Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 1/30/25: DCA Plane Crash, RFK Confirmation, Trump UFO Coverup, Medicaid Chaos & MORE!

Episode Date: January 30, 2025

Krystal and Saagar discuss the tragic DCA plane crash, RFK Jr wild confirmation hearing, warhawks freak on Tulsi Snowden support, Trump backs down after Medicaid chaos, Jeremy Corbell calls out Trump UFO coverup, Jewish author unloads on ADL Elon salute whitewashing.   Peter Beinart Book: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/775348/being-jewish-after-the-destruction-of-gaza-by-peter-beinart/ Jeremy Corbell: https://x.com/JeremyCorbell?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor   To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com   Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See 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. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator,

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

Let me hear it. Listen to voiceover on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. A lot of times, big economic forces show up in our lives in small ways. Four days a week, I would buy two cups of banana pudding, but the price has gone up, so now I only buy one. Small but important ways. From tech billionaires to the bond market to, yeah, banana pudding. If it's happening in business, our new podcast is on it. I'm Max Chastain.

And I'm Stacey Vanek-Smith. So listen to Everybody's Business on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey guys, Sagar and Crystal here. Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election, and we are so excited about what that means for the future of this show. This is the only place where you can find honest perspectives from the left and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else. So if that is something that's important to you, please go to BreakingPoints.com, become a member today, and you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad-free, and all put together for you every morning in your inbox. We need your help to build the future of independent news media, and we hope to see you at BreakingPoints.com. Morning, everybody. We have a great show for everybody today, but we have a horrible tragedy

here in the D.C. area, which we're going to go ahead and start with. So go ahead, Crystal. Yeah, so we're going to have breaking news about that mid-flight collision between a regional jet and a military helicopter. Tell you everything we know. This morning, we're also going to take a look at some of the political news coming out of D.C. We had the RFK confirmation yesterday. Tulsi's hearing is going to be today. We're going to give you the latest on whatever's going on with that spending freeze. Another judge weighed in there. We're going to try to get in a block with the breaking news. The show is a little bit scrambled. We're going to try to get in a block about Elon's attempts to cull the federal workforce. Jeremy Corbell is going to join. We got an answer from the White House, sort of, on the New Jersey drone situation. Not very satisfying, so Jeremy will do a great job

breaking that down. And Peter Beinart is going to join me to talk about his new book, Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza. But let's go ahead and break into that horrific news we got last night. A regional jet, American Airlines regional jet, that was traveling from Wichita, Kansas, collided last night with a military Black Hawk helicopter that was doing a training flight from Fort Belvoir. Airlines Jet 3 were on board the military helicopter. As far as we know, search and rescue efforts this morning are ongoing in the icy Potomac River. At this point, it's hard to imagine that there would be survivors, but we continue to pray for some kind of a miracle. Thus far, as of 8.01 a.m., the latest that we have is that 27 bodies have been recovered of those who were known to be on board. And this is the first major airline accident that we've is that 27 bodies have been recovered of those who were known to be on board. And this is the first major airline accident that we've had in this country since 2009. I'm going to show you a video that was taken from a nearby webcam that shows the midair collision and the explosion. I

mean, it is horrifying to watch. So just a warning before I go ahead and put this up on the screen. But let's go ahead and play this so people can see what we're talking about. This is the approach, and then you see this explosion midair. If you look more closely here, you can actually see the jet and then the helicopter coming right towards it. And you see the moment of impact and this unbelievable flash in the sky. People who were nearby at DCA, this is literally miles away from where we sit right now, said that they were able to see the explosion. They heard a loud boom. Of course, the airport is completely shuttered at this point in time.

And there are going to be a lot of questions about how the hell this happened. But let's take a listen to this is actually an Australian news broadcast, but they did a good job of breaking down what we know as of, you know, relatively recently about what occurred. Let's take a listen to that. This plane was immediately diverted away from the airport. The passengers watching the horrifying news unfolding beneath them on their in-flight screens. The Potomac splits two states, Maryland and Virginia, and Washington, D.C. The White House is just kilometers from the crash site, as well as the Capitol building and some of America's most important national monuments.

The Pentagon is just across the river. It's our deep sorrow about these events. This is a difficult day for all of us at American Airlines, and the American Airlines care team has been activated to assist our passengers and their families. So that's a little bit of information that was coming out yesterday evening. We have a photo that we can show you here of some of the wreckage

that is being pulled from the Potomac. You can see the airport there in the background. Anyone who's traveled to D.C. or lives in this area, very familiar with this airport, very familiar with the approach. The airspace around here is tremendously busy. That's something we'll return to, maybe one of the factors that contributed to this. But at this point, you know, we're just learning the very basics. And then let's put the CNN tear sheet up on the screen as well that gives what we know about what was going on at the time of this crash. So the headline here, FAA issues ground stop at Reagan National Airport after passenger plane

collides midair with helicopter. And they say in this article, the passenger plane was American Airlines Flight 5342 operated by PSA Airlines. It was traveling from Wichita, Kansas. I saw some information this morning also that indicated there were a number of kids who were returning from a figure skating camp who had been selected to get to go to this camp, and they were on their way back. The kids and the coaches, some of them were the individuals who were on board. That plane was due to land at the airport outside of D.C. per CNN Wednesday evening, collided midair with that U.S. Army helicopter as it approached the runway. Flight records showed the plane was expected to land around 9 p.m. local time. D.C. police said it received calls at 8.53 p.m. about an aircraft

crash above the Potomac River, so it was just about to land. The U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter was on a training flight at the time of the incident. The 12th Aviation Battalion based out of Fort Belvoir in Virginia provides helicopter transportation and technical rescue support to the National Capital Region. Remains unclear where the Black Hawk took off from before the collision. So that is, by and large, what we know, Sagar, at this point. Yeah, it's just really horrifying, honestly, to think about. I drove past the crash site this morning. The airport remains sealed. It's a very eerie morning here in Washington. There's no planes up in the sky. As we said, this is one of the busiest airports in the entire country,

one of the busiest runways, one of the most congested pieces of airspace. And it's very heavily controlled because it is so sensitive, close to the White House, the National Monuments. Pentagon's right there. Pentagon, that's right. You literally can see much of it on my entire drive in, and it's horrifying to learn from the emergency rescue people. They say that no survivors are expected. We're obviously praying for a miracle, knowing some of what's happened. But yeah, for those who aren't aware, coming into this airport, it happens right off of a river. It's very similar if you've ever flown into San Francisco airport, a similar type

of approach that comes where you come straight off the water right onto the runway. This is a smaller aircraft, a regional jet that was coming in. This was coming into one of the smaller ones here in Washington. And that appears to be right where the collision. But the big question mark is how this is all possible. I mean, for me, it's genuinely unfathomable that helicopters are crisscrossing this runway. I'm told by the transportation secretary who just did a press conference this morning. He says a routine flight path, of course, of which I had no idea. We can only speculate a little bit at this time.

Some of the aviation experts that I've checked in on basically say that it was a perfect storm of horrible things that happened where air traffic control called out to the helicopter, told them to watch out for a RJ, which is shorthand for a smaller aircraft. Regional jet. Regional jet. There was actually a regional jet that was taking off at the same time. So the speculation is, is the helicopter pilots are looking over to the right at a taking off aircraft. Air traffic control tells them, hey, you right at a taking off aircraft. Air traffic control tells them, hey, you need to get behind that aircraft. They think that they have plenty of clearance for that takeoff. When meanwhile, what air traffic control really meant was this

incoming regional jet that was landing, making its final approach. Helicopter pilots' eyes are to the right where the jet is coming in on the left. The other problem is when you're coming down is that the collision lights apparently on the helicopter would have looked just like the landing lights. There's a lot of other lights happening here. You know, as you come down, you're literally landing in the midst of a major city and there's lights everywhere. So it would have been difficult for the pilot to distinguish. And also, I mean, if you're literally coming out on top of something and your eyes are trained directly on your landing strip or the runway, then you're not necessarily looking for peripheral vision,

and that's how that happened. Because the most shocking part about the video is that it looks almost like the helicopter is making a beeline straight for it. Now, keep in mind, we don't have, you know, look, all indications right now is it was an accident, but, you know, there's all, there's full investigation that remains to be had.

So we have three U.S. Army service members who are on board the helicopter. You have some 60-odd passengers. Apparently this is the if all are confirmed dead, which is very likely according to EMS and Rescue, or the recovery operation currently going down. This is going to be the deadliest crash in the United States in 24 years, even more so than that 2009 crash over New York State. And while that is the case, we know because we've been covering here closely, there have been so many near misses in the past couple of years and so many people raising red

flags about, do we have enough air traffic controllers? Some of this has to do with also, this is unrelated obviously to this crash, but that raised a lot of questions about the manufacturer Boeing. This has been something that has been an ongoing concern because we had narrowly avoided horrible tragedies just in the past couple of years, several times. And now everybody's worst fears here coming true. This was Sean Duffy, the new transportation secretary's first day, literally. Literally his first day. On the job. So now he's having to go out and give a press conference about this terrible tragedy. There are going to be a lot of questions about how the hell this could happen.

Let me go ahead and put M3 up on the screen. This is just the official announcement confirming the crash here from the FAA. They say a PSA Airlines Bombardier CRJ, sorry if I could read, 700 regional jet collided midair with the Sikorsky H-60 helicopter, commonly known as a Blackhawk, while on approach to runway 33 at Reagan Washington National Airport around 9 p.m. local time. PSA was operating that flight as American Airlines departed from Wichita, Kansas. FAA and NTSB will investigate. The NTSB will lead the investigation. Sager was alluding to the flight path of this regional jet. We have an animation we can show you of this specific flight path as it was being tracked here. You

can see it there over Maryland, and then it comes across the Potomac River and is just about to land there at the airport when it crashes. And the Potomac River there separates Maryland, Virginia. You go a little bit further down and you're right there in D.C. And so that is, you know, typical flight path. I did read that this was a particularly busy time at the airport. There were a lot of planes coming in, going out, etc. That could have contributed, as Sagar was alluding, because you could have had confusion about which regional jet the helicopter was being warned about. Apparently, air traffic control was in communication, both with the regional jet attempting to land and with this military training helicopter.

As a layman, I don't know anything, but it does seem crazy. These helicopters were there at the time, especially as the airport is so incredibly busy. And I'm sure that will be a topic of discussion as well. I mean, I've been landing at this airport literally since I was 18 years old. It's almost 15 years. I've never seen a helicopter out the window. Maybe I'm not paying attention. I don't know. But we do have a statement here from President Trump. Let's put that, please, on the screen. Quote, I have been fully briefed on the terrible accident which just took place at Reagan National Airport. May God bless their souls. Thank you for the incredible work being done by our first responders.

I am monitoring the situation. I will provide more details as they arise. And so that's really all we know now at this point. Now, the big question marks are about some of the things that we are going to look at for transportation safety. And in the background of all of this, we'll recall all of those near misses that were happening over the last four years. Bizarrely, we seem to have weird connections to some of these. I mean, we were on the ground in Austin, I think the very hour that there was one of the nearest misses ever in U.S. history happened right there on the runway where they had to abort a landing very, very quickly and avoid a collision there.

But this raises big questions about specifically really about the air traffic control, which have all the near misses have highlighted staffing problems, software issues. There's been accusations by the airlines, by the unions, et cetera. Nobody really knows anything. They're going to be a spotlight now on aviation safety. And that's the question mark now, because this is, you know, look, you know, it's not necessarily the Trump administration or whatever's fault, but they're going to have to deal with it now that this happens. And that's the big question mark is what are they going to do? Because what I would like to say is somebody needs to burn for this. Like this isn't just some, we're throwing it to the pilot. If there is imprecise language that is not drilled into the heads of air traffic control, or if some guy is

tired because he's been on for a double shift or something like that, we need to know every single thing about this because now it looks like some 60-odd people are dead as a result of this accident. You know, we need to talk about this helicopter situation. It's true. There are Blackhawks that are circling Washington literally all the time. For what reason? Why? You were supposed to be training. We're supposed to be doing training flights, which just apparently was right there across the airport. You know, go two miles down the other way. Look, again, easy. I'm a layman. I can only say this, but I'm literally a customer of the airport. I've been landing there millions of times, lots of other people in this area.

And most importantly, the families of these people, they will need both answers and every passenger. That's what Secretary Duffy said that we all learned. We don't have question marks when we fly in the United States. It's a point of pride for our FAA, for our country. To see something like this, which is almost certainly some sort of horrible accident tragedy, there has to be major reforms. Yeah, there's no doubt about it. And look, Trump's been in office a week. I think it will be different.

A lot of people are sharing, you know, some of the moves that he's made. We can put the next piece up on the screen here for the Huffington Post that, you know, he came in. He gutted a key aviation safety committee, fired the head of the TSA, Coast Guard. Obviously, we're going to try to get to a block later in the show about this. People are calling it a buyout. It's not really a buyout, but they say that people can continue working from home until the fall if they promise to resign at that point. But, you know, an effort to cull the federal government. Again, Trump's been in office for a week.

However, I do think that this will cast those attempts to strip the federal government down to bare bones in a different light, because it is a reminder that having sufficient personnel of high quality can be a matter of life and death. The air traffic controllers, we'll see whether they are to blame or not. That continues to be an open question. But the functions of the federal government really, really matter. One thing that may be quite relevant here is some of the Lever News outlet, David Cerro's outlet that we always appreciate there. Reporting is out with this report. We can put this up on the screen. So months ago, before this collision, lawmakers brushed off warnings and boosted flights. So despite the fact that there had been mid-flight near Mrs. Dyer, please, airline bankrolled lawmakers recently expanded flight traffic at Washington's busy airport.

Apparently, they just added an additional number of flights to this airport. And both senators from Virginia and Maryland, so four senators total, voted against this as a protest saying this airport is already too busy. It's already dangerous. There are already too many flights going in and out. You can't add five more flights to this airport. Everybody else voted for this bill. And, you know, was this a contributing factor to this airport. Everybody else voted for this bill. And, you know, was this a contributing factor to this crash? Nobody knows at this point, but it is certainly potentially the case that the

busyness, just the sheer number of flights in and out of this airspace helped to create the dynamic that led to this horrific tragedy. That's going to be one of the—actually, it was very supportive of those opening slots. But for people who want to know why they did that, it's because lawmakers don't want to drive. If you're not from D.C., it won't make a lot of sense. But there's two airports here. There's Washington, D.C.A., which is like a 10-minute drive from the city. And then there's Washington, Dulles, which is like an hour drive, maybe more, with traffic. And the people who represent the state of California and a few others who want direct flights that they can get to from Congress open up these new slots because

they want to be able to go home quicker, just so everybody understands what their motivation was for voting for that. You're absolutely right. And actually, one of the reasons, so I was supportive of that, but one of the problems was they didn't increase the number of air traffic control. And so the safety mechanisms that were at the airport. Now, I actually was not fully aware that that provision had not been added or had been extended more fully. Now, obviously, we are. So, like I said, somebody – when 60-some-odd people are killed, clearly as a result of systemic – and even if it is pilot error, there are systemic things that have contributed to that. You need to have a full root-to-branch examination of all the problems

that happen. It does appear that there have been people who have been warning about this now for years about both congestion, about DCA specifically, from the new slots being added at the airport and all of that. And so we should listen to them. We should need to have actual hearings. This is one of the least things that we should – it's one of those things where we really need to – for the families of those people who have so tragically lost their lives,

like actually do them service and also for our own country. This is our nation's capital. Right. Well, and to avoid this happening again because as of just a few months ago, air traffic control, they're short, roughly 3,000 air traffic controllers nationwide. So there's been an ongoing shortage. So I certainly hope that no air traffic controllers are planning to take the buyout because this is an area where we need more and highly qualified and capable. Well, I think that's for work from home. It's only for work from home employees

doesn't apply to everybody. Well, they received the same email offering them the same thing. I think it went to every federal employee. In terms of eligibility, look, I have no idea. I actually haven't looked specifically to air traffic control. I know there were certain areas that were exempt in terms of which specific departments, because when they say it's all federal employees, really only half of the people who even qualify, they blasted it to everybody. We'll talk about it more in the bio. But yes, listen, yeah, please stay. And beyond that, let's think about it. And you're right, you know, look, some of the federal government is extremely superfluous and stupid, and some of it is extremely critical. Absolutely, life or death critical, and this is certainly one of those instances. So,

we'll keep an eye on anything new that comes out because this obviously has immense consequences for safety of air travel, which a lot of Americans already rightfully had a lot of concerns about, given all the near misses. Of course, yeah. Near misses, Boeing, you know, and all these questions. I mean, don't forget about all of the investigations that happened after those horrible Boeing crashes as a result of software. And then nobody goes to jail for it, you know? This is what I'm talking about, where we have, you know, if you improperly are driving your car and it's your fault, like you're going to face consequences for that.

But when hundreds of people get killed as a result of this, people, oh, it's, you know, they have to pay a fine or whatever. Well, I don't think that's satisfactory. And so I'm really hoping that somebody gets punished for this, whoever is responsible. Not a scalp or something like that, but somebody, an actual investigation from NTSB on downwards. I also think we really need to share it with on downwards. And then that we have real change. You know, if it's a human error, but also, like you said, it is likely to be emblematic of a broader systematic issue. Human errors don't occur within a vacuum.

They occur within this system. Aviation is one of those which we're most tightly controlled, focused on, specifically, like you said, because of the stakes. Well, and there's supposed to be multiple layers of fail-safes. It's supposed to be the case that you would have to have a whole series of things go wrong, mistakes and errors and things go wrong to result in this sort of a horrific crash because the stakes are so incredibly high. Really, really just so tragic for the families of all these

people. We're going to learn more. I'll keep everybody updated as to all of it. But yeah, just awful for the city, for Wichita, where these people were all coming from. Apparently, there were two world-class figure skaters, champions, who were on the plane from Russia. All of them, you know, just really, really tragically lost. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy,

transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and re-examining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. 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. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation.

To most people, I'm the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. Voiceover is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my

mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to Voice Over on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of something much bigger than themselves. This medal is for the men who went down that day. It's for the families of those who didn't make it.

I'm J.R. Martinez. I'm a U.S. Army veteran myself, and I'm honored to tell you the stories of these heroes on the new season of Medal of Honor, Stories of Courage from Pushkin Industries and iHeart Podcast. From Robert Blake, the first black sailor to be awarded the medal, to Daniel Daly, one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice. These are stories about people who have distinguished themselves by acts of valor, going above and beyond the call of duty.

You'll hear about what they did, what it meant, and what their stories tell us about the nature of courage and sacrifice. Listen to Medal of Honor on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Let's go to RFK Jr. So RFK Jr. testified yesterday. He will testify again before the United States Senate. Two different committees that he appears over because HHS is actually split into two,

the Health and Human Services Department, for oversight before the Senate. So this is his first. You did see the opening of what we're likely to see more of today. Lots of Democratic attacks here on RFK Jr. using some of his past statements against him. First, we're going to go ahead and take a listen to his opening statement where he thanked President Trump and basically laid out the Make America Healthy Again movement. And we'll get into some of the Q&A. Let's take a listen. Today, Americans' overall health is in grievous condition. Over 70 percent of adults and a third of children are overweight or obese. Diabetes is 10 times more prevalent than it was during the 1960s. Cancer among young people is rising by one or two percent

a year. Autoimmune diseases, neurodevelopmental disorders, Alzheimer's, asthma, ADHD, depression, addiction, and a host of other physical and mental health conditions are all on the rise, some of them exponentially. There is no single culprit in chronic disease, much as I have criticized certain industries and agencies. President Trump and I understand that most of their scientists and experts genuinely care about American health. Therefore, we will bring together all stakeholders in pursuit of this unifying goal. I want to make

sure the committee is clear about a few things. News reports have claimed that I'm anti-vaccine or anti-industry. I am neither. I am pro-sine uh uh protesters behind rfk jr uh by the way don't worry he was not singled out it's a washington tradition to be screamed down by protesters in your confirmation hearing for everybody let's get then to uh what he there, vaccine statements. That is where the bulk of a lot of the criticism against RFK Jr. was concentrated by from a lot of the Democrats. Let's take a listen to some of that questioning. So I'm running out of time. I think the gist of what you're trying to say today is you're really pro-vaccine. you want to ask questions, you have started a group called the Children's Health Defense. You're the originator. Right now, as I understand it, on their website,

they are selling what's called onesies. These are little things, clothing for babies. One of them is titled, Unfaxed Unafraid. Next one, and it's sold for 26 bucks a piece, by the way. Next one is no vax, no problem. Now you're coming before this committee and you say you're pro-vaccine. Just want to ask some questions. And yet your organization is making money selling a child's product to parents for 26 bucks,

which casts fundamental doubt on the usefulness of vaccines. Can you tell us now that you will, now that you are pro-vaccine, that you're going to have your organization take these products off the market? Senator, I have no power over that organization. I'm not part of it. I resigned from the board. That was just a few months ago. You founded that. You certainly have power. You power over that organization. I'm not part of it. I resigned from the board. That was just a few months ago. You founded that.

You certainly have power. You can make that call. Are you supportive of this? I've had nothing to do with leadership. Are you supportive of these onesies? I'm supportive of vaccines. Are you supportive of this clothing, which is militantly anti-vaccine? I am supportive of vaccines.

I want good science science and I want to protect the vaccine. But you will not tell the organization you founded not to continue selling that. Are you lying to Congress today when you say you are pro-vaccine or did you lie on all those podcasts? We have all of this on tape, by the way. Yeah, Senator, as you know, because it's been repeatedly debunked, that statement that I made on the Lex Friedman podcast was a fragment of the statement. He asked me and anybody who actually goes and looks at that podcast and will see this. He asked me, are there vaccines that are safe and effective? And I said to him, some of the live virus vaccines are. And I said, there are no vaccines that are safe and effective.

And I was going to continue for every person. Every medicine has people who are sensitive to them. Are you supportive of the onesie being the iconic line from the hearing? But basically that I watched the entire thing. That was basically a taste of all of the Democratic questioning. Do you want to weigh in before we play the Lex Friedman clip? Because that's the one that Ron Wyden referenced in his opening statement and then was brought up several more times by Senator Cantwell, Senator Bennett, and a few others. I mean, listen, I would never support RFK Jr. for this position because he has been consistently, over the course of the past two decades, I would say, anti-vax. And so I would never support him for this position. But I would respect it more if he would actually rep the position that he has held consistently for the past two decades.

And we'll show you the Lex Friedman thing. The thing he says about it is total and complete nonsense, Not to mention, even if you take that out of it, like he founded the Children's Health Defense in 2011. He led that organization. It has been consistently anti-vax. Now what he'll say is, oh, I'm not against vaccines. I just think that none of the existing vaccines are actually safe. He has his own children vaccinated, but he also has said he would do anything to go back and have them not be vaccinated. So listen, there's a lot of people out there now who are anti-vax, okay? You've succeeded. Your movement has grown. I think that that movement is devastating to public health. I think it's contra to science.

And I think that vaccine development has been one of the greatest inventions of modern medicine in terms of reducing, extending life and reducing deaths, et cetera, et cetera. But you have succeeded in winning a lot of people over this cause. So rep that cause. Like, why are you running away from it now? Because he can't get confirmed. Well, and that's the thing that's so pathetic is like, okay, then, I mean, you, like, one of the most preposterous moments here is you guys all know how critical RFK Jr. was about the COVID vaccine. Many of you out there are probably, like, on board with his criticisms and believe what he says. In this confirmation hearing,

he's like, Operation Warp Speed was amazing. It was great. The vaccine development was spectacular. It's like, why should anyone believe a goddamn word that you have to say about anything when this has been the core of your views and your life's work for the past several decades? And you will just throw it in the garbage so that you can get closer to power. It's just like Tulsi Gabbard. It's the only way that you're going to get confirmed. So, look, it's politics. I'm not saying I forgive it. No, necessarily.

I do think you probably should have just, man, this is part of the problem though, with these confirmation hearings, you know, it's like cable news, you know, you only have five minutes of question and answer. You can't really get into it. In terms of what he said for past criticism of MMR and the polio vaccine, his defense and the defense of Maha and all those other people is basically like, no vaccine can be 100% safe and effective. All vaccines, all medicine has side effects. Look, in general, I don't think that you're wrong, that there are a lot of people now

whose eyes have really been opened to the medical system. And to be honest, I find myself in that category. I mean, I thought RFK Jr. was some evil person. And then, you know, you learn a little bit more. I thought COVID vaccine really opens your eyes. So there's a lot of questions here about vaccination schedules and the way that we do things and even the legislation that has been passed. I think these are legitimate questions. But that's not his position. No, but OK, in practice, that is the position of how it will look like as a member of the United States government. And this, well, I mean, but that's not really true.

I mean, he has a lot of power if he is confirmed in this position, which there's still a question mark about. I don't think that any, I mean, I thought the Democratic questioning here was much more effective with RFK than it was with Pete Hegseth, for example, for one key reason, which is they actually focused on his relevant policy, like statements relevant to policy for this position. So I do think that they landed some effective blows here, not to mention just how like ridiculous you look to completely change your position on a dime with no real explanation. So if he was just like, oh, you know, maybe we should look at the schedule and other European countries do it differently, blah, blah, blah. That is not what he's been out there doing. I mean, it's true. You know, there was questioning about him and his organization's involvement in these deaths

in Samoa, of which, you know, the people who were involved there say that the impact of his lies and his organization's lies helped to contribute, not 100%, but helped to contribute to the death of dozens of kids from not getting vaccinated after there was a horrific human error type accident with regard to the MMR vaccine. They seized on it and lied and said that the whole vaccine was unsafe. People were terrified. They stopped getting their kids vaccinated. There was a virulent outbreak of measles and dozens of kids died. So I, listen, there are things that RFK Jr. says that I actually agree with, especially when it comes to food and pesticides and ultra-processed foods in

particular. If he was up for Ag Secretary, I might actually consider putting him in that position because I think that his views are more grounded in science, and I think he could actually effectuate some of the things he cares about with regard to nutrition, healthier lifestyle, etc., be in a better position to do that. As HHS secretary, I think that he could be incredibly, actually deadly for this nation, especially as we're heading into the possibility, we have an ongoing threat of an avian flu pandemic. There is a vaccine, by the way, that exists for avian flu. And guess what? RFK Jr. has gone out and said that he doesn't think it's safe.

So in any case— Well, maybe he's right. What do we know about bird flu vaccines? What, are we going to trust Dr. Fauci and the rest of these people? Sager. This is part of what I'm getting at here with the HHS. How can it be worse than right now? You're saying it's deadly.

We're already living in a deadly country. It could be worse. It could be worse by reducing vaccination rates and having polio and measles outbreaks and people dying. Most of these children are going to die of diabetes, cancer, like chronic disease. So then he should support health care for all, Medicare for all. I understand that that's your position, but that's not what the American people voted for under Donald Trump. This is clearly like adjudicated. What can he even do about nutrition at HHS? That falls under the ag secretary would be in a much better position to deal with that sort of stuff. HHS actually controls dietary guidelines, as he talks about with SNAP.

He will have immense regulatory authority. I mean, this is part of what I'm talking about with this vaccine thing. Look, I completely understand. And I used to be really in this camp. I just don't see how it could be bad to publish the studies and the safety data and then leave parents with some choice. Like, look, that's not even what I'm saying, though. But that's in practice. He said, I will not touch the polio vaccine. I will not touch the MMR vaccine. He is clearly willing to lie about everything all the time when it serves his interests. I think that yes, he's a politician. I'm not forgiving it. I think we should assume that what his life's work has been, which is to tell people that all vaccines are unsafe and to try to get them to not vaccinate their kids as emblematic of the onesies, right?

The fact that even he wants this like baby propaganda about them not getting any vaccines. I think you should assume that that is the ideology that he takes into this position. And like I said, I'd have a lot more respect if he would actually rep what he has said and what he believes. And the fact that he will just run 180 degrees, turn on a dime, do whatever he can to get into power is, to me, utterly disgraceful and unforgivable. And when you're in that position, he could effectively, so one thing he could do is eliminate certain vaccines from being covered by Medicaid. By the

way, he doesn't seem to appear to know the difference between Medicaid and Medicare, was very confused about that during the hearings. But he could eliminate a number of vaccines getting covered by Medicaid. That in and of itself would make it impossible for many poor parents to get their kids properly vaccinated. He could also change the current structure and make it basically so that it is unprofitable and impossible for vaccine makers to continue to distribute and sell vaccines. He would have tremendous power in this position. And so if you're anti-vax and you just think that you should let it fly and you're cool with measles and polio and whatever coming back,

then this is your guy. But this is one of the primary things he'll have responsibility for. And I think he already, already has done tremendous damage and has blood on his hands, literally in the case of Samoa, for the type of lies,

unscientific lies, not legitimate questions of which that's fine, but unscientific lies, not legitimate questions of which that's fine, but unscientific lies that he has spent decades at this point promoting. I think, look, I understand that. The Samoa thing is complicated, as we know. It's not complicated. No, I mean, look, I've cited the Vinay Prasad thing.

I read it. It's pretty convincing. Not that it was necessarily 100% false. There's a lot of the questions about MMR. But, look, I guess where it comes down to is that the Vax position is at blood on his hands, et cetera. It's like, well, how come there's no smoke? If there was a traditional pharma lobbyist here, wouldn't they have 10 times more blood on their hands and more responsibility for all of the chaos that has been wrought in our healthcare system? Look, I understand your

position. Universal healthcare and all that did not win within the Republican context. Honestly, this is as good as it gets as opposed to what? Who was our previous HHS secretary? That moron who's taken private flights? What was his name? Tom Price using US taxpayer dollars to pay for a private jet? You got somebody here who at least can publish some safety data. What did he say? He said people should be able to buy whatever they want as long as they have the knowledge in front of them. Look, you got to go to war with the, you know, with the fighters that you have. This is on balance. I think it's much better than any, any traditional HHS secretary who could have taken that position. And, you know, look, the vaccine question here about Medicaid, et cetera. Right now, U.S. government policy and state policy forces you

to comply with the schedule or face immense consequences socially, public school and all of that. Do you think that that's fair in all of these era of the post-COVID landscape? I don't believe a f***ing word that these people say. I'm serious. I really don't. After what I read- So you don't think the polio vaccine is a good thing? You don't think the MMR vaccine is a good thing? I think the polio and the- Okay, but there's 63 vaccinations that children get before what they age four. So tell me which one you would get rid of. I'll tell you right now, there's no, the HPV or what is the hepatitis B vaccine that's given to a child literally the moment it's birthed for literally for societal

reasons, which only applies to drug addicts. No way, not happening. Like, and you know, the societal consequences you face for this and the medical system and the way that they push this stuff, stuff is unbelievable. You brought up vaccine profit. It's like, I mean, you know, how many times we talked here on the show about drug profit and the ability for— The answer to that is not—listen, here's my core problem. His diagnosis of the system and what's wrong with it I think is completely wrong. The problem is not that the vaccines don't work.

The vaccines do work. We have decades of information showing that the vaccines work and have saved huge numbers of lives. That's not the problem. The problem is a lack of access to health care. The problem is a lack of ability to pay for health care. The problem is a profit motive at the center of health care. What he wants to do has nothing to do with any of that. It's just a reaction, an immediately knee-jerk reaction against any actual, like, scientific medicine and advancements in favor of some, like, natural hippie, dippy, woo-woo bullshit. But why is it so bad? Which is way less because— But why?

Why is it bad? Because I like kids to not get sick and die. That's why it's bad. Yeah, but this is a straw man argument. It's not a straw man argument. For example, the vaccine is added to the schedule literally last year. What do we know about the straw man argument? OK, well, we have 63 people who are dead from in Samoa, again, with an open question mark, whether it's 100 percent RFK Jr.'s fault or not. There are, what, tens of millions who have died now of chronic illness and of disease here in the United States.

Like, where's the smoke and question mark around this? But what is he going to do with regard— Again, if he was up for ag secretary, I think there's a lot more he could do about lifestyle, diet, pesticides. But HHS guidelines control that. The SNAP program, as he talked about 10, I had no idea, by the way, that 10% of SNAP dollars are spent on sugary drinks and 60% of SNAP dollars are spent on processed food. Now, again, I don't even disagree. And my least

libertarian opinion is he was like, oh, we shouldn't be telling people what to eat. I'm like, actually, we probably should, especially if they're on government assistance. Secondary, I think, question mark, not going to happen in the Republican Party. But I mean, on balance, the current system is a disaster. We talk about drug addiction, obesity, cancer. I mean, when you listen to not even him, go listen to the more credible people, Dr. Casey Means, right? She's got a rant that's like three and a half minutes long of all of the chronic disease markers that have gone up. His proposal for NIH is to end infectious disease coverage. Great, by the way, as we'll talk a little bit about with Lyme disease and to focus on chronic illness like cancer and obesity. I think, you know, one of the big drug company

dreams right now is to have Medicare and Medicaid cover Ozempic for all, including children. Maybe, but, you know, there should probably be some rigorous studies and long-term views as to whether this is important or even useful for children and what the long-term impacts are of that. In this country, we go drug first and not lifestyle. I think the HHS secretary does have a lot of impact. It is the largest organization in the entire U.S. federal government, even when you accept Medicare and Medicaid payments that are gone out of that. I mean, what we look at the terms of the coverage, like you're talking about with vaccines, I had no idea even from the hearing that 40% of births in this country are covered by Medicaid, which is insane, which means that the government has total authority over payment and control over people's lives. I think that's wrong. To me, it's terrifying.

I mean, the man is a liar and a quack who spouts all kinds of, he's an HIV truther. He doesn't even believe that AIDS is caused by HIV. He makes stuff up all the time. What's more dangerous, quackery or institutionalized death and pharma, which is our current healthcare system? He wants to institutionalize a different sort of death. I mean, this is the thing. Listen, maybe there are things he would do that I would support. Although, I don't know.

The Snapchat, that's a longer debate. But I hold out the possibility that there are theoretically things he could do that I would support in this position. To me, it does not outweigh the risk of confirming him and the immense damage that he could do to families and children and their health simply through his consistent anti-vaccine views. I do want to get to the Lex Reidman clip because one of the things he'll say, oh, you heard him in that clip that we played a long time ago at this point, where he was like, oh, no, I totally didn't say that. It's taken out of context. I was gonna add like, no vaccine is safe

for everyone all the time. If you listen to the clip, so we'll play the extended thing, you can hear the whole context. That's not what he was saying. He was saying there is no, he theoretically may support some vaccine that theoretically exists, but he does not support any of the vaccines that

currently exist. Let's take a listen to what he had to say to Lex. You've talked about that the media slanders you by calling you an anti-vaxxer. And you've said that you're not anti-vaccine, you're pro-safe vaccine. Difficult question. Can you name any vaccines that you think are good i think some of the live virus vaccines are probably uh so averting more problems than they're causing there's no vaccine that is you know safe and effective the in fact big words what about the polio can Can we talk about the polio? Here's the problem. Here's the problem. The polio vaccine contained a virus called semivirus 40, SV40. It's one of the most carcinogenic materials that is known to man.

In fact, it's used now by scientists around the world to induce tumors in rats and guinea pigs in labs. But it was in that vaccine, 98 million people who got that vaccine in my generation got it. And now you've had this explosion of soft tissue cancers in our generation that kill many, many, many, many, many more people than polio ever did. So if you say to me, did the polio vaccine was effective against polio? I'm going to say yes So if you say to me, did the polio vaccine was effective against polio? I'm going to say yes. If you say to me, did it kill more people, did it cause more deaths than ever? I would say, I don't know, because we don't have the data on that. But let's talk, well, you know, we kind of have to narrow in on, is it effective against the thing it's supposed to fight? Oh, well, a lot of them are. Let me give you an example.

The most popular vaccine in the world is the DTP vaccine, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. It was introduced in this country around 1980. That vaccine caused so many injuries that Wyeth, which was the manufacturer, said to the Reagan administration, we are now paying $20 in downstream liabilities for every dollar that we're making in profits, and we are getting out of the business unless you give us permanent immunity from liability. So the vaccine companies then were given, and by the way, Reagan said at that time, why don't you just make the vaccine safe?

And why is that? Because vaccines are inherently unsafe. They said unavoidably unsafe. You cannot make them safe. You can hear the entire context there. Him saying, you know, no vaccine is safe and effective. And then going on to explain why he has an opposition to polio vaccine, why he has these other problems with vaccines. And like I said before, listen, if that's your view, there are has these other problems with vaccines. And like I said before, listen, if that's your view, there are some people that agree with you at this point, rep that view, rep that view. But the reason he doesn't is because he knows that even though there has been an uptick in vaccine skepticism, it is still dramatically unpopular to actually be

blanket anti-vax, which is why he always runs away from the label, even though, sorry, it does apply and it has applied for a long time. So he has to hide the ball about what he's articulated over decades, are so poisonous in terms of how the American people would think about it that there's no way he could get confirmed if he actually held on to the views he's expressing there with Lex Luthor. Look, I don't disagree. I think it's probably fair to say that he's been skeptical of all vaccines in the past. He doesn't think any are safe and effective. Again, I think it's a choose your fighter thing. Would you rather have somebody who's deeply skeptical of that system or somebody who's like, yeah, no, it's actually totally fine. I mean, you know, using Claude, so blame Claude if these numbers are incorrect. You know, a child born in the United States today will receive 47 to 51 and up to 60 doses of a vaccine by the age 18. Before

1990, that was, it was between 10 to 17. So with the advances in medicine, the same doses and all of that, do we really believe that the public health system, which delivered us COVID-19 and all of the death and everything, where rigorous safety studies were done and that all of the correlative long-term data on top of their exemption exists? I do not believe it for one second. And this doesn't just apply to vaccine. This is the problem. It's not vaccine. There was another senator, I forget her name. I think it was Cantwell who was railing at him for not supporting SSRIs. It's like there's a religion in this country around drugs, around, well, let's just prescribe and move on and forget about it. I think that his general

disposition against that is far more beneficial than any just wholesale, quote unquote, acceptance of whatever bullshit that these pharma companies publish in their preprints and journals. And, you know, they don't even release all of the data. I mean, this was part of the real learning process, I think, for me, for millions of other people through the COVID vaccine policy, through all of the justifications. You know, even today that they're pushing COVID-19 vaccines on pregnant women and flu shots and all this other stuff. Again, maybe, maybe it's safe. They tell us it is. But given how what has transpired over the last five years, and I think a lot of this comes back to, I mean, let's make a political point here. Donald Trump is not president without RFK Jr., in my opinion. Do you agree? I don't think there's a chance in hell that he wins. He would never win Michigan, no way, considering

how tight that the margin was there, especially if you look at the margin in Pennsylvania and others. We did focus groups of a lot of these people. If he had not explicitly endorsed them, a lot of them were not going to vote for Donald Trump. He is an integral part of the MAGA 2025 coalition, up there with the libertarians. Then he should rep what he actually believes. He should rep what he actually believes. What are we supposed to do?

He should rep what he actually believes, too. But that's not how politics works. Look, I agree. I wish it were that way. Why are the idiots in the United States Senate even get a say over the cabinet? I have no idea. So insulting for him to try to claim he's not anti-vax for him to try to, Oh, well, my kids are vaccine. Yeah. And you said you wish that you had never done that. You would do anything to go back and change that. Like for you to just brazenly lie. I mean, and there were moments up there where you'd be they'd ask him a question.

Did you say that the chemicals in the water are turning kids tranchant? Oh, no, I never I never said that. Oh, really? Well, here's five clips of you saying that. Did you compare the rollout of the covid vaccine to Nazi death camps? Even though now you're like, oh, Operation Warp Speed was amazing and Trump is, it was great. It was such a great accomplishment, blah, blah, blah. Oh, no, I didn't say that. Oh, really? Well, here's the transcript of you literally saying that. So listen, if you have those views, which are wrong and not based on anything, right? You can doubt the, you know, pharmaceutical

studies, but at least there are studies. At least we have years of data to back up the efficacy of these vaccines and the number of lives that they have saved. At least we have that versus like what you made up in your head, because it is just as foolish to knee-jerk reject all of science, which is his posture. It is just as foolish to do that as to, you know, accept lock, stock, and barrel everything that a pharmaceutical company tells you. Yeah, no, that's true. So if you really want to get at the problem here, which I would love to do, you have to take the profit motive out of health care. That's what you really need to do. Is there any impetus in that direction

with RFK Jr. whatsoever? No, no. And so, like I said, listen, for me, obviously, we're not going to come to an agreement here today. For me, the theoretical potential possible may be good that he could do in this position is vastly outweighed by the longtime track record and committed ideological belief, which has been at the core of his adult work and life, that he is against all vaccines and that he is a brazen liar who will say anything to anyone when it is convenient for him and his pursuit of power. I think RFK, look, I've accepted we're going to move on to abortion. I think he's a politician. I agree. And I think it's sad what happens to these figures whenever they actually have to get into power. So yeah, I agree. I wish he would have actually defended

a lot of his views. I think if you have to take a real politic view of this, would you rather have somebody who quote unquote accepts mainstream science, big pharma and all that again, within the universe of options for MAGA, for Donald J. Trump, you know, would we rather have the billionaire CEO of Pfizer or somebody be HHS secretary or somebody who thinks that the Pfizer people have been lying to people for decades? I'm going to go with the latter. And I think that that's a core to the reason why RFK Jr. has even become a popular MAGA-like figure was a lot of skepticism about the COVID vaccine, which opened up a lot of people's eyes. Now, on abortion, I think this is where we can say fairly for both a lot of the pro-life and the pro-choice crowd, arguably 10 times more of a

bigger flip-flop that has happened. There were a lot of questions about RFK Jr. in the HHS role. The reason why is that he'll have jurisdiction specifically over mifeprestone, which is the abortion drug of which there has been a change in Biden administration policy about prescriptions for it and of which the pro-life coalition has been pushing Donald Trump to, quote unquote, study the safety of it and to look at the drug and possibly hold it up, which of course would dramatically reduce the number of abortions in the United States. So we have a lot of the questioning, the back and forth on this issue, including some of the past statements that he's made. Let's take a listen. I agree with President Trump that every abortion is a tragedy. I agree

with him that we cannot be a moral nation if we have 1.2 million abortions a year. I agree with them that the states should control abortion. President Trump has told me that he wants to end late-term abortions. With a life-threatening bleeding from an incomplete miscarriage goes to the ER, and her doctor also determines that she needs an emergency abortion. But she's in a state where abortion is banned. You would agree also, as an attorney, that federal law protects her right to that emergency care, correct? I don't know. I mean, the answer to that is I don't know. Let me ask you this as an attorney.

Doesn't federal law preempt state law? The federal constitution does. Sometimes not every federal law preempts state laws. It could be unconstitutional. We need to understand the safety of every drug, Mifepristone and every other drug. And President Trump has made it clear to me that one of the things he is not taking a position yet on Mifepristone, a detailed position, but he's made it clear to me that he wants me to look at safety issues. And I'll ask NIH and FDA to do that. Thank you.

So in other words, keeping it as is with Roe versus Wade having been overturned and leaving it up to the states to determine if and when a woman can have an abortion? No, I wouldn't leave it to the states. Right. I would. You would say completely it's up to the woman. My belief is we should leave it to the woman. We shouldn't have government involved. Even if it's full term.

Even if it's full term. I think we can all agree him being there in the socks was disgusting. I was wearing socks. That's a big question for her. The last clip there was showing what he used to say about abortion now versus what he's saying in confirmation hearings. I mean, he said similar things on our show. Confirmation hearings. Multiple times, you know. True, yeah, true.

Look, I think it is, that is the biggest hit against him, always has been. That's why Mike Lee, not Mike Lee, Mike Pence has been campaigning very hard against RFK Jr. for being pro-life. We've been talking. Sorry, pro-choice. James Lankford, the person who was questioning him there, that was really important. He's the chair of the National Prayer Breakfast here in Washington. He is probably the most pro-life member of the Congress.

I didn't actually realize that. Yeah, he's from Oklahoma. Makes sense in terms of the big evangelical population. But there are a lot of people who fall into the Lankford category. It's still actually open question mark how some of them. Joni Ernst is another one who's very pro-life. Well, we have a list if we want.

A6, can we put A6 please? I'll just read off some of the names. These are the Republicans who are currently question marks on RFK Jr. We've got Mitch McConnell. We've got Bill Cassidy. Who's a polio survivor.

That's right. You've got Bill Cassidy, who's a doctor, who actually, he questioned him a little bit there. Senator Chuck Grassley, who also questioned RFK Jr. Senator Jeremy Ernst. You have Senator Tom Tillis, who now has come out as a lean yes.

And then, of course, you have Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who, if I had to guess, are probably going to be no's on that. I would think so, yeah. I think he'll probably lose those, and then what, he can lose one more? Or he can't lose it? Well, he can lose McConnell, Murk can't lose or that's well you can he can lose mcconnell murkowski and collins just like pete hegseth yeah that's it because if he loses those three then jd vance can cast the tie-breaking vote but there are big there's still uh i'd give him like a 65 chance of getting confirmed i'm pretty sure i look, the MAGA base right now is behind RFK 100 percent. And Trump is whipping for him. J.D. is whipping for him. The online Maha army against a lot of like for these people. You should. I mean, the enthusiasm there was crazy yesterday. RFK has got like a genuine constituency. We've been waiting. People have been waiting a long time for someone like him to actually be in power. So you would be surprised, I think, to see

one of these Republicans turn, especially one who might be up for re-election. But if anyone could get away with, I mean, that's like, do we really believe Lindsey Graham is going to vote against RFK Jr.? No. He's like a toad, you know, in terms of his sucking up to Trump. You would really need these Murkowski and Collins people, and McConnell, who's never going to run again for anything, they're unique for a reason because they're really insulated from the political cost of all. The rest of them, you really do need the GOP behind you to be able to win. So I think what I did take away is no Democrat is going to vote for him. I don't think so. No, and Satterman was a possibility, but afterwards he came out and was like, I don't know how anybody could vote for that dude after that.

And he also voted against Hegstaff. You know, he's an interesting guy. Talks a big game, goes to the Lake and Riley thing and all of that. Still votes against all of the Trump nominees. So it's like, who are you, dude? Like, what are we doing here? Yeah. Senator from whom?

Jerusalem. Okay. One other thing I wanted to mention here because you were talking about the political pressure. Nicole Shanahan, who was RFK Jr.'s running mate, who was a billionaire by dint of her marriages, she came out and said that she would use her billions to primary anyone on the Republican side who didn't vote for RFK Jr. And she specifically threatened, I don't think that this really has any particular impact, but she threatened Raphael Warnock of Georgia and said like, oh, I gave you lots of money before and that's the only reason you won, which I don't know if that's really, I mean, I know she did give money to the super PAC

that supported him previously. But in terms of the Democratic context, a Nicole Shanahan-backed primary challenge against a Democrat is not going to get very far. And in a general election, there's going to be tons of money going up against him anyway. But in the Republican context, that could be a real threat, you know. And so this has become the norm of like individual, Elon Musk did it before, threatening with regard to nominees and with regard to the spending bill, like if you don't do what we want you to do, I'm going to fund a primary challenge against you. So these billionaires are also being used to enforce discipline within the, you know, the Republican pro-Trump coalition. So that's another piece of what's going on here.

Just the last comment on the abortion piece, because I do think that it is important. Just so people know, in the wake of Roe versus Wade being overturned, actually, aren't the numbers, Sagar, that the number of abortions have actually gone up? Yes. And the reason primarily is because of Mifepristone, which is, you know, used very early in pregnancy for an abortion. And, you know, even if you live in a state that's extremely restrictive, most people have the ability to get that somehow through the mail. And so there was a court case that went all the way up to the Supreme Court, if I'm not mistaken, saying, oh, the FDA wrongly approved this and it's not really safe. And the court was like, we're not going to go and second guess the FDA. Like, that's their job is to evaluate the safety and efficacy.

There's some 40-round studies that indicate mifepristone is, in fact, safe to use in this manner. But this has been a primary goal. It was in Project 2025. It's been a primary conservative goal to get control of the FDA so that they can say, oh, no, actually, we don't think it's safe. And this would be, this would have a massive, massive impact on women's reproductive rights. Huge. Oh, it's the biggest question mark on abortion. Yeah, I don't think any, no one on either side of the debate would deny that. That's why they're so laser focused on it and why it's, you know, was so noteworthy and important that RFK Jr. in this hearing said, I will look at the safety of that and I will follow Trump's lead on that, which is a major goal of the pro-life movement.

So even though he has personally been pro-choice, he's trying to reassure Republican senators that he will also set his sights on rolling back use of Mifepur Stone, which, like I said, will have a tremendous, in my view, very negative impact if that is in fact. It will have a big impact no matter what. And that's why that was one of the big, you know, Kamala campaign points there correctly, in my opinion, you know, in terms of what the power of the federal government can be on this. Just very last thing. One, I had to get this in here. Senator Michael Bennett, whenever he was railing against RFK Jr., was like, did you really say that Lyme disease was genetically engineered in a lab as if it was some sort of conspiracy theory?

By the way, I thought everyone knew this, but can we please put my tweet up there on the screen just so people can understand this? Lyme disease is probably a lab leak. And I'm explaining it to people very clearly here. If you're watching and you can see this, Lyme disease originated in old Lyme, Connecticut in the 1970s, which just happens to be mere miles away from Plum Island, the U.S. Army bioweapons lab that was studying insect spreading bioweapons, specifically with ticks, in the 1960s. Just so everyone knows, a lot of people actually who have been suffering from Lyme disease

through research of the tragedy and really of how decimated they are find themselves across books like Lab 257 and others. But it really is sad because what's happened is that in the Cold War, we had these literal Nazi scientists and others who were brought under from Operation Paperclip to study bioweapons that we could inflict on the Soviet Union, specifically via insects, to decimate them, not kill them, but just cause chaos through this bacteria. This Lyme bacteria is exceptionally rare. One of the dunks on the lab leak theory is like, oh, they found it in Oatsy the Iceman. It's like, yes, it's traditional gain of function. You take a rare bacteria, you bring it to a lab, you try to weaponize it, you try to increase the infection, the vector,

the way that it will cause disease. And there are millions of people now in America, specifically in New England, who suffer from Lyme disease. There are multiple offshoots and others. It causes devastating consequences. I actually know somebody who's suffered Lyme disease for years. It's really never been the same since then. So, yeah, it's really unfortunate. Lyme disease is probably a lab leak.

Ebola 2014 was a lab leak, as we covered here on the show with Ryan Grimm. COVID was a lab leak. So we need to figure this stuff out. And tying it to RFK Jr., that's the one thing, at least I hope, that we cut. Let's cut all those. We need to cut that NIH gain-of-function budget to zero, and we need to do some actual transparency on all this crap that we've been funding and hopefully shut a lot of these labs down who clearly don't have safety protocols or anything.

So it's really sad because a lot of Lyme people reached out to me saying, thank you for highlighting this because we've been suffering now for so long, and there's still insurance companies fight them on Lyme disease. The doctors don't believe a lot of the people who suffer of Lyme disease. It's one of the most devastating conditions that's out there. Yeah, it's very strange symptoms. That's what I mean. And they just don't want to do anything for it. You're on your own.

Sagar did get community noted on this. No, they took it off. Oh, they took it off? I was going to say, I looked at, I mean, it's not conclusively proven, but it's a pretty big coincidence. Yeah, exactly.

It's right there. So I'll give him that one. It's just like Wuhan, Crystal. The drugs turning the kids trans, not going to give you that one. No, chemicals. HIV, oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, chemicals turning the kids trans, not going to give you that one. Chemicals. HIV, oh, I'm sorry, yeah. What, you think birth control chemicals in our water?

That's zero effect. Zero effect. The HIV not causing AIDS, not going to give him that one either. So, yeah, there was a lot there going on. Look, there's a lot of shit in our water. Nobody even knows what the hell it is. Reverse osmosis, folks. If you can afford it, you should do it.

Highly recommend. All right, let's get to Tul shit in our water. Nobody even knows what the hell it is. Reverse osmosis, folks. If you can afford it, you should do it. Highly recommend. All right, let's get to Tulsi Gabbard. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually

like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and reexamining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. 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. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be.

These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family.

I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to Voice Over on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of

something much bigger than themselves. This medal is for the men who went down that day. It's for the families of those who didn't make it. I'm J.R. Martinez. I'm a U.S. Army veteran myself, and I'm honored to tell you the stories of these heroes on the new season of Medal of Honor, Stories of Courage from Pushkin Industries and iHeart Podcast. From Robert Blake, the first Black sailor to be awarded the medal, to Daniel Daly, one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice. These are stories about people who have distinguished themselves by acts of valor, going above and beyond the call of duty. You'll hear about what they did, what it meant, and what their stories tell us about the nature of courage and sacrifice. Listen to Medal of Honor on the iHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. At the same time, speaking of confirmation, we've got a lot of news concerning Tulsi Gabbard, who is up today for her confirmation hearing, and we're getting a taste of what some of the Republican attack against her will be. Let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen. Quote, at Gabbard's confirmation hearing, Edward Snowden may loom large. So a lot of very pro-national security state Republicans have been very upset with, quote, Tulsi Gabbard's past support for Edward Snowden. While in Congress, Gabbard introduced legislation that would have offered a bipartisan whistleblower protections for people like Snowden. While in Congress, Gabbard introduced legislation that would have offered bipartisan whistleblower protections for people like Snowden accused of violating the Espionage

Act, she actually co-sponsored that legislation with Matt Gaetz that called on the charges against Snowden to be dropped. Now, since she will be the DNI, there are a lot of questions whether she is, according to them, is somebody who would compromise national security. So, for example, just a taste, Susan Collins said, Mrs. Snowden's disclosures have jeopardized all the people who are helping us. They say, one of my greatest concerns is how she views Edward Snowden in the light of the resolution that she co-authored with Matt Gaetz, calling all criminal charges against him, which were serious and involved high class information, to be dropped. So that is the taste.

But Susan Collins is just one of many people who share these views. For example, Senator Tom Cotton, who is the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, has called Snowden a traitor. You continue on down the line. You've got people like Mitch McConnell. You've got James Lankford, who said that he was, quote, spoken with Gabbard about Snowden. And he said that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has a responsibility to make sure that we don't have our secrets leaked out. So this is in addition, this Snowden thing, to the Section 702 about face that she has already made on FISA and on spying. So I think you said it, they always

attack you for the worst thing. It's like the only good reasons to put Tulsi in here and they're like forcing her to change. I mean, and listen, she has her own will. She's making her own decisions here as well. But yeah, that report for the New York Times says that she's expected to distance herself and say that she believes Mr. Snowden's disclosures hurt the intelligence community and national security. We have always said, and Glenn Greenwood always makes this point, if what Snowden revealed had truly hurt national security or compromised our soldiers or intel assets in the field, we would all know about it. They would have screamed that to the high heavens a million times. They've never provided any evidence of that, something that Tulsi Gabbard knows and has no doubt said and

pointed out herself. But now, in an attempt to appease the hawks on the Republican side, she's going to do this about face and be like, oh, Snowden's so bad, actually, and 702, we got that all cleaned up, no worries whatsoever. So that's where we are with her. And I there was one Senate aide who told The Washington Post they're not even sure she makes it on a committee. So I don't know if that's I don't know if that's true. I don't know if that's what's going to happen. I do think that her confirmation is certainly the most imperiled and the most in danger of failing because you will definitely have no Democrats vote for her whatsoever. Fetterman certainly wouldn't be. He's the one who would be most likely to cross over, and he's like a belligerent, insane hawk, so he's not going to be down with her either. Well, I've got the list in front of me. You've got Tom Cotton, so that's probably a no. Maybe.

I don't know. You know, Cotton said something that was kind of open to her. He was like, oh, well, we have our disagreements, but, you know, I don't know. He said something that was like a little bit conciliatory towards her. Let me see. Oh, no, he said, I support her. Okay, last night he was on Fox News. I support her lead.

I look forward to working with her. Okay, so that's good. She's got the chairman. You've got James Reich from Idaho. He can be a weirdo. Susan Collins. She's already probably a no. John Cornyn, total national security state hawk.

Jerry Moran. I don't know much about him. Lankford. He's the guy who already got her to flip on 702. So he'll probably vote for her. Mike Rounds, same thing. He's wild card. Todd Young, also a wild card.

And Ted Budd. Ted Budd will probably vote for her. Well, and this is to vote her out of committee. You're looking at the committee. And so if every Democrat votes against her, they only would need, what, one more Republican to join the Democrats to vote on a committee. Can you still get a committee, a floor vote with an unfavorable report out of committee? I think you can. I'm not sure. It looks bad. I thought they had to go through the committee first before you could bring them to the floor. They testified before the committee. I could be wrong about that. But it's like a report. So sometimes like a piece of legislation will be unfavorably voted out of committee, but it'll still be brought. This is parliamentary nonsense that I have no idea about. So please keep that in mind. But yeah, that's

where we are right now with Tulsi Gabbard. If you want a taste, again, of the campaign against her, you've got the Wall Street Journal editorial board, the voice of Mitch McConnell. Let's put this up there on the screen. Tulsi Gabbard, Edward Snowden is intelligence. Does the U.S. really want a director of national intelligence who excuses mass leaking of secrets? So you can see there, they mentioned specifically Senator Tom Cotton's past reservations about her. And they also talk about, quote unquote, the damage that Snowden had done as a result of the leaks. But it's parodying a lot of the national security state concerns against her. So I think you're going to get a real taste of what happened against RFK Jr. So with the

Democrats, it's going to be all Assad all the time. It's all going to be like, why did you meet with Assad? You know, all this 2013 rehash about that. Apparently there's some story. Maybe some questions about her cult connections has been a subject recently as well. There's been a lot of chatter in Washington

about Hezbollah. I'm not really quite sure yet what it's about. They say a story is coming about some of her alleged connections to Hezbollah. I'm not really quite sure yet what it's about. They say a story is coming about some of her alleged connections to Hezbollah. I believe it when I see it, I guess, for what that is. Then Snowden. That'd be a problem for Republicans. Exactly. That's why the story's being planted. 702 and Snowden. So those are the top four things. But yeah, I would say she's the only one who I'm giving like a 50% shot. She's got the lowest chance, in my opinion. That doesn't mean I still think she won't get one who I'm giving like a 50% shot. She's got the lowest chance, in my opinion.

That doesn't mean I still think she won't get confirmed. I think she probably will because Trump and J.D. have really made it – I mean look, with RFK and with Tulsi and Hegseth, they have rammed these people through committee. And they have made it like a real zero in against the folks. But you only need four, and you've got three wild cards already. So you really only need one, one person to flip who is like a traditional person. McConnell, Murkowski, Collins would vote against her. Almost certainly. Pretty sure. So then you can only lose one more. And with the number of national security hawks that are on the Republican side, yeah, it's definitely perilous. According to Chad GPT, you are correct. Regardless of the committee's vote, the nomination can proceed to the full Senate for consideration.

The Senate majority leader schedules the nomination for debate and a final confirmation vote. So traditionally, it has to go from the committee and they have to issue a positive referral, but it's not absolutely required. So that's where that stands. Yep, there you go. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight-loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family

that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and re-examining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. 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. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation.

To most people, I'm the girl behind voiceover, the movement that exploded in 2024. Voiceover is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voice over, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships.

I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now.

Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of something much bigger than themselves. This medal is for the men who went down that day. It's for the families of those who didn't make it. I'm J.R. Martinez. I'm a U.S. Army veteran myself, and I'm honored to tell you the stories of these heroes

on the new season of Medal of Honor Stories of Courage from Pushkin Industries and iHeart Podcast. From Robert Blake, the first Black sailor to be awarded the medal, to Daniel Daly, one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice. These are stories about people who have distinguished themselves by acts of valor, going above and beyond the call of duty. You'll hear about what they did, what it meant, and what their stories tell us about the nature of courage and sacrifice. Listen to Medal of Honor on the iHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Let's get to the Medicare section. Yes. Medicaid, sorry. I'm like RFK Jr. I don't know the difference. I'm not a vote-free for HHS secretary either. To be honest, the difference is honestly kind of difficult to understand sometimes.

Like Medicaid in terms of the individual programs, not the senior care and then like the disability care. Yeah, but you're talking about the way the funding works and the programs themselves. Sometimes I'm like, well, because, you know, there's provisions under Medicare that sometimes overlap with Medicaid. Like in terms of the, there's like Medicare Advantage, but then there's Medicaid plans for people who are born under Medicaid. But sometimes you can be covered by Medicare too. I feel confident. I was trying to research into it. It's actually like, for me to wrap my head around it, I'm like, this is a behemoth, man.

I feel confident if you were up for HHS. That's fair. Yeah, that's right. You would do that homework, and you would be ready to know the difference quite clearly and simply. I'm just saying, as a layman, you know, just entering into this, I was like, huh, you know, it's actually kind of complicated. I had no idea. All right. Let's get to the funding freeze or whatever the hell has been going on, which, by the way, continues to be a question. So Ryan and Emily did a great job covering this with Jeff Stein, who was all over the case when they issued this original memo, very broadly wording, saying freeze all federal funding except for things that go directly to individuals.

And they named specifically Social Security and Medicare, but not Medicaid. And as I said before, the wording was very broad. So they said freeze all federal funding effectively so we can assess whether or not these different programs match, you know, meet the standards as laid out by Trump's various executive orders against green energy and DEI and whatever else he issued. So yesterday, after creating a whole disaster and the Medicaid payment portals being shut down and, you know, domestic violence shelters and addiction programs and Meals on Wheels and Head Start and all these programs calling addiction programs and Meals on Wheels and Head Start and all these programs calling their senators and their representatives freaking out, like,

what is going on? They decided to completely rescind that memo. So let's put B1 up on the screen. This is the memo rescinding the original memo. However, then the White House press secretary came out and said, well, the first memo is rescinded. However, the funding freeze still applies for the programs that are in, you know, in contradiction of President Trump's executive orders. So continued confusion. Effectively, Jeff Stein summed it up. We can put this up on the screen as how this timeline all went down. This is B2. He says, do I have this right? What am I missing? Sincere question. from the original memo here, including but not limited to those that violate Trump executive orders on DEI, clean energy, trans-related programs. Then on Tuesday, White House issues Q&A saying the pause only applies to dollars that violate Trump executive orders. The White House press secretary says it's a limited freeze that will not affect individuals' benefits but major

disruptions at Medicaid, housing assistance, and elsewhere. Wednesday, the OMB, Offices Management and Budget, formally rescinds the Monday memo. White House press secretary says on Twitter that the freeze on spending that violates executive orders remains in effect. We can put up that statement from Caroline Leavitt. She says this is not a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. That's confusing, confusing to me at least. Why? To end any confusion created by the court's injunction, the president's executive orders on ruled. So this has already gone to two judges at this point. The first one said, this is not going to affect. We're putting an immediate freeze on this, you know, on the freeze going into effect. Another judge weighed in yesterday and said they will grant the restraining order saying the withdrawal of the hugely ambiguous OMB order is only a distinction without a difference

based on comments by the president's press secretary. So it is still a bit of a jumble and very confusing and continues to be put on pause by, you know, at this point, multiple judges who have taken a look at this. And Sagar, this is some major Trump 2017 vibes. This is major Trump 2017 vibes. There's a portion of our audience, which is shocking, was actually either in high school or younger whenever Trump was first president. So if you all want to know what covering the first administration was like, this is what it was. It was like orders and then they were rescinded and people didn't know what was happening. And then there was chaos and then there was a judge. And now we're back to, well, this is still in effect, except it's not.

But it's also not in effect. Welcome to Donald Trump America. This is what it's always effect. Yeah, welcome to Donald Trump-us America. This is what it's always like. Hope you're all enjoying the next four years. Producer Max says he was 16 when all of this was going on last time. There you go. So fair enough. The guy who works on the show was 16.

I've met people who are like 22 who watch the show. So I'm like, hold on a second. I was like, so how old were you when Trump was? One of my often questions is, so you were born you when Trump was? They're like, one of my often questions is, so you were born after 9-11. That's always a crazy one. And then it's like, do you remember anything about Obama? And they're like, no, not really. I wasn't really paying attention. So this is the Trump era. That's the thing that they most remember, which is kind of crazy. But the point is that this is a lot like it was like this is also uh what i would say is what really caused

him to become more unpopular the first time around you and look i mean governance is an art it's difficult it's one of those things which is maddening with bureaucracy uh and it's one of the reasons why i always tell people we were going to cover buyout so maybe we can mention some of this in here but look for all the talk of run the government like a business, like what do we learn from this air traffic control thing? It's not a business. It's a life and death stake sometimes. Like if you slash the workforce at Twitter and sometimes your DMs crash. Right. Which happens to me all the time. Who gives a shit? Nobody dies. No one cares. Right. Or even if the stock goes down. Let's say you have a company, a stock goes down, employees lose their job. Tragic. Not downplaying it. Not the same as a plane crash. And this is

what I always point to, where the Byzantine nature of the United States government, and specifically of the welfare state, is such where it is both maddening, ineffective, bureaucratic, stupid, bloated, overpriced, et cetera, and is one of the most beloved programs in the entire United States. So don't screw with it. This is one of the main lessons that Obama learned in 09 with Obamacare and all that is, I remember being in some of those Tea Party protests. Those were some of my first acts of journalism being like, hey, why are you all out here? And they're like, hands off my Medicaid, hands off my Medicare. And we were like, well, you know, it doesn't. But it didn't matter.

Like the idea that you were even screwing with old people's health care, that will send people into a rage. Same here. You don't screw with Medicaid. And watching the hearing, had no clue how many babies are born in this country literally under Medicaid. 40 percent. That's nuts. Of all of the babies in the United States who are being born under the Medicaid program. Not to mention the number of people with disability, et cetera, who are affected by this.

All of the hospitals and the doctors. Our hospital – watch our RFK debate. Our healthcare system is screwed up enough as it is. Having to worry about reimbursement of care, all of that while that's going on is a nightmare. So it was a one-day thing, but it's a taste of if you screw this type of stuff up, you really only get one shot. I'm not sure it was a one-day thing because at least according to Jeff Stein's reporting, there continue to be a lot of local programs funded by federal grants. Well, I'm talking about Medicaid. Oh, the Medicaid, yeah.

So all the Medicaid portals were shut down in all 50 states. Those are back up. But there continue to be, I mean, questions about what the state of affairs even is right now, what the White House actually wants people to be doing or not doing within all of these federal agencies. What the press secretary said in her very first briefing was like, oh, well, if you have a question, just like, you know, Russ votes, line is open. It was not even confirmed at OMB, by the way. And I think part of the reason they decided to rescind this first memo was because

he is up, I believe, tomorrow, his hearing start. And I'm sure this was throwing his potential confirmation into a little bit of chaos as well, just because, listen, it doesn't matter if you're a Republican or a Democrat. Like, every single senator and representative was fielding calls from the Head Start program, the Meals on Wheels program, the domestic violence program, like, all the addiction recovery programs, all sorts of, you know, veterans homelessness, all of these programs. Say, what the hell is going on? Like, are we going to get our funding or not? If not, we're gonna have to lay people off. We can't open our doors. The kids can't come to class, et cetera, et cetera. So truly, you know, both parties were quite concerned about what was going on here, regardless of what they were saying publicly. Now, apparently, as best we know, the backstory here is that, and again, this is very Trump 2017, the memo was written, Stephen Miller sort of directed that this memo

be written. Russ Vogt writes the memo and puts it out, but without going through any sort of review process to recognize the fact that, oh, your language in here very clearly indicates all federal grant funding is frozen, not just like whatever trans or DEI or whatever stuff they're not happy about. By the way, the $50 million Gaza condom thing was total and complete bullshit and nonsense, just so you know, as an aside. But to your point, Sagar, if we could now put B4 up on the screen, because this kind of gets to what you're talking about. So if you ask people, should you cut spending? Does the federal government spend too much? Is it inefficient? They'll be like, yes. But then when you're like,

okay, well, what should they cut? You know, should they spend more on Social Security or less? They're like, definitely spend more. What about education? Definitely spend more. What about assistance to the poor? Definitely spend more. Medicare? Yes. Medicaid? Yes. Border security is where you get to 50-50. Military, they're like, we're probably spending plenty there. We're good there. And federal law enforcement, same thing. But by and large, if you go down the list of budget items, when it comes to these programs, they are very popular. So Republicans oftentimes run into this where, you know, in theory, people are like, yes, the government is spending too much. But then when it actually comes down to these social safety net programs, they don't,

they do not want to further strip our already threadbare safety net even further. And, you know, typically the defense budget only ever goes up. So that's not on the table politically, even though actually the American people would probably be most open to cuts there. One other thing I wanted to get to here is we can put B6 up on the screen. So even though this was chaotic and continues to be chaotic and unclear and not done in an effective way, it's not like it was done haphazardly. The Huffington Post was able to actually get their hands on some internal documents that proved that this was a plan to provoke this constitutional challenge to try to directly challenge the, what's it called, the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which says that effectively, you know, Congress has the power of the purse. If they pass funding, then the executive is obligated to spend it.

This was a post-Watergate reform. The Nixon administration didn't want to spend money that was appropriated by Congress on something. I can't remember exactly what. And so this was put into place to codify into law. No. If the Congress appropriates the money, we have the power of the purse. You as the executive branch don't get to say like, well, I don't like that program, so I'm not going to spend money on that particular thing. Except for rare instances, like if there's going to spend money on that particular thing, except for rare instances like if there's some new technological game that creates efficiencies, then there might be a loophole

there, but very, very limited. As part of Project 2025 and something that Jeff Stein has been telling us about and we've been reporting on here, and it's also part of the plan with Doge, they want to challenge that and basically be able to say that Congress's appropriations are just a basically suggestion. And then the executive branch gets to be like, we like that. We don't like that. And have Matt. I mean, this would be this would almost be rendering Congress completely irrelevant effectively and making it so that the executive branch really has near monarchical powers to do everything that they want. So that was revealed in terms of these internal documents, which many people have been speculating about, but it's sort of confirmed by Huffington Post.

Last thing I'll say, and I'll get your reaction to this, Sagar, is Lever News had a good report about just looking at, OK, well, how might the Supreme Court rule on such a question? This is a very conservative Supreme Court number. These individuals were put on the bench by Donald Trump. So, you know, there's certainly a possibility that even though this has never been the understanding, and it's pretty clear in the Constitution, power of the purse with Congress, et cetera, there is certainly a possibility that they would side with the Trump White House on this. But let's put B7 up on the screen. This could end up being relevant. Apparently, John Roberts weighed in back in a 1985 communique, weighed in on a question.

This is classic David Sirota to be able to find this, by the way. Weighed in on this very question with regard to whether the executive branch can just, you know, say, no, we don't want to do that. Sorry, Congress, we're not following the law that you passed. He said that no area seems more clearly the province of Congress than the power of the purse and discouraged going in the direction of questioning that whatsoever. So that could potentially become relevant. I think it's almost certain that this will end up at some point at the Supreme Court. Not only that, Justice Gorsuch is much more libertarian, much more skeptical of executive power, and Justice Barrett also very much in

that camp. So there's big ideological divides. I'd be curious to see, okay, Kavanaugh's usually more of a big state power guy, like executive branch. They've definitely got Thomas. Thomas Alito, Kavanaugh likely to go on the side of the Trump administration. But yeah, you could conceivably see a 6-3 on something like this. Yeah, I'd be curious to see how it breaks down. I asked around and they told me the same thing. They're like, Kavanaugh, or they said Gorsuch, Coney Barrett are both big question marks.

A lot of it, remember, comes back to implementation as well. This chaos does not help your case because that's something that they've written about often in Supreme Court opinions is that you have to follow the letter of the law and the process. That's what specifically came back to screw them on the census back in 2018 when Justice Roberts ruled against the Trump administration. So he's got a long history of not buying some of this stuff, you know, going all the way back to Obamacare and others, like novel conservative legal theories. So they really could have issues before the court with this one. It's all about testing the limits of power. This was very basically laid out by a lot of people incoming in the Trump administration. They want to be able to do as much as they possibly can,

and they're trying to get it done early to figure out what they actually can do going forward. Yeah, yeah. No, that's right. And I will say like Democrats have been utterly pathetic in responding to Trump this time and are generally utterly pathetic and disappointing, et cetera. But it is also true that it is easier

to like dismantle, cut and destroy than it is to like build new programs. So, you know, I mean, that's what they're, they're with this, with the buyouts that we mentioned, which aren't really buying, whatever, put that semantic difference aside, but you know, they're trying to cut some 10% kind of randomly broad swath of the federal government. All of those, you know, all of those attempts to, they want to, they've talked about, they want to demoralize the entire federal workforce. They want to use these sorts of truly unprecedented, extraordinary powers to just, you know, take a hatchet to all sorts of

things within the federal government. So yeah, the wrecking ball has arrived and they're doing everything that they possibly can with it. Yep, that makes sense. All right, let's get to Jeremy Corbell standing by UFOs. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children

was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and re-examining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. 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. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. To most people, I'm the girl behind VoiceOver, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships.

I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,

or wherever you get your podcasts. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of something much bigger than themselves.

This medal is for the men who went down that day. It's for the families of those who didn't make it. I'm J.R. Martinez. I'm a U.S. Army veteran myself, and I'm honored to tell you the stories of these heroes on the new season of Medal of Honor, Stories of Courage from Pushkin Industries and iHeart Podcast. From Robert Blake, the first black sailor to be awarded the medal, to Daniel Daly, one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice. These are stories about people who have distinguished themselves by acts of valor, going above and beyond the call of duty.

You'll hear about what they did, what it meant, and what their stories tell us about the nature of courage and sacrifice. Listen to Medal of Honor on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Joining us now is my friend Jeremy Korbel to react to some of the news around the New Jersey drones. It's great to see you, sir. Thank you for joining us. Good to see you. Absolutely. Jeremy, we want your reaction here to the White House coming out with a statement on the New Jersey drones. It's great to see you, sir. Thank you for joining us. Good to see you. Absolutely. Jeremy, we want your reaction here to the White House coming out with a statement

on the New Jersey drone phenomenon. Let's take a listen and we're going to get your reaction. And before I turn to questions, I do have news directly from the president of the United States that was just shared with me in the Oval Office from President Trump directly, an update on the New Jersey drones. After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large numbers were authorized to be flown by the FAA for research and various other reasons. Many of these drones were also hobbyists, recreational, and private individuals that enjoy flying drones. In time, it got worse due to curiosity. This was not the enemy. A lot going on there, Jeremy. So in your expert opinion,

what do you make of this? Yeah, I mean, the explanation is fundamentally nonsensical. I think we all had high hopes for a new era of transparency. Look, for me, on the UAP topic, but also just on a bunch of topics, we're not seeing it in that statement. Let me just give you a little breakdown here. The FAA would not approve research flights without communication with facility heads and same with military bases. You know, did the FAA authorize the ones

that buzzed Langley 17 nights in a row? Did they authorize the untrackable drones that infiltrated three US and UK air bases? And that was going on for weeks. Did the FAA authorize flight restrictions if they had originally authorized these drones, it's absolutely nonsensical. And I'll tell you, I get reports from people that are actually guarding these critical infrastructure sites. What they're seeing through their FLIR and through their thermal, it's not just traditional drones.

And so this is an issue of transparency. We had high hopes. We're not getting it. Remember, these drones were not affected by anti-drone technology. These just weren't approved tests. It's just a blatant flat-out lie. Yeah, I mean, research and various other reasons. Like, listen, I'm a skeptic personally, so I would be open to an explanation that's like,

research, and here's exactly what's going on, and here's why it's's confusing to people and here's why the drone detection technology didn't work and why the flight space wasn't authorized, blah, blah, blah. But I don't think anyone, skeptic, not skeptic, whatever your thoughts are about the situation is going to be satisfied with research and various other reasons. Yeah. And look, this is not necessarily something that we have to be skeptical about where they come from. This is just a matter of fact that we have unidentified craft that are loitering over sensitive military and nuclear should be honest about it. It's just that the answer they came up with is absolutely nonsensical. And that's the problem. Right. Especially when you consider all of the authorities involved, the military bases. And that's what I want to talk to you about here, Jeremy. Can you put this answer in the context of all of these other UAP incidents that we have seen over military bases and then the subsequent explanation

some, what, month and a half later, that vague, you know, oh, it was research, it was authorized. Does this fit with the pattern from the U.S. government? Yeah, it does. And this is something back in 2019 when we had 10 Navy warships over a hundred mile radius swarmed by over 100 unidentifieds. And that's where George Knapp and I provided so many different types of footage showing that this is an issue. Everybody on the ships we've spoken with that we've brought forward. This is something where you have these incursions and this has been going on for a long time. You know, your history, you guys, you know, the shutdown of nuclear based shutdowns of airports. We're not

getting truthful answers. And that's what we were all hoping for. Again, this answer is just so nonsensical. It's almost comical if it wasn't a serious issue, you know? Right. What are some of the ongoing transparency issues that you're hoping are going to be resolved ultimately under this administration, Jeremy? Well, you know that I'm obsessed with the UFO and UAP issue, so I'd like that to be resolved. We tried to do that in Congress a number of times. I think the American public deserves, or not even deserves, it is our right to have transparency within government. And we're just seeing, I hope we're not, but it appears we're just seeing the kind of same status quo. As things unfold,

a lot of promises are made. Remember back in the day, the Clintons tried to get this information out. John Podesta tried to get this information out. Ground truth on what UAP UFOs are, what they represent to humanity. And it's just, we're not seeing that right now. That's a fact. Jeremy, could you also give us your reaction? There's been some more whistleblowers and others that have come out, you out, government psionics and others. I'm just curious for your take on the matter and how that fits in the broader scheme of whistleblowers coming forward, trying to give information to Congress and to the government.

And then at the very same time, we have the White House here with a traditional, obviously BS explanation about the New Jersey drones. Right. And so that's what we're seeing. What we're seeing is we're not going to get the answers to the traditional means we were hoping. Unfortunately, you know, through the Senate, through the House, just through the White House in general, we're not going to get those answers. So how are we? It's going to be on journalism. And that's OK. That's what we're all doing, is trying to get to the bottom and core

truth on all of this. So I'm very hopeful for journalism right now. A lot of people are throwing down or a lot of people are getting involved with this issue. So we have to do good journalism, no matter what the White House does. Absolutely. So we'll end it there, Jeremy. Thank you so much. And listen, Jeremy, me, us, we tried to warn you. We could do it the easy way, but catastrophic is the way that you guys want to go. So be it, right? We're going to see that. Yeah. We've tried to give them the option of coming forward, of disclosure. They are leaving it to the whistleblowers and the eyewitnesses and others to have to come forward and to force

their hand. If that's the way they want to play it, fine. We can continue to fight if we need to. Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate you. Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate you. Thank you. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. Campers who began the summer in heavy bodies were often unrecognizable when they left. In a society obsessed with being thin, it seemed like a miracle solution. But behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children was a dark underworld of sinister secrets. Kids were being pushed to their physical and emotional limits as the family that owned Shane turned a blind eye. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie.

In this eight-episode series, we're unpacking and investigating stories of mistreatment and reexamining the culture of fatphobia that enabled a flawed system to continue for so long. 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. VoiceOver, the movement that exploded in 2024. VoiceOver is about understanding yourself outside

of sex and relationships. It's more than personal. It's political, it's societal, and at times, it's far from what I originally intended it to be. These days, I'm interested in expanding what it means to be voiceover, to make it customizable for anyone who feels the need to explore their relationship to relationships. I'm talking to a lot of people who will help us think about how we love each other. It's a very, very normal experience to have times where a relationship

is prioritizing other parts of that relationship that aren't being naked together. How we love our family. I've spent a lifetime trying to get my mother to love me, but the price is too high. And how we love ourselves. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it.

Listen to Voice Over on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Medal of Honor is the highest military decoration in the United States. Recipients have done the improbable, showing immense bravery and sacrifice in the name of something much bigger than themselves. This medal is for the men who went down that day. It's for the families of those who did make it. I'm J.R. Martinez. I'm a U.S. Army veteran myself.

And I'm honored to tell you the stories of these heroes on the new season of Medal of Honor, Stories of Courage from Pushkin Industries and iHeart Podcast. From Robert Blake, the first Black sailor to be awarded the medal, to Daniel Daly, one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice. These are stories about people who have distinguished themselves by acts of valor going above and beyond the call of duty. You'll hear about what they did, what it meant, and what their stories tell us about the nature of courage and sacrifice. Listen to Medal of

Honor on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Very fortunate to be joined this morning by Peter Beinart. He is editor-at-large of Jewish Currents. He is author of Beinart Notebook on Substack and also author of a brand new book that we can put up on the screen, Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza, A Reckoning. Great to see you, Peter. Thanks a lot. So my typical first question is what prompted the writing of the book,

but I think that much is pretty obvious. But maybe you could start off by talking a little bit about what this period has been like, the post-October 7th period has been like specifically for you and for your relationship with the Jewish community? So one of the central metaphors in Jewish tradition is of a family, a kind of imagined extended family. We even use the term, you know, Bnei Yisrael, the children of Israel,

to describe all of us, even though Israel is the name that was given to Jacob after he wrestles with the angel in the book of Genesis. And so there's something very, and it's also a family that has, imagined family that has been through a lot of trauma and then experienced another tremendous level of trauma on October 7th, which was really, I'd say for many of us, one of the worst days of our lives. It's very, in those moments, what families want is solidarity and support. But the tragedy to me is that the way in which the organized American Jewish community, Israeli government, asked for that solidarity is unconditional support for the brutal oppression of Palestinians and now the destruction of Gaza.

So for me, I think the emotions that led me to write this book were this struggle to show that I do feel a sense of solidarity and love for people and a tradition that is at the center of my life. And yet something has gone profoundly wrong when we take that tradition and that sense of obligation to one another and it becomes an excuse for doing just the most horrifying things to another group of people. So you talk about how the Jewish community needs a new story. Talk a little bit about what the current story is and what are the problems with that current story and what a new story that may better serve not just the Jewish community but the world at large, what that might look like. I think Jewish public discourse tends to be dominated by a narrative of Jews as kind of history's permanent virtuous victims. The truth is the Jewish sacred texts actually tell a much more complicated story than that. But that becomes the one I think that is

often in the kind of folk, the folk kind of narrative that exists. And then so you hear this even in the description of October 7th, right? To be clear, October 7th was a horrifying act of violence, including against many, many Israeli civilians, but it gets called a pogrom. So what happens then is you are linking this to violence against Jews in the Russian empire in the late 19th and early 20th century, as if basically the Jewish condition is the same, because there are always going to be these vicious anti-Semites who are going to try to kill Jews wherever they are, right? Or people say it's the worst killing of Jews since the Holocaust, right? But the truth is the conditions that exist for Palestinians, and particularly Palestinians in Gaza, are nothing like the conditions that exist in the Russian empire

in the early 20th century or during the Nazi period, because you can't understand European anti-Semitism and violence against Jews without understanding Jews as a legally subordinated group of people. But in Israel-Palestine, it's the reverse. Jews have legal supremacy. It's Palestinians who are legally subordinate, who live without basic rights. And if you want to understand Palestinian violence and you want to make sure that it doesn't happen again, that everybody is

safer, you have to face that reality of the oppression that exists for Palestinians, not to justify, God forbid, what happened on October 7th, but to understand the conditions so you can ensure that it doesn't happen again, which means responding to the desire of Palestinians to be free. You have a quote in here. You say, Treating a state as a god is a very frightening endeavor. It confers upon mortals a level of veneration that we do not deserve and will always abuse. Leibowitz called it the essence of fascism. How did support for the state of Israel, not just broadly the state of Israel, not just, you know, broadly the state of Israel existing, but even the specific policies effectuated by an extremely far-right, I would say, fascist government under

Bibi Netanyahu, how did that get tied up so much with Judaism to the extent that, you know, the ADL and other groups, the definition that the U.S. government is working with now, will say that if you criticize this state, you are actually yourself anti-Semitic. You know, I don't think I really understand. I don't think I know the answer to that question. But I think it's actually a global thing that's happening now. When I look at the way some white evangelical Christians in Trump talk about the United States, it seems to be almost a parallel in which in Trump's America, in Trump's talk about the United States, it seems to be almost a parallel in which that in Trump's America, it's in Trump's support, it seems to me, if you don't have an American passport, if you don't have the right documentation, you are worthless. Your life

is meaningless. The worship, the state is all that matters. And whether you have citizen anything, my, I mean, I'm not an expert on Christianity, but my understanding is that Christianity has a message about the universal dignity of all human beings, irrespective of what passport you have, right? And I think something parallel has happened in much of the organized American Jewish community, in which Judaism's message of the universal dignity of all human beings, because Torah does not start with a story of Jews. According to Jewish tradition, Adam, Eve, Noah, the first characters in Torah are not Jews. They're universal human beings, and they are symbols of the infinite value of all human life. And yet, what happens when we talk about Israel and Gaza is that the first thing that's demanded is that people accept

Israel's right to exist. Jewish tradition does not think in terms of states having rights to exist. It thinks in terms of human beings having rights to exist. States are mere instruments for the protection of human life. And if they do a really terrible job of protecting the lives of the people under their control, they should be reimagined, recreated. And yet instead it's inverted. So the lives of the children of Gaza and the other people of Gaza are considered not to be precious. But the right of the existence of Israel as a Jewish state with a certain political system is considered sacrosanct. And to me, that's idolatry. It's funny you make that

connection because I was thinking about that same connection too in the context of the freakout over what the bishop had to say about mercy for migrants, mercy for LGBTQ people, and how there was such a vociferous reaction against that from the right. You know, obviously the president was upset and J.D. Vance was tweeting about it. And, you know, it was a subject of primetime programming on Fox News, et cetera. Even though, listen, I'm also not a Christian, but I do have reading comprehension skills and I have a basic understanding of Christianity. and I know that, you know, humanity for the foreigner is kind of a key theme throughout the whole thing, even Old Testament, New Testament, Jesus Christ, like whoever you want to look at,

that is a key message. And I think Tim Alberta has done, he's, I think, probably done the best job writing about this connection. But I really, it did actually help me to understand also the societal process that has gone in on within the state of Israel. And I think, you know, more broadly with many exceptions, but more broadly within the stridently, you know, Zionist Jewish community that has led to this place where the state itself is sacrosanct and that that is put above even, you know, the religious texts that are supposed to be so central, you know, that really did kind of hit home for me as well. Thanks. Thanks. Yeah. I mean, it's interesting if you look at, you know, if you look at Jewish religious thinkers in the early, you know, in the early decades of Zionism,

there's a great fear, actually, of nationalism, of secular nationalism, that secular nationalism actually doesn't, that secularism will undermine and threaten the kind of ethical principles in Judaism. And I think that's exactly what's happened, that nationalism has become a religion, not just nationalism, but ethno-nationalism has become a religion. And you see it in the United States. You see it among Jews. You see it in India, right, where Hindutva kind of has become a version of Hinduism or a place of Hinduism in which basically the rights of Muslims now are considered to be

something that doesn't need to be respected because this is a Hindu nation. It's a very dangerous thing that I think is happening globally. Yeah, I think that's a really important point. I did want to ask you a little bit about some current events and Elon Musk in particular, because it certainly directly relates to your book. I mean, you know, this is a person who has shared and spread the quote unquote great replacement theory, which is brazenly anti-Semitic. He had to go and like pay, you know, do penance with the ADL and go on this trip to Israel, etc. But routinely, you know, his algorithm on Twitter boosts. My feed is filled with a bunch of Nazis constantly like amplifying their talking points. Goes now and speaks to the far right German AFD party, absolutely reactionary,

did what sure looked to be, in my humble opinion, like a Nazi salute twice on Inauguration Day. And yet, you know, the ADL, which is supposed to be the arbiter of what is and what isn't anti-Semitism, comes out and is like, just an awkward gesture. We understand tensions are high. Just an awkward gesture. And not just them. Bibi Netanyahu himself comes out and says, Elon's a friend of the Jew. I mean, how do we explain this whitewashing of Nazism directly from the organs that are supposed to be repelled by such an ideology? Well, first of all, it's just sheer cowardice, which we're seeing. There's an orgy of cowardice happening across American institutions, right? People are afraid of Elon Musk and they're afraid of Donald Trump. So that's just, I think, one broader thing which is happening, which is the ADL is doing as well. But it's also because the struggle against a

certain kind of bigotry, in this case, anti-Semitism, has been profoundly corrupted by the equation of a struggle against bigotry with the defense of a state. And indeed, with the defense of a state that itself is practicing state-sponsored bigotry, right? Israel's own leading human rights organizations say that Israel is practicing apartheid. So you can't be an anti-bigotry organization if you define your mission as defending a state that's practicing bigotry, right? And so, you know, I sometimes imagine what would happen if the NAACP defined its struggle against anti-Black bigotry as also including the defense of Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Sudan, and a bunch of other African governments, right? They would be lobbying accusations at progressives all the time who were criticizing these governments for their human rights abuses, right?

It would completely distort and undermine their effort against anti-Black racism. And this is really what's happened with the ADL and other American Jewish organizations since the 1970s when they redefined themselves as Israel Defense Organizations. What do you make of some of the developments that we've seen here early in the Trump administration, even before he comes into office? They're able to secure what is at least a temporary ceasefire deal in the Gaza Strip. We see people who have just recently been able to return to their homes. At the same time, a lot of question marks about what is going to happen next. You see increasing mass violence in the West Bank, both by violent settlers, but also very much backed by the IDF.

You know, Bibi Netanyahu has already seemed to promise that they're going to go back to the war and the atrocities as soon as this phase is complete. What do you sort of make of where we are? What are your hopes and fears for what happens next? I think that, look, obviously it was a good thing that there was a ceasefire, that some of those hostages are coming home, that Palestinians at least can get some aid in so they're not starving to death. But the trajectory overall looks incredibly bleak. If you had to ask me what I think is the most likely scenario, you know, trajectory that we are headed on, and it will take decades maybe to be had. But this is unless we change U.S. policy and Europe changes policy and Israeli impunity ends, I think we are on a path towards the destruction of the Palestinian people.

Not that every last Palestinian is going to die, but something analogous to what the United States did in the 19th century with Native Americans, right? We didn't create a two-state solution. You know, we didn't stop along when we stop at the Mississippi River and say, you can have the land, right? Basically, the U.S. just continued and continued until Native Americans were destroyed as a political entity that could resist. And I think that what we are seeing is that things that we did not believe were possible in the 21st century, we believed were relegated to an earlier era in human history, are very much

possible. And I don't think they will stop with Palestinians. And I don't think they will stop with Gaza unless we can stop it through a mass political movement that can change the political dynamics in the United States. I think that's the only thing that's going to, because Donald Trump is not going to stand in the way of this. In fact, he's going to applaud this. He said, the people of Gaza should go to Jordan and Egypt. I mean, that statement alone should have him sitting in the Hague before the International Criminal Court. It is a call, it is a monstrous call for mass ethnic cleansing. The United States has, with our weapons, destroyed this piece of territory, destroyed most of the hospitals, the schools, the agriculture, the buildings. And now Donald Trump says, oh, it looks like it's really awful there. Not that we're going to rebuild it, not that those people deserve freedom, not that they should be

able to return to Israel, which is where their families are actually from and were expelled in 1948, but that they should go and become stateless refugees in a foreign country. Unless we can change the politics through a mass movement, this is where things are headed, I fear. And I think that you are right to point out that even if this was, quote unquote, only, this treatment was only reserved for Palestinians, obviously that would be horror enough. But to me, the implication is much broader. Because once a complete genocide and ethnic cleansing is on the table, with the backing of the world's superpower and our weapons and the president of the United States saying, hey, this is the solution I want going forward, that doesn't just stay in that corner of the world. That opens up a Pandora's box of new horrifying possibilities that we really haven't fully – I mean, not that the world has ever been perfect. Not that the post-World War II order has been – not that the U.S. has been benevolent. Not that we haven haven't fully, I mean, not that the world has ever been perfect, not that the post-World War II order has been,

not that the U.S. has been benevolent, not that we haven't fallen down, but it truly opens up a new order of pure makes-right barbarism that has ramifications for the entire world, the United States of America included. Absolutely. You know what, I think we forget, actually,

we could be entering a real new age of ethnic cleansing. I mean, there was ethnic cleansing of Armenians that actually happened in the summer of October 23 that people don't remember so much. But countries learn from each other. Governments learn from each other. Right. And they see what is possible. They see what you can get away with. And so there are a lot of countries, governments in the world. You think of Narendra Modi with Muslims in India. There are a lot of governments that say, we have disposable populations. We have populations that are a nuisance for us and our vision of the state that we want, right? And if Israel can do this to the Palestinians, and Israel is also exporting this technology all over the world, right? It's

testing and exporting this dystopic technology of surveillance and death. And it will be used all over the world to populations that their governments consider a nuisance. Yeah. No, that's right. Palestine, you know, Gaza has truly been a sort of laboratory for AI-driven death and destruction. The Dropsite and 972 Plus magazine both revealed Microsoft's biggest AI customer now, and this is OpenAI's partner, biggest AI customer now is the Israeli government post-October 7th.

And our own government obviously pushing huge amount of dollars in their direction and celebrating this sort of development. And so it's not just, you know, obviously we already have nuclear weapons. We already have the capability to destroy the world. But the level of barbarism that will be enabled by these AI tools also ups the stakes just in insane levels that we can barely comprehend. Absolutely. You know, and in the Torah, idolatry is linked to barbarism again and again, because it means, idolatry is that you don't respect the dignity of the human being. And, you know, you were referring to that, to the woman, I'm forgetting her name, who spoke out at the Episcopal Church, you know, in front of Donald Trump and J.D. Mann.

And when I looked at her, I thought, where are our equivalents of that woman in the Jewish world? People who are willing to risk being publicly attacked. People who are willing to risk Jewish world, people who are willing to risk being publicly attacked, people who are willing to risk violence against, people who are willing to risk their jobs. Abraham Joshua Heschel, one of the greatest American Jewish figures of the 20th century, said that during the Vietnam War, he could not pray. He could not open the prayer book because he saw images in his mind of children being napalm. Where are our rabbis that are speaking that way about the fact that Gaza now has more child amputees than any place in human history?

I feel like there's a huge moral absence there. Yeah, well, you're not a rabbi, but your voice has been really important, not just with this book, but with your track record of speaking out and risking significant consequences, both in terms of your personal and professional life. So Peter, tell people where they can get the book

and we can put the book jacket back up on the screen too. Oh, thank you. You can get it. You can just get it online. Any of the online booksellers are hopefully your local bookstore. And I'm really, really grateful to have the opportunity to talk about it with you.

Yeah, it's absolutely our pleasure. And it's always an honor to get to speak with you, Peter. Thank you so much for taking the time. Thanks a lot. All right, guys, thank you so much for watching Jam Pack Day. We did not, in fact, get to that promised blog about buyouts because there was just too much to say about too many other topics. But thank you guys so much for sticking with us and trusting us in this very, very busy and consequential news cycle. And we'll see you guys again next week. 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. of male validation. I'm also the girl behind Boy Sober, the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, Boy Sober is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it.

Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. A lot of times, big economic forces show up in our lives in small ways. Four days a week, I would buy two cups of banana pudding, but the price has gone up, so now I only buy two cups of banana pudding, but the price has gone up. So now I only buy one. Small but important ways. From tech billionaires to the bond market to, yeah, banana pudding. If it's happening in business, our new podcast is on it. I'm Max Chaston. And I'm Stacey Vanek-Smith. So listen to Everybody's Business on the iHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.