Speaker 1: Good evening and welcome to another edition of The Cajun
Speaker 1: Knight Live. I am your host, The Cajun Knight, Jacob Mook,
Speaker 1: and thank you everybody for joining me on this evening.
Speaker 1: I wanna go ahead and apologize now. My voice is
Speaker 1: starting to crack a bit. I've got this throat thing
Speaker 1: going on. It's a whole situation, but we're gonna push
Speaker 1: through and we're gonna make this happen. A lot of
Speaker 1: things that discussed tonight. We're gonna be talking a little
Speaker 1: bit about Trump, a little bit about the situation, not
Speaker 1: just with Epstein, but a lot of things that Trump
Speaker 1: is doing in spite of and in lieu of the
Speaker 1: Epstein conversation. We're gonna swap over to NATO and Turkey
Speaker 1: and how both of these relate to bricks. Then we're
Speaker 1: gonna swap over to what's going on in Israel right
Speaker 1: now with them bombing the only Catholic church in Gaza.
Speaker 1: I find that to be quite a flex that they
Speaker 1: just took and killed the priest. If I'm not mistaken,
Speaker 1: We're gonna read about it, don't worry. And then we're
Speaker 1: gonna swap over to Southeast Asia. Cambodia has got some
Speaker 1: wild things going on. They have for a while, and
Speaker 1: I mean mr still in an open civil war. So
Speaker 1: that whole area of what some might call Indo China
Speaker 1: is got a lot going on. We're gonna talk about
Speaker 1: it all for anybody who is joining us on the
Speaker 1: audio version, you're listening on the Cult to Conspiracy. If
Speaker 1: you would like to be a part of this conversation,
Speaker 1: then please go to the link in the description below
Speaker 1: and come checking me out on the Cajun Night on Patreon.
Speaker 1: It's the only place to come and join the conversation,
Speaker 1: the only place to see the videos for all the
Speaker 1: things that we talk about here. And you know, it's
Speaker 1: just the best way to support and keep this dream alive.
Speaker 1: So all right, let's get after it without any further ado. Now,
Speaker 1: let's start off talking. This is ABC News here, and yes,
Speaker 1: I understand consider the source, but let's just talk about
Speaker 1: it here. The Justice Department faces subpoena over Epstein files
Speaker 1: by House Oversight Committee. So if anybody that hasn't heard
Speaker 1: long story shorts I have, you've been living under a
Speaker 1: rock for the past two weeks. All of the Trump
Speaker 1: cabinet people and his administration who have said up and
Speaker 1: down that we are gonna give full disclosure. There's ten
Speaker 1: thousand hours of videos that are sitting on Pambondi's desk,
Speaker 1: and she's gonna go through it. They have the list.
Speaker 1: We remember just a few months ago and they had
Speaker 1: all these quote unquote influencers. If I said their names,
Speaker 1: you wouldn't know them, but they self style themselves as
Speaker 1: influencers whatever. And they had this big photohop where they
Speaker 1: had these giant three inch binders saying Epstein List Part one,
Speaker 1: and they were all holding it up like it was
Speaker 1: a big victory thing. Then when you could look at
Speaker 1: the side view of these binders, they were completely empty
Speaker 1: and it was in fact all a photoop. We even
Speaker 1: talked about that on the Cult as a matter of fact.
Speaker 1: But anyway, now with all of these things, and now
Speaker 1: they had new video evidence to talk about, Oh, Epstein
Speaker 1: clearly did kill himself, and it was this whole thing,
Speaker 1: even though the video is clearly doctored, clearly edited, and
Speaker 1: has a minute and six seconds missing from it. Then
Speaker 1: this whole list, the list never existed. That was all
Speaker 1: part of the ploy. It was all part of a plot,
Speaker 1: and all this So story short, the Justice Department, who
Speaker 1: is saying that there is nothing more to look into
Speaker 1: at the Epstein conversation, is now about to face subpoena.
Speaker 1: I believe they should. But let's learn a little bit
Speaker 1: about this here. Matter of fact, there's a video we're
Speaker 1: gonna play to kind of give the overarching view here.
Speaker 1: Let's listen.
Speaker 2: In this morning is the Jeffrey Epstein saga rages on.
Speaker 2: Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who until recently was President
Speaker 2: and Trump's personal lawyer, is preparing to meet with Epstein's
Speaker 2: former companion, Glaine Maxwell, who is serving a twenty year
Speaker 2: prison sentence for conspiring with Epstein to traffic underage girls.
Speaker 1: President and Trump.
Speaker 2: Says talking with Maxwell wasn't his idea, but he's fine
Speaker 2: with it.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I don't know about it, but I think it's something
Speaker 3: that would be sounds appropriate to do you.
Speaker 2: This comes as Maxwell has been appealing her case trying
Speaker 2: to get out of prison. Trump used to socialize with
Speaker 2: Epstein and Maxwell and was asked about her when she
Speaker 2: was arrested in twenty twenty.
Speaker 4: Do you feel that she's going to turn in powerful men?
Speaker 1: How do you see that working out?
Speaker 5: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I haven't really been following it to much.
Speaker 2: I just wish her well.
Speaker 6: Frankly.
Speaker 2: In an interview with Axio shortly after that, he wished
Speaker 2: her well yet again.
Speaker 7: Mister prestct glean Nexwell has been arrested on allegations of
Speaker 7: child sex trafficking.
Speaker 8: Why would you wish such a person?
Speaker 5: We don't know that, but I do know that she has.
Speaker 1: She's been arrested for that.
Speaker 9: Friend or boyfriend Epstein was either killed or committed suicide
Speaker 9: in jail.
Speaker 6: She's now in jail.
Speaker 10: Uh huh, yeah.
Speaker 1: I wish you well.
Speaker 3: I'd wish you well.
Speaker 1: I'd wish a lot of people well.
Speaker 11: Good luck.
Speaker 2: Trump and some of his top allies spent years stoking
Speaker 2: shadowy conspiracy theories about Epstein, but now his administration has
Speaker 2: backed off or promise to release the full FBI files
Speaker 2: on Epstein.
Speaker 12: The President's staff, administration, his own children, his Vice president
Speaker 12: have promised that these files would come.
Speaker 1: Out, and now we're being told it's a hoax. It
Speaker 1: just doesn't wash.
Speaker 2: The House Oversight Committee Tuesday voted to subpoena Maxwell to testify,
Speaker 2: but Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, a close ally
Speaker 2: of the President announced Congress this is going into early
Speaker 2: recess this summer, avoiding any more votes on the Epstein case.
Speaker 2: The Trump administration is falsely claiming that Obama deliberately manufactured
Speaker 2: and politicized intelligence reports about Russian interference in the twenty
Speaker 2: sixteen election. In a rare rebuke, Obama fired back, his spokesman,
Speaker 2: pointing to the quote widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked
Speaker 2: to influence the twenty sixteen presidential election but did not
Speaker 2: successfully manipulate any votes. Obama noted that those findings were
Speaker 2: affirmed by Republicans in Congress at the time, including Trump's
Speaker 2: now Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Obama spokesman adding quote,
Speaker 2: these bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.
Speaker 2: The Justice Department won't say when Deputy Attorney General Todd
Speaker 2: Blanche will meet with Maxwell or where she's currently serving
Speaker 2: her sentence in a federal prison in Florida. Maxwell's attorney
Speaker 2: tells ABC News they are in discussions with the government,
Speaker 2: saying in a statement, quote, Galaine will always testify truthfully.
Speaker 1: Okay, I feel like that's a bit of a lie
Speaker 1: just right off the rip, but Yeah, a lot of
Speaker 1: things to unpacked. There a lot of things to unpack,
Speaker 1: and some of them we already kind of talked about here,
Speaker 1: not just Trump, not just his family, his whole cabinets
Speaker 1: that we'd get full disclosure. Now they're saying there is
Speaker 1: nothing to disclose. It was all a hoax, and now
Speaker 1: Trump is pivoting from talking about what's going on here
Speaker 1: to the twenty sixteen election was rigged and Obama was
Speaker 1: a mastermind colluding with Russia. We're gonna talk about it
Speaker 1: all here, let's read in A House Oversight subcommittee voted
Speaker 1: Wednesday to subpoena the Department of Justice to release the
Speaker 1: Jeff Epstein files. The motion passed by a vote of
Speaker 1: eight to two. Notably, three GOP lawmakers were Representative Nancy Mace,
Speaker 1: Scott Perry, and Brian Jack, joined with Democrats on the
Speaker 1: subcommittee to approve the subpoena, defying Republican Leadership Oversight Committee
Speaker 1: excuse click that one. The House Oversight Committee James Comer
Speaker 1: might be I'm sorry, must sign the subpoena before it
Speaker 1: has been officially issued. Per committee rules. Comber plans to
Speaker 1: sign off on the subpoena a Republican committee source told
Speaker 1: ABC News the top Democrat on the subcommittee, Republican Summer Lee,
Speaker 1: a representative Summer Lee rather initially offered the motion here
Speaker 1: we go. Republicans on the committee pushed back and amended
Speaker 1: the subpoena to also include communications by Biden's administration officials
Speaker 1: and the DOJ. These officials include Bill and Killery, Clinton,
Speaker 1: James Comy, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland, Robert Mueller
Speaker 1: or Mueller I'm not sure, William Barr, Jeff Sessions, and
Speaker 1: Alberto Gonzalez. And if you recognize some of those names,
Speaker 1: that's because they are some of the more prominent shitheads
Speaker 1: that always seem to be in the mix when things
Speaker 1: are going awry. Anyway, Oversight ranking member Representative Robert Garcia
Speaker 1: said in a statement that the subcommittee's votes on Wednesday
Speaker 1: was just the first step towards accountability and we will
Speaker 1: continue pushing for the truth. Today, Oversight Democrats fought for
Speaker 1: transparency and accountability on the Epstein files and one I
Speaker 1: don't really classify this as a win just yet, but
Speaker 1: we shall see. House Republicans didn't make it easy, but
Speaker 1: the motion was finally passed to force the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice to release the Epstein files. Garcia said the news
Speaker 1: comes the same day House Oversight Committee Chairman Comber, which
Speaker 1: Comber is a whole other one, on Wednesday issued a
Speaker 1: subpoena to Glaine Maxwell Jizlaine Maxwell. I don't know how
Speaker 1: to pronounce her name. There's too many consonants and too
Speaker 1: many fowls. Whatever Maxwell, okay, the woman in question, the
Speaker 1: convicted associate of Jeffrey Epstein, for a deposition to occur
Speaker 1: at Federal Correction Institution Tallahassee on August eleventh. The fact
Speaker 1: in circumstances surrounding both you and mister Epstein's cases have
Speaker 1: received immense public interest and scrutiny, Comber wrote in a
Speaker 1: statement Wednesday. Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking and other
Speaker 1: charges and sentenced to twenty years in prison in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two. What we're talking about here is someone who's
Speaker 1: in federal prison on appeal. So our attorneys will have
Speaker 1: to communicate with her attorneys to see if there are
Speaker 1: terms if she wants, Comber said before the subpoena was issued.
Speaker 1: If there are no terms, we'll roll in there quick.
Speaker 1: The situation will be similar to Comber's efforts to interview
Speaker 1: Jason Galanis, a former business partner of Hunter Biden and
Speaker 1: Devon Archer. Yeah, Devin Archer, Devon Archer. I don't know.
Speaker 1: During the GOP's impeachment inquiry of then President Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: I did that with Jason Galanis, and the Democrats were
Speaker 1: real offended that we would want to interview anyone in prison.
Speaker 1: But now you know, they're all, they're all they want
Speaker 1: to interview someone in prison. Comber said, Okay, I feel
Speaker 1: like he kind of spoke that one. Weird, but all right, whatever.
Speaker 1: The committee has shown a propensity to record video of
Speaker 1: the interviews and release content after wards, as it did
Speaker 1: with several former Biden officials who invoked their Fifth Amendment
Speaker 1: rights earlier this summer. Shocker. That's another big thing. You know,
Speaker 1: we talked about that last week. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: Jill Biden's top associate, the White House doctor, all of
Speaker 1: them when they were brought into question pretty much just
Speaker 1: held up the number five. They're gonna call that Fifth Amendment.
Speaker 1: They're gonna plead the fifth I mean to say fifth,
Speaker 1: you know what I'm saying. That's just how it goes.
Speaker 1: So it's possible there could be handout video from the deposition. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we'll see separately. Attorney General Pam Bamdy said Monday that
Speaker 1: Attorney or Deputy Attorney Todd Blanche will meet with Maxwell
Speaker 1: sometime in the coming days. President Donald Trump last week
Speaker 1: said on his social media platform that he had ordered
Speaker 1: the Justice Department to release all grand jury testimony with
Speaker 1: respect to Jeffrey Epstein's subject only to court approval. Comer
Speaker 1: has said also, I'm sorry. Comber also has signaled that
Speaker 1: the circumstances of a closed door deposition at a federal
Speaker 1: prison could attract both Democrats and Republicans to attend the interview. Well,
Speaker 1: I should hope so. Right this, you would think that
Speaker 1: this would be a bipartisan issue. You would think that anybody,
Speaker 1: regardless of what side of the isle they're on, would
Speaker 1: want to see justice for what these monsters did to
Speaker 1: these victims. Right However, I feel like that list has
Speaker 1: a lot of people with very different letters by their names.
Speaker 1: But you know, we'll see who shows up. I suppose
Speaker 1: there will be so many members of Congress that it'll
Speaker 1: want to be that will want to be in that prison.
Speaker 1: Commerce said, I would assume that there will be a
Speaker 1: lot of members of the oversight committee on both in
Speaker 1: both parties. They'll want to be there. Yeah, well, we
Speaker 1: should hope. A congressional subpoena is a formal legal order
Speaker 1: issued by a congressional committee or individual compelling their testimony.
Speaker 1: David Oscar Marcus, Appellit Council for Maxwell, said in a
Speaker 1: statement to ABC News that Maxwell looks forward quote unquote
Speaker 1: to meeting with Blanche and that the meeting will inform
Speaker 1: how she proceeds with the subpoena. As for the congressional subpoena,
Speaker 1: Miss Maxwell has taking this one step at a time.
Speaker 1: She looks forward to her meeting with the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice and that discussion will help inform how she proceeds.
Speaker 1: Marcus also responded to comments from the House Speaker Mike
Speaker 1: Johnson earlier Wednesday questioning Maxwell's credibility as a witness if
Speaker 1: they see fit to bring the Jesu Laine Maxwell for testimony.
Speaker 1: To bring in Islaine Maxwell for testimony. God, I'm having
Speaker 1: issues reading this evening. That's fine, I won't note the
Speaker 1: obvious concern the caveat that Chairman Comber and I and
Speaker 1: everyone that has that could she be counted on to
Speaker 1: tell the truth. Yeah, again, these people don't make sense
Speaker 1: with their words. If she is a credible witness, okay,
Speaker 1: and fair enough, they're basically saying, like, will she even
Speaker 1: tell the truth if we were to subpoena her, Is
Speaker 1: she even a credible witness at this point? I mean,
Speaker 1: we could look at a character assassination of her pretty easily,
Speaker 1: and I feel like a lot of people would probably
Speaker 1: not take what she says to heart. However, I guess
Speaker 1: it all depends on what she says and who she
Speaker 1: implements and everything else. We understand Speaker Johnson's general concern
Speaker 1: Congress should always vet the credibility of its witnesses, but
Speaker 1: in this case those concerns are unfounded. If miss Maxwell
Speaker 1: agrees to testify before Congress and not take the fifth
Speaker 1: which could happen, and that remains a big If she
Speaker 1: would testify truthfully as she always has said to, as
Speaker 1: she always has said she would, and as she will
Speaker 1: with mister Blanche, the truth should not be feared or
Speaker 1: preemptively dismissed. Marcus said in a statement, Okay, so this
Speaker 1: is kind of all coming to a head all at
Speaker 1: the same time here, And with that being said, we
Speaker 1: also have another article from USA today. This one is
Speaker 1: rather interesting. Pam Bondy reportedly told Donald Trump in May
Speaker 1: that he's named in the Epstein files. So she told
Speaker 1: him this in May. However, if you were to look
Speaker 1: on for any news group right now, they're reporting on
Speaker 1: this today and by two day I mean within the
Speaker 1: last six hours of time of recording. So if she
Speaker 1: told him this in May, why are they just getting
Speaker 1: this information now? I also find it interesting that Donald
Speaker 1: Trump had his own section of the CIA go through
Speaker 1: the entire Epstein logs and lists and all the files
Speaker 1: and had them flag anytime his name was mentioned. Why
Speaker 1: would you do that if you weren't worried that you
Speaker 1: would be mentioned in the files. This is one of
Speaker 1: those things. Right when RFK Junior, when they first had
Speaker 1: any question about if he ever flew on the Lolita Express,
Speaker 1: if you ever had any dealings with Jeffrey Epstein, he
Speaker 1: got ahead of it. He said, you're gonna see my
Speaker 1: name on the flight logs because I flew from point
Speaker 1: A to point B and from point C to point
Speaker 1: D two times. Here's the situation. Here's how it happened.
Speaker 1: That was my entire dealings with the guy. I don't
Speaker 1: know if that was a true statement or if that
Speaker 1: was him just trying to perpetuate a story so that
Speaker 1: it doesn't look as bad. But my point is, if
Speaker 1: you know that you're gonna be on the list, at
Speaker 1: least try to cook up a story, at least try
Speaker 1: to have something. Or if you really are innocent of
Speaker 1: any kind of real Malfeesians, you better have a freaking
Speaker 1: alibi here. Instead, Trump hired goons from the CIA to
Speaker 1: go through the entire file and then flag and remove
Speaker 1: his name from any documentation. How did he know? Probably
Speaker 1: because Pam Bondi told him this in May. Now again
Speaker 1: a few weeks ago, she said that she had not
Speaker 1: yet gone through the files. There was ten thousand things
Speaker 1: on her desk, and she was gonna get to it immediately.
Speaker 1: Yet somehow in May she went through it enough to
Speaker 1: know that old Donnie T was on the list in
Speaker 1: some way, shape or form. Now, also, did that mean
Speaker 1: flight list? Did he borrow the plane from time to time?
Speaker 1: Did it mean a business associate? We do know that
Speaker 1: Epstein and Trump used to be very cordial, very friendly
Speaker 1: in the nineties, in the early two thousands. There was
Speaker 1: allegedly a big split between them, and I think it
Speaker 1: was four. Does it mean that he was a part
Speaker 1: of the client list, flight log list, roll of decks
Speaker 1: of business associates lists. We don't know. We don't know,
Speaker 1: but that's the question, right, So let's read in here.
Speaker 1: The Attorney general reportedly told Donald Trump that in the
Speaker 1: spring that he and many others were named in the
Speaker 1: government's files on Jeffrey Epstein. This is from Washington Attorney
Speaker 1: General Pamboma. He told President Donald Trump in May that
Speaker 1: he was named multiple times in the government's files on
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein, according to reports from The Wall Street Journal
Speaker 1: and CNN. Understand, yes, we must question the source. Shocker
Speaker 1: that the Wall Street Journal and CNN would be running
Speaker 1: with this if there was even a whiff of any
Speaker 1: truth here. I'm not saying that makes it not credible.
Speaker 1: But we also do know that these new whose agencies
Speaker 1: lie more often than they tell the truth. I get that,
Speaker 1: but let's keep going. A White House official did not
Speaker 1: dispute Trump's name is mentioned in the Epstein files, telling
Speaker 1: USA Today that briefing Binders BONDI prepared for the MAGA
Speaker 1: influencers in February. Those would be the influencers I was
Speaker 1: talking about. They'll quote unquote influencers with those big binders
Speaker 1: that were empty. I might add, but neither here nor
Speaker 1: there included the President's name. But the official rejected any
Speaker 1: suggestion that Trump engaged in wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.
Speaker 1: Bondi told the president that he and many other figures
Speaker 1: were named in the documents. According to the reports from
Speaker 1: the Journal and CNN, again test the source. The Journal
Speaker 1: cited quote senior administration officials end quote, while CNN cited
Speaker 1: quote sources familiar with the discussion end quote. Okay, once again,
Speaker 1: we must make sure that we are testing the source
Speaker 1: on this, but anyway, let's continue here. Being named in
Speaker 1: such documents doesn't mean the person broke the law. The
Speaker 1: fact that the the fact is that the President kicked
Speaker 1: him out of his club for being a creep, said
Speaker 1: White House communications director Stephen Chung, referring to Trump's Mar
Speaker 1: A Lago club in Florida. Now, I'll have a little
Speaker 1: bit of an issue with this, I do. I do.
Speaker 1: So everybody's seen that video, especially right now, BART mean
Speaker 1: where Trump invited Epstein to his penthouse suite, and I
Speaker 1: think it was in New York. It was a part
Speaker 1: of some you know, the Next Great Calendar Girl pageant
Speaker 1: or something that he was hosting, right, And he invited
Speaker 1: all of these young models. And when I say young,
Speaker 1: I want to say the youngest person in attendance was
Speaker 1: like sixteen or seventeen. But the majority, the vast majority
Speaker 1: of them were around twenty two years old. So it
Speaker 1: wasn't like it was a bunch of just teenagers running around.
Speaker 1: But it also doesn't help that there was someone there
Speaker 1: that was underage. And I don't know how many, but
Speaker 1: he invited them to his hotel or his penthouse whatever
Speaker 1: to meet with some wealthy people that could help help
Speaker 1: them in their career. You know, if you're a young model,
Speaker 1: you get in touch with some very wealthy individuals and
Speaker 1: perhaps they know somebody in the media space, perhaps they
Speaker 1: know somebody who does some publishing for a magazine, whatever
Speaker 1: the case is. It's a networking gambit. And I get that, Okay,
Speaker 1: nothing inherently wrong there until you realize that the only
Speaker 1: rich person that was invited was Epstein. Oh, by the way,
Speaker 1: he was the only person invited to this party. Not
Speaker 1: even just the only rich person. It was literally Donald Trump, Epstein,
Speaker 1: Maxwell is laying Maxwell and then all of these calendar girls.
Speaker 1: That paints a different picture now that we have the
Speaker 1: full context of the situation. That's all I'm gonna say.
Speaker 1: So the fact that you kicked him out of his
Speaker 1: club for being a creep homeboy, you knew he was
Speaker 1: a creep for decades, I don't know. I don't know. Anyway,
Speaker 1: this is nothing more than a continuation of the i
Speaker 1: fake news stories concocted by the Democrats and the liberal media,
Speaker 1: just like the Obama Russia Gate scandal, which President Trump
Speaker 1: was right about, Chung said, which we will get to
Speaker 1: the Russian Gate conversation. I'm not saying that that was incorrect.
Speaker 1: I'm saying that most of us already knew that most
Speaker 1: of us already knew that the Democrats were the ones
Speaker 1: that were colluding with not just China, with Russia. During
Speaker 1: the twenty sixteen election, there wasn't much question there. Putin
Speaker 1: and Trump were on very good terms, They were very cordial.
Speaker 1: They were both business minded individuals. So what would make
Speaker 1: not Putin specifically, but what would make the Russian agencies
Speaker 1: throw in their lot with the Democrats anyway? And we'll
Speaker 1: get to all of it here in a bit. The
Speaker 1: reports offer potential additional contexts for the Justice Department's decision
Speaker 1: not to make the Epstein files public. In a memo
Speaker 1: released July seventh, the Department said a review of the
Speaker 1: documents failed to turn up any incriminating lists of clients
Speaker 1: who may have been involved with Epstein in a sex
Speaker 1: trafficking ring. Again, that's very counterintuitive to what they were
Speaker 1: telling us for months and months and years now. The
Speaker 1: same review found no evidence that Epstein blackmailed prominent people
Speaker 1: or that he was murdered while in custody. According to
Speaker 1: the memo, New York's chief medical examiner ruled in twenty
Speaker 1: nineteen that Epstein died of suicide, but Trump himself has
Speaker 1: previously previously expressed suspicion about that conclusion, along with most
Speaker 1: of the you know, thinking world. There's no way that
Speaker 1: he would have gotten the fractures to his neck and
Speaker 1: jaw that he had from hanging himself with paper thin
Speaker 1: bed sheets. I'm sorry, even the manner in which he
Speaker 1: hung himself off of a bedpost. You're not gonna snap
Speaker 1: your neck, even if you were to drop all of
Speaker 1: your weight from that distance that's that's not gonna be
Speaker 1: enough to snap a neck. There's a reason if you
Speaker 1: look at the old Western movies, right, there's a reason
Speaker 1: why the news has to have thirteen knots in it,
Speaker 1: or loops in the knot. I should say there's a
Speaker 1: reason why there is a minimal drop distance because that
Speaker 1: knot has to hit with so much force that it
Speaker 1: snaps the neck. That's not going to happen with bedsheets
Speaker 1: from a three foot sit down. So anyway, Yeah, most
Speaker 1: human beings would question the statistics on his quote unquote
Speaker 1: suicide anyway, certainly about the way Epstein died. It would
Speaker 1: be interesting to find out what happened there because that
Speaker 1: was a weird situation and the cameras didn't happen to
Speaker 1: be working, et cetera. Trump said on Fox and Friends
Speaker 1: Weekend on June third of last year. Now, Trump faces
Speaker 1: backlash over the Epstein files decision. This revelation comes as
Speaker 1: the Trump administration has faced an intense backlash over the
Speaker 1: Justice Department's decision not to disclose the Epstein files. Earlier
Speaker 1: this year, Bondi made public statements that the build up
Speaker 1: in I sorry, that build up intrigue about the Epstein files.
Speaker 1: It's a new day, it's a new administration, and everything's
Speaker 1: going to come out to the public, Bondie told Fox
Speaker 1: News hos Sean Hannity in the March interview. Amid the scrutiny,
Speaker 1: Trump has tried to shift attention to other red meat
Speaker 1: topics that resonate with the magabase, including unsubstantiated allegations that
Speaker 1: former President Barack Obama committed quote unquote treason during the
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen election when intelligence agencies found Russia was attempting
Speaker 1: to influence the election in Trump's favor. It's time for
Speaker 1: they were trying to influence the election in Trump's favor. Okay,
Speaker 1: President Obama, old Brack Hussin committed treason when intelligence agencies
Speaker 1: found Russia was attempting to influence the election in Trump's favor.
Speaker 1: If that doesn't make sense to you out loud, good,
Speaker 1: it shouldn't, right. But anyway, it's time to go after people,
Speaker 1: Trump's said on July twenty second. Trump on July fifteenth,
Speaker 1: alleged that his political enemies made up the Epstein files.
Speaker 1: When a reporter asked whether Bondi told the President that
Speaker 1: his name is in the files, No, no, Trump said,
Speaker 1: she's given us just a very quick briefing, and in
Speaker 1: terms of the credibility of the different things that they've seen,
Speaker 1: I would say that these files are made up by
Speaker 1: Comy Obama. They were made up by Biden, and we
Speaker 1: went through years of that with the Russia Russia Russia hoax.
Speaker 1: Oh my god. Okay. Trump has said BONDI should release
Speaker 1: all credible information from the Epstein files, even though what
Speaker 1: we're hearing right now is that there is no information
Speaker 1: in the Epstein files. Apparently Epstein and Maxwell just kind
Speaker 1: of did these things all by themselves. There's over a
Speaker 1: thousand victims confirmed, so apparently that was just Epstein and
Speaker 1: Maxwell by their day mnself. There's no other parties according
Speaker 1: to what we're hearing now. But anyway, last week, Trump
Speaker 1: said that he directed BONDI to ask a federal court
Speaker 1: to produce a all pertinent grand jury testimony from federal
Speaker 1: cases brought against Epstein and his associates convicted sex traffickurgisline Maxwell.
Speaker 1: A federal judge and Florida rejected one of the administration's
Speaker 1: requests on July twenty third. Two other requests are still
Speaker 1: pending in a Manhattan Federal Court.
Speaker 8: Wow.
Speaker 1: Okay, so I wonder how long this video is? President
Speaker 1: Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein's relationship over the years explained.
Speaker 1: Let's see.
Speaker 13: Long before Donald Trump was president and Jeffrey Epstein died
Speaker 13: by suicide in a jail cell, they were poster boys
Speaker 13: for the New York City party scene in the nineties.
Speaker 13: The pair reportedly met in nineteen ninety after Epstein bought
Speaker 13: a mansion in Palm Beach, just a few miles from
Speaker 13: mar A Lago. As Epstein was climbing the ranks of
Speaker 13: high society, Trump appeared to be in his social circle.
Speaker 13: In nineteen ninety two, Trump and Epstein were spotted by
Speaker 13: NBC cameras at a mar Lago party, laughing and dancing
Speaker 13: to the hit song Rhythm Is a Dancer by Snap.
Speaker 13: In nineteen ninety five, Epstein moved into a Manhattan townhouse
Speaker 13: one mile away from Trump's penthouse in Trump Tower. Trump
Speaker 13: flew on Epstein's private jet between New York and Florida,
Speaker 13: and in two thousand and two, the president famously told
Speaker 13: New York Magazine that Epstein was a terrific guy. Trump
Speaker 13: told the magazine he has a lot of fun.
Speaker 9: To be with.
Speaker 13: It is even said that he likes beautiful women as
Speaker 13: much as I do, and many of them are on
Speaker 13: the younger side. In two thousand and four, Epstein and
Speaker 13: Trump had a falling out when Trump outbid him on
Speaker 13: a mansion.
Speaker 11: He later flipped.
Speaker 13: Trump and Epstein reportedly did not speak for fifteen years
Speaker 13: before his death. Epstein was convicted of paying teenage girls
Speaker 13: for sex in two thousand and eight. In twenty nineteen,
Speaker 13: federal prosecutors accused Epstein of a sex trafficking scheme, but
Speaker 13: he died before the case went to trial. The president
Speaker 13: has not been accused of any wrongdoing in the Epstein case,
Speaker 13: but Trump's name is among the dozens of celebrities, politicians,
Speaker 13: and business moguls connected to the billionaire. Though Epstein has
Speaker 13: been dead for almost six years, his name has come
Speaker 13: up again and again since the White House tried to
Speaker 13: close the book on the case during Trump's second term,
Speaker 13: even as Trump's pushed for the Justice Department to release
Speaker 13: more evidence. Trump claims to be baffled by the attention.
Speaker 1: He's dead for a long time.
Speaker 5: He was never a big factor in terms of life.
Speaker 1: I don't understand what the.
Speaker 5: Interest or what the fascination is.
Speaker 14: I really don't.
Speaker 1: You don't understand what the interest or fascination is. This
Speaker 1: is kind of a clear sign to me personally, just
Speaker 1: Jacob speaking on behalf of Jacob here. He has completely
Speaker 1: lost contact with what his base actually cares about. He's
Speaker 1: completely detached at this point. This is one of the
Speaker 1: biggest campaign promises that people actually wanted and voted him
Speaker 1: into office to do. Yeah, the border policy, Yeah, the
Speaker 1: economics and all these things. Yes, agreed, but you ran
Speaker 1: with this being a very big sticking point for most
Speaker 1: of the people that voted for you. The mag of movement,
Speaker 1: the Epstein files were connected to the MAGA movement. There
Speaker 1: was no separating the TUIs. Matter of fact, now he's
Speaker 1: gone on and said that, you know, the MAGA supporters
Speaker 1: that are believing this Epstein hoax are idiots. These are
Speaker 1: his words. He's calling them stupid now, and it's like
Speaker 1: you are fracturing the very basis that put you in
Speaker 1: that office At this point. I'm sad to say this.
Speaker 1: Trump is literally just another politician. Everybody hoped that he
Speaker 1: wouldn't be this way because well, he's not a politician,
Speaker 1: he's a businessman. We've set for decades, we need a
Speaker 1: businessman to run the country. We'd see how great it
Speaker 1: would be in all these things. And his first turn
Speaker 1: went off very well. Yes there was a lot of
Speaker 1: scandals and all this, but it wasn't involving with this.
Speaker 1: The scandals were mostly perpetuated by the left that was
Speaker 1: trying to impeach him. They wanted to see him in
Speaker 1: a jumpsuit, they wanted to see a mug shot. They
Speaker 1: tried twice to impeach him and both fell flat. So
Speaker 1: with that being said, at this point, with this run
Speaker 1: in DC, Trump is showing that Yeah, No, at this
Speaker 1: point he's been he's been compromised as far as this
Speaker 1: whole situation goes. He's just another shthead politician in DC,
Speaker 1: just like the rest of them. Anyway. The Epstein files
Speaker 1: contain a large volumes of images from of Epstein and
Speaker 1: victims who were miners or appear to be minors, the
Speaker 1: Justice Apartment and FBI said, as well as more than
Speaker 1: ten thousand videos and images of illegal child sex abuse
Speaker 1: material and other pornography. The agency's July seventh memos said
Speaker 1: federal authorities found no basis to revisit the disclosure of
Speaker 1: those materials and will not permit the release of child pornography. Okay,
Speaker 1: no one wants to see that. No one wants to
Speaker 1: see the video evidence in question. That's not what the
Speaker 1: people are asking for the release. And that's the other thing.
Speaker 1: The Justice Apartment is like, we will not release those
Speaker 1: videos nude. No one is asking for the videos. We're
Speaker 1: asking for the guilty parties in the videos, and we're
Speaker 1: at what we're We're not asking to see them, we're
Speaker 1: asking for their names. That's it. It's it's ridiculous, but
Speaker 1: that is the current situation with this whole shebang before
Speaker 1: we go to the next one here, I'm gonna go
Speaker 1: ahead and read the comments because we're about to get
Speaker 1: into the whole the shift in the the blaming of
Speaker 1: other parties and all these things. Here, let's go. This
Speaker 1: article was weirdly written. Yeah, I agree, thank you, Raven.
Speaker 1: I think it was very strangely written. And for the
Speaker 1: ones that were like direct quotes if the person was
Speaker 1: speaking and kind of misspoke and then they typed it
Speaker 1: out as it was said, I get that, but that
Speaker 1: was kind of weird. I know, I'm having an off night.
Speaker 1: My voice is a little a little shitty right now,
Speaker 1: But that was that was extra random. RFK got the
Speaker 1: COVID shot out of the kid's list of injections yesterday. Oh,
Speaker 1: very good. Okay, so RFK made to where kids cannot
Speaker 1: get the COVID shot. Very good. I'm hoping, hoping that
Speaker 1: RFK Junior can do what he set out to do.
Speaker 1: He's been one of the biggest health nuts. And I
Speaker 1: don't mean that in like a disparaging way. I mean
Speaker 1: not just the vaccines, and not just the diet, not
Speaker 1: just the water supply. It's kind of the all encompassing.
Speaker 1: I really hope he stays the course and Trump just
Speaker 1: pretty much lets him do it, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: Let the man cook. All right, let's keep going here
Speaker 1: to do. Hey, y'all, Anthony, happy to see you here
Speaker 1: with his brother. Let's see fourteen more good God Almighty, y'all. Okay,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of internal conversations with the chat. All right,
Speaker 1: good things, good things. I'm glad that this community with
Speaker 1: the Cajun Knight is as cordial with each other as
Speaker 1: they are. I really do enjoy this, all right. Next,
Speaker 1: this is from the BBC. Gabbert says, declassified report exposes
Speaker 1: the Obama administration. Now, before I read this, I want
Speaker 1: to let this be known. Now. I haven't always liked
Speaker 1: Tulsi Gabbard for her political leanings and things like that. However,
Speaker 1: I respect her immensely. Lieutenant Colonel Gabbard, it's their current
Speaker 1: rank anyway, is a solid woman. I don't know how
Speaker 1: she is going to do in DC after this administration
Speaker 1: wraps up. I don't know if she has higher aspirations
Speaker 1: or what the deal is, but as of this particular moment,
Speaker 1: I do have an immense amount of respect for her.
Speaker 1: I hope that things do not come out and transpire
Speaker 1: to make me lose that respect. You know, she ran
Speaker 1: as a hardcore Democrat for a long time because apparently
Speaker 1: in Hawaii that's just how it is. Then she shifted
Speaker 1: to the Independent Party whenever the left went to the
Speaker 1: far psycho left and she couldn't be she couldn't really
Speaker 1: associate herself with that. They didn't hold true to her
Speaker 1: ideals that she believed in. Now she is a Republican,
Speaker 1: but it's more of this new age Republican right. It's
Speaker 1: like a lot of people in the Trump administration, including
Speaker 1: Trump himself, we're all registered Democrats like twenty years ago. Now,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, there this new type of Republican
Speaker 1: which is more of a centrist look, but it's like
Speaker 1: just barely right of center, or it's like it's not
Speaker 1: necessarily Rhino, but it's like a second tier Rhino, second
Speaker 1: tier centrist, barely Republican leaning. And I mean again, you
Speaker 1: don't have to agree with every single thing that a
Speaker 1: person believes in to respect them. So before I read this,
Speaker 1: I do want to give that out. I respect Lieutenant
Speaker 1: Colonel Gabbert. I mentally, let's move on. US Director of
Speaker 1: National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbart has released a previously classified report
Speaker 1: which says, she points uh. She says, points to a
Speaker 1: treasonous conspiracy to undermine the results of the twenty sixteen
Speaker 1: presidential election. The House Intelligence Committee document takes issue with
Speaker 1: the conclusion reached by numerous intelligence reports, including one by
Speaker 1: the CIA, that Russia saw to help Donald Trump in
Speaker 1: that election. Gabbart pere at the White House on Wednesday
Speaker 1: and said the report reveals egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence. Well,
Speaker 1: that's kind of how that goes, right. The current person
Speaker 1: in charge of the Executive Branch runs the CIA because
Speaker 1: they are within the department of the Executive Branch. So
Speaker 1: that's kind of how that goes. If Obama's in charge,
Speaker 1: he's gonna sick his intelligence goons to dig up dirt
Speaker 1: or find whenever they can find, and Trump is currently
Speaker 1: doing the exact same thing, so I okay. Anyway, Democrats
Speaker 1: said that the White House is trying to distract from
Speaker 1: the ongoing controversy surrounding his decision to not publish the
Speaker 1: files or related to Jeffrey Epstein. It seems as though
Speaker 1: the Trump administration is willing to declassify anything and everything
Speaker 1: except the Epstein files, Democrat Senator Mark Warner said, adding
Speaker 1: that a bipartisan Senate report had backed the CIA's conclusion
Speaker 1: about Russia, favoring Trump. Now I'll find that interesting. The report,
Speaker 1: gabber dclassified, was prepared by Republicans on the House Intelligence
Speaker 1: Committee and is dated to the eighteenth of September twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: It was declassified on Wednesday, a day after President Trump
Speaker 1: accused former President Barack Hussein Obama of leading an effort
Speaker 1: to falsely tie him to Russia and undermine his twenty
Speaker 1: sixteen election campaign. Direct quote here, These bizarre allegations are ridiculous.
Speaker 1: In a week attempt at distraction, that would be Obama
Speaker 1: speaking on it right now. Right last week, Gabbert threatened
Speaker 1: to refer Obama's administration officials to the Justice Department for
Speaker 1: prosecution for their actions in twenty sixteen, but offered little
Speaker 1: detail on any alleged crimes. The declassified report says the
Speaker 1: CIA did not adhere to the tenets of analytic standards
Speaker 1: and used one scant, unclear and unverifiable fragment of a
Speaker 1: sentence from one of the standard reports, okay, to conclude
Speaker 1: that Russias Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win. I mean again,
Speaker 1: that doesn't sound crazy out loud. Putin likes Trump, Trump
Speaker 1: liked Putin. I don't know how they favor each other.
Speaker 1: Right now, we're going to talk about some of that
Speaker 1: here in a minute. Apparently America just sent a bunch
Speaker 1: of Patriot missile systems to Ukraine and Putin's not happy
Speaker 1: about it. But in his first term, Putin and Trump
Speaker 1: got along very well, as a matter of fact, and
Speaker 1: that's why they always said that, you know, the Kofefe
Speaker 1: tweet or whatever it was, went back when it was
Speaker 1: Twitter that was clearly a call sign for some Russian collusion.
Speaker 1: In reality, it was like a fat fingered thing. But
Speaker 1: I don't know. We'll see anyway. There is little evidence
Speaker 1: in the document, however, that challenges the prevailing view in
Speaker 1: the US intelligence that Russia saw to influence the vote
Speaker 1: in favor of Trump. Among the key authors of the
Speaker 1: report was Cash Pttel, who is now Trump's FBI director,
Speaker 1: and a surprise appearance at the White House Press briefing
Speaker 1: alongside President Press Secretary Caroline leave it, leave it or
Speaker 1: leave it, I don't know. On Wednesday, Gabbert said the document,
Speaker 1: along with another document released on Friday, presented irrefutable evidence
Speaker 1: that Obama and other officials directed the creation of an
Speaker 1: intelligence community assessment they knew was false. They knew it
Speaker 1: would promote this contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen election to help President Trump. She said. Democrats
Speaker 1: have condemned the allegations, with many suggesting Trump is seeking
Speaker 1: to divert attention away from the Mountain calls to release
Speaker 1: the Epstein files, who die of suicide, blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: I think they do not want to talk about Jeffrey Epstein,
Speaker 1: Arizona Democrat Senator Mark Kelly told reporters they fed into
Speaker 1: this conspiracy theory and now they want to run away
Speaker 1: from it. Yeah, well, I guess there's reasons for that
Speaker 1: in there. Gabbart has filed a criminal referral on the
Speaker 1: case to the Justice Department, directly implicating Obama over what
Speaker 1: she has described as a year's long coup and treason
Speaker 1: is conspiracy theory or conspiracy against the American people. In
Speaker 1: response to a question about Epstein on Tuesday, Trump responded
Speaker 1: that the which hunt you should be talking about is
Speaker 1: that they caught President Obama absolutely cold. Is it's there.
Speaker 1: He's guilty. This was treason, he said. Okay, again, I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that's incorrect, but every president who has ever
Speaker 1: used the CIA to further their own personal agenda could
Speaker 1: therefore be arguably guilty of treason. And I'm not against that. Fine.
Speaker 1: If you're gonna fry them, fry them all, including you know,
Speaker 1: Donnie t himself. Patrick Rodenbush, a spokesperson for former President Obama,
Speaker 1: said in a statement earlier this week that no released
Speaker 1: information undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to
Speaker 1: influence the twenty sixteen election, but did not successfully manipulate
Speaker 1: any votes. The US intelligence community published an assessment in
Speaker 1: January twenty seventeen concluding that Russia had sought to damage
Speaker 1: Clinton's campaign and boost Trump in the vote. Three months earlier.
Speaker 1: US officials found this effort had included Russia's bought on
Speaker 1: social media and hacking of Democratic emails, but they ultimately
Speaker 1: concluded the impact was probably limited and did not actually
Speaker 1: change the election results. A twenty twenty bipartisan report by
Speaker 1: the Senate Intelligence Committee also found that Russia had tried
Speaker 1: to help Trump's twenty sixteen campaign. Secretary of State Marco Rubio,
Speaker 1: who was the senator at the time, was among the
Speaker 1: Republicans who co signed that report. So also it's worth
Speaker 1: mentioning here the Russian bot farms that were used to
Speaker 1: boost up Trump's situation and all these things that they're
Speaker 1: talking about here, the hacking of Democrat emails. That wasn't Russia,
Speaker 1: that was Killery herself, that went through and wiped all
Speaker 1: of those emails. We remember this, right, We remember the
Speaker 1: Stele dossier. We remember all the emails that she wiped,
Speaker 1: and everybody was pissed that she was using her personal
Speaker 1: or she was using her work email and her work
Speaker 1: computer for her personal communications, which inherently I don't ness
Speaker 1: necessarily have a problem with. Yes, it's unprofessional, but I
Speaker 1: have worked in a few professions where you have a
Speaker 1: work email and a work computer and although you should
Speaker 1: never use those for your personal means, sure it happens. Fine,
Speaker 1: that's a slap on the wrist in any other context,
Speaker 1: except that it was thirty thousand emails that she had erased,
Speaker 1: and there was printouts of those that were made by
Speaker 1: your boy, John McAfee of the McAfee anti virus software company.
Speaker 1: He donated a bunch of laptops to the Democratic National
Speaker 1: Convention that were later used in the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Speaker 1: And what he did basically to assure that they would
Speaker 1: pay because they were already kind of witch hunting him
Speaker 1: for other things. He installed a little bit of spyware
Speaker 1: and all of the emails that were deleted he had
Speaker 1: copies of. They basically implemented that killery was among the
Speaker 1: worst of humanity, which again that's to the shock of
Speaker 1: literally no one. The the Drenochrome situation, the Frazzle Jip
Speaker 1: Drip conversation, Belizian Grove. It's like the female version of
Speaker 1: Bohemian Grove, the Satanic cult that she's a part of
Speaker 1: all of these things. That sounds like Alex Jones is
Speaker 1: going on a whole rant. Here were basically confirmed and
Speaker 1: identified with what McAfee found in the emails that were
Speaker 1: later deleted. So as far as the Russian spying on
Speaker 1: the Killery campaign, it wasn't Russians. It was an American dude.
Speaker 1: But anyway, I digress. All right, let us move on
Speaker 1: to this next article from NBC News. The Supreme Court
Speaker 1: allows Trump to fire members of product safety agencies. Now,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of controversy surrounding the Supreme Court basically
Speaker 1: giving Donnie t the ability to reshape the government as
Speaker 1: he sees fit, especially with what's going on now with
Speaker 1: the files and the shifting and the pivoting and all
Speaker 1: these things. But that doesn't negate the fact that they
Speaker 1: absolutely just gave him that privilege. A judge has restrained
Speaker 1: three members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, a federal
Speaker 1: agency Congress set up to be independent of political pressure.
Speaker 1: Let's read in on this now. The Supreme Court on
Speaker 1: Wednesday allow President Trump to fire members of the Consumer
Speaker 1: Product Safety Commission, a federal agency congress set up to
Speaker 1: be independent of political pressures. The justices, granting an emergency
Speaker 1: request filed by the Trump administration, blocked a Maryland based
Speaker 1: federal judges ruling that reinstated Mary Boyle, Alexander Hone, Sarik,
Speaker 1: and Richard trum Trumpka Junior, all of whom were appointed
Speaker 1: by President Joe Biden. Without the three members, the five
Speaker 1: member commission would for now lack the necessary quorum to
Speaker 1: fulfill its obligations to protect consumers from defective products. Under
Speaker 1: EXISTE laws, the members can be removed only for neglect
Speaker 1: for duty or I'm sorry, neglect of duty or malfeasans.
Speaker 1: But Trump went ahead and fired them anyway as he does,
Speaker 1: or as he has done to other agencies with similar restrictions,
Speaker 1: as part of his aggressive efforts to reshape the federal government.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court may allowed him to fire members of
Speaker 1: the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit System Protection Board,
Speaker 1: casting aside precedent dating to nineteen thirty five that upheild
Speaker 1: removal protections. The unsigned order Wednesday said that the latest
Speaker 1: case was squarely controlled by what the High Court decided then,
Speaker 1: as in the previous case, the three liberal judges on
Speaker 1: the conservative majority court dissented. Once again, the Court uses
Speaker 1: its emergency docket to destroy the independence of an independent
Speaker 1: agency as established by Congress. This is justin, Elena Kagan wrote.
Speaker 1: The Court has ruled in favor of Trump's administration on
Speaker 1: a wide variety of issues in cases that reached the
Speaker 1: Court on an emergent and see basis, with decisions made quickly,
Speaker 1: with little explanation, and without extensive briefing or oral arguments.
Speaker 1: Most recently, the Court on July fourteenth allowed the administration
Speaker 1: to move ahead with the mass layoffs at the Education Department, which,
Speaker 1: for the record, is anybody mad about? Is anybody actually
Speaker 1: mad that the federal government is getting out of our
Speaker 1: education system? I'm happy about that. I believe that that
Speaker 1: should be handled at the smallest and most local level.
Speaker 1: Your state should have some influence over what is taught
Speaker 1: in the state. Your local county or parish in my
Speaker 1: state should have say in what gets taught in the classrooms.
Speaker 1: What does Washington, DC have anything to do with what's
Speaker 1: getting taught in bf Nebraska. That sounds ridiculous to me
Speaker 1: out loud, But then again, I'm somebody who really really
Speaker 1: wants the federal government to have as little interference and
Speaker 1: as little hands on our daily lives as possible. I
Speaker 1: know a lot of Democrats disagree with me. Anyway, Raven,
Speaker 1: go ahead.
Speaker 15: I think that we should remove state testing, release limited
Speaker 15: how much testing that these children are doing, because like
Speaker 15: a lot of the parishes and counties just want to promote,
Speaker 15: they're testing scores and they aren't actually caring about what
Speaker 15: the children are learning. And if they're learning, that's a
Speaker 15: big thing too. They're not really learning like we should
Speaker 15: be adopting styles from overseas. Clearly they know what they're
Speaker 15: doing compare to us. That's just me.
Speaker 1: No, I fully agree with that. It's they're teaching the children,
Speaker 1: that is true. They're teaching them how to be really
Speaker 1: good test takers. That's all it is. They are basically
Speaker 1: preparing them to pass the standardized test. Because if this
Speaker 1: school has scores that are higher than the parish average
Speaker 1: or county average, higher than the state average, higher than
Speaker 1: the country average, they get more federal funding. I don't
Speaker 1: want that. If anything, that should be an incentive to
Speaker 1: remove federal funding and federal bureaucracy from the Education Department,
Speaker 1: so that we can get away from this system where
Speaker 1: we're teaching children how to pass a test. Instead we
Speaker 1: should be teaching children the curriculum itself. But I know
Speaker 1: there's a lot of people that have their own discerning
Speaker 1: opinions on this, But yes, Rave and I agree with
Speaker 1: you one hundred percent. We have a video that's just
Speaker 1: under a minute long. Let's go ahead and listen in
Speaker 1: I let you go. I want to get to another issue.
Speaker 7: Yesterday, the Supreme Court granted a Trump administration request to
Speaker 7: allow the president to fire members of independent agencies. But
Speaker 7: the court said that doesn't apply to the Federal Reserve.
Speaker 7: Why that exception?
Speaker 8: So, the Federal Reserve has this long history in this
Speaker 8: country of theoretically being not political, being quasi independent, being
Speaker 8: quasi private, in the tradition of like the first and
Speaker 8: second historic banks of this country.
Speaker 16: And it's because the Federal Reserve is supposed to set
Speaker 16: long term monetary policy, take care of our long term
Speaker 16: nations monetary health, and not be subject to kind of
Speaker 16: the political back and forth of a different administration. But
Speaker 16: we did have a discent here, for example, from Justice Kaigan,
Speaker 16: who said, no, that doesn't make any sense. Because the
Speaker 16: Federal Reserve Chair is the same as the FDC, the SEC,
Speaker 16: et cetera. So it's certainly controversial.
Speaker 7: It's an issue people we're talking about with President Trump
Speaker 7: talking about whether or not Jerome Powell should stick around
Speaker 7: as they debate all these issues over inflation.
Speaker 1: All right, Okay, Moving in here, It says in ruling
Speaker 1: against Trump on the independent agency firings, lower Court judges
Speaker 1: relied on the nineteen thirty five president a case called
Speaker 1: Humphrey's execut Yeah, Humphrey's executor versus executor. Excuse me, Humphrey's
Speaker 1: executor versus the United States, which is Supreme Court has
Speaker 1: not overturned, but has signaled it will in due course.
Speaker 1: The Court has in recent rulings undermined the nineteen thirty
Speaker 1: five president by saying similar restrictions on presidential powers involving
Speaker 1: other Yeah, other agencies are unconstitutional because they infringe on
Speaker 1: the core constitutional powers of the president. And twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: the Court ruled on those grounds in a case involving
Speaker 1: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau director and followed that up
Speaker 1: with a similar ruling a year later concerning the Federal
Speaker 1: Housing Finance Agency. Okay, Trump and May moved to fire
Speaker 1: three Consumer Products Safety Commissioner members. A month later, the
Speaker 1: US District Court Judge Matthew Maddox ordered that they be reinstated,
Speaker 1: and they returned to their jobs. While litigation continued. The Richmond,
Speaker 1: Virginia based Fourth US Circuit Court of Appeals declined to
Speaker 1: put maddocks against ruling on hold. The commission, set up
Speaker 1: for or set up in nineteen seventy two rather by Congress,
Speaker 1: oversees a wide variety of consumer products issued, including safety
Speaker 1: standards and research into injury prevention. Senator Amy Klobacker clobe
Speaker 1: Booker Klaubaker, I don't know. A Democrat from Minnesota, a
Speaker 1: member of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, criticized the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court decision. Wait a minute, the Commerce, Science and
Speaker 1: Transportation Committee. Now is she a member of three separate committees?
Speaker 1: Or is she is that one committee? Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Speaker 1: How are all three of those lumped in together? I
Speaker 1: thought the Transportation Committee was its own thing, the Commerce
Speaker 1: was its own thing. Maybe I'm just maybe it's three
Speaker 1: separate committees and I'm just looking at it different. I
Speaker 1: don't know anyway, this is her old Clobuoker Clowbacker whatever.
Speaker 1: By firing the three Democratic commissioners, the President has undermined
Speaker 1: the independent structure of the Commission and its critical work.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court is letting it happen. To insinuate the
Speaker 1: Commission from politics, Congress gave the members staggered seven year terms,
Speaker 1: stipulated that only three could represent the same political party,
Speaker 1: and said the President could not fire them at will.
Speaker 1: All five members who are appointed by the President and
Speaker 1: confirmed by the Senate are expected to have expertise in
Speaker 1: consumer product safety issue, right of course, because that's that's
Speaker 1: how presidential appointees work. They they're seen to have expertise
Speaker 1: in the field at which they've been appointed, because that's
Speaker 1: that's traditionally how that's gone down. UH Solicitor General Solicitor General, Wow,
Speaker 1: that's a title. Solicitor General d John Sower said in
Speaker 1: court papers that Maddox's ruling has quote sown chaos and
Speaker 1: dysfunction at the agency. Wow. With the rest reinstated members
Speaker 1: moving to undoe actions the Commission took after they were
Speaker 1: initially fired. Cara Rollings UH Litigation's council for the nonprofit
Speaker 1: legal group New Civil Liberties Alliance, which is not directly
Speaker 1: involved in the case, but is engaged in other legal
Speaker 1: battles against The Commission said in a statement that the
Speaker 1: High Court's order quote puts an end to the chaos
Speaker 1: that followed Maddox's ruling. Lawyers for the commission members wrote
Speaker 1: in their own filing that the court would be adding
Speaker 1: to the disruption if it allowed their clients to be
Speaker 1: removed from office a second time. In some cases, three
Speaker 1: commissioners have been undoing actions that the CPSC unlawfully took
Speaker 1: during the time they were prevented from working. The lawyers added, Okay,
Speaker 1: so again, a lot of things are being shook up
Speaker 1: in DC right now, and that's not necessarily a bad thing,
Speaker 1: but it's not also necessarily a good thing, especially with
Speaker 1: Trump not really acknowledging that the Epstein files are as
Speaker 1: important as they are and being so detached from the
Speaker 1: voter base and from his constituents and from the American
Speaker 1: people that he's calling them all a bunch of you know,
Speaker 1: gullible idiots. I can't believe you fell for this hoax,
Speaker 1: this thing that the Democrats put on. It's like, bro,
Speaker 1: wait a minute, that's not accurate. That's not at all
Speaker 1: what people are thinking here then too, you know, hard
Speaker 1: pivot to a treasonous hack by Barack, which again, his
Speaker 1: entire presidency was treason. This I'm pretty sure that's also
Speaker 1: like Kat's out of the bag here. He wasn't born
Speaker 1: in America. He should have never been allowed to be
Speaker 1: the president. That's a thing. His birth certificate. If you
Speaker 1: look it up right now on the White House file
Speaker 1: or the White House website, you can take that and
Speaker 1: upload it into Adobe and undo the photo shops that
Speaker 1: have been done on it. And it's very poorly done.
Speaker 1: You would think that they would at least cover their
Speaker 1: tracks a little bit. They didn't. They pretty much left
Speaker 1: it able to be edited when they uploaded it to
Speaker 1: the White House website. And so you could take that
Speaker 1: and put it into Adobe yourself right now, anybody listening
Speaker 1: to this, and you could just hit the undo button
Speaker 1: a bunch of times and see that it's fake, like
Speaker 1: embarrassingly fake. So yeah, it's his entire presidency was treason.
Speaker 1: Is everything he did. It was fraud with controversy and
Speaker 1: scandal beginning to end. But yes, this is the thing.
Speaker 1: Now we're gonna indict him for election fraud in an
Speaker 1: election that he wasn't even a part of I'm just
Speaker 1: saying anyway. Anyway, moving on, all right, So this article
Speaker 1: from Financial Express the US EU is headed towards the
Speaker 1: trade deal with fifteen percent baseline tariff, says report. White
Speaker 1: House calls it speculation. Here we go. The EU would
Speaker 1: continue to continue preparations for a possible ninety three billion
Speaker 1: euro package over taliatory tariffs set at it up to
Speaker 1: thirty percent if a deal could not be struck by
Speaker 1: the end of this month. Let's talk about it the EU.
Speaker 1: I've just read that one. The White House issued a
Speaker 1: rebuttal on Wednesday after reports broached the possibility of a
Speaker 1: trade deal with the European Union ahead of the August
Speaker 1: first deadline. The US President Donald Trump has previously threatened
Speaker 1: to impose higher tariffs against the BLOCK from next month.
Speaker 1: The updates came even as the Block continued preparations for
Speaker 1: the one hundred and nine billion dollar package of retal
Speaker 1: towards tariffs. Discussions about any possibil possible deals with the
Speaker 1: United States should be considered speculation unless they are announced
Speaker 1: by President Trump. Reports quoted White House spokesperson Cush Desig
Speaker 1: as saying the POTUS confirmed later on Wednesday that the
Speaker 1: United States was in the process of completing a trade
Speaker 1: deal with China and plan to set straight tariffs for
Speaker 1: most of the rest of the world. Trump also said
Speaker 1: that Washington was in serious trade talks with the European
Speaker 1: Union and would set lower tariffs for the Block if
Speaker 1: it opened itself up to US business. The EU headed
Speaker 1: towards this trade deal with Washington now. The clarification came
Speaker 1: hours after The Financial Times quoted to EU diplomats to
Speaker 1: reveal that the Block was headed towards the deal with Washington.
Speaker 1: The yet to be confirmed agreement would impose fifteen percent
Speaker 1: tariffs on European imports, with Brussels matching the reciprocal levels
Speaker 1: or levies. Rather, officials told the publication that the EU
Speaker 1: would continue preparation for a possible ninety three billion euro
Speaker 1: package of retaliatory tariffs if a deal cannot be struck
Speaker 1: by the end of this month. According to the Financial Time,
Speaker 1: support both sides are in talks to wave tariffs on
Speaker 1: some products, including aircraft, spirits, medical devices, things of this nature.
Speaker 1: Exporters from the Block have been paying an additional ten
Speaker 1: percent leve on goods sent to the US since Trump
Speaker 1: announced sweeping reciprocal, yeah, reciprocal tariffs in April in addition
Speaker 1: to pre existing duties averaging four point eight percent. The
Speaker 1: fifteen percent tariff deal would essentially cement a status quo
Speaker 1: ahead of the August first deadline. The rate could also
Speaker 1: extend to cars, would mirror the framework agreement the United
Speaker 1: States has struck with Japan. Yeah, we did just recently
Speaker 1: strike a tariff deal with Japan in especially with it
Speaker 1: comes to automobiles. Because I don't know about y'all. I
Speaker 1: like my toyotas, I like Macniss signs. I like these
Speaker 1: Japanese made cars. I know, people talk a lot of
Speaker 1: noise about them. They're good vehicles, man, I'm just saying,
Speaker 1: and uh yeah, I would like for those to not
Speaker 1: go up in price because of some tariff war. Some
Speaker 1: of these things that could be exceptions to the rules.
Speaker 1: We shall see. But yeah, anyway, moving on with that now,
Speaker 1: as we were talking about international things here, we were
Speaker 1: talking about you know, international money, economy, tariffs and all
Speaker 1: these things. And now we're still conversating about the EU
Speaker 1: here and now we're gonna swap over to NATO a
Speaker 1: little bit here. Turkey still wants to join BRICKS while
Speaker 1: pretending to be a NATO ally. This is from the
Speaker 1: Foundation for Defense of Democracies, So little backstory here for
Speaker 1: anybody who doesn't know. Turkey is seen as the resident
Speaker 1: bad boy of NATO. No one actually likes them, but
Speaker 1: everybody's happy that they're a part of it. But nobody
Speaker 1: really is happy that they're a part of it. They're
Speaker 1: like the redheaded step child, if you will, right, and
Speaker 1: it's a part of it. Turkey is seen as a
Speaker 1: necessary evil by a lot of people, and they come
Speaker 1: in clutching situations, but they're always there to stir the pot.
Speaker 1: That's just what they do. And as of this moment,
Speaker 1: Turkey is wanting to join BRICKS, which is literally set
Speaker 1: out to break the US dollars dominance as the world
Speaker 1: economic power. Okay, so let's just talk about all of
Speaker 1: this now. Last year, Turkey took observers by surprise by
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty four Bricks Summit in Russia when it
Speaker 1: applied for full membership in an organization that seeks to
Speaker 1: challenge the Western led liberal international order and is an
Speaker 1: adversarial alternative to NATO. At the time, Turkey was turned
Speaker 1: down due to concerns over its NATO membership. Member states
Speaker 1: China and Russia have had reservations over admitting a US
Speaker 1: ally and aspiring member of the European Union. This hesitance
Speaker 1: resulted in the Bricks Block offering Ankara the option of
Speaker 1: being a partner cunt as an alternative, something which Turkish
Speaker 1: President Erdogan I think I pronounced that right. Urdigan is
Speaker 1: still considering. At the organization's twenty twenty five Brazil summit,
Speaker 1: which recently concluded, Turkey renewed its interest in joining the
Speaker 1: Block of Anti Western countries, only to be rebuffed again,
Speaker 1: although Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fadan Fetan, who attended to
Speaker 1: represent his country at the summit, underscored that Turkey is
Speaker 1: very interested in Bricks. India reportedly issued a hard objection
Speaker 1: to greenlighting Turkish membership owing to Turkey's diplomatic and military
Speaker 1: support of Pakistan in the recent skirmish between India and
Speaker 1: Pakistan over Kashmir. Yeah, that was also kind of a
Speaker 1: cool thing. India is one of those countries that, depending
Speaker 1: on the timeframe at which you're talking about them, they
Speaker 1: might be a super good ally of America. They might
Speaker 1: be siding with our enemies. India's doing India shit right.
Speaker 1: They're looking out for their own interests, which makes sense.
Speaker 1: I have no issue with that. That being said, when
Speaker 1: it came to Turkey possibly joining BRICKS, India was one
Speaker 1: of the only ones to throw that black ball in
Speaker 1: the ring real quick and say no, way, absolutely not.
Speaker 1: We are not even not entertaining this conversation. Now. I
Speaker 1: don't know the inner workings of BRICKS. I don't know
Speaker 1: if it has to be a unanimous decision or whatever
Speaker 1: the case is. But overall they were still rebuffed because
Speaker 1: they are NATO and EU member, and BRICKS literally is
Speaker 1: going against NATO in the EU and America and Western
Speaker 1: powers in general. So yeah, I know it's kind of
Speaker 1: seen as a turd in the punch bowl that way,
Speaker 1: but Turkey is still very interested in this. The eagerness
Speaker 1: of Ankara's contra continued bid to join a club that
Speaker 1: seeks to undermine the foundations of the Western world order
Speaker 1: should be concerning to the decision makers in Washington and Brussels. However,
Speaker 1: as one observer recently noted, the US used Turkey as
Speaker 1: a necessary partner against Moscow in Europe. Oscillates between criticism
Speaker 1: and cooperation, further emboldening Turkey. As I said, it kind
Speaker 1: of goes back and forth. It ebbs and flows, honestly,
Speaker 1: week to week. It seems. The reality that Western leaders
Speaker 1: consistently ignore, however, is that Turkey is a persistent and
Speaker 1: growing danger to vital security interests. Turkey acquired and holds
Speaker 1: s four hundred Russian missile defense systems, which at present
Speaker 1: are present rather a security threat to NATO's alliance, not
Speaker 1: necessarily if they're a NATO member, though you would think.
Speaker 1: But at the same time, Ankara has renewed its interest
Speaker 1: in purchasing forty F thirty five stell fighter jets and
Speaker 1: forty F sixteens from the US, a desire that the
Speaker 1: Trump administration appears keen to help realize. Turkey is simultaneously
Speaker 1: developing nuclear power capability with Russia through the construction of
Speaker 1: the Akuu Power Plant god I hope I pronounce that right,
Speaker 1: which is expected to become operational this year. Ankara is seeking,
Speaker 1: as I'm sorry, is also seeking to develop its independent
Speaker 1: nuclear fueling capabilities, which opens the potential for the development
Speaker 1: of a nuclear weapons program, a prospect for which Erdigan
Speaker 1: has previously expressed interest well that makes sense. While pursuing
Speaker 1: all these goals, Turkey maintains a military threatening posture towards
Speaker 1: European and Greece I'm sorry, towards European allies Greece and
Speaker 1: Cyprus in the Eastern Mediterranean by challenging their sovereign maritime
Speaker 1: territory under its Blue Homeland doctrine. In the Middle East,
Speaker 1: Israel continues to monitor and raise concerns over a continued
Speaker 1: Turkish military build up inside Syria, fearing that Ankara Harbor's
Speaker 1: intentions of becoming the next regional power like Iran. The
Speaker 1: Ertigan regime is also a premier champion of the Muslim
Speaker 1: Brotherhood affiliated and US designated terrorist organization Hamas to the
Speaker 1: actual shock of nobody here, taking a decisive stance against
Speaker 1: Ankara's actions that seek to undermine the security and economic
Speaker 1: interests of the United States and its partners and allies
Speaker 1: is a hard one for one very simple reason. Turkey
Speaker 1: is a NATO country, and it is difficult to perceive
Speaker 1: a fellow member state acting against the interests of the collective. However,
Speaker 1: one only needs to connect the dots of Urgon's long
Speaker 1: and ongoing list of transgressions against the interests of NATO,
Speaker 1: the US, and Europe. That's the thing. If there was
Speaker 1: going to be a NATO country to go against the collective,
Speaker 1: it would be Turkey. Like that's that's not even a question.
Speaker 1: That's absolutely how that would go down. The Trump administration
Speaker 1: just declared its intent to levy additional tariffs against future
Speaker 1: Bricks members quote. Any country aligning themselves with the anti
Speaker 1: American policies of bricks will be charged an additional ten
Speaker 1: percent tariff. There will be no exceptions to this policy.
Speaker 1: Trump wrote on truth Social Turkey more than qualifiers for
Speaker 1: such a measure, and then some Turkey's aspirations on joining
Speaker 1: bricks is only the tip of the iceberg of the
Speaker 1: Urdigans as adversarial behavior. It is way past time to
Speaker 1: realize that the Turkish president is continuously taking steps to
Speaker 1: undermine Western security interests. The United States and Europe should
Speaker 1: stop coddling him. So I find this interesting, right, there
Speaker 1: are people that are very much in support of bricks.
Speaker 1: They think that it is the next great thing. They
Speaker 1: think it is absolutely going to topple the US dollar.
Speaker 1: And that would be great if the majority of the
Speaker 1: big players in bricks weren't in open revolt or in
Speaker 1: open conflict or dealing with some other political crisis. It's like,
Speaker 1: how could I put this? It's too many chiefs all
Speaker 1: trying to take the lead and have one common goal,
Speaker 1: when none of them can agree on their own common goals,
Speaker 1: let alone some joint venture. I'm not saying that there's
Speaker 1: never gonna be a monetary system to replace the US dollar.
Speaker 1: I absolutely that that is going to come with time.
Speaker 1: I just really have a hard time believing that it's bricks.
Speaker 1: I don't know. There's a conversation to say that maybe
Speaker 1: crypto is gonna be the thing to take over and
Speaker 1: do that. I don't know. But with that being said,
Speaker 1: they're talking about throwing tariffs on any country that supports bricks,
Speaker 1: and it's aggression, economic aggression against the US dollar. Now
Speaker 1: we're gonna swap over to this article here NATO Chief
Speaker 1: warns India, Brazil, and China over Russia trade ties. Now
Speaker 1: this is kind of a catch twenty two before I
Speaker 1: read this here, India, Brazil, and China are all members
Speaker 1: of BRICKS. Russia is a member of BRICKS. These countries
Speaker 1: have trade agreements, they have economic agreements. Now NATO Chief
Speaker 1: is warning three of the big countries in Bricks that
Speaker 1: if it continues to trade with Russia, they will get
Speaker 1: slapped with so many economic sanctions that they will literally
Speaker 1: go into bankruptcy. Will that actually happen, I don't think so.
Speaker 1: I don't think the math math's enough for that. But
Speaker 1: let's talk about it here. Mark Root urged the three
Speaker 1: Bricks countries to maintain the phone call to President Vladimir
Speaker 1: Putin to stop the war in Ukraine or face secondary
Speaker 1: sanctions from the US. NATO Secretary General has called on China, Brazil,
Speaker 1: and India to pressure Russia or to be hit by
Speaker 1: US sanctions. President Donald Trump has said he would impose
Speaker 1: very severe terriffs against Russia if no deal was reached
Speaker 1: at the end to in the war in Ukraine in
Speaker 1: fifty days. Trump also threatened secondary tariffs of one hundred
Speaker 1: percent on any country that buys Russian exports. So the
Speaker 1: export in question is oil, that's it. That's the big
Speaker 1: concern here basically, And I mean they've been using middlemen,
Speaker 1: right That's why you have out of nowhere, nobody can
Speaker 1: buy Russian oil, but people can buy oil through Uzbekistan
Speaker 1: right now. That's the thing that's going down. I don't
Speaker 1: know if anybody knows this. Uzbekistan does not have a
Speaker 1: big thriving oil industry. I'm sure they have a couple
Speaker 1: of wells, but it's not anywhere where they're able to
Speaker 1: produce enough to ship out the amount of oil they've
Speaker 1: been shipping out. They're basically taking Russian oil, throwing on
Speaker 1: their label onto it, and selling it. That's how fencing works, right,
Speaker 1: So basically that's the big conversation. If you are caught
Speaker 1: buying Russian oil, Trump is threatening to hit that country
Speaker 1: with a one hundred percent tariff on top of whatever
Speaker 1: tariffs there already are on the said country. So what
Speaker 1: did Roots say about India, Brazil, and China? While meeting
Speaker 1: senators in the US, Roots said he was sure that
Speaker 1: these countries, especially China, would be very helpful in putting
Speaker 1: pressure on Russia. Yeah, they would if they had a
Speaker 1: vested interest in ending the war in Ukraine. Sure they
Speaker 1: could put pressure on Russia and maybe they will get
Speaker 1: a response. But they have no interests in that. So
Speaker 1: this is why Trump's trying to make them have an interest.
Speaker 1: This is a direct quote here. My encouragement to these
Speaker 1: three countries particularly is if you live now in Beijing
Speaker 1: or Delhi, or you are the president of Brazil, you
Speaker 1: might want to take a look into this because this
Speaker 1: might hit you very hard, he told reporters. So please
Speaker 1: make the phone called to Vladimir Putin and tell him
Speaker 1: that he has to get serious about peace talks, because
Speaker 1: otherwise this will slam back on Brazil, on India, on
Speaker 1: China in a massive way. So why India, Brazil, and China.
Speaker 1: The three countries account for the vast majority of Moscow's
Speaker 1: energy trade, and together with South Africa, they are the
Speaker 1: coordinations of the Bricks Alliance. Well, yeah, that's why their
Speaker 1: names are in the acronym. Trump had already vowed higher
Speaker 1: tarrifs on bricks countries that align with the Blocks plan
Speaker 1: to challenge the US hedgemony, even before Trump's announcement of
Speaker 1: secondary terriffs earlier this week, US lawmakers have been working
Speaker 1: on a bipartisan bill for even tougher sanctions. The legislation
Speaker 1: seeks a five hundred percent tariff on goods imported from
Speaker 1: countries that continue to buy Russian oil, gas and uranium
Speaker 1: and other exports. Yeah, so that's something that they're absolutely
Speaker 1: pushing for. We'll see if it actually comes through. Tony,
Speaker 1: I saw your hand raised, brother, what you got?
Speaker 10: Yeah, I was wondering how much trade still exists between
Speaker 10: the US and Russia, and surprisingly there actually is still
Speaker 10: a little bit. It's down from thirty six billion dollars
Speaker 10: a year before the Ukraine War. Do about three billion
Speaker 10: dollars a year, and it's about half of that is fertilizer.
Speaker 10: The rest is non ferrous metals, including uranium.
Speaker 15: That we've.
Speaker 10: Okay, some stuff I kind of forget. I was just
Speaker 10: reading about it. But yeah, it's dotting off that last
Speaker 10: three billion dollars a trade. I don't think it's going
Speaker 10: to hurt him that much. And I predict India and
Speaker 10: China they're not shut down any trade with Russia at all.
Speaker 10: They're buying lots of oil from them.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 10: Only about fifteen percent of China's exports are to the
Speaker 10: United States. And I thank you.
Speaker 1: I mean I agree with that, but those fifteen percent,
Speaker 1: that is kind.
Speaker 10: Of hurt us. You cut out, Go ahead, Oh sorry
Speaker 10: if I'm cutting out, But yeah, I don't think we
Speaker 10: can force other countries to stop trading with Rush.
Speaker 1: We can't force them to stop trade. But they're threatening
Speaker 1: to hit them with a five hundred percent tariff, which
Speaker 1: is that's that's out of the box. High, don't get
Speaker 1: me wrong, And I'm not even saying that that's going
Speaker 1: to actually get the response that you're wanting. If anything,
Speaker 1: that would just force them to do more business with
Speaker 1: other countries rather than US. I don't know, right, I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: fifteen percent of China's goods come to us. That does
Speaker 1: make us buy the numbers their largest buyer. But it's
Speaker 1: not like we're they're only yer. Most of Europe buys
Speaker 1: things from China, most most of everywhere on Earth buys
Speaker 1: things from China. We just have more consumers per capita
Speaker 1: in America than most other countries do, so I get it.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I'm with you on that. You can't force
Speaker 1: a country to do what you want, but you can
Speaker 1: try to incentivize them to do so. It's uh, we
Speaker 1: will see how it shakes out. I don't know. Russia
Speaker 1: keeps going back and forth whether they want to come
Speaker 1: to the peace negotiations or not. Zelenski, I haven't heard
Speaker 1: anything from him about the peace talks. I think he
Speaker 1: wants peace, but I don't think there's terms that he
Speaker 1: would agree to and I don't honestly know if Putin
Speaker 1: is actually suing for peace anytime soon. What have you heard?
Speaker 10: Right? I don't think he is. And even though a
Speaker 10: lot of the recent news about Ukraine has focused on
Speaker 10: some protests against against Zelenski, I don't think the protests
Speaker 10: are going to go anywhere. But Russia has taken more territory.
Speaker 10: They're advancing on a place called Pa Kruffsk right now. Yeah,
Speaker 10: And they're just taking a few square miles every day basically,
Speaker 10: And Russia is gonna keep doing that. That's their strategy.
Speaker 10: They're really happy with it. Times on their side, and yeah,
Speaker 10: Russia does not want peace right now.
Speaker 1: Now you're still saying this is gonna be wrapped up
Speaker 1: by March up next year.
Speaker 10: Well, yeah, I'm still gonna bet on that.
Speaker 1: Okay, Okay, Now when you say it's gonna be wrapped up,
Speaker 1: do you think it's gonna like do you think that
Speaker 1: Russia will take all of Ukraine at that point? Or
Speaker 1: they'll pretty much call that the stopping point and whatever
Speaker 1: they've got at that point, they'll call it good because
Speaker 1: correct me if I'm wrong here. The springtime is when
Speaker 1: the you know, that's when campaign season typically starts once
Speaker 1: the frost wears off and once the muddy slop kind
Speaker 1: of dries out, it becomes more of a spring offensive
Speaker 1: time frame. You're saying that there won't as of your
Speaker 1: beliefs as of this moment, you don't believe that there
Speaker 1: will be a spring offensive in twenty twenty six.
Speaker 10: I'm not sure when it'll be, but I think they're
Speaker 10: not gonna take all of Ukraine. I think they're going
Speaker 10: to take something like fifty percent more than what they
Speaker 10: already have have taken since twenty twenty two. So I
Speaker 10: think that they're gonna get something like nearly all of Zapparosia,
Speaker 10: don Yetsk and everything Zaporosia. I think includes some parts
Speaker 10: of the north or the left, I mean right bank
Speaker 10: of the Nyeppa River. I think Russia might get all
Speaker 10: the way up to the river, and maybe maybe that's it,
Speaker 10: but they'll get more territory than they have now, and
Speaker 10: then the border will be drawn there and it'll be
Speaker 10: like nineteen forty five forty six where it gets kind
Speaker 10: of finalized and then with the new border everyone kind
Speaker 10: of moves on. That's kind of the end scenario. I
Speaker 10: imagine it's going to happen, gotcha.
Speaker 1: I mean, we will see how it shakes out. Now
Speaker 1: that we have there's new patriots systems that have just
Speaker 1: got sent to Ukraine, and I'm not saying that's gonna
Speaker 1: be the thing to change the tide of the war
Speaker 1: by any means. I'm also not not saying that it's
Speaker 1: We'll see how it shakes out. Both sides are making
Speaker 1: this the slowest, grindingest war of attrition that we have seen,
Speaker 1: definitely in this millennia. But it's been quite a few
Speaker 1: decades since we've seen a war that goes down like this,
Speaker 1: So I honestly don't know what to make of it.
Speaker 1: I just recently saw, actually to this morning. I saw
Speaker 1: it was a live combat footage a Russian for lack
Speaker 1: of better words, let's call them. I don't know what
Speaker 1: their special forces are called anymore. I know they used
Speaker 1: to be called the Spesnas. I don't know if that's
Speaker 1: still a thing anymore or what. But they were deep
Speaker 1: inside Ukrainian territory and ambushed a truck and they lit
Speaker 1: into this truck. It was just a single guy driving it,
Speaker 1: but it was trying to get to a spot to
Speaker 1: extract some soldiers or bring them from pointing to point
Speaker 1: B or whatever the case was. Yeah, he did not
Speaker 1: get to his destination. So I mean there is still
Speaker 1: very brutal fighting going on in and around this area,
Speaker 1: so we shall see how it shakes out. Anyway, Now
Speaker 1: let's move on. As we were talking about international things,
Speaker 1: Let's go to the Jerusalem Post Hamas claims that groups
Speaker 1: submitted ceasefire response anti Drew's anti Semitic hate speech online rises.
Speaker 1: Now with this, we keep hearing a lot of things
Speaker 1: about the Drews. Now, for anybody who doesn't know what
Speaker 1: the Drews are, I got a little quick short video
Speaker 1: that's gonna do a little background into the Drus population
Speaker 1: because that gets brought up a lot, especially when it
Speaker 1: comes to the Israel conflict. So who are the Drews.
Speaker 11: Wondering who the Drews are? They have a long history
Speaker 11: deeply connected with Israel, but they are Jewish. Check this out.
Speaker 11: The Jrews are an Arab religious group that have a
Speaker 11: very secretive religion. What we do know, however, is very intriguing.
Speaker 11: Like Christians, Muslims, and Jews, they believe in the singularity
Speaker 11: of God. However, like Hindus, they also believe in reincarnation,
Speaker 11: but their reincarnation follows a different set of rules. The
Speaker 11: Jrews hold shu Ab as their most revered prophet. It
Speaker 11: is commonly understood that Schueb is none other than Jethro
Speaker 11: from the Bible, Moses's father in law. Because of this
Speaker 11: positive ancient relationship, the Drews generally align themselves with Israel,
Speaker 11: but the Sixty War of nineteen sixty seven had devastating
Speaker 11: consequences for the Drewz community in the Golan Heights. After
Speaker 11: the war, the Purple Line was created as the de
Speaker 11: facto border between Syria and Israel. This Purple Line effectively
Speaker 11: split the Golani Jruis community into two. Surprisingly, in nineteen
Speaker 11: eighty one, when Israel offered citizenship to the residents in
Speaker 11: the Golan Heights, only ten percent of the Drews accepted
Speaker 11: this offer. This split was so charged that it threatened
Speaker 11: to tear the community apart. Many speculate that this was
Speaker 11: because at the time, many thought Syria was going to
Speaker 11: reoccupy the Goal Line at some point. Being a minority,
Speaker 11: the Jews need to walk a very delicate political line.
Speaker 11: They accepted Israeli citizenship, then they would have opened themselves
Speaker 11: up to attacks from Syrians, but this sentiment has gradually
Speaker 11: been shifting, especially since the civil war in Syria that
Speaker 11: started in twenty eleven. Also, Hamas's brutal attack of October
Speaker 11: seventh in Theslow rocket that struck a soccer field in
Speaker 11: mans Del Sham's killing twelve Drews children has further brought
Speaker 11: the Israeli and Golani Drews community together. Requests four Israeli
Speaker 11: citizenship from the Jews are now at record heights. Israel's
Speaker 11: considering allowing Drews from Syria into Israel for work, and
Speaker 11: the IDEF is recently committed to protecting the Drews town
Speaker 11: just outside of Damascus. The recent fall of Asad al
Speaker 11: Bashar is once again greatly changing the dynamics of the
Speaker 11: Jews community.
Speaker 1: One okay, so I thought that was a good little
Speaker 1: background into who the Drews are, where they operate these
Speaker 1: kinds of things. So now Hamas claims that the group's
Speaker 1: submitted ceasefire response anti Drews, an anti Semitic hate speech
Speaker 1: online has risen Canada calls for an immediate un AID resumption.
Speaker 1: Rubio discusses Syrian ceasefire Gaza strip West Bank security situation
Speaker 1: with Jordanian counterpart. Let's get into it. The surge into
Speaker 1: an anti Drus hate speech linked to Syria unrest and
Speaker 1: the Cyberwell reports. According to the watchdog, the incitement includes
Speaker 1: explicit anti Semitic language and conspiracy theories portraying Syrian Drews
Speaker 1: as collaborators with Israel amid recent violent unrest in the
Speaker 1: southern Syria's Sueda province. I hope I'm pronouncing that right.
Speaker 1: A new report by the watchdog group Cyberwell has revealed
Speaker 1: a surge in online incitement targeting the country's Drus minority,
Speaker 1: with over forty five million views recorded on inciting posts
Speaker 1: on the social media platform x in just one week.
Speaker 1: According to the report published this week, the incitement includes
Speaker 1: explicit anti Semitic language and conspiracy theories could portraying Sirian
Speaker 1: Drews as collaborators with Israel. Now Hamas claims terror group
Speaker 1: submitted Gaza ceasefire proposal to mediators. Now here's the report.
Speaker 1: This follows a tense meeting when the mediators made clear
Speaker 1: to Hamas that the leaders that if you don't return
Speaker 1: with a serious response, your problem will be with US
Speaker 1: the mediators, wow Hamas claims that the terror group handed
Speaker 1: its response to the Israeli ceesfire proposal to mediators. Hamas's
Speaker 1: official news agency, SAFA, reported on Thursday morning. This follows
Speaker 1: an Israeli official telling The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday that
Speaker 1: Hamas has yet to deliver an official response to the
Speaker 1: Israeli proposal that was submitted a week ago, and is
Speaker 1: now raising new demands on issues that had already been
Speaker 1: resolved the hostage ceasefire deal. Mediators refused to relay Hamas's
Speaker 1: response to israel proposed deal on Tuesday, saying it was
Speaker 1: not a serious answer to people's familiar with the matter
Speaker 1: told the Post, I really don't care if we could
Speaker 1: read this one about Canada calling for an immediate resumption
Speaker 1: of you in led aiding Gaza. I don't really care
Speaker 1: about that one, but yeah, I did want to bring
Speaker 1: this up anyway, that the anti Drew's sentiment is becoming
Speaker 1: more prevalent here because they have aligned themselves with Israel.
Speaker 1: Now that being said, a lot of Drews do live
Speaker 1: in Syria, but the current for lack of better words,
Speaker 1: warlord that is running Syria has historically he was a
Speaker 1: former al Qaeda member, so he's not very fond of
Speaker 1: the Drews. However, he has lightened up on them a
Speaker 1: good bit. So I don't know if the Syrian Drews
Speaker 1: are seeing as much, you know, the persecution as they
Speaker 1: once did. I'm not saying that they are or not, honestly,
Speaker 1: but we do know that Hamas is you know, and
Speaker 1: the online anti drew sentiment is at an all time
Speaker 1: high right now. I thought it was interesting talk about. Now,
Speaker 1: with all of that being said, let's continue on the
Speaker 1: conversation of what's going on in Israel. Now. This is
Speaker 1: an update. This is from CNA, the Catholic News Agency.
Speaker 1: There's an update. Latin Patriarch confirms the Holy Family Church
Speaker 1: in Gaza was hit. Three deaths reported. For anybody who
Speaker 1: does not know the IDF, the Israeli Defense Forces as
Speaker 1: they were attacking in Gaza, there's a whole war going
Speaker 1: on there, they probably have heard about they hit the
Speaker 1: only Catholic church in Gaza. They say that it was
Speaker 1: an accident. It was a misfire. It was a straight round.
Speaker 1: A piece of shrapnel from a bomb that went off
Speaker 1: of a different building went into the Catholic church, and
Speaker 1: it's very horrible how this happened. It killed three and
Speaker 1: it hurt ten. It killed the priest. So I'm just
Speaker 1: saying this is, this is how crusades have started. I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that we need to make that happen right now,
Speaker 1: but like historically speaking, that is not a good move,
Speaker 1: especially with the pope in charge right now being as
Speaker 1: pro Israel as he is. This is let's talk about
Speaker 1: it here. The Holy Family Church in Goadzawa was struck
Speaker 1: by an Israeli attack on Thursday, with the strike resulting
Speaker 1: in casualties and injuries among civilians present at the historic church.
Speaker 1: The pastor of the parish, father Gabriel Ramanelli, was also injured. Okay,
Speaker 1: so I heard one report saying that he was killed.
Speaker 1: I heard one report saying that he was injured. This
Speaker 1: is from July seventeenth, so it's a few days old.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure if he's succumbed to his wounds by
Speaker 1: this point. It depends on the source you read, so
Speaker 1: we always got to consider the source. The direct strike
Speaker 1: killed three people. I'm not going to try to pronounce
Speaker 1: their names out of respect for them, and I'm really
Speaker 1: not trying to make a joke here, like these people
Speaker 1: have passed and I'm not trying to make light of it,
Speaker 1: but yeah, there we are, these people, confirmed by the
Speaker 1: Latin Patriarch of the Jerusalem or of Jerusalem. A few
Speaker 1: hours after the attack, a third person succumbed to her injuries.
Speaker 1: A few hours later, the patriarch stressed that it was
Speaker 1: praying for the repose of the souls of the dead
Speaker 1: and for an end to what it called this barbaric war.
Speaker 1: According to the press report, several other civilians sustained moderate
Speaker 1: to severe injuries, while the parish priest, Father Gabriel Romanelli,
Speaker 1: was wounded by shrapnel in his leg. His continue or
Speaker 1: His condition was described as mild, and he later returned
Speaker 1: to check on the wounded. According to the church sources
Speaker 1: in Gaza, fourteen people were injured in the attack. In
Speaker 1: its initial statement earlier the day, the patriarch said the
Speaker 1: church was attacked this morning, causing injuries among those inside,
Speaker 1: including the parish priest. In Rome, the Vatican issued a
Speaker 1: statement signed by the Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Perilyn
Speaker 1: Sure express Pope Leo the fourteenth profound sorrow upon learning
Speaker 1: that the lives were lost and others injured. The Holy
Speaker 1: Father conveyed his spiritual closeness to Romanelli and the parish community,
Speaker 1: renewing his call for an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza
Speaker 1: Strip and expressing his desire for dialogue, reconciliation and lasting
Speaker 1: peace in the region. So the priest himself, for anybody
Speaker 1: who doesn't know, he was actually rather close with Pope Francis.
Speaker 1: They spoke via FaceTime at least once a week up
Speaker 1: until the former Pope's death. So, this particular Catholic church
Speaker 1: in Gaza, the only Catholic church in the Gaza Strip,
Speaker 1: it's very special to Rome itself, it is very important
Speaker 1: to the Holy See itself. So for this to be
Speaker 1: hit by the IDF, that is that's quite a move.
Speaker 1: I'm not even say it's a flex that's that's that's
Speaker 1: that's a situation. They messed up. They messed up bad.
Speaker 1: While the IDEF said they were investigating the incident, the
Speaker 1: spokesperson for the Israeli Foreign Ministry or in Marmurnstein Marmerstein,
Speaker 1: Jesus Okay express his country's deep regret over the damage
Speaker 1: to the Holy Family Church in Gaza City and over
Speaker 1: any civilian casualties. I am so sure because you know
Speaker 1: how Israel has always been so welcoming of the Catholics. Right.
Speaker 1: He added that the circumstances of the incident remain unclear
Speaker 1: and that the results of the investigation would be published transparently.
Speaker 1: The Holy Family Church is considered the last Christian refuge
Speaker 1: in Gaza, where dozens of families have been sheltered since
Speaker 1: the outbreak of the war in October twenty twenty three.
Speaker 1: The church also suffered partial damage in July of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four when its surroundings were shelled, an incident that
Speaker 1: at the time drew condemnation from the church leaders in
Speaker 1: the Holy Land.
Speaker 6: Wow.
Speaker 1: Okay, So with that being said, let's watch this. This
Speaker 1: is from CBS. I understand, can question the source all
Speaker 1: the things, but Netta Yahoo calls Pope Leo after deadly
Speaker 1: Israeli strike on Catholic church in Gaza. Let's listen in.
Speaker 5: Prime Minister Benjamin Netnat, who has called Pope Leo the
Speaker 5: fourteenth this morning, a day after an Israeli strike on
Speaker 5: Gaza's only Catholic church killed three people and injured several others. Earlier,
Speaker 5: my colleague Errol Barnet spoke with facin Nation host Marcat
Speaker 5: Brennan about this attack and the state of ceasefire negotiations
Speaker 5: in the enclave.
Speaker 6: We know from the White House podium they made clear
Speaker 6: President Trump did not like this at all, and in
Speaker 6: fact had called the Israeli Prime minister about it. The
Speaker 6: Israeli Prime Minister claimed it was a quote unquote mistake
Speaker 6: that the IDF accidentally fired on this church where some people,
Speaker 6: including those who are handicapped, have long sheltered. But when
Speaker 6: it comes to that Palestinian territory in Gaza and the
Speaker 6: efforts to broker a deal, I am told that there's
Speaker 6: reason to hope at this moment. In fact, we know
Speaker 6: that Israel submitted a new map suggesting other areas that
Speaker 6: they could withdraw to within Gaza, and that the mediators
Speaker 6: who are pressing Hamas to accept it think there is
Speaker 6: a good shot this time.
Speaker 5: All right, For more in the situation in Gaza, I'm
Speaker 5: joined by CBS News correspondent Courtney Keely. Good to see you,
Speaker 5: Great to see you. All right, So this is potentially
Speaker 5: getting closer to a ceasefire deal, but what are some
Speaker 5: of the major sticking points?
Speaker 3: Major sticking points really are where will the IDF go,
Speaker 3: Because this is seen by the Palestinians, especially Hamas, as
Speaker 3: occupying forces in their land. That's how it's viewed. So
Speaker 3: where are they going to deploy to and what are
Speaker 3: they going to do with the Palestinians. Are they going
Speaker 3: to herd them into these areas that we've heard from
Speaker 3: this proposal and it seems like that, you know, a
Speaker 3: lot of people are very critical of that, saying it's
Speaker 3: it's not what they've been moved and moved and moved.
Speaker 3: They need aid that's supposed to come through. They want
Speaker 3: to release twenty Israeli hostages that are still alive after
Speaker 3: all this time, and they want the Palestinians who are
Speaker 3: malnourished and starving to get the aid they need. But
Speaker 3: we haven't seen the aid delivery work. We haven't seen
Speaker 3: this displacement in any way give shelter or food or aid.
Speaker 3: And what we're seeing is continued bombardment, even on that
Speaker 3: Catholic church where disabled and elderly people sheltered. Where the
Speaker 3: videos when we saw the Pope talking about his benevolence,
Speaker 3: it was these calls to Gaza every night, And now
Speaker 3: we're seeing this church, it's not good. But Hamas has
Speaker 3: always said that they want an end to the war.
Speaker 3: And the problem is that Another sticking point is is
Speaker 3: Prime Minister Benjamin Netie, who's power with his coalition, and
Speaker 3: it not disintegrating on him to agree to this deal
Speaker 3: because often people like the Defense Minister Israel cass does
Speaker 3: not want an end to the war to get to
Speaker 3: that point or to say that they agree to that.
Speaker 5: And Courtiny, does it feel to you and in talking
Speaker 5: to your sources that the Trump administration is growing frustrated
Speaker 5: with Bibi Netyahu and his coalition.
Speaker 3: Yeah, absolutely, And like let's zoom out a little bit,
Speaker 3: as we always do, and move on to Syria, and
Speaker 3: let's listen to what the State Department had to say
Speaker 3: about the Israeli strikes in Syria.
Speaker 14: Okay, the United States did not support recent Israeli strikes.
Speaker 14: We are engaging diplomatically with Israel and Syria at the
Speaker 14: highest levels, both to address the present crisis and reach
Speaker 14: a lasting agreement between the two sovereign states.
Speaker 3: Sovereign states, sovereign sovereign states, emphasis on sovereign. Syria is
Speaker 3: a sovereign state, It's a Nassan state. Coming out of
Speaker 3: fourteen years of civil war, brutal dictatorships of the outside
Speaker 3: family for decades, but it is supported by the Gulf countries.
Speaker 3: And the US President did release and take away those
Speaker 3: American sanctions. So there was actarian We use that word
Speaker 3: a lot, but it was the Druze, which is its
Speaker 3: own sect of offshoot of Islam and Bedouins that are
Speaker 3: fighting and it's gotten bloody, and it's in southeast Syria,
Speaker 3: and that's it's been a bloody, almost tribal Not to
Speaker 3: be disrespectful, but that's kind of what it looks like.
Speaker 3: What Israel did was the minute the Syrian forces moved
Speaker 3: close to southeast Israel bombed Damascus, bombed, the military headquarter,
Speaker 3: bombed near the presidential Palace. So they've got to allow
Speaker 3: the Syrian forces to control their own land without interfering
Speaker 3: and saying that they're doing it to protect the DRUS
Speaker 3: because that goes across borders, and these borders should be
Speaker 3: hard and fast. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netniaho clearly distruss Thisria,
Speaker 3: these new Syrian forces and does not want him near
Speaker 3: the Israeli border.
Speaker 5: All right, Corney Kiely, always great to have you here
Speaker 5: you make it okay.
Speaker 1: So there's a lot of things going on as far
Speaker 1: as Israel's concerned right now now. To be completely honest
Speaker 1: with you, it's it's absolutely insane. And the bombing of
Speaker 1: the Catholic Church. So for anybody who doesn't know, Yeah,
Speaker 1: the Cajun Knight might be a moniker that I've put
Speaker 1: on as far as the content creation side of this goes,
Speaker 1: and that's kind of a two part conversation. So I
Speaker 1: have in the past done booheart fighting, and I would
Speaker 1: like to get more more heavily involved with it. I've
Speaker 1: had to take a step back from him for the
Speaker 1: past few years because life be life. And but aside
Speaker 1: from that type of night fighting that I do, the
Speaker 1: organization that I am a part of also has representation
Speaker 1: in Jerusalem in the Holy Land, and our main objective
Speaker 1: is to keep a Christian presence in the Holy Land
Speaker 1: and to protect Christians there and you know, Christians at
Speaker 1: risk around the world. That being said, I personally know
Speaker 1: people from that church. I actually just was speaking to
Speaker 1: some of them a couple of weeks ago in Phoenix,
Speaker 1: and I haven't heard from anybody that I talked to
Speaker 1: to my knowledge everybody that I met is safe. But
Speaker 1: this is a bit of a situation. This is this
Speaker 1: something that actually kind of hits close to home. I'm
Speaker 1: not a Catholic, but I was, you raised Catholic until
Speaker 1: I was about thirteen. I have respect for the Catholic faith.
Speaker 1: I may not agree with a lot of the things
Speaker 1: about their dogma, but I can respect them and give
Speaker 1: them their flowers where they're due. This is a bit
Speaker 1: of an issue for me personally. Okay. So the Christians
Speaker 1: are discriminated against in Israel and in Gaza, and ever
Speaker 1: since this whole conflict has kicked off, they have been
Speaker 1: doubly persecuted and discriminated against because the Jews are not
Speaker 1: giving them any kind of safety or support. The Muslims
Speaker 1: are not giving them any kind of safety or support.
Speaker 1: They are kind of left to fit for themselves. And
Speaker 1: this is a population that is less than two percent
Speaker 1: in this region, so it's a very tight knit community,
Speaker 1: and both sides pretty much just lead them to their
Speaker 1: own devices. And when something happens to the Christians, no
Speaker 1: one's really putting them at the top of the priority
Speaker 1: list to come help them. So when you hear that
Speaker 1: the only Catholic church in Gaza just got bombed by
Speaker 1: the IDF. And I'm not saying that it was purposely done.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that either. I don't know. I'm sure
Speaker 1: there's gonna be a internal investigation, and it was a yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. I don't really believe all of that. I
Speaker 1: don't know if it was intentional or not. Either way
Speaker 1: this goes. It is not good optics, especially if Israel relies.
Speaker 1: And by Israel relying on the outside forces, what I
Speaker 1: mean is American help. Right. Israel has always relied on
Speaker 1: us for a lot of things. They do not need
Speaker 1: our help, but they also really like our help. You know,
Speaker 1: pissing off the evangelicals in America by hitting a church
Speaker 1: is probably not the smartest move. I don't know, Tony, go.
Speaker 10: Ahead, Yeah, I've seen a lot of discussion of this.
Speaker 10: My overall impression of Israel has not changed much as
Speaker 10: a result of this. This is just the kind of
Speaker 10: thing that happens in war. I don't want to make
Speaker 10: too much excuses for them. I certainly don't think this
Speaker 10: was approved at a high level or authorized, but there's
Speaker 10: a lot of lower commanders and infantry who can exercise
Speaker 10: their own individual initiative in a war. So I think
Speaker 10: that's the kind of that's the root of an attack
Speaker 10: like this. It just kind of happened. They've been negligent. Also,
Speaker 10: the Christian population of Israel. I've found it from people
Speaker 10: who defend Israel. Of course, the Christian population of Israel
Speaker 10: has increased over the last forty or fifty years, but
Speaker 10: they've been a pretty constant, like one and a half
Speaker 10: percent of Israel's population. They used to the Christians used
Speaker 10: to be a higher percentage of the Palestinian population, maybe
Speaker 10: ten percent, and now they're down to two percent there too,
Speaker 10: And I think it's because Christians get it have an
Speaker 10: easier time emigrating. So there's large Christian Palestinian communities and
Speaker 10: places like Chile where you wouldn't expect him, and Los
Speaker 10: Angeles and Sirhan. Sirhan, it was a Palestinian Christian. He's
Speaker 10: still alive, by the way. In San Quentin. He was
Speaker 10: the he alleged assassin of Robert Kennedy, although I believe
Speaker 10: it was probably Kennedy's bodyguards. And you know, both of
Speaker 10: those guys, Sirhan and thing Eugene Caesar, were mob linked
Speaker 10: and it was probably a double assassin job there. But
Speaker 10: that's a tangent here. One thing I was a little
Speaker 10: surprised to see. I was surprised this got so much
Speaker 10: attention because when Israel bound the Church of Saint Porphyrius,
Speaker 10: that was like a few weeks after October seventh, and
Speaker 10: it killed a lot more people, but including some of
Speaker 10: Justin Amasha's relatives. But I think everybody the time thought
Speaker 10: that it was so close to October seventh that you
Speaker 10: just have to expect stuff like this to happen.
Speaker 1: It was the fog of war, Yeah, I remember that.
Speaker 10: Yeah, Israel's also attacked some smaller churches in Syria and
Speaker 10: this isn't authorized by the government. These are just guys
Speaker 10: on the ground doing their own thing. But yeah, it's
Speaker 10: never gotten as much attention as this one particular Catholic
Speaker 10: church in Gaza. And the last thing I want to
Speaker 10: bring up is uh, I think there's a There was
Speaker 10: a big split between Catholics and Protestants on Twitter this week,
Speaker 10: especially because the battle on Beat. Editor Joel Barry made
Speaker 10: a couple of posts about this, and one of them,
Speaker 10: the most incendiary one, was that look, there's there are
Speaker 10: all of those Catholics in Gaza are Hamas supporters, because
Speaker 10: if they weren't, they would have lapsed by now. And
Speaker 10: there used to be probably a thousand Catholics in Gaza
Speaker 10: and there's only about two hundred left now. And he actually,
Speaker 10: I'm not saying I fully agree with this argument, but
Speaker 10: he does kind of have a point that the ones
Speaker 10: who are the least favorable to Hamas have already left,
Speaker 10: and the ones who are left are the ones who
Speaker 10: are favorable to Hamas in some regard as, if not
Speaker 10: at least being a political about it.
Speaker 1: I see the argument, dude, but I also feel like
Speaker 1: the ones that are left are the ones that probably
Speaker 1: don't have the financial means to pick up and move
Speaker 1: to another place like it went. There's only two hundred
Speaker 1: of them in Gaza City. Those two hundred are probably
Speaker 1: like the impoverished dregs that happen to be members of
Speaker 1: that parish. I could be so wrong here and come
Speaker 1: to find out they are. They're absolutely helping support Hamas.
Speaker 1: I just I have a hard time believing that, especially
Speaker 1: with Hamas being an internationally recognized terrorist organization and this
Speaker 1: particular parish being so closely linked to the Vatican. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I just that's a hard sale for me.
Speaker 10: Well, anyway, those were some of the arguments that were made,
Speaker 10: and yeah, a lot of people were fighting on Twitter
Speaker 10: about that. I definitely think I disagree with Joel Barry
Speaker 10: on the whole from that, and I think within the
Speaker 10: evangelical community there's certain there's a debate opening up about dispensationalism,
Speaker 10: where US evangelicals for the last I don't know fifty
Speaker 10: plus years, have mostly agreed with the notion that Israel
Speaker 10: is God's chosen people today and this refers to their
Speaker 10: genetic lineage Jewish people who have been moving there, and
Speaker 10: that's why we need to support Israel. And the younger generation,
Speaker 10: even of Protestant Evangelicals, doesn't really believe this as much,
Speaker 10: and they're really tealing away. It's a pretty major redefinition
Speaker 10: of evangelical belief in the United States, I think going
Speaker 10: on right now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's the veil has been lifted as far as
Speaker 1: that goes. For the longest time, evangelicals as a whole
Speaker 1: thought it was our religious duty to support the nation
Speaker 1: of Israel, win lose, draw, doesn't matter whatever Israel is doing.
Speaker 1: We need to support them. I mean, hell, I was
Speaker 1: even a part of that for a good long while here.
Speaker 1: But I gotta say I'm not a big supporter of
Speaker 1: Net and Yahoo. I support the nation of Israel. Yes,
Speaker 1: I believe that that country should exist, There should be
Speaker 1: a Jewish nation in this area. I have no problems
Speaker 1: with that. By definition, that turns me into a Zionist. However,
Speaker 1: what we are seeing these days is more of a Zionist.
Speaker 1: How could I put this Zionist supremacist movement that is
Speaker 1: currently going on right now, And it's not just happening
Speaker 1: from Israel, It's happening in a America where people are
Speaker 1: just inherently they're happy with anything that Israel does, and
Speaker 1: they're not talking about Zionists as in they believe Israel
Speaker 1: should exist. It's like the Zionist extremists that are going
Speaker 1: on this kind of tangent and going about it this way,
Speaker 1: and it's it's become a thing where you can't be
Speaker 1: critical of net and Yahoo without being seen as an
Speaker 1: anti Semite, and you should be allowed to do that.
Speaker 1: You can you can support Israel as a nation and
Speaker 1: think they're being led by shitheads like that. The two
Speaker 1: can be true at the same time. God forget which
Speaker 1: comedian it was. I just heard speak on this. He's
Speaker 1: a libertarian talking head. He just went on Charlie Kirk
Speaker 1: and said this, and I agreed with him. Basically, Israel
Speaker 1: is like that guy that's a part of your clique.
Speaker 1: He's your buddy, and every time you go out to
Speaker 1: the bar with him, y'all get in a fistfight that
Speaker 1: he starts and then you get your ass beat over it? Right, Like,
Speaker 1: how many times do you do this before you just
Speaker 1: know no longer start going out with this guy. It
Speaker 1: seems like that is turning into the Israel America friendship.
Speaker 1: And I'm not saying that America's been drug into wars
Speaker 1: because of them. Yeah, we bombed Iran, cool, all right.
Speaker 1: I personally don't have a problem with it. I'm not
Speaker 1: a big fan of the iatola. It is what it is.
Speaker 1: How the people in his country were happy that we
Speaker 1: did it, it depends on the source. I understand that.
Speaker 1: My point is we haven't been drug into a war
Speaker 1: because of Israel in quite some time. However, a lot
Speaker 1: of evangelicals are starting to think more critically and they're
Speaker 1: not just going along with whatever. Mister Pastorman says, they're
Speaker 1: thinking for themselves, which is beautiful in my opinion, and
Speaker 1: they're being more critical of the Israeli government and what
Speaker 1: they're doing, and they're looking at the ties between the
Speaker 1: Israeli government and the American government a little more skeptically,
Speaker 1: which again I am in favor of. So with that
Speaker 1: being said, them bombing this Catholic church, and you're right,
Speaker 1: this is not the only Christian group to be hit
Speaker 1: by the idea, especially in this whole conflict. But this
Speaker 1: is getting a lot more eyes on it now. I
Speaker 1: don't know if that's because we just got a new pope.
Speaker 1: I don't know if it's because it's so close to
Speaker 1: home as far as the Gaza area and this is
Speaker 1: the only Catholic church in Gaza. I don't know why
Speaker 1: this is getting more optics than any of the other
Speaker 1: attacks that have happened. But it's also kind of bringing
Speaker 1: to light the situation for the Christians on the ground
Speaker 1: in this area of the world, which I, for my
Speaker 1: own reasons, am in very high support of the Christian world.
Speaker 1: Forget the denominations for two seconds, right, Catholic, Protestant, Methodists,
Speaker 1: I don't care. Christians should care about what other Christians
Speaker 1: have going on in their area. If you have a
Speaker 1: group that is being executed right now because they're Christians,
Speaker 1: regardless of what denomination they claim, that shouldn't matter to you.
Speaker 1: If you are a Christian to hear that the only
Speaker 1: Catholic church in Gaza just got hit, that matters to
Speaker 1: me personally. Now I understand that that's my own thing.
Speaker 1: And there's people that are not Christians that don't care.
Speaker 1: It's just another a stroke of the pin in the
Speaker 1: overarching theme of the war. I get that, but this
Speaker 1: one's getting a lot more optics to your point, for sure.
Speaker 10: Yeah, And you know, agrievement I think drives a lot
Speaker 10: of the violence in the world throughout history. And you know,
Speaker 10: the most obvious example would be the Versailles Treaty that
Speaker 10: made Germans feel aggrieved. But aggrievement and it can only
Speaker 10: make other people sympathize with you to a point. And
Speaker 10: I think Israel's main aggrievement story is obviously the Holocaust,
Speaker 10: which happened in the early to mid forties, right, and
Speaker 10: they founded, they established their country and got it recognized
Speaker 10: by the UN largely on a kind of a social
Speaker 10: capital or reputational capital or agrievement capital, whatever you want
Speaker 10: to call it, based on that, and that capital I
Speaker 10: think is running out based on just how old the
Speaker 10: people of that generation are getting. But I think October
Speaker 10: seventh gave them a lot more of this agrievement capital
Speaker 10: in this understanding or license that Okay, you're going to
Speaker 10: go to war with Gaza, You're going to kill a
Speaker 10: few thousand people. But that agrievement capital still runs out
Speaker 10: in people's minds. So when you know, a church gets
Speaker 10: fomed in October twenty twenty three, it seems to most
Speaker 10: people that are, well, yeah, what do you expect? But
Speaker 10: if years and years go by, eventually most of the
Speaker 10: rest of the world figures, Okay, your time's up, your
Speaker 10: your agrievement capital is spent. When are you going to
Speaker 10: wrap this up? Or are you just going to use
Speaker 10: this as an excuse to seize the land and kill
Speaker 10: everybody on it if they if they don't move out.
Speaker 10: And it's really looking like the latter, So I think
Speaker 10: international pressure and their reputation is going down. It's they're
Speaker 10: being told they got to wrap this up.
Speaker 1: And I'm absolutely right, And as a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: I was gonna read this article here but it kind
Speaker 1: of reiterates everything we're talking about here. It's from the
Speaker 1: Vatican News. Cardinal Pieza Bala. Wow, Pizza Bala.
Speaker 10: Yeah, he was being conserved to be pope. But he's
Speaker 10: right where he needs to be right now.
Speaker 1: I think I agree, But I mean that's also a
Speaker 1: badass name. Cardinal Pizza Bala. All right, dope. The Church
Speaker 1: will never abandon afflicted people in Gaza. And it goes
Speaker 1: into talking about this, and again I support it. I'm
Speaker 1: sure it's going to be a great article. But to
Speaker 1: your point about pushing people out this as we're still
Speaker 1: talking about the Israeli conversation. This is from Al Jazeera,
Speaker 1: so again consider the source. I understand that. But Israeli
Speaker 1: parliament approved symbolic motion on West Bank annexation. Yeah, dude, Nasceette.
Speaker 1: Lawmakers vote seventy one to thirteen in favor of annexation,
Speaker 1: raising questions about the future of a Palestinian state. Israeli's
Speaker 1: parliament has approved it. We just talked about that. The
Speaker 1: lawmakers seventy one to thirteen in favor of the motion
Speaker 1: on Wednesday, a non binding vote which calls for applying
Speaker 1: Israeli sovereignty to Jujeia, excuse me sovereignty to Judea, Samaria
Speaker 1: and the Jordan Valley. The Israeli terms are for the area.
Speaker 1: It's said that annexing the West Bank will strengthen the
Speaker 1: State of israel It's security and prevent any questioning of
Speaker 1: the fundamental right of the Jewish people to peace and
Speaker 1: security in their homeland. The motion, advanced by Prime Minister
Speaker 1: net Yahoo's coalition, is declarative and has no direct legal implications,
Speaker 1: though it could place the issue of annexation on the
Speaker 1: agenda for future debates in the Parliament. The idea was
Speaker 1: initially brought forward last year by Israel's far right Finance
Speaker 1: minister Bizell Smocktrik sure smatrich smash. I don't know, Royce,
Speaker 1: how do you pronounce that last name? Brother? Do you
Speaker 1: throw on that ch or is it an ick? What
Speaker 1: is that?
Speaker 16: Oh?
Speaker 1: Hold, let me see Azaliel.
Speaker 10: I hear him referred to as bes smow Trich smow Trich,
Speaker 10: who also may not know how to pronounce it, but
Speaker 10: that's how I hete it.
Speaker 1: Help me out. You're a resident Jewish correspondent, How do
Speaker 1: you how do you jewify that name?
Speaker 17: Give it?
Speaker 1: Give it to me, Hebert, I'll tell you English. I
Speaker 1: could not tell you whatsoever.
Speaker 10: It might be Polish for all we know. Yeah, ye,
Speaker 10: smo trich.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're right, he might be a Polish matra may.
Speaker 10: I don't know it could be. But smow trich is
Speaker 10: how I hear most people pronounce it. I have heard
Speaker 10: it pronounced in American media a lot.
Speaker 1: Okay, fair enough that homeboy, who himself lives in an
Speaker 1: illegal Israeli settlement and holds a position within Israel's Ministry
Speaker 1: of Defense where he oversees the administration of the West
Speaker 1: Bank and its settlements. The West Bank, along with the
Speaker 1: Gaza Strip and Eastern Jerusalem, has been under Israeli occupation
Speaker 1: since nineteen sixty seven. Since then, Israeli settlements have expanded
Speaker 1: despite being illegal under international law and in the case
Speaker 1: of the settlement outposts, Israeli law. Wow, okay, you know,
Speaker 1: let's watch this little video. It's only almost three minutes long.
Speaker 1: We'll see.
Speaker 17: To get groceries at each Jabbari has to cross at
Speaker 17: least three Israeli military checkpoints and four barriers, and to
Speaker 17: protect her family from harm, she's had to turn her
Speaker 17: home into it looks like a prison. Metal barriers cover
Speaker 17: all the windows of the house, even the ones inside
Speaker 17: her bedroom. Still at each says it's impossible to feel safe.
Speaker 17: This is life in the old city of Hebron, south
Speaker 17: of the occupied West Bank, where's really Settlers often attack Palestinians.
Speaker 1: This is just.
Speaker 12: Temporary barbed Why it can't prevent all settlers rocks. It
Speaker 12: can't save us from bullets or tear gas often fired
Speaker 12: by Israeli forces towards us, and.
Speaker 17: Each often documents settler attacks, but that comes.
Speaker 9: With a risk.
Speaker 12: Israeli soldiers raided the house, broke the windows with the
Speaker 12: rifle butts. They seized my camera and confiscated the memory
Speaker 12: card and told me not to film. They often yell
Speaker 12: at me if I open the windows, so I try
Speaker 12: to record discreetly.
Speaker 17: Every time he puts a lock on their door, Israeli
Speaker 17: forces destroy.
Speaker 9: I keep this winding black here and secure it like
Speaker 9: this to try and block settlers from entering. But sometimes
Speaker 9: they still break through anyway. Settlers jump inside, climb the
Speaker 9: stairs to the rooftops. They cause destruction and terrorize the children.
Speaker 1: Okay, so you know what we will see if this
Speaker 1: annexation does get pushed through, and if so what's gonna
Speaker 1: happen to the people that are currently living in the
Speaker 1: West Bank. I don't see it going necessarily good. But
Speaker 1: again it's the situation is getting more and more tense
Speaker 1: over there. They're keep there is constantly a conversation of
Speaker 1: a ceasefire agreement that's about to be reached. Yet here
Speaker 1: we are and nothing has been reached. It's very similar
Speaker 1: to what's going on with Russia and Ukraine. We keep hearing,
Speaker 1: we keep hearing in the West anyway, that a ceasefire
Speaker 1: is just around the corner, yet there's actually no signs
Speaker 1: of this taking place. I don't know, I don't know
Speaker 1: what to make of it, but that is what we
Speaker 1: do here. We talk about these things, you know.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I gotta think this West Bank's way harder to
Speaker 10: take than Gaza. They got way more foreign relations and
Speaker 10: they got six million people instead of only two million.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and uh.
Speaker 10: Yeah, this talk of annexting has been going on for
Speaker 10: a while and they got these settlements, of course, but
Speaker 10: it's way harder. And this, uh this, who were we
Speaker 10: talking about? Smo Trich? Yeah, yeah, he's got a reputation
Speaker 10: and he's been talking about he's been quoted as saying
Speaker 10: it might be moral and justified to starve everyone in Gaza.
Speaker 10: And he's also on the record saying that he thinks
Speaker 10: Israel's border should extend all the way to Damascus, which
Speaker 10: would include Souweyta and the Druze area we were talking
Speaker 10: about today and last week. So he's got a reputation
Speaker 10: as being very, very expansionist, even for an Israeli. I
Speaker 10: wanted to bring up one last thing. Mike Huckabee is
Speaker 10: the US Ambassador to Israel, and he's on record in
Speaker 10: the past. I've seen footage of him saying when people
Speaker 10: talk to him about Palestine or the West Bank, he
Speaker 10: will immediately say, stop right there, it's not the West Bank,
Speaker 10: it's Judea and Samaria. So he refuses to call it
Speaker 10: West Bank. He says, it's you got to refer to
Speaker 10: it by the name that Israel chooses to give it,
Speaker 10: which is the name that they've given it historically. And
Speaker 10: very recently, after that Catholic church attack or accidental hit,
Speaker 10: whatever it is, he started actually shifting his rhetoric quite
Speaker 10: a lot on Israel because Israel started to deny some
Speaker 10: tourist visas to American Protestants and Mike Cuckabee of all people,
Speaker 10: started saying, well, this is very serious and they really
Speaker 10: got to change what they're doing here. And it surprised
Speaker 10: me because it really went against his reputation in his
Speaker 10: history of being unqualified pro Lekud pro Israel. So if
Speaker 10: they've lost Mike Cukabee and Michael Knowles and a number
Speaker 10: of people like that, yeah, things are changing pretty fast.
Speaker 1: They really are, and it sucks. So the group that
Speaker 1: I belonged to, they were trying to make a pilgrimage
Speaker 1: happen this spring as a matter of fact, and the
Speaker 1: guys that came from Israel to the big talk that
Speaker 1: we had, the big convention, they said that, yeah, there
Speaker 1: is fighting going on, but it's way over here and
Speaker 1: it's way over there, not in the areas that we're
Speaker 1: talking about. It's completely safe and because of the conflict,
Speaker 1: like all the Holy sites are pretty much empty. You
Speaker 1: should come, it's gonna be great. And then we see
Speaker 1: the Catholic churches got bombed and it's like, ooh, sorry, homie,
Speaker 1: I'm you're gonna have to catch me after y'all settle
Speaker 1: down over there. I'm not I'm not gonna get caught
Speaker 1: in some straight round because I wanted to go see
Speaker 1: the sites that Jesus walks like one of these days, yes,
Speaker 1: like it's on my bucket list. I would love to
Speaker 1: be baptized in the Jordan River. I would love to
Speaker 1: see the Old Temple, right, I would love to see
Speaker 1: all of these places. I just there's no way I'm
Speaker 1: going anytime soon. Absolutely no, especially because I can't carry
Speaker 1: a weapon there, Like, you know, that's ridiculous. And I
Speaker 1: know it's anybody listening right now from another country that
Speaker 1: might seem crazy to y'all that an American just like
Speaker 1: wants to carry a weapon at all times, But yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that's how we roll. And I'm not going to
Speaker 1: an act of warzone with hopes and dreams that I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna become a hostage or something like. There's no way,
Speaker 1: absolutely no way. So yeah, it's uh, the relations are
Speaker 1: definitely souring. The American public's opinion is shifting more and
Speaker 1: more by the day, and I don't think that this,
Speaker 1: even if it was completely accidental, I don't think this
Speaker 1: is gonna go over well. To try to strengthen the
Speaker 1: relations and the public opinion of what's going down there
Speaker 1: with the American people. But yeah, no, anyway, all right,
Speaker 1: let's move on to the next conversation. Thailand recalls the
Speaker 1: ambassador to Cambodia amid border tensions. This is another Al
Speaker 1: Jazeera article. Governing party says that it has downgraded ties
Speaker 1: with Cambodia after a landmine incident that injured a Thaie soldier.
Speaker 1: Now a land mine going off in the Indo China
Speaker 1: region isn't exactly a monolith by any means. This area
Speaker 1: is riddled with land mines. We just did an episode
Speaker 1: on the Cult of Conspiracy about this with the stone
Speaker 1: jars that are currently in Laos and why they have
Speaker 1: two hundred and sixty two million cluster bombs that were
Speaker 1: dropped on them during Operation Barrel Roll. That's just one example.
Speaker 1: Cambodia also has a lot of these things. Thailand has
Speaker 1: had all kinds of conflict. Just to the left, ershas
Speaker 1: the west of them. You have me and mar that's
Speaker 1: an open revolt. So it's not crazy, but this could
Speaker 1: be the catalyst for something a lot larger in this
Speaker 1: region of the world. Now, like it said, Thailand has
Speaker 1: recalled its ambassador for Cambodia, and we'll expel Cambodia's ambassador
Speaker 1: the governing Few Thai Party Foe Tai. I don't know,
Speaker 1: I'm probably mispronouncing it followed a land mine incident that
Speaker 1: injured a TIE soldier along the disputed border between the
Speaker 1: two countries. The Taime Ministry of Foreign Affairs has lodged
Speaker 1: a formal protest with Cambodia, saying the land mines found
Speaker 1: in the area were newly deployed and had not been
Speaker 1: encountered during previous patrols, the party said on social media
Speaker 1: on Wednesday. So Thailand has downgraded diplomatic relations with Cambodia,
Speaker 1: it said. Thailand's Foreign Ministry has said it has yet
Speaker 1: to be informed of the decision to recall the envoy
Speaker 1: and the plan to expel Cambodia's ambassador. The government has
Speaker 1: also ordered the closure of all border checkpoints under the
Speaker 1: jurisdiction of the Thailand's second Army. The Foe Thai Party
Speaker 1: I'm not sure that's Foe or Fu or how they
Speaker 1: pronounced that, but my bad tourists are strictly prohibited from
Speaker 1: entering these border areas, it said, along running territorial row
Speaker 1: in an area known as the Emerald Triangle, where the
Speaker 1: borders of both countries and Laos meet boiled over into
Speaker 1: military clashes in May that left one Cambodian soldier dead.
Speaker 1: Since then, the two sides have traded barbs and tip
Speaker 1: for tat retaliatory measures. In the landmine incident on Wednesday,
Speaker 1: the Thai soldiers sustained injuries and lost his right leg,
Speaker 1: the party said. Earlier, Thailand accused Cambodia of place lacing
Speaker 1: land mines on the Tai side of the disputed border
Speaker 1: area after three soldiers were injured by Penn denied, but
Speaker 1: Phenam Penn declined excuse Me denied the claim and said
Speaker 1: the soldiers had veered off the agreed routes and triggered
Speaker 1: a mine left behind from decades of war. Tai authorities
Speaker 1: said the soldiers were injured, with one losing a foot
Speaker 1: by a land mine while on patrol on July sixteenth
Speaker 1: and the Taie side of the disputed border area between
Speaker 1: Ubon Ratchathani Yeah and Cambodia's pre Vehar Province. Cambodia's foreign
Speaker 1: minister denied that the new mines had been planted, and
Speaker 1: said in a statement on Monday that the Thai soldiers
Speaker 1: deviated from agreed patrol routes into Cambodian territory and into
Speaker 1: areas that can contain unexploded land mines. The country is
Speaker 1: littered with land mines laid during decades of war, which
Speaker 1: is a very true statement. That's fair. The continuing border
Speaker 1: dispute has soured relations between the two countries, prompting the
Speaker 1: closure of border crossings and Cambodia blocking imports a fuel
Speaker 1: and gas, as well as fruits and vegetables from Thailand.
Speaker 1: It also triggered a domestic political crisis in Thailand, where
Speaker 1: Prime Minister God I'm not going to pronounce that anyway,
Speaker 1: The Thailand Prime Minister has been suspended from office pending
Speaker 1: in ethics probe over her conduct during this During the row,
Speaker 1: a diplomatic call between the Pentagon and Hun Sen, Cambodia's
Speaker 1: former longtime ruler and father of the Cambodian Prime minister,
Speaker 1: was leaked from the Cambodian side, prompting a judicial investigation.
Speaker 1: Last week, the Prime minister announced that Cambodia would start
Speaker 1: conscripting civilians next year, activating a long dormant mandatory draft law.
Speaker 1: He said the tensons with thailand miant conscription was needed,
Speaker 1: and the defense budget may also be increased. Now, with
Speaker 1: all of that being said, I know I'm listing a
Speaker 1: lot of names of countries that people may not be
Speaker 1: that familiar with. So I got this guy here Geography Now,
Speaker 1: if anybody will like to go check him out. I
Speaker 1: absolutely love his content and he is going to explain
Speaker 1: this region in about three minutes, and he does a
Speaker 1: beautiful job of doing So let's listen.
Speaker 4: In Southeast Asian Peninsula summarized. First off, I'm not gonna
Speaker 4: include the CROs Isthmus, which includes parts of Malayia and Singapore,
Speaker 4: because that's kind of like a separate thing. And also
Speaker 4: if I include Malaysia, then I'm gonna have to hop
Speaker 4: over to Borneo, which has the other part of Malaysa.
Speaker 4: Then I'm gonna have to talk about ru Nai and
Speaker 4: then Indonesian and then we're gonna get off topic. So
Speaker 4: just the main peninsula. First of all, they're all members
Speaker 4: of OSION, which is the largest political and economic block
Speaker 4: in the region. First, let's talk about who's related to
Speaker 4: Starting with Thailand and Laos. These two are basically siblings.
Speaker 4: They can even understand each other mostly when they talk
Speaker 4: to each other. The only difference is that they had
Speaker 4: a little bit of different upbringings, but they get each other.
Speaker 4: Vietnam and Cambodia are very distant cousins. It's just Vietnam
Speaker 4: they had very different upbringings. Vietnam got more Chinese influenced,
Speaker 4: Cambodia got more Indosphere influenced. They've had a lot of
Speaker 4: fighting with each other in the past, but technically they're
Speaker 4: long distant cousins, whereas the people of Myanmar are very
Speaker 4: distant cousins of the Tibetan people found in the Tibetan
Speaker 4: Plateau of what is now China. These are the vast
Speaker 4: Buddhist majority countries, mostly under the Theravada branch, Whereas Vietnam
Speaker 4: and Laos, although they do have Buddhism, their cultures are
Speaker 4: more focused on folk religious elements, and it's not uncommon
Speaker 4: to see syncredism. Back in the day, Thailand and Myanmar
Speaker 4: were called Siam and Burma. You've probably heard of those
Speaker 4: words like Siamese cats and Burmese pythons. Yeah, that's where
Speaker 4: they get their names from. And they were the biggest rivals.
Speaker 4: They were always fighting each other. They had so many
Speaker 4: wars and they were always riding the elephants in the wars,
Speaker 4: which is honestly kind of badass, but that's besides the point.
Speaker 4: Whereas the Vietnamese and Cambodians have always had conflicts over
Speaker 4: the southern areas by the Mekong Delta, and of course
Speaker 4: they also used the battle elephants. Later on, these three
Speaker 4: countries fell under French colonial rule as French Indo China,
Speaker 4: which by the way, that word is kind of stupid
Speaker 4: because it's just lazy. It's like, well, it's not India,
Speaker 4: it's not China. Let's just call it Indo China, which
Speaker 4: is why today you can still see some of the
Speaker 4: French influence in certain areas, like French signs in public
Speaker 4: and Vietnam has those Bunme sandwiches which uses French baguettes
Speaker 4: and they're so good. I love them. They're so cheap
Speaker 4: on the streets of Vietnam. Whereas Burma or mean Mar
Speaker 4: fell under British rule. Originally it was under British India,
Speaker 4: and then eventually it just got its own like British
Speaker 4: Burma status. It even included the Andaman Islands, which were
Speaker 4: later given to India, even though it's closer to meon
Speaker 4: mar whereas Thailand was sitting pretty as a buffer state
Speaker 4: that neither side would call an eye so that they
Speaker 4: could stay away from each other, which made Laos feel
Speaker 4: like bro hell and then for a brief period of time,
Speaker 4: imperialist japantic over everything. Vietnam has some current drama with
Speaker 4: China over the nine dash line because China claims all
Speaker 4: of that, and there's the Parcel islands that Vietnam claims,
Speaker 4: but China built a military base on one of them. Anyway,
Speaker 4: There's also so much other stuff going on, but that's
Speaker 4: kind of like just the.
Speaker 1: Basics you need to know, Okay. Like I said, I
Speaker 1: do love his content. He does that with like random
Speaker 1: regions around the world. It's great. It's entertaining as hell anyway,
Speaker 1: all right, So, as we get ready to wrap this up,
Speaker 1: if anybody has any saved rounds or anything they would
Speaker 1: like to add into the conversation, please do so. We
Speaker 1: covered a lot on this episode. We talked a lot
Speaker 1: about American politics, a lot of a lot of controversy
Speaker 1: surrounding old Donnie t As of this moment. We will
Speaker 1: see how this shakes out. I don't have a lot
Speaker 1: of high hopes as of this very moment in time.
Speaker 1: Talking about the situation in Israel, we briefly touched on
Speaker 1: the whole Bricks conversation, and yes, that does involve the
Speaker 1: trade routes with Russia and how Trump is trying to
Speaker 1: put on a five hundred percent tariff for anybody who
Speaker 1: buys Russian oil. Good luck. And then the bricks, of course,
Speaker 1: are trying to take out the USD. Will they succeed
Speaker 1: As of this moment, I can't envision a world where
Speaker 1: they do. Maybe some other currency can do it, maybe
Speaker 1: crypto will be the thing to finally do it, But
Speaker 1: as of time of recording, I just it's not it
Speaker 1: doesn't really hold a candle to it. That being said,
Speaker 1: shifted over to Israel, talked a little bit about the
Speaker 1: wild things that are going on right there, and then
Speaker 1: I thought it was nice to kind of wrap it
Speaker 1: up in Southeast Asia. Yes, there is some controversy going
Speaker 1: on with Cambodia and Thailand. However, the region is not
Speaker 1: This isn't like a monolith. This region has had all
Speaker 1: kinds of conflicts for a very long time. They're going
Speaker 1: to continue to have issues for a very long time.
Speaker 1: But anyway, all right, let me check the chat real
Speaker 1: quick before we leave and make sure I didn't leave
Speaker 1: anything out. No, I think we're good. All right, excellent.
Speaker 1: Once again, everybody, I want to thank all of you
Speaker 1: for joining me on this episode of The Cajun Night Live.
Speaker 1: For anybody listening that would like to be a part
Speaker 1: of this conversation next week, please go to the link
Speaker 1: in the description below. Come check out The Cajun Night
Speaker 1: on Patreon, only one tier for entry. We do this
Speaker 1: every Wednesday night at nine pm Central, and it's always
Speaker 1: a great time. We learn a little bit, we talk
Speaker 1: a little things, we grow as a community, and I
Speaker 1: thoroughly enjoy our Wednesday Night conversations. Once again, everybody, I
Speaker 1: am the Cajun Night and as always, God bless