9/3/25: Trump Threatens Chicago Takeover, Venezuela Ship Blown Up, Tariff Refunds & MORE!

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 (00:33):
All right, good morning and welcome to Breaking Points. Happy Wednesday, Emily,
How you doing doing great?

Speaker 4 (00:38):
How about you?

Speaker 3 (00:39):
Very good. We've got a packed show today. We're going
to talk to Lieutenant Colonel retired Anthony Aguilar later today.
He's in Washington, DC. It's actually going to be disrupting
a Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Don't tell anybody, but check
that out. That'll be at ten am. Right, that's kind
of fun. It's kind of our secret.

Speaker 4 (01:00):
We got him before. It's going to head to Capitol Hill.

Speaker 3 (01:02):
By the time this airs, it will have already.

Speaker 4 (01:04):
Happened, right, But he has some really important perspective to
share ahead of that about recent updates, and.

Speaker 3 (01:10):
It's the enforced disappearances that is was accused of effectuating
through the guys A Humanitarian Foundation and also his recent
concert conversations with the ICC. He also told me that
the USAID and the State Department Internal Investigators have reached
out to him, So you know, while he is working

(01:32):
the while he's speaking publicly, he's also speaking directly to
whatever authorities will listen about the crimes that he's witnessed.

Speaker 4 (01:41):
The scrappy remnant of USAID.

Speaker 3 (01:43):
Apparently there's still some people with like Wi Fi access
at USAID in their probeinginess interesting.

Speaker 4 (01:51):
We're also going to start today with some clips. I
feel like, actually I was thinking about this earlier, Ryan.
The amount of times that we have opened up a
show by saying the President had a truly wild press
conference escday has to be in the like dozens of anymore.

Speaker 3 (02:07):
It's just called a Trump press conference at this point.

Speaker 4 (02:09):
Right, Although it's absolutely accurate that he did have a
truly by other standards banas press conference yesterday where he
was confronted with video evidence that he had died responded
to that, so you're not gonna want to miss this block. Also,
as usual, he also addressed some very important questions, whether
it's what's happening in Ukraine or what's happening here at home.

(02:32):
So we're going to.

Speaker 3 (02:32):
Bring launching a war in the Caribbean YEP against fishing boats.

Speaker 4 (02:36):
Yeah, well, yes we are. We will discuss all of that,
and we have video of the strike that the government
is putting out, so we'll get into that. Also, we
will have updates on whether or not companies are going
to get tariff refunds from the United States government, which
is an actual question on the table right now. So

(02:57):
market's reacting a little bit to some of Trump's comments
yes about those tariffs and what might be coming. So
we have a lot to get into with that major
Jeffrey Epstein victim press conference happening on Capitol Hill today.
There was a big document dump just yesterday. We have
some details on how legitimate or compelling any of that

(03:19):
evidences and what you can expect to see here in
Washington today as Rocanna and Thomas Massey assemble this press
conference of victims to get that discharge petition which is
right now hanging in the balances, So whether they'll get
enough republicans they need six, whether they'll get enough Republicans
to sign that discharge petition and compel the release of

(03:42):
additional documents.

Speaker 3 (03:43):
Yeah, and then we're going to take a look at
the unrest in Southeast Asia. Malaysia, the Philippines, and Indonesia
all seeing significant protests. Each one of them has their
own unique characteristics, but all of them kind of related
to corruption and people fed up at the way that
their governments and their elites are ripping them off.

Speaker 4 (04:05):
And we'll also be joined by Pam Bailey, right, Ryan, Yeah, I.

Speaker 3 (04:08):
Think that is that an extra? Is that going to
be part of the show.

Speaker 4 (04:10):
It's in the last block here.

Speaker 3 (04:12):
So Pam Bailey and others put together a book called
We Are Not Numbers, which is a collection of essays
and poems, pieces of literature by by Palestinians about their
experience not just in the last two years, but also
you know, leading leading up to it as well, and
that book rolled out this week.

Speaker 4 (04:33):
All right, Well, looking forward to hearing from Pam Bailey.
Let's dive into our a bloc, which is this winding
press conference that Donald Trump conducted yesterday where he made
this announcement that Space Force Command Center was being moved
from Colorado to Huntsville, Alabama, and had a collection of
Senators Cabinet members assembled behind him, and of course took

(04:57):
many many questions from the press, including the questions on
whether or not he was actually alive. If you missed
the fever speculation over Labor Day weekend, then you probably
weren't on TikTok or acts or Instagram, because ran it
was absolutely everywhere. There seemed to be a genuine contingent
of I guess you could say bluing on that was
pretty convinced there was something odd going on with the president,

(05:19):
and there was. There's always something odd, but that's what
I was just gonna say. In fact, there have been
obvious signs that Donald Trump is aging. The bruises on
his hands, he had the swollen ankles, you know, in July,
the White House mentioned that he'd been diagnosed with the
benign condition that caused the swelling of the ankles. And

(05:40):
then for Donald Trump to not have public events scheduled
for three days is always strange, even if it's the
slowest week of the entire year. In Washington, d C.
Which is Labor Day week, but granted that is what
it was. And Trump appears to be very much alive,
as he confirmed for everyone in front of the cameras yesterday. Ryan,
let's put let's roll a one here.

Speaker 3 (06:01):
How did you find.

Speaker 5 (06:02):
Out over the weekend that you were dead?

Speaker 6 (06:06):
You see that it's sort of crazy.

Speaker 7 (06:09):
But last week I did numerous news conferences, all successful.

Speaker 6 (06:12):
They went very well, like this is going very well.

Speaker 7 (06:15):
And then I didn't do any for two days and
they said there must be something wrong with him.

Speaker 6 (06:21):
Biden wouldn't do him for months.

Speaker 7 (06:23):
You wouldn't see him, and nobody ever said there was
ever anything wrong with him, and we know he wasn't.

Speaker 6 (06:28):
The greatest of shape.

Speaker 7 (06:29):
I did numerous shows and also did a number of
truths long trus so I think pretty poignant truth now.

Speaker 6 (06:36):
I was very active over the weekend.

Speaker 8 (06:38):
There is a video that is circulating online now of
the White House where a window is open to the
residence upstairs and somebody has thrown a big bag out
the window.

Speaker 9 (06:48):
Have you seen this?

Speaker 7 (06:49):
No, that's probably AI generally so I actually you can't
open the windows, you know why. They're all heavily armored
in bulletproof a fake video. What's got to be because
I know every window up there, number one they're sealed,
and number two, each window weighs about six hundred pounds.

Speaker 6 (07:07):
You have to be pretty strong to open them up. No,
that has to be. Where was the window?

Speaker 8 (07:11):
Let me shoe which is the window? It looks like
this is on the fifteenth Street side.

Speaker 3 (07:16):
I think right here.

Speaker 6 (07:19):
Yeah, those windows are sealed. Those windows are They're all sealed.
You can't open them. But also they create things. You know,
it works both ways.

Speaker 7 (07:27):
If something happens it's really bad, maybe I'll have to
just blame Ai.

Speaker 4 (07:31):
Okay, So if you're joining us as a podcast listener,
what you missed was Peter Deucy of Fox News within
that exchange was happening between the President and Doucy walked
up to the Presidential podium at Trump's request with his
phone and showed Donald Trump the video and Trump sort
of looked over like your grandparent at Thanksgiving, who you're
showing a very funny meme to, and said, it's a

(07:53):
if anything goes wrong, blame Ai. Ryan.

Speaker 3 (07:57):
Let's add that as in post as vo people can
see if they haven't seen it, the like the video
and side the White House is already commented on it
and said like, it's not Ai like Trump is confused
on this.

Speaker 4 (08:09):
He might be because they are renovating the Lincoln Bedroom.
This was part of the reason the conspiracy theories should
have been halted by at least Friday, is that he
did this long interview with the Daily Caller, and the
reporter of their Reagan Reeves, who posted pictures with him,
said she talked to him for an hour, and in
the transcript you can hear him he gets up at
one point and shows her the renovations of the Rose

(08:31):
Garden and then says we should get her up to
see the Lincoln Bedroom at some point, which is why
he's just so. I mean, he's talking there about the windows,
and he says, I know every window up there. Of
course he knows every window up there, because he seems
to be extremely focused on the details of every renovation
that's happening at the White House. And we've seen since

(08:53):
some comments from sources and media reports that suggest this
is actually Donald Trump's something he sees as his legacy,
is like the Trumpian renovations to the White House. So
I thought the trash thing was legitimately weird and understand
you know why people spialed and went down the rabbit holes,
given his his bruising and everything else. But it was
obviously pretty by Friday, I think it was obviously a

(09:16):
little a little bit over the edge.

Speaker 3 (09:18):
Well he's alive. He's alive, and.

Speaker 4 (09:20):
He's posting the most poignant truths.

Speaker 3 (09:22):
And he's playing the very poignant truths. He thought they
were poignant. Anyway, I'm sure they were poignant. Yes, I
love that he thinks his truths are poignant. That's amazing.
He also announ said he's going into Chicago, So he's
going to do that. We've got we can roll that
next side of Chicago.

Speaker 6 (09:39):
Though, well we're going in.

Speaker 7 (09:41):
I didn't say when we're going in when you lose. Look,
I have an obligation. This isn't a political thing. Chicago
is a hellhole right now. Baltimore is a hellhole right now.
Parts of Los Angeles are terrible. If we didn't put
out the fires, and I mean the other fires, the
bullet fires, they didn't do a good job with they
should have had the water coming down. Like I said,

(10:02):
you know, we had to release the water. We had
to go in and release the water to LA.

Speaker 6 (10:07):
It's so badly run.

Speaker 8 (10:08):
Every one in March today in California ruled the deployment
of National Guard troops to Los Angeles was illegal. Do
you have any response?

Speaker 7 (10:16):
Well, it was a radical left judge, But very importantly,
what did you not tell me in that question or
statement that you made pretty much of.

Speaker 6 (10:25):
A statement I think response? No, No, you didn't say
what the judge said. Though. The judge said, but you can.

Speaker 7 (10:33):
Leave the three hundred people that you already have in place.

Speaker 6 (10:37):
They can continue to be in place. That's all we need.
But why didn't you put that as part of your statement?

Speaker 3 (10:42):
So he said he's going in Chicago, but doesn't know when,
So presumably it's going to happen, we don't know when.
What can we make of this the latest legal setback?

Speaker 4 (10:54):
Yeah, it's a good question because obviously what's happening in
DC is different than any other city, So whether it's
Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, completely different across the board
from DC and in LA. The justification is that the
National Guard was guarding federal property and federal agents, so

(11:16):
ICE agents and then also federal buildings, and that is
what the Trump administration now they can declare emergencies of
various kinds. That's something that was discussed in twenty twenty
and actually had been used before, if I'm remember in correctly,
Ryan right in the nineteen sixties that the National Guarden
sure had been brought in. And that was what the

(11:36):
Tom Cotton, the no infamous Tom Cotton at the New
York Times was talking about, is that there's some historic
precedent for doing that. But of course those are active
riots that were then trumped up to the legal standard
of insurrection in order to justify it.

Speaker 3 (11:50):
And they also brought the military and a bunch to
break up strikes in the nineteenth century.

Speaker 4 (11:55):
Oh, that's such an interesting point. Yes, and so there
are all kinds of ways that you can stretch, and
that's what was happening in Los Angeles, and it means
that the administration has to think about how that would
work in a place like Chicago. Are they just deploying
around federal buildings. Are they just going to be following

(12:17):
ice agents? I mean, this is a difficult or or
is there going to be some type of legal like
to your point, justification that there's an ongoing emergency. Obviously
that would be part of it. But is there something
that's going to say that the crime? What are they
going to use they have? They have different devices, so

(12:38):
it probably means that they have to look at another
tool in the toolkit.

Speaker 3 (12:41):
Legally, US they have to fight crime only around federal buildings.
Illinois Governor JB. Pritzker responded, thank you, but no thank you.
Here's Pritzkers's response.

Speaker 10 (12:52):
I'm aware that the President of the United States likes
to go on television and beg me to call and
ask him for troops. I find this extraordinarily strange, as
Chicago does not want troops on our streets. I also
have experienced asking the president for assistance just to have
the rug pulled out from underneath me. When execution meets reality,

(13:15):
I refuse to play a reality game show with Donald
Trump again. All those events required significant coordination between all
levels of government. Some, like the Democratic National Convention last year,
even required a limited deployment of the Illinois National Guard

(13:36):
for broad security purposes, including especially preventing terrorism.

Speaker 3 (13:41):
So Illinois lawmakers might not want it, but Morning Joe
lawmakers do. Let's roll a three.

Speaker 5 (13:48):
I actually think that JB.

Speaker 11 (13:49):
Printzker should do something radical I think you should pick
up the phone, call the president and say you now.
And I know you don't have the constitutional authority to
deploy the National Guard here and to police my my.
You can do that in DC, you can't do that
in Chicago. But let's partner up. These are the most
dangerous parts of my state. We would love to figure

(14:13):
out how to have a partnership that's constitutional, that respects
the sort of balance of federalism between the federal government
and the state government, and let's work together to save lives.

Speaker 3 (14:27):
Was he proposing like a clear and hold strategy in Chicago.

Speaker 4 (14:30):
I mean, first of all, the stilts a melodramatic delivery
of Joe Scarborough when he says I'm going to propose
something radical, and it takes like a ten second pause.
But Brian, I let me say something radical. I know
it's not radical at all. It's actually a conventional, probably
wisdom of people like Joe Scarborough, although in this case
I'm not convinced it's entirely wrong. The Chiron on that

(14:53):
morning Joe segment was fifty four people shot, at least
seven killed in Chicago. I think there probably is is
a middle ground. It's not to say that Donald Trump
would be eager to compromise with JB. Pritzker, But I
think JB. Pritzker's political instincts here are way off, unless
what he's doing is just to position himself for a

(15:14):
twenty twenty eight primary, in which case that's great because
you're building up goodwill with the sort of activist base
of the Democratic Party who absolutely wants resistance at all costs.
On the other hand, people of Illinois see Chicago as
being in like this rolling state of emergency for decades,
and I think not incorrectly so. And this is there

(15:38):
has to be a way for people like JB. Pritzker
to say, I'm taking this seriously, and you know, the
people of Chicago who are desperate for protection and some
order in different parts of the city that desperately need it.
You know, I'm not going to look like I'm blocking
all of that. I'm not going to look like I'm
because that's what Trump is doing. Trump is positioning them.

(15:58):
He's like boxing them in so that they look like
they're against taking this more seriously. And that's not exactly
what's happening. But on the politics of it, people in
Illinois are going to want to see like Chicago be
in some state of order. They might not like Donald Trump,
but then you're forcing them to choose between something they
don't like from Donald Trump and something they don't like

(16:19):
from JB. Pritzker. And a lot of people are going
to side with Trump and the Trump Pritzker. If Pritzker
looks like he's against taking crime in Chicago more seriously
and Trump looks like he's for taking crime in Chicago
more seriously, well.

Speaker 3 (16:32):
The reason I disagree with that is that I don't
think there's anybody who's persuadable who thinks that Trump sending
the National Guard into Chicago is actually going to do
anything about crime, even necessarily short term. If you send
a whole bunch of National guardsmen into a block, I

(16:53):
think while those guardsmen are on that block, you might
have less crime. You cannot occupy every single.

Speaker 4 (17:02):
Block, and you can't do it definitely either.

Speaker 3 (17:04):
It's not it's not a short term solution for the
whole city. It's it's not a medium or long term
solution period. And so what it is is just a
photo op and you know, cool optics for the MAGA
guys who want as MR videos of boots stomping through Chicago.

Speaker 4 (17:23):
I don't disagree with that, but I think for a
lot of people, I mean there were here in d
C when you know, local news was going around and
asking people about the federal takeover. There are people in
like Ward seven Ward eights and I'd love to see
the National I don't have Donald Trump, but i'd love
to see the National Guard actually come to the statehood
because we haven't seen them yet. So I don't necessarily
agree that. Maybe that's where we disagree on this. I

(17:44):
don't whether or not it's successful. I think there's an
appetite for whether it's a National Guard or some like
heightened enforcement among like average people. That's a different question
of whether or not it'll actually be successful. And that's
one of the big problems here in d C that
I'm already seeing is you have National Guard out and
then across the street. I mean, I just saw this

(18:04):
this weekend. You have people who are suffering from like addiction,
tweak outs on the street. They're not doing it, like
that's not what they're to do. And so yes, it's
it's obviously a very band aid type solution, and probably
the longer it goes on, Ryan the more the less
persuasive that is to the average person. Maybe it actually
works against Donald Trump if he deploys the National Guard

(18:25):
in Chicago in some way, because it becomes sort of
DC with the federal city status is different than Chicago
Los Angeles, it becomes more obvious that it's not actually
a long term solution.

Speaker 3 (18:39):
Right if he had if he even tried to present
a solution like I'm going to send these national federal officials,
whether it's Guard or eyes so whoever it is, into
the city, and here's how they're going to actually make
the situation better. Right, then I think he might at

(18:59):
least get a hearing from a decent number of people.
But he's not even trying that. He's just like, I'm
going to fix it. I'm going to send in the Guard,
right And I don't think anybody takes that seriously.

Speaker 4 (19:09):
Well, it's so this was the decision that Trump was
referring to. There was from actually Stephen Brier's brother out
in California who said that deploying to LA earlier in
the summer violated passe commentatus. So Trump then has to say,
on the one hand, the National Guard is restoring order,

(19:31):
and that he is not violating posse commitatus. And those
two things are really difficult legally to say are both
true at the same time unless you can find, like
we were talking about earlier, the quote loophole of I mean,
it's not really loophole, it's the Insurrection Act exists. There
are ways that you can do it. But Brier's ruling.

(19:51):
Briar's ruling bars the Pentagon from quote ordering, instructing, training,
or using the National Guard currently deployed in California or
in an or and any military tree here to for
deploying California from quote engaging and arrests, apprehension, searches, seizures,
security patrols, traffic control, crowd control, riot control, evidence collection, interrogation,
or acting as informants unless they have permission from Congress,

(20:13):
according to Politico, So obviously that's narrow. The language is
narrow to California, But looking to Chicago, the administration is
not going to be afraid to test that ruling and
see if they can get something like this up to
the Supreme Court.

Speaker 3 (20:26):
Probably, So let's move here to Venezuela, because I think
it's actually a good segue because rather than trying to
actually prevent crime. The Trump administration appears to be just
committing crimes. The you know, we sent down this naval armadas,
it's nuclear powered submarines to Venezuela. Saber rattled at Nicholas

(20:50):
Maduro put a Marco Rubio put a fifty million dollar
price on his head, so.

Speaker 4 (20:55):
You got have you seen your fifty million yet?

Speaker 3 (20:57):
I haven't seen my fifty million, saying that he's the
head of a narco trafficking operation. Then said that he
runs Trendy Arragua Venezuela, a US based gang.

Speaker 4 (21:09):
Which they designated as a foreign terrorist organization. So this
is how they're bringing Maduro. This is how they're going
to justify it. We don't know yet, it's still early,
but they does need trend To Ragua a foreign terrorist organization.
And then they sanctioned something called the Cartel of the
Suns and say that Maduro is They say that Cartel
of the Suns is providing material support to Trendo Iragua
and that Maduro controls Cartel of the Suns, which has

(21:30):
been sanctioned. So this is how they're building the justification YEA.

Speaker 3 (21:32):
And in order to get to that, they needed the
intelligence community to say that this was not a total
figment of our imagination. Intelligence community put out a report saying, sorry,
this is a figment of your imagination. He does not
run Trendy Iragua. This is false. Those people were then
fired by Tulsea Gabbard for producing a report that did

(21:54):
not align with the outcome that the Trump administration wanted.
She then put people in place who would write the
report that she wanted written to say that Trenda a
rog was actually this foreign terrorist organization is under the
control of Meduro, which just use your common sense. If
you are a government, do you need gangs? Like if

(22:19):
Robbie Swabe were here, he would tell you what is
a government is It is a gang that has evolved
into having a monopoly over violence. If you are the
government you are a basically regulated, empowered gang already. You
don't then go and create new gangs like that's that's

(22:42):
not in general how these things work. You create paramilitary organizations.

Speaker 4 (22:49):
I think Contra create JASA organization.

Speaker 3 (22:53):
Yeah, so anyway, according to that I see American intelligence community,
this was bogus. Fired, those people got a new report
said that actually, yes, Maduro does run. Tryd to Iragua. Now,
the other problem for the administration's rationale here is trendy
Iragua is not primarily a or even in the main

(23:15):
a narco trafficking operation, like that's not their thing or
some of their people involved in it some ways. Sure,
but that's crucial to understanding what they did yesterday. So
let let's roll. What's the first one that we have here? Oh,
so this is the administration released this a little dinghy

(23:35):
rolling through the Caribbean. The laws of the sea here.

Speaker 4 (23:39):
Just getting lit up. If you're listening to this, yes.

Speaker 3 (23:42):
Would say that if you want to and there's people
getting burned alive, the laws of this see here would
say that if you believe that this is this ship
in international waters is doing something that you don't like,
as the Coastguard, US Navy, you can you can try
to intercept them, you can try to stop them. You
can't blow them out of the water without warning. You

(24:04):
can't blow them out of the water. If they're not
a threat to you, you're obligated to try to stop
them and board them. And if if you think that
they're trafficking and drugs, then board the ship and seize
the drugs and interrogate the people, because again, use some
common sense here. If they're serious about rolling up a
drug trafficking operation, what's a better way to do it.

(24:28):
Do you seize the drugs, interrogate the people, ask them
where'd they get the drugs and roll it up that way?
Or do you use a fifty dollar missile to bomb
every fishing boat that you think might have some drugs
on it.

Speaker 4 (24:45):
That's good business for Lockeed, that's.

Speaker 3 (24:47):
Good business for Lockeed. Do you I don't know if
we have enough missiles, yeah, hit every single fishing boat
that may or may not have drugs on it.

Speaker 4 (24:58):
Yeah. Well, I mean that's really important point obviously, and Ryan,
you've covered this for years, but particularly in the Middle East,
and this is now in our hemisphere. And obviously there
were Cold War conflicts in some of these very places
where there were extra judicial killings and all of that
from the sort of fervent anti communists in America and
in some of these countries themselves. But we're getting support

(25:21):
and aid from America. But this high tech extra judicial
killing where we're not. I don't think it's confirmed whether
it was a drone or a helicopter, that type of strike,
and we can put this next element up on the screen.
This is from a Representative Kassar, who introduced an amendment
to the NDAA Pentagon Bill requiring Trump to follow the

(25:42):
Constitution and War Powers Act. As this person xput it
puts it. The amendment simply says that Congress must vote
before Trump sends our troops into danger in Venezuela as
required by law. So getting to the point as to
whether it's a drone or helicopter is actually important because
that indicates if it's a helic you have potentially people
in harm's way. These parlitary paramilitary cartel organization.

Speaker 3 (26:06):
Didn't look like that was a very dangerous dinghy no, but.

Speaker 4 (26:10):
You can see how that becomes. That spirals really quickly
into a protracted conflict in our hemisphere. And it doesn't
really behoove anyone, at least of all the people of
these countries to have such robust paramilitary organizations running so
much of the land in their countries. Like the war
that's happening right now in Sinaloa is like that, that's

(26:30):
land that is out of control of the Mexican government
and it's not that far from the American border. This
doesn't absolve the US of any of its role in
helping fuel the rise of.

Speaker 9 (26:39):
Some of these groups.

Speaker 4 (26:40):
One of the least discussed things, ever, is basically that
because of the Biden administration's immigration policy, every single person
was who crossed the border under Biden was pitching like
money in the cartel's pockets. And so they've exploded in
terms of their tech capabilities, not just because of that,
also because of fentanyl and other things, but they've exploded

(27:02):
in their capabilities, and they now do have some you know,
they have more drone capacity, all of that stuff, and
it's not just hawkish war mongering to say that they're
just like actually pretty well funded advanced paramilitary organizations that
now run swaths of their respective countries, and so to
then be doing questionable or operations with questionable legitimacy, I mean,

(27:28):
we'll take a look at the evidence, but given our
track record in the Middle East, I'm not optimistic that
this will come out looking like it was fully constitutional
legal use of force. Then you are genuinely risking what
seems like the Trump administration wants, which is some type
of all out military conflict with these paramlitary terry groups,

(27:49):
which will mean that Americans die, right, And.

Speaker 3 (27:51):
Eleven people were killed yesterday on this on this fishing
boat or whatever it was. And here's here's Trump with
a six announcing this attack.

Speaker 7 (28:00):
When you come out and when you leave the room,
you'll see that we just over the last few minutes
literally shot out a boat, a drug carrying boat. A
lot of drugs in that boat, and you'll be seeing that.
And there's more where that came from. We have a
lot of drugs pouring into our country, coming in for
a long time, and we just these came out of Venezuela.

Speaker 3 (28:24):
There's more where that came from. Yes, there is more
drugs where that came from. And you think you're going
to blow up every boat. I might have drugs on it.
I don't even want to know. Not maybe it did.
I don't even want to acknowledge that without some type
of evidence. There's plenty of fishing going on in the Caribbean.

Speaker 4 (28:40):
Well, yeah, I mean there are also people who followed
us have already said it's a very small craft. And
there's times some debate of people in that space, like
former agents, guys like Jo and Gorilla who've covered this
really closely as to whether or not. That boat, from
what we know now, looks like something that would be
engaged in mass trafficking. Some people say, you see the
waterproof back in the middle of it. I think that's

(29:01):
hard to see, but we'll obviously learn more, at least
from our government's perspective. But very interestingly and aftermath of
the shrike, Maduro this is I don't know if you
saw this, Ryan, because you'll have interesting thoughts on this.
Maduro tried to drive a wedge between Rubio and Trump
by saying Marco Rubio, who obviously has supported one Guido

(29:23):
and other opponents of Murdua, has been a vicious enemy
of Murduro for a long time, saying, Marco Rubio is
trying to draw you into a war with the people
of Venezuela. But I'm confident you know that there's a
way that we can work with Donald Trump, et cetera.
That's what Maduro said afterwards. Was a pretty pretty interesting attack.

Speaker 3 (29:41):
No, I think it's smart by Maduro because I think
it's true. I think Rubio, I think Rubio is going
is taking the opportunity that he sees. Yes, he's boxed
out of a lot of the rest of the world.
But the thing that he really cares about is fighting
the left in the Caribbean, Latin and Latin America, and

(30:02):
he's just being allowed it.

Speaker 4 (30:05):
And stop on that point, because notice, I think Trump
is absolutely itching for a conflict with cartels that.

Speaker 3 (30:11):
He can, but Mexican cartels, not communists. Rubio is like,
how about we go after Venezuela.

Speaker 4 (30:16):
Exactly, yeah, Because if I think Trump is absolutely itching
for a war with cartels, which is not like I
think it's really emotional for people who have lost family
members of fentanyl, which is just staggering number of Americans
who do want to see justice and want to see action.
And I absolutely understand that. I think we've we've learned,

(30:37):
you know, after nine to eleven, for example, that it's
very easy after deep tragedy to be swayed in one
direction or another by politicians who say they have our
best interests and are pursuing justice at hand. So there's that.
But the Mexican cartels, Trump, I think is particularly eager

(30:59):
because he feels like they're fairly easy to crush, and
I think he's eager to have, you know, videos of
those cartels getting lit up. But your point, I think
is important, which is that Marco Rubio, who's actually on
a sort of swing of Latin America. This happened literally
right before he was going on his trip. Marco Rubio,

(31:19):
isn't it interesting? Is going after the first The first strike.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
Is on Venezuela.

Speaker 4 (31:24):
How about that the communists?

Speaker 3 (31:25):
Maybe he'll find some Cuban drug traffickers next.

Speaker 4 (31:29):
That probably is coming, That probably is coming. We started
this by saying it was a wild press conference that
spanned all kinds of different topics and it was including tariffs.
So Ryan, let's talk about how the president responded to
setbacks or maybe he doesn't see them, the stepbacks, but
setbacks in his tariff war. We can go ahead and

(31:52):
roll be one again from this press conference yesterday.

Speaker 6 (31:56):
And now it's going to the Supreme Court.

Speaker 7 (31:57):
Now we're going to be asking for early admittance where
we're going tomorrow, and we're going to ask for expedited
and expedited ruling because, uh, you know, when you look
at the stock markets down today, the stock market's down
because of that, because the stock market needs the tariffs,
they want the tariffs. Without the tariffs, we wouldn't have
a chance because we wouldn't be able to protect those

(32:18):
investments of the companies coming in. So if you took
away tariffs, we we could end up being a third
world country.

Speaker 6 (32:28):
That's how that's how big the rule is. So we're
asking for an expedited ruling.

Speaker 8 (32:33):
China's having a massive military parade that President Putin and
Kim Jongman will be attending.

Speaker 6 (32:37):
Do you interpret that as a challenge to this?

Speaker 11 (32:40):
I are You've not heard at all about those countries now,
not at all.

Speaker 7 (32:45):
China needs us, and I have a very good relationship
with Presidency is you know, but China needs us much
more than we need them.

Speaker 6 (32:53):
No, I don't see that at all now.

Speaker 7 (32:56):
And I had actually a very good meeting with President
Putt in a couple of weeks. We'll see if anything
comes out of it. If it doesn't, will take a
different stance.

Speaker 4 (33:04):
Wait, so two things going on there not unrelated, of course,
the tariff war and the meeting between Stooting Peg and
Vladimir Putin. Obviously an arund remodi was in the mix
as well. Over the last couple of days, run What
was your reaction to Trump's comments there?

Speaker 3 (33:19):
So he referenced the stock market plunge, So it wasn't huge.
But like Mark goes down across the board, this is
coming because this appeals court has affirmed the lower court's
ruling that Trump's use of the tariffs is illegal. That
the president retains ability to put tariffs in place in

(33:41):
particular instances, but he does not have a across the
board ability to just willing nearly slap tariffs on everybody
for any reason. He just doesn't have that power. And
he's clearly doing it that way. Like India's buying oil
from Russia, Well, here's another twenty five percent tax on

(34:02):
a tariff on India. Or the entire formula that he
rolled out that hit the entire world, there was nothing,
you know, there was very little attempt to root it
in the statutory authority that delegates to the president the
ability to implement these tariffs. The consequence of that is
think about that. One reason that the market hasn't gone

(34:25):
haywire over the tariffs is because there was significant revenue
coming in and we haven't had a complete calamity economically,
and so Wall Street starts saying, oh, wait, it's actually
a decent revenue potential for the United States, and so
maybe we'll keep maybe, maybe that keeps bond prices a
little bit flat and interest rates don't go crazy because

(34:45):
we're not as worried about a debt spiral. If the
tariffs are illegal, and let's say you run a small
business that manufactures, you know, fishing gear in Ohio, and
you paid two hundred thousand dollars in tariffs in June

(35:06):
for you know, the material that you need to you know,
manufacture the goods that you're producing here in the United
States and then selling here. You paid two hundred grand.
You didn't have that two hundred grand. You went to
the bank and you're like, look, I'm going under if
I don't pay for these imports. So you got this
two hundred thousand dollars, you paid it. You're now told
that these tariffs are illegal. You want that two hundred
thousand dollars back, and you're not alone. Everyone who paid

(35:30):
those tariffs is going to then demand those back, and
so Wall Street is factoring that in. And that's that's
why Trump was saying the mark went down. I think
he's I think he's actually right about that. The B
three is the appeals court ruling. We put up that
real quickly so people can people can see it, but

(35:53):
and then quickly moved to be four, which is that
you know, Trump is not crazy to think this. This
is the NBC headline, Treasury yields jump on prospect of
US having to refund tariff money. Thirty year yield tops
four point nine to seven percent. We saw fifty point

(36:14):
swing fifty fifty bases point. Interest rates swing is half point,
like massive jumps in interest rates as as a result
of this uncertainty. And so that means two things. One,
the tariffs get approved and we continue to have prices
going up because everybody's paying more for the things that

(36:36):
are coming into the country, which is most of the things.
Or the tariffs get shot down, and then the US
has to spend hundreds of billions of dollars refunding people
they're tariffs that they collected illegally, neither of which the
market or the economy is going to like. So Trump

(36:57):
has set himself up for a completely lose lose situation here,
which goes back to what I was saying at the
very beginning. If you remember, you and I both liked
the idea of protecting domestic industries where it's necessary, but
you want to have the public on your side, and
you want to have a strategy for why you're protecting
those industries and how you're going to bolster them in

(37:20):
the meantime. Let's say it's aluminum. Here's our aluminum strategy.
We're going to make sure the Pentagon and the federal
government and the states are buying from American aluminum makers,
and we're going to make sure that would they have
access to the global sources that they need in the
time over the course of the time that they're building
up the industry. We'll do some tax breaks, do whatever

(37:42):
you want, and explain it and put it into law,
and then that can work. He's just like, we're doing
this because you suck and you've been ripping us off.
And the Court's like, well, you can't do that, and
the voters and the businesses don't think you're going to
stick with it, so it doesn't actually develop any domestic industry,

(38:05):
and then you wind up in this lose lose situation.

Speaker 4 (38:08):
So Trump also has said a couple of other things
worth noting. One is he told Scout Innings that the
uncertainty was hurting the stock market, which is what his
critics have been saying since we liberated on April second.
But he then also said that the stock markets are

(38:29):
upset because they need the tariffs. That was another another company.
So they're bringing these tariffs, have brought in about thirty
billion dollars a month. And so if that that goes
straight to the treasury. So if then that leaves the treasury,
this is a huge hole in Trump's talking point about tariffs,
which isn't just that we're going to make fair deals,

(38:51):
we're going to protect American industry, but also that it's
going to help the deficit. And so if that goes away.
Also there are companies experts who weighed in on this.
We still put the CNBC article up on the screen already.
That article talks to some people who're like, it's possible,
actually that it's it's not that difficult to do the refunds,
that the process like logistically is not impossible. You be

(39:14):
able to do it. It all has a right, but
some companies do their imports through third parties like DHL
or other groups, which is a nightmare for the and then.

Speaker 3 (39:26):
Who's entitled to that right?

Speaker 4 (39:28):
Yeah, so we can this is a before This is
the CNBC article that you can you can read if
you if you want to. But basically the breakdown is
that the logistics of this, you know, they're they're they're doable,
but then it gets really really messy for certain companies,
and obviously the markets are going to react to that.

Speaker 3 (39:47):
Yeah, it's a good point. Think about this. Let's take
your fishing rod company again. Yeah, like, let's say that
fishing rod company their costs for the imports went up
by two hundred thousand dollars, but they actually paid this importer.
It's the importer exactly paid. So the importer now got
paid by the company itself because they they told the

(40:13):
fishing company, hey, look, sorry, man, you want to make
these fishing rods, it's going to cost you extra two
hundred grad Yes, Trump did this to me. And then
they take the money from the fishing company, they pass
it on to the treasury. Now, if they get ruled illegal,
the importer is going to go to the treasury and
say give me my two hundred thousand dollars back. Yes,

(40:33):
of course. Now the fishing rod company is going to
be like, well, you owe me that two hundred k.
Of course, because I had to raise my prices and
I had to go into debt. So now give it back, like, no,
I legally it's mine. I'm not giving it back to you.
And then me who spent an extra thirty bucks on

(40:54):
the fishing rod, It's like, I want the thirty dollars
back exactly.

Speaker 4 (40:59):
They're going to be like, no, too bad, Well maybe
you'll get your tariff rebate. What was it called. So
let's put B five on the screen because some of
this actually is probably already priced into things. So this
is a screenshot from NBC package carriers suspending shipments to
the US. Lots and lots of carriers from different countries

(41:21):
around the world that have already kind of addressed to this,
and that's why.

Speaker 3 (41:24):
Suggested in a brutal way. So this is the Deminimus rule,
which says, which is awesome. It used to be under
what a pound or two maybe.

Speaker 4 (41:33):
Started that way. It evolved in a really egregious way
over time with inflation. So it started as like a
buck or two to your point, and then what was
a twenty fifteen or twenty sixteen they moved it to
like eight hundred dollars something like that. So basically you
could package a crazy amount of stuff in these little
boxes from China and not have to pay.

Speaker 3 (41:52):
Right, not have to Paanny tariffs and so then so
they got rid of that.

Speaker 4 (41:56):
And so if you've ever wondered why stuff got really
cheap in the last ten years, that's a very good example,
like why the Amazon prices started tumbling about roughly ten
years ago and you started being able to get crazy
stuff really quickly on Prime.

Speaker 3 (42:09):
Right, and different LLCs could then be the ones that
are buying all these different things and so, but again
they didn't really figure out a rational replacement to what
is going on. So all of these mail carriers just like, well,
we don't really understand what the new rules are for
the US, so we're not sending any packages period. So

(42:29):
if you need something from this list of thirty plus
countries here, like it's not coming. Yeah, you have to
find some other like private shipping method. It's going to
be super expensive to get it in, right.

Speaker 4 (42:45):
Yeah, I mean, this is we'll see. I mean Trump
also said this is another thing I wanted to get
your take on, because I think it was Obama and
justin Trudeau may have done something similar at some point.
You'll remember it is better than me on this. But
Trump was talking about how these AIPA tariffs. So the
emergency tariffs are actually it's great that they go through

(43:05):
the president and not Congress because it gives the president
the ability to make deals. And you've sort of the
implication of what he was saying in paraphrasing him, of course,
is that it gives the president the ability to make
deals for national security and for prosperity and do sort
of all of that rolled up into one negotiator, not

(43:25):
trying to go through this byzantine legislative system just to
negotiate with other world leaders. And it sounds it reminds
me a little bit of do you remember when Obama
was he got hammered really hard for almost sounding like
he yearned to have the power of shijinping at one point.
I'm sure you remember this. It sounds exactly like that that,

(43:48):
you know, the president should be able to kind of
wave the wand and do these emergency deals, even though
that also sort of undercuts the legal emergency of justification
for doing these deals by saying, well, it's just better
this way anyway. But yeah, that's I think a worthwhile
distinction is we may we don't know, I mean, like,

(44:09):
but we may look back on this five to ten
years from now and say the emergency tariff authority of
the executive pursuing these tariffs with that vehicle was actually
the downfall of the Trump tariff policy ultimately, because while
there was some in some ways, he does have more
leverage just as a sole negotiator because he's able to

(44:31):
say I don't know, I don't like this, I'm not
getting along with you right now. Whatever. But then on
the other hand, that creates such enormous uncertainty that everyone
just bets on bricks or just stops doing as much
business with the United States. And again, like I'm saying,
that's a possibility that we look back ten years from
now and that's the problem, because that's actually not the

(44:53):
way that the system is designed to avoid that problem. Yeah,
it's exactly how it was designed.

Speaker 12 (44:58):
No.

Speaker 3 (44:58):
I saw somebody joke only suggesting that Trump actually is
on track to win his Nobel Peace Fries because the
achievement of bringing together the historic rivals of China, Russian
and India, which represent billions of people around the world,
into coalition together. H Like, that's a piece deal that
he deserves great credit for. People didn't think it was possible. Hey, yeah,

(45:20):
he's pulling it off so amazing.

Speaker 4 (45:23):
Yeah. I mean, the theme of the show so far.
We started with, you know, Chicago, then we talked about Venezuela,
and now we're talking about tariffs. The theme of the
show so far is the theme of the administration, which
is testing the legal limits, both as norms and as
legal precedents. Some of these constraints, particularly on executive branch power,

(45:49):
which is the same in the case of Chicago, is
the same in the case of Venezuela, and it's right
now the same in the case of tariffs. And let
me just say on tariffs and what tariffs in particular,
if Barack Obama had been doing this, the anti Obama
right would have been up in arms about Obama wanting
to be a king, which was the case with DACA,

(46:10):
and I think correctly the case with DACA. But now
that Trump is in this position, it's possible he leaves
office and the executive branch is not in any way
less powerful, to the point that some conservatives this is
a battle internally in the conservative movement whether the executives
woud be more or less powerful or powerful in different ways,

(46:30):
but that the executive the executive power is massively expanded
and then wielded by a democratic president in ways where
their emergency power is punishing countries that don't go along
with like the LGBT agenda or something like that, and
Conservatives then find themselves in that position somehow.

Speaker 3 (46:50):
I suspect the Supreme Court will find a way to
distinguish between democratic and Republican president stuff we'll see t.

Speaker 4 (46:58):
D because actually that very internal debate in the conservative movement.
These justices are federal society justices that are not in
every case Maga justices, and so they have been involved
in this debate about executive power over the course of
the last several decades. And it is not a given
whether they side with the kind of originalist branch that

(47:20):
they came up in or Maga world. And that's actually
very maga world, which is sort of cribbing from Nixon
in this case. And that's if they think they're just
going to ge rubber stamped at the Supreme Court. My
guess would be that that's not the case. We'll see though.
Let's move on to Anthony Aguilar, who is joining us
in studio this morning on his way to disrupt a
hearing over on Capitol Hill. We'll bring him in just now.

(47:45):
We're joined once again by retired Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Aguilar Ryan.
We have a lot to get into. So first of all,
thank you so much for being here and coming back
on the show. We appreciate it.

Speaker 5 (47:56):
Thank you, I appreciate it. You can come back and
having the opportunity.

Speaker 3 (47:59):
Yeah, So welcome back to Washington, d C. We're recording
this early in the morning on Wednesday. You're headed from
here down to the United States Senate and by the
time this show airs, the hearing that you're going to
will have already begun. What's your plan there? Can you
tell us anything about what brought you to Washington?

Speaker 5 (48:21):
So today Senate is back in session. They returned for
the one hundred and nineteenth second Second Congress on Monday,
administrative work yesterday. Today the Senate in the House are
back into sessions. Today at ten o'clock will be the
Foreign Affairs Committee discussing nominations to be presented moving forward.

(48:44):
So kind of somewhat business work, but also kind of
the start of business for the Foreign Affairs Committee, and
the Foreign Affairs Committee, in my particular interest, is crucial
in how the United States continue used to back fund
support what's going on in Gaza. So my goal is

(49:10):
to ensure that our lawmakers are representatives the Congress that
works for us the people, is unquestionably aware of what
the truth is in Gaza and the that there can't
be any confusion as to well, we didn't know, or

(49:32):
we thought this, or we thought that. And hopefully by
being there through you know, I will disrupt the hearing
and that there is a an acknowledgment or at least
going back because the next the rest of this week
and next week is all matters you know, in the House,
so they're not actually having committee hearing meetings, so they'll
take back and do work. So I'm hoping that by

(49:55):
addressing this now in a more elevated way, that it'll
be discussed and lawmakers will actually put some serious effort
into what we're going to do.

Speaker 4 (50:07):
Is it a strange position to find yourself in right now,
being so upset about what you see that you're willing
to disrupt congressional hearings. Is this a position you ever
thought you'd find yourself in.

Speaker 3 (50:18):
And also, I assumed by the way that everybody watching
this is familiar with your work. We'll just let people
know who are just tuning in. You were a contractor
at the so called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation and so called
aid distribution sites that have been speaking out about the
killings and the starvation policy that you've seen unfolding there.

(50:38):
So if you're new, that's what we're talking about it.

Speaker 4 (50:42):
Go click on the interview with Hagar and Crystal, catch
yourself up and then come right back here.

Speaker 3 (50:46):
Pause this, Google, go watch that.

Speaker 5 (50:48):
Yeah, so it's I wouldn't say it's a it's a
strange situation. It's a situation that I did not necessarily
think i'd find myself in terms of standing up for
what's right, standing up for the values and the ideals
of humanity. But a weird position I find myself in
that that what's happening in Gaza is happening. It's it's

(51:13):
mind blowing to me that that that the world has
stood by for so long and has done nothing but
write stern letters or made statements on media. But you know,
the great nations of the world have the have the
ability to do something and we and we haven't. And

(51:33):
when I first went to Gaza, I was aware of
the ongoing conflict. I was aware of both sides of
the of the position in terms of, well, this is
what this is what Hamas has done, this is what
Israel's doing. There's a lot of narrative, There's a lot
of rhetoric. The it's very difficult for as it was
for myself and for the average American to cut through

(51:54):
what's truth and what's not.

Speaker 4 (51:55):
And you are sure generally favorable to Israel when you
went over right.

Speaker 5 (51:58):
In all honesty, Yes, as a military officer in the
United States Army, we we are trained and somewhat brought
up in our officer education that that that Israel is
a is an army that we should emulate. They're they're
an army that we should you know that that is
as professional as we are, and they are these partners

(52:20):
that we should strive to work with and and so yes,
when I went to Israel, I kind of had that
initial perception of you know that, okay, what Israel's fighting
a war. War is war is complex and complicated. There's
a problem with starvation. They didn't let the un because
UN go in anymore because they're giving food to Hamas.

(52:43):
What's true, what's not right? And so me going there,
I really was focused on. I can't control the political
aspects of food going in or not, but what I
can be a part of is providing aid to a desperate,
an in need population. Regardless of the politics. The people

(53:03):
of the Palestinians are dying. So that was my premise
for going in. I was I was lied to, We
were lied to, all the contractors that went there. It
was it was not a mechanism to provide aid to
the population. So yes, I kind of I first went in.
Kind of if you were to put me in a
camp on day one, the twenty fourth of May going

(53:26):
into Gaza, I probably would have fallen too, that fallen
to the side of the the pro Israel side. And
that's that's just me being completely transparent and honest that
that's just that that's the military culture that I spent
my career in.

Speaker 3 (53:43):
And you and I were talking just before you came
on here about meetings that you've been having outside of
this Senate one, but more above board meetings. You said
you're had some interviews with the ICC. Can you tell
us a little bit about what they're curious about and
what are they what are they looking into? That relates
to your work there.

Speaker 5 (54:03):
So when you particularly look at the the ICC, and
there are numerous entities, offices and organizations that are now
taking a deeper look into this, this cloak and dagger
organization of the Gods, like Humanitarian Foundation, the ICC particularly
is looking at the aspects of the violations of international
humanitarian law. The core of the international humanitarian law that

(54:27):
we that Israel is a signature to are the protocols
of the Geneva Convention. That's the So if you have
this large body of law that is the international humanitarian law,
you know, the the meat of it in terms of
how we fight wars is the protocols of the Geneva Convention,
and the ICC, like many many who are informed and

(54:49):
aware of these conventions and these laws and these protocols,
is that there are clear violations, clear violations of this
in terms of force, displacement, starvation, not providing water, and
these things are all articles of the protocols that are
identified by specifically like you have to give civilians water,

(55:11):
you have to feed civilians, you have to safeguard civilians,
you can't displace civilians, you can't do A B and C.
So it's very rational in its approach. Now, where the
investigations come to, which will take the voice of the world,
is that how do you then establish intent? So if
I if I'm in an unfortunate situation where someone is

(55:37):
someone's killed, just say, you know, in my everyday life,
I don't immediately get charged with first degree murder and
go to jail. There's a trial, there's an investigation. You know,
what was the intent? What was the situation? Right? But
I think at this point it's very very very clear
that Israel's involvement in Gaza and how this war is

(55:58):
being fought, it's no longer a war. This is not
a war. This is an annihilation. This is a genocide.
And that the body of evidence that now looks to
the reality that we see every day we are seeing
a genocide occur every day in front of our eyes

(56:18):
on the world stage, is that it was planned from
the beginning. This has always been the plan. It's premeditated,
it's designed, and unfortunately the United States is a part
of it.

Speaker 4 (56:32):
I want to ask we can put this element up
on the screen, if you saw anything related to these
new allegations about forced disappearance, is actually the word they're
using is quote enforced disappearances of Palestinians at aid distribution
sites in Gaza. As The Times of Israel reports, the
allegations are that the military lawfully detains individuals who approach

(56:53):
aid compounds after hours or in ways that endanger its forces. Now,
unlawfully is probably the best wort to frame the allegation.
Now Israel is saying the claim of the forced disappearance
of Gaza residents and aid compounds is baseless and entirely unfounded,
according to a statement. But these are particularly about those

(57:13):
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation AID sites. So did you see anything
that would lead you to believe that these allegations of
enforced disappearances of Palestinians are actually happening?

Speaker 5 (57:26):
Without question? Not only did I witness it, but you
can they're on the ground in terms of the plan
and how things are enacted. Two data points. I would
say that they give me a clear understanding of that one.
The response from Israel and the IDF very similar in

(57:49):
parallel to the GHF's response to any and every allegation
is always that's baseless, that's categorically false. Last week when
we saw a hospital, and then there's irrefutable evidence from
what occurred. But up until the Israelis were faced with

(58:09):
irrefutable evidence and they apologize it as a mishap, what
did they say, Oh, that's categorically false, that didn't happen.

Speaker 3 (58:17):
Don't do that.

Speaker 5 (58:17):
You're lying, We don't do that, and the world saw it.
So when the IDF says they didn't do it or
they didn't do something, that's like asking a criminal to
adjourn their own trial. Oh nothing to see here, it's
like you did it. So let's take that with a

(58:38):
grain of salt that when Israel or the GHF say
this is categorically false or this is this is not true.
So what is true is that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation,
through safe Each solutions and UG solutions, Safe each solutions
and UG solutions in Israel and Gaza from day one,

(58:58):
from the very beginning, they implemented biometric facial recognition data
collection from day one and began building out these extensive
POIS Persons of interest databases of anyone that looked like hamas.

Speaker 4 (59:18):
And were you, as a contractor at GHF expected to
sort of have a recollection of who might be a
POI or be aware of who might be a POI.

Speaker 5 (59:28):
We were yes. So in the first few days of distribution,
we were told very clearly by the Safe Reach Solutions
intelligence analysts, why does the Humanitarian Assistance Operation have an
intelligence analyst? We were told to kind of give us
this briefing of a look for these things, look for
these things, be aware of this.

Speaker 3 (59:48):
What do you look for? Like, what do they say
makes a person hamas at an as?

Speaker 5 (59:52):
You know, I feel like I feel like I'm reliving
lessons that we learned long ago when I was in
Iraq Afghanistan the early days. Let's look for the MAM's
military aged males, which all comes the.

Speaker 3 (01:00:10):
If you look at the videos and if you also
just use your common sense, these sites are you tell me,
five to fifteen kilometers away from where people are staying.
The person in the family who's going to be able
to make that journey and then make it back is
going to be the mam, the military aged male person.

Speaker 5 (01:00:30):
Typically someone in the family that's that's capable.

Speaker 3 (01:00:33):
And so if you look at the videos, most and
I'm curious from your perspective, you had actually eyes on
the ground. The video is most of the people are
military aged males, which makes sense because those are the
ones that can hike all the way through the desert
the middle of night way.

Speaker 5 (01:00:45):
It's very difficult to get there.

Speaker 3 (01:00:47):
Yeah, so almost everybody then fits the category that they're
describing as potentially a hamas it sounds.

Speaker 5 (01:00:53):
Like, and what you will see now and again, the
proof is in the reality of what we're seeing in
the beginning days of distribution. What GHF under the umbrella,
in coordination with the idea called Phase one, Phase one,
establish the sites, run the sites, and begin collecting data.

(01:01:14):
It's never about humanitarian aid. Start building these persons of interest.
Mug shots, they even call them that.

Speaker 3 (01:01:22):
Mug shots already take a photo.

Speaker 5 (01:01:26):
So if you're you know so, facial recognition software cameras
on site, they're doing that. They're set up to look
for certain characteristics. Right now, what you will see in
the distribution that's happening now with people that are coming
down to the south to this large two point seven
kilometer area concentration camp that GHF is running. They call
it a humanitarian village. But when you displace a population

(01:01:50):
and you concentrate them in an area and you put
them on a camp that has a name, it's a
concentration camp. So when you look at how that was
being done. Now, the majority of Palestinians coming to the
sites are women and children are elderly, because that's all
that's left. Because what wasn't advertised and wasn't told is
that if you leave your house and you're going to

(01:02:13):
Cite one, two or three, Sites one, two, and three
are all south of the Maragu Corridor, which is a
militarized corridor that bisects the southern portion from the central well.
If you want to go to Site one, two or
three to get food, you have to cross that corridor.
Once you cross that corridor, you don't go home. You're

(01:02:35):
you cross the corridor. You've got to get your food.
On your way back, and you hit the intersection of
a site and the Maragu Corridor, you're sent. You're assigned
to one of the encampments Unice Camp Milwassee Camp. You
never go home, so then your family.

Speaker 3 (01:02:49):
This is the trap of my colleague Jeremy scare Hill
described it's a.

Speaker 5 (01:02:53):
Trap, and then it's a one way trap, and then
your family that's back home or already in a uning caampment.
A lot of the people that came to get food
from these sites were already in UN encampments. Un encampments that, oh,
by the way, are not being run managed by the UN,

(01:03:13):
so because the UN is out. So it was designed
that way and it will continue.

Speaker 3 (01:03:20):
And did you see people detained and interrogated and could
that be related to these enforced disappearances?

Speaker 4 (01:03:27):
That's what they're The claim from the IDF is if
the initial field questioning people come in after hours and
are around the compound. They say, if the initial field
questioning raise the suspicion that a detainee has engaged in
activity against our forces, the suspect is transferred for further interrogation. Israel.
Detainees for whom there is no justification for detention or
released into the gaza strip. Well, those for whom grounds

(01:03:48):
exist for continued detention in accordance with the law are
brought before a judge and are entitled to legal representation
as provided by law. That's the claim.

Speaker 3 (01:03:55):
And to this can you add the context of they
say after hours? How do people know when the hours
are and how consistent are these hours?

Speaker 5 (01:04:04):
That's a that is a great question because the truth
is they don't. It's all left to obscurity and confusion
to you know, kind of like I equate it to
like if you were trying to get your taxes done
at the DMV, Just like, which line do I go to?
Where does this exist? How do I how do I
do this? Is that building's over there? What are the hours?

Speaker 6 (01:04:23):
Though?

Speaker 5 (01:04:24):
We're only open every fourth Sunday?

Speaker 3 (01:04:25):
Right, You're like, and sometimes everything.

Speaker 5 (01:04:27):
Sometimes we close for lunch eight days a week.

Speaker 3 (01:04:30):
And we'll let you know when we let you know.

Speaker 5 (01:04:32):
So it's like it's so it's intentionally designed to be
confusing and and cryptic, and how it's being done. Now
to the point of the actual detention. One anecdote I witnessed,
one I did not witness, but I'm intimately familiar with.
I'll start with the latest, the latter Middle Eastern Eye.

(01:04:54):
They have a reporter that was recently killed who was
in Naser hospital. That order that did the story about AMR,
the story that was broke about my interaction with a Mirr.
The person that then followed through on that story because
JJF came out and said, oh he's fine, here he
is and showed a different a different boy altogether. So

(01:05:16):
Middle Eastern I, who was in Gaza, followed that up
and I had done it and found his mother and
talked to his mother. And days later last week, that individual,
that reporter, the person that wrote that story, who was
further looking into the disappearance of a mirror where's his
body was detained and questioned on Site number three, the

(01:05:40):
communist site, then further detained, and then a few days later, yes,
sir yes.

Speaker 3 (01:05:51):
Sir Mohammed Salama look up as he did, and he
did some great reporting on the sixteen medics that were
killed in Rafa's.

Speaker 5 (01:05:58):
Yes, that's right, he was killed in the Naser hospital hit.

Speaker 3 (01:06:04):
They detained a source of his right, so.

Speaker 5 (01:06:07):
They detained a source of his specifically trying to find
out where he was. And then days later he as
well as others are hit in Naser Hospital, which is
directly north of Conunis. So when you put these pieces together,
it seems awfully convenient. And now I did not witness that,

(01:06:29):
but it's reported and the individual that was his source
is dead. What I did witness was in early June,
an individual who worked at the site Site number two,
distribution Site two which is in southern Rafa, the Kogat,
the organization out of the Ministry of Defense of Israel

(01:06:49):
that covers governance and the territories. They had aligned Palestinian workers,
Palestinians that live in Gaza that got vetted through them
to then work for us at these sites. And in
that time, within like the first couple days of distribution,

(01:07:10):
one of their buses was hit and apparently that was
blamed on Hamas. There's no Hamas cannot operate in the
area that far south of the Moron Corridor with unless
the Israelis let them.

Speaker 3 (01:07:23):
There's just you can't, right because you're talking about five
to fifteen kilometers through the desert with total drone surveillance,
total drone surveillance, and no tunnel, no tanks, right.

Speaker 5 (01:07:33):
Infantry tunnels have been destroyed, full coverage and everything is flattened.
You're not looking at a city, right. So for Hamas
to openly have operated and shot up this bus of
twenty five Palestinian workers in late May early June, the
only way that could have happened is if is if
the idea of leed it or it didn't happen and

(01:07:55):
they were killed another way, because how do we know.
So on this particular incident, on this day in early
June at Site number two, I cannot recall the exact date,
but we got we got a call from co got
a radio phone call from from CO got to our
operations center that said one of the local Palestinian workers

(01:08:15):
on site too is Hamas. And our position on it
was like you're the ones that vetted him, Like what
are you talking about? Like, Hey, I brought a guest
to your house and man, he's a jerk. You brought him,
like he's your guest. So these people that were here
that were working on the site, co God says, Oh,
one of them is Hamas. Okay, well how do you
do that? Like does he if I pad him down?

(01:08:37):
Does he have his Hamas membership card? If I take
off his his his shirt? Is he wearing a Hamas
T shirt? How do you know that? Well? He has
connections really so g HF. UG Solutions American contractors who
mind you are in Israel in Gaza on a two

(01:08:57):
wrist of the sell detained this man and would not
let him leave until the IDF said he could leave,
took his passport, took any of his identification, would not
let him leave, and he was under the control of
UG Solutions until the IDF told us that he could
either leave or he was going to be taken away

(01:09:18):
by the IDF. And this prolonged to the point to
where it's almost as if the IDF wanted to tire
us out or wait us out to say like, oh,
we'll just come.

Speaker 9 (01:09:28):
And get him.

Speaker 5 (01:09:29):
But then later in the later at the two o'clock
in the morning, Remember at two o'clock in the morning,
it's hunting season, if you will. For the IDF out there,
it gives them the perfect excuse that anybody out moving
around or they must be bad. So this man gets
released go back home. And he begged, cried and begged

(01:09:52):
not to be put off the site and just put
He was like, I live all the way in Darish,
which is north by the Netzering Corridor. Help, I can't
get home from here. I'm going to get killed either
by a hamas for supporting this effort or by the IDF.
And this man was released and set out from the

(01:10:14):
site to his own to his own device, to his
own devices, and moments later north of the site. Now
I didn't see a drone strike or a missile strike
hit this individual, but moments later, as he left the
site in the area that he was walking, there was
a strike. So is is it any doubt to me

(01:10:39):
that the UG Solutions under Gassi Humanitarian Fund are part
of this detention and extra questioning tactic Gestapo tactics, if
you will. They absolutely are Americans on tourist visas are
detaining people on behalf of the IDF. That should be
very concerning to any American that is paying their tax

(01:11:03):
dollars towards this effort.

Speaker 3 (01:11:05):
Yeah. And also for the the men are women who
it's all men? Are any women there of the Palatine contractors,
I mean any of the contractors.

Speaker 5 (01:11:15):
Oh from UG Solutions. During my time there, it was
it was all men there, weren't I can't say what
there is now.

Speaker 3 (01:11:21):
These men went there on a tourist visa and participated
in murdering somebody most.

Speaker 5 (01:11:28):
Likely participated in murder, participated as as elements as tools
of a planned genocide and a planned force displacement. The bait,
the anecdote you gave over the analogy you gave of
the bait, well, the if you think about bait in
a mouse trap, well, the the the people guarding that

(01:11:50):
bait to bring everybody in are American contractors.

Speaker 3 (01:11:54):
Right now, we could put up this second element on
the screen that the Washington host has finally followed the
Financial Times and some of its reporting on the Boston
Consulting Group and others who have put together plans that
they say are circulating among administration officials that would see

(01:12:17):
basically the population of Gaza expelled. There would be some
opportunity some Gazans would get a token and they could
use a token to come back and buy like an
apartment future gulfified Gaza that would be the riviera that

(01:12:37):
Trump has talked about. This plan even included from north
to south what they called an MBS highway east to west,
like an NBZ highway named after Mohammad ben Salma and
of Saudi Arabia and Mohamed ben Zaiad of the UAD,
trying to get their buy in by naming streets after them.
So the plans are advanced for a post Palestinians. As

(01:13:02):
you witness what's going on in the ground unfold, do
you think that it is past the point of no
return or do you think that the clock is still
ticking on whatever the strategy.

Speaker 5 (01:13:13):
Is, the clock is still ticking, But we are seconds
away from that clock striking midnight. We we there is
time for the world to make a humane decision. But
there's also time to do nothing, as we've been doing
as a as a as a world community. The final

(01:13:38):
solution of you will in this greater plan, this plan
for a post war Gaza, and what that would look
like with this real estate venture, the riviera, tech parks
and all these things, you know, things that you're voluntary
Palestinian would not want and want to live in their land.

(01:13:59):
So one this notion of We're going to kill everybody,
consolidate them, move them out, rebuild their homeland, and then
give them a token to come back in. That's laughable.
And then this aspect of the plan has always been
from before we even open the sites, the Boston Confident

(01:14:22):
BCG Boston Consulting Group had already developed this plan for
this post war real estate venture, that was already planned.
That't that's not something that came about last week's like,
oh we did this, what's the plan from the beginning.
So what that will will look like in Gaza is

(01:14:42):
is the forced displacement of the entire population. And we
don't have much time left because the final phase of that,
the final solution to rid Gaza of all Palestinians is
already happening Operation Gideon's Chariots two in the North to
clear Gaza City to Jabalia to that was not supposed
to begin operationally until the end of September because the

(01:15:06):
IDF has to call up sixty thousand reserves. They have
people that aren't wanting to fight. They don't have the
forces to execute that offensive in an actual military way.
They're just going to use bombing.

Speaker 3 (01:15:19):
Last night they were bombing, dropping in sandiary devices on tents, Yes,
burning tents. So that is the unspect Do you suspect
that that's happening because they don't have the manpower. Absolutely
they can drop bombs.

Speaker 5 (01:15:30):
They are critically short in manpower, especially in the North,
for an offensive and calling up sixty thousand reserves that
you don't have time to train or prepare. Israel knows
that putting israelis I think they yesterday or the day
before there was the article about the ultra Orthodox that
have been forced into service. If they go into the

(01:15:54):
offensive on the ground and try to fight this in
a way that a moral army would fight this war,
a lot of people will die, A lot of Israelis
will die, and Israel is not going to stand for that,
so they're going to bomb the reason. I feel that
we have time, but not much, as in within the

(01:16:14):
next nineteen days twenty days, the question of a Palestinian state,
or the question of the Palestinian's existence and the right
to exist, won't even be a question if we don't
do something now, because Operation Gideon's Chariots two, they started
it a month early. The sixty thousand reserve call up.
They're bringing them in, but they've already started the bombing campaign.

(01:16:36):
And they're not only coming from the south, they're coming
from the north. They're halfing the time and how long
it would have taken them. So before the Palestinian question
comes to the UN General Assembly on the twenty second
of September, it's likely that if the world doesn't condemn
this displacement and the starvation and stop the war, it

(01:16:58):
is highly likely that there will not even be a
question of a Palestinian state. Come the twenty second of September.
We won't be discussing when the UN meets. When the
UN General Assembly meets, we won't be discussing a future
of Palestine. We will be discussing the memoriam of millions
that have died.

Speaker 4 (01:17:21):
Well retired with Sennant. Colonel Anthony Aguilar, you're heading to
Capitol Hill. Thank you for stopping by our show once again.

Speaker 5 (01:17:28):
On your way, love what y'all do, and thank you
for having me always welcome here.

Speaker 3 (01:17:33):
Thankk you hemen.

Speaker 4 (01:17:36):
The House Oversight Committee yesterday released documents that the Justice
Department turned over to the committee about the investigations into
Jeffrey Epstein and Galene Maxwell. That said representative wrote, Kanna
tells us that we can quote him, less than one
percent of those documents, less than one percent of those
documents are new, So much of what was released today

(01:18:00):
was already public. But Rocanna and Thomas Massey are right now,
actually as we're recording, assembling a press conference of people
who say this survived abuse at the hands of Jeffrey
Epstein and Galline Maxwell on Capitol Hill as they rally
support for a discharge petition that would force a vote
on releasing more Epstein files on Capitol Hill. So they

(01:18:22):
believe they can pressure. They need to get enough Republicans.
If they get every Democrat, they need to get six Republicans,
so five not including Massy, to support forcing that vote
with the discharge petition, and they believe rallying and having
House Republicans hear from people who say they survived abuse
at the hands of Epstein and Maxwell will help compel

(01:18:43):
members to join the cause and force that vote. So
after House Republicans met with some of those people who
say they were abused by Epstein and Maxwell just last night,
here's what Representative Anna Paulino, Luna Republican had to say.

Speaker 13 (01:18:57):
The biggest thing that stands out to me is the
victims themselves have stated that this is a lot bigger
than I think anyone anticipated. We are obviously being going
to be requesting the stars reports from Treasury and also
to following up on that there's some very rich and
powerful people that need to go to jail. I think
everyone's been frustrated as to why that hasn't happened before.

(01:19:19):
But it is very much so possibility that Jeffrey Epstein
was an intelligence asset working for our adversaries. But also too,
I think the questions that we have is how much
our government know about it.

Speaker 4 (01:19:31):
Some of these people actually told NBC News just on
Tuesday night, so last night that they're compiling basically their
own client list of people that they know were in
the Epstein orbit and are implicated by all of this.
And also, I think one of the interesting things happening now,
Ryan is some of these people who say they were

(01:19:54):
abused are not the high profile folks who have been
on the scene for years sharing their experience, and some
of these people have not been in the press with
the same level of exposure. And that's I think a
pretty interesting development that rote Conna and Thomas mass He
are bringing to the table right now.

Speaker 3 (01:20:13):
And I thought it was interesting that Representative Luna, if
you notice in the very end of the clip there
she said it's possible that Epstein was a foreign intelligence
asset for one of our adversaries, which seems directed at
debunking the claim that he was an asset for Israel,
even though in the emails that we've gotten so far,

(01:20:36):
one of his biggest interlocutors is a who Barack A Barack,
not just a foreign prime minister. Perhaps more importantly, Barack
is a key player in the advancement of Israel's cyber
technology over the last twenty decades. He sits on a
bunch of those boards, He's involved with a bunch of

(01:20:57):
these companies, and the most one of the most significant
kind of I think developments historically in the last ten
twenty years is the growth of Israel's cyber warfare capacity,
which changed its power power balance with regard to Iran, Hesbola,
the pager attack, et cetera. Like. Its ability to get

(01:21:23):
inside the communications devices of its allies and adversaries is
almost unrivaled, and Barack is a key part of that.
And so a Barack being a key, key friend of
Jeffrey Epstein flies in the face of this claim that
he was but maybe he was also a foreign intelligence

(01:21:44):
asset for an adversary, Like just just because he was
let's say he was an asset for the US and
Israel doesn't mean he wasn't also one for Russia or.

Speaker 4 (01:21:52):
Yeah, exactly. Yeah, I think that's an important point. He
could he could have been basically a freelancer. That was
a quote asset, however you want to define that, whether
it was a formal arrangement or not. That was basically
just telling his services.

Speaker 3 (01:22:05):
Decent number of connects, and Israel has a lot of
relationships with Russia as well and Epstein, and if you
go through the files that are already public there's a
lot of Victor Wexelberg and all, like, there's a bunch
of Russians that are in the mix constantly.

Speaker 4 (01:22:19):
And you were referencing these emails that were posted by
distributed Denial of Secrets back in May of Barock, which
is sort of ironic that Hi Barock's inbox ends up
on the wiki leaks like website. And actually, Ryan, this
is very I'm curious how you respond this because you've
covered things like Pegasus in the past. If you have Pegasus,

(01:22:42):
you don't necessarily need to get people on a plane
into an island. It's like the shortcut. You can jump
into their device.

Speaker 3 (01:22:49):
Right, it's easier. Well, and that's Asrael, right, there's still right,
So Pegasus is this no click penetration of your thumb,
Like basically they'll send you a link link on furrals
and if you don't have your phone, say on Apple,
is called lockdown mode. When the link on Furrals, it
sends the virus into the phone and they're in. Like

(01:23:11):
you didn't you didn't have to be a Jampodesta and
like accidentally put your or have your assistant put the
password into change a password and give it to the
Russians or whoever. Like it just boomed. They've got you right.
On the other hand, it's taking getting people to the island,
Like getting Proter to the island is helpful too, like
or in his mansion that is completely filled with cameras.

Speaker 4 (01:23:32):
And Barack and Epstein. We're going back and forth actually
on whether or not Barack would bring his security to
the island. That's one of the leak demails is him
saying like, Wow, I'm trying to do it without the security.

Speaker 3 (01:23:42):
Yeah. And also for people who are good at operational security,
your phone should not actually have much on it at
any given time, so even if they do manage to hack,
they shouldn't be able to get much, and at least
up until recently, if you turn your phone off and

(01:24:02):
back on, it kicks Pegasus out. They may have fixed that.
I don't know, but that's part of the security device
that that phones have. And every every Pegasu's hack is expensive.
It's not like they can it's not like sending a
let's say they want to hack Emily over here. It's
not like they can just constantly be sending her links
every time they do it. For whatever reason. It's like

(01:24:23):
pretty expensive to do it. So if you if you
keep kicking them back out and there's nothing in the
phone in the six hours that are in there, then
we get Then they didn't get anything. So if you
can get somebody in a compromise position on an island
or mansion, go for that.

Speaker 14 (01:24:40):
For now.

Speaker 4 (01:24:41):
The old fashioned methods are still the best. You don't
think you can take these shortcuts like modern kids.

Speaker 3 (01:24:45):
Get lazy kids. Intel kids today, I just want to
click and get you. So we got to put the
time in.

Speaker 4 (01:24:52):
Was a Hoodbarock involved in Pegasus?

Speaker 3 (01:24:56):
I we can google that one. He may he may
he was, since he's got his.

Speaker 4 (01:25:01):
But that's his business basically like that that time.

Speaker 3 (01:25:04):
He's got his fingers in like so many different Intel.

Speaker 4 (01:25:07):
So let's run this clip.

Speaker 3 (01:25:08):
He's co founder of Paragon Solutions. Oh yes, which is
Paragon is is kind of a rival that the Trump
administration is actually just lifting some obstacles to to bring
them in and use them to try to hack immigrants
around the country, which is like not legal.

Speaker 4 (01:25:30):
So they're a rival to NSO, which is in charge
of pegasos.

Speaker 3 (01:25:35):
So, yeah, so who brought co founder.

Speaker 4 (01:25:37):
Of Paragon there?

Speaker 6 (01:25:38):
You go?

Speaker 4 (01:25:38):
All right, definitely Epstein, right, so that that space in
the industry. Let's roll this clip of Thomas Massey after
the document dump yesterday. MASSI is obviously working with Rocanna
in the discharged position. Here's what he had to say.

Speaker 15 (01:25:53):
It's like only one percent of what they possess and
percent it's already been released. I'm afraid this is going
to be like Pam Bondi's binders. Is people are going
to dig into it and say, there's nothing new here.

Speaker 5 (01:26:09):
They haven't given us anything. They've given us the sleeves
off their vest.

Speaker 4 (01:26:13):
So he convered what happened yesterday. So those are documents
from the Justice Department to the Oversight Committee as potentially
being like Pambondi's binders all over again. We can roll
D three as we keep talking here, this is Nancy
mace leaving that meeting with people who say they experienced
that abuse in tears. So I think Ryan whatever.

Speaker 3 (01:26:35):
She later said that it triggered her like hearing that
because within the last two years she was a victim
of abuse.

Speaker 4 (01:26:41):
Yeah, yeah, so I did say. Whatever. We don't even
need to get into open up the Nancy mace ken
worms here, but we can just say that the stages
being set for a very very high pressure campaign on
House Speaker Mike Johnson. They the White House is not
wanting any Republicans to go along with this discharge petition pressure.

(01:27:05):
So what does Marjorie Taylor Green do, What does Nancy
Mace do, What does Tim Burchett do? What happens in
the future now or actually, like literally now, when these
Republicans just came back from their August resis definitely hearing
for people who want information on the Epstein files in
their own districts. What decision do they make here? Because

(01:27:27):
just just to be clear, all of this additional pushing
for information, it's all in the hands of a select
group of people at the Justice Department. There's absolutely nothing
no one can do or anyone can do to make
sure that that you know, zero zero one percent of
the documents in existence that actually are potentially smoking gun documents.
We've seen this with the JFK files. You can get

(01:27:49):
ninety nine percent of the documents and the one percent
of the documents that's actually important will always stay behind
closed doors. Now that may or not be the case
with the JFK files. It may just be and this
is potentially the case of the Epstein file, is that
fifty years from now out we're in the situation with
the Epstein files that we're in now with the JFK files,
or sixty seventy years from now where we start getting

(01:28:10):
that maybe that last one percent of documents. But just
to be clear, like people can push for as much transparency,
and they should push for as much transparency as they want,
but right nobody should be optimistic at all that the
government is actually complying with these requests for the relevant information.

Speaker 3 (01:28:28):
Maybe that's the one thing we'll get when Trump.

Speaker 4 (01:28:31):
Dies potentially potentially or Bill Clinton or both.

Speaker 3 (01:28:38):
Bill Clinton, it's amazing that Democrats are still defending Bill
Clinton and protecting him. Guys, he's been out of office
for twenty five years.

Speaker 4 (01:28:47):
But you know, it's the same to go. But with
the Kennedy files, is such an instructor parallel here because
it's the same thing with this and that people who
might be implicated can die. And my Pumpel will still
say there's a national security reason, you know, they're people
who will be in danger if the JFK files are
released in twenty twenty. He can still make that claim.
But what they're actually protecting in un likelihood is allied

(01:29:11):
quote allied intelligence services and countries so and the institution
of the CIA itself or whatever, and that doesn't go
away just because people die. I suppose it gets easier
to say that you've improved in reform with time, but
just that's we're not getting any I think we're not

(01:29:31):
getting any like smoking gun information in the near future unfortunately. Yeah,
all right, Ryan, let's move on to Asia, where we
have actually a lot of video here. You're going to
walk us through what's happening in Southeast Asia and Indonesia
and the Philippines because it's not getting a ton of
play in American media.

Speaker 3 (01:29:50):
So, yes, we're seeing unrest all over Southeast Asia, particularly
in Indonesia, but also in the Philippines and Malaysia. We
can put up e one here. All of the is
are are corruption related and also related to people's sense
that they're you know, working harder and falling farther behind,
prices are getting out of control, and that the elites

(01:30:12):
and in particular the lawmakers, are enriching themselves while not
doing what they're supposed to be doing, in some cases
through some flagrant corruption where they're you know, taking millions
of dollars or millions or whatever to build things, not
building them, and then people are catching their kids going
out and buying fancy cars. In other cases, in UH Indonesia,

(01:30:35):
the Philippines lots of foreign travel and like lavish stipends
for these lawmakers while while people are are suffering in
in Indonesia, protests are you know, began about the uh
these like these like ridiculous stipends and travel that Indonesian
lawmakers were getting some corruption, and then really exploded. I mean,

(01:30:58):
put up e four here when a police vehicle you
can see it here smashes into a delivery driver who
was not involved in the protests, who was just doing
his job as a delivery driver. And then the crowds
surround the vehicle and the and the police vehicle keeps

(01:31:20):
going and kills the man. And so this then took
what were modest protests and took them, you know, uh
and put them on steroids.

Speaker 4 (01:31:33):
Uh.

Speaker 3 (01:31:34):
Proboo, who is the Indonesian former death squad guy, you know,
us death squad guy who's now kind of a little
hostile to the US. Kind of funny, our own death
squad guys can't keep those in our orbit. Has said
he's going to prosecute these police officers. He said they're
going to roll back some of these lavish treats and

(01:31:55):
bonuses that these uh, that these different lawmakers have, but
also said he's going to crack down if people, you know,
continue pushing hard. The but the protests are getting quite serious.
You can roll some of this vo from from E two.
The the the parlam A, a parliamentary building, not the

(01:32:16):
not the main one, but one elsewhere it was was
burned by protesters, killing some people inside of it. You know,
you've got you know, troops in the street, you've got
people pushing back pretty aggressively. In in the Philippines, you
have one of the big scandals being these what they
call ghost projects Emily, where it's like the government will say,

(01:32:40):
all right, we're going to build a sea wall because
there's so much flooding, and we're going to appropriate money,
and then the politicians, uh buddy gets the contract, throws
a couple of stones and calls it today. And uh
the president recently went up there and looked at the
the sea wall and was like, wait, there's no seawall here.

(01:33:03):
It's still flooding. Constantly. We could jump out of this
and go to E eight, which is a bit of
a mash up about what I was just explaining.

Speaker 16 (01:33:13):
Since July there's been massive flooding over there, with over
twenty five people dead, hundreds of thousands more displaced, schools
and offices, air travel all suspended. And what's come to
light from all this is the catastrophic failure of the
Philippines flood control systems, Which is weird because they've spent
a lot of money on this, around five billion USD
this year alone, but it doesn't seem to be working

(01:33:34):
at all. So where did all that money go. Well,
it turns out it's going right into the pockets of
the politicians and their families. The whole thing is corrupt.
Tons of flood control projects were found to be poorly
documented or unfinished, and there's been huge outrage from the public.

Speaker 14 (01:33:47):
For instance, the other week, the Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos
Junior this town of Balley Wide, which is just north
of Manilla, and you can see that there's this river
that flows through it that dumps into the Manila Bay
and it floods all the time, so much so that
the government decided to invest fifty five million pesos, which
is in equivalent to about one point two four million
US dollars to build a two hundred and twenty meter
river wall, which would have stopped the flooding, and official

(01:34:08):
paperwork from the Public Works stated that at the end
of June.

Speaker 3 (01:34:11):
That the project was completed.

Speaker 14 (01:34:13):
When President Marcus arrived into town in August twentieth, he
found that there was no wall and there was nothing
but a field where the water was getting dangerously close
to the houses made of wood. Or this other flood
wall in Lucina City that just cracked and collapsed earlier
this month after it costs the government over one hundred
million pesos or roughly about two million dollars to build.
So when you have people like Sarah and her husband Curly,

(01:34:34):
this guy who owned a couple of these construction companies,
one of which that had a ninety six million peso contracts,
are roughly about one point ninety six million US dollars
to build one of these flood mitigation structures. And when
the president of the country goes to Bulacana visit this
project that was allegedly completed earlier this year and finds
a wall that is barely started and clearly abandoned right
after Sarah, This guy just made a blog showing off

(01:34:55):
her brand new Mercedes may Bog Rolls, Royce Bentley and
horses show, where she basically stayed tumming again. I bought
this rolls race because it has an umbrella in the door.
Or people like Claudine Coe, whose father also owns construction companies,
who also received those flood contracts, is making videos flaunting
her brand new Mercedes g Wagon with custom interior having
such a hard time trying to figure out which one

(01:35:16):
of Daddy's credit cards to pay for gas with just
a quick reminder, g Wagon's base cost is almost one
hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Or Jammie CRUs loves to
flaunt her Chanel bags when her father has secured over
three point five billion pesos or roughly seventy one million
US dollars worth of flood contracts. Again while the rest
of the country is literally drowning underwater.

Speaker 3 (01:35:36):
So in Malaysia we can put up E nine here.
They went through this one MDB crisis, which, if you
guys haven't seen What's it mant on the Run document
you were watching right instaw me all of a sudden, Oh,
it's just doc vent. It's this document about this guy Jolo,
who was a Malaysian official who basically teamed up with

(01:36:00):
the UAE and some others to figure out how to
move money around and steal more than a billion dollars.
The book about it called a billion dollars. Well, I've
done some reporting on it over the years, is right,
which is why I was in that documentary. And then
this guy becomes friends with like all these like Hollywood celebrities,
and he funded the Wolf of Wall Street with the

(01:36:21):
stolen money, and as far as we know, he's living
on like a yacht in China somewhere. He still haven't
caught him. That nobody, nobody knows where the guy is.
So Malaysia's like, okay, we're going to not do this anymore.
Figure out how to not get ripped off again. The
Prime Minister went to jail for that, and they rushed
through this like ethics bill that everybody said, wait, don't

(01:36:43):
rush this through, like we want to take this seriously,
and so they did this slap dash thing that now
people are protesting as well. Meanwhile, the symbol for all
of this all three countries are using protesters are using
the one piece flag, which, if you're an anime fan,
you're like, well, good for these dudes, this is this
is amazing. Mac didn't. Producer Mac was very excited to

(01:37:06):
see the one piece flag standing in for these for
these rebels. I am not that much into anime, so
I can't tell you much about it. Your kids are
kids are in anime, for sure. Every kid nowadays is
deep into anime.

Speaker 4 (01:37:20):
I'll take your word for it.

Speaker 3 (01:37:21):
We need Producer Mac to explain to us why the
one piece flag is so appropriate, though.

Speaker 4 (01:37:25):
Producer Mac just sent over his thought quote everyone loves anime,
and I see he's typing now, so I think we're
about to get in comments.

Speaker 3 (01:37:31):
I mean, yes, everyone does love anime. It's not just
oh my gosh.

Speaker 4 (01:37:34):
Producer Griffin's typing too. He says big true, and Mac says, quote,
it's a symbol of liberation and freedom. Okay, so take
that to the bank. I trust Mac as a.

Speaker 3 (01:37:43):
Source on this, all right, get them guys right.

Speaker 4 (01:37:45):
I don't know if you've caught this, but there's a
debate happening on the sort of I don't know what
you could say, like nationalist right about whether or not
it's cringe to say civil wars potentially coming to America.
But as you were breaking down, these protests reminded me
of this massive piece the Wall Street Journal published yesterday.
Soccer sent it to us. The headline was, Americans lose

(01:38:07):
faith that hard work leads to economic gains. America's becoming
a nation of economic pessimists, they write. A new Wall
Street Journal nork Pole finds that the chair people say
they have a good chance of improving their standard of
living fell to twenty five percent, a record low in
surveys dating back to nineteen eighty seven. More than three
quarters that they lack confidence that life for the next
generation will be better than their own, the poll found.
And what's interesting about that is, you know, I think

(01:38:31):
there's a non zero possibility that we look back on
twenty twenty protests January sixth, on twenty twenty one as
the beginning of something, and Luigi Miggioni and what happened
in Midtown not long ago as a build up, not
as the peak, but as somebody that was building up
to a much more violent time that does more resemble

(01:38:53):
the violence of than late nineteen sixties, and that's obviously
something that we want to avoid very much. But when
you look at what's happening here, it's the sense of injustice.
You can just you know, go through the Batman movies
if you want to see how that plays out. That
you know, they're getting cheated by people who are bringing

(01:39:14):
the system for themselves, and that just creates such a
powder keg. And we always think that it feels far
off and distant, but I think we've had some indications
that it might not be right.

Speaker 3 (01:39:25):
And we also have to understand the way that the
US really kind of outsourced its violence in the twentieth century.
As we think about violence here in the United States,
like we know the names of a lot of the
people who were killed in the saying the civil rights

(01:39:46):
during the Civil Rights movement, whereas in Indonesia, you know
the US back death squads. They are killed half a
million to a million people. We're talking nineteen sixty seventies,
Like within our lifetime, Philippines in Malaysia, within our lifetimes

(01:40:08):
have seen enormous amounts of US sponsored violence as well,
and so and so that that leaves that leaves a
mark on a society, and so I think that that
could be one reason you see more aggressive protests as well,
that that that that memory is there, the pro boo,

(01:40:31):
the Indonesia guy like literally oversaw a massacre for instance,
that nearly killed Amy Goodman, like she she famously infamously
was covering this, covering the movement there, covering the kind
of civil war of whatever you want to call it,

(01:40:52):
and was very nearly killed in a masca that killed
enormous numbers of people. You just can go look up
for Amy Goodman on that and now he's president.

Speaker 4 (01:41:06):
Yeah, well, thanks for breaking all of this down. It's
definitely not getting the play it deserves American media.

Speaker 3 (01:41:12):
All right, up next, we're going to talk about a
new book from writers in Gaza called We Are Not Numbers.
A new book is out in the United States and
it's called We Are Not Numbers. The Voices of Gaza's Youth,
co edited by akbed Al Nuk and Pam Bailey and

(01:41:33):
part of the project We Are Not Numbers that was
founded in twenty fourteen to give voice to young people
in Gaza. Pam Bailey is joining us today to discuss
this project. In this book, we encouraged Pam over the
last several months that people go and buy ray Fad

(01:41:53):
Alarreer's book If I Must Die, not just because it
was a terrific collection of poetry, pro and interviews, but
also as an act of resistance to annihilation. That just
that the very act of reading the poetry, of reading
these stories is a is a way to stand against

(01:42:13):
the elimination of a people. And I would encourage everybody
to do the same with with we Are Not Numbers?
Which is which is this? Which is a Let let's
let's back up. Tell us about the project we Are
Not Numbers. First of all, thank you so much for
being here.

Speaker 9 (01:42:30):
Thank you. Yeah, it was We're Gonna Numbers founded it in.

Speaker 12 (01:42:36):
Right in the aftermath of the twenty fourteen Israeli War
on Gaza, which at the time I thought would be
like the.

Speaker 9 (01:42:42):
Worst in history.

Speaker 12 (01:42:44):
I could never imagine at the time that we'd be
going through something like this.

Speaker 9 (01:42:48):
But it was.

Speaker 12 (01:42:49):
It was the worst of the wars at that point
in time. And I was I was living in Gaza
at the time, and I met this.

Speaker 9 (01:42:59):
Young man.

Speaker 12 (01:43:01):
I had met this young man in Gaza at a
party and I sort of followed up with him on Facebook.
I noticed that his Facebook profile had gone dark. He
wasn't posting like he usually did. He was a prolific poster,
and so I just reached out to him and said,
you know, how are you And he said fine? And
I said, no, no, no, tell me something real. Clearly something's wrong.

(01:43:22):
It turned out his elder brother, who he idolized had
been killed, had been murdered in that war. And because
I'm a writer by background, and because I knew that
he had been struggling to improve his English, instead of
avoiding the topics like people tend to do when a
tragedy happens, I leaned into it and I encouraged him

(01:43:43):
to write a story about his brother, to honor him,
honor his memory, and help other people know who he
really was. And so over the course of like three months,
we passed this story back and forth.

Speaker 9 (01:43:55):
That the young man is.

Speaker 12 (01:43:56):
Ahmed, who's who now heads the project? And what was
really really important, And I think what this whole book
tries to do is that I learned in the course
of that essay that he wrote that his brother had
been killed because he was a member of the resistance.
He was, and he was afraid to tell me that
at first, he thought he assumed that once I knew that,

(01:44:19):
I would no longer feel sympathy with his brother. But
of course that wasn't true, because by the time he
told me that, he had told me all about his
brother growing up, and I knew what kind of a
kid he was. I knew what kind of what was
going on in the life of the family, what he endured,
what he saw that no child should ever see. And
I realized, you know, that's the story we don't hear here.

(01:44:40):
We still don't hear here, right. We hear about Hamas
and the people who fight for Hamas, and we think
of them as terrorists. We don't think of them as humans,
as individuals with stories, and we don't think about, gee,
why did they get to the point where they felt
like they had to do that? Same with October seventh,
we don't question too many people don't question about why
did that happen? And you know, it doesn't happen in

(01:45:01):
a vacuum. People don't get to that point in a vacuum.
And so I realized, we have an important story, and
I tried to get it published.

Speaker 9 (01:45:09):
It was the first time that.

Speaker 12 (01:45:12):
You know, a resistance fighter had been depicted as just
an ordinary person. And also at the same time, Mom
had came out of his depression. What's interesting is at
that time too, he was thinking that he should join
the resistance, that he should become a fighter.

Speaker 9 (01:45:28):
He saw no other future for him. All he saw
was bleak, a bleak future.

Speaker 12 (01:45:34):
So, uh, the act of writing and telling the story
and actually seeing it get published convinced him that perhaps
there was another way to resist.

Speaker 9 (01:45:43):
Now what breaks my heart today. So I really did
think if I started.

Speaker 12 (01:45:47):
The project that you know, this would give young writers,
young people another way to resist and express themselves.

Speaker 9 (01:45:56):
And I thought it might make a difference.

Speaker 12 (01:45:58):
So you know, when I went through all the stories
that we had mentored over the years since the project
got started in twenty fifteen, I just cried because you
look at where we're at today, and I felt like
I broke in a promise to them, you know, I
told them that this could make a difference. You know,
this is another way and if you know, this war,

(01:46:21):
what we're going through now is worse, so much worse
and all the Yeah, so it's it's a heartbreak for me.

Speaker 4 (01:46:29):
Yeah, well, I was gonna say, I mean, even what
you just explained was not a conversation. I mean, in
many corners of the American media, it's still not a
conversation that you're allowed to have. You can't talk about
people who come acts of terrorism as human beings. Even
if we take like the most hardened, reprehensible terrorist, asking

(01:46:54):
questions about how they got from point A to point B,
from being a baby to point B is forbidden. You're
absolutely not allowed to have that conversation because you get
lumped into a category as empathizing with acts of terrorism itself. So, Pam,
can you tell us a little bit about when you
spend time actually diving into these stories, what patterns maybe emerged?

(01:47:18):
What are people missing by not digging into those particular stories?

Speaker 9 (01:47:23):
And I think what makes this book unique.

Speaker 12 (01:47:25):
There's been a lot of books about gods and palasans
to come out recently, which is wonderful to see. But
what makes this book unique is that it's a collection
of very real stories. These are not professional writers, which
is the beauty of it. I think, very real snippets
of vignettes of life and gods over ten years. And

(01:47:48):
this book answers the question why October seventh happened, because
if you look going back from twenty fifteen, month after month,
year after year. Not only were there constant attacks in
terms of Israeli forces, you know, coming in every year.

Speaker 4 (01:48:05):
We didn't hear.

Speaker 12 (01:48:06):
About it all the time, but it's the everyday structural violence,
the lack of water, just potable water, the astronomically high
unemployment rate youth. You know, they have a very high
rate of education there. You know, they go through college
and everything, and then they come out to no hope
of a job. They can't leave, you know, Gaza, to

(01:48:27):
to pursue that. They can't even travel for a vacation,
you know. So it's like, that's what I think comes
out of the book and the lesson I want people
to take. It was a grinding oppression in both the
big ways, the attacks and the small ways every day.
Twenty four seven, for this gave us ten years. You
can't go through that kind of oppression and not and

(01:48:50):
not have something happen. And then the other thing is that,
you know, they also write about all the forms of
non violent resistance that they tried. There's a number of
the stories you'll probably remember.

Speaker 5 (01:49:00):
There was.

Speaker 12 (01:49:02):
A great March of Return, you know, there was a
non violent protest along.

Speaker 9 (01:49:06):
The border with Israel. They quote it for return because it.

Speaker 12 (01:49:09):
Was like their their desire to go back to their
original land that they'd been kicked off of. But it
was it was nonviolent, you know. And they write about
all the other ways they've gone to the ices, you know,
the international Criminal Court. They've only tried everything and it
didn't work. And to me, the sad part is I
also want everybody to take home from this is that
the only time they got attention, serious attention, has been

(01:49:31):
there was bolence. I mean, if we didn't want this
to happen, we didn't want chop for seventh to happen,
then the international community should have responded and heard them
all those other things were going on. If you don't
want people to resist, then show them that some other
technique works. You know, when people people have no future,

(01:49:52):
When people have they came and envision themselves living past
the age of thirty, what do you think some people
are going to react? And this is this is true
in our own country. Look at the American Revolution. This
is not a non violent country, you know. But yeah,
so I think And the other thing I think is
I hope people get from the book, is that you
also have glimpses of just ordinary kids struggling with weight,

(01:50:17):
with migraines and going to the beach, you know, woven
in and all the tragedy, you know, is everyday life,
and you start to recognize that there there's no difference
between them and us.

Speaker 3 (01:50:29):
And to the point about nonviolence, the Palestinian Authority, you know,
with you know, the PLO, put down arms and entered
into negotiations with Israel in the hopes that it would
you know, lead to some two state solution and a
slow down in settlements. Instead, the settlements expanded, and just
this last week, the US even said that members of

(01:50:51):
the Palestinian Authority, not humas Pile standing authority, would be
denied the opportunity to even travel to New York to
attend the United Nations upcoming Assembly, which when the US
agreed to take the United Nations or what you know,
asked if it could host the United Nations, one of
the deals was, we are going to allow even our

(01:51:13):
worst enemies to come here to New York. Doesn't mean
they can go around the entire country, but they can
come to New York and they can go to the UN.
Because it would give us an immense amount of power.
We're going to have the UN and we can just
keep people out of the country and not let them
attend the unit nations. And the one group of people
we do that too is the officials with the Palestinian authority,
who you know, did everything that they were supposed to

(01:51:36):
do but lay down their arms, entering negotiations and so on.
I'm curious for what you've been hearing about this, because
there's there's a paradox at play in the sense that
October seventh led to where we are today, which is utter,
absolute catastrophic annihilation of Gaza. On the other hand, a

(01:51:57):
lot of people who, like you said, committed to non
violent forms of resistance over the last decades have told
me they questioned that decision, And I say, it's a
paradox because the violent path led to this utter complete catastrophe.
Yet still some internally they're feeling like, well, perhaps that

(01:52:22):
was all there was. So how are the people that
you're talking to sorting through that question?

Speaker 12 (01:52:28):
Well, you know, there's sort of a I guess a
split between you know, the activist community outside and are
Gazan writers who are still trapped there.

Speaker 9 (01:52:40):
At this point.

Speaker 12 (01:52:41):
The people in Goza, they just they just wanted all
to stop, you know, I mean, what what breaks my
heart is that, you know, this is a very proud
people who rightfully so, are very proud of their culture,
and they're reduced to the point now of being to
accept anything. You know, you want them to all leave

(01:53:03):
and go to Uganda, you know, then okay, then we will,
but just stop the killing, stop the killing, and they're
reduced to that. And the conundrum here is like from
the outside, from the activist's point of view, I mean,
of course, this is probably the point in time that

(01:53:23):
we've seen the largest growth in supporters of Godza in Palestine,
you know, I mean there's a you know, huge change.

Speaker 9 (01:53:31):
I mean, did you.

Speaker 12 (01:53:32):
See even the number of Democrats we have in Congress,
you know, posing a bill to stop arm sales to
israel Is. You know, we've never been there before. And
isn't it a shame that this.

Speaker 9 (01:53:44):
Is what it took? This really is what it took.

Speaker 12 (01:53:48):
You know, where were they when you know, all those
years of just like not being able to live, you know,
I mean, you know, not having power.

Speaker 9 (01:53:58):
I mean when I.

Speaker 12 (01:53:59):
Lived there, we had electricity for three hours a day
every day. Americans complain if they're without a power for.

Speaker 9 (01:54:07):
Like a couple of days.

Speaker 12 (01:54:09):
I mean I often say you put an American over
there for say I give them three months, some of
them will be throwing rockets. I mean some of them will.
You know that this is human nature, that's how we
respond to oppression, you know.

Speaker 9 (01:54:22):
So it's a little bit it's.

Speaker 12 (01:54:25):
To me, I have this sort of like dueling things
like we've gotten the cause for Palestine to appoint, you know,
in terms of broad base of public support, and even
some politicians are always way behind. Have you know, is
at a point we've never been before. But this is
what it took a little bit of a follow up
on Ryan's question. You know, it's less than a year

(01:54:47):
ago we were being told by Anthony Blincoln, that Anthony
blinkn that Hamas had already reconstituted, and we know this
in different parts of Gaza. And the entire purpose of
war from Natiahu's perspective was to return the hostages and
eradicate Hamas. Does any of what's happened, of course in

(01:55:10):
the last several years, has that made Hamas from your perspective,
Having talked to people in these places Has this fueled
what the future violent conflicts? Has this made them more powerful?
Less powerful?

Speaker 4 (01:55:28):
Is this going to create a generation of Gossans who
are more attracted to the cause of Hamas. What do
you make of what happens now?

Speaker 12 (01:55:37):
I see, I think we're I think there's a mistake
in focusing on Hamas. We should talk about their resistance,
because one thing that was really important that was said
earlier is that I don't believe it's really about Hamas
at all. Israel has never supported any Palestinian movement that
any kind of power. They were against yes Er air Fat.
They actually helped curate Hamas in the very begin as

(01:56:00):
a counterweight to the Palsing authority. They will not like
anybody who is in power over the Palstini that they
don't control. So I don't think this is about Hamas
at all. And the question should be not so much
whether Hamas will continue, but will the resistance continue?

Speaker 9 (01:56:18):
And I believe that despite.

Speaker 12 (01:56:21):
The fact that you do have a the people overall
are at a point now and many of them would
just give everything up. The resistance will come back. You
can pound it for a while into the underground into submission,
but it will come back. I mean, that's what history
I think has shown us. You tell me, you tell
me one country where you haven't had this kind of

(01:56:44):
oppression and.

Speaker 9 (01:56:46):
Resistance totally went away. It doesn't happen.

Speaker 3 (01:56:51):
Anything else you'd like to say about the book before
we wrap, I just.

Speaker 12 (01:56:55):
Think I do think that what you said earlier. But
buying this book is an active resistance that America can do.
What's going on in the US with his President Trump's
latest action suspending or threatening not to give visas to anybody,
the palesty and pass porholder is trying to keep this
narrative from coming out. So one way you can fight

(01:57:19):
those kinds of actions is to buy the book and
give it to people, talk about it and again. But
I think is really important about this book because these
are not There's a few Palestinians have become really prominent,
but there are so many more that talent is so broad.

Speaker 9 (01:57:34):
And that's what, to me is also the beauty of
the book.

Speaker 12 (01:57:36):
It's not just one person who manages somehow to get
above the fray and get like in the New York
or whatever all the time. There's all these others, in
visible Palestinians, And this book is a collection of those.

Speaker 9 (01:57:48):
Stories is important.

Speaker 12 (01:57:50):
So I would say please buy it because if we
can make it a best seller in the US, this
sort of sends a message to the administration. No, we
want to hear these voices and we value it. And
send the message to the writers too. It tells them
that we're hearing you. We can't control our government, but
we are hearing you and we value your voices.

Speaker 3 (01:58:09):
And I think people will also want to know where
the proceeds are going.

Speaker 9 (01:58:12):
It's all going to be out numbers.

Speaker 12 (01:58:14):
It goes to the project, and we're desperately trying to
help I say about half of our writers are still there,
and we're really trying to help them. It's difficult to
get money in right now. You have these sort of
vultures that take.

Speaker 5 (01:58:27):
Half of half more.

Speaker 3 (01:58:28):
No, I can confirm that.

Speaker 12 (01:58:29):
Yeah, but we're trying desperately to support them, and any
any money we get from the book is.

Speaker 9 (01:58:36):
Going to help do that.

Speaker 3 (01:58:38):
Well. Pam Balley, thank you so much for taking the time,
and best of luck on the roll out of the book.

Speaker 9 (01:58:44):
Thank you so much for having me.

Speaker 3 (01:58:46):
You got it. I was lucky enough to get an
early copy of the book. Is very good it's rare
to get, you know, these ground level insights from people
who've been become quite good writers.

Speaker 4 (01:58:59):
Yeah, check it out. I mean, I can't say I
agreed with with everything there, but what is remarkable is
that it's a conversation you are not allowed to have still,
this conversation you are not allowed to have to because
if you if you answer some of those questions, they
go into a very uncomfortable place for the United States
and for Israel's to whether Israel has actually made its
own people more safe in the way this war has

(01:59:22):
been waged, and I think you know that has been
greatly to our detriment.

Speaker 3 (01:59:28):
Yeah. In Achmed's case is instructive in the sense that
you know, we always we all understand that when you
understood in Afghanistan, you drone strike a family, you might
kill one member of the Taliban, you probably created three more.
And so you know, killing his brother who was in
the resistance, killed him. But then his brother wanted to join,

(01:59:52):
but was then persuaded in a non violent direction instead
through the hope that the the sword the pen would
be mightier than the sword. Turned out neither were a match.

Speaker 4 (02:00:06):
At this point, I wish I had the exact quote
actually here it is. This is from Antony Blincoln. Again,
this was as the Biden administration was leaving office. He said,
each time Israel completes his military operations and pulls back
Hamas militants regroup and re emerge because there's nothing else
to fill the void. Indeed, we assessed that Hamas has
recruited almost as many new militants as it has lost.

(02:00:28):
This is a recipe for enduring insurgency and perpetual war.
That is from Antony Blincoln saying that. And that's where
one of the things I disagree with Pamlin is that
it's I think it is very worthwhile to focus on
Hamas narrowly as opposed to the resistance broadly, as she said,
because not that we don't have to get into the
vader I think, but I mean, if Hamas itself is recruiting,
by the US's estimates, almost as many new people who

(02:00:50):
had been lost by last year the end of twenty
twenty four, what is all of this death actually right?
Service is it serving?

Speaker 6 (02:01:00):
At that?

Speaker 3 (02:01:01):
So that's why full extermination seems to be on the
on dockets. As Anthony Aguilar talked about today.

Speaker 4 (02:01:07):
Crazy Show This was jam packed, so thank you to everybody.
If you want to get a premium subscription, which means
you get the show early right in your inbox, and
you get access to the second half of the Friday Show,
lots of fun stuff behind the pay wall. Let's get
step behind the paywall. You can head over to Breaking
Points dot com subscribe there no problem if you can't.
Most important thing is subscribing on YouTube. That helps us

(02:01:27):
so much.

Speaker 3 (02:01:29):
And Emily and I will see you on Friday. I
guess

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}9/3/25: Trump Threatens Chicago Takeover, Venezuela Ship Blown Up, Tariff Refunds & MORE!

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;}24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

All Episodes

9/3/25: Trump Threatens Chicago Takeover, Venezuela Ship Blown Up, Tariff Refunds & MORE!

24/7 News: The Latest