassador of the US is
in the book referring to Epstein as quote my best pal.
It was known that Mandelson had some connection to Epstein
that they were friendly, if not friends, But here you have.

(11:04):
Of course, he is the current ambassador to the US,
and he's there referring Tosin as quote unquote my best pale. Now,
the journal says several digital copies of the album have
been created. Pages have been reviewed by Justice Department officials
who investigated Jeffrey Epstein and Maxwell years ago. According to
people familiar with the matter, the album is part of

(11:26):
Epstein's estate. It's unclear if any of the pages of
the album are part of the Trump administration's recent review
of the Epstein case files Now they also add Brad Edwards,
a lawyer who rapped more than two hundred of Epstein's victims,
said on MSNBC Wednesday evening that he has multiple clients
who remember the birthday book. Jeffrey Epstein's brother, Mark Epstein
told the Journal that he recalls Maxwell putting together the

(11:48):
book for his brother's birthday, and the album included a
note from Mark Epstein. So what sounds like here is
that there are digital copies of this birthday out. That's
what the journal says, And it sounds the journal saying
that sounds like they haven't seen the original but they've
seen the digital copies that and they say pages have

(12:11):
been reviewed by just department officials who investigated epscene in
Maxwell years ago, according to people familiar with that with
the matter, and it's part of Epstein's estate. So what
that sounds like it is the sourcing is people who
looked at it a long time ago or took or
they reviewed it a long time ago and still have
a digital copy because they used to work at the

(12:33):
Justice Department and they are now leaking because they no
longer work at the Justice Department. But that's also that's
also quite odds. That's strange, to be honest. So all
of this is weird. I think it's it's weird for
different reasons, but it's not weird because it's fake. At
this point, when the original letter came out, that of

(12:57):
Trump with the naked woman and all of that, it
seemed like a pretty sloppily done report from the Journal
because they were rushing to get it to print. They
didn't want Rupert Murdoch to pick up the phone and
say I'm killing the story, which is partially why that
leaked over to Oliver Darcy at the time to kind
of force their hand and publishing it. But with that story,

(13:19):
it was a little bit like, what if somebody forged
this and tossed it into the files? So many people
have looked at the files over the years. What if
someone did do that? I didn't order.

Speaker 4 (13:30):
I also heard some I guess theories that it maybe
even just laying just wrote it and then like signed it,
you know, like because it was so kind of flowery,
like who knows what these books? You know, like this
could have all just been done by a handler or
something like that. It was another theory.

Speaker 3 (13:47):
Yeah, And you just never know when you have so
many files that have been flipped through by so many
different people, and then you have a denial, which of
course Trump is going to deny it. So if if
you have a denial and then you have sort of
sketchy sourcing and you don't know the full chain of custody, yeah,
I mean it could. I mean I do think part

(14:10):
of the reason that the Trump administration felt so confident
coming out swinging against the Journal and actually filing in
a lawsuit is that the text of the letter. We
can all say a lot of things about Donald Trump
Griffin that are are you know, across the spectrum from
compliment to insult. But it didn't sound like him. It

(14:32):
was all just it sounded out of character for him
in a way. The women's body doesn't seem out of character,
but the it was just a weird, weird story. But
I think what we're learning is that the journal has
its hands and I think what they're signaling is that
they have their hands on, if not the full book,
pretty damn close to.

Speaker 4 (14:52):
The full book, absolutely. And you know, so, speaking of files,
there's a ton of other file stories happening. We've got
right here. The New York Times reports of the Justice
Department has over one hundred thousand pages of materials related
to mister Epstein, who died in prison six years ago.
During the inquiry, Justice Department officials diverted hundreds of FBI

(15:14):
employees and federal prosecutors from their regular duties to go
through the documents at least four times, including one s
to flag any references to mister Trump and other prominent figures.
And you know, some of what I've been hearing from
the Department of Justice since then is that, well, there's
a lot of stuff in there, but there still is
no client list. So we weren't lying there isn't a

(15:36):
specific page of this of the one hundred thousand documents
that says client lists title and then list them all.
But you know, the client list is maybe something a
little bit more like amorphous. It could just be details
scattered around all these documents. We don't know. So when
they say, oh, there's not really a client list in

(15:57):
these documents, that doesn't mean that there isn't a kind
of incriminating evidence about like a wide range of figures
that could be involved in these files. And I guess
you know it, the smartest thing for the Trump administration
to do in this moment would be to just you know,
shoot as many out as possible, redact the hell out
of them even if you want to, but like give

(16:18):
your base something in this moment. Uh so, But instead
Trump isn't doing any of that. He's just doing truth
social posts calling it a hoax Obama, uh you know,
shift all all those people. And that doesn't seem to
I don't know, tell me from the from the from
the magaside, is that helping? Is that? Is that diverting

(16:41):
the attention enough? Or or do they does he really
need to feed his base some raw meat some some
some redacted raw files here.

Speaker 3 (16:50):
Well, I think a bunch of different things can be true.
I think looking at Mago World, they are going to
and Crystals made this point, they are going to you know,
he's right about being able to shoot someone on Fifth
Avenue essentially, like you can molest someone on Fifth Avenue.
Hopefully not literally, but maybe literally. And the bass will

(17:11):
stick with Donald Trump. They may not be happy about
sticking with Donald Trump. They may be and this is
some there's probably some credence to the fact that this
is theem strategy. It may depress enthusiasm among the Magabas
for Trump. That doesn't mean they don't still stick with
Donald Trump because they always see him as the imperfect

(17:33):
like that's kind of been baked into it for a while,
that he's he's imperfect. He was part of the system.
That's what he campaigned ones. Yeah, he said I alone
can fix it because he was part of the system.
That was kind of his pitch. And so for them,
it's it seems to be a matter that it could
dampen enthusiasm. But I don't think anybody is like breaking

(17:55):
off and saying like we're now vance heads. I don't
I don't think that's exactly what's going to happen. But
I think what he really has to be concerned about
is the kind of Rogan demo. And that's an obvious point,
but that's sort of independence who look at this and
h on Andrew Schaltze's show. Sorry, I'm blanking on the

(18:15):
name of No No, Yeah, it was him. I think
now that you say that, he made a really interesting
point when they were talking with Ezra Klein. Actually he said,
for me, this is like the straw that breaks the
camel's back, and paraphrasing him like, this is for me
the last point about like him saying he's going to

(18:35):
do things and not doing them. This for me was
like the final straw, essentially, is what I was saying.
And I do think that's a good like indication that
people who were casual Trump voters vibe Trump voters for
good reasons. I don't mean that pejoratively, like they looked
around and said, like, this guy's better, and you know,

(18:55):
even if we don't agree with that, it's a way
that a lot of people make up their mind, and
it's I think for for that type of voter, this
is devastating for Trump, like that's I don't know how
big that part of the electorate is, but it was
big enough to swing. We've seen new gen Z poll
numbers that are hitting record lows amidst the Epstein scandal.
So it's not as though Maga is the problem here.

(19:20):
It's it's more the type of casual vibe Trump person.
I don't know, I.

Speaker 4 (19:25):
Doesn't think it's I think it's also young Maga, like
you know, young Sheldon, Like it's it's just like I
talk to people that are like my agent lower that
are you know, Maga people, and you know, they're upset
about Iran, they're upset about Israel, and then they're also
like just super you know, I mean upset. It's one word,

(19:45):
maybe embarrassed or they just find it cringe. Like it's
just it's not very energizing. I did want to go
back to the Democrats for a second because you mentioned
Ezra Kline the Schultz thing, and I, you know, I
mean like I said, like, yeah, Pelosi said like really
to Epstein files or whatever. Her Kim Jeffreys is like
I got to look into that. But like it does
seem like such a bag fumble for the Democrats to

(20:07):
not ride this, and I think Ezra Klein's sort of
response about the Epstein stuff on Andrew Schultz was really
revealing of the Democrats kind of like, I think, very
silly strategy with this, because you know, when asked about
the Epstein stuff, Ezra's like, oh, you know, I don't
I'm not really into conspiracy theories. But is it an

(20:27):
embarrassing how Trump's admin is handling this? And that's not
enough to suck up these people that are you know,
that are upset. You could be pulling over more independence
by going, you know, really fire and brimstone on this
and not being And I think the Democrats kind of
have this sense of, oh, we're better than this, We're

(20:49):
not QAnon or whatever, but you don't have to be
QAnon to make some of these basic connections in this
case where a bunch of people are recorded hanging out
with them on these flights go into the island, and
I'm sorry, but like, that's that's just not quanon, that's
just doing any kind of basic research on the subject.

(21:11):
What do we got here, Democrats?

Speaker 3 (21:13):
I pulled up the Democrats Twitter feed because this is
something I think maybe they learned from Zora Mamdani is
that they have to silo their messaging, and when you're
talking to reporters, print reporters in Congress, like how King
Jeffreys was, it's sort of different than when you're trying
to message on Twitter, which should have been an obvious point.
You probably didn't need Zoron to teach you that, but
I've seen them doing it way more now. So just
as we were speaking Griffin, they put out this little

(21:35):
video that says new don't let Republicans bury the truth
about Trump and Epstein. Watch our latest ad now live
in twelve GOP held house districts. Call your representatives. The
ad says, over that infamous footage of Jeffrey Epstein at
mar A Lago with Donald Trump, Republicans shutdown Congress to
bury the truth. Call your reps. Demand they release the
Epstein files. So they are now running this in red districts,

(21:57):
GOP held house districts. And then if you keep scrolling
down they are meming Epstein files, it's over. Then they
have summer ly on the Epstein files. Then they have
this is just from like the last twelve hours, Ken Martin,
don't forget that House Republican skipped out of town, a

(22:18):
block votes on the Epstein files. Then they created this
little meme Griffin Pedophile Protect the Republic.

Speaker 4 (22:25):
The starting to get some juice. They're starting to get
some as the kids say.

Speaker 3 (22:29):
Motion, it's all about It's all about Epstein. Here's the one.
Right after that, you do the math on Glenn Maxwell.
They say, then the Pedophile Protection Party set down Congress
because they know Trump's in the Epstein files. They keep
rocking the Summer Lee clip. Here's another one, another post,
Another Ken Martin posts on Epstein. Another Summer Lee post

(22:50):
on Epstein. Another Epstein post. They have literally been posting
almost entirely about Epstein. Granted this is just on X
and I think Gryffin that you are right that there
is this among the sort of it's a problem for
Democrats actually that the commentary, the commentariat, the chattering class

(23:10):
is actually so liberal in a sense, like it it
bites them in the ass every now and then because
they think they are too good. I agree with you, right,
they've minimized, they've minimized and downplayed it. And they would
look at those dem meme posts and be like, that's
kind of icky, like that these read like magat Twitter,

(23:31):
And that's actually that tells me that whoever over there
is over there doing this for the DNC is like
on the digital beat, is actually doing a great job
right now, because that's how you like get back into
the demo that you're going for it now. Doesn't mean
that it's not cynical, doesn't mean that it's a matter

(23:51):
of great principle.

Speaker 4 (23:53):
But I think you're right they sense blood in the water.
That's interesting.

Speaker 3 (23:57):
Yeah, of course, yes, absolutely, And I think you're right there.
They feel as though the sort of chattering class has
spent so much time downplaying the story as the QAnon
fever swamp that it's very difficult for them to now
reckon with the potential ramifications because they're on the record
over and over again and even like on the cocktail

(24:18):
party circle with their friends being like nothing nothing to see.

Speaker 4 (24:23):
Yeah, I mean this is not comment pizza, okay, Like
this is something far more substantial than that. But I
think it all gets lumped together and like the same
attitudes or whatever. But I mean, listen, the Trump has
lost the QAnon shaman. This this whole you know, Pizzagate
q Andon coalition like is breaking. Maybe you're maybe they're

(24:47):
too good for their votes. I guess, you know, as
reclient maybe needs to get on the on the Democrat
Twitter account beat because I think that like, yeah, summerly
some Democrat congressmen like, but they don't have that presence,
that Internet presence. It's a really like yeah, the Democrat
Twitter account. If you're following it, you're already like very

(25:07):
locked in. But I think like they need real vocal,
like on camera leadership stuff like grilling about this constantly
if they're going to like own the subject and not
kind of be bystanders to the event. But anyways, good
full Democrats Twitter account.

Speaker 3 (25:25):
And let's just while we're on the New York Times article,
I do want to kind of dissect the sourcing and
some of the information that they're revealing here the picture
that they're painting, because this is the most I think complete,
This is the most complete picture of what's been happening
at the DJ and the FBI over the course the
Trump administration related to Epstein that we've seen so far.

(25:48):
So the Times reports that over the spring, FBI Doojay
made quote an all out push involving hundreds of employees
to scour the Epstein files. With a single goal in mind,
find something, anything, that could be released to the public
to satisfy the mounting clamor from the angry legions of
President Trump's supporters. So what we get from that is
actually the New York Times reporting that there is this

(26:10):
quote all out effort with hundreds of employees scouring the
Epstein files. Now they imply that it's being directed very cynically,
And I think this is important because that likely goes
back to Pampondi as the Attorney General, saying that all
you have to do is find something that will satisfy

(26:32):
the public. Now, the Times continues, after devoting countless hours
to the project, working at times around the clock, searching databases,
hard drives, network drives, cabinets, desks, and closets. The Bureau
and the Department finally acknowledged this month that they had
little to show for their efforts. And then Griffin You
noted they came to realize that there was no client list.

(26:53):
But also, let's keep going here. They say this captive
for Antic scrambled to Swart more than one hundred thousand
pages of materials. One hundred thousand pages of materials we
now know because of this New York Times report that
the Justice Department has more than one hundred thousand pages
of materials related to Jeffrey Epstein and that they, according

(27:15):
to Times, diverted hundreds of FBI employees and federal prosecutors
from their regular documents to go through duties to go
through the documents at least four times. And they say
including wants to flag any references to mister Trump and
other prominent figures. And just finally, I want to point
out that the Times of sourcing this is interesting with

(27:36):
the Wall Street Journal sourcing that we were just discussing.
They say details of the review were based on accounts
by three former FBI and Justice Department officials who spoke
on the condition of anonymity because of fears of retaliation.
So Griffin, this is really important because it tells us
at this point that where some of these leaks may
be coming from to the Journal and the Times, people
who were at the DOJ at the FBI during the

(27:59):
Try administration and who are no longer there. You can
think about people like, for example, what was her name,
Danielle Sassoon, who has now taken a job with the
Manhattan Institute. She sort of quit in protest over whether
or not the administration was following court orders early on.
You could I have no idea if she's involved in this,

(28:21):
but you can think about a person like that who
would have knowledge of what was happening, may be getting
at secondhand though. I mean that's another thing is if
they left, how much do they know about the inside?
We can't make conclusions about the sourcing other than that
it sounds likely it's disgruntled people who have left during
the Trump administration, right, that doesn't Yeah, but to me, it's.

Speaker 4 (28:44):
Like one hundred thousand documents, one hundred thousand like that
is that is the volume alone is incredibly incriminating, not
just on Epstein but on the Department of Justice, who's
had these for how long, like in multiple administrations at
this point that you know, yeah, obviously we can poke
a lot of fun at what's going on with the
Troad administration, but just the idea that they've had like

(29:05):
what must be terabytes of documents that just like we're
just collecting dust until someone wanted to talk about it
again or there was enough pressure, Like I think just
the volume itself is so is such an indictment of
I think both parties that none of this stuff had
been released in any in any kind of redacted form,

(29:26):
and there just seemed to be oh, just, I guess
no one really cares about this kind of like like
Trump said, kind of boring, kind of boring stuff. I
guess I'm boring. But you know, we do have more
material news, But did you have anything more than New
York Times.

Speaker 3 (29:39):
I just wanted to add quickly that it's worth noting
because we're hearing now from people that there's all of
these one hundred thousand pages, you know, only it's like
a needle in a haystack, like maybe one line in
one of those one hundred thousand pages is your smoking
gun or is worth you know, just closing to the public.
But that's not how we should doing this. Like when

(30:01):
you get JFK files, for example, as they have been
shamefully dripped out over the years. Yeah, you get a
lot of boring documents. That's good because the boring documents
are coming out showing that you're just sort of getting
it all out to the public. And so no, it's
not good if you're only putting out the boring documents
intentionally to keep running out the clock. But nobody is

(30:25):
saying please refrain from releasing boring documents, because sometimes even
those boring documents, members of the public are able to
compare with the public record, are able to read something
deeper into that the government. You know, it's like, put
the boring documents out. We would all love to see
the boring documents, so long as of course they're not

(30:46):
ritraumatizing victims, and if they are mentioning different people, you
do have to be careful that they're not obviously incriminating
people whose names randomly pop up because someone you know
made or whatever. Like nobody's interested in a wild goose chase.
Like people just want justice. They want to understand why

(31:08):
Donald Trump and Bill Clinton we're in a birthday album
in two thousand and three for Jeffrey Epstein, and fortunately
people have are Unfortunately for them, people have filled in
the blanks for years, and not unreasonably so, with some
really disgusting theories, and they aren't disproving them unfortunately. So
at this point it's pretty clear that they don't have

(31:30):
a lot to do to disprove them.

Speaker 4 (31:34):
There's more document news here outside of the one hundred
thousand documents. Apparently Lady just Laine has a box of
material of her own. She was just met with Trump's
deputy attorney general. And We've got a little video right
here that I'll share.

Speaker 3 (31:54):
Yeah, her.

Speaker 6 (31:55):
This is video of Maxwell returning to prison just moments
after meeting with Trump's deputy attorney general. And you can
see her there actually if you look closely, she's carrying
a box of material. Maxwell attorney says she was forthcoming
with every question that Trump's team threw at her today.

Speaker 3 (32:11):
Okay, so Deputy Yeah, Deputy Eternal Attorney General Todd Blanche
was announced by Pam Bondi yesterday and he confirmed this
himself that he was going to meet with Gallaine Maxwell
in federal prison. And Blanche did meet with Gallaine Maxwell
indicated after that meeting that they are going to meet

(32:32):
again today, I believe, And Aaron Burnett rightfully pointed out
there on CNN Gallaine Maxwell was coming back from that
meeting ostensibly with a giant box. You could see her
like actually in the second clip that CNN rolled sort
of struggling with the weight of the box. That that's

(32:52):
quite interesting, that's quite and so.

Speaker 4 (32:55):
Is she keeping that in her cell? Like is she
like using it? As like a like a like a
prop up for her pill. Oh, like what is what
is the Why did you get to just have that
in her cell? Like? Can we can someone visit her
and see the box? Like what is I wasn't aware that,
like you could just have classified materials in your in
your prison cell.

Speaker 3 (33:14):
Well they may not be classified, they may just be
personal affects. And but that's very odd also to me
that you would have personal affects. What it could be
is that so Gallaine Maxwell's attorney also obviously has been
involved in this sole process. This is from a G.
Blanche who does say on the screen you see I
met with Glaie Maxwell, and I will continue my interview

(33:34):
of her tomorrow. The DJ will share additional information about
what we've learned at the appropriate time. So that means
they could be meeting literally as we speak here Griffin.
But what the box could have been supplied to Maxwell
by her attorney to whom she has given some of
these materials. And I think we have here, yes, we
have here a statement from Gallaine Maxwell's attorney, whose name

(33:56):
is Dave Marcus, on all of this. Put that up
on the screen. David Oscar Marcus, he says, looking forward
to another productive day tomorrow. Gallaine honestly answered every question
that a Deputy ag Blanche asked and she will continue
to do so. We are grateful that the government is
trying to uncover the truth. They have never before spoken
with her, and we trust the process. Yeah, now this

(34:23):
is getting interesting because well, first of all, the point
that the government has never done this. I mean, if
if that's the good that comes out of this Trump
administration circus, then I guess if we end up getting
more information out of this Trump administration circus because they've
fumbled the bag, looked ridiculous because Trump told them not

(34:45):
to put anything out, then I mean good, I guess.
But where this is going is, let's take a listen
here to Charlie.

Speaker 7 (34:55):
Kirk, they are in discussions with the federal government about
holding discussions. Maxwell's cour sentenced to twenty years in federal
prison for sex trafficking, but it's pursuing a claim that
her trial was unfair.

Speaker 4 (35:07):
Since she is still contesting her.

Speaker 7 (35:08):
Own case, that may impact what she is ready to
tell prosecutors. But maybe some kind of a deal could
be reached for information we will see.

Speaker 3 (35:17):
Okay, So that's Charlie Kirk saying maybe a deal could
be made in here. We also have Griffin representative Tim Burchett,
who has said all kinds of he's sort of known
for saying wacky stuff.

Speaker 4 (35:30):
He's a yapper.

Speaker 3 (35:32):
He's a yapper, he sure is. And I saw him
walking around the house last week with a skateboard, which
he may on skateboards. He makes his own skateboards. I
don't even know.

Speaker 4 (35:45):
We needed Tim Poole. Tim Burchett combo, Oh, they probably
already worked on it.

Speaker 3 (35:50):
Yeah, so yeah, he's been on this story. But also said,
you know, things like I also hang out with dirt bags,
like people hang out with dirt bags like me. I
think that's another thing he said yesterday. But here's we
said about there's.

Speaker 4 (36:04):
A difference between dirt bags and pedophiles. I'll say, you know,
we're all allowed to have a dirtbag. Fram, maybe not
a pedophile. Fram.

Speaker 3 (36:10):
Well, it's like a square. What is a ramas is
a square? But a square is number a rhombus. Soophile
is a dirt bag. Right, So here's here's burship.

Speaker 4 (36:21):
She is a liar and she's a dirt bag.

Speaker 8 (36:24):
And because the one thing we got holding over her
head is if we find out she lies, she goes
back to her original sentence, and that's that's looking at lifetime.

Speaker 4 (36:34):
And if she's looking at maybe.

Speaker 8 (36:36):
Parlay in this and the reducing her sentence, then we
could absolute leverage there.

Speaker 3 (36:40):
Okay, So Griffin, Yeah, there's you know, all of that
sounds in theory, fine, because that's the normal process here.
That's how oftentimes you get bombshell type information that helps
you better understand and pursue justice. In the case of Epstein,
for example, Epstein himself, for example in The Victims, but

(37:03):
combined with the details about Donald Trump's friendship with Jeffrey Epstein,
combined with Donald Trump's j is history of obfuscating just
in the course of six months on Epstein, the possibility
that you end up with some type of deal struck

(37:24):
to exonerate Trump, while Clinton, for example, Yes, that is
a different story. So the idea of striking a deal
with Glene Maxwell now for her victims, uh and estein

(37:44):
Epstein's Victims probably sounds absolutely disgusting on its face. And
we don't know exactly what a deal would look like,
what kind of deal it would be. You know, does
she still spend life in prison. What does it look like.
I don't know, But the idea that politically the Republicans
could like just pardon Maxwell and get away with it,

(38:08):
they can't. I mean that would take another level of
idiocy because people who are power hungry typically aren't quite
that dumb. But we'll see.

Speaker 4 (38:18):
And also, she was correct me if I'm wrong, already
criminally charged. That's the reason that she's like currently in jail.
So like you are essentially freeing someone who was criminally
charged for sex trafficking, for taking minors across state lines
or traveling them for the purposes of sex trafficking. So yeah,

(38:41):
it would seem like a little absurd to be like, well,
Trump's not Trump's not in it and refreeing just laying
maybe like they're talking about a reduced sentence. But I mean,
think about it from like just Laine's perspective, Like essentially,
your option is like to tell a certain truth to
get a limited rede sentence or to be freed that

(39:01):
doesn't implicate Trump or any of the Trump DOJ handling
or any of that, or you tell a truth that
implicates Trump and what so they're gonna be like, oh,
you were extra honest, so we're still gonna free you
or reduce your sentence now, Like of course that's not
gonna happen. So it doesn't seem like it seems like
no matter what comes from these just Laying testimonies or

(39:25):
interviews or questions, that it needs to all be very,
very heavily scrutinized and that we're probably only seeing a
small peak through the curtain. Even if some of the
stuff that she says does turn out to be true,
it's probably gonna be very partisanally directed in one direction.
And listen, like, I think taking anybody down Democrat, Republican,

(39:48):
inempeded or you know, not non political a you know, celebrities,
you know, a listers like I'm okay with basically anyone
going down is an improvement. But yeah, it's like it
really does seem like this is kind of starting to
be crafted in a way to protect Trump. But it

(40:09):
doesn't really seem like they've thought through the ending of
that story, because I don't think people that are upset
about the handling right now are going to feel good
about Jizz Laying getting any kind of reduced sentence. Like,
I don't think there's any ending to that story that
makes people happy.

Speaker 3 (40:27):
I'm so uncomfortable with the way you pronounce your name Griffin.

Speaker 4 (40:30):
Sorry, gizz Gizz Lane.

Speaker 3 (40:34):
You know Blaine, But even if it is just Lane,
you are so emphatic about the first half of the
word that's just it.

Speaker 4 (40:44):
I don't I don't want to be psychoanalyzed on this podcast.
I'm I'm doing my best with all the names today.

Speaker 3 (40:50):
We should we should, actually that is, we should do
an episode like the It's Always Sunny episode where they
get analyzed by Kerry Kenny Silver as I think called
the Gang gets analyzed. We should do that with the
Breaking Points crew.

Speaker 4 (41:04):
That can be in a Paywald second half of a
Friday show for sure.

Speaker 3 (41:07):
Oh it would have to be Paywald.

Speaker 4 (41:09):
Yeah. I do think though, that the MAGA commentators, the
people that are trying to take the smoke off of
Trump are flying very close to the sun with this
one we've got here from Newsmax describing Glaine as a victim.

Speaker 9 (41:26):
She's also been subpoened by the Oversight Committee. I think
this is great. I do have a feeling that she
has been She just might be a victim. She just
might be. There was a rusty judgment. There was a
lot of chaos there for a while.

Speaker 3 (41:44):
All Right.

Speaker 9 (41:45):
Granted she hung out with Jeffrey Epstein.

Speaker 4 (41:47):
Yeah, yeah, granted hung out.

Speaker 3 (41:50):
She procured the women. Granted, the women who have been
victimized have said that it was Gallaine Maxwell, who is
oftentimes either abusing them or procuring them for abuse. That aside,
she may also be a victim.

Speaker 4 (42:05):
Yeah, the hangout was limited, So not only are they
you know, I think this is just a huge, huge fumble,
because it's like, listen, if you're gonna be like questioning
her and suggesting a reduced sentence, you gotta still say
that she's bad, Like you can't be like, actually, this
whole thing might be wrong, like maybe everybody's innocent. This

(42:27):
was so rushed, So yeah, I do think that this
stuff may actually come around to potentially hurt them even
more unless the only antidote is just a mass dumb
of documents and yeah, you redact the hell out of
them or whatever, but like that is the only cure
to this, not like a rehabilitation of Maxwell.

Speaker 3 (42:51):
Glynne Maxwell. Well, if you start rehabilitating Glenn Maxwell, then yeah,
you lay the groundwork for potential I'm not saying Greg
Kelly is doing that. But if people in the MAGA
world start getting nudged by the Department of Justice to
rehabilitate Glenn Maxwell and saying, hey, hey, she was sort
of railroaded on this, this and that, and you start
seeing rhetoric like this, then yeah, it's it's definitely a sign.

(43:15):
I mean, Maxwell, if anything wasn't like, got off kind
of easy. So people can go revisit how she was prosecuted.
But the idea that she's a victim is like beyond
far fetched. I don't even sort of want to do
it justice now.

Speaker 4 (43:32):
Griffin, do you want to steal man that?

Speaker 3 (43:34):
I don't even feel the need to at this point,
But I'm sure we will get all kinds of steel
manning of that in the days to come before we
get to well, actually we might as well at this
point get to the south Park dust up and gen

(43:56):
z a little bit. Although I guess south Park is
sort of millennial code. I don't know. The zoomers, can
U the zoomers who are like Zoomer hipsters who watch
south Park can correct me in the comments. I'm sure
you will.

Speaker 4 (44:09):
Well, the zoomers are watching it in like thirty two
sections on TikTok okay, So we're not respecting their viewing habits.

Speaker 3 (44:17):
Yeah, it's like Quibi never died. Quibi will always do with.

Speaker 4 (44:20):
This whoa you know what Quebe was? That's a that's
a very deep cut.

Speaker 9 (44:24):
Oh I was.

Speaker 3 (44:25):
I was on Quibi screeners. I was watching Whoa. Yeah, yeah,
I used to be a culture writer, Griffin, lest you forget,
but yeah, lots of Well, basically I use the Quibi
screeners just to watch the Reno nine to one one
screeners and called it.

Speaker 4 (44:43):
Okay, all right, all right, you're actually you're a victim.
You're a victim.

Speaker 3 (44:50):
Well, thank you, thank you for acknowledging that. Finally, yah
south Park. Well, actually, let's just put a bow on
the Trump segment. This is both It's given them a
lot to work with, and it's given them so they're
damned if they do and damned if they don't. And
I just want to say that's that's kind of an
obvious point. But because of the nature of the Epstein case,
I think this is worth noting. It gives them a

(45:11):
huge advantage and a huge disadvantage. The huge advantage is
that this is sprawling. This case sprawls across industries, across decades,
and across like different crimes that have potentially been committed.
So what that means is like the Kennedy file. And
I think that's where this is heading. The Trump administration
and any other administration can come in and run out

(45:34):
the clock and keep pulling at threads here, threads there,
and say we're waiting, we're waiting, we're waiting. Okay, we
got what we wanted, wasn't enough here, so we're going
to go over here, We're going to go look at
those Treasury Department records, Okay, when we're going to go
talk to Maxwell in prison. And then you don't hear
from it, you don't hear much from it for a
few months, and then by the time the administration is over,

(45:56):
they've sort of gone through the motions of pulling on
these threads and we have gotten drips and drabs, And
I think that's probably what will happen. We will get
drips and drabs, and people who wanted drips and drabs
or wanted more information, we'll say, by the end of
the Trump administration, they gave us something. But of course
by giving you something, they've probably often hidden other things.

(46:18):
We're learning this right now with the Jonities file in
the Kennedy case, that you can disclose all kinds of
things and use those disclosures as good as the disclosure
is as a way to obfuscate. And so I think
that's where we're heading. I think it's an advantage for
the Trump administration that the case is so sprawling, and
for any political party Democrats as well, given the Clinton affiliations,

(46:39):
that they are not conveniently ignoring. But this is going
to be an advantage for the political class to just
run out the clock on the case until basically everybody
is dead, which is what's happening exactly what's happening with
the Kennedy case. So I think that's where this is interesting.

Speaker 4 (46:54):
Well. And then then my final bow is this statement
from Trump, who is feeling still very stressed out all this.
How Trump sees it. Trump has ruminated about the Epstein
fileout for weeks. They're gonna accuse me of some funny business,
he said recently in the Oval Office, according to a
Republican close to the White House who personally heard the
President make those comments. Trump again maintained his distance from

(47:16):
Epstein's criminal behavior but lamented they're gonna fuck me anyways,
So well, we'll see. We'll see who's getting fucked by
the end of this thing. Could be quite quite a
few people. But did we want to answer the.

Speaker 3 (47:32):
Answers answer to the public. Yes, let's move on to
South Park and South Park's war with a Trump administration.
Now we should be clear. At the top of this,
Griffin and I are going to play some of the
full video in the paywild section, So Breakingpoints dot Com
if you want to see that and get the second
half of these Friday shows. We're gonna roll the clip there,

(47:52):
but for copyright reasons obviously, But there are some poll
numbers that we're gonna talk about along with the Trump
administry war on South Park. So Griffin set this up
for us, and then we'll talk a little bit about
what's happening. Like this was happening in the White House
while I was in the briefigreove yesterday and the scuttle
butt was like it was one of those everybody it
was like, oh, they just bought out a statement on

(48:14):
south Park. So set us up for us.

Speaker 4 (48:18):
Yeah, So, I mean this is amidst of a one
point five billion dollar deal from Paramount to own all
of the South Park catalog and all of the future
episodes coming out, which is a massive media deal. And
Trey and Matt have done what is honestly the most

(48:39):
honorable thing to do as a comic, which is to
spit in the face of the money men and you know,
kind of stick there a nose that kind of everyone
by immediately taking that money and I actually don't even
know if that deal's even fully finished being inked yet,
but taking that deal and immediately going and essentially going

(49:01):
I was what I'm calling dark woke against Trump. We're
gonna We're gonna play I'm gonna just I'm gonna share
note out video and I'll describe it for the audio
listeners here what we're looking at. Miight's touch ended up
sharing some of the copyrighted version of this here. I
won't play the audio. But this is I think the

(49:22):
scene that upset people the most. If you're seeing this
on screen right now, you've seen this Emily yep.

Speaker 3 (49:28):
So uh.

Speaker 4 (49:29):
This is a AI video that ended the South Park
episode of Trump walking through the desert, taking off all
of his clothes, getting naked and then I'm not gonna
you know, I'm not gonna show this last part for
the YouTube sensors, but revealing his micro penis and then
his micro penis speaks and that's the end of the episode.

(49:55):
It's wow. It reminds me, you know, it reminded me
of like early resistance in twenty sixteen around Trump and this,
like you know, this, this the micro penis thing was
huge in twenty sixteen. I remember in La there was
this coffee shop that installed a naked Trump statue that showed,

(50:20):
and it was actually a big flare up and they
actually ended up taking the statue down and apologizing because
back then it was normal woke, and they're like, actually,
this is body shaming. This is wrong. He's he's we
don't like him, but it's wrong to be a body shamer.
But now in this Trump two era, now we're in
dark woke. Now, body shaming is back in a big way,

(50:42):
and we're allowed to be as as cruel and sort
of as as rude and as disgusting as the other
side because they deserve it.

Speaker 3 (50:50):
It will be really interesting if the death of cancel
culture makes DEM's attack on Trump more pot because cancel
Culture's over, Dems like actually get their mojo in attacking
Trump because they don't have to worry about body shaming

(51:11):
Donald Trump, like if it actually empowers uh, the attacks
on Trump. But that's actually a thing, by the way,
not that South Park was compliant with quote unquote wakeness,
but uh there there was just like a total chill
of obviously comedy on the left for the first Trump administration,

(51:31):
Like that's when all of this was building. So it
may be the case actually that this is a these
attacks on Trump are going to be a lot better. Honestly,
I kind of I'm not a South Park fan. That
probably won't surprise anybody, but I kind of expected butter
from the clips that I've seen, Like, am I wrong?
I don't know. I feel like there's more to the

(51:52):
diaper done micro penis stuff is so it feels like
it feels like so.

Speaker 4 (52:00):
It doesn't have substance, it feels like it's Yeah. I've
been like, yeah, well there's a few things about it
and kind of put a pin in that because I
do have a little bit more to say about like
the I guess the type of comedy they're doing with it,
But there was a lot of this did feel like
a big moment for the show because they'd refuse to
mention Trump before this. They had set up a different

(52:24):
character as a Trump stand in this like teacher at
the school. We like painted his face orange and he
was kind of the Trump standing because they feel like
they didn't want to just be like ripping on Trump
every week. They felt like it might be tired territory
because that's what the rest of the media was doing.
But it seems like now they're just like, you know what,
fuck it. If he's gonna be around for another four years,

(52:45):
you know, we might as well do it. And they
represented Trump in the show in sort of a very
sort of full circle way as what they used to
do for Saddam Hussang. So we're just gonna play with
no audio here, but for people who just listening, uh,
they're doing a full animated realization of like Trump's face,

(53:08):
but they're doing it in the style that they used
to do Saddam Who's sing And in the episode they
are like, oh, you know, the biggest I think substantial
critique the episode makes about Trump at all is that
Trump is acting like a Middle East dictator. Is essentially
what they say.

Speaker 3 (53:27):
Yeah, that's not a bad I mean that's actually more novel. Like, right,
he's guilt. He's like redecorating the Oval Office to look
like a Sagar Alway says, yeah, there you see him
in bed with Satan and yeah, we'll get into that
in the premium half. But he is like redecorating the
Oval Office to make it look like Aser, says Versalles.
But like as other people say Saddam's palace, that's that's

(53:50):
what it's giving. It's giving Saddam, and so that's I mean,
there's something to it, right, Like he loves being sort
of a I say, mob boss in a sense that
I don't know how much he would even disagree with it, right,
Like the Roy Kohane, I'm in charge, and I'm going
to actually act like I'm in charge, not like I'm

(54:12):
delegating all of my powers to the bureaucracy.

Speaker 4 (54:15):
But on the zero in the lawsuit part, they zero
in in south Park, on the oh, I'm going to
assue you, like they kind of make Trump's lawsuits to
be this like toy like I'm gonna sue you. They
they make the lawsuits and how Trump sues people to
be this kind of like essentially like bitch made kind
of way of acting. It's like, oh, like his main

(54:35):
thing is like whenever he doesn't like someone, he's gonna
sue them, and they're that's kind of like the main
critique of Trump in this Outside of like Middle East dictator,
there's really no talk of like immigration or any of
the other things that I guess liberals are upset about
with Trump. I mean, there's like a little bit about
like bombing or something like that, but essentially the episode

(54:56):
cuts to just sort of like a deeper character U
teak of Trump, that he is this Middle East dictator,
that he's very full of himself, and that he is
in bed with Satan, and that he sues people because
he is so insecure himself. And this all really triggered

(55:16):
the White House so much that the White House felt
like they had to give an official statement, which I'm
going to put on the screen here.

Speaker 3 (55:23):
They gave a statement to Rolling Stone, So Rolling Stone
reached out. Clearly, Rolling Stone reached out, and the White
House responded.

Speaker 4 (55:31):
And the White House said, through dried tears, the Left's
hypocrisy truly has no end. For years, they have come
after South Park for what they labeled as offensive content,
but suddenly they're praising the show. Just like the creators
of South Park, the Left has no authentic or original content,
which is why their popularity continues to hit record lows.

(55:54):
This show hasn't been relevant for over twenty years and
is hanging on by a thread with uninspired ideas in
a desperate attempt for attention. President Trump has delivered on
more promises in just six months than any other president
in our country's history, and no fourth rate show can
derail President Trump's hot streak. So you know, the best

(56:15):
way to tell people you're not mad is by giving
a very lengthy statement about why you're not mad.

Speaker 3 (56:23):
Yeah, that's a good point. So people found a don
Or tweet I'm pulling it up right now and old
Don Junior tweeting, I think this is when south Park
was yet here it is, this was him. This is
Don Junior responding back in twenty twenty three to South
Park going after what someone on Twitter said was quote

(56:46):
unquote woke Disney content. But here's Don Junior said, this
is the pull numbers on gen Z. We're gonna get
to that in a second. Sorry, we're sharing this one,
Don Jor. Ha ha ha ha ha as always part
do it all, Yeah, every ha, south Park doesn't miss

(57:08):
twenty twenty three.

Speaker 4 (57:10):
And you know, like in the White House statement, they're
like they refer to south Park as the left, whereas
south Park has always been known as more of this
like libertarian streak where they kind of like hit both
sides over the years. It does seem like and like
and I, you know, to give the White House some credit,
and not that they deserve any, but do it. I

(57:32):
will say, I will steal man their case and say
that I do think that South Park has evolved to
be a little bit more left liberal than sort of
snotty libertarian. Both sides are equally bad. They have done
big things like they've gone back and apologize for Man
Bear Pig saying that they actually think climate change is

(57:54):
a big problem and they were being too flipping about it.
They've they've done a few other things like that where
they're kind of like, you know, updating the way they
talk about these subjects because I think they feel like
probably a lot of other independence and libertarians that well this,
you know, maybe they felt ten fifteen years ago like

(58:14):
both sides were equally bad, but when they see this
Republican administration and action, they find themselves a far closer
identifying to the left than to the right, And I
do so. I do think it is fair to say
that South Park is a little bit more liberal than
it used to be.

Speaker 3 (58:32):
Yeah, I think that's actually a really good point in
many such cases, by the way, And I understand why
people have done that, because they don't want to have
any culpability for what they see with Trump as being
so beyond the pale. I get that. I mean, I
think a lot of people on the right have a
similar thing where they no longer want to give any

(58:52):
credence to the idea that, like the left might have
some points here and there, which is where you end
up with these like absurd partisan defenses of every breath
that Donald Trump takes. Instead of just kind of calling
balls and strikes even when he does something that is
like very non conservative, for example, you get conservatives kind
of This is where the Saddam critique is actually pretty good,

(59:15):
breathlessly defending him at every step of the way. So yeah,
I understand the argument, like you don't want to feel
like you have blood on your hands, so to speak,
for creating Trump, or like fueling trump Ism from their perspective,
It's the same thing with people.

Speaker 4 (59:32):
On the right.

Speaker 3 (59:34):
But it is just like kind of lame. I don't know, Griffin,
so okay to more of a if Sager were here,
If Sager were here, he'd be like shut the He'd
be like, shut up. They are the best that have
ever lived.

Speaker 4 (59:52):
Oh.

Speaker 3 (59:54):
Sager loves south Park nice. He said to us yesterday.
He was like, and I think I think Crystal does too.
I'm I'm not positive, but Sager was like, you don't
understand how how important they were during the Bush administration.

Speaker 4 (01:00:08):
I agree with that. I agree with that. Well, soccer
has a liberal media. Diet Sacer is a Harry Potter conservative.

Speaker 3 (01:00:15):
Harry Potter conservative.

Speaker 4 (01:00:16):
I love that.

Speaker 3 (01:00:17):
That's a great.

Speaker 4 (01:00:18):
Yeah, you know, it's like, you know, it's like there
he he loves media, And let's be honest, most media
is liberal leaning, Like I mean, like, you know, there's Yellowstone,
I guess there's I don't know some more like like
I don't know is Bosh republican conservative media like I
don't know, Like there's very few conservative directed blue bloods

(01:00:42):
land man. I mean that they're all from the same
time with uh yeah, but yeah, so there is always
been this lack of conservative art. I don't know if
that's because conservatives thought that like doing art was a
or like not not a great like profession or whatever.

(01:01:03):
Like I'm not really sure. Well I think it's I
think it's gay coded but in a good way. But
uh yeah, I mean I wanted to go back to
like the your critique of like the humor of South Park,
because I did kind of agree like that. It was like, okay,
so the jokes on Trump are like he has a
micro penis and he's gay for Satan, yeah, and and

(01:01:25):
it's like, okay, it's like it's kind of like an
old school way of like making fun of like a
like a politician or whatever. I don't know if I
needed South Park to have like a more substantive like
dismantling of like ice or or anything like that. And
in a certain way, it was kind of fun to
just kind of go at something more lobidinal with Trump

(01:01:46):
because they knew it would have it probably would upset
him more, and like it seemed like a lot of
the goal was to just upset him and to kind
of scare this media sphere that's afraid of lawsuits that's
been paying off Trump and and and very scared of
these lawsuits. So I think from a sort of a
meta comedy narrative perspective, I think it was the funniest

(01:02:09):
way to do it because it really did spit in
the face of Paramount and Trump at the same time,
which is kind of the best way to be a comedian,
to to kind of like give respect to no one
in power.

Speaker 3 (01:02:21):
Well, this is a I think an important point because
they obviously CBS made the Pairmount made a decision to
cancel its late show franchise, storied franchise in like the
history of American media, and a lot of people saw that.
And I don't want to disagree with, for example, stoler
Matt Stoller, who says, you know, it's all about the merger.

(01:02:43):
They want to, you know, give them with grease the
skids a little bit, tell the Trump administration they got
rid of Colbert and it'll help the Paramount to guidance merger.
I actually don't disagree that some of that may be
happening behind the scenes, that they're using it like it's
it is a financial decision. I think clearly it is
a financial decision because they're not just getting rid of
Colbert and trying to juice the ratings and get more

(01:03:04):
ad revenue. They're getting rid of the entire Late Show
and so, but that could be kind of juicing the right,
That could be juicing their caste right. They can use
that behind the scenes and be like, lit'ten we got
rid of Colbert, even if it wasn't really about that.
You can sort of toss it in there. It doesn't hurt,
I'm sure because Trump also put out a long post

(01:03:25):
on True Social about Colbert after Colbert lost the slot
to what we were making about how long the south
Park statement was. This stuff really does get under his skin.
But they do have this merger that the FCC, which
is now Brendan Carr was talking about the view potentially
being in trouble. He is reviewing like licensing. I think

(01:03:48):
it's it's mostly posturing, because it is true that the
government does have a job to make sure that people
are using their broadcast licenses quote unquote in the public interest.
That has been I mean, south Park is one of
the originals that challenged those you know back in the
day when Siger's talking about you know, the hits that

(01:04:09):
they were taking against the Bush administration, for example, in
a wartime period it was really edgy then to challenge
what you could put on cable television on TV.

Speaker 4 (01:04:21):
Yeah, yeah, we're constantly on the verge of being canceled
just for the proprocative material they put out.

Speaker 3 (01:04:27):
Yeah, right, which is why when you do it now.
And I actually feel very similarly about John Stuart and
Stephen Colbert, like it does lose the edge because we're
they were part of that, like as a testament to
their success, Like they numbed us to the edginess of
some of this. But if Paramount thought that Nixon Colbert
would help with the merger, that argument definitely doesn't make

(01:04:49):
sense because they knew this South Park shit was about
to drop.

Speaker 4 (01:04:53):
No, the thing is South Park makes their episodes in
four days, so there's no way Para, there's no way
Paramount knew the level of how hard they were about
to go with this episode that was most likely written
on Monday and Tuesday. Right, that's true.

Speaker 3 (01:05:06):
But they Park was coming out during the Trump.

Speaker 4 (01:05:09):
Sure, sure, yeah, but but they were like, well it's
not Trump. They like have kind of shifted it off
to this other character. So it's in safe territory, but
Matt and Trey decided to do something far funnier. So overall,
on a comedy critique level, on a meta comedy level,
I do think it's funny. I think it's funny to
ship on not just Trump, but on all these media
institutions that are scared of him. But uh, okay, we've

(01:05:32):
got some Donald Trump's approval among jims.

Speaker 3 (01:05:35):
Yeah, and let's get to Israel in one second.

Speaker 4 (01:05:38):
Just rap, we want to get to that as well
before we go to the second half. Just for just
a little touch on that for sure.

Speaker 3 (01:05:44):
Yep. And let's let's just wrap on this point though
about the vibes. So Trump was actually above water according
to this polling, which is from CBS, and you go
when he no, h no, when he took office, which
is for a republic president shocking. That's you know, we're
talking about eighteen twenty nine year olds. That's crazy for again,

(01:06:06):
a Republican president. He is now so underwater with gen
Z and that happened in six months. So this is
being connected in the media. The points also being connected
to the Epstein scandal. Morning Console has pulling on this too.
They put Trump's approval rating in an all time low
with gen Z seventy one percent disapproving of his job,

(01:06:28):
only twenty eight percent in the CBS poll approve of him,
and twenty four percent in the Morning consult Pro Pole
approve of him. And again, that is a hell of
a decline from when he was, I mean, he was
barely above water. This chart's really helpful, but you can
see here this is the U of CBS numbers. There's

(01:06:50):
a point where he's at fifty five percent with gen Z,
fifty five percent approval with gen Z that is now
at twenty eight percent and just forty five percent disapproval
with gen Z that's now it's seventy two percent. That
is a really I mean, that is a really really
sharp change. That's you don't see that often in political polling,

(01:07:11):
where something changes so dramatically so quickly. And the right
was using those numbers at the time to say this
is a new chapter, this is a vibe shift, this
is Trump doing the unthinkable for the culture and for
the right. But Griffin, that has actually all crumbled really
really quickly, and the vibes are I mean, the vibes

(01:07:32):
are the we talked about, how about gen Z votes
on economics and all of that. But I think this
is a pretty clear indication that Trump is not making
the argument successfully. If he thinks it's true that he's
delivered on his promises, he's not making that argument at all.

Speaker 4 (01:07:50):
Yeah, I mean for just for me, Like to me,
it just reads as you know, these these people, these
gen z conservatives, they seem to be a lot more
reachable if you're trying to convince them of a more
left liberal perspective, like, well, yeah, they're not conservative, it's
based on vibes. They're not. Really, they're not. They're majority
not driven by by like a religious faith. They're not

(01:08:14):
driven by like a neo con view of the world.
And Trump hasn't made the economy like much better for
them to notice in their own lives, they can't still
afford a house. Grocery prices I mean, I'm told they're
going down, they still seem really expensive to me personally.
So yeah, it doesn't seem like there is much for
them to get excited about. And you know, the like

(01:08:36):
I was at Fourth of July with some Maga patriots.
I did a little Maga Fourth of July and uh
Venice Beach, listen out there.

Speaker 3 (01:08:47):
Okay, no, No, California is a maga hub, absolutely.

Speaker 4 (01:08:51):
And you know, they were just low energy, kind of
depressed about the whole thing and just being like, ah,
just kind of feeling like they got burned Iran on Israel.
They even told me, you know, that they hated watching
these ice videos of some mom getting taken away, like
that wasn't what they were expecting. So I don't know,
just to say that these people are movable, these people

(01:09:15):
are not like a monolith that is gonna go along
with everything. I don't know what that means for Trump's term,
if that affects the midterms truly or not, because you know,
at the end of the day, you cannot like Trump,
but then you see whatever the next Kamala Harris is
and you don't like that either. So everyone has to
kind of make the devil's choice there. Do we want
to get to Israel before we jet over to the

(01:09:35):
second half? Yep?

Speaker 3 (01:09:36):
I was gonna say, that's the point you can hype.
You had a lot of disillusion lefties either stay home
or vote for Trump because he seemed like the lesser
of two evils. Actually, even on the Gaza question, not
a lot, not everyone but enough to swing probably in Michigan.
So the lesser of two evils has always benefited that
calculation has always benefitted Donald Trump. Griffin. We are now

(01:10:03):
awaiting really a response from the Trump administration that is
matching the tone of the public and even some people
on the right who are increasingly sounding the alarm about
the famine in Gaza.

Speaker 4 (01:10:19):
Yeah. I mean, it has been a twenty four hours
for sure on the topic where people from all over
that from the pro zionist crowd are starting to what
I would say, it's kind of cover your ass time,
where all of a sudden people are putting out statements
on the record saying, oh, actually, we don't like the

(01:10:42):
starvation policy here. And it's really alarming because we're seeing
people like Barry Wise, people from the Free Presence stuff
like that make statements which really, to me is a
sign that we are at a very dark point, potentially
a point of no return with this siege and starvation.

Speaker 3 (01:11:02):
So let's I'm gonna share this right now. Here's the
Free Press Barry Weiss, The Price of Flower shows the
growing hunger crisis in Gaza. Important report she points to
that was in the Free Press just yesterday so that
was the headline of the story The Price of Flower
shows the hunger cress a month ago. I'm sure if

(01:11:23):
I scrolled down, we'll see it in the mentions. Yeah, Griff,
and go ahead, this is what you're what I'm about.

Speaker 4 (01:11:29):
A month ago in the Free Press there was an
article that says, the Gaza famine myth less than like
thirty days ago. So everyone is kind of trying to
get out of this when it's far too late. I mean,
we're getting reports right now that I would say, there's
almost like what there's the majority of the population is

(01:11:52):
in now stage five of malnutrition and starvation. And what's
so dangerous about that stage is that's kind of the
point of no return. That's the point where even if
you are given food, even if you are finally given aid,
your body will be irrevocably changed, and that it's not

(01:12:14):
enough to ever recover from. And we're hearing that a
majority of the population is currently in that stage or
nearing that stage.

Speaker 3 (01:12:21):
And I was gonna say, don't take it from Lefty Griffin,
you can take it here from Javiv Retiger of the
Free Press. It was just obviously staunch defender of Israel,
the Israeli Left, Yes, so is Yeah, this is the
free press posting Israeli journalist havev retig Gur after twenty
two months of false and he's been on our show.

(01:12:42):
By the way, Ryan booked him and debated him a
bit a few months back. After twenty two months of
false or misleading reports in Western media, Gaza is now
actually approaching catastrophic levels of hunger. We are very close
to real, actual desperate hunger in Gaza. It's hard to
convince Israelis of that because literally everything's to them for
twenty two months on this topic has been a fiction.

(01:13:02):
We need to wake them up. Here's a little bit.

Speaker 10 (01:13:04):
From the major news reports about hunger over the last
twenty two months. Has been wrong, sometimes mistaken, sometimes brazen
and ridiculous. Line and when you hear a report about
hunger in Gaza, always wait forty eight hours.

Speaker 4 (01:13:19):
Just pin it, stick it.

Speaker 10 (01:13:21):
In your bookmarks and your browser, or print it out
and put it on your desk and come back to
it forty eight hours later and check if it's still true,
because most people turn out not to have been true.

Speaker 3 (01:13:30):
So Griffin, what we're getting from that is, basically it's
the media's fault. It's the left's fault for crying wolf right.
And what's I think important about that is, as somebody
on the right, one of the lines that you've heard
over and over again from the Israeli right and the

(01:13:52):
American right that basically takes talking points from the Israeli
right defers to the Israeli right over and over again.
Is that okay? So if people are hungering, Gauza, why
aren't they dying of starvation in drugs? And it's because
people were on the cusp. And that's always been the line.
People are on the cusp of starvation and death, and

(01:14:12):
you need to get food in. Now what's happened, correct
me if I'm wrong on this Griffin over the last
week or so more than a week, is that it stopped.
It actually stopped people. That's what everybody was warning about.
To the point that he's making there, those warnings were insufficient.
Now the food is not getting in and now people

(01:14:33):
are dying.

Speaker 4 (01:14:34):
Yeah, starvation deaths are in the hundreds.

Speaker 8 (01:14:36):
Now.

Speaker 4 (01:14:37):
You know, we were seeing starvations over the last six
to eight months, typically with children that were that had
healthy malis and things like that. But now We're seeing
people without health conditions starving to death. We're seeing pictures
of children that are just bones, babies that have trash

(01:14:58):
bags for diapers because there's nothing left, and they're just
skinning bones. And I think what frustrates me so much
about Haviev and these free press and all these people
coming in super late and saying, oh, well, it's been
so tough to talk about this subject because you know,
everyone's been crying wolf for two years saying they're starving.
But that's not how starvation works. You don't wait till

(01:15:21):
people are actually falling over and dying of starvation. To
prevent a starvation, you have to do it in the
early stages, or it becomes impossible to stop. It becomes
this large snowball. And we've got right here pulled up
an experience from a few kids. These are teenagers that

(01:15:44):
were abducted from the Gazza humanitarian sites and we're tortured.
You know what this person is saying, if you can't read,
if you're just listening on the podcast, is you know
a group of children. I believe that this manner here,
this child is like fourteen or fifteen. There were people
as young as like ten eleven twelve with him. They

(01:16:05):
were at one of these sites looking for aid. They
were taken by Israeli forces and held and tortured. They
were talked about being beat for hours with batons. They
would play loud music in their cells, so loud that
they couldn't think. They were forced to kneel for twenty
four hours at a time. They were in rooms that

(01:16:26):
were so hot they couldn't even breathe, And there were
even reports of IDF throwing stun grenades into the cells,
just tossing grenades into these cells to torture them. And
so imagine if you are someone who hasn't eaten in
two or three days, and you make this trek through

(01:16:48):
this long, dangerous path waiting for food desperately. People are
being shot around you, and then instead of getting any food,
you're kidnapped and tortured for weeks. I mean, I don't
know how anyone physically could survive something like that. Now
here we've got go for Emily.

Speaker 3 (01:17:07):
Well yeah, no, I was saying, the momentum on this
is shifting now. Amy Klobatar is obviously not a Republican,
but she is somebody who just a couple of weeks
ago was in that photo op with Benjamin Netanna, who
wasn't she Griffin and I got that too. Yeah, here
you have her. This is a quote from her yesterday.
Let me play a little bit of it.

Speaker 5 (01:17:25):
As one pediatric doctor, the leader of the ward at
Nasser Hospital in southern Gaza, said there is no one
in Gaza now outside the scope of famine, not even myself.
This is the pediatrician.

Speaker 3 (01:17:44):
So Clobatar goes on to say, a cute nutrician. Malnutrition
is rising. Hundreds of pastings have been killed in recent
weeks while seeking food, most in the vicinity of Gaza
Humanitarian Foundation distribution sites and others on the routes of
aid convoys. This is simply an acceptable and Griffin, actually,
the implication of what Aviv Retiger and Immi Klobachar are

(01:18:07):
doing here is that they were wrong. I mean, I'm
sure have you I mean have youv has actually been
talking about this a little bit longer than some other
people if you were listening closely, but I mean before
saying that everything else was disinformation, which is he's saying now,
of course there's there's some disinformation. There's some misinformation of course,

(01:18:30):
because this is political and that's what happens.

Speaker 4 (01:18:33):
And guess what, there's no reporters allowed in. There'd be
a lot more of the information type if they actually
let reporters in. But we're hirt, we're forced to just
hear from on the ground reports from journalists in Gaza
and whatever horror show videos we get on the side
of the GHF.

Speaker 3 (01:18:49):
But I do think that this is an implication that
people were wrong to say this is your you are
anti Semitic, or you are slam entering Israel, if you're
saying that they would do this, because that was actually
part of the defense, right that Israel is a Western,
civilized democracy that does not treat civilians this way, and

(01:19:15):
that is what you know the I feel like that's
actually been a sort of cornerstone of the defense. And
if you now say, but that's why, Griffin, then I
was hoping that you could explain some of this to
the audience because you follow this so closely. That's why
Now the line is basically, hey, it's the un Ryan

(01:19:36):
has a good job site.

Speaker 4 (01:19:39):
So so yeah, Ryan did a great job with this one.
So basically now they're saying, oh, it's like not us
that Israel's like, not the people who have been enacting
as siege for months where no aid has gotten in.
It's not us doing it. It's actually the U n
that are starving the goze. And essentially, through Ryan's reporting here,

(01:20:04):
what they find is that the reason why the UN
isn't bringing trucks in anymore is because every time they
bring a truck in, their truck gets shot at by
the Gaza humanitarian forces that you know, we're seeing reports
of you know, eighty people dead, ninety people dead, one
hundred and ten people dead every single day. And so

(01:20:26):
what's happening is UN truck workers are bringing trucks in
through these crossing points and then they're getting lit up.
They're sitting targets. They know every day people right outside
their truck are being shot. So their lives are like
being put directly in the line, and they literally are
The UN is expected right now to put their workers
in front of a firing squad essentially, and so that

(01:20:50):
is why the UN has slowed stuff. I mean, nothing
has been more destructive in the last three months than
this Gaza humanitarian and foundation thing. I mean, it's been
a explicit, I mean just kind of out and out open,
just killing field. And you know these people like Barry,

(01:21:12):
like Aviv, like all the other Hizbaris, and the Democrats too,
like Klobuchar, who are all saying this now when honestly,
it's fucking too late for a lot of these people.
A lot of these people are going to starve to
death in the next couple of days, and even getting
food might not be enough to save them at this
stage of malnutrition. They these people all smeared, Unra smeared,

(01:21:35):
all the other AID mechanisms that were getting food into
here that were doing it because they have processes that
actually work. But guess what happened. Unra's Hamas or the
world's central kitchen is just going to get their cars
triple tapped by IDF drone strikes. So and all of
that was actually okay and blood libel to report on,

(01:21:59):
according to these voices from before, it was anti semitic
to report on this stuff before.

Speaker 3 (01:22:06):
Well, and yeah, so let's take a look. This is
a point that's actually being made sort of implicitly here
by Barack Revide of Hexios, who says Israel will now
allow Arab countries to resume the air drops of food
into Gaza. This is a step that hasn't happened for
many months. It happened last year when the humanitarian situation
was extremely dire. Now here's the key line. And this

(01:22:29):
is just new reporting this morning, he says. At the
same time, Israeli officials continue to claim there is no
starvation in Gaza.

Speaker 4 (01:22:37):
Yeah, and I just you know, obviously Israel is what
seemingly in not just a pr but a cultural sort
of death spiral with this stuff. I mean, and I
guess I would just have to say to anyone who
is still not pro Israel is a really big umbrella.
But people who if you care about Israel, if you

(01:22:57):
care about Jewish people all around the world world being safe,
and and and and if you care about this rise
of anti Semitism sentiments, then moments like this are making
Jewish people around the world incredibly less safe and making
this future of the state of Israel greatly in question,

(01:23:20):
because you can't starve hundreds of thousands of people to
death and not have it backlash and come back to you.
So this these messages from from these people who helped
and allowed and created cover for Israel to create the
situation they're just trying to cover their asses right now.
But for you know, normal people, non commentators, people that

(01:23:43):
really care about this, that care about Jewish safety, this
has to stop. This has to stop now, or you're
putting just the future of you and other Jewish people
like and A in a great danger. And I just
think that it it's really it's really really scary, and
it has it has to stop. But there just seems

(01:24:05):
to be no line other than well, we're gonna get
some food in and then we're gonna keep bombing them again.
It's like, we can't bomb kids on an empty stomach.
We can bomb them on a full stomach, which was
the de facto position before the siege that started three
or four months ago. It was like, well, we're feeding them,
but we're still gonna keep bombing them. Every single day.

(01:24:26):
The bombs have continued. The food is gone, and it's
it's hell on earth, and it stains the Israel and
it stains the US, and it's made the whole world
unsafe because the sanctity of life itself is at risk.
The idea that we care about human life and that
the human life is precious and matters, all of that

(01:24:48):
is being thrown out the window, and that makes not
just Jewish people but everyone unsafe.

Speaker 3 (01:24:52):
Well to your point about Israel, it punctures what Israel
sees as it's I think it that's the credibility of
Israel's claim to being a important bedrock of Western civilization
in the Middle East, which is used to convince Western allies,
including the United States heavily, the United States, that they

(01:25:15):
are the bulwark against you know, all kinds of awful, inhumane,
barbarous behavior in the Middle East. This is something that
really if that's an important kind of founding myth to
the nation of Israel, and it's an important part of

(01:25:36):
the politics of the foreign policy. The credibility of that
is it's not at risk. It's gone when you see
this happening.

Speaker 4 (01:25:46):
Yeah, and you know, it's been two years of horror show,
but we are at a new low. And I just
think that people need to protest, get back out into
the streets and let any and you know, and hold
anyone that had anything to do with this in American
politics accountable and essentially, you know, just make sure this

(01:26:07):
never can happen again to anyone else, like actually really
never again.

Speaker 3 (01:26:11):
So yes, So I was gonna say, Griffin, we have
some more political updates on this, so France recognizing Palcidian
state and the ceasefire talks basically ending, and I think
we should move to the paywall section of the show
the second half of the show and where we'll cover that.
We will then Injex some levity to the best we

(01:26:31):
possibly can into everyone's weekend with some reactions to longer
South Park clips, and then we have a clip of
Joe Rogan talking about Hunter Biden that you are definitely
not going to want to miss because it's interesting in
all kinds of different ways. So again to see the
rest of the episode, details on the ceasefire and then

(01:26:52):
of course Rogan on Hunter Biden. Go ahead and head
over to Breakingpoints dot com, get a premium subscription, and
we'll see you over there.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

The Breakfast Club

Crime Junkie

.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;}7/25/2025: BREAKING: Ghislaine Meets DOJ For Potential Epstein PARDON as Gaza STARVES

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;}Dateline NBC

The Breakfast Club

Crime Junkie

All Episodes

7/25/2025: BREAKING: Ghislaine Meets DOJ For Potential Epstein PARDON as Gaza STARVES

Dateline NBC