Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 1/18/22: Red Wave, GOP War, Testing Plan, Oathkeepers, Djokovic Ban, Kamala Trainwreck, Mask Wars, Nina Turner, & More!

Episode Date: January 18, 2022

Krystal and Saagar talk about the coming red wave for the GOP, Trump's battle against DeSantis, Biden's covid testing plan, DOJ charging Oathkeepers with sedition, Australia banning tennis great Novak Djokovic, Kamala's rebrand trainwreck, school mask wars, Nina Turner on the Left's future, 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/Nina Turner’s Work: https://ninaturner.com/ Nina Turner On TYT: https://tyt.com/about/talent/4W4m6epr60GSoIQ0uIkmuA Nina Turner’s Podcast: https://www.hellosomebodypodcast.com/  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. 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. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? and subscribe today. 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 Podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Over the years of making my true crime podcast

Hell and Gone, I've learned no town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've heard from hundreds of people across the country with an unsolved murder in their community. I was calling about the murder of my husband. The murderer is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case.

If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line 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 gonna be totally upfront with you. We took a big risk going independent. iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast 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, everybody. Happy Tuesday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal?

And we missed everybody. Indeed we do. Yes, we missed you guys. So I mentioned this on Twitter. I think we sent out an email to Premium Subs, too. We're doing the show Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday. We didn't want to mess with the winter storm. It was MLK Junior Day.

Anyway, so Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday this week.'t want to mess with the winter storm. It was MLK Jr. Day. Anyway, so Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday this week. Anyway, lots of stories to get to. New shots fired in a little brewing GOP civil war between Trump and DeSantis. We will give you the very latest there. Some movement from the federal government. We now have a date when you guys can start ordering free tests online. There's also some new numbers, which are pretty encouraging from Omicron. We'll give you all of those details.

We also have the first higher-level charges with January 6th. It had 10 members of Oath Keepers charged with sedition. I read through the entire indictment to tell you what you need to know about that, so we'll get into that also. The controversy continues with tennis star Novak Djokovic. He has now been

officially deported from Australia and banned from that country for three years. Three years. Seems a little aggressive. So we've got the timeline and the details there. Also, the one and only Nina Turner is going to join us for her unvarnished thoughts on the Biden administration. Speaking of which, that is where we want to start with some pretty dire and rather extraordinary new numbers. Let's start with party identification. Let's go ahead and throw this tweet up on the screen. So and leave this up for a minute, Colvin, because you can see at the beginning of the year, Democrats had a sizable edge in terms of party ID. This was actually their largest edge, nine points there, advantage in terms of party identification that they've had since like 2012. So the largest advantage in a

decade. Think back to that time. That was, you know, the tail end of Trump. They're doing all their stop the steal nonsense. Democrats just won those two seats in Georgia. You have won six. And then as we move forward in time, their fortunes dramatically begin to change, bringing us to the present day where now Republicans, who normally historically carry about somewhere around a three-point disadvantage in party ID, now they have a five-point edge. That is one of the largest advantages that Republicans have had in terms of party ID in decades. The Republicans last held a five-point advantage in party ID and leaning in early 95. That was right after they won control of the House of Representatives. They had a larger advantage only in the first quarter of 91. That was right after the U.S. victory in the Persian Gulf War led by then President George H.W. Bush. Most of the movement in terms of party identification, the hard Democrats basically stayed where they were.

The hard Republicans basically stayed where they were. Where the movement was was in the Democratic-leaning independence and the Republican-leaning independence. Look, some of it is, I mean, there's no secret here. You went from a tremendously unpopular president in Republican Donald Trump to a now tremendously unpopular president in Democrat Joe Biden. And as leaders of their respective parties, the party fortune overall suffers dramatically when their failures are so obvious in the American people's minds. Absolutely true, Crystal. You know, I've tracked this for a long time. And I remember a lot of the focus that we gave during impeachment and the Ukraine gate and all of that.

And I could consistently point to that at the very height of impeachment, January of 2020, right during the vote, right before coronavirus struck and all of that, Republican Party identification was at highest it had been in a decade, almost since 9-11. Yeah. And I would always point to that and be like, listen, it's not working. Generic party ID is actually a very, very useful barometer for how people may actually vote come midterm and come presidential race. This is a very, very important metric. And look, it's early days still. Obviously, the next election is a year away, and that's the midterms. The president's got three years to turn it around. But the stunning reversal here is just to lose seven points on the generic ID and then seven-point increase in the Republicans.

So it's not that Democrats lost seven points and then those people became independents. It's that that seven was directly transferred up and to people who said that they were going to vote for the other party. That is how you see, I mean, Glenn Youngkin very much could then be a harbinger of what's to come because he won the Mitt Romney type, you know, people who had voted for Joe Biden and did not vote for Donald Trump. And he drove out other Republicans who voted for Trump in like Southwest Virginia. Those types of numbers and coalitions, you're looking at a popular vote win in many places, which are even remotely bluish type purple. That's the big problem that they have right now. Big problem that they have right now. And we pulled another analysis that we're going to get to in a minute of exactly how this could translate in terms of the midterm.

Spoiler alert, it looks very grim for Democrats on those metrics as well. But there were some more numbers that help illustrate why people feel the way that they do right now. Let's go ahead and put this tweet up on the screen. CBS News and YouGov did a really interesting poll here. They asked their respondents, how has the Biden presidency made you feel. Smart. Top responses were frustrated, disappointed, and nervous. Those were the top three. And then you drop all the way down to 25% calm and satisfied. But it was half, 50% of respondents who said that they were frustrated and disappointed. I actually think disappointed is a really interesting one because that indicates these were people who were open to the Biden presidency, being positive. They were probably excited about him getting elected. And they're looking, they're like, you aren't

delivering for me whatsoever. And this is the other piece of the CBS News YouGov poll. Voters do not feel like Democrats and Biden are focusing on the issues that you care about. I mean, what could be a more important metric here? So 39 percent, that is the plurality of response here, say that they feel like Biden and Democrats are focusing on issues that they don't care about at all. Almost 40 percent say you're focusing completely on the wrong issues. 28 percent say I only care a little bit about the issues that you're focused on. And only one third say that Biden and Democrats are focused on the issues that they care a lot about. I dug into this a little bit more because I thought like, I mean, the obvious

things that voters care about right now are inflation and the economy. But I thought, let me look. Economist YouGov always does a really thorough analysis of issue importance. So I looked there to see, OK, what are people naming as their number one issue? And actually, the number one issue, according to the last Economist YouGov survey, was health care. Number two was jobs and economy. They were very closely tied for one and two. Number three, you might be surprised on was actually climate. But when you consider that, you know, I mean, effectively right now, Democrats, they're making this sort of like theatrical display of caring about voting rights, even though they're not going to do anything there either. Like, no matter what issue you care about outside of grandstanding around one sixth, you would feel like these people aren't focused on your concerns because they're just not doing much of anything at this point. The reason Biden is so unpopular is, number one, you've got half the country, which, like he says, pissed about gas prices, pissed about bare shelves in the grocery store, high prices, supply chains, all of that.

But then you pointed this out. The biggest swing amongst people for disapproval has actually been amongst younger folks. And so that's where you bring in the health care and the climate numbers. You have a base of Democratic voters, you know, generally much more left liberal than the generic population. Those people also disappointed with Biden. So he leaves pleasing nobody. I mean, he's got basically zero constituency who's excited about seeing him in office. I say this all the time. I mean, Trump and his numbers are not all that dissimilar, but Trump's strong approval of people who would crawl through broken glass for the man never dropped below like 90%, 95% approval in terms of the Republican Party. It's because they always

felt at its core that he was representing them. So with Biden, he's got no strong support. He's also just got a national tide and national circumstances of which he does not just seem to care about doing anything about. And I was thinking about it here. You know, you see this meme online of Republicans being like, bare shelves, Biden. And look, like he didn't invent the snowstorm. OK, but that being said, I mean, why does the president in the White House not put out an order saying we are moving to fortify our supply chains? We will make it so that the National Guard clears the roads and make sure that no empty, you know, no grocery shelf will be will be bare in this time of crisis. You could just say that and do it would cost not that much money.

I mean, call a governmental task force, have a bunch of calls with the governors, do it publicly. Instead, he's in like Rehoboth Beach doing nothing. Like, this is the part where I just don't get it. Same with gas prices. Gas prices are still very high. I mean, the more, and you look, in terms of the prices of California, if I was down in Florida, I mean, it was like $4 in terms of the price, $4.50 or something, the price of gas. That's outrageous. The president should be attacking and talking about this every single day. He tapped the SPR one time. Okay. I mean, drag the Saudi king over here. Do something. Go over there. I don't know. I mean, show America that the number one thing of their concern, gas prices, which is 50% of all inflation in the year 2021, is something that you care deeply about doing about. I mean, just in general, in terms of that disconnect, this is why build back better voting rights. Nobody understands what's happening.

They just know they're paying more and he does nothing. This is why he is a failed president, in my opinion. He is truly one of the least effectual presidents in our lifetime. I mean, it really has gotten that bad. The strategy has been bad. The use of the bully pulpit has been bad. The use of the bully pulpit has been bad. The disconnect from what people really care about. I mean, on every level, it has completely failed. And, you know, there's this sort of like

sneering attitude that comes especially from Jen Psaki. Yeah. When reporters question her and question the administration, their moves most famously when it was like, OK, well, why don't you send tests down? Oh, you want me just to send tests? Yes. Coronavirus. Yeah, we actually do. Other countries are doing that. Why the hell can't we do that too? But, you know, they love to say like, well, the president doesn't have a magic wand. Voters know that, okay? The American public isn't stupid. They don't think that you can just snap your fingers, fix all the problems of the country, but they would like to see at least put in some effort. So there's a little bit of a narrative that I've seen in the media, especially in right-leaning media, that's like, oh,

the Democrats went too far too fast. They tried to do too much. That's actually not the issue. The issue is that they haven't delivered on anything. They've not had a single coherent message. And yes, the things that they should be fighting for and focused on, things like lifting wages, things like directly combating inflation, there hasn't been any really realistic approach or any real efforts to put pressure on people like Manchin, Sinema, and others who are standing in the way of those reforms. Rather than having this gigantic thing build back better that no one could really get emotionally invested in, put up each individual piece, put paid sick leave on the floor, and dare Joe Manchin to vote against it. Because you know what? That thing is like 85% popularity. Put

prescription drug price reform on the floor and dare them to vote against it, because again, 85% popularity. Then you're actually making people uncomfortable. And sometimes it'll work and sometimes it won't. But at least people will see that you're doing something that is relevant to their lives. And I do want to say on the numbers of voters under 30 that have fled Biden, this is astonishing. This is not the first survey that has found this either. At the beginning of Biden administration, 70% approval among voters under 30. 70%. Something like 60% of them voted for this guy. Now, 42%. That's almost a 30-point swing. So again, these weren't people who were hardened going in saying, I don't like Joe Biden. I don't believe that he should be president or whatever. These are people that believed in the promise of this administration and been dramatically disappointed. And again, top priorities there, health care, climate change areas.

Again, health care is a no brainer during a pandemic. I mean, put up some health care measures and dare people to vote against it. You don't even have like this is always the point. People like what? Put Medicare for all. OK, maybe. I mean, I don't think that's going to pass. You could also break up hospital cartels. That's actually pretty popular. Prescription drug price alone would save the government hundreds of billions of dollars.

You could make it so that reimburse on COVID care, not make it so, and we'll get to this in the testing block, but I can't help but mention it about, oh, well, the approved tests have to be approved by your insurance company, and it'll reimburse you up to eight tests per month, and you file a claim. Yeah, okay, you lost me, all right? And if you lost me, you lost hundreds of millions of people. It's a total failure all across the board. Every area of life which is causing you nuisance is not being focused on or even spoken about by the president. So from that perspective of mine, you just see somebody who's fundamentally bad at politics, both here in Washington of getting his own people who openly scorn him, Manchin and Sinema. They have nothing but upside at this point from being seen

to go against him. The Republicans obviously zero incentive, probably never did. But then in terms of popular support, like actual people who support you, nothing because you're not doing anything to please anybody except what? Some lobbyist groups and then some weird activist groups who are very vocal online, but not exactly a real activist. Even the activist groups, I mean, some of them boycotted his voting rights because they're like, you're not serious. And they're right. They're totally right. So what does all this translate to? And this is what's really sad. It's not like the Republicans aren't even running on an agenda. They have

nothing to offer. We're about to cover, you know, their own sort of like Republicans and disarray thing that's going on. But they're poised for historic gains in the House of Representatives. Let's go ahead and throw this tweet up on the screen. This is from the UVA Center for Politics. Larry Sabato, our friend Kyle Kondik, who we use on this show as a very good analyst, had a hand in writing and in this analysis. They write here with some key national factors seemingly in their favor. Republicans could win a healthy majority in the House, perhaps even their biggest in nearly a century. So just to be clear, they're not saying right now they're going to win their biggest majority in nearly a century,

but they're saying it's quite possible that if some more balls continue to bounce their way, they are in that position. So they would need 35 seats. They would need to pick up 35 seats in order to have that once-in-a-century majority. And the thing is that, you know, that would actually be fewer seats than they gained in, say, 2010. But they were starting from a lower number back going into 2010. Now they already have

a pretty high number of seats that they hold. They're just, you know, just barely three seats shy of having the majority already. So they only need to pick up 35 in order to have that historic majority. Right now, so what they're looking at more closely, we talked about the party identification. They're looking at the generic ballot, which is a little bit of a different metric, but kind of similar, where you basically ask for people, okay, if we have in your congressional district generic Republican, generic Democrat, who are you going to vote for? So they're looking closely at that right now. That number is more or less even. But Republicans, because they have this advantage in the House, the way the lines are drawn,

they don't have to have a huge advantage on the generic ballot in order to make significant gains here. So right now, they're predicting that Republicans are more likely to pick up somewhere in the 20-seat range, but it is not out of the question that they would pick up that historic once-in-a-century. And don't forget, a 20-seat gain is still an incredibly large margin in the House, because they're only five seats shy. So that would put them well within the region of being able to not pass next legislation, obviously, since Biden will still be president, but to block anything, they would not even have a number. Basically, think about it this way. Their margin would be larger than the current Democratic margin. And you can see already with that current Democratic margin that just having a few seats is

enough in order to swing legislation. Republicans wouldn't have to deal with that large majority. What they also point to here in the article is that all they really have to do is perform better in areas where Biden did better than the median Democrat, as in places which swung more towards Biden but were disproportionately a little bit more conservative type district. If they just win those, they will win control of the House of Representatives. So there are seven seats, they say, that Democrats won for Congress where Donald Trump carried them for the presidency. So you have a situation where the district overall voted for Trump, but they did vote in a Democratic representative. I mean, if they did nothing other than just win those seven seats. Yeah, they win. Then they're in control. And I think every analyst basically at this point expects them to do a lot more than that.

So, you know, Democrats are acting like they had all this language about the existential stakes, democracy on the ballot and climate crisis on the ballot and whatever. And they win control of the House and the Senate and the presidency. So what is your case for keeping you in power when you're telling us you can't do anything with that power? Like that's a difficult case to make to voters. Keep us there so we can continue doing nothing. All right. That sounds like a wonderful sales pitch and I can see how well it's working out. That's the Obama pitch. The other people are worse. Right. Voting for us works out real well. Don't worry, though. Our friends on the

other side, but clowning themselves. I've watched this with great interest and I knew it was inevitable to happen, which is that as Ron DeSantis has really grown in the media, become very much a Republican figure who is beloved by a certain activist class here in Washington. What I mean by that are people who look at DeSantis and are like, well, you know, the guy's Ivy League educated, looks actually smart, like he doesn't talk like a buffoon, none of the drama, but is actually able in order to implement some of these actual Trumpist style policies. He's actually quite popular in the state of Florida, obviously a national icon in leading against lockdowns. I knew Trump was going to get jealous. And it really showed its head recently in that interview, which we brought you. But for those who haven't seen it, Trump ripped DeSantis, not by name, but called him gutless as because DeSantis had been interviewed previously, refused to reveal his booster status. Look at the language that Trump gave in a very unsolicited shot at DeSantis in an interview.

Let's take a listen. Do you reconsider your push for it or what's your view now on the vaccine in general? Well, I've taken it. I've had the booster. Many politicians, I watched a couple of politicians be interviewed. And one of the questions was, did you get the booster? Because they had the vaccine. And they, oh, they're answering it like, in other words, the answer is yes, but they don't want to say it. Because they're gutless. You've got to say it. Whether you had it or not, say it.

But the fact is that I think the vaccine has saved tens of millions of people throughout the world. I have had absolutely no side effects. I've had it like other people have had it, nothing special. I've had it. So that was very important, calling out DeSantis gutless in the state of Florida, where Trump obviously lives. DeSantis fired back almost exactly the next day. He was interviewed on a podcast. Let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen, where DeSantis says he regrets not opposing, and this is very important terminology, the Trump administration lockdown in the earliest days of the virus. So he went ahead and then

quickly he goes, well, and it actually, it was Fauci. So both of these men kind of engaged Crystal in a Cold War. But all of it blew up in The New York Times. And look, people out there who are skeptical of anonymous sources, et cetera, you should be. But this is a very clearly planted story and part of a concerted campaign by some Trump aides, probably greenlit by Trump himself, in order to go out in the press and slam DeSantis. So let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen. Who is the king of Florida?

Tensions rise between Trump and a former acolyte, and in Axios, literally the very same day, Trump dogs, quote, dulled DeSantis ahead of potential 2024 matchup. Two of those things drop in the national media within a span of 24 hours, both sourced to people who are around Trump. And in both cases, you know, you have a basically Trump who thinks DeSantis is too big for his britches. And Trump's basic complaint against DeSantis is that DeSantis refuses to say that he won't run if Trump runs in 2024. That's his main gripe. Trump is like, how dare this guy? He called them the magic words.

Yeah. Saying he wouldn't run against him in 2024. That's the most classic Trump. I actually interviewed Trump right after the election in Florida. And I remember him being like, DeSantis, this guy, he was a nobody. And Trump comes in, 35 points. You know, he was like, DeSantis, this guy, he was a nobody. And Trump comes in, 35 points. I'll never forget it. He was like, he had it convinced in his mind that Trump was, he was like, I'm the only reason Ron DeSantis won in the state of Florida. So he thinks DeSantis

owes him for his victory. Look, that is kind of true in terms of at least pushing him up in the Republican primary. And now he's pissed that DeSantis won't bow down and basically swear fealty to the king. And there's some very nasty shots. It's interesting too, though, because I don't really know what DeSantis is thinking, Crystal. DeSantis seems to think that he's asking too much, that he himself is very popular.

I mean, yeah, that's true. But, I mean, the idea that you're going to take on Trump in a primary or even here in a little spat, I mean, dude, like no chance in terms of the Republican base. And there's a lot of people here in D.C. who love DeSantis because he's not like Trump who are like, no, Ron, he's the chosen one. He's the good one. I like Ron DeSantis. There is no way in hell he would win a Republican primary. I don't know what he's thinking.

I think what he's thinking is he's spending too much time with those people. Yeah, I think he must be right. I mean, that's what's happening. It's very easy to have a bubbler out there telling you, ah, we're over Trump, he's done, he's finished. Actually, Ann Coulter gave a quote to The Times in this piece that was like, forget about Trump, he's over. She's had, I mean, she's...

All right, Ann. Yeah, exactly, exactly. I mean, she's been over Trump for a while now, but the rest of the Republican base, not so much. They love Trump, yeah. So I do—I look back at the margin because I was trying to remember. Remember, DeSantis went up against Andrew Gillum. Yeah, that's right. It was actually very close.

Oh, it was very close, yeah, a couple thousand votes. 0.4 percent. It was the closest race of all the 2018 gubernatorial elections. So, you know, to the extent that Trump had any impact on that race, if it was positive, he, I guess, could make the claim that DeSantis is there because of him. But, you know, the other thing that's funny about DeSantis' criticism here, saying he regrets not speaking out against the Trump lockdowns, DeSantis himself in Florida, this is a little bit forgotten history, but he went further than Trump did in terms of lockdowns in the state.

He ordered schools to shut down. He closed down bars. He prohibited indoor dining. He even banned travelers from New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Louisiana, required them to self-isolate for two weeks. He had police checkpoints set up on interstates to make sure that travelers weren't violating his requirement that they quarantine for two weeks when they came to the state. Now, again, this is kind of forgotten because then he switched tax and over the summer really opened things up and became the subject of a lot of national conversation about whether his COVID policies were going to lead to tremendous spikes and deaths and all of those things. But not only did he not push back on the Trump lockdowns, he took it even a

step further. So I think it's going to be hard for him to kind of hold these positions. And also on the booster thing, if you could imagine them on a debate stage together where Trump's like, just say it, you know, just say whether you have, why wouldn't you say anytime you try to get into this weaselly place of having it both ways, it's, it's blood in the water for a guy like Trump who has a great instinct for going in for the kill. I think at the end of the day, it's about his confidence, which is Trump really doesn't care about the, he doesn't really care if there is, you know, quote unquote, anti-booster sentiment or whatever amongst his base.

And also I think Trump still has a better read of all of this. You know, 95% of boomers in this country are vaccinated, fully vaccinated. 95%, which are all of the people who vote in the primary and constitute a huge portion of the base. I mean, whenever you play footsie with this stuff, it really goes to show that Trump, I think, has a better read of what his elderly constituents and what the national message is. And I've said this before. I mean, it kind of shows you what an alternative history would look like if Trump never was banned off of Twitter. But DeSantis in general, I have no idea what he's thinking here because, look, there is no way that you rate amongst the average Republican in any way compared to Donald Trump. Trump is the most significant figure in the Republican Party and beloved since Ronald Reagan.

I'm not saying this is an endorsement. I'm telling you the basic facts. But also, whenever you go and you had a look at the head-to-head matchups, somebody who sent me this most recently, they went ahead and polled Joe Biden and Ron DeSantis. And what they found is that Trump is tied with Biden and Ron DeSantis. And what they found is that Trump is tied with Biden and DeSantis trails Biden by like seven points. Now they would say, oh, nobody knows his name, all of this. Okay. Maybe. I would also put this as a problem for DeSantis, which is, and this was a very inside baseball story, so forgive me, but I can understand at least the currents of this. He has incredibly high staff turnover amongst political consultants.

Oh, really? Now, that doesn't sound like something, but it shows you that, A, he's either difficult to work with, but, B, he has not built his own real political operation in Florida that's national. He doesn't have his own style of people who are dedicated, loyal to him. These are all the things that you actually have to think about when you run for president. Now, yeah, you're right. The counter is Donald Trump. Well, Trump was in Home Alone, too, and he was famous for like 40 years. So like, if you are that, that's fine. Otherwise, you have to go with the more traditional route. And from what I'm hearing in terms of

donors who are independently would back a DeSantis over a Trump, they just don't really exist. Like, he doesn't have his own constituency of donors, of political activist class, more importantly, of voters. I mean, there is just no mean Republican voter who is going to choose Ron DeSantis over Donald Trump. These are just basic facts. So it's a very odd war. DeSantis would do himself a lot of favors just by going to Trump and being like, look, I'm not going to run just for his own political future if he actually wants to do that. And I think he's a little bit too high on his own supply, Crystal. It definitely seems that way. I mean, there's just, look, Trump's got a stranglehold on the party.

The only thing that matters to him is your loyalty to him. That's it. It's the one thing that you cannot stray on. You can do whatever you want policy-wise, honestly. He doesn't care at all about what policies you pursue, whether you're in a different place on borders or COVID or, man, any of it. He doesn't care at all about what policies you pursue, whether you're in a different place on borders or COVID or man, any of it. He doesn't care. All he cares about is that you say what he calls the magic words that you will not oppose him.

You will be loyal till the end. That's the only thing that ultimately matters to him. And like you said, listen, there's a lot of media figures and, you know, the sort of thinking class in D.C. on the right who want to be done with Trump. But the reality is that the GOP base isn't done with Trump. So 2024 is going to hinge 100 percent on what he decides. Let me just underscore, too, about how much this is about loyalty. Elise Stefanik from New York, you know, this is somebody who's endorsed like the Equality Act, who's basically pro-choice, who is like, anyway,

fails many of the litmus tests for what a supposed Republican is. Trump, just five days ago, said that she could be president in 2028. Right. You know why? Because she kisses his ass during impeachment and she goes down to Mar-a-Lago

and bows down and then, Trump is like, she's going to be president in six years, a huge star. He doesn't care about lockdowns, any of that stuff. He just cares about whether that you suck up to him and are willing to bow down. So, Ron, if you're listening, that's probably the best course. You know, you cast your die.

If you want to work in Republican politics in the year 2022, this is just how it goes. I don't know what else to say. Let's go ahead and move on to testing. I alluded a little bit to this in our A block, but the current Biden administration plan for distributing rapid tests, which they promised at the height of the Omicron wave, is a complete and total joke. So let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen. So starting tomorrow, January 19th, Americans will be able to order their tests online at covidtest.gov. Oh, that's great. However, tests will typically ship between 7 to 12 days of ordering. There are a limited number of tests that you can even get. So with a slow turnaround time,

you can order four free at-home tests. You may not be able to get more in the future. The U.S. has not actually secured the supply of that crystal in terms of the future ones, and we're still working on different vendors. You can wait 7 to 12 days to get to a test while the Omicron wave continues to abate. So do I have that right? I mean, what a complete testament. By the time you can actually get a test, Omicron wave continues to abate. So do I have that right? I mean, what a complete testament.

By the time you can actually get a test, Omicron will be over. You will be fine. Yeah, you will have nothing. And what really annoys me even more is that beyond the free at-home COVID test, I alluded to this earlier, Americans will be allowed under the Biden plan

to have their insurance cover up to eight COVID tests per month. However, those COVID tests have to be approved by your insurance company. You can't just grab any old COVID test off the shelf. It has to be one which is in network. And then if it is out of network, they'll reimburse you up to $25, and you have to do paperwork. Once again, you lost me.

Nobody's going to do that. It's the most convoluted BS system in the world. Everywhere else just gives you a freaking test. They just send them out. They either send them out or they have them widely available at pharmacies for a dollar. In Germany, for example, you can just go and there's no worries about shortage.

You just go in. You're like, hey, dollar, here's five tests. That's it. I was telling you this. My dad just got back from India. I am having him bring me home tests from there because they don't have the same FDA regulation. You could buy as many as you regulatory state, of the administrative state, of the White House, of Vision, the entire country. The only good news we have is that Omicron does seem to be abating, especially in some of the hotspots. So let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen, which is that you can see that this is a graph of cases per day in New York City. New York City very much was the beginning, kind of the Omicron wave.

You can see that there has been a pretty dramatic dip in the seven-day average. So 90% of sequence cases for Omicron began there right in the middle of December. And now after about a couple of weeks, it begins to go down. I shouldn't say that it's going to be gone. That was obviously in New York, so it still has to burn through the rest of the country. But at this point, the facts are clear. You probably will get Omicron or be exposed to it in some way. This is very likely to be milder. We know this, too, from analysis of the data. Let's put it up there on the screen. David Leonhardt, in his review of the evidence, very clear that Omicron is milder in terms of its severity, both in terms of how it impacts you and in terms of hospitalizations and death.

I can tell you this. I know multiple people, including my own mother, who got Omicron and others. They did not suffer even close to the same amount of symptoms that I did, despite the fact that I was vaccinated and got Delta. Yeah, I know. I'm like so S.O.L. I like the, you know, one of those people who got Delta post-vaccination, but it's okay. I like to think that I have decent antibodies. So the testing regime is a complete and total joke, Crystal. However, the good news is, is that the cases seem to be getting better. Yeah. And it's actually not just in New York City. They say recent data also shows a downward trend in other Northeastern states, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. Those are all really encouraging signs. And that is the trend that we saw around the world, too.

Huge spike and then pretty precipitous fall off. So fingers crossed that we're headed in the same direction there. And it's not just the new case numbers. Also, the test positivity rates are down as well. New York Governor Kathy Hochul gave a press conference saying, you know, it looks like the clouds are parting a bit. Obviously, fingers crossed that those trends continue and we don't get another terrible variant to have to deal with. On what we know now about Omicron, basically our hopes, you know, that it would be milder, it has come to fruition. And not only are you much less likely to go to the hospital with Omicron,

but even those, and this is what David Lienhardt was tracking, even those people who do need hospital care, their symptoms are milder on average than people who were hospitalized in previous waves. So you're less likely to go to the hospital with Omicron. If you do end up in the hospital, you are more likely to have milder symptoms than previous hospitalization waves. And we haven't seen a big spike in deaths. Now, that's a trailing indicator. So it's possible that you see deaths jump up here, you know, as we move through time. But so far, that hasn't been what has happened. And that is really,

you know, that's really important. I mean, I that is really, you know, that's really important. I mean, I do want to say I think it's really important. The hospital staff being stressed and the hospitals being overwhelmed in these places, that's a real thing. And it is a real problem, especially when you have a lot of health care staff that have quit or retired over the last year. So they already had limited staffing capacity. And then even if you have someone who is coming in with Omicron, not because of Omicron, you still have to go through special procedures because they're infectious and you have to, you know, it takes additional resources, both from a space perspective and from a staffing perspective. So those are real burdens being put

on the hospitals. But there is good news here that could indicate that we are on sort of the, you know, the downward slope significantly of the Omicron wave. Yeah, I think that's right. And I think that I really am focusing on where the future is. My monologue is going to be about school masking and about the future politics and the wars over that. But as we begin to look at this, a wide availability of tests, even with the annoying regime now put into place by the U.S. government in terms begin to look at this, a wide availability of tests, even with the annoying regime now put into place by the U.S. government in terms of four tests and more, the massive amount of natural immunity that has now been accrued by the population, both in terms of vaccine immunity and in terms of antibodies that people get from being infected with the virus,

on top of the people who are elderly, immunocompromised, who absolutely did need the booster shot. And it does seem that that has kept them very much so out of the hospital. I saw some recent data that boosters amongst people who are age 65 reduce their hospitalization rate to the same level as the generic hospitalization rate for normal COVID of 12 to 25-year-old people. That's great, fantastic news. So if you're old or you have a BMI that makes you obese, that's definitely something that you should consider. That thing is, and we continue to look, is you put all that together, the off-ramp is here. And it's been here now for a while. Omicron is what brought back a lot of the restrictions,

but they really don't have a lot of excuses at this point. You're right about the strained hospitals. However, we still don't see the return of triage care that we saw in New York City at the height of the wave. We don't see the ICU beds or whatever at 100% capacity. And another thing I want to note here, because not a lot of people tell you this, you know, ICUs normally run at 60, 65% capacity. I had no idea about that. So when I hear ICUs are 75%, well, if you don't know the baseline, then you don't really know what that actually means. So when they're saying strain, yeah, it's like 10%, 15%, 20% more. Not downplaying it for the people who are in the hospitals. But ICUs are actually built in order to be occupied. It makes sense because it's super expensive, and you shouldn't have nobody in the beds anyway.

So really what I would say is off-ramp is here. The tests are now available. You can live your life. We have a very good preview of what the future will probably look like. And if you look at the 1918 flu pandemic, this is exactly what happened. I didn't know this either. I've been recently doing some research, which is that the part of the seasonal influenza that we have now, the little remnants of that are from the 1918 flu. What happened is that the flu came the seasonal influenza that we have now, the little remnants of that are from the 1918 flu. What happened is, is that the flu came, it was extremely virulent, you know, had two waves in which it killed a lot of people. And then just basically, just like Omicron, in order to become more infectious, becomes less deadly. And then parts of that virus will simply

just float around. So the thesis around coronavirus is that currently the common cold is nine different rhino or coronaviruses, is that this will, COVID-19 will become a part of what we all collectively know as the seasonal flu within, I don't know, a couple of years, maybe by next year, hopefully. This is the last winter that we have to do this thing. Indeed. So anyway, a little bit of good news there, even as the administration, I'm going to cover this in my monologue, but Kamala in her interview telling people if you're having trouble finding a test, just Google it. Yeah, Google it. Take some personal responsibility. Google harder. Then I'm sure you can find a test. I went to 12 different stores or called, went to or called 12 different stores. They had nothing. You had to like stake out a Walmart at 2 a.m. for when the truck arrived. So thank you, Madam Vice President, for that helpful piece of advice. Thank you, ma'am. Okay, so this is pretty interesting. So something we've been

tracking here, and I think a lot of people have been tracking across the political spectrum, is the fact that on January 6th, you had a lot of rhetoric from the government that was, this is treason, this is sedition. And yet, the charges that had been filed up until last week were relatively low-level charges. They were things like trespassing or things like vandalism or things like obstructing an official government proceeding or something like that. So we now have the first higher-level charges. Let's go ahead and throw this New York Times tarot sheet up on the screen. The headline here says, Oath Keeper's Leader Charged with Seditious Conspiracy in January 6th Investigation. The FBI arrested Stuart Rhodes. He's the founder

of the far-right militia and a major step forward in the investigation into the attack on the Capitol by supporters of Donald J. Trump. So first, I want to give you kind of like the straight news facts here, and then I'll tell you a little bit about I read the indictment and, you know, what I took from it, at little bit about I read the indictment and, you know, what I took from it, at least. So the lead here says Stuart Rhodes, leader and founder of Oath Keepers, was arrested on Thursday, charged along with 10 other Oath Keepers with seditious conspiracy of what prosecutors said was their wide-ranging plot to storm the Capitol on January 6th last year and disrupt the certification of Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s electoral victory. They are the first to be charged with sedition among the more than

700 people who are accused so far of taking part in the assault. This charge can be very difficult to prove because it requires prosecutors to show that at least two people agreed to use force to overthrow government authority or delay the execution of a U.S. law. It carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. The last time that the government charged anyone with seditious conspiracy, they were unable to prove the case. I think we have that tear sheet as well. We can throw that up on the screen. U.S. judge in Michigan acquits militia members of sedition. Basically, the judge found that they didn't go beyond their sort of First Amendment

political speech. And so the bottom line here is that this can be a very difficult charge, ultimately, to prove. The Oath Keepers, some of the Oath Keepers who were charged here, by the way, they say they were really there, and this is kind of laughable, to protect conservative celebrities like Roger Stone. Oh, okay. That was the real reason that they were there storming the Capitol on January 6th. Okay, guys.

The other important piece from this New York Times story is apparently at least four Oath Keepers are now cooperating with the government and have sworn in court papers the group intended to breach the building with the goal of obstructing the final certification of the Electoral College vote. Okay, so I read through the indictment, and basically it was the saddest 50 pages I have ever read.

Okay. Because you've got these dudes, and I don't want to downplay what they did. They showed up in Virginia, not actually in D.C., but in Virginia, with all of these thousands of thousands of dollars worth of weapons and ammo and tactical gear, and they were there doing their little, you know, military formation, marching into the Capitol in their tactical gear costumes, and at least one of them is charged with assault of a police officer. So I'm not downplaying that this was—these people are idiots, it was a dangerous situation, and that this was, you know, none of this was good.

However, it's also really clear from reading the indictment, number one, they were nowhere close to actually, like, effectuating a coup. Yes. Number two, most of, they spent months, like, building each other up with all this talk of, like, what weapons they're buying and how the Civil War is coming and there's going to be blood in the streets and this was the moment that they'd signed up for and all of this stuff, okay? They even went so far as one of them was floating, like, let's get boats and then we can have our ammo on the boats.

They set up these at these hotels in Virginia with their ammo because obviously Virginia's gun laws are way more permissive than D.C.'s. So they didn't bring weapons into D.C., but they're like, let's have the ammo ready to go on the boats. And then when it all goes down, we can just ferry them across the river with our troops, with our backup. And we'll be we'll be ready for revolution. We're patriots like the founders, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So this is their talk, okay, leading into this. Then on the day of, what do they actually do? They go.

They're part of the mob that storms into the Capitol. Some of them certainly behave violently. And then they leave. They dip. They sped to the Capitol, by the way. I liked this detail in the indict Capitol, by the way, I like this detail in the indictment, on golf carts.

Okay? Wearing their LARPing tactical gear costumes. March around like tough guys. And I think there's

a woman charged here, maybe a couple women. And then they dip and they go to Olive Garden to celebrate. Okay? That was their, that was their civil war.

And then they continue to have this talk on their WhatsApp channels and whatever about, oh, this is just the beginning and we're going to continue and let's go on our recon missions and whatever. Do they do anything else other than like drive around the Capitol to do their pretend fake recon missions? No, they don't. So they have all this talk again and all these preparations for their bloody civil war. But when it comes down to it, these tough guys who clearly are

trying to fill some hole inside of themselves by engaging in all of this like expensive cosplaying didn't do a whole lot. And again, if this was the most aggressive and well-organized plot to overthrow the Republic, then I actually feel a lot better that the Republic is pretty safe. Oh, I completely agree. And like you said, nobody's downplaying what these idiots were doing. They were absolutely, you know, narcissistic LARPers in their group chats and clearly were bringing ammo and other supplies to Washington with the stated intent to actually do something. And then as usual with these people, what actually happens does not look even close to the tough talk that they usually will display amongst themselves. The key part here is around the sedition charge, which is that sedition is very, very difficult to prove. I mean, in terms of what the government would have to prove here is that they were willingly and actually had the ability in order to delay the impact of this law.

Now, election certification is not a law, number one. But number two, overthrowing the government, yeah, it may have been what they said in terms of their messages. But remember, the First Amendment actually does cover a lot of anti-government rhetoric. So they have a very, very strong case in order to try and make. I find it very difficult to see how they're going to be able to prevail here in court. I know there will be overwhelming pressure against them. I don't know why you can't just charge these people with rioting like everybody else. I mean, that's ultimately what this is about. So it looks almost, Crystal, like a political move by the Department of Justice

to mollify the critics saying, why have you not brought harder charges against the people? And also, frankly, to try and silence, I think, people like us who are saying, hey, if all these ringleaders were there, like, why have you not charged them? You read through the indictment of what we saw here. I mean, does it rise to the level of what the media portrays like this actually was? Because the media would have you believe that these folks had a real chance at success and that they're you know they're sort of cosplay preparations translated into their actions on that day and again i i don't want to be i don't want to downplay because what they did caused a lot of harm and pain for the country there's no doubt like this was a horrible day. It was terrible to watch.

It was another sign of the deep decline of the nation and this kind of unraveling. It was painful and it was a dangerous situation too. Obviously, there were people who lost their lives on that day. And for the lawmakers and the journalists and the cops who were there, this was extraordinarily frightening and difficult and violent and all of those things. But ultimately, their words did not come close to matching the actual actions of that day. And so if this was the conspiracy, and maybe there are more charges to come, but if this was the most organized attempt to overthrow the government then you should actually feel kind of comforted that you know this this was not going to come even close like they were not even going to come close

to achieving what they said was their stated goal so anyway um I actually thought I would recommend to you actually reading this. And again, this is the government's version of events, which is always important to keep in mind. Although they do clearly have cooperators who are providing them with the text messages and stuff. So you can read what exactly was being said and what plans were being made, et cetera. But so they're putting their most forceful and scary and nefarious spin on it. But yeah, I mean, I think it'll be a difficult charge to prove. I think it definitely there's the possibility that the government felt pressured to charge somebody with something other than like trespassing and vandalism and their obstructing official government proceeding.

People, you know, were led to believe that there was this super organized conspiracy with a chance of success. And so I think this is a stretch for the government ultimately to be able to prove. But I'm also not a legal expert, so we'll ultimately see where this goes. One other thing I want to say, it'll be interesting also to see what we've learned a lot about the Gants in their ranks and whether they had fed infiltration or if it's just people who after the fact kind of turned and are now cooperating with the government to lessen their own sentences. Yeah, I think that's a very good point. I went ahead and looked. The last time that anybody even remotely like this, a white nationalist group, were indicted for a seditious conspiracy in 1987, all 10 of the people who were put on trial were acquitted. And this was a much more serious plot. It was called the Fort

Smith Sedition Trial. They were plotting to take over a U.S. base and actually assassinate military officials. But the burden of proof is very high. The last person who was convicted, notably, of seditious conspiracy was Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. That's the blind Sheikh who inspired the 1992 World Trade Center attack and was behind some of the initial jihadist activity here in the U.S. All we're trying to say is the bar is very, very high. Much more serious plots that you have seen here that were much better organized have not been actually convicted of seditious conspiracy. And the very last time that the nine members of the Huatri militants were charged with seditious conspiracy, they were acquitted because the prosecution relied on

circumstantial evidence. So you look at all of this together, it's a very, very difficult charge to prove. They probably have them dead to rights in terms of storming the Capitol. Sure. Obviously, right? Yeah. And there are a lot of lesser charges that are filed against these people that I fully expect them to be convicted of. Right. And they should be.

Which they almost certainly will be convicted of because they probably are guilty. But on the sedition one itself, you know, just because you're charged with something doesn't make it true. And we will watch it very closely. Because I do think it is important, which is that if just saying the words like, and LARPing Civil War, if that is sedition, which is then connected to a riot, well, there is a lot of precedent set there from the judicial system about who and what can be charged. So always remember that the alien and sedition acts are not looked at as a very bright time in American history for a reason. We have laws on the books which are crimes and we should treat it that way. And these have very high barriers of proof. And I think that's

a good thing for all of us. I think it's important for people to have their expectations set properly too. Because no matter what, you may wildly disagree with my assessment of these individuals and, you know, the readout from the indictment, but I think it's just important that people have the expectation that this will be very difficult to prove in court, and it is, you know, probably unlikely that the government will ultimately succeed, but we will watch it very closely. Good point. Okay. Okay, so I've been following this closely with Novak Djokovic, who is a top-ranked tennis player in the world. I have a sort of newfound interest in tennis, so I've been watching a lot lately.

So that's why I've been following this relatively closely. So here's a little bit of the backdrop and context. Djokovic is tied with Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer to basically be like the greatest tennis player of all time. And he needs one more major event win in order to take his place ahead of them in history. So significant stakes. And by the way, the Australia Open is an event where he has historically performed extraordinarily well. He is the three-time reigning champion, and I believe he has won the Australian Open nine times in his career. So he tends to do...

It's like his event. He's the guy at the Australia Open, okay? And again, if he gets one more of these major championship wins, then he pulls into the lead ahead of Rafa and ahead of Roger Federer in terms of being the sort of tennis greatest of all time. So, Novak Djokovic is a crank.

He has all kinds of crazy beliefs. Yeah, you were telling me about his gluten one. There was something. He has a lot of like crazy, totally anti-science beliefs and he is opposed to the COVID vaccine. So he thought that he had an exemption to Australia's very onerous rules and restrictions that ban people from entering the country unless they are vaccinated because he has been infected with coronavirus before. And he had received some word both from the government and from the

relevant tennis authorities that the fact that he had been infected with coronavirus before meant he had some natural immunities, which is scientifically based. Yes. And that he was given, granted a waiver to those vaccine requirements so that he could enter the country, move about the country, and compete in the Australia Open. Okay. Then he goes to actually fly to Australia. He's detained in the airport

and then unfolds this whole back and forth between him and the Australian judicial system and the Australian government. One judge actually, you know, stood with Djokovic and said, actually, I think you, you know, have been granted this exemption and should be allowed to stay.

That is then ultimately overturned. And now the long and short of it, let's go have been granted this exemption and should be allowed to stay. That is then ultimately overturned. And now the long and short of it, let's go ahead and put this up on the screen, is that he has been not only deported from Australia and cannot play in this Australia Open, but he is banned from the country for three years, which I'm going to get into some of the things that make this a little bit more complicated, but top line level, it is anti-science to pretend that natural immunity is not a thing. That's correct. So if you're going to have, especially something, and I don't support something so aggressively,

you know, authoritarian as these types of laws. But if you're going to have them, at least have them based on science so that, OK, if you're vaccinated, then you get in. And also, if you have natural immunity from having had COVID that gives you similar protection to a vaccine, then also you should be let in. So that's kind of my top line thing. And the idea that he's banned for three years is to me bonkers. Now, they do say that he could apply for an exemption. The minister for home affairs,

Karen Andrews, said the outcome of the process that went before the federal court and the determinations, the visa was canceled by immigration minister Hawk. That cancellation was upheld by the federal court. So as a result of that, he will be banned from entry for three years into the country. Now, there are some compelling reasons that might be looked at, but that's all hypothetical at this point. Any application for those exemptions will be reviewed on its merits. Here's the one thing I will say that makes this more complicated is that his application, he appears to have lied on. Because you had to swear that you hadn't traveled anywhere else for two weeks. And there are pictures of him on Instagram.

He had been other places. Got it. So he lied about that. The other thing is just, I mean, this isn't really relevant to the application, but it also looks like while he had COVID, he was still out like doing tennis events and photo shoots. Not great. With people.

Yeah. To give you a sense of the type of sort of posture he has towards all of this. But I think the most complicating factor for him is the fact that he did lie on his application and said he hadn't traveled when in fact he had traveled. I think you're right. And the problem though is that the Australian ministers, they cited that kind of as, you know, internal evidence. But in general, the reason that they said that he was being booted from the country

was because he would encourage anti-vax sentiment within Australia. That's the explicit reason that they gave. Look, I support Australia's right to do whatever it wants with its borders, but I think this is totally nuts. I mean, they're booting out Novak Djokovic, as you say, both on an anti-scientific basis, but also on the idea that he would encourage anti-vax sentiment within the country. I mean, A, there's no evidence of that whatsoever. But B, what does it also say about you for your citizens to look at this and say, wait a second, are we, you know, this is possibly leading to at least consciousness within Australia. A lot of people, I actually saw, there was this guy on the Joe Rogan podcast kind of defending the Australian policy. He himself was an Australian. And it was a fascinating kind of view for me into the mind of people who are Western, but also not necessarily committed to

things like the Bill of Rights. I always see this whenever I see like Britain, where they don't really have a free press and same in Australia, they have huge government censorship and government ability. There was a lot more just compliance, or whenever it comes to some of the most draconian policies of quarantine camps, COVID camps, and, you know, hardcore mandates, the hardest core lockdowns that you'll ever see. It was actually kind of supported by the majority, it looks like, of the Australian people, although it's difficult in order to get accurate polling. I do think, though, that in the long run, as you say, blocking Novak Djokovic from coming has diminished the event in the sport of tennis by making it not really a fair game.

Anybody who wins this one is going to know in the back of their mind that Djokovic was not allowed to come in. But this is ruining the sport as we know it. Apparently, he may not be allowed in Paris to compete in the French Open. I was in France. They do have a hardcore passport vaccine mandate. Although they do allow unvaccinated travelers, you're just not allowed to do anything. So it's possible that that's what he'll have to do.

He'll have to get tests every 48 hours. He's rich enough. I'm sure he can do that. But it's'll have to do. He'll have to get tests every 48 hours. Yeah, he's rich enough. I'm sure he can do that. But it's diminishing the sport. It's sending the wrong message, I think, around what this is all supposed to be. And in terms of Australia itself, I think this diminishes their standing

on the world stage dramatically. A lot of people are looking at this and saying, this is totally nuts. Casual sports fans. I mean, listen, on the other hand, he could just get the freaking vaccine and then he wouldn't have all these problems. So let's just put that out there as well. However, I mean, I don't disagree with you. I think the big problem with this is it ended up feeling super political because the politicians ultimately were the ones

who got involved and made the decision and, you know, not only boot him from the country, but also ban him for three years. And it does, I mean, you know, it does have significant consequences for the sport of tennis. Rafael Nadal is back from injury. I saw, I don't know if he's played. I know in the first round he was extraordinarily dominant. It would be extremely exciting to watch him play Djokovic in the final. And there's a chance, I mean, again, he's just newly back from injury, so I don't know how well he'll do, but there's a chance that he then

goes and wins this event and puts him in the lead as the greatest of all time, which personally, I am an Nadal fan, so I wouldn't mind, but it does have a little asterisk next to it. And it always will. Yeah, because you didn't go up against Djokovic at this event, and so now you

pull ahead because he's been banned from the country. I mean, listen, it's just sport, so it's not the end of the world. But I do think that ultimately the bottom line here is that even as Djokovic is a total crank, apparently people in the tennis world don't like him. He's kind of a jerk. Put aside his personal attributes. The Australian government's position here felt political and seems to be blatantly anti-science. And that's the issue I have with it. And ultimately, extremely draconian. Three years?

That's crazy. That's totally crazy. Yeah, it's totally nuts. Like, look, yeah, we don't have a right to go to Australia. But I mean, you know, their economy relies on a lot of tourism. A lot of people go over there. It's actually my last continent populated, so I do desperately want to go. But even now, I'm like, I don't know. You know, this whole thing seems completely nuts. Gold Coast seems cool, but this is, I don't want to have to sit in a hotel room for like two or three weeks. And that seems to be what they require. I think it does diminish and tarnish their image on the world stage. It's not good for the sport. And these are just not the international precedents that we should be setting, especially in a time of vaccination, of, you know, dramatically much lower hospitalization and death rates amongst people who have immunity and have some sort of protection.

This is something that I think is important for people to accept and to move on from. Sport is a very, very powerful symbol of what life was like before and can be going forward. And I think we should go ahead and try to preserve it. Yes, indeed. We have one other final piece for this, which you can throw up on the screen, which is Djokovic's reaction. He says he's extremely disappointed with the court ruling to dismiss my application for judicial review of the minister's decision to cancel my visa, which means I cannot stay in Australia and participate in the Australian Open. I respect the court's ruling. I will cooperate with relevant authorities in relation to my departure from the country. I'm uncomfortable that the focus of the

past weeks has been on me, and I hope that we can all now focus on the game and tournament I love. I'd like to wish the players, tournament officials, staff, volunteers, and fans all the best for the tournament. And that ends that whole chapter. Crystal, what are you taking a look at? Well, guys, it is a new year and supposedly a new Kamala Harris. She's hired a new comms director who, full disclosure, Sagar and I actually worked with back at the Hill. And she is testing out a new strategy of actually doing interviews and being in the public eye. Crazy idea there, Vice President. According to McClatchy, Kamala wants to sit for longer form interviews where she can delve into policy as she tries to reshape the

narrative on her vice presidency. As one former aide put it, quote, I think it's taken a little bit more time than maybe some people would have hoped, but I think they've got a good opportunity to get her feet under her soon in 2022 and have 2022 be a much better year than 2021. There is just one teensy-tinesy tiny problem. This is Kamala Harris, and she is extremely bad at this. In one of her first efforts at this New Year, New Kamala strategy, she was asked a pretty basic question by NBC's Craig Melvin. Is it time the administration changes its COVID strategy? Her response, and I quote, it is time for us to do what we have been doing. And that time is every day. Every day, it is time for us to agree that there are things and tools that are available to us

to slow this thing down. Okay. That sounds like something I might think was really profound if I was extremely high. What is time anyway? Every day it is time. And that time is every day. But in my personal opinion, this was not even the worst part of the interview, since that answer was just perplexing and sad rather than absolutely enraging. For my money, the worst part of the interview came when the vice president of the United States told us to do Google to find COVID rapid tests. We're two years into this. Why didn't the administration just go out and secure more at-home tests? After the Delta surge in the fall, why are we at a point now where folks still can't get tests? But we just ordered, I don't have the number in front of me, but millions of tests. We have 20,000 sites where people can go.

And I urge people to, you can Google it or go on to any search engine and find out where free testing and the free testing site is available. But Madam Vice President, the fact that we're still telling people to Google where you can get a test. But come on now. I mean, really, if you want to figure out how to get across town to some restaurant you heard is great, you usually do Google to figure out where it is. So that's simply about giving people, right, a mechanism by which they can locate something that they need, something that can help them. You hear that, people? Take some personal responsibility for the fact that there is a massive rapid test shortage. Are you sure you're Googling hard enough? When asked about timing for distribution of free rapid tests, she admitted she didn't actually know the timeline.

Boy, these long-form policy discussions are really off to an incredible start. What I've come to realize about Kamala Harris is that she is so much more than just one bad politician who happened to end up in a position of power and prominence. In fact, she is perfectly, precisely emblematic of the Democratic Party and all of its corruption, incompetence, shallowness, and lack of interest in governing. She's not about anything and somehow believes that the answer to everyone's problem isn't health care or labor rights, but more Kamala. In that way, she reminds me actually a lot of Hillary Clinton. Hillary might have actually started out with some real values. I do believe that is possible.

But over the years, her quest for power led her to conclude that any means was justified, so long as it put her closer to power. Because the true greatest good was Hillary Clinton running the show. Kamala's modern version of that, having skipped the part about having a single principle to start with and jumping straight to the conclusion that the answer to all of our prayers lies in the personal fulfillment and achievement of one Kamala Harris. I've actually started reading Edward Isaac Dover's gossipy campaign book, Battle for the Soul, and he captures this dynamic pretty well. He writes that as a black woman obtaining trailblazing

positions, quote, she is always cognizant of what her presence and her wins represent. That she always sees herself as the answer and reaps the benefits from that, well, she likes that too. Like the Democratic Party, Kamala really only has two skills. The first is sucking up to rich donors and persuading cultural elites that their own virtuousness lies in supporting her. This requires nothing of them and also nothing of her. She is not promising them policy or change, just that her existence and identity will give them emotional sucker. It's the political equivalent of having a black friend, allowing these elites to convince themselves and broadcast to the world that they are sort of the sort of good people who care about progress. Meanwhile, their low taxes

will stay just as they are, their kids' grip on the good life perfectly secured. The second skill Kamala shares with the larger Democratic Party is her creative weaponization of a litany of excuses to explain why she is failing. No misstep or disappointment is ever Kamala's fault. During the presidential primary, she and her toxic band of trolls actually believed that the reason she failed so hard was because the media was unfair to her. Can you imagine

actually thinking that? The media tried so hard to make Kamala Harris happen, granting her top tier status before she had done or proved a single thing, going down the checklist of identity signifiers to argue that they had done the math, and the answer must be Kamala Harris. And of course, the most consistent excuse that Kamala falls back on is that any critique isn't really about her failures. It's about the journalists and the society at large's racism and sexism. Not sure how that explains her inability to answer very basic questions. Constant turnover in every office she's ever run, thanks to a totally

dysfunctional workplace environment, and total rejection, not just by the broader public, but by the Democratic base to include plenty of women and voters of color. No failure is ever Kamala's fault. Just as for the Democrats, it's always the fault of gerrymandering, or the filibuster, or those battle Republicans, or those bad voters who are just too deplorable to respond to the Democrats' enlightened ways. But the true defining characteristic of both Kamala and the larger Democratic Party is their total lack of any core. The only goal is their own advancement through Machiavellian machine politics, not by like, I don't know, appealing to voters. In Battle for the Soul, the book I referenced, Kamala launched her presidential campaign after running a bunch of focus groups on how she personally tested as

compared to fellow woman Kirsten Gillibrand and as opposed to fellow black person Cory Booker. She and her operatives held a retreat to run through these focus groups and debate the personal risks to Kamala Harris and the potential personal gains to Kamala Harris. Never once, according to those in the room, did they actually think about why one might want to be president, what one might do to improve the lives of the American people through the incredible powers of that office. As one person in attendance said, quote, there was not any discussion of policy, the why she would run.

We launched into a void without a worldview. Now, this was obvious to everyone watching her campaign unfold, where the message and the theme changed along with the seasons. The one thing she held relatively consistently to was her insistence that it was, quote, time to tell hard truths, a totally meaningless phrase that, just like the content-free person uttering it, hit the perfect mark among a certain set. Kamala's campaign was so empty and unconcerned with policy that she jumped on the bandwagon to co-sponsor Bernie's Medicare for All bill in the Senate out of pure political calculation, without even having the foggiest idea what the policy

actually was. Here's how that all unfolded, according to Dover, quote, this was her thinking, sign on to his bill first to get the credit for taking a bold stand and make the announcement as a surprise at the end of August in a church back home in Oakland. Aides realized afterward that she had so thin a grasp of the policy that she'd said she was backing, she said she was backing Medicaid for all in that church. Now, I was always astonished that Biden and the Democratic elites would select Kamala Harris as their handpicked successor, as their next leader. She literally was rejected so hard by voters that she had to drop out of the primary before a single vote was cast. She was so

obviously unserious, unlikable, and just really bad at every single skill necessary to be even halfway decent at politics. But the more I watch her, the more I think about it, the more I realize Kamala and the hapless Democratic establishment are a match made in heaven. Prop up a diverse face that stands for nothing and challenges no one and call it change. Yeah, that sounds about right. At least Barack Obama could give a really great speech. This interview was really something. The book contains a lot of... And if you want to hear my reaction to Crystal's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at BreakingPoints.com.

All right, Saga, what are you looking at? Well, the single worst part of this pandemic has been the treatment of young children, the closing of schools, the forcing of masks, the intentional effort by the CDC and the media to scare the living daylights out of parents for a disease which is not fundamentally a risk to the vast majority of children here in the U.S. or on Earth. And while we have as much information as we ever could to reverse these draconian policies, some people, they just won't give up. And unfortunately, while those people are a minority of this country,

they also happen to be the most powerful people in the world. They have the highest positions in the CDC, the White House, the U.S. government. In their positions of power, they seek to institutionalize their insanity upon all of us, and even worse, the U.S. government, in their positions of power, they seek to institutionalize their insanity upon all of us, and even worse, upon kids. Nowhere is this more stark than masks in schools, where Biden administration has announced an unprecedented action. Biden's Treasury Department is instructing the state of Arizona that it would take back some of the $4.2

billion in pandemic aid and withhold future payments if the state does not halt or redesign programs which undercut mask requirements in schools. These are dollars explicitly given to the states by Congress for education purposes, and Arizona is using them as they see fit to encourage in-person instruction and even aid to families who want their kids to be, who want their kids to be able to attend schools without onerous restrictions. That's too far for the Biden administration, which through this action is making a full-throated government defense of masks in schools. Now, those who watch me regularly know the great irony of the Biden administration

action here, as I've dedicated an entire monologue to. The CDC study justifying masks in schools is complete BS. David Zweig of The Atlantic pointed out that the study allowed online and virtual schools in its control group. It used ridiculous criteria to define a community COVID case. And the time horizon of which they said they were looking at was not valid data whatsoever. But here's the most ironic part. That study by the CDC justifying masks in schools was based on the BS data set out of the state of Arizona itself. You can't make this up. The CDC's junk science was based on BS Arizona data, and then when the state of Arizona rightfully defies that guidance, the government threatens to claw back aid from them.

Now, we have gotten to a an actual experiment with many more students and much better data, found that there was zero statistical impact from wearing masks in schools, and thus they do not have it as national policy. Layer that obvious piece of news that the CDC finally admitted to, that they concede that cloth masks do not protect against the virus as effectively as other masks. So masks in schools don't really work. Actually, cloth masks themselves barely work. So why exactly are we forcing kids to wear them? Nobody has an answer to that question.

And any sane person or parent knows that this is ridiculous. That is why masks in schools are set to be the best political fight of my generation for Republicans. Newly inaugurated Governor Glenn Youngkin, he announced on his very first day of office in Virginia the statewide mandate to wear masks in schools was repealed. And from here on out, it would be up to the parents if they want to their kids to wear masks or not. That's a great policy. If you want to inflict that on your kid, I disagree, but it's a free country. For the rest of us, we are moving on. It is one of the most obvious political winners of the last two decades.

But, which of course, the White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki somehow found the need to come out on the other side of that. She's going after Glenn Youngkin for coming out against masks in schools. Psaki thanked the Arlington Public School District for, quote, standing up for our kids, teachers, and administrators. This once again has no scientific basis. Youngkin's order is simple. If Jen Psaki wants to strap an N95 to her kid's face, fine. Any person who is concerned, including staff, you can do the exact same thing. The fact that they insist on strapping a mask to your kid's face shows that they don't

respect you and they don't respect science and they will literally never give these things up for everybody. It is not enough for them to just have the option. They will only be happy when everyone on every plane and school and college in the country is as miserable and terrified as there are. And to that end, I honestly say, keep it up. It will be the biggest electoral backlash in modern memory. Some electoral analysts, as we covered today in the show, say it could be the biggest blowout in a century. I think that's right. And the reason is obvious and simple. These people care more about voting rights and the fake Build Back Better Act, whatever that is, than making sure that your daily life is not miserable

and expensive. In fact, the misery is probably the point. But that's why, lucky for us, we still live in a democracy. And the very last thing that we have at our disposal is the vote. So make sure you use it. Because COVID policy departed science long ago. To escape misery requires turning on these people at every turn, regardless of party. Only one of the great shellackings in modern American political history will shut them up. And even then, it may not be enough. But at least it will be something. And Crystal, I was telling you this before the show, Alexandria Public School responds.

And if you want to hear my reaction to Sager's monologue, become a premium subscriber today at BreakingPoints.com. Joining us now, we have a wonderful guest, the one and only Senator Nina Turner. She is host of the Hello Somebody podcast on the Black Effect Network. She's also host of the conversation over on TYT and, of course, former national co-chair of the Bernie Sanders campaign. Great to see you, my friend. Good to see you, Nina. Yeah, great to be with you both and Happy New Year. Happy New Year to you. It's Great to see you, my friend. Good to see you, Nina. Yeah, great to be with you both and Happy New Year. Happy New Year to you. It's great to see you. Let me start with like sort of a big picture question. You can take this in any direction that you want. But what do you think is the

biggest failing or are the biggest failings of the Biden administration to date? Not giving people something they can feel. I mean, you know, the Build Back Better plan, even though as a progressive, I want to see it go a lot further. But it's certainly a strong foundation that should be a push very hard. Also not allowing two senators and the people who are hiding behind them, because let's face it, it's not just Manchin and Sinema that are standing in the way of the filibuster. They just have the courage to come out and say we won't support changing the rules so that the filibuster and the way that it has been used historically, as we know, has been something, has been used as a tool to stop civil rights.

And so they have no problem in the 21st century saying that the rules, the Senate filibuster rule means more to them than upholding democracy, and they're not alone. And so I want to see the president take the righteous indignation of this nation over that, over voting rights and other things that the Senate needs to get done to give people something they can feel on the road and compel the American people to be on his side and say, hey, I'm standing up, but these two and any others who hide in the shadows are standing in the way of my agenda, and this agenda can change your lives materially. Nina, you were recently on CNN. It caused a little bit of a stir.

Let's take a listen to that, and we'll talk about it on the other side. They better not utter the, not one quote from the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Not one or any of his colleagues and contemporaries as we come up on his birthday on Saturday and the national celebration on Monday. This is, these people are cowards. They are soulless cowards to hold up a daggone rule. Filibuster is a rule. It's not written in the Constitution. It's not a right. It is a rule. And they're standing in the way of it.

So this is nonsense. They worried about what the Republicans going to do. Let's take care of 2022. Let's do what Democrats can do right now. They have the power. And my message to President Biden, now he done wasted a whole bunch of time with these folks being diplomatic, inviting them out to the White House and to time out for it. He needs to hold a press conference. Let him know.

Either you're going to be by my side saying you're going to be with me and getting rid of the filibuster or I'm gassing up the jet on your behind. And I will be in Arizona and West Virginia directly and let the American people know who's standing in the way of my entire agenda, not just voting rights. So President Biden, gas up the jet and cancel student debt. So it's interesting, Nina. I agree with your sentiment. But at this point, isn't Biden so unpopular that Manchin and Sinema have nothing but to gain except for being to see against him? Like at this point, would that strategy even work for a president with approval rating in the low

30s? Popularity rises and falls. So it went down. It can also go back up by action, by being very passionate, direct, and deliberate, and really pushing the agenda that he ran on. I mean, let's just start right there. And we know the overwhelming majority of the American people, no matter how they lean politically, agree with canceling student debt, driving down the cost of prescription drugs, having paid family leave, et cetera, so we could go on and on. So it really is just holding strong to the agenda that he ran on. And his low approval rating, I believe, will go back up. It will go up, rather. Senator Turner, there's been some conversation now about, okay, so Biden clearly has been a

disappointment. In fact, we covered a poll today. Majority of people describe themselves as either being frustrated with his presidency or disappointed in his presidency. His approval ratings have fallen off a cliff. He hasn't been able to deliver on really much of any of his core campaign promises. People certainly don't feel like the country is, quote unquote, back to normal. So now there's a conversation about, all right, so what does the progressive left do about that? Do they have a primary opponent for Joe Biden? Is there another track or tack that they could ultimately take? Some people are interested in, hey, is there a third party effort that we get behind for 2024? What is your view on those conversations? Crystal, before we get to

progressives in 2024, word has it on the street, or at least in the Twitterverse, that Sinema is the one that's going to primary President Biden. So they need to be very much worried about the moderate and corporatist Democrats. This is, you know, in talking with Marianne Williamson, and I know she's been on the show many times. And my conversations with her has been about the why. This is a suffocating moment in America's history and also the world's history, starting with the pandemic. So I urge the progressive movement to start with the why. Why do we fight so hard? Why are we the champions? And and and and progressives have been the ones continue to be the ones to hold up the president's agenda even stronger than he is holding up his agenda. The squad members are right when they said do not decouple, do not separate the the infrastructure bill from Build Back Better. Guess what? They turned out to be right. And what is so important about Build Back Better, even though it is not as robust as I and many other people would like to see it and it needs to be in this crisis moment.

But that that portion of the bill, not the infrastructure bill, that's only going to primarily enrich the people who always get enriched. And that's the corporations will build back better is about the social fabric of everyday people in this nation, the child tax credit, et cetera, et cetera. Those are the things that need to change. So, Crystal, I believe that the progressives need to continue to fight like hell as they are in the Congress and the outside activist groups need to continue to push our agenda, whether people agree with it or not, when you distill it down to its basics, it really is about lifting humanity, lifting the poor, the working poor and the barely middle class in these United States of America. And if you are against that, you are the extremists. If you are against canceling student debt to lift the burden off of 45 million people, you're the extremist. If you are against legalizing marijuana and making sure that people's records are expunged and also that from the economic standpoint that the black community that has suffered the burden of the war on drugs receive and are able to participate on the economic side, you're the extremist.

If you believe that not having voting rights, expanding and protecting the right for everybody, no matter who they want to vote for, is not fundamental in the United States of America, you're the extremist. If you don't want to see minimum wage increase, everything else is going up. Why not minimum wage? You're the damn extremist. So listen, progressives need to keep being hard charging. And as I said on CNN, let's gas up the jet, let's gas up the cars, even though gas prices are so damn high.

So many people can't necessarily afford it, but the White House can afford to gas up the jet. I have a feeling they could do it. I think they could if they want. I mean, let me ask you this, though, Nina, because you said the progressives in Congress need to continue to fight like hell. But I'm just going to be honest with you. I haven't seen them fighting like hell. I mean, there seems to have been a decision. I don't want to relitigate, force the vote for the millionth time.

But there was a sort of pivot point at the beginning of the Congress of they could take a more adversarial approach towards Democratic leadership and make clear to the American people, here's the real divide within the party, or they could try to position themselves to influence the bills that were coming out as they were making their way through Congress and have their own strategy, which is what you refer to. OK, let's try to keep these bills tied together. Ultimately, that strategy didn't work. You know, when it came down to it, there was a lot of pressure on the Progressive Caucus to effectively fold and let the infrastructure bill go through without also tying it to build back better. There were some squad members who continued to dissent, but ultimately the strategy did not work. And so their efforts to, you know, push Biden left and be a voice inside the room haven't borne a lot of fruit. So what would be your advice to

them as they head into this year of how they could be more effective with the positions of power that they have? Remember what separates them from the extremist Democrats, from the mainline Democrats. That's what they have to do. So Marianne Williamson is right. The why crosses all intersects here, intercepts. It is, why are you there? Why are you fighting? And what makes you different from mainline and corporatist Democrats? Don't lose sight of that. And don't allow

mainstream media, anybody else, to talk you out of standing up for humanity. So you're right, because people disappoint all the time. I disappoint, everybody disappoints. Just because that's the reality today does not mean that that has to be the reality tomorrow. So the progressive, just as President Biden can, I believe, overcome his approval rating by giving people something they can feel, I do believe that the progressive caucus can overcome this moment and use their power. Why should Senators Manchin and Sinema get to have all the fun?

They are holding up the agenda on the bad end. How about progressives stand strong and hold it up on the stronger end? They are the largest caucus in the United States Congress right now, and they need to act like it. So kudos to the squad for standing up extra strong. And there should have been some other members of that progressive caucus to do the same. And this is not I'm not indicting them here today. What I am saying is remember what makes you different and hold strong to that. And if you know you are fighting for what is just, for what is right and for what is good, really to hell with what other people have to say.

And yes, is there a consequence for fighting for justice? Yes, there is. But baby, it is a consequence and a risk worth taking because the American people need somebody or a group of somebody to hold fast to standing up for what they need. We need it. We certainly do. I'm not sure we're going to see it in the White House, though. Great to see you, Nina. Thank you so much for taking some time. And tell people, where do you want them to follow you? Well, thanks for having me. And I just want to thank you both for your courage. I mean, we need alternative media resources, and you all are certainly the best of the best. People can find me on Twitter at Nina Turner, the gram, Nina Turner Ohio,

and Facebook, Nina Turner. Perfect. Thank you, Nina. Appreciate it very much. Thanks, Nina. Great to see you. Thank you both. Thank you guys so much for watching. Thanks for bearing with our snow schedule.

If you don't know, everything shuts down here within like two inches of snow. Causes complete havoc. So we appreciate that. Of course, we appreciate your support. We have got three shows here. We will have Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday. It's going to be amazing.

If you could support us, we appreciate it. Link is there in the description. And we'll see you all tomorrow. Love you all. See you back here tomorrow. 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. 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 Podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Over the years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned no town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've heard from hundreds of people across the country with an unsolved murder in their community. I was calling about the murder of my husband.

The murderer is still out there. Each week, I investigate a new case. If there is a case we should hear about, call 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.