Latest / Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar / 7/1/26: Corporate Dems Defeated In CO, Justice Alito Retirement Leak, Congress MKUltra Testimony

Transcript

7/1/26: Corporate Dems Defeated In CO, Justice Alito Retirement Leak, Congress MKUltra Testimony · Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar

0:00
Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
0:01
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
0:05
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
0:07
Speaker 2: the future of the show.
0:08
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
0:10
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
0:13
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
0:14
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
0:17
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
0:19
Speaker 2: you'll access to our full shows, unedited, ad free, and
0:23
Speaker 2: all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
0:25
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
0:27
Speaker 1: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
0:29
Speaker 1: dot com.
0:34
Speaker 3: Right.
0:34
Speaker 4: Good morning, and welcome to Breaking Points. Another Wednesday, another
0:36
Speaker 4: socialist celebration. We'll get to that in a moment, but first,
0:40
Speaker 4: we do have a newsletter now, Yes, sign up for
0:43
Speaker 4: at breakingpoints dot com. You're not getting It's great, tells
0:46
Speaker 4: you what the show's about, helps you decide which ones
0:48
Speaker 4: you want, which segments you want to watch. You don't
0:51
Speaker 4: have to look down the comments section to see when
0:54
Speaker 4: I'm done rambling in the first segment and we actually
0:57
Speaker 4: get to the news, It'll just tell you right there.
1:00
Speaker 5: Convenient.
1:00
Speaker 6: Yeah, and join the many people who have signed up,
1:03
Speaker 6: because we're getting lots of sign ups. If it is
1:05
Speaker 6: not if it's not hitting your inbox, free, it's free. Yeah, yeah,
1:07
Speaker 6: it's free. Now there's a premium version as well for
1:10
Speaker 6: premium subscribers. And if it's not hitting your inbox, check
1:12
Speaker 6: your spam spam folder. And if it's not your spam folder,
1:16
Speaker 6: what's the email is support at supercast dot com, right,
1:20
Speaker 6: so hit us up.
1:22
Speaker 5: We'll make sure that you get it and it goes.
1:23
Speaker 6: To the right place. We're really excited about this product.
1:25
Speaker 6: It's pretty cool. I keep kind it a product. I
1:27
Speaker 6: feel like that's what you're supposed to do when you
1:29
Speaker 6: pitch these things, but it's not really a products produced.
1:32
Speaker 6: It's a labor of love. But it is really cool
1:35
Speaker 6: because like yesterday, for example, Chrystal and I were talking
1:37
Speaker 6: about a particular study and we were able to just
1:40
Speaker 6: pop that in the newsletter to make sure that if
1:42
Speaker 6: while you're listening to the show, you're like, ah, I
1:44
Speaker 6: want to check that study for myself, Well, now you
1:46
Speaker 6: have the link in your inbox.
1:47
Speaker 7: Boom, right there, there you go.
1:49
Speaker 6: You don't have to take my word for it anymore.
1:50
Speaker 7: Exactly.
1:52
Speaker 4: So yesterday the Supreme Court said, hey, this thing that
1:57
Speaker 4: has been legal for two hundred plus years, birthright citizenship,
1:59
Speaker 4: still caused a huge freak out on the right. The
2:02
Speaker 4: ruling came down after you guys were doing your show yesterday.
2:06
Speaker 4: So we'll talk about that and it's and it's fallout
2:09
Speaker 4: and the various crash outs that are resulting from it.
2:14
Speaker 4: And yesterday, as Emily Flagg, there was sort of a
2:18
Speaker 4: first Wisconds says the Church Committee. Maybe not exactly as meticulous,
2:22
Speaker 4: but still we'll take it. Mk Ultra came in for
2:26
Speaker 4: a lot of attention on Capitol Hill.
2:29
Speaker 6: Tom O'Neill and Stephen Kins are testifying. Called by Republicans
2:32
Speaker 6: this Tom O'Neil and Stephen Kins are called by Republicans
2:35
Speaker 6: to testifying.
2:35
Speaker 5: I'm Kultra.
2:36
Speaker 4: This was the CIA's mind torture program. There they're hunt
2:40
Speaker 4: for a mind control drug in the fifties and sixties.
2:44
Speaker 7: Yes, and and much more.
2:46
Speaker 6: And Stephen Kins are seminal book on the subject sites
2:49
Speaker 6: our own Ryan Grim here.
2:51
Speaker 7: Yes, as you noticed, I didn't even realize that that's
2:53
Speaker 7: that was very cool.
2:54
Speaker 6: Yes, So we'll dive into that and then also be
2:58
Speaker 6: talking a little bit about what's happening in Israeli politics.
3:02
Speaker 4: Yeah, more evidence that Israel enacted the Hannibal Directive, which
3:09
Speaker 4: they had legally gotten rid of in like twenty sixteen,
3:12
Speaker 4: which is a doctrine that says, if there is an
3:16
Speaker 4: effort by Palestinians to take Israeli's captive to trade them
3:21
Speaker 4: for prisoners, kill all the Palestinians and the Israelis on
3:25
Speaker 4: while it's happening, so that there's nobody to exchange. It's
3:28
Speaker 4: so gross and humane. They publicly said they don't do
3:31
Speaker 4: that anymore. We're going to show you video evidence of
3:34
Speaker 4: them implementing it, ordering it before I think like ten
3:38
Speaker 4: am on October seventh.
3:39
Speaker 6: And Wanda vid Rojas will join us as well. He
3:42
Speaker 6: has been covering the Colombian election, which is much more
3:44
Speaker 6: interesting than it's getting credit for, to be honest. They
3:47
Speaker 6: have a new incoming president who's being referred to as
3:51
Speaker 6: the Colombian Bucelle, and he's got some music videos obviously
3:55
Speaker 6: in a podcast, and Petro is taking things not quite
4:00
Speaker 6: in stride, so we'll have an update from Colombia. He
4:03
Speaker 6: has an interesting theory about how environmentalism may have affected
4:06
Speaker 6: Petro's parties odds of hang into power.
4:09
Speaker 5: So one will be with us.
4:10
Speaker 6: And then Ryan, we have a wild interview to close
4:13
Speaker 6: out the show.
4:13
Speaker 4: Yes, medical researcher Shalenbot will be joining us, and I
4:18
Speaker 4: don't want to give too much away, but he has
4:23
Speaker 4: a his a which is interesting. Big fan of Breaking Points.
4:27
Speaker 4: B has made a discovery about the human body. It's
4:33
Speaker 4: and the way that the brain interacts with that body
4:37
Speaker 4: that could revolutionize both our approach to autoimmune disorders. So
4:42
Speaker 4: if you or anybody you know has lives with an
4:44
Speaker 4: autoimmunis or are you going to watch this, but also
4:46
Speaker 4: our understanding of consciousness and spirituality, right that part didn't
4:50
Speaker 4: make it into his published papers.
4:51
Speaker 7: We're going to talk to him about that.
4:53
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's going to be absolutely fascinating. So stick around.
4:56
Speaker 6: Make sure you subscribe to the newsletter if you haven't
4:58
Speaker 6: done that yet. Like we said, we have a reversion
5:00
Speaker 6: of the newsletter that is available, so if you want
5:03
Speaker 6: to get it, go ahead and head over to Breakingpoints
5:05
Speaker 6: dot com. Let's get into the show. We'll start with
5:09
Speaker 6: the big Socials takeover in Colorado. Ryan.
5:11
Speaker 4: Yeah, So Meila Kiros, who you saw this week on
5:15
Speaker 4: Breaking Points, ended up trouncing Diana to Get, who has
5:19
Speaker 4: been in Congress so long that some of her defenders
5:23
Speaker 4: were reminding us.
5:24
Speaker 7: Last night that, hey, she's not so bad. She voted
5:26
Speaker 7: against the Iraq war. It's like wool good for her,
5:32
Speaker 7: But what she done since then?
5:34
Speaker 4: And also, let me just make one quick point, that
5:37
Speaker 4: was an easy vote, Like for a Democrat in a
5:40
Speaker 4: deep blue seat as a House member, it was actually
5:44
Speaker 4: easy to vote against the Iraq word was it do
5:47
Speaker 4: not rewrite this?
5:48
Speaker 6: Was it the aumath that she voted against?
5:51
Speaker 7: She vot voted again?
5:52
Speaker 4: Yeah, basically the whatever the two thousand and two vote
5:55
Speaker 4: was to authorize the invasion of Iraq, and something like
5:59
Speaker 4: a third of Democrats did vote with Bush and give
6:01
Speaker 4: him support. But that was There was a lot of
6:03
Speaker 4: swing district Democrats Clinton, there were marches Glarick Clinton. There
6:07
Speaker 4: were marches across the world at the time, across the
6:10
Speaker 4: United States. It was obvious voting against the Iraq war
6:14
Speaker 4: was the right thing to do for a Democrat.
6:16
Speaker 7: Why are we wasting time talking about this? Meylack?
6:18
Speaker 4: Heros despite millions of dollars spent in the last couple
6:23
Speaker 4: of weeks to support to Get, And that's that tells
6:27
Speaker 4: you kind of what her record, what her real record.
6:31
Speaker 7: Was in Congress.
6:31
Speaker 4: So it's like, yes, she's in the Congressional Progressive Caucus,
6:35
Speaker 4: she's a good liberal. She voted the right way on
6:37
Speaker 4: the Iraq War. But if APAK and corporate interests come
6:42
Speaker 4: in at the end of your race with millions of
6:45
Speaker 4: dollars to defend you, that tells you everything about how
6:50
Speaker 4: they think, where they think your position is in the
6:53
Speaker 4: political ecosystem. And it is an ally of theirs.
6:57
Speaker 6: That that viral video of Diana to Get several months
7:00
Speaker 6: ago was absolutely brutal.
7:02
Speaker 4: Right where she was She's asked about the black the
7:05
Speaker 4: Back the Block the Bombs Act, and she's saying that
7:09
Speaker 4: she doesn't like the legislation and if and eventually gets
7:13
Speaker 4: really upset, like.
7:14
Speaker 7: If Chase is the activist, Yeah, if that's the only
7:16
Speaker 7: thing you care about, then don't vote for me. And
7:18
Speaker 7: the woman's like walks away and to Get like chases
7:20
Speaker 7: her through the coffee shop.
7:21
Speaker 5: R It's desperate.
7:22
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's very very strange, and she ended up getting
7:26
Speaker 4: beaten by more than ten points. Not all the votes
7:28
Speaker 4: aren't counted yet, but it's not even going to be close.
7:32
Speaker 4: In the end, it may a lot is going to
7:33
Speaker 4: wind up with more than fifty percent of the vote,
7:35
Speaker 4: and it gets going to be down around in.
7:38
Speaker 7: The low forties. Let's roll a two b here, here's
7:40
Speaker 7: me like heroes from her victory party.
7:43
Speaker 2: I want to tell you something about why this campaign matters,
7:47
Speaker 2: because it matters for what comes next. When I wrote
7:51
Speaker 2: a letter defending students' rights to protest the genocide and Gaza,
7:57
Speaker 2: my law firm, my law firm told me take it
8:00
Speaker 2: down or you're fired.
8:03
Speaker 7: I didn't flinch.
8:06
Speaker 3: I didn't flinch because I stood by.
8:08
Speaker 8: Every word and I always will.
8:14
Speaker 7: But I know, I know that will not be the
8:18
Speaker 7: only moment where those in.
8:20
Speaker 9: Power will tell me to change my tone, to not
8:23
Speaker 9: rock the boat.
8:25
Speaker 7: That seems to happen a lot in Congress.
8:28
Speaker 8: But here in Denver, we stand by our values.
8:32
Speaker 9: And we stand with our community. We will not wait
8:41
Speaker 9: to take the fight with Donald Trump and the old Garthy.
8:45
Speaker 10: We will not wait.
8:48
Speaker 9: We will not wait throw ballish Height and Psntica. We
8:58
Speaker 9: will not wait to put an into the politics of
9:01
Speaker 9: the past, to that big money out of that politics
9:05
Speaker 9: and to a jet pan a path. And we will
9:15
Speaker 9: not wait to end the genocide and palistine.
9:19
Speaker 4: First of all, why do we not have one of
9:20
Speaker 4: those horns here on this show? We're a morning Showilla
9:24
Speaker 4: without the Zilla, without the horn, we come on, we
9:25
Speaker 4: got it.
9:26
Speaker 7: I don't know, we gotta have it right. We need
9:28
Speaker 7: one of those.
9:29
Speaker 6: We don't do enough Kathy Lee and Hode just to
9:32
Speaker 6: begin with. That's like the energy we need to bring.
9:34
Speaker 7: We need more of that.
9:35
Speaker 3: Yeah.
9:36
Speaker 7: So this was another w for the political powerhouse.
9:39
Speaker 4: We can put up eight three mss Rachel who had
9:42
Speaker 4: endorsed me a lot. It's also a win for Justice Democrats,
9:46
Speaker 4: which has been on its biggest winning streak, the biggest
9:52
Speaker 4: romp since its founding. Like this is they're blowing away
9:56
Speaker 4: their transformational year of twenty eighteen.
9:59
Speaker 7: What they're able now.
10:00
Speaker 4: May Loott also had the support of Denver DSA and
10:04
Speaker 4: the National DSA and also Hassan Piker. There's a cool
10:10
Speaker 4: video that's that from the stream that from Hassan stream
10:13
Speaker 4: that will play for you in a second. You're going
10:15
Speaker 4: to see in it Chris rab who was the DSA
10:18
Speaker 4: back Justice Democrats backed candidate in Philadelphia who traveled to
10:23
Speaker 4: Denver to try to recruit vote recruit voters for may Lot,
10:28
Speaker 4: you've got Hassan Piker, and then you've got Linda Sarsura,
10:30
Speaker 4: the New York activist, and they talk a voter into
10:35
Speaker 4: getting to the polls and actually getting three of her
10:38
Speaker 4: family to the polls.
10:39
Speaker 7: Over data centers, let's roll a.
10:41
Speaker 11: Two c you guys, what do you guys think about
10:44
Speaker 11: the data center that just popped up over here?
10:46
Speaker 1: Yeah?
10:47
Speaker 11: Right, all right, listen, so bad to get this represented
10:51
Speaker 11: this district for thirty years in Congress. Is saying nothing
10:56
Speaker 11: about the data centers because she's in the pocket of
10:58
Speaker 11: big corporations. Maylocke Kiros, on the other hand, is going
11:02
Speaker 11: to fight back on the data center more terms. She
11:04
Speaker 11: got endorsed by Bernie Sanders too. They want to put
11:06
Speaker 11: a stop to these data centers being getting propped up
11:10
Speaker 11: left and right.
11:10
Speaker 7: You guys are stuck.
11:11
Speaker 11: Between a factory, purre in a factory, and a data
11:14
Speaker 11: center in between, and that's not good for these little guys.
11:17
Speaker 5: Back then, you only have till seven o'clock to vote.
11:21
Speaker 11: So if you don't have to have a ballot in
11:23
Speaker 11: your house currently, yes, yeah, you got, you gotta put
11:26
Speaker 11: it in a druse.
11:28
Speaker 6: Yeah yo, drop them off to Congress.
11:33
Speaker 12: In Philly all the way up because you have the
11:36
Speaker 12: opportunity to York, New York.
11:40
Speaker 7: Yeah, well, you have the opportunity to bring.
11:44
Speaker 12: Someone to Congress who's actually going to change things and
11:48
Speaker 12: not you know, not be with the corporations, but be
11:51
Speaker 12: with the people. But only if you come out. So
11:53
Speaker 12: if you got three battle at home dropping in by seven.
11:55
Speaker 4: O'clock, they then talk about like where her ballot drop
11:59
Speaker 4: off location is, and they figured out there's a library nearby,
12:02
Speaker 4: So she went home, found those ballots, brought them back.
12:07
Speaker 7: Everybody every voted.
12:08
Speaker 4: The data centers are driving people absolutely insane, like driving
12:13
Speaker 4: people completely completely nuts. You put up a seven because
12:20
Speaker 4: it was This win was not just limited to may Lot.
12:26
Speaker 4: Juli Gonzalez lost her race. We'll talk about that in
12:28
Speaker 4: a second, to Hickenlooper, who was the incumbent senator. She
12:31
Speaker 4: was kind of running as a ticket with with may Lot.
12:34
Speaker 4: It's very difficult to win statewide in a Senate race.
12:38
Speaker 4: But in the state Senate race to replace Julian Gonzalez,
12:41
Speaker 4: the progressive populists won that one. There's there are two
12:45
Speaker 4: House races where the progressive movement was challenging incumbents. Those
12:50
Speaker 4: are those are now too close to call, so they
12:52
Speaker 4: may end up knocking those folks off, and then we.
12:55
Speaker 7: Put up a six. Phil Weisser is a oh wait,
13:01
Speaker 7: this is a SOT. So let me just tell you so.
13:02
Speaker 4: Phil Weiser is the attorney general running against Michael Bennett,
13:06
Speaker 4: who is the incumbent senator who's actually still in office
13:09
Speaker 4: through twenty twenty eight. Corporate, kind of centrist democratic senator,
13:15
Speaker 4: a popular, well known figure for many years in Colorado,
13:20
Speaker 4: and he was far and away the favorite. In the
13:24
Speaker 4: last couple of weeks, he had to lend his campaign
13:26
Speaker 4: something like a million dollars, which is its own little
13:29
Speaker 4: corrupt Act, which, if you remember Ted Cruz kind of
13:32
Speaker 4: legalized this chicanery where you lend yourself money and then
13:38
Speaker 4: you can raise money as a senator directly to you
13:42
Speaker 4: to pay yourself back.
13:43
Speaker 7: It's this.
13:45
Speaker 4: It creates this situation where it's legal for then a
13:48
Speaker 4: rich person to just hand money directly to a person
13:53
Speaker 4: rather than kind of having to go through the whole Oh,
13:57
Speaker 4: this is just a campaign contribution.
13:58
Speaker 7: No, that's going on in your pocket at this point.
14:02
Speaker 4: So Bennett did that and then ended up getting beaten
14:05
Speaker 4: by Phil Weiser, who a friend of David Serotis, So
14:11
Speaker 4: that gives you some indication of I think where he
14:13
Speaker 4: sits politically, ran as an kind of anti corruption crusader,
14:19
Speaker 4: somebody who is kind of in the anti monopoly wing,
14:23
Speaker 4: wants to get big money out of politics, has and
14:26
Speaker 4: has ideas for how without a constitutional amendment you can
14:30
Speaker 4: restrict big money. So as the same you know that
14:36
Speaker 4: just as we're getting like the world's first trillionaire and
14:39
Speaker 4: wealth is increasingly being concentrated, we're seeing some level.
14:44
Speaker 7: Of pushback against against that.
14:46
Speaker 4: I don't know if it'll be too late, if they've
14:48
Speaker 4: if they've locked everything down, but at least there's kind
14:52
Speaker 4: of a rearguard action against these trillionaires.
14:55
Speaker 6: And I was reading this morning, so with Milt Kios
14:58
Speaker 6: in Congress, that would bring DSAY affiliates to seven right
15:02
Speaker 6: in Congress. Is that's where the count is right now?
15:06
Speaker 6: I mean, that's just a gargantuan number compared to nothing.
15:09
Speaker 7: Yeah, that's pretty crazy.
15:10
Speaker 6: And if we actually put the Tanniel post up on
15:12
Speaker 6: the screen one more time, this is a seven.
15:14
Speaker 5: I just want to dwell on this for a moment.
15:16
Speaker 6: Because we of course covered the like dem Tea party
15:19
Speaker 6: here before. I feel like a lot of the corporate
15:21
Speaker 6: press did, and we would joke about it a bit,
15:24
Speaker 6: but then it became pretty obvious.
15:26
Speaker 5: It was very serious.
15:28
Speaker 6: This is the dem Tea Party. If you're looking at
15:30
Speaker 6: this post from Taniel right now, three Congress members, well,
15:33
Speaker 6: basically it says he's counting fifteen dem incumbents who have
15:36
Speaker 6: lost to a challenger to their left. So three congress members,
15:39
Speaker 6: four state senators, eight state House members. That's the Democrat
15:44
Speaker 6: Tea Party.
15:45
Speaker 4: Yes, and we had a stunted tea Party basically in
15:49
Speaker 4: twenty seventeen twenty eighteen, when you.
15:52
Speaker 7: Got the first squad wave.
15:54
Speaker 4: The problem then was that there was not really what
15:59
Speaker 4: the Republican Tea Party had in nine to ten was
16:03
Speaker 4: conservative media. Once Eric Canter got beaten by Brat in
16:10
Speaker 4: Virginia and once you started to see all of these
16:12
Speaker 4: people coming out to these protests around tax Day, around
16:15
Speaker 4: and then in the summer of two thousand and nine,
16:17
Speaker 4: Fox News flipped completely. They're like, all right, this Republican
16:22
Speaker 4: establishment world is done. Like we are throwing our weight
16:25
Speaker 4: in with the Tea Party, and that just shifted the
16:29
Speaker 4: entire balance of power. In twenty seventeen and eighteen when
16:33
Speaker 4: the Democrats came with their own version of a tea party,
16:36
Speaker 4: and you had AOC and the others, The New York Times,
16:38
Speaker 4: CNN and MSNBC stayed very firmly with the Democratic Party
16:44
Speaker 4: establishment and said no, no, no, that way lies ruined
16:50
Speaker 4: Democratic establishment is the way to resist Trump. And they
16:53
Speaker 4: elevated resisting Trump and said the way we're going to
16:56
Speaker 4: do we need Schumer and Pelosi and these tested fighters.
16:59
Speaker 6: Although they AOC and magazine covers and that sort of thing.
17:02
Speaker 7: But yes, but she got way way. There was a
17:05
Speaker 7: period they were for Dave Brett.
17:07
Speaker 4: Right, and there was a period in right, but you know,
17:10
Speaker 4: Dave breats, it's not There was a period in twenty
17:13
Speaker 4: nineteen where her name, AOC's name recognition was like triple
17:18
Speaker 4: what it triple among conservatives what it was among liberals. Yep,
17:21
Speaker 4: because Fox was covering her every single day, and you
17:25
Speaker 4: rarely see her mentioned on MSNBC, Like they just weren't
17:28
Speaker 4: interested in it.
17:30
Speaker 7: And so.
17:32
Speaker 4: After the party established was given its shot, they got
17:35
Speaker 4: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Now that there's this energy again,
17:42
Speaker 4: you're getting more attention paid in the in the traditional
17:46
Speaker 4: kind of democratic press, CNNMSNBC, New York Times.
17:50
Speaker 7: To this insurgent wing.
17:51
Speaker 4: But more importantly, there's a media apparatus like places like
17:56
Speaker 4: this and the podcast world and mightas touch like just
18:00
Speaker 4: all of these different plate, all of these ways for
18:03
Speaker 4: these candidates to reach voters that just didn't exist even
18:07
Speaker 4: in twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen.
18:09
Speaker 7: Well, and intershipjection is only reaching so many people, right.
18:13
Speaker 6: Well, yeah, And this has always been part of my theory,
18:16
Speaker 6: is that like the having some built in sympathy from
18:21
Speaker 6: corporate media, even though yes, it's true corporate media is
18:23
Speaker 6: generally more pro war than the public and more pro
18:26
Speaker 6: like tax cuts for the rich than the public. There's
18:29
Speaker 6: like a cultural alignment between a lot of the corporate
18:32
Speaker 6: press and more progressive and center Democrats.
18:37
Speaker 5: Again, this is just uncultural. I'm not talking about anything else.
18:40
Speaker 6: But that often hurts Democrats because it makes you think,
18:44
Speaker 6: for example, that you can get away with running Joe
18:46
Speaker 6: Biden again until he crashes out on a debate, or
18:48
Speaker 6: it makes you think that you can run let's say,
18:53
Speaker 6: in twenty you can get away with putting Hillary in
18:56
Speaker 6: front of Bernie and the Chicknry involved in that there
18:59
Speaker 6: won't be any as fallout over the next decade, that
19:02
Speaker 6: it's worth it to just like jam Clinton through and
19:05
Speaker 6: make it really hard for other people to even try
19:06
Speaker 6: to compete with her, and people won't get pissed off
19:09
Speaker 6: about it because we are in control, and it does
19:12
Speaker 6: end up I think backfiring. And part of what we're seeing.
19:14
Speaker 4: Is that, Yeah, I think there's something to that for sure,
19:16
Speaker 4: and the cultural break you're seeing between this Meylack hero
19:20
Speaker 4: swing of the party and the kind of mainstream MSNBCCNNS
19:26
Speaker 4: is really around Israel, that they are unable to metabolize
19:32
Speaker 4: the criticism of Israel as really anything other than just
19:36
Speaker 4: anti Semitism and derangement, whereas normal voters can't understand kind
19:44
Speaker 4: of sna in the New York Times defense of Israel
19:46
Speaker 4: is anything other than corruption. So it is a very
19:50
Speaker 4: stark divide, and just like with Spayot last week and
19:56
Speaker 4: Reinoso also that their unwillingness to voice real criticism of Israel,
20:03
Speaker 4: it became a proxy for weakness and.
20:06
Speaker 6: Corruption, which is yes, I think that's right. That's how
20:09
Speaker 6: abduyle Sayet has been framing it, and that's what I
20:12
Speaker 6: think a lot of people have missed. Finally, just want
20:14
Speaker 6: to point out that viral posts of Scott Wiener, the
20:16
Speaker 6: videos of Scott Wiener being shouted out of pride, that
20:20
Speaker 6: is actually interesting from the perspective. He has referred to
20:23
Speaker 6: what happened to Gaza as genocide.
20:25
Speaker 7: So did Reinoso. But both of them did it after
20:28
Speaker 7: they were running for Congress.
20:29
Speaker 6: And that's how I guess powerful of a test or
20:34
Speaker 6: that's what this test means exactly.
20:35
Speaker 4: People people are Okay, I'm glad you're saying it now,
20:38
Speaker 4: but we don't think we think you're saying it cynically.
20:44
Speaker 4: Let's talk about the uh, the Supreme Court ruling, which
20:49
Speaker 4: was paired with a very bizarre story. You can walk
20:52
Speaker 4: us through this Ina Totenberg, who is the kind of
20:55
Speaker 4: legendary Supreme Court reporter for my entire lifetime.
20:58
Speaker 5: Best day of Ruth Burderginsburg.
20:59
Speaker 4: Yeah, and so she reports that Justice Alito is retiring,
21:04
Speaker 4: which would be tactical and smart of Alito at this point,
21:09
Speaker 4: because if Democrats take the Senate, then they are going
21:14
Speaker 4: to follow the McConnell president and they're not going to
21:18
Speaker 4: confirm a Trump justice. But as you'll see on the
21:20
Speaker 4: image here Editor's note.
21:22
Speaker 5: Oops, this is enormous.
21:25
Speaker 7: It's not good.
21:26
Speaker 6: The decisions that were handed downe yesterday were enormous as well. Obviously,
21:30
Speaker 6: upheld birthright citizenship, upheld state's abilities to ban boys from girls' sports.
21:36
Speaker 6: So West Virginia and Idaho's laws were upheld by the
21:39
Speaker 6: Supreme Court yesterday. A few pretty significant, big decisions, but
21:43
Speaker 6: potentially overshadowed by the story from NPR where Nina Totenberg
21:48
Speaker 6: reported that Samuel Alito, who right now, I mean he
21:50
Speaker 6: wrote the Dobbs decision. Samuel Alito is seen as like
21:53
Speaker 6: the conservative leader of the court. Obviously Clarence Thomas is
21:56
Speaker 6: there as well, but in recent years Alito has been
21:58
Speaker 6: seen as the kind of champion where people are nervous
22:03
Speaker 6: about Gorsach sometimes, or Kavanaugh sometimes and certainly now Amy
22:06
Speaker 6: Cony Barrett. Many times he was seen as like the
22:09
Speaker 6: stallwart who was writing these brilliant conservative opinions, and the
22:15
Speaker 6: strategy of him retiring now makes sense. It's been a
22:17
Speaker 6: rumor for a long time, but Totenberg posted a story
22:21
Speaker 6: to NPR that got taken down pretty quickly, and yet
22:25
Speaker 6: interestingly enough, it said in the post, people caught this
22:30
Speaker 6: in the wayback machine that on Friday, Alito announced his retirement.
22:36
Speaker 6: So what that means is possibly it.
22:38
Speaker 7: Was yesterday Friday, just to be clear, Yes.
22:40
Speaker 6: Yesterday, Yeah, yesterday was Tuesday. So it sounds like possibly
22:45
Speaker 6: she had something that was under an embargo, or she
22:48
Speaker 6: knew because she has very deep relationships on the Court
22:52
Speaker 6: that something was coming down and had a pre write
22:55
Speaker 6: ready to go. She says, let's just walk through this
22:58
Speaker 6: that you can make your own decision about what or not.
23:00
Speaker 6: We have a Supreme Court vacancy coming up, which would
23:03
Speaker 6: be massively significant obviously, So I'm going to read from
23:06
Speaker 6: Brian Steltz's rundown NPR's eminent Supreme Court correspondent, Nina Totenberg.
23:10
Speaker 6: So she made a rookie mistake on Tuesday morning, and
23:12
Speaker 6: that's why she reported that Justice Samuel Aledo was retiring.
23:16
Speaker 6: Toltenberg's story sent other newsrooms scrambling to confirm, leading a
23:20
Speaker 6: court spokesperson to deny the reporting. Totenberg discussed the matter
23:23
Speaker 6: on All Things Considered Tuesday afternoon and read the text
23:26
Speaker 6: of the apologies he sent to Alito. The apology didn't
23:29
Speaker 6: fully explain why NPR published the report without additional confirmation. However,
23:34
Speaker 6: the embarrassing episode, Stalter said, amplified questions about whether Alito
23:38
Speaker 6: was contemplating retirement. Toltenberg said, quote, I scared everybody half
23:41
Speaker 6: to death for about five minutes. It's entirely on me.
23:44
Speaker 6: It's not anybody else's fault. So she read her apology
23:48
Speaker 6: to Aledo, which was, Dear Justice Alito, there are no
23:51
Speaker 6: words to adequately apologize for today's error in reporting your retirement.
23:54
Speaker 6: It was entirely my fault. Now here's where she explains
23:56
Speaker 6: what happened. I rushed out of the courtroom after the
23:59
Speaker 6: opinion announcement, and when I realized that the usual rush
24:01
Speaker 6: of folks after a few minutes had not happened, I
24:04
Speaker 6: asked somebody what's going on inside, which the answer was
24:07
Speaker 6: retirement announcements. I didn't hear the s on announcements, and
24:11
Speaker 6: I assumed something no reporters should ever do, that you
24:15
Speaker 6: were retiring. So, just to be clear, she says, this
24:20
Speaker 6: was the worst professional mistake of my more than fifty
24:21
Speaker 6: years in journalism. I don't know I could go on,
24:24
Speaker 6: but I don't know what else to say that I
24:26
Speaker 6: except that I am so so sorry. It was a
24:27
Speaker 6: class apology. I suppose but just to be clear, what
24:30
Speaker 6: she's right, it looks to me trying not to do
24:33
Speaker 6: is reveal the source here, because she's saying I heard
24:36
Speaker 6: announcements and or I heard announcement instead of announcements, which
24:42
Speaker 6: I think the implication of that is she knew that
24:45
Speaker 6: an announcement announcement was coming right exactly, and she took
24:49
Speaker 6: that as license to then phone up NPR say run
24:51
Speaker 6: the pre rite, which they didn't change to Friday when
24:54
Speaker 6: they just ran it, So NPR then didn't do the
24:56
Speaker 6: due diligence of saying, okay, we need to even get
24:59
Speaker 6: behind this. They were just rushing, which is odd because
25:01
Speaker 6: NPIERRE doesn't really even need to do that. They're not
25:03
Speaker 6: competing with like the Wires for the most part, so
25:06
Speaker 6: they really wanted to have that story first, and it
25:08
Speaker 6: ended up going out. I've never seen anything like that.
25:11
Speaker 4: It's the stuff of nightmares for for a reporter who's.
25:14
Speaker 7: Driven by these scoops.
25:16
Speaker 4: But yes, clearly it seems like what she's trying to
25:18
Speaker 4: say is that she knew or she somebody told her and.
25:22
Speaker 6: Announce Probably not Alito. Maybe he sort of famously doesn't.
25:27
Speaker 7: Talk to anybody, not even need a Totenberg.
25:29
Speaker 6: Definitely not need a Tonenberg.
25:31
Speaker 4: He is somebody somebody told her that, hey, leader's retired.
25:34
Speaker 4: This is my guess that leader's retiring. She then hears
25:38
Speaker 4: a announcement retirement, an announcement yep, oh shoot, like run
25:43
Speaker 4: my story quick without checking, like what announcement? Now, in
25:49
Speaker 4: her defense is like she thought retirement announcement. There's only
25:52
Speaker 4: nine justices, Like what are the chances it's somebody else retiring?
25:56
Speaker 7: What was it a secretary or.
25:58
Speaker 6: Something without her knowing?
25:59
Speaker 7: Yeah, and so they run the.
26:02
Speaker 4: Story and so yes, So the substantial point here would
26:07
Speaker 4: be it's likely that he is, yes, retiring, Yes.
26:12
Speaker 6: But now does he stay on another year? Honestly? Does
26:15
Speaker 6: he stay on?
26:15
Speaker 4: An amazing if If he stays on another year, just
26:19
Speaker 4: despite Nina Totenberg and then Democrats win the Senate, well
26:22
Speaker 4: what he would do is.
26:23
Speaker 7: Retire the day after the election.
26:25
Speaker 4: Yeah, and then they would use the lame duck in
26:29
Speaker 4: one week and just ram somebody through.
26:30
Speaker 6: Yeah. So we'll see what happens. But that's it looks
26:34
Speaker 6: like we're about to have a Supreme Court vacancy and
26:36
Speaker 6: another fight over that. Now Conservatives are We covered this
26:39
Speaker 6: a bit yesterday but that was before the birthright citizenship
26:42
Speaker 6: opinion came out.
26:43
Speaker 5: Conserves were already frustrated.
26:44
Speaker 6: With Amy Cony Barrett's mail in ballot just decision in
26:48
Speaker 6: the Mississippi case.
26:49
Speaker 5: But yesterday there were actually calls.
26:51
Speaker 6: After the birthright citizenship case went five to four with
26:54
Speaker 6: Cony Barrett siding with Katanji Brown Jackson, John Roberts, and
26:59
Speaker 6: Soda Mayor and Kagan, there were calls for her to
27:02
Speaker 6: just resign. Here is b three Mike Davis of the
27:06
Speaker 6: Article three Project. There, he says Amy Cony Barrett lied
27:09
Speaker 6: during her confirmation hearing, and he's demanding Missus Benny had
27:14
Speaker 6: Mike on his show that she resigned. Quote, I think
27:16
Speaker 6: it was the biggest mistake imaginable supporting Amy Coney Barrett.
27:19
Speaker 6: She is a disaster for the Supreme Court. She is
27:21
Speaker 6: a rattled law professor with her head upper ass and
27:24
Speaker 6: thinks she's the smartest person in the room. She's not.
27:26
Speaker 6: She is a junior varsity justice. She auditioned as a
27:29
Speaker 6: constitutional conservative. She has a fraud. She lied, She should resign.
27:32
Speaker 6: She is not up to the job. That just honestly
27:34
Speaker 6: gives you a little flavor of what seems like we're
27:36
Speaker 6: poised for with a Supreme Court vacancy coming up, because
27:40
Speaker 6: Trump famously won the Conservative coalition over by agreeing to choose.
27:45
Speaker 6: In twenty sixteen from the Federal Society, Leonard Leohan picked
27:49
Speaker 6: list of potential Supreme Court justices which included Gorsich, Cavanaugh,
27:54
Speaker 6: and Amy Coney Barrett. And now, yes, there have been
27:58
Speaker 6: contentious back and forth over Gorsich. I'm over Kavanaugh, but
28:01
Speaker 6: she has just become the source of the ire and
28:04
Speaker 6: that's going to upend the process for Donald Trump actually
28:07
Speaker 6: picking a Supreme Court justice you could see, honestly to
28:10
Speaker 6: go to like a Mike Lee or somebody that's totally
28:12
Speaker 6: left field because he's so exhausted with the Federal Society
28:17
Speaker 6: kind of con inc conservative establishment.
28:20
Speaker 5: Meanwhile, you have.
28:21
Speaker 7: Mike Davis, by the way, the guy who's.
28:25
Speaker 4: Client Ticketmaster, who yes, he worked for Ticketmaster and persuaded
28:29
Speaker 4: the Trump administration to give them a completely corrupt.
28:32
Speaker 7: Settlement almost single handedly. Feris Mike Davis.
28:35
Speaker 5: Almost single handedly?
28:36
Speaker 13: Yes?
28:37
Speaker 6: So let's put up actually, Graham Plattner, this is a
28:41
Speaker 6: taste of what you might see from the new Democratic
28:43
Speaker 6: Senate if they take the Upper Chamber. Platner says, not
28:46
Speaker 6: a single Democrat or self proclaimed moderate should vote to
28:49
Speaker 6: confirm anybody the Supreme Court over the next two years.
28:51
Speaker 6: And if you have a problem with that, blame Mitch
28:54
Speaker 6: McConnell famous callback to the one and only Merrick Garland.
28:59
Speaker 6: Now Stephen Miller said, this was quote one of the
29:01
Speaker 6: most destructive and outrageous decisions in the long history of
29:05
Speaker 6: the Supreme Court. American citizenship is not the birthright of
29:09
Speaker 6: the world. It belongs only and solely to Americans. No
29:11
Speaker 6: provision of the Constitution can be read to require our
29:14
Speaker 6: national self obliteration. Donald Trump, we can move on to
29:18
Speaker 6: his reaction, this was a truth social b six. The
29:21
Speaker 6: Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is too bad for
29:24
Speaker 6: a country. But we can easily make it up in
29:26
Speaker 6: Congress through legislation with the support of the President. That
29:29
Speaker 6: has now been determined during this process, no longer in
29:31
Speaker 6: wieldy constitutional amendment is necessary. Congress should start today to
29:36
Speaker 6: work on ending expensive and unfair to our country birthright citizenship.
29:40
Speaker 6: So a call from Donald Trump to then move on
29:45
Speaker 6: a major piece of legislation what would obviously be a
29:47
Speaker 6: significant piece of legislation overturning birthright citizenship through Congress. Now,
29:52
Speaker 6: whether you can do that that would actually itself or
29:56
Speaker 6: back to the court right because Kavanaugh, I guess the
30:01
Speaker 6: legal ticket is. Kavanaugh's opinion left a little wiggle room,
30:03
Speaker 6: but he was the sixth vote.
30:04
Speaker 7: Yes, yeah, so yeah.
30:06
Speaker 4: So Kavanaugh said that according to federal statute, birthright saysenship
30:09
Speaker 4: is legal. Therefore you can change federal statute and make
30:13
Speaker 4: it illegal. The other five said that it was a
30:16
Speaker 4: constitutional right. And if it's a constitutional right, you can't
30:20
Speaker 4: go in the House and the Senate and change it.
30:23
Speaker 6: And this is why people are so angry at Amy
30:25
Speaker 6: Cony Barrett, basically because they believe the opinion actually went
30:29
Speaker 6: way further than it had to, and she co signed
30:31
Speaker 6: the opinion that it's right, not just that it's upheld,
30:34
Speaker 6: but that it's actually a constitutional right because of the amendment.
30:37
Speaker 4: Now, what they could do, and I've seen them start
30:40
Speaker 4: to float this maybe you can have some more details
30:43
Speaker 4: on this is try to tighten visa restrictions, Like I
30:48
Speaker 4: don't even know if you can say, like hey, if
30:51
Speaker 4: you're like monsterrably pregnant or something, then you can't have
30:55
Speaker 4: a visa to come here or something like that because
31:00
Speaker 4: they're what's interesting to me, though, is that how they're
31:06
Speaker 4: Steven Miller saying we're just going to lose our country
31:08
Speaker 4: and here and people cite that there is this like
31:11
Speaker 4: Chinese tourism, where you like, somebody will come here. The
31:15
Speaker 4: New York just had a great article, right, But think
31:17
Speaker 4: about what we're concerned about if that's the case. So
31:20
Speaker 4: we're worried that somebody a mom from China will fly
31:24
Speaker 4: to the United States, have a baby, the baby's an
31:28
Speaker 4: American citizen, they will fly back to China. They clearly
31:32
Speaker 4: have a decent amount of resources to be able to
31:34
Speaker 4: pull all of this off, and to think about it,
31:36
Speaker 4: even they will then raise their kid in China, getting
31:41
Speaker 4: a very good socialist education. They will obviously teach them
31:45
Speaker 4: English because they care a lot about the United States.
31:49
Speaker 4: China will spend an enormous amount of money educating and
31:54
Speaker 4: training this kid. The kid will be bathed in the
31:58
Speaker 4: American hegemonic culture. Stuff'll he or she will know our
32:03
Speaker 4: hip hop artists, know our movies. And then the fear
32:08
Speaker 4: is that when this person turns eighteen, they will then
32:12
Speaker 4: go to college in the United States and then after
32:16
Speaker 4: that maybe start a company or go work for an
32:20
Speaker 4: American company as an American citizen, and that that is
32:25
Speaker 4: going to destroy our country.
32:29
Speaker 7: I just don't see that. Like, in a world of.
32:32
Speaker 4: Absolutely plummeting birth rates, the country that can attract that
32:38
Speaker 4: driven person who obviously likes the United States because they
32:42
Speaker 4: want to be there and will they will speak English,
32:44
Speaker 4: they'll do all these things like we win there. Also,
32:49
Speaker 4: the hardest thing about it training a labor force is
32:51
Speaker 4: the parenting and the immense cost that goes into raising
32:56
Speaker 4: a baby from zero to eighteen, zero to twenty two two.
32:59
Speaker 6: I actually think that's probably if Stephen Miller were here,
33:01
Speaker 6: I think that would probably be his rebuttal to you
33:03
Speaker 6: that the bigger problem is not like Chinese birth tourism.
33:05
Speaker 6: But the bigger problem is that when you have people
33:08
Speaker 6: who are for example, given asylum, or if you have
33:11
Speaker 6: Democrats with laxer border policies that look more like the
33:15
Speaker 6: Biden administrations, and they are not in attention while they
33:18
Speaker 6: wait asylum hearings or make different claims, then they have
33:22
Speaker 6: children here. Because some of those, like TPS claims, are like.
33:25
Speaker 5: Two years the court date would be two years.
33:26
Speaker 6: In the future, they have American kids and that basically
33:29
Speaker 6: makes it impossible unless you're the Trump administration to deport
33:34
Speaker 6: people who came here then had kids. And it's like
33:36
Speaker 6: the quote unquote anchor baby theory. I think that's probably
33:39
Speaker 6: what he would say is the bigger concern when he
33:42
Speaker 6: says it's going to destroy the kind of yeah or okay,
33:46
Speaker 6: well but the yeah, the Chinese birth tourism stuff is wild,
33:50
Speaker 6: but I agree. I mean it's not on like a
33:52
Speaker 6: massive scale, like it's it's not at all on a
33:55
Speaker 6: massive scale.
33:56
Speaker 4: Yeah, and if if you're born here like that, this
33:58
Speaker 4: is I was I was kind of surprised at the
34:01
Speaker 4: outrage from conservatives because it's like you're raised in the
34:06
Speaker 4: US being taught if you're born here, you're American.
34:11
Speaker 7: It's a fundamental thing.
34:12
Speaker 4: And you saw in I think it was Alito's decent
34:15
Speaker 4: saying other Western societies don't do. It's like, yeah, like
34:18
Speaker 4: the whole I keep being told that we're exceptional, that
34:20
Speaker 4: we're special, like American exceptionalism, like we're the greatest country
34:24
Speaker 4: in the world. And then you get somebody like Alito saying, well,
34:26
Speaker 4: Europe does it differently, Like that's the whole point.
34:31
Speaker 7: Isn't it, Like are we exceptional or not? Or are
34:33
Speaker 7: we just another Denmark or something? What are we here?
34:37
Speaker 4: I was always told if you're born in America, you're
34:39
Speaker 4: American and that's what makes us great.
34:42
Speaker 6: And there's been a lot of backlash to that sentiment
34:44
Speaker 6: and the sort of like intellectual right over the last
34:46
Speaker 6: ten years. So that's probably what.
34:47
Speaker 4: Un American that those those are Unamerican weirdos.
34:51
Speaker 6: Here's here's Matt Walsh calling Amy Coney Barrett a DEI
34:54
Speaker 6: higher B nine. He says, it turns out that Amy
34:57
Speaker 6: Coney Barrett is a DEI hire a little better than KATANJ. Jackson.
35:01
Speaker 5: Terrible pick.
35:01
Speaker 6: When's the last time we had a Republican president who
35:04
Speaker 6: didn't put a liberal justice on the court. So actually
35:06
Speaker 6: taking it out on Trump a bit there, he did get,
35:09
Speaker 6: I guess, a win in the or the administration got
35:13
Speaker 6: a win in the form of B seven. So this
35:15
Speaker 6: was a decision rendered yesterday that upheld state laws in
35:21
Speaker 6: Idaho and West Virginia banning boys from competing on girls
35:24
Speaker 6: sports teams. But that also didn't go as far as
35:29
Speaker 6: some conservatives would have liked. They would have liked actually
35:32
Speaker 6: the court to have overturned any state that is allowing
35:36
Speaker 6: it to happen on a federalist basis, but the Court didn't.
35:40
Speaker 6: The Court upheld just the ability of the states to
35:43
Speaker 6: make their own laws on this, which means that the
35:45
Speaker 6: blue states that have their own laws on this are
35:48
Speaker 6: safe going forward.
35:49
Speaker 7: Democrats might have preferred that too. Yeah, yeah, it'd be like, well.
35:53
Speaker 4: We'd love to keep fighting on this ninety ten issue.
35:55
Speaker 4: Hands are tied, but hands are tied. Supreme Court says,
35:57
Speaker 4: we can't.
35:57
Speaker 6: Right right, It's sort of like Republicans after a bergafell.
36:01
Speaker 6: Now let's put up this other major decision. This is
36:05
Speaker 6: B eight the Supreme Court, as this political headline, Political
36:08
Speaker 6: headline says, Lusen's campaign finance laws opening up a flood
36:12
Speaker 6: of midterm cash. So this was actually with the It
36:15
Speaker 6: was a case involving the National Republican Senatorial Committee the NRSC, and,
36:20
Speaker 6: as Politico says, it struck down limits on coordinated spending
36:24
Speaker 6: between candidates and political parties, a win for Republicans that
36:27
Speaker 6: will fundamentally change how tens of millions of dollars are
36:30
Speaker 6: spent in congressional elections. The decision political rights is a
36:35
Speaker 6: blow to Democrats, who argued that eliminating the limit on
36:38
Speaker 6: coordination would put more power into the hands of large
36:41
Speaker 6: donors who can cut bigger checks to party committees than
36:43
Speaker 6: to candidates. Republicans tend to get more money from large donors,
36:46
Speaker 6: while Democrats have been more reliant on small dollar donors.
36:50
Speaker 6: And that is particularly in reference to these party committees. So,
36:54
Speaker 6: as Politico says, the NRSC brought this case seeking to
36:57
Speaker 6: overturn the limits in twenty twenty two, alongside now vpjd Vance'
37:01
Speaker 6: Senate campaign. Trump's Justice Department declined to defend the law.
37:04
Speaker 6: Court well, Democratic groups intervened to oppose the lawsuit. And
37:09
Speaker 6: while we're talking about this, let's put B ten up
37:12
Speaker 6: on the screen. This is a new report from Public
37:16
Speaker 6: Citizen that found corporate political spending has surged to a
37:20
Speaker 6: record shattering level. Corporations have spent one point five eight
37:24
Speaker 6: billion dollars on federal elections since Citizens United in twenty ten.
37:30
Speaker 6: In the twenty twenty six election cycle alone, they've spent
37:32
Speaker 6: five hundred and seventeen million already, half a billion dollars already.
37:38
Speaker 5: And it is July Ryan.
37:40
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's an absolute, absolute flood of money. This and
37:44
Speaker 4: what this ruling does is right now you're limited. You
37:47
Speaker 4: can give thirty five hundred dollars to a candidate for
37:50
Speaker 4: the general election, thirty five hundred.
37:51
Speaker 7: For the primary.
37:52
Speaker 4: That's the maximum you're allowed to donate. What this would
37:56
Speaker 4: allow you to do is give thirty five hundred to
37:58
Speaker 4: the candidate and then give of a million to the
38:02
Speaker 4: NRSC or the D Triple C, the party itself and
38:06
Speaker 4: basically tell them, with a wink and a nod, spend
38:11
Speaker 4: it on my guy, which you currently currently can't do.
38:14
Speaker 4: That's so you can't coordinate now because they're trying to
38:19
Speaker 4: keep the limits on the spending with the party committees
38:21
Speaker 4: have said, well, you have super PACs now that aren't
38:25
Speaker 4: exactly coordinating, but they basically are coordinating, and you can
38:27
Speaker 4: give the super pac a million dollars to spend on
38:30
Speaker 4: this candidate. So what that is empowered super PACs and
38:33
Speaker 4: hurt parties. What they're going to do eventually is say
38:38
Speaker 4: that you know what, actually, then it's not fair. So
38:40
Speaker 4: super PACs can also coordinate with camp with campaigns, and
38:44
Speaker 4: then you will have any limits totally in name only,
38:49
Speaker 4: and coordination will be legal.
38:50
Speaker 7: And then when they get.
38:52
Speaker 4: Angry at dropsite for naming, like who the donors are
38:57
Speaker 4: and the donors, like you know, get yelled at on
38:59
Speaker 4: social media.
39:00
Speaker 7: They'll say, well, that's not.
39:01
Speaker 4: Fair either, and it's really you really can't participate in
39:05
Speaker 4: the democratic process without anonymity. So let's let people give
39:12
Speaker 4: millions of dollars in secret directly to candidates and that'll
39:16
Speaker 4: be fine. And the whole the joke that's embedded in
39:19
Speaker 4: their ruling is they say there are already prophylactic measures
39:23
Speaker 4: in place to prevent quid pro quote corruption.
39:26
Speaker 7: Huge, so they're like, we've already they used the word prophylactic.
39:29
Speaker 7: It's so funny.
39:31
Speaker 4: So we're already we've already taken care of corruption. There
39:34
Speaker 4: is no corruption, so we can let a little extra
39:37
Speaker 4: money and coordination into the system. And the joke is
39:41
Speaker 4: the Supreme Court every time they get a corruption case,
39:45
Speaker 4: they overturn it.
39:46
Speaker 7: They overturn the conviction.
39:49
Speaker 4: Yeah, and they'll say they'll say, oh, yes, okay, money
39:52
Speaker 4: exchanged hands for a public favor, but the money came
39:57
Speaker 4: after the favor, and so you really can't say that
40:01
Speaker 4: the favor was done for the money.
40:03
Speaker 7: Maybe it was, but maybe it wasn't.
40:04
Speaker 6: Maybe it's for speech.
40:06
Speaker 4: And yeah, so like they like other it's Republicans like
40:11
Speaker 4: Donald or Democrats like but that is like they just
40:13
Speaker 4: keep eroding what counts as bribery down to you would
40:19
Speaker 4: need to be on video saying I am giving you
40:23
Speaker 4: this cash for your personal use in exchange for you
40:26
Speaker 4: performing an official act on my behalf today not tomorrow,
40:32
Speaker 4: because that would be okay, I need it right now.
40:36
Speaker 4: Then maybe the Supreme Court would find that to be illegal.
40:40
Speaker 5: And they're all getting away with it anyway.
40:41
Speaker 7: So at this point, is that the Supreme Court's argument.
40:44
Speaker 6: Yeah, well they're like et my argument too, but not
40:47
Speaker 6: for the particular decision. Just in general. I think we
40:50
Speaker 6: all understand how pathetic it is and basically doing whatever
40:53
Speaker 6: they want. So that's exciting. Let's talk about the mk
40:59
Speaker 6: all H's for a hearing that Anna Paulina Luna, Republican congresswoman,
41:03
Speaker 6: obviously held yesterday. Actually just a stunning kind of story
41:08
Speaker 6: politically partisan on a partisan basis. So if you're not
41:12
Speaker 6: familiar with the authors, Stephen Kinzer and Tom O'Neil.
41:15
Speaker 5: You have been reading enough books there.
41:16
Speaker 6: I think two of the most important authors honestly in
41:19
Speaker 6: the history of American twentieth centric politics. Books that have
41:23
Speaker 6: come out just in the last decade. I actually went
41:25
Speaker 6: back and checked. Kinser's books have totally changed the way
41:29
Speaker 6: that we see our own government, and if you haven't
41:30
Speaker 6: read them, you're missing out on that. But they're fairly recent,
41:35
Speaker 6: like his books have been like last ten fifteen years,
41:38
Speaker 6: have totally changed the way. For example, he does have
41:40
Speaker 6: probably the most complete book on MK Ultra.
41:43
Speaker 7: I think it was twenty nineteen or something.
41:44
Speaker 6: Right twenty nineteen. I went back in check. That's why
41:46
Speaker 6: I was in the index because Ryan hascided in the index.
41:48
Speaker 6: It was published in twenty nineteen. It's called Poisoner in
41:51
Speaker 6: Chief on Sydney Gottlieb and so Anna Paulina Luna basically
41:55
Speaker 6: convened to this hearing, and a lot of this is,
41:58
Speaker 6: you know, there's discussion about how having a new Church
42:00
Speaker 6: committee after the Republican Party became oppost the deep state
42:05
Speaker 6: and got very skeptical of the CIA and FBI for
42:08
Speaker 6: a brief moment in time, and now there's like remnants
42:10
Speaker 6: of that still happening. But convene this hearing to put
42:14
Speaker 6: focus on MK Ultra. She's been doing other things as
42:17
Speaker 6: well along these lines. Just for example, hired Jeff Morley
42:21
Speaker 6: to help her look into the JFK file releases, which
42:24
Speaker 6: is also very interesting. But this was focused on MK ultra,
42:30
Speaker 6: but also what happened in the past, what the CIA
42:33
Speaker 6: still hasn't told us about MK ultra. Kinser got into
42:36
Speaker 6: that in particular, but whether or not mind control is
42:40
Speaker 6: happening right now? And kins are In and O'Neill, both
42:44
Speaker 6: foremost experts on this basically said they don't have evidence
42:46
Speaker 6: of it, but they would be shocked if.
42:47
Speaker 5: It weren't continuing to happen today.
42:50
Speaker 6: There were questions specifically about Butler and the Charlie Kirk assassination,
42:54
Speaker 6: as people can imagine, So why don't we go ahead
42:58
Speaker 6: and just run a couple of stots here?
43:01
Speaker 10: Almost fifty years ago the last Congressional hearings into MK
43:05
Speaker 10: ultra It took place just a short walk from here
43:07
Speaker 10: in the Dirkskan Senate office building. At those hearings, convened
43:12
Speaker 10: in August and September of nineteen seventy seven, representatives of
43:16
Speaker 10: the CIA told Congress and the American people that its
43:19
Speaker 10: twenty five year effort to control human behavior had been
43:22
Speaker 10: a colossal failure. Because I believe Congress was never told
43:28
Speaker 10: the truth about what this program actually achieved. In fact,
43:32
Speaker 10: I believe the agency misliked Congress in nineteen seventy seven
43:36
Speaker 10: when it characterized mk Ultra as a failure.
43:39
Speaker 14: Is it in your expert opinion that Jack Ruby and
43:42
Speaker 14: Manton were assets of the Intelligence Agency specifically pertaining to
43:47
Speaker 14: m k Ultra. Were they mkltrving?
43:49
Speaker 10: Yeah, theoretically, Manson, I've never been able to prove absolutely,
43:53
Speaker 10: Jack Ruby, I believe this is something else. The Warren
43:57
Speaker 10: Commission investigation on the Warrant Commission was Alan Dulles, the
44:02
Speaker 10: former CIA director who authorized and ran MT Alster until
44:08
Speaker 10: he was fired by President Kennedy. The liaison to the
44:11
Speaker 10: Committee for the CIA, who handled the information coming from
44:15
Speaker 10: the CIA back and forth to the Warrant Commission was
44:18
Speaker 10: Richard Helms, who was a direct supervisor of Jelly West.
44:21
Speaker 10: They knew who West was. They knew that what West
44:25
Speaker 10: was capable, and what they had paid him to do,
44:27
Speaker 10: and what he had reported to them that he could do,
44:30
Speaker 10: including inducing mental disorders and people. That was never disclosed
44:36
Speaker 10: to the Commission as far as anyone knows. So I
44:39
Speaker 10: believe that West was put in there to keep Jack
44:41
Speaker 10: Ruby from telling his story.
44:44
Speaker 6: So it was tim Oonial and Anapauline a Luna going
44:46
Speaker 6: back and forth on Manson and Jack Ruby connections there
44:50
Speaker 6: Jolly West Ryan, which are I mean damning in a
44:54
Speaker 6: million different ways. Chaos as he just said, doesn't really ever,
44:57
Speaker 6: You're never able to really establish and this is by
45:00
Speaker 6: design of course in the CIA, the definitive link. But
45:03
Speaker 6: you have everything you need to know basically.
45:06
Speaker 4: Also the whether or not it was intentional or not.
45:11
Speaker 4: What the CIA ended up doing was seating an entire counterculture. Yes,
45:16
Speaker 4: Ken Kesey famously participated in an mk ultra kind of
45:22
Speaker 4: CIA led acid experiment when he was in the army
45:27
Speaker 4: or people google the exact details of that, and you know,
45:31
Speaker 4: he became you know, he goes on to the Mary Pranksters,
45:37
Speaker 4: Grateful Dead.
45:38
Speaker 7: And the like, the.
45:40
Speaker 4: Hell's Angels get looped in with that, and it produces
45:45
Speaker 4: the Northern California kind of counterculture. As as a result
45:49
Speaker 4: of that, like he's you know, he's driving around the
45:51
Speaker 4: further busses around and that that then takes it. There's
45:56
Speaker 4: a lot more to what kind of drove the left
46:01
Speaker 4: kind of away from class politics and into whatever it became.
46:07
Speaker 4: But that played a significant and played a significant role
46:10
Speaker 4: in it creating that detour, and so that's why you
46:12
Speaker 4: have some people saying, well, this was intentional. This was
46:14
Speaker 4: intentional on the part of the government to disrupt a
46:19
Speaker 4: class politics that was beginning to form in the nineteen
46:22
Speaker 4: fifties between labor unions and civil rights groups and anti
46:28
Speaker 4: war groups. The March on Washington by Martin Luther King
46:33
Speaker 4: was funded by the UAW and that too, and.
46:40
Speaker 7: Black people who had moved.
46:41
Speaker 4: From the South amid the Great Migration were increasingly moving
46:44
Speaker 4: into union jobs and there was a real threat that
46:48
Speaker 4: this kind of New Deal coalition was adding this element
46:54
Speaker 4: to it that was then going to be hegemonic and
46:56
Speaker 4: then be a real challenge to capital, and that the
47:03
Speaker 4: counterculture kind of helped unravel that. So there's an argument
47:06
Speaker 4: that that was intentional. I don't know, there's never been
47:08
Speaker 4: any memos or anything that have emerged, but systems are
47:11
Speaker 4: what they do, and it is what actually happened. So
47:14
Speaker 4: while they didn't get mind control, they did reshape the country.
47:19
Speaker 6: And you know, there's a good point because this is
47:21
Speaker 6: where Kinser started saying, basically like, we don't know they
47:25
Speaker 6: burned all of the files, like the mk Ultra files,
47:27
Speaker 6: were like famously Richard Helps completely burned, and they were
47:31
Speaker 6: talking at the time about not putting a lot of
47:32
Speaker 6: things in writing.
47:33
Speaker 5: Here's kinser.
47:34
Speaker 6: This is a C two.
47:36
Speaker 13: There have been enormous advances in cyber technology in that
47:40
Speaker 13: artificial intelligence, in neuroscience, covert agencies may have access now
47:47
Speaker 13: to tools for mind control that Sydney Godlie could not
47:50
Speaker 13: even have imagined. It may well have been true in
47:53
Speaker 13: nineteen sixty three that mind control is a myth, or
47:58
Speaker 13: whether it's still true is uncertain, and that question of
48:05
Speaker 13: whether mind control might now be possible under our new
48:10
Speaker 13: circumstances is something that has presumably occurred to scientists who
48:15
Speaker 13: work for secret services, including our own. This task force
48:21
Speaker 13: has a chance to connect the path to the future.
48:24
Speaker 7: A renewed effort to.
48:26
Speaker 13: Find mk ultra documents from the nineteen fifties and to
48:30
Speaker 13: fill out the redactions of those that have been released,
48:33
Speaker 13: might shed new light on how the CIA operated during
48:36
Speaker 13: that period. It could also inform a new inquiry into
48:40
Speaker 13: whether any mind control projects are now underway inside the
48:44
Speaker 13: US security apparatus that might help prevent the emergence of
48:48
Speaker 13: a twenty first century MK Ultra that could be even
48:51
Speaker 13: more destructive than the original.
48:53
Speaker 6: Prevent the emergence of a twenty first century mk Ultra.
48:56
Speaker 6: That's what you just heard from perhaps the foremost expert
48:59
Speaker 6: on mk ault in the world, saying that there is
49:02
Speaker 6: a legitimate need to potentially prevent a twenty first century
49:05
Speaker 6: mk Ultra. Another little newsy bit out of this as
49:08
Speaker 6: Anna Pauline Luna was talking about Operation Paper.
49:10
Speaker 5: Club, this is a wild here.
49:12
Speaker 6: I watched all of it and saying, actually she's going
49:15
Speaker 6: through the German Parliament to start trying and finding to
49:19
Speaker 6: try and find the victims of MK ultra buried in Germany.
49:23
Speaker 5: Kinser's book does a lot on this. C.
49:25
Speaker 3: Three Kurt Blohma, who was the chief of biological weapons
49:30
Speaker 3: development for the Nazi government, came to work for the CIA.
49:33
Speaker 3: So did Walter Schreiber, who was the surgeon general of
49:36
Speaker 3: the Nazi Army. I can just tell a brief story.
49:41
Speaker 3: When I was researching my book, I found what I
49:43
Speaker 3: think might be the first secret CIA prison or black site.
49:47
Speaker 3: It's a nice chalet in Germany, and the guy who
49:51
Speaker 3: now owns.
49:51
Speaker 7: It took me into the basement.
49:53
Speaker 3: He said, these were the cells where the mk ultra
49:57
Speaker 3: officers working.
49:59
Speaker 13: Side by side with Nazis carried out those gruesome experiments,
50:04
Speaker 13: which were actually just continuations of the experiments that those
50:10
Speaker 13: Nazis had been conducting just a few years earlier.
50:13
Speaker 7: Right down the road.
50:14
Speaker 14: Just for timeline and clarification, these experiments were happening after
50:17
Speaker 14: the Nuremberg trials, correct, so the CI would have known
50:19
Speaker 14: that these were crimes against humanity.
50:22
Speaker 15: I looked for an episode in which the Nuremberg doctrines
50:25
Speaker 15: were posted on the wall in some MK ULTRA or
50:28
Speaker 15: CIA office, and I was never able to find any
50:30
Speaker 15: indication that those Nuremberg principles ever were even consulted, much
50:35
Speaker 15: less obeyed.
50:37
Speaker 6: Right, I'm the last person that needs to explain this
50:39
Speaker 6: to you, but this has been the domain of the
50:41
Speaker 6: left for decades, and instead of actually taking this hearing seriously,
50:46
Speaker 6: Democrats sent a former NIH director to talk about Trump's
50:54
Speaker 6: politicization of science. Not a non issue, but still just
50:59
Speaker 6: wasn't having to do with nothing, literally nothing, what more?
51:02
Speaker 4: What more politicization of science could there be than teaming
51:06
Speaker 4: up with Nazis to extend their human experimentation, right, which
51:11
Speaker 4: we did, to.
51:12
Speaker 6: Be clear, right, And so let's roll the witness that
51:15
Speaker 6: Democrats chose to bring in for no reason, had absolutely
51:18
Speaker 6: no relationship to MK Ultra. Was like very much just
51:21
Speaker 6: making that clear, and it was an attempt to get
51:23
Speaker 6: soundbites into the hearing about Trump.
51:26
Speaker 8: So this is C three and right now we're seeding
51:29
Speaker 8: our leadership in biomedical research to China.
51:32
Speaker 6: That's what's happening.
51:33
Speaker 16: Right What about covering up harmful side effects of vaccines
51:37
Speaker 16: and the role that the NIH has played in that.
51:40
Speaker 16: What do you have to say about that, ma'am?
51:43
Speaker 8: The US history of human subjects protection has evolved greatly.
51:49
Speaker 8: Numerous research improprieties from the fifties to the seventies in
51:53
Speaker 8: the United States, including the Tuskegee Syphilist Study, forced Congress
51:58
Speaker 8: to establish formally federal.
52:00
Speaker 16: I'm not asking you about that rules. You know what
52:02
Speaker 16: I'm asking you about. I'm asking you about how NIH
52:05
Speaker 16: handled COVID. Obviously, this is supposed to be a hearing
52:08
Speaker 16: about MK ulture. But when you gave your opening statement,
52:11
Speaker 16: and I don't even know why you were called to
52:13
Speaker 16: this hearing because you didn't offer anything about MK Ultra,
52:16
Speaker 16: But since you are here and you're going to defend NIH,
52:19
Speaker 16: I'm going to call you out on it.
52:21
Speaker 6: Try not to sound naivera and but like, there's no
52:23
Speaker 6: reason for Democrats not to take an mk Ultra hearing
52:26
Speaker 6: seriously and to send somebody who's not just like an
52:28
Speaker 6: anti Trump witness to divert the conversation and try to
52:33
Speaker 6: kind of troll. There was an opportunity probably to do
52:37
Speaker 6: something slightly more interesting.
52:38
Speaker 4: Right, And the politicization of medicine and science maybe the
52:44
Speaker 4: kind of worst argument to make in a hearing like
52:47
Speaker 4: this when it is literally politically driven as being deployed
52:53
Speaker 4: on defenseless people that the CIA determined were expendable. You
52:59
Speaker 4: could they went around the world trying to find people
53:02
Speaker 4: that if they died in these experiments in which they
53:04
Speaker 4: were being tortured, that nobody would miss them. And it
53:07
Speaker 4: reminded me of Chernobo's book. We've had him on a
53:10
Speaker 4: couple of times. It's about the Ebola outbreak in West Africa,
53:14
Speaker 4: but the subtitle is Corporate Gangsters, Multinationals and Rogue Politicians,
53:18
Speaker 4: And there's a chapter and then that goes through the
53:20
Speaker 4: history of medical research in Africa, which was pioneered by
53:28
Speaker 4: Germans in amid their genocide, which became the model for
53:34
Speaker 4: the genocide that they carried out later in Germany, and
53:38
Speaker 4: a lot of a lot of the kind of discoveries
53:41
Speaker 4: and people involved in this human research in the early
53:45
Speaker 4: nineteen hundreds in Africa on Africans evolved into the Nazi research,
53:51
Speaker 4: which then evolves into the American research literally with the
53:56
Speaker 4: Nazis and also taking place heavily in Africa on subjects
54:02
Speaker 4: who had no idea what they were signing up for.
54:05
Speaker 4: And then when we're when when there's an Amola outbreak
54:10
Speaker 4: which is going on now, and you find people suspicious
54:14
Speaker 4: of Western interventions, we're like, oh, look at those those
54:19
Speaker 4: dumb tribal people who don't understand the genius of modern medicine,
54:23
Speaker 4: when a significant amount of the history of their interaction
54:28
Speaker 4: with Western medicine was them being the unwitting subjects of
54:33
Speaker 4: medical torture.
54:34
Speaker 6: Oh Neil testified yesterday that USAID was quote very likely
54:37
Speaker 6: used as a front for MK Ultra and the breathless
54:40
Speaker 6: defenses that we've seen from Dems who are just trying
54:42
Speaker 6: to anti Trump posture about USAID contrasts starkly with some
54:47
Speaker 6: anti colonial activists an active in Africa who would tell
54:50
Speaker 6: you something very different about USAID. And I guess just
54:53
Speaker 6: to run out the segment. I'm hopeful in some way
54:56
Speaker 6: that maybe the DSA aligned candidates who come into Congress
55:00
Speaker 6: would be able to do a little bit of at
55:01
Speaker 6: least what Matt Gaetz and AOC did on some of
55:03
Speaker 6: these topics, like, for example, au m f use in
55:07
Speaker 6: what Libya I think they work together on. Maybe you
55:10
Speaker 6: would see something that isn't just such a dumb anti
55:13
Speaker 6: Trump stunt like that in the future.
55:15
Speaker 4: Yeah, let's get some of these new DSA people in
55:17
Speaker 4: those committees. I think they'll have a much different understanding
55:20
Speaker 4: of the history.
55:21
Speaker 6: Yeah, well, I would hope so, because Dems should not
55:25
Speaker 6: be seating these issues. They're no right for the picking.
55:28
Speaker 7: Absolutely