Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 11/23/21: Waukesha Attack, Economy News, Obama & Bezos, Andrew Cuomo, Fox News, Thanksgiving Topics, Maxwell Trial, Debating Race, and More!

Episode Date: November 23, 2021

Krystal and Saagar talk about the Waukesha attack, economic news, Obama and Bezos, Andrew Cuomo revelations, Fox News, Ghislaine Maxwell trial, Thanksgiving topics of conversation, how to talk about race, and more!To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and SpotifyApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/Briahna’s Podcast: https://www.patreon.com/badfaithpodcast  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, voiceover is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to voiceover on the iHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, the unexpected, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of something much bigger than themselves.

This medal is for the men who went down that day. On Medal of Honor, Stories of Courage, you'll hear about these heroes and what their stories tell us about the nature of bravery. Listen to Medal of Honor on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey guys, thanks for listening to Breaking Points with Crystal and Sagar. We're going to be totally upfront with you. We took a big risk going independent.

To make this work, we need your support to beat the corporate media. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, they are ripping this country apart. They are making millions of dollars doing it. To help support our mission of making all of us hate each other less, hate the corrupt ruling class more, support the show. Become a Breaking Points premium member today, where you get to watch and listen to the entire show ad-free and uncut an hour early before everyone else. You get to hear our reactions to each other's monologues. You get to participate in weekly Ask Me Anythings, and you don't need to hear our annoying voices pitching you like I am right now. So what are you waiting for? Go to BreakingPoints.com, become a premium member today, which is available in the show notes. Enjoy the show, guys.

Good morning, everybody. Happy Tuesday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal? Indeed we do. Actually, a lot going on in this holiday week. Some fairly significant moves by Biden. Both a decision to release 50 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in concert with other countries. We'll talk to you about what that means for your prices at the pump. Also deciding to re-nominate Jerome Powell, who made some extraordinary and unprecedented moves during the coronavirus pandemic to try to stem the economic fallout of that. We'll bring you that. Some new updates about former President Obama teaming up with Jeff Bezos. He's given him $100 million. I'm sure it was just completely out of the kindness of Jeff

Bezos' heart. Yes. Apparently this was initiated by Jay Carney. Anyway, we'll tell you what that money is supposed to be for. A bombshell report out of the assembly in New York about Governor Cuomo. Of course, we already knew the allegations about sexual harassment, using state resources to write his book, the VIP treatment of his relatives, all of that. So they have even more details and even more extraordinary revelations about just how abusive Andrew Cuomo was of his position and of that office. Two contributors are out at Fox News. They have left.

We will tell you why and our read on all of that. We also have Breonna Joy Gray in the show this morning. She has been doing a fantastic job with her podcast, Bad Faith. Yeah, she has. She just had on Iron Me, I Was Safe from Pung and Zed Jelani, two people that the Breaking Points community will know very well, to debate white supremacy and critical race theory. Very interesting discussion. She does a fantastic job of sort of moderating those types of debates. So we've got some clips from that. We're going to talk to her about all of that. But we wanted to start with that tragedy in Waukesha, Wisconsin. We mentioned

it yesterday at the top of the show, but we were just getting details. Now we know so far the death toll is five, with 48 at least injured when an SUV, a maroon SUV, drove seemingly intentionally through a crowd of people who had gathered for a holiday parade. Just an absolutely horrific tragedy. Here was what the police chief in that town had to say. I provide an update. At 4.39 p.m. on Sunday, November 21st of 2021, a lone subject intentionally drove his maroon SUV through barricades into a crowd of people that was celebrating the Waukesha Christmas Parade, which resulted in killing five individuals and injuring 48 additional individuals. I just received information that two of the 48 are children, and they're in critical condition. We have information that the suspect prior to the incident was involved in a domestic disturbance,

which was just minutes prior, and the suspect left that scene just prior to our arrival to the domestic disturbance. When the suspect was driving through into the crowd, one officer did discharge his firearm and fired shots at the suspect to stop the threat, but due to the amount of people had to stop and stop and fire Noah, did not fire any other additional shots. The officer is on administrative leave as part of the department protocol. No one was injured as a result of the officer firing his, discharging his firearm. The subject was taken into custody a short distance from the scene, and we are confident he acted alone. There's no evidence that this

is a terrorist incident. Due to the wind yesterday. So listen, you always want to be a little careful about these early details, but this coming directly from law enforcement, it sounds like this man, who I'm going to get into a moment, has a long and violent record within the criminal justice system, was fleeing the scene of another crime, gets to this parade and just barrels through the crowd. We're talking about, I mean, you guys have been to parades, you know, it's kids marching in the marching band and doing dance routines. There's a group of dancing grannies that every year would perform at this parade in all around Wisconsin that took some of the heaviest casualties here. Absolutely horrific scenes. We wanted to show you a little bit of what that looks like. I mean, listen, guys, if you're sensitive, this is violent. It's hard to watch. So just a little bit of a warning here, but we

wanted to show you, Eric, if you can go ahead and put that up, a little bit of what this scene was. Some of the earliest videos, you see the SUV barreling by, narrowly missing a small child. Here you see them mowing through what looks to be a marching band, of course, screams, people totally panicked. There were scenes of, you know, dance with pom-poms all around, injured children. And as the details have come out, this individual is well known to law enforcement, had many interactions previously with the criminal justice system. A very long rap sheet. Let's go ahead and throw the next tear sheet up on the screen. Daryl Brooks is the suspect in the Waukesha Christmas Parade incident. The Milwaukee man has been charged with crimes 10 times since 1999. And by

the way, guys, these weren't like, you know, low-level nonviolent drug offenses. We're talking about repeated violent offenses, including most recently he was charged with attempting to run over the mother of his child. So another incident involving his vehicle. And so a lot of people were saying, what the hell? Why was this guy? Why was this person released? Why was this guy out on the streets to start with? And some of the focus has been around his bail in that last incident where he allegedly tried to run over the mother of his child was set at only $1,000.

We can put this statement up on the screen next. So the Milwaukee County District Attorney is saying, hey, he shouldn't have been released on such a low cash bond earlier this month. They're conducting an internal review. In a sense, though, Sagar, I think the focus on the dollar amount of the bond is misplaced. This dude shouldn't have been out, period. We're not talking about, oh, well, if he was wealthier and he'd committed these crimes and he'd set it at $10,000 and he'd gotten out, well, that would be fine. No, no, no. way this is supposed to work is when you are charged with, especially a violent offense, there is a risk assessment to determine whether you're going to be released on your own

recognizance, whether you're going to have the opportunity to post bail, that's kind of the middle ground, or whether you're going to be held regardless of how much money you're able to pony up in that situation. And one thing that I just wanted to point out here that people misunderstand about, bail. Bail is not about keeping violent offenders in prison. Bail is about compelling people to show up for their court appearances. So again, I think the focus here on the dollar amount of the bail is a little misplaced.

This risk assessment, given his prior history, given the fact that he had done something so horrific and violent, allegedly, as trying to run over the mother of his child, that he would be released at any dollar amount, to me, is completely insane. I completely agree with you. And actually, you know, it's not just this domestic disturbance, but there was also another one right after and leading to the plowing through this crowd. You know, he was involved in what police are describing as some sort of incident. They don't know if Knipe was involved or not. That's what some of the preliminary reports said. Also, I mean, you know, one of the things that he's admitted to on camera was, you know,

getting involved sexually with a young woman of the age of 16 years old. And he has two open court felony cases in Milwaukee County. And in July of 2020, was charged with three felonies after being accused of firing a gun during an argument with his relative. And as you said earlier this month, purposefully ran over with his vehicle, the woman who he apparently had a child with while she was walking through a gas station after he followed her there after a fight, according to that criminal complaint. And he was charged on November 5th. So we're talking like a couple of weeks ago.

And then, like you said, bail, the point is not to keep people in prison. It's to compel people to go ahead and show up. And what you see here is a tremendous misfire, obviously. A lot of scrutiny right now on that district attorney's office and on the district attorney's office on how exactly the bail recommendation made, all of that. And also, really in terms of why it was even considered okay to release them in the first place. So, it's really interesting. But, you know, the main thing is you can't forget victims in these cases. It just kills me. I mean, let's put

this up on the screen. You know, three of these dancing grannies were killed and at least 18 children were injured at the Waukesha Christmas Parade. And yes, I'm sorry I said the town's name wrong yesterday. I heard from many of the residents of the town. And what they say there at the children's hospital said that the 18 children have been brought to the hospital after the parade between the ages of three and 16. Ten of them are apparently in the ICU and six are in critical condition. So unfortunately, the death toll could even be higher. Currently, the number of people who have died there are all above the age of like 65 years old. So they're the seniors that were plowed into. I said it yesterday.

One of the most evil things you can do is just plow your car into a Christmas parade and drive past dancing girls and then hit a bunch of grandmas and grandparents. And now there's children who are in the hospital right before the holiday season. It's the worst thing that could possibly happen. But tremendous, tremendous screw-up, obviously, within the district attorney's office. And I do think it is going to cause some questions around how exactly that election happened, who was financing it. I've been seeing a lot of this reaction around George Soros. This is not a conspiracy theory. He's actually involved in electing district attorneys, people like Chesa Boudin and others. And there's a lot of scrutiny right now on that

type of criminal justice policy. So that could be a possible tie-in to some of this. But as you said, it really does belie the point because even under the, as I understand it, the most liberal criminal justice policy, people who have 10 violent crimes are not supposed to be released on bail, period. And that's why I say there's all this question, oh, the bail was set too low. No, he shouldn't have been released, period. And just, you know, so people understand the case against cash bail is effectively, I mean, the obvious thing is it creates a two-tier system of justice. So no matter what violent crime or what kind of crime you commit, if you're a wealthy person, you can post bail.

Well, that doesn't make sense that you should be treated differently than people who are poor. That's totally different than a risk assessment that should be done. If you are a repeat violent offender, I don't care how much money you have, you should not be released and have the

ability to commit horrific crimes like this. So I think that really is where the conversation needs to be. The fixation on the amount of the bail, to me, sort of misunderstands what the real problem was. And as you said, look, the most important thing here is the families who have lost loved ones, who are worried about if their kids are going to be okay or what kinds of injuries they're going to sustain that are going to be with them, the trauma of this community. I can hardly imagine. I mean, there you are, holiday. Kids are probably off of school for Thanksgiving, gearing up for the Christmas season, the holiday season.

And this turns into just absolute terror. These kids are going to live with these traumatic memories their entire life. The five victims, as you said, all of them over the age of 50. Virginia Sorensen, 79. Leanna Owen, 71. Tamara Duran, 52. Jane Kulich, 52. Wilhelm Hospital, 79. Leanna Owens, 71. Tamara Duran, 52. Jane Kulich, 52. Wilhelm Hospel, 81. Two of them members of that dancing grannies group and our hearts break for the victims and their families

of this absolute tragedy. Yeah, that's right. We want to make sure you guys are updated. It's the biggest story in the country. Let's move on then to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the Fed. These are both hugely important announcements. Obviously, you guys know that I've been calling for the Biden administration to do this a little too little too late, in my opinion, but look, at least they got their act together. And to their credit, let's put this up there on the screen. In the announcement that was actually made this morning, it was leaked yesterday, is not only are they releasing oil from the reserve, but they're joining up with other countries, including China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United Kingdom. That's really important because, as I've been trying to say, the oil crisis has not just hit

us here at the US. China has rolling blackouts because of the lack of energy. India, obviously, also a country with tremendous energy expenditure. They've been getting absolutely hammered in the petrol and the price there. Japan, of course, island nation that literally relies on all oil imports. They don't have any domestic capacity. So they've been getting slammed. Korea, very similar situation. And the United Kingdom, where because of Brexit, there's been all sorts of wonky stuff happening in their oil market as well. So team up. Everybody's tapping the strategic petroleum reserves across the country. Now, what we're beginning to see is that the millions of barrels released from us, as you were pointing to, Crystal, one of the things that matters in the oil market is that because it's global, even if we were just to release ours, it would just get absorbed out into the general market

and we would end up subsidizing the rest of the world. That's why it's a good thing that you do it in conjunction with other nations. So right now, as it looks, and this is a very good thing, which is that the US oil price has dropped about 1.3% to $75 a barrel after the administration announces the SPR release and with the other countries. Now, I know it doesn't sound like necessary a lot, but remember what I was talking about yesterday, which is that oil futures actually dropped a little bit out in the next couple of two to three weeks. So you should see some maybe 30, 40 cents or whatever reduction in the price of gas.

I also, I'm kind of suspicious that they waited until this long. And I think that they saw the oil futures market and they were like, now's the time to release it in order to drop the price even more. Listen, smart politics, if actually, if that's the thing to do. It probably also just took time to line up all these countries since they're doing this in concert with a number of other nations. The other context here, you'll remember we had Ken Klippenstein on talking about the fact that it looks like the reason OPEC, the oil cartel, wouldn't release more barrels of oil to help deal with this problem, which is a global problem of

rising energy prices, was because the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, MBS, better known as, is pissed off at the Biden administration because he wouldn't meet with him. So this is sort of, I mean, it actually is a pretty dramatic show of force with the U.S. acting in concert with these other nations to say, all right, you're not going to play ball. We're going to do what we can on our own. And so it kind of escalates things in terms of that diplomatic clash, which is playing out for all of you guys at the gas pump. I think it's a good thing, actually, in order to get, I mean, look, when's the last time you got the U.S. and China to do something in concert?

This is one of the few areas where everybody is united and say, yeah, screw you, OPEC. You're really screwing us, and our people are beginning to take notice. So it is an interesting kind of geostrategic thing. I was reading some of, you know, energy analysts, by the way, are some of the most fascinating people because nobody cares about them until they care a lot. And they're like, oh, we've been waiting for you. We've been sitting here for five years talking about oil. So what they're actually saying is that it's extraordinary in particular for Japan to have hit their petroleum reserve. Very rare. Obviously, you know, Japan literally

started a war with the United States over us cutting them off from oil. So very oil, they're a very oil shock prone nation. There's a lot of concern there. I'm trying to avoid this type of situation. And what they said was is that Japan would never have done it if the Biden administration did not put a tremendous amount of pressure basically on them to do so.

So, you know, to get two of the biggest, you know, China and India, two of the other big powers, and along with the Asian powers and the United Kingdom in order to do this, that's extremely significant. So also shows that those are the areas also that consume, you know, even more gas and stuff than we do here in the United States or something very similar. It's a big moment. As to how it will play out in the price, like I said, right now, 1.3% drop in barrel, which it depends on how that translates to you actually at the pump. But you combine that with the general drop in oil futures, strategic petroleum reserve, and in general, as we covered yesterday, the supply chain crisis and production beginning to ease.

It takes time to ramp up some of these natural gas wells and others, fracking and all of that. It's not just a switch you can turn on and off. And so when people are ramping up production, it takes several months. So this could lead to a general overall drop in oil prices, not necessarily to the pandemic lows. But look, I think it's a very good thing. The Trump administration actually filled up the SPR at the very, very height of the pandemic since oil was so cheap.

And this is exactly what it's here for. So I'm glad they did it. We'll see how much of an actual impact that it has. I love to see him standing up to Saudi Arabia too. Me too. I mean, it's been a long time since any administration, Democrat or Republican, they always just had complete fealty to Saudi Arabia.

So, I mean, that is a pretty dramatic shift as well, that there's any willingness to stand up to the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Biden made some other big economic news, though, yesterday as well. That's right. So Biden announced yesterday he's going to be keeping Chairman Jerome Powell of the Federal Reserve in his position. He gave a speech at the White House. Let's take a listen to what he said. Now, some will no doubt question why I'm renominating Jay when he was the choice of a Republican predecessor. Why am I not picking the Democrat? Why am I not picking fresh blood or taking the Fed in a different direction. Put directly, at this moment of both enormous potential and enormous uncertainty for our economy, we need stability and independence at the Federal Reserve. Jay has proven the independence that I value in the Fed chair.

In the last administration, he stood up to unprecedented political interference and in doing so successfully maintained the integrity and credibility of this institution. It's just one of the many reasons why Jay has support from across the political spectrum. Really big news there, Crystal. I mean, Jerome Powell, one of the first Federal Reserve chairmen to not only prioritize interest rates, but to also target employment. For people who don't know, the Fed actually has a dual mandate, is not only to look after interest rates in the economy, but also to look after employment. Since the Volcker era, they've almost predominantly been focused on interest rates, which, you know, how they manipulate it can literally cause a recession or not. Powell really broke ground,

both during the pandemic and before, by focusing on full employment, which is why, I mean, look, the economy, the labor market under Trump was pretty fantastic. 2019, I think it was like 3.8%, something like that, that we hadn't seen in quite some time. And look at it right now, we have a very, very tight labor market for a variety of reasons. But that is something that's being prioritized by the Fed, which, in my opinion, is a very good thing and a change in policy. So of all the stories we're covering today, I understand this might be the most boring. I know it's boring. But it's also by far, by far the most important because the Fed has become an extraordinarily powerful institution and effectively ever since the 2008 crash has innovated with new tools to

inject massive amounts of money into the system. And so without getting into all of the gory details, during the coronavirus crisis, when there was that brief moment, remember the stock market was in total freefall and the treasury market even, which is supposed to be extraordinarily liquid, even that was seizing up. All the gears were grinding to a halt. Corporations, even large sort of blue chip corporations, people like Ford, they were having trouble rolling over their debt. And so Jerome Powell, acting in concert with, of course, the rest of the Fed, but this was really his plan, he not only continued and amped up the quantitative easing, that's the buying of assets that was done under Bernanke, he innovated with new programs to buy assets that they had never bought before. So buying corporate debt, for example,

and even not just buying blue chip corporate debt, but buying debt that was technically junk bonds of companies that used to have those great credit ratings, but because of the crisis had fallen off. So they effectively backstopped the stock market and the bond market. Okay. Now, listen, the challenge with the Fed is that they only have certain tools at their disposal. So, you know, they can't, or at least they haven't figured out a way to inject money directly into your household budget.

Well, they're not legally allowed to. That's part of the problem. Right. Yeah. So effectively what they have to do is play at the top with this extreme trickle down. So when we were relentlessly covering, like the nation is in crisis, people are lined up for miles in literal bread lines,

tens of millions of jobs have been lost, and yet the stock market is at record heights, that's literally directly because of Fed action. Now, again, this is not, so that fuel, that's the reason why you see all these billionaires who made more money than ever before. You combine that with the federal government programs, which, yes, actually were pretty effective in stemming poverty, but disproportionately benefited people who were already wealthy. So if you did okay, they did fabulously well.

But the big reason why you saw that massive disparity is because of the Fed. This is not really meant to be a criticism. No. Because they used the tools. Well, this is often used as a criticism. Right. But they used the tools that were at their disposal to try to stem what looked to be, you know, a catastrophic crisis. Now the question is, you have all of these assets now on the Fed balance sheet over years and decades, etc.

They have to unwind this. And that's where who ends up being in charge of the Fed is going to be really important and really, really significant. So that's why I say, you know, so much of what we see happening in our economy, some of the things that, you know, you're looking at, how does that make sense? How does it make sense that the stock market is so high when so many people are suffering? The Fed is at the center of a lot of that. And by the way, the negative, the downside of the actions that they took during this crisis is now every corporation, every hedge, every private, they all know that if this happens again, the Fed's going to bail them out. You can't undo it. And so, you know, this, it used to be, they understood, okay, the stock market is going to be propped up by the, by the Fed.

Now it's okay. Everything is basically going to be backstopped by the Fed. Now it's, okay, everything is basically going to be backstopped by the Fed. They are not going to let us go under no matter what. And so that is a negative effect of the dramatic and unprecedented programs that were put into place. I just want to give credit, Christopher Leonard has a new book coming out in January, we should definitely have him on, called The Lords of Easy Money. He's got an excerpt out that breaks down some of these extraordinary actions that were taken in Fortune magazine. But extremely significant that he was picked. Let's just throw this Politico tear sheet up on the screen. There has been some objections from the left, in particular Elizabeth Warren and AOC.

I think I've led the charge on this, to Powell's renomination. Now, their complaints are around he took some actions under the Trump administration to roll back some of the Dodd-Frank banking regulations. They feel he hasn't done enough with regards to some of the tools they could use to combat climate change. But I would submit that the bigger questions here are about how they unwind this massive balance sheet that the Fed now has. Yeah, no, that's a really excellent summary. And it's important for people, like you said, to understand this, which is that of all the institutions of the government, the Fed probably has the most impact on your life. They can literally induce a recession or not. So that's why who's in charge and what they perceive their mandate to be, as in, is it interest rate and

employment? Is it employment over interest rate or is it a balance of both? Matters extraordinarily to your life, the unwinding of that. I would also say, and I hear that criticism a lot from the AOC Warren people. Listen, I mean, the real thing, the real problem is that we don't have the same backstops for ordinary people. Yes. I think at the height of the crisis, I even talked about this, there are different things that you could kick in, automatic stabilizers like stimulus checks and more, if the unemployment rate drops to 10% or something like that. Well, actually, that's exactly right. There's an easy way to do it. We can set up a Fed for normal people. We could easily do it

because Congress has the power of the purse. That's why the Fed's not allowed to inject money to you because then it would be real. They would be creating money that actually goes on your sheet into that only Congress is allowed to do that. That's the problem. Yeah, that's right. Yes, Congress has failed. Yeah. And so the fact that, you know, you and this was disgusting to see that automatically when there was a crisis for the rich people, there was a fix. They got bailed out. There was no friction. I mean, it literally happened overnight. Whereas for everybody else, good freaking luck. And that actually is the real problem here. 100%. Okay.

Speaking of the fantastically wealthy, the unfair, and so much more, a great scoop from, and I want to make sure I say his name correctly, from Teddy Schleifer over at Puck News, which is a new outlet. Let's put this up there on the screen. Teddy uncovered that Jeff Bezos has now given $100 million to the Obama Foundation. It is the single largest philanthropic donation of its kind in terms of presidential libraries. And according to Teddy's reporting, the $100 million donation was midwifed by Jay Carney, Bezos' political sherpa, and the former Obama press secretary.

Before Obama's press secretary, he worked for one Joseph R. Biden as his press secretary. So here's where it stands right now. Jeff Bezos, the richest man in America, well, second richest, I guess, if you count Elon Musk's stock. So let's say Jeff Bezos, the second richest man in the world, worth over $100-something billion, just gave $100 million to the former president of the United States, his presidential library. He was like, I want it to be named after John Lewis, you know, out of the kindness of his heart, of course, because that's why all people give people significant amounts of money. The single largest donation to the entire Obama Foundation and to the Obama Library. And it was brokered specifically by Jay Carney, a former

Barack Obama press secretary and with close ties to the Biden administration. I remember the most extraordinary thing that happened during the campaign is when Jay Carney on his Twitter account, which he often uses to contest stories about Amazon, tweeted in his personal capacity how he was all in for Joe Biden. And I'm just like, this is crazy. I mean, you have here the head of Global Vice President of Communications for probably one of the most powerful companies in the entire United States, just openly cheerleading for a presidential candidate. And now we learn that he himself brokered this $100 million deal between the two of them. And now, Valerie Jarrett, who is a longtime Obama aide, says that Bezos and Obama, quote, have seen each other socially from time to time.

Yeah, they're in the same circle. I mean, they're in the same circle. Yeah. You know, the most revealing thing Obama did is right after leaving office was going to go hang out with Richard Branson. I still believe—hanging out on a private island with a billionaire. Really sent quite the message, didn't it? That's who he is.

And that's who—they're celebrities now. The Obamas, they're doing these deals with Dropbox—or, sorry, with Netflix. They're Instagram influencers. I mean, at their best. Michelle Obama's doing arena tours for her book becoming, and I don't begrudge them. Like they're becoming, you know, lifestyle figures. I 100%. Well, okay. I begrudge them on a personal level. I'm saying it's not illegal, but it's gross. And, you know, Stoller, Matt Stoller, who's, you know, a big foe of the

Obamas. Let's put this up there on the screen. He points out that unlike all presidential libraries, Obama's library will not be run by the National Archive and thus is not subject to government rules because it's not a library and research historians are actually offended because it is a private nonprofit entity rather than the National Archives and Records Administration, which is the federal agency that administers the library and museums for all presidents going back to Herbert Hoover. So Obama is above all the other presidents. He creates his fancy little project. By the way, I don't know if you guys remember this. I covered it at Rising. Whenever the Obama Foundation called in all of Chicago's business leaders to push back against environmental activists who had concerns about the building of the Obama Foundation. Well, part of the controversy here, too, is that the fake presidential library, the library that isn't actually a library. It's a monument to Obama and how great he is. It's being built in public parkland. Of course.

So there's actually an ongoing lawsuit against the city for, especially because it's being run by a private foundation rather than by the National Archives and government agency the way it normally is. They're arguing it's inappropriate for the city to give public park land to private foundations. Yeah, and it is. You know, look, I actually grew up in a town with presidential library, probably unlike most people. They're awesome. I, in George H.W. Bush's library, it's cool because they have stuff, you know, the pieces of the Berlin Wall or whatever. I went there when I was like a little kid. Yeah. And you go, you get to see. I've been to the LBJ one. Right, you get to see, you know, the Air Force one, mock-up. The LBJ one and get to see. I've been to the LBJ one. Right. You get to see, you know, the Air Force one, mock-up. The LBJ one is a good library.

I've also been to the Bill Clinton one. Yeah, me too. Hope, Arkansas. The Reagan Library is actually very nice. I'm trying to think if I've been to any others. Anyway, these libraries are useful places for children. They have conference rooms, you know. It was even part of the community.

You could, like, rent it out or whatever. And, you know, the Bushes, Barbara Bush and President Bush were there all the time. I mean, when you're a little kid and you get to of the community. You could rent it out or whatever. And the Bushes, Barbara Bush and President Bush, were there all the time. We were a little kid, and you get to meet the president. Anyway, what I'm saying is they can actually be very, very good for communities and for perpetuating history. It's one of the original places I actually got to learn some history and see some of that stuff. But to have it then be degraded to not even a real library, not a real research institution, because people go to that Bush Library where I grew up in order to actually do research and now have it at a place where Bezos is pumping $100 million into this thing for nut—

look, this is pure oligarch patronage. We all just call it for what it is, you know? Well, both of these guys, what they have in common is they're very interested in their public image and their lives. Right, and that's Bezos. Oh, yeah, he cares a lot about voting rights. Get the hell out of here. And so, yeah, he really cares about black lives, as we've covered here. Let's ask Chris Smalls about that.

Ask his black employees at Amazon. Who we had on the show yesterday. I mean, listen, it's hard for me to get super outraged about, you know, the inner workings of the fake presidential library. But what I would say overall is, you know, we've been covering these stories about how the biggest problem for the Democratic Party is not any of these, you know, culture war flare up, the CRT, those debates or whatever. The actual biggest problem for them is they're seen as out of touch, elite assholes. And so when you have like Nancy Pelosi officiating the Ivy Getty wedding, you see those photos come out.

When you see, it's not just Bezos, by the way, also involved in this library are a bunch of different people. Bill and Melinda Gates, Sean Parker, Reid Hoffman, Mark Benioff, all involved. So when you have that association, you're supposed to be the party that cares about working people. At a certain point, and that point has already occurred, people are like, you're really interested in being part of their circle. We see what's going on here. And it also ties back to, in my mind, Democrats love to talk about the problem with money in politics, which is a dire problem and something we cover here a lot. But then they play the same game. I mean, they're not any different. We were pointing this. One of the stories we considered covering at some point is that after Citizens United, it's actually Democratic dark money groups that are spending more money than Republican groups. Yeah, so how are you going to have any credibility?

And then it hamstrings their agenda. I mean, this is the reason why the Biden agenda has completely collapsed from whatever, you know, moderately good thing it started as. It's all because of their ties into the donor class. So it has real world consequences ultimately for what can get accomplished here and also for what people believe their government is capable even of doing. No, I completely agree with that. And this is just naked outright. It's a payoff. What it is, is it's like social laundering. It's why Bezos owns the largest house here in Washington, D.C. It's reputation. Yes, it's reputational. It's why he bought the Washington

Post. If you screw with Bezos, you're screwing with one of the most powerful papers here in D.C. And he has set himself up as a power broker. He's hosting salon dinners. From what I hear, he is now that he's not CEO of Amazon, he's here all the time. He's always having politicians over at his Calorama mansion, which is like three houses altogether. I've never been invited. That's the same neighborhood that Obama used to live in. Of course he lives in. Actually, he still lives in it.

He has a house very close by. I walk my dog by there sometimes. That's the closest I'll probably ever get there. So there you go. Let's move on. All right, guys, we wanted to update you on all of the misdeeds of former Governor Andrew Cuomo. So a report was just released. It was originally commissioned by the state legislature to investigate whether or not he should be impeached. Well, he's gone from office, so there was originally a question, oh, well, should we continue with the report? And they said effectively, absolutely, yes, which I think is important, especially since this dude, you know, isn't even secret about harboring future intentions to run again for governor or attorney general or something else.

So really important to know exactly how terrible he was when he was in office. You guys are probably familiar with the range of allegations and a lot of things that were actually proven that Cuomo actually did. So let's take a look at some of the details from this report. Let's throw this first thing up on the screen. This is from Zach Fink News, who covers New York state politics. So among the findings, former Governor Cuomo engaged in multiple instances of sexual harassment, including by creating a hostile work environment and engaging in sexual misconduct. The former governor utilized state resources and property, including work by executive chamber staff to write, publish, and promote his book, a project for which he was guaranteed

at least $5.2 million in personal profit that no one bought or read, by the way. And the former governor was not fully transparent regarding the number of nursing home residents who died as a result of COVID. Let's go ahead and throw the next tweet up on the screen with a few more details. This is stunning. So to me, of all the revelations here, probably the newest ground was about the use of state resources to write this damn book. So the idea for him to write a book about COVID, that came less than three weeks after New York had its first confirmed COVID case. So that tells you from the beginning of the pandemic,

when he was supposed to be all in focused on people's lives who were being lost. And I mean, you guys remember those images, the trucks with dead bodies. I mean, it was horrible. And this dude's thinking about writing a book. I mean, that says it all to me right there. And they also had state employees who were complaining that all this time spent of their time, these are taxpayer funded jobs, that they were spending too much time writing this book and not able to focus on the task at hand of saving people's lives during a pandemic. So pretty stunning. We have

that tweet, actually. Let's put it up there. It says, evidence obtained in our investigation demonstrates that junior members of the executive chamber worked on that book and that work was not voluntary. Junior staff members were asked by senior executive chamber officials to perform tasks that were related to the book as part of their regular course of work. So imagine you're working in the government at the height of a crisis and people, thousands of people are dying. Let's also imagine that you, you know, for mistaken reasons, end up sentencing a lot of elderly people to death because of nursing home policy. And in the midst of all of that, you are required to drop what you're supposed to be doing to help write your boss's book that he is personally profiting to

the tune of $5 million, all so that he can build up his own personal brand. And you covered this extensively at the time. The whole Cuomo sexuals thing was real. I mean, people saw how Biden was, you know, disaster. And that has generally come true in terms of after he became president, they saw what he was. They thought about replacing him at the ticket. That was a serious topic of conversation at the time. Right. Yeah. Yeah. No, that's exactly right. I mean, some of the details here about the state resources that were used. And of course, he denies and his lawyers say this is not true and it's a political hit job, whatever.

Which, you know, first of all, I never bought that. But it had a little bit more of a ring of truth, potential truth to it. It was a better talking point. Let's put it that way. When it was Letitia James, who now is running for governor. See, she's just after me because she wants my slot. Yes. Well, this was done by the Democratic legislature who protected your butt for years. So it's very hard to make the case when this is your team, who, again, your allies, who protected you for years, who are now putting this information out. But some of those details, the report details

multiple instances of staff involvement in the writing, editing, and promotion of Cuomo's book. One senior staff member sent or received 300 emails regarding the book in just the second half of last year. Another sent or received more than a thousand. So when they were supposed to be focused on the crisis, instead, they were being forced to make Andrew Cuomo more of a millionaire than he already was. And by the way, they have more details here too about Cuomo personally intervening to change the numbers and reporting around nursing home deaths. That is criminal. And some are tying these two things together that, yeah,

he needed those nursing home deaths to be suppressed so that he could sell this book and make the case that he was the hero governor that the media relentlessly portrayed him as. I'm sure his brother's going to cover this on CNN. Can't wait to see that. Kept trying to say at the time, the sexual harassment stuff, while very bad, it was the least of the crimes that this guy actually committed. I mean, the worst one was the routine use of office to prioritize not only himself financially, but also in order to skew the COVID numbers, fool the New York state population, and help his own reputation. There's no way around that. I mean, screwing and manipulating the actual documents and figures of the number of people dead

when reporting to the Department of Justice because you don't want the Trump administration to report what the actual numbers are. I don't know how else you can describe that as not criminal. Or how about the use of his office in order to both sexually harass state troopers, which was part of the, one of the most disgusting part where, you know, had a woman transferred onto his detail just so he could basically play grab ass with her. And then, um, also using his state office and requiring state troopers to rush like Chris Cuomo's swab samples to the lab to get a COVID test. And I know now you can go to CVS and just go get a COVID test.

But try and remember, you know, you have the sniffles or something and it's March or it's May. I think I remember I had to, I remember, remember I had a scare and I had to go like, you know, 20 miles away or something. Yeah. In order to pay $250 to go get a COVID test because there were simply none available at that time. That's what you and I were doing, and we were trying to scheme about what was happening while Chris Cuomo got concierge state trooper treatment

while he was working at CNN just because he's the governor's brother, and also at the time when the network was promoting Governor Cuomo relentlessly and hailing him to become a hero. And now the moment that he's in trouble, it all just disappears. There's just layers of corruption and disgust all throughout this entire story. Very, very revealing set of incidents. That's right. Okay, all right, last story here. This is a little bit of a fun one.

So let's put this up there on the screen. We always save the good media stories for last. Two Fox News contributors were both stars of the pre-Trump conservative movement, Jonah Goldberg and Stephen Hayes. They've resigned from the network in protest of Tucker Carlson's January 6th special. So I think we actually covered that special whenever it was released, and you guys will know. Well, we covered some of the facts around it in terms of what was happening. And what we covered was the very basic and well-established fact now, at this point, that

there were absolutely federal informants, and there was at least one known undercover officer who were present at the January 6th, whatever you want to call it, Capitol riot, insurrection, etc. That is a well-established fact. Now, Tucker, let's just say it,

it went a little far in the way that he presented that. However, if you were to look at the facts that have been established since that day and the amount of information that has come out, you'll also recall the video that we played here, a compilation video of that gentleman, Ray Epps, who before on January 5th, the night of January 5th, was saying, we got to go into the Capitol. We got to go into the Capitol. We got to go into the Capitol.

And so much so that people in the crowd were chanting that he was a Fed. Right. And there's an entire compilation of video that shows him all the way from the night of January 5, all the way up to the lead up, in which he led the charge into the Capitol itself. We know that Epps himself has never been charged with a crime while the QAnon shaman's in jail for like four years or whatever, despite being like obviously mentally ill. You see all of these facts. You see that Epps' name is known. It was reported in Arizona state media where he is from, and yet seemingly disappeared. So that's sketchy, you know, and there's a lot of people who have remained confidential informants or co-conspirators or whatever that have not been indicted. We know that all to be true. So on balance, you tell me which is more directionally correct. There was nobody or not. Well, these two gentlemen, Jonah Goldberg and Stephen Hayes, have resigned from Fox as saying that it was the bridge too far. This was something that pushed them over the edge.

And the reason why is because what they say is that they're simply not willing to participate in this narrative of the idea that the U.S. security state is being turned on normal American citizens. That is the central critique that these two gentlemen have. This is the actual thing that has pushed them over the edge. Now, I think that's very important to be established here around the actual objection that these guys have, Crystal. Do you want to add anything before I tell them a little bit more about Jonah Goldberg and Stephen Hayes? Yeah, so let me just say, I haven't seen, what's it called, Patriot Purge. It's on Fox Nation, which I will not pay for. Yeah, same. I haven't seen it. I have no interest in defending it.

I have no idea what claims were made. So it is entirely possible that it is. I think they said the words false flag. Outrageous piece of propaganda. I haven't seen it. So I'm not going to weigh in to either condemn or confirm what is there. But it is very interesting, the red lines that these guys draw. And I feel like this is a consistent theme. I remember when John Bolton quit the administration, it was like that these guys draw. And I feel like this is a consistent theme. I remember when John Bolton quit the administration, it was like he was mad. Yeah, Taliban, because we invited the Taliban to the door. He was mad about like one of the few good things that Trump actually did.

And that was the red line. That's a bridge too far. Now I'm out. So what Stephen Hayes said, and this was in a Ben Smith who just breaks news left and right. It's kind of incredible. What he said to him is that he was particularly concerned about Fox lending support to the idea, quote, that there's a domestic war on terror and it's coming for half the country. That's not true. Particularly disturbing in Patriot Purge, he added, was the imagery of waterboarding and suggestions that half the country is going to be subject to this kind of treatment.

That's the same kind of treatment that the federal government used when it went after Al Qaeda that people like you defended, that people like you helped make the case for the outlandish overreaches of the national security state to start with. Yes. And now you want a hand ring about, oh, we can't say that this would ever be applied to some of our citizens. Well, we already know what this, I mean, we've covered the way that the same entrapment that was used primarily against young Muslim men during the war on terror is now those tools are being used. Same legal precedent and in many cases the same organizations within

the FBI. Yeah I mean the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot for example many analysts who were not right-wing insane people because there were more FBI informants than there were actual waters, whether this would have been a plot at all if the federal government didn't help push it along and craft it. So the concerns about the overreach of the national security state are very real. Now, again, this is not a defense of Patriot Purge whatsoever, which I have not seen. But I'm just judging by their statements here. And it takes some kind of gull for you to now be outraged about the imagery of waterboarding given what these two individuals have justified and propagated and defended in the past. I want people to know how integral Stephen Hayes in particular was in selling the American public on the war in Iraq. Here's a little book that Stephen wrote in the

lead up to that. Let's put it up there on the screen. He'll try and live this one down for a long time. Two of the most vocal and unhinged advocates of the first war on terror, Jonah Goldberg and Stephen Hayes just quit Fox News where nobody knew they worked in protest over Tucker Carlson. Put the next one up there on the screen, please, Eric. Check out this book. Stephen Hayes wrote how Al-Qaeda's collaboration with Saddam Hussein has endangered America. The connection. Stephen Hayes of The Weekly Standard. That is the person that we're dealing with. One of the chief drivers of the war in Iraq wrote a fantastic piece all the way back in 2006 calling out Jonah Goldberg for justifying waterboarding and torture, in which he's calling him out. And Glenn rightfully points out, for everybody who says, what happened to you, here's what I wrote in 2006, which is identical to what I have to say about him right now. The real question is,

what happened to you? And what he's talking about there is that all of the people who rightfully recognized the role of these two gentlemen, but particularly Stephen Hayes, in creating an ideology and selling an ideology that pushed the American people to the war in Iraq, defending President George W. Bush, the single worst president of my lifetime, and probably one of the worst presidents ever in American history. You put that all together and you ask yourself, is resigning over Fox because Tucker's patriot purge, is that enough to absolve you in the media's eyes? And it is. That's the thing. Chris Hayes is praising this. You know, you see Jonathan Haidt and these people being like, oh my gosh, you know, I have many disagreements, but, you know, thank you to these gentlemen upstanding.

I said Jonathan Karl, who's a White House correspondent, by the way, saying these are the smartest, most, smartest conservative thinkers, writers, or whatever in America. Look, really what it is to me is what's forgivable and what's not. To me, the war in Iraq is unforgivable forever. And if you played a role in that, screw you and screw everything that you have to touch. And, you know, trying to paint it specifically in this way as saying he's concerned about the idea, the correct idea, that there is a domestic war on terror against half the population when you created the original war on terror, justified the original war on terror, how dare you? That's really all I have to say. You created this system in the first place. And now you're concerned about people who are afraid of a misapplication and overuse of state power. Yeah, and my objection always to the framing of they're coming after half the country is the reality is no one is safe from an open state.

I mean, look at some of the tactics that were used against Black Lives Matter protesters, if you want to understand. Like this is going to come for anyone who dares to challenge the system. And the precedent for that was set during the war on terror and furthered and enabled by propagandists like Jonah Goldberg and Stephen Hayes. And so, yeah, Fox News is trash. Fox News has been trash for a long time. And you all are part of what built that trash heap. And look, you know, people can come to Jesus and recognize the error of their ways, etc.

But you never see that. You never see the recognition of like, oh, we helped us get to this place and that was bad. You know, when we were justifying torture and waterboarding and when we were lying and concocting crazy stories about Saddam Hussein and 9-11 and Al-Qaeda, like that actually was really horrifically bad, led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, led to this mass expenditure, upended an entire

region, made us all less safe. How about a little bit of acknowledgement of that? And so, yeah, it's always interesting, ultimately, what their red lines are. And just one other thing about Jonah Goldberg, he wrote a book called Liberal Fascism. So he also contributed to this like, you know, existential nature of politics. And he literally argued in that book that effectively every Democrat ever has been a fascist, including FDR. So like, this is the level of propagandist that these individuals have been.

But yeah, they're going to get on their high horse and get all kinds of media love for it. Well, of course they have media love. And this is always what's so annoying. Listen, I mean, they have views which they're going to get on their high horse and get all kinds of media love for it. Of course they have media love. And this is always what's so annoying. Listen, I mean, they have views which they're allowed to have and they can claim whatever they want. But what annoys me about it is that they're like, we're the true conservatives. Listen, and by the way, I'm not even a true conservative anymore or a true conservative in any fashion because I am not slavishly devoted to Donald Trump. But I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I represent the entire Republican Party

or true conservatism. It's not up to me. And this is also not up to them either. It's up to the actual voters. The voters have decided that they want MAGA cringe. That's fine. Seriously. Be honest, though, about what it is.

These guys want to try and say, like, oh, we're going to reclaim conservatism. It's not yours. It's up to the actual democracy. If you fall out of it, like I do, I'm as out of it, if not more so probably of the institutional right than them. But I'm honest with all of you about where I stand and where most of the voters stand and where the actual Republican party is. Trying to wish cast yourself because you have such a large ego onto a party because you used to be a part of it and saying that that's what the real ideals are. Who are you? You know, it's clear that the voters don't want either what you have to say and what you're selling. The vast majority of the people who subscribe to their newsletter called The Dispatch or whatever, are probably mainstream liberals who like the idea of reading

a conservative. A very reasonable conservatism. You're not getting a real reflection of what actual Republicans think, or at least the vast majority of Republicans think. There are some people in the constituency who agree with them. I shouldn't downplay it. Glenn Youngkin is very much like a Jonah Goldberg, Stephen Hayes type conservative. So it's not like it doesn't have some electoral whatever, but let's just be honest about where you stand in the national conversation around things. Just don't try and say very egotistically that you are the person who represents real conservatism. It's not up to you. Like I said, it's a democracy. The actual voters have very much shown that they love Trump and all that a lot more than they like anything that you had to say. And you should be

okay with that. You know, it is interesting that there's this line in the piece that I'm curious your reaction to where Ben Smith says, um, Fox employees often speak in terms of respecting the audience when they're effectively justifying bullshit that they know is just slavishly, you know, slavish fealty to Trump, never criticizing him, kind of giving a wink and a nod to all the election conspiracies. They talk about, quote, respecting the audience as if when you're a major media institution like that, you don't have any influence over the audience. And so I found that rationalization coming from Fox, I found pretty disgusting. And, you know, I mean, we're obviously a lot smaller than Fox, although oftentimes we get higher ratings than some of

the shows. Higher ratings than CNN, MSNBC, and actually much higher ratings than any daytime Fox, to be clear. Yes, exactly. But, you know, we have made it our mission to not try to, like, pander to you of what we think you want to hear, but to actually, you know, come from an honest place of what we think is important and trying to sort through these things. And sometimes you guys hate what we have to say, and sometimes maybe you've changed a little bit. I've certainly changed some of my views based on having Saadra sitting next to me. So this idea that it's only a one-way street where you just have to give the audience whatever their instinct is in that moment,

I find that really pretty shameful to be honest with you. I completely agree with you. Why do you think, one thing, please do not construe this as a defense of Fox. There's a reason that I don't go on the network anymore. Do you want to be, do I want to be invited

for a two-minute program where you go like, oh, Democrats are bad, blah, blah, bad. Oh, also, I also have some stuff about today the Republicans are like, yeah, we'll seal it. We'll get done next week. And we're out of time. Boom. It's like, there's no, I had no interest in it whatsoever, ripping the country apart. As you said, also, you have a huge amount of influence. These boomers, they got no other

option. They're going to watch you no matter what. As we've seen now with the fall of OAN and Newsmax and all this stuff, they're glued to the TV. Fox is part of their routine. So if you lead them in a different direction, you cover a different story and all of that, they'll watch it. They have to, they really don't have another choice. And so you have the opportunity to create something new, to introduce something different and all that. You just don't want to. That's cowardice.

And that's the problem with the network and why they're really just hamstrung and they don't really know how to handle themselves at this time. So there's no heroes in this story. That's really what I want to get across because one side's being lionized, the other side are the villains. What if both sides are the villains? That's the real story. Indeed. Whistle, what are you taking a look at?

Well, guys, as you know, we here at Breaking Points believe in engaging with people across the political spectrum. We embrace open dialogue, fearlessly tackling difficult topics, and rejecting the media narrative that seeks to divide us along partisan lines from our friends, family, and neighbors. So as Americans begin to reclaim their pre-COVID Thanksgiving traditions, I wanted to offer you some advice on how to discuss those politically charged topics that can create tension at the Thanksgiving table. Just don't. Seriously. What, you're going to bring up critical race theory with Uncle Rufus? Are you a psycho? Let's be honest, folks.

Certain conversations in certain contexts are pointless wastes of time that will just end in frustration, hurt feelings, and even more hardened views about whatever topic it is that's in question, as we all feel the need to dig in when our position is attacked. And that is not just me being pessimistic. That is what research routinely demonstrates. Follow the science, as they say, although definitely don't say that at Thanksgiving unless you want to ruin everyone's day. It's called the backfire effect. When we're confronted with facts that dispute whatever thing it is we believe, we just become more convinced of whatever that thing is. So voters

who like a candidate were found to like that candidate even more when they were shown negative information about them. That explains a lot about the diehard loyalty to Trump, doesn't it? Parents nervous about vaccinating their kids became more convinced that vaccines can lead to negative health effects when shown data that would disprove that notion, and on and on and on. Now, not every political topic is off limits. I'll get to that in a moment. But I have compiled a helpful short list of five topics that you should absolutely, under zero circumstances, engage with on Thanksgiving Day. First, Kyle Rittenhouse was just acquitted on all counts, a timely topic that has consumed endless cable news hours. Fairly decent probability that somebody is going to

say something about it at your table. Is he a white supremacist or a new American hero? Who cares? No one ever needs to know your opinion on the personal character of Kyle Rittenhouse. Second up, Anthony Fauci exists and people feel a lot of ways about that. Is he basically Christ resurrected to save us from COVID and anti-vaxxers? Or is he a demon who worked with the Chinese to start the pandemic in the first place? The nearly religious fervor around this man should remain within the walls of the Church of MSNBC or in the fire and brimstone of Fox News. Third, speaking of religious devotion, I cannot possibly state this strongly enough. Do not talk about vaccines.

Listen, guys, all the relevant vaccine or mask or social distance or other pandemic-related measures for your Thanksgiving should have been worked out long in advance. If you have decided to share a table with someone who is unvaccinated, it's over. They made their risk calculation and you made yours. And now everyone has got to live with the consequences. I would be shocked if a single person changed their mind about whether or not to get vaccinated based on a Thanksgiving Day reading of the latest FDA data. Fourth up, the aforementioned CRT. Now listen, there's actually an interesting and nuanced conversation to be had about critical race theory. What is it? Where is it actually being taught? How much are its tenants being bastardized by an industry of consultant grifters who are genuinely bad?

There are zero worlds in which you want to spend time when you could be eating pie, instead talking about Robin DiAngelo book burning and whether math is white supremacist. Now, last but not least, and this should be obvious, stop the steal. Is it going to help anyone for you to know the full details of what your aunt believes happened with Mambo Lays ballots from China or with a dead Venezuelan dictator? Some terrain, frankly, is just best left unexplored. So basically, anything that falls into culture war brain rot territory, best to avoid. Look, good and productive dialogue, it doesn't just happen. It needs a context. It

needs a certain state of mind. One that is unlikely to be achieved in a once a year holiday setting after a few glasses of wine and a grotesque amount of carbs. Now, there are plenty of unifying topics that you can feel free to explore. Things like labor strikes, like corruption, general hatred of the media, the fact that Joe Biden's brain doesn't work, and anything related to justified contempt for our ruling class. Historical topics, like how the CIA killed JFK, those are timeless classics that bring the whole family together. And you can discuss plenty of current events as well, like the fact that Travis Scott is a Satan worshiping member of the Illuminati. Everybody knows that now.

Of course, if you get your whole family watching Breaking Points, you'll have nothing to worry about except how best to enjoy a lovely day hating each other less and the corrupt ruling class more. And if you want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at BreakingPoints.com. All right, Sagar, what are you looking at? Well, as we explained yesterday, one of the biggest problems with the Kyle Rittenhouse trial coverage in the mainstream media is they never actually told you what happened. If you watched only CNN or MSNBC, you probably had no idea what the actual facts of the case were, what Wisconsin self-defense law is, and instead,

you got a bunch of screeching opinions, right and left, which leave the entire country much worse off when the thing actually happened. What we always try to ask in that situation is, why that trial? Well, it was pretty convenient for the narratives of the right and left. As I always say here, what they choose to show you is not nearly as important as what they choose not to show you. And one of the trials that's happening right now and getting zero press attention is that of Jeffrey Epstein's right-hand woman and alleged decades-long sexual predator Ghislaine Maxwell, allegedly, for the lawyers, who has just begun. And coincidentally, nobody at CNN or Fox or MSNBC seems to care all that much. So I'll break it down for all of you. Maxwell is finally on trial, the date set for November 29,

after her defense team has buried the court in motions for dismissal and complaints over her imprisonment conditions, over trying to interview case agents involved in the Epstein case, and so much more. It's been a very long road of passing the buck to this point, and a lot of Epstein watchers like myself have been puzzled as to why more information has not come out about that case. Maxwell is being tried on six counts specifically of sexual assault, including transporting minors to engage in criminal sexual activity. The allegations against Maxwell stem

from criminal activity allegedly allegedly, in 1994 and 2004. Now, that's critical to our understanding because these actions took place before Epstein's sweetheart deal with the Palm Beach County Police and the FBI, where he barely served any jail time and eventually was let off and victimized hundreds of other young girls. Yet, even with the old charges, there are a lot of very powerful people with a lot to lose. Vicki Ward, one of the reporters who's known about Epstein for the longest time, she writes in Rolling Stone magazine that the rich and powerful in New York City are terrified about one thing in particular. If Ghislaine Maxwell takes the stand

in a last-ditch effort not only to save herself, she can do so to burn many of the people who helped her survive over the last several decades. Maxwell, in testifying for her own defense, would be allowed to admit and say anything in open court as long as the judge rules that it's in favor of her theory of the case. Now, her defense so far has been she didn't do anything wrong. The only person who did was Jeffrey Epstein, and that because he's dead, she's being put on trial in his stead. There's some truth to that, certainly. But nearly every Jeffrey Epstein victim reports that Maxwell allegedly groomed them, that she procured them for his abuse, and in many cases she participated in the abuse herself. She also, of course, served as a very important social validator for Epstein, bringing Prince Andrew into his orbit and Bill Clinton, many other powerful people that she became acquainted with through her rich father's connections. That raises another

question. Within the accusation against Ghislaine Maxwell is an acknowledgment by the federal government that she and Epstein did not act alone. In fact, Maxwell maintains that others were involved too. Their names remain redacted. And interestingly enough, it's not just Maxwell saying that. Epstein's victims, who are concerned that these two women whose names are redacted, are apparently cooperating with the government in exchange for not having charges brought against them. One victim said that it just wasn't right that Maxwell alone faces trial

when so many others were involved. And indeed, that it just wasn't right that Maxwell alone faced his trial when so many others were involved. And indeed, that is what this trial highlights to me. It's really just not enough at all. I'm talking at the end of the day here about just two cases of sexual assault when we know that she and Epstein were involved in hundreds of others, allegedly. Of course, Epstein had many valets and assistants and personal acquaintances who helped him. But honestly, it's deeper than even just the assault in the hundreds of cases. The question surrounds his longtime entanglement with some of the most powerful people on the globe. Take, for instance, a story which we highlighted but will never go to trial.

Barclays' former CEO, Jess Staley, was forced to resign from the head of one of the largest banks in Europe because regulators found deep ties between him and Epstein, so deep that they found he exchanged 1,200 emails with Epstein over four years that included unexplained terms in an apparent code which was known to them, including the term, quote, snow white, which means he has refused to explain what that means. Staley has claimed that he let his relationship with Epstein taper off. But in fact, right before he joined Barclays, he was literally on Epstein's private island and sailed his yacht there. He also allowed Epstein to, quote, mentor one of his daughters during her college application, which is certainly

a choice. And Staley is the only in the latest of series of high-profile men to have been revealed as Epstein associates. We have Bill Gates or Leon Black, one of the richest men on Wall Street, who caught paid $150 million to Epstein for tax advice. Or Glenn Dubin, the billionaire hedge fund manager, whose wife apparently also dated

Epstein, and literally had him over for Thanksgiving dinner at their house while he was on probation. Or Leslie Wexner, the original source of Epstein's wealth, who has never once said why he allowed Epstein into his inner circle in the 1980s. None of those questions are getting answered at trial, but we'll continue to ask them here. And the media should be telling you a lot more about Ghislaine Maxwell's trial. They should be digging into the men that I mentioned. But that's too hard, so we'll get more race-baiting coverage instead, designed to rip us apart, while the real villains, they lurk right above us. And if you want to hear my reaction to Sauber's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at BreakingPoints.com.

Joining us now, the one and only Brianna Joy Gray, host of the Bad Faith podcast and former national press secretary for Bernie Sanders. Great to see you, Bri. Good to see you, Bri. It's good to be back. You have been hosting some of the most interesting conversations anywhere recently, and we want to dig in particular, you did a series of two different podcasts regarding the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. You kind of dug into some of the specifics of what exactly happened and the legal issues involved. And then you had a broader conversation about white supremacy and is the term overused and how does it apply throughout society and where

does this concept come from with two people the Breaking Points community would be very familiar with, R. Miosé from Pong and Zed Jelani. First, Brie, if you could just set up for us, what was your inspiration for this conversation? And what were you hoping to get at in this conversation? So not just in the context of Kyle Rittenhouse, but in this broader context of the CRT battles that have been waged for about a year now, the question on everybody's lips is sort of, what is white supremacy? And is white supremacy

being bandied about in a way that basically makes the term meaningless? Oftentimes in these conversations, people end up talking past each other, right? Because people who are more to the right, more conservative, see the left as being overzealous in their application of that term because they understand what white supremacy is very differently. And part of the whole battle around CRT is challenging a more structural understanding of how systems of race and oppression work in this country. And whether or not you agree that those systems of racism or oppression or hierarchies are real, for a lot of the population, calling those systems white supremacy feels like a bridge too far, given their understanding of white supremacy as being something more direct. A guy in a KKK robe, someone saying you can't work here because you're Latino, et cetera. And so I wanted to unpack what

we mean when we say these kinds of things so that we can have more grounded, realistic conversations that don't just end up with us talking past each other. And then also move on to this more substantive conversation of, given the confusion around these terms, and given the fact that even those who believe in systems and hierarchies of oppression, are often misusing or differently applying the term white supremacy. How useful is this term? If everything is white supremacy, how useful is it to use a term that is so confusing and misleading and difficult to understand by a bulk of the population that you're actually trying to reach?

Yeah, I think it's been so valuable what you've been doing. You've been getting a lot of attention and I'll tell the right-leaning listeners here, you've had on a lot of people who are very dissident necessarily from mainstream left thought, and you've totally heard them out, Andrew Sullivan and many others. And I think that's why, despite the bad faith name, probably the best faith conversation. Very true. It's ironic. I know. It's always ironic. Let's give people a taste here of the clip. Let's go ahead and take a listen. So Kyle Wentenhaus, he's not a Bond villain, right? Like he's an indeterminate joiner. He just kind of joined the team that made him feel like the most

relevant, right? So it's kind of what Hannah Arendt said about Eichmann. These bad guys are not particularly bad. They're just participating in a bad structure. It was like I was watching Ralph from The Simpsons on trial. This guy is not some sort of super villain, but yet he brought, it takes a series of institutions actually before you actually find this guy across state lines with a large weapon shooting people. Like, we have to talk about the families that produced him, the schools that failed to produce him. He's a social failure. And at 17 years old, he's a youth. And we say that youths are not actually responsible for what they do.

What they do is actually a reflection of who their minders are. So like, where, like, it's a, he is an, it's a reflection of us, right? So we need to actually do a real autopsy and all of the cultural institutions that created that moment. What did you make of that moment, Brianna? And what was Zedd's response to that? Because I know some of the tension between Irami and Zedd was Irami wanted to say, this is connected to what happened in El Paso. This is connected to what happened with those massage parlor shootings. They all come out of these cultural institutions. Zedd was saying, wait, wait, wait, you can't just paint with a broad brush like that. So what did you make of those exchanges? Yeah, I mean, I don't want to misrepresent irony, so people should feel free to go and listen to the full episode. But the case he was basically making is that there is something wrong with quote unquote white culture. And while we often hear, especially from the right, you know, black culture described in these terms, there's often questions about, you know, where is the father? Where is the two parent household? These kinds of conversations that often I, detach us from having a substantive policy conversation about how to actually enrich the communities and make life better for human beings, working people.

Iremi is basically saying there's a white cultural problem here as well, and you can see it tethered through all these different kinds of events and the rise of certain kinds of hate crimes and violence from this particular community over the last four or five years. Now, Zed objected, saying basically that it's as inappropriate to make that kind of broader white cultural leap as it is to say the same thing about a broad black culture when cultures are so diverse and diffuse regionally, ethnically, among kind of racial groups. We uh we can have a conversation about you know the socially constructed nature of race etc um but that is inappropriate to do so and my addition to the conversation was that there's this theory by these women um the field sisters professors both

of them who wrote this book called racecraft and i asked whether talking about whiteness white people this way ends up shoring up a kind of racial identity that is less productive, less healthy, and ultimately perhaps feeds into a kind of politics that I don't subscribe to instead of letting people identify by their regions or their cultural backgrounds, Irish, Italian, Jewish, et cetera. And that creating whiteness by talking about whiteness in this way is ultimately exactly what white supremacists are angling for. Yeah.

You know, it's really interesting. I just want to say, I tweeted, Joe Rogan had Snoop Dogg on his podcast. And Joe said something where he said, if they can keep us divided by race and nationality, then they won't have us talking about class. I'm paraphrasing him a little bit, but that's the juxtapose of what he said. And what I loved about it is it was getting attacked from identitarian lefts and also far right white supremacists who were like, well, if we're divided by race and nationality, maybe that's what just actually divides us or something. And it was like a strange horseshoe on that. I'm curious, you have been delving into this now.

This is a series and a conversations, a very difficult ones, especially I think for somebody who occupies the ideological lane that you do to have. How have you found the reception to this, Brianna, in pushing for the type of politics? I actually think there's a lot of commonality here on the screen.

Yeah, well, the thing is, you have to take what the response is on Twitter and the response on YouTube and the response in real life. Those are all three very different audiences and three very different things. You know, I've gotten a lot of personal feedback, but there's a lot of folks in the world who feel this way, right? And there are shades and gradations here. But I think what's really helpful to people and what gives me some leeway here is that I am also coming to terms with what I think about these things kind of live on air. Right. I'm working through issues in a really sincere way. There are things that that said that I absolutely agree with. I'm more inclined with him to think that talking about whiteness and white cultural deficits is not productive and is frankly inaccurate. But I also understand what Iron Me is saying about there being something more than just a gun violence problem in America, right? That there are these cultural localized trends

that emerge and that have something to do, I think, less with cultural whiteness, but with broad precarity, status threat, white decline, the opioid crisis, all of these things that we know are going on, but are so infrequently brought into the conversation. And as moments of tragedy continue to erupt over the country, whether they're around, you know, protests, whether they're around these kind of political moments like 1-6, we're going to be really challenged to come up with a concrete and consistent way to measure our response to things that's not so polarizing and ideologically driven. And I think starting now and being able to say, look, Kyle Rittenhouse has been embraced by some of the worst toxic elements in the country.

He's also a 17-year-old kid. And if we're leftists who have this kind of abolitionist framework that understands that we don't want to be locking up children in particular, and that people are products of their environment, then we have to figure out how to talk about this that doesn't minimize the broader cultural trends and what people are making of this, at the same time that we don't try to make a martyr out of someone who doesn't necessarily fit the mold of our cultural expectations in this moment. So there was another moment that we pulled of some of Irami's commentary that kind of gets at some of these questions because Irami, and again, like you, I don't want to mischaracterize his comments. We're going to put the link down in the description box so you guys can subscribe and you can watch this episode. And I highly recommend that all of you do that because these conversations have been extraordinarily enlightening.

But he's getting at this idea. things like potentially UBI or a federal jobs guarantee, etc., that you're kind of missing what he sees as the main problem, which is related to but not exclusively about these material conditions. Let's take a listen to a little bit of what he had to say there. I do think like in a deep way, if like a vaguely ethno-fascist government politician like supported universal healthcare, the left wouldn't really have the arguments to fight against it. Agreed. And that's a problem, right? That is a problem. And so the idea that we're okay with a racial hierarchy as long as it delivers goodies and it seems to work in such a way that is short of self-governance and self-determination and it might be a little bit high on like a count, like coddling racial anxiety of the whites, as long as it delivers goodies is a form of white supremacy. And I think that's like a large part of the left. And you're saying that's where we already are. Basically the goodies aren't great,

but that's kind of the status quo we're in already. The question is, and the people who want to get out of that status quo want more goodies by catering to white culture as it is, as opposed to I'm saying that like, we might need to like downgrade the goodies and go full board on changing the whites. So part of what I found interesting there is that you, you agreed with him about the initial comment about, you know, I think a lot of the left would be good with an ethno-fascist as long as they gave out universal healthcare. What did you think of his comments there? Yeah, I mean, I think it speaks to the reality that people are in a vice grip. People feel desperate and they would make a lot of trade-offs. They continue to make trade-offs. They've already made trade-offs to my point,

right? Joe Biden is Jim Crow Joe. He was the author of the crime bill. And yet the overall majority of black Americans lined up and voted for him because the alternative seemed worse. And we've been caught in that kind of vice grip, right? The goodies right now are simply not Trump. I mean, that's how low the bar has gotten, right? But what I disagree with Iron Me about is this notion that whiteness, in quotation marks, is the best offer you can give to people, or that is necessarily at the top of their priority list of white voters priority list. Since the beginning of this country, we have an upcoming episode with Ben Jealous, the youngest ever president of the NAACP, who walks through a little bit of this early American history, where part of the reason that we had racial codes,

race was codified in the way that it was that set rules about the progeny of mixed race couplings being black and making sure that people understood that there was a consequence to being black and aligning with blackness. It's because some of the earliest kind of revolutionary moments in this country were white indentured servants and black slaves coming together to resist authority, right? To resist their oppressors, the people who literally and frankly owned and directed their entire lives. And that by creating racial division, you can break up very natural coalitions. And that has been a pattern over the course of American history, Bacon's Rebellion, Blair Mountain, et cetera, et cetera, on and on and on. And so I resist IRME's, what I think of as a kind of essentialized view of the

matter, which says no matter what, the only thing that you can offer to white people that will work is necessarily racism. It is coddling whites. It is giving up something you shouldn't be giving up. It is throwing people of color and other marginalized groups under the bus. When in my view, history shows us that offering basic populist programs that enrich people's lives is more attractive than offering racism. It's just what has happened is that it's very infrequently offered and we don't have very many test cases for what happens when someone like an elected Democrat like Joe Biden or Barack Obama actually follows through with their populist campaign promises. Yeah. I think you really are having some of the most important conversations.

We really appreciate it. That's why we wanted to highlight it here. I hope everybody subscribes and supports your work. It's really important. So we'll have the link down there in the description. Thank you, Brianna. Thanks, Bri. Great to see you.

And happy Thanksgiving. Good to see you both. Happy Thanksgiving. Absolutely. Happy Thanksgiving. Thank you guys so much for watching. We really appreciate it. We're not going to have a full show for you on Thanksgiving,

but we will have a lot of extra content, which we've worked on here on the show. As Crystal said in her monologue, spend some time with your family. Just don't talk about politics. Just relax. But really unplug. Take a time to appreciate everything that you might have

or maybe have lost. It's a time for everything. That's what Thanksgiving actually should be all about. And for those of you might have or maybe you've lost. It's a time for everything. That's what Thanksgiving actually should be all about. And for those of you who have supported us now over the last couple of months, it just absolutely means the world. It's going to be something that I'm thankful for. Really, yesterday when we talked about YouTube and coming and demonetizing our segment on Peng Shui,

the amount of support that we've heard from you guys is just amazing. Today we covered Jeffrey Epstein. I guarantee you that one's going to get demonetized. Today we covered Wakesha. Guarantee you that one's probably going to get age restricted or whatever. But what we take our responsibility as is to show you the news unvarnished in the best possible way that we can. And sometimes that means going afoul of YouTube. So if you can help us out, we deeply appreciate it. Thank you guys so much. You guys have allowed us to do that. And for that, we are extraordinarily grateful.

So have a beautiful week. We will be posting some content throughout the week and a number of things on Thanksgiving as well, if that's how you want to spend some of your time. But most importantly, enjoy your friends and your family. And we will see you back here next week. See you next week. See you next week. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. I'm also the girl behind Boy Sober,

the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, Boy Sober is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now.

Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? Well, Sam, luckily, it's your Not the Father Week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This author writes,

My father-in-law is trying to steal the family fortune worth millions from my son, even though it was promised to us. He's trying to give it to his irresponsible son, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. They could lose their family and millions of dollars? Yep. Find out how it ends by listening to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success.

You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. This is an iHeart Podcast.