Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 2/17/26: Randy Fine Islamophobia, Israel West Bank Annexation, Lindsey Graham Pushes Iran War, James Talarico Censored By CBS

Episode Date: February 17, 2026

Krystal and Emily discuss Randy Fine islamophobia, Israel annexation in West Bank, Lindsey Graham quiet part out loud, James Talarico Colbert interview blocked by CBS.   Will Creeley: https://www.thefire.org/about-us/our-team/will-creeley       Jasper Nathaniel: https://www.infinitejaz.com/    To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.comMerch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed Human. 1969, Malcolm and Martin are gone. America is in crisis. At a Morehouse college, the students make their move. These students, including a young Samuel L. Jackson, locked up the members of the Board of Trustees, including Martin Luther King's Senior.

It's the true story of protests and rebellion in black American history that you'll never forget. I'm Hans Charles. I'm Manilic Lamouba. Listen to the A building on the I-Hearton. Cart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Bowen-Yin. And I'm Matt Rogers.

During this season of the Two Guys Five Rings podcast, in the lead-up to the Milan Cortina-2020 Winter Olympic Games, we've been joined by some of our friends. Hi, Bowen, hi, Matt, hi, hi, Elmo. Hey, Matt, hey, Bowen. Hi, Cookie. Hi. Now, the Winter Olympic Games are underway, and we are in Italy to give you experiences from our hearts to your ears.

Listen to Two Guys Five Rings on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Talking to your kids about the dangers of vaping can be hard. Getting them to listen to Hot Gossip is easy. So here's some drama you could share with your kid. Dude, did you hear about Cassie and Jake? No, but did you hear that vaping can cause irreversible lung damage and nicotine effects brain development? No-uh. You don't need to gossip if you want to have an open conversation about vaping.

So if you want to get tips on when and how to talk to your kids, visit Talk Aboutvaping.org. Brought to you by the American Lung Association and the Ad Council. Hey guys, Saga 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 breaking points.com. So Randy Fine, you know, was out doing his Randy Fine thing. Florida Six. Being a disgusting genocidal racist, and he tweeted this.

Let's put this up on the screen. If they force us to choose, the choice between dogs and Muslims is not a difficult one. So this was in response, we can put this up, he had to respond to his own tweet by saying, for context, this is the leader of one of the key mainstream Muslim groups that supported Mamdani, and it was a post on X from Nardin Kiswani, who said earlier this month, finally, NYC is coming to Islam. Dogs definitely have a place in society, just not as indoor pets.

Like we've said all along, they are unclean. a joke that I think was also probably a little bit rooted in some sincere feelings. There are cultural differences with dogs, Crystal. There are some people who do find it to be unclean culturally that folks keep dogs in their house. Not you, though. You're a dog lover. Yeah, I have a dog. I would also say she does make my house less clear.

Unclean. I'm a centrist. I agree. But yeah, I mean, this is just like, to me, Emily, this is sort of perfectly emblematic of the Trump, the Trump regime and Trump 2.0 in particular. You have a dumb fake outrage fest. By the way, based on lies, number one lie they're framing this woman is she's like some top Zoron, Mamdania, that we're not an advisor to him whatsoever that we know of. She supported a group that supported him. Yeah. According to Randy Fine, that's what her role is. They frame her like she's like,

you know, in the mayor's office every day, guiding him on policy with regard to dogs and other things. She's not exactly seal weaver while we're on the scale of Zoron controversy. She's on the, you know, she's on the council that's going to impose Sharia law in New York City. That's her. She's the head of that task force for Zoran Mandani. So anyway, the framing of her relationship that I saw from a bunch of conservatives, totally incomplete law. This is a joke, right? It's clear.

And then the New York Post, which is obsessed with Zoran, I think they're the ones that write this up, like, oh, my God. Like it's some, you know, newsworthy scandal that someone put a joke on Twitter about this. And then, so you've got something that's rooted in idiocy and lies. and then you have this total, like, genocide. I mean, Randy Fine is a disgusting, disgusting person. And this is not the first incident, right, whatsoever. And we've got some of that as well that we could put up on the screen. Yeah, I was going to say, let's just go to D7 here.

Yeah, go to D7. Let's revisit some of what Randy Fine is notorious for. Let's remind what this man is all about here. This is a brand new one. This also just came out this week. He says, Palestinian is a synonym for evil, okay? Got that one. The anti-Muslim bigotry with this guy is through the roof.

Absolutely disgusting, he says, jihadi Mamdani is to blame for the rise in Muslim terror happening across New York City, denaturalize and deport him now. Okay. So deport Mamdani. Deport Mamdani, who is a U.S. citizen. May the streets of Gaza overflow with the blood of these animals, talking about Palestinians. These animals live in Florida, hopefully not for long. There is no suffering adequate for these animals. May the streets of Gaza overflow with blood.

Tell your fellow Muslim terrorists to release the hostages and surrender until then starve away. Talking about the— That's October 8th. Yeah, talking about the fact that you've got—you know, that Israel's imposing a siege on the entirety of the Gaza Strip, including women and children. So just an overt, undeniable, racist, anti-Muslim bigot, whose rhetoric about Muslims very much echoes the rhetoric about Jews, leading up to the Holocaust. So, you know, now he's embraced this style of Nazi propaganda to completely dehumanize a group of people. So you've got the combination of something fake outrage based on idiocy and lies combined with just overtly evil dehumanizing sentiments from Randy Fine.

And, you know, there were some conservatives like you. Megan Kelly said something. There were a few, like, not that many, but a few conservative influences. who had something to say about this. As of this morning, there is not a single elected Republican official who has said anything about this at all. And this is the same group in Congress who censured Rashida Talib because she said from the river to the seed, Palestine would be free, a rally chant

that she explains in her view means equal rights for all. That is what she's calling for. She gets censured. And this disgusting, vile, racist bigot just gets off Scott, and gets to go on cable dues and be treated like he's a normal human being. Yeah, I mean, he's used the term, quote, filthy Arab. He has said, I believe he said there's no such thing as an innocent Palestinian child. It's something to that effect.

I'll find the exact quote while we're talking about this. But yeah, my response to him was simple. It wasn't even to get into an argument. It was just D3 because, you know, he's purportedly conservative. So as a conservative, I just responded, all human beings are created in the image of God. For that, I got piled on. There was, this is D4, Joel Berry from the Babylon B responded, doesn't mean we have to let all of them in our country. And so people were also like, hey, it was a joke, blah, blah, blah.

It's like, I don't think anything justifies a sitting congressman playing fast and loose with language that dehumanizes citizens. This is not a Jewish country or a Christian country. This is a country where we have the First Amendment. Thank God we have the First Amendment. And that is dehumanizing his citizens, even if it's a joke. He's a congressman. And I know we're in the Trump era, but he's a congressman. And to dehumanize other people, whether you're joking, you're responding to a joke.

He tweeted this without any context. First of all, this guy is way too online. He's like just randomly posting stuff as a congressman. As if we're all supposed to even know what this context is. Right, yeah, exactly. Which is reckless if you're going to say, quote, if they force us to choose, the choice between dogs and Muslims is not a difficult one. So it's obviously dehumanized in language. It should obviously be something that people say is not okay. I guess we have a Milo Yanopoulos response. Oh, he rosed of them.

Milo was an outrage. You are a man of low moral character unfit to hold public office. Now, when Milo Yanopoulos is lecturing you about your moral character, you've done fucked up. Although in your case, he says, although in your case, quote, unfit falls woefully shy. A little bit of, we support fat shaming in the context of Randy Fine, always. He was getting roasted badly. And rightfully so, rightfully so. Yeah. Well, and here's the thing.

I mean, it's like cliche and trite to say at this point. But imagine if, you know, Ilhan Omar or Rashida Talib had said if they forced us to choose the choice between dogs. and Jews is not a difficult one. You think that everyone, oh, it's just a joke. It's just a joke, you know, about cultural differences. It's just a joke because we, you know, that doesn't mean we have to let all the Jews in our country to the Babylon B's point.

You know, it would be a, and rightfully so, in my opinion, it would be a national scandal. She would be censured, very possibly kicked out of Congress. There would be national news cycles about this. Every Democrat would be asked. what they think about those comments and would, you know, and would condemn them, by the way. And instead, this is just, you know, I do think Democrats are, especially progressives, are going to try to push on this because Republicans should have to answer.

Elected Republicans should have to answer what they think about these comments and these sentiments. They should be forced to go on the record about whether they agree that, you know, Muslims are lower than dogs and that dogs should be chosen over Muslims. They should be forced to answer for all of his rhetoric and explain whether or not they agree with it and why. Well, he said, yeah, I found the quote. There's no such thing as innocent Palestinian civilians. And so to Crystal's point, that is the type of language that is dehumanizing an entire group of people. Whereas categorizing literally every single person who considers themselves Palestinian to be a combatant, essentially.

that's how you end up slaughtering innocent people because you are engaged in a process of categorizing people as worthy of combat deaths. And that is disgusting. It's a problem for the United States, a problem for our foreign policy, obviously. And it should be an easy thing to just... I mean, this is something he said long ago.

So when you then also see him posting this... This wasn't posted in a vacuum. And one of the reasons that, like, I felt compelled to respond is because he has a history of saying this kind of stuff. That's exactly. And so it's not like you can just say, oh, Randy, fine. Oh, he's just making a joke about dogs. Ha, ha. He's just talking about, you know, whether you should let people have massive cultural differences with us into the country.

No, he's been doing this over and over again. He obviously, when you're saying things like filthy Arab and you're saying there's no such thing as innocent Palestinian civilians. And then you'd dehumanize people and say you'd rather have dogs in the United States than, Muslims. I mean, it's not acceptable from a congressman. Again, I know that we're in a post-Trump era and our standards have been lowered. They were already low.

I get it. But it's just an easy thing to say like, dude, cut it out. I think Megan responded, we can put that. She just said, what the fuck is this? Basically, WTF is this, the next element. This is Randy Fine. Doing Randy fine things.

Big Randy. We should mention that Ryan and I interviewed a man running in a primary against Randy Fine, whose name is Aaron Baker. I think he's like a roofer in Florida 6, and he's running against this. He's not just running a primary campaign against Randy Fine on, like, all the issues.

He specifically has called out Randy Fine for talking about people in this way over and over again. So if you happen to live in Florida 6, go check out the Baker campaign. And he's running as a Republican? He's running as a Republican. It's a very Republican district. And Randy Fine, when he got elected here,

dramatically underperformed, you know, I've, it's like a Republican, I don't know, I'm making up the numbers, it's like a Republican plus 25 district. Come at least. He won it by like single digits, you know, and, and it's because he's just, like, people are revolted by him that is so much that couldn't overcome this partisan of a lien of a district, but, you know, I'm glad this guy's running against him in the Republican primary because that's where the next congressperson will be chosen in that primary is very unlikely that a Democrat would be able to unseat him.

So go check him out and see if he is to your taste if you are in that district or if you want to support someone who wants to get this man out of Congress because he is just a disgrace. And wants to stand against this from a conservative perspective. You know, it's unacceptable, obviously, especially if you're trying to make the point that your belief or if you're trying to show people you believe that everyone is created equal and in the dignified image of God, this is not an acceptable piece of rhetoric, and it's not an acceptable position

to pretend you have the moral high ground while also having Randy Fine in the coalition. So check out Aaron Baker. All right, Crystal, speaking of Palestine, the Middle East, let's talk about the West Bank. You want to know what my evenings actually look like? Homework questions. Someone needs a permission slip.

signed, the dog's begging for a walk, someone's yelling for a snack. And somewhere in the middle of all that, I'm supposed to figure out dinner? That's why Hello Fresh has been a lifesaver. Fresh ingredients show up at my door, locally sourced when possible, simple step-by-step recipes that actually make sense. And no matter how chaotic the rest of my night gets, dinner is the one thing I don't have to stress about. I'm just cooking a delicious meal my family will actually eat, and it takes around 30 minutes. And honestly, the real value is knowing that even on the messiest nights, dinners handled. That's one less thing pulling at me, and that matters.

Take some stress out of your evenings. Right now, get 11 free meals, free shipping, and free sides for life. Hurry, this offer won't last long. Go to Hellofresh.ca, code rescue. That's 11 free meals, free shipping, and free sides for life at Hellofresh.ca, only with code rescue. They say abs are made in the kitchen. Cool, but who has time for three hours of meal? prep and a fridge full of Tupperware. That's why I started using Factor. Factor delivers fresh,

never frozen, ready to eat meals that are dietitian designed for balanced science-back nutrition. No prep, no cleanup, just heat, eat, and move on. I've got gym days, work days, super long days, and Factor keeps me on track without slowing me down. It's real food, great flavor, and the kind of meals that actually support the work I'm putting in. We're talking chicken pesto, steak with veggies, roasted salmon, meals that feel like they were cooked for you, not by you. So, yeah, abs might be made in the kitchen. But thanks to Factor, I don't have to be in the kitchen. Right now, get 11 meals, free shipping, and free sides for life.

Hurry, this offer won't last long. Go to FactorMeals.ca and use code fuel. That's 11 meals, free shipping and free sides for life, but only with the code fuel at factormeals.ca. Factor, Canada's number one, ready-to-eat meal delivery service. Canadian women are looking for more. More out of themselves, their businesses, their elected leaders, and the world around them. And that's why we're thrilled to introduce the Honest Talk podcast.

I'm Jennifer Stewart. And I'm Catherine Clark. And in this podcast, we interview Canada's most inspiring women. Entrepreneurs, artists, athletes, politicians, and newsmakers, all at different stages of their journey. So if you're looking to connect, then we hope you'll join us. Listen to the Honest Talk podcast on IHart Radio or wherever you listen to your podcasts. There has been a massive acceleration in the process of stealing land in the occupied West Bank. And there's one reporter who has been covering the story extensively that we're very happy to join us this morning.

Jasper Nathaniel is an independent journalist covering the occupied West Bank and writes over at his substack Infinite Jazz. Great to see you, Jasper. Yeah, thanks for having me back. Our pleasure. So let's go ahead and put your latest tear sheet up on the screen. Headlined here, annexation breaks containment. where you talk about, of course, this has been a multi-decade process of stealing land from Palestinians executed by the Israeli government. But there's been such an acceleration in recent days and weeks that it has actually broken

through in some mainstream media coverage, you say here, with a new package of cabinet decisions. Israel's message to Palestinians in the West Bank is clear, take the money and run. Just bring us up to speed on some of the, you know, the late. decisions that have been made that have led you to this conclusion and led to some actual outbreak of coverage from the mainstream press. Yeah. So just to take a quick step back, you know, Bezal Smotrich, who's the finance minister of Israel, he's this far right settler.

He in early 2023 pulled off what was effectively a sort of bureaucratic coup where he took control of the governance of the West Bank. And just a reminder, the West Bank is technically and legally a military occupation, which means that it cannot be governed by the state, by the Israeli government. It has to be overseen by the military. And the military has to adhere to the laws of the occupied country or of the occupied people. So what that means is that the laws from Jordanian times, pre-occupation in 1967, are still supposed to be in effect. But those laws have been steadily eroded. And what happened in 2023 was Smotrich installed himself in the defense ministry, put in basically a chain of command of settlers, and stripped all the bureaucratic guardrails away from the settlement movement who is determined to take over the entire West Bank.

So over the last three years or so, there's been all these new policy initiatives meant to both strip. authority away from the Palestinian Authority, but also from the Israeli military, who does not necessarily have the same political or ideological agenda of the settlers. And so what the latest cabinet decisions did, the first one that I think is the reason this story sort of broke into mainstream coverage was it basically took out what was left of the Oslo Accords. So the Oslo Two Accords, I should say, in 92. What it did was it divided the West Bank into areas A, B, and C. And there's this misconception that area A, B, and C means who owns the land. But to be clear, the land was still Palestinian land. It never became part of Israel. The occupation was always legally, technically, supposed to be temporary.

So what Oslo did was it said that in area A, the Palestinian Authority is full control, in area B, Israel, the Israeli military, I should say, and the Palestinian authority have joint security control and the PA has administrative control and then in area C, Israel has full control. But again, that land, despite who had administrative control, still belongs to the Palestinians. So what the first cabinet decision did was it said that now, in addition to having administrative control in area C, the Israeli military is now allowed to go into areas A and B to take control of things like housing development, demolitions, all sorts of sort of municipal activities.

And the way the law is phrased or the cabinet decision is phrased is typical of how they do things. It doesn't just say Israel now has control of area A and B. What it says is in instances where there is an environmental hazard or there is risk to a Jewish heritage site or there is, you know, water theft. or something like that, then Israel has the ability to go in and take control to remedy it. But these are essentially pretenses that Israel uses to go into these places and take control. So, for example, Israel makes it impossible for most Palestinian cities to have a true waste management system. They sabotage their dumping grounds, they steal their routes, they take over garbage trucks.

Now they can go into these places where the Palestinians have been left with no children. but to burn their waste, they can then accuse them of creating air pollution and take control of that whole area. So that is just basically the last remnants of where Palestinians actually theoretically had administrative control in Area A, Israel has now taken that away from them. So that was the first thing. The next thing, and the reason I said in that subhead,

take the money and run, was what they have basically done is made it really easy for Israelis to now go to go directly to Palestinian landowners and buy their land in the West Bank. And, you know, they have made conditions so bad for Palestinians in the West Bank, both in terms of, like, the checkpoints and the, you know, increased violence. But they've also really suffocated the economy. They've prevented 100,000 Palestinians from going into Israel to work where they were working before. And they've basically caused unemployment and poverty to soar. And now they're saying, no problem.

You can just, you know, we'll buy you out. You can take the money and go somewhere else. And, you know, that is a problem for a number of reasons. But the biggest one is that for a long time, the Israeli military actually had veto power over settlers purchasing Palestinian land. And again, the reason for this is because while the settlers want all of the West Bank, the Israeli military historically has been concerned with maintaining some sort of stability. Or at the at the very least, you know, ruling with an iron fist. And the settlers are not interested in that. What they would like is to cause chaos and to, you know, draw the military in, lead to, you know, an event where they end up with the land. So now where settlers used to try to, you know, go and buy Palestinian land in, like in the deep in area A, in the middle of a Palestinian city, the military would say, no chance that's going to cause a war. Now they can just go and do it. They can buy land wherever they want, wherever Palestinian is willing to sell it. to them. And then the military is obligated to go protect them wherever they are. So what it means is

that the settlers are now going to be effectively dictating settlement policy by going wherever they want. They're already doing that in the sense of, you know, building these illegal outposts. But now they have a formal legal route to go wherever they want in Palestinian territory, bring the military with them, start a fight, and, you know, ultimately end up with that land. So that those are just two of, I could go on. I wanted to ask issue about some of the big picture of politics that maybe even what you could go on here, Jasper, there's a Jerusalem Post headline that didn't get a lot of attention, at least that I saw, Jews prey on Jerusalem's temple mount as decades-old status quo begins to

shift. This is one of the most important questions in the entire conflict. And just reading from the piece, they mention here that in the past few weeks and what amount to a dramatic change to the status quo that has prevailed since 1967, police have begun to allow Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount under certain conditions. That is a very big change, especially relative to the amount of news coverage that's gotten. The Jerusalem Post also mentions that in the past few years,

the number of Jews ascending to the Temple Mount has increased dramatically to more than 68,000 in the Hebrew year that ended in September 2025, an increase of 22% over the previous year, according to an activist group. So the big picture politics, I mean, the landscape here is, mounting pressure from the Israeli religious right to completely take over the land and to undo a lot of the norms or the legal standards, actually more powerful even the norms, that have governed the area in decades. Is that a correct reading of some of this, Jasper?

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, to be honest, it's hard to sort of say how much of it is driven by an actual, you know, religious fervor and how much of it is purely sort of territorial ambition. I mean, I think with the settlers, that line is impossible to find. But, you know, what you're talking about is Jews increasingly going to the temple mount to pray. But in these new cabinet decisions, Israel has, again, sort of formalized this in two other sacred areas. So in the Ibrahim Mosque, in Hebron, and in the Rachel's Tomb area near Bethlehem, these are areas that are deeply sacred. to Muslims and to Palestinians in particular. And in these new cabinet decisions,

Israel has seized administrative control away from the Palestinians, given it to Israel, which will make it more and more difficult for Palestinians to be able to go to these sacred places in peace. Israel will now be expanding settlements into these areas, demolishing buildings. So, you know, what you just described is one of these sort of informal things that the settlers have been doing to take control and cause chaos.

And, you know, to be blunt about it, like the tail is wagging the dog because it always starts with the settlers just going rogue and, you know, going somewhere where they shouldn't be, bring the military with them. And then months later, a new policy initiative comes through or a cabinet decision or some sort of actual legislation in the Knesset that formalizes it. And so, you know, the same thing is happening with the settler violence. You know, you hear occasionally that the Israeli government or the military condemns, you know, one of these settler attacks. Usually when the settlers attack the military, but every once in a while when they actually attack a Palestinian village, and every once in a while they actually arrest somebody. But then what they do is they give money and funds and weapons to the settlers who are out on the front line, building these outposts. Like I said, before, the military has to follow them wherever they go.

And so what started as a couple of settlers going and terrorizing and wreaking havoc on a Palestinian village, over time, the government comes in and authorizes it as a formal settlement. And so it is this really sort of nefarious system where the most extremist, far-right, ambitious, frankly racist of the entire political bloc in Israel are controlling all of the policy decisions in the West Bank by just doing whatever they're. want to do and knowing that the government will fall close behind to formalize to legalize what they've been doing. Let's put E3 up on the screen. This is, you know, some of the recent West Bank attacks by violent settlers. And, you know, I think the reporting that you have done here, Jasper, not just on the, you know, the bureaucratic moves that have been made, but also on this horrific and escalating

settler violence is you show how the two work together. Because as you said, if you are not only having your life made extremely difficult by the checkpoints and by the dehumanizing apartheid nature of the system in the occupied West Bank, but then you also live under the direct threat of settler violence. And now the government has passed these laws that make it easy for settlers to identify, okay, this Palestinian owns this piece of land. You can go and terrorize them and threaten them until they agree to sell it to you. you know, it's not exactly free and fair sale. And then they frame the whole thing as, oh, it's voluntary migration, you know, they just, they're, they're ready to move and explore a new part of the country. You can see how the settler attacks work hand and glove with the aims and the goals of the government. Exactly. I mean, if you live in a, like the, the clip you just

showed was in Masfriata. This is, you know, a Bedouin community in the South Hebron Hills. If you live there, I mean, that whole area was designated a military training zone decades ago. And that is what gives Israeli military sort of a sensible authority to go in and demolish buildings and prevent them from building their own structures. Now you have settlers coming in. They are building outposts right next to these villages, terrorizing them on a regular basis. Over 60 of these communities have just gotten up and left on their own. in the last, just since October 7th, now you have another option. Just take the money and leave.

And it's not, you know, in my mind, like the strategy is sort of converging with what's happening in Gaza, where, you know, sure, they are still, you know, of course, bombing and killing people on a daily basis, but they are also, you know, trying to describe what they're doing as sort of a humanitarian situation where they want to help the people of Gaza go and and, you know, find a better place to live, find a better way to live outside of Gaza. And then Israel will come in and, you know, build industrial cities and factories and, you know, perhaps settlements too. So it's, you know, this is actually, this was in the playbook. This is in the Smotrich Blueprint that he were in 2017, where he doesn't say we're going to genocide the Palestinians in the West Bank.

He doesn't even say we're going to run them off the land. he says, look, let's just be practical here. There's not room for both of us here. There's not room for two countries, for two states. So let's give them some options. Option one is they can live as colonial subjects under Israel. Option two is they can leave, and maybe we'll even give them money to leave, and they probably will because they want a better life somewhere.

And option three, if they don't do that, is we'll fight to the death and we'll probably kill them. And so all of these different methods of getting the Palestinian off the land from the brute force to, you know, suffocating policies to now just saying, look, it's really bad here. Don't you want to just have a better life somewhere, take this money and go? I mean, all of it is working to one end, which is to get the Palestinians out of the West Bank and Gaza.

You want to know what my evenings actually look like? Homework questions. Someone needs a permission slip signed. The dog's begging for a walk. Someone's yelling for a snack. And somewhere in the middle of all that, I'm supposed to figure out dinner? That's why Hello Fresh has been a lifesaver. Fresh ingredients show up at my door,

locally sourced when possible, simple step-by-step recipes that actually make sense. And no matter how chaotic the rest of my night gets, dinner is the one thing I don't have to stress about. I'm just cooking a delicious meal my family will actually eat, and it takes around 30 minutes. And honestly, the real value is knowing that even on the messiest nights, dinner's handled.

That's one less thing pulling at me. And that matters. Take some stress out of your, evenings. Right now get 11 free meals, free shipping, and free sides for life. Hurry, this offer won't last long. Go to Hellofresh.com. That's 11 free meals, free shipping, and free sides for life at Hellofresh.com. Only with code box. They say abs are made in the kitchen. Cool, but who has time for three hours of meal prep and a fridge full of Tupperware? That's why I started using Factor. Factor delivers fresh, never frozen, ready to eat meals that are dietitian designed for about

balanced science-backed nutrition. No prep, no cleanup. Just heat, eat, and move on. I've got gym days, work days, super long days, and Factor keeps me on track without slowing me down. It's real food, great flavor, and the kind of meals that actually support the work I'm putting in. We're talking chicken pesto, steak with veggies, roasted salmon, meals that feel like they were cooked for you, not by you. So, yeah, abs might be made in the kitchen. But thanks to Factor, I don't have to be in the kitchen. Right now get 11 meals, free shipping and free sides for life. Hurry, this offer won't last long. Go to factormeals.ca and use code fuel.

That's 11 meals, free shipping and free sides for life, but only with the code fuel at factormeals. CACTA. Factor, Canada's number one ready to eat meal delivery service. Canadian women are looking for more. More to themselves, their businesses, their elected leaders, and the world are of them. And that's why we're thrilled to introduce the Honest Talk podcast. I'm Jennifer Stewart. And I'm Catherine Clark.

And in this podcast, we interview Canada's most inspiring women. Entrepreneurs, artists, athletes, politicians, and newsmakers, all at different stages of their journey. So if you're looking to connect, then we hope you'll join us. Listen to the Honest Talk podcast on IHeart Radio or wherever you listen to your podcasts. Jasper, want to get your reaction to a couple of recent clips of Senator Lindsay Graham, Republican of South Carolina. Let's roll this first one where Lindsay... Carolina slash Tel Aviv. Yeah, slash television.

He says he goes there every two weeks. Every two weeks? Not bad. Probably more often than he's in South Carolina. All right. Here's Lindsay Graham talking about the future of wars. The wars of the future are being planned here in Israel because if you're not one step ahead of the enemy, you suffer.

The most clever creative military forces on the planet are here in Israel because they have to be to survive. So what we're looking at is that Israel is advancing down the road of new weaponry. far beyond us. And it would be nice to have a process where we could be partners. We have one more clip. Jasper, that's a great clip to get your take on because you've done so much work in the space. But let's roll E5 first, more of Senator Lindsey Graham. Could our soldiers be hit in the region? Absolutely they could. Can Iran respond? If we have an all-out attack, absolutely they can. I think the risk associated with that is far less and the

risk associated with blinking and pulling the plug and not helping the people as you promised. So the future of war in Israel, Jasper, you know all about that. Tell us what Lindsay Graham would actually probably agree with you that he's talking about. Yeah, I saw that clip and I mean, it was one of these moments of like, I don't know if he let he, if he could take it back, if he could or if he just, you know, wants to be saying the quiet part out loud. I mean, there's a number of things he could be talking about. One of them is, you know, the fact that Israel is, you know, is actually, you know, testing out new weaponry, in many cases, American weapons that will then, you know, go straight to the American military after it's been tested out there.

I think, you know, of course, the U.S., many, many hawks in the government, including our Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, have long wanted war with Iran. You know, Israel is, of course, wants more than anything, or Nanyahu certainly wants more than anything to take out the regime in Iran. And so they're a good sort of proxy to get that war going. But also, I mean, I think it should be said that, like, you know, many people have noted that the genocide in Gaza has sort of, you know, stripped away the last pretences of a rules-based order. It's shown that, you know, the stronger country can do whatever it wants, not just to to Gaza where, you know, they use October 7th as a pretense, but in Lebanon and in Syria and in the

West Bank and anywhere they want, the stronger country can just, you know, go in and dominate with force as the U.S. has done in Venezuela and, you know, potentially in Cuba. And so I think Lindsey Graham is, you know, he's sort of projecting his fantasies of empire onto this situation. And he's just, he's saying that, yes, they're going to help us out with the war on Iran, with, everything we want to do, they're helping test our weapons, but also like Israel is setting the new standard. This is how warfare is going to work. This is how empire is going to work going forward and just watch. Yeah. Well, and speak a little bit to the Trump administration context here as well. I saw Trump made some throwaway comment. I believe it was last week about like, oh, we don't want to

see them taking over the West Bank. But we also know that, of course, one of his top contributors, Miriam Adelson reportedly gave him some $100 million plus. in exchange for, hey, you're going to let them annex the West Bank. And it reminded me also very much of the many reports of how upset Biden was about not now who doing blah, blah, blah, but it never amounts to any sort of action. Do you think there's any possibility that he would see this brazen land grab as a threat to some of the things he wants, I mean, mostly he just wants bragging rights about his, quote, unquote, peace deal and his, you know, his peace board, et cetera.

How do you see those pieces fitting in? Well, the annexation of the West Bank is even before Trump, it's been done in a way that is deliberately meant to provide plausible deniability to Israel. So they haven't just come out and said, we've annexed the West Bank or we have declared sovereignty over the West Bank. They are putting in place all these policies that, like I said, are stripping control away from the military occupation and from the Palestinian Authority and giving it to Israel, basically to the, basically to the side. one step at a time, which amounts to a de facto annexation. But I think that, you know, beyond that, like, Trump obviously acts in his own self-interest. I don't even think he knows where the West Bank is. I don't think he could point to it on a map. There are two things that could potentially cause him to speak up, which he actually has done in the past. The first one would be

if the Abraham Accords or, you know, the normalization deal is threatened. So in 2020, the UAE actually threatened to pull out of normalization if Israel, if Nanyahu pushed forward an annexation effort that he was making, Trump immediately came out and said, told Nanyahu he couldn't do it. And obviously it's because it was going to cause him to lose his, you know, big foreign policy achievement, the Abraham Accords from the first term. So far, there's no indication that the UAE is threatening that this time around. Qatar has, you know, a lot of these Arab states who are either already normalizing with Israel or who are considering it have issued these completely toothless threats. So I don't see that as a factor right now. The other thing, which I have even less hope for, is that somebody points out to Trump that, you know, I think point 19 in your 20-point peace plan says that the Palestinians have to have a path to statehood to self-executive. determination. And what they're doing in the West Bank, which would be, in theory, in a parallel

universe where the settlement movement was forced out, the West Bank would be the bulk of the Palestinian state in terms of land and population. And if somebody points out to Trump that, you know, all of these new policies in the West Bank are making it completely physically impossible, legally impossible for the Palestinians to have a state, there goes your whole peace plan. And again, you know, it's a legacy play for him. So I think that in theory, he could say, oh, wait a minute, these guys are screwing up my plan, but it doesn't look like that's happening. Well, final point on that from me, Jasper, Jeremy Schaahel at Dropside is now reporting a senior Hamas official has told him that Hamas will not accede to the sweeping demands, as Jeremy

writes from Trump and Netanyahu that the Palestinian resistance disarm, nor will it submit to a total demilitarization of the Gaza Strip, end quote. What's your reaction here in that, Jasper, actually, in line of everything you just said. Yeah, I mean, listen, like, I'm not going to get into the details of the 20-point plan and, like, what is and is impossible. But I'll just say that, like, if I was a Palestinian living in Gaza right now, I would be very concerned about the idea of completely disarming, knowing what's been done to us, not just over the course of two years,

but also in theoretically in times of peace, you know, during the march of great return. Hundreds of people were killed. Thousands were maimed by Israeli snipers during a peaceful protest. And so, you know, the position that they want the Palestinians to be put in, you know, just at 100 percent complete mercy of this state and this military that has been massacring them for years and for decades, really. Yeah, I don't know why they would trust that that would then finally lead to them being able to live in peace. And so, look, I think that the peace plan was, you know, it was designed to fail, maybe not by Trump himself, but I think everybody in Israel knew it was going to fail. I mean, Nanyahu was saying one thing to the U.S.

press and another thing to the Israeli press about, don't worry, we're not going to actually, you know, we're not going to actually stop trying to destroy Hamas. We're not going to actually let them have a state. And so to me, this is just like the completely predictable outcome of what was always a sham peace process. And I don't know what's going to happen, but with guys like Kushner and, you know, Whitkoff and Trump and Tony Blair and then Yahoo in control, I mean, it looks pretty bleak. Yeah. I mean, that really is kind of my last question is, you said earlier that the plan for Goss and the plan for the West Bank have effectively converged with that plan being make people so miserable that they leave or that we just, you know, completely subjugate

them or if they, you know, step on a line, we kill them. I mean, do you think that plan is going to work? Well, it's working in the sense that they are getting more and more land, literally every day. I mean, yesterday or two days ago on Sunday, the Israeli government approved land registration drive in the West Bank and Area C, which means that they will now go through all of the land. in Area C, which is like 60% of the West Bank, forced Palestinians to prove that they own the land, which is impossible for many of them to do, because they've not been able to get titles since 1967,

and anything that they can't prove becomes theirs. And so, you know, that is just one of any number of policies that will never get any coverage in the Western press. That is just, you know, tightening Israel's grip on the West Bank. It will drive Palestinians off the land. So in one sense, yes, it's going to work. In another sense, I mean, I know lots of Palestinian people. I've spent a lot of time in the West Bank.

And a lot of them are just not going to leave. They're just not going to leave. And I think the same is probably true of a lot of people in Gaza. To be clear, I think a lot of people would leave. And I mean, I'm certainly not in a position to judge somebody for wanting to have a more peaceful life for them and their family. But a lot of people just will not. And so I don't see, certainly don't see a sort of neat resolution.

that, you know, Israel just gains control of everything anytime soon. I think it's going to be bloody and messy. And, you know, the only thing that could really stop Israel is a weapons ban from the U.S., in my opinion. Yeah. Jasper, thank you so much for your reporting and for spending some time with us this morning. We're very grateful. My pleasure. Thanks both. You want to know what my evenings actually look like?

Homework questions. Someone needs a permission slip signed. The dog's begging for a walk, someone's yelling for a snack. And somewhere in the middle of all that, I'm supposed to figure out dinner? That's why Hello Fresh has been a lifesaver. Fresh ingredients show up at my door, locally sourced when possible, simple step-by-step recipes that actually make sense. And no matter how chaotic the rest of my night gets, dinner is the one thing I don't have to stress

about. I'm just cooking a delicious meal my family will actually eat, and it takes around 30 minutes. And honestly, the real value is knowing that even on the messiest nights, dinner's handled. That's one less thing pulling at me. And that matters. Take some stress out of your evenings. Right now, get 11 free meals, free shipping, and free sides for life. Hurry, this offer won't last long.

Go to Hellofresh.ca code box. That's 11 free meals, free shipping, and free sides for life at Hellofresh.ca. Only with code box. They say abs are made in the kitchen. Cool. but who has time for three hours of meal prep and a fridge full of Tupperware? That's why I started using Factor. Factor delivers fresh, never frozen, ready-to-eat meals that are dietitian designed for balanced

science-backed nutrition. No prep, no cleanup. Just heat, eat, and move on. I've got gym days, work days, super long days, and Factor keeps me on track without slowing me down. It's real food, great flavor, and the kind of meals that actually support the work I'm putting in. We're talking chicken pesto, steak with veggies, roasted salmon, meals that feel like they were cooked for you, not by you. So, yeah, abs might be made in the kitchen. But thanks to Factor, I don't have to be in the kitchen.

Right now, get 11 meals, free shipping, and free sides for life. Hurry, this offer won't last long. Go to FactorMeals.ca and use code Fuel. That's 11 meals, free shipping, and free sides for life. But only with the code Fuel at Factormeals.ca. Factor. Canada's number one ready-to-eat meal delivery service. Canadian women are looking for more.

More out of themselves, their businesses, their elected leaders, and the world are out of them. And that's why we're thrilled to introduce the Honest Talk podcast. I'm Jennifer Stewart. And I'm Catherine Clark. And in this podcast, we interview Canada's most inspiring women. Entrepreneurs, artists, athletes, politicians, and newsmakers, all at different stages of their journey. So if you're looking to connect, then we hope you'll join us. Listen to the Honest Talk podcast on IHart Radio or wherever you listen to your podcasts.

We're happy to be joined right now by Will Kreeley, who is the legal director over at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Will, thanks for joining us. It's a pleasure. Thanks for having me. Of course. There's a lot of news on the free expression front to get to, actually starting with something that broke overnight. We can put the deadline tear sheet up on the screen. This is F3. Stephen Colbert is saying that CBS told him he could not interview. An interview he had already recorded with Democratic Senate primary candidate James Talleyco of Texas on the late show. Now, Talleyco posted the clip anyway, but people in the FCC camp are saying, actually,

it was because CBS would need to, or CBS should feel in some sense responsible to then, quote, unquote, platform, Jasmine Crockett for the equal time rule. So this is starting to really get traction as we're talking right now, Will. Could you give us your legal? perspective, having followed a lot of these cases, and particularly the FCC and Trump 2.0, what's going on here? Yeah, there's a lot to get to. First of all, I think it's of a piece with what we've seen from the FCC over the past year, a very aggressive, very expansive understanding of their legal authority to, frankly,

bully broadcasters into taking political lines that the FCC would like them to take. I think that there's an equal time rule that requires broadcasters generally to provide equal time on what are called bona fide news broadcast news programs to candidates running for the same office. For a long time, the FCC has understood this to mean really news broadcasts, not things like Saturday Night Live or other kind of comedy talk shows. But recently, over the past year and a half, we've seen a push to expand the equal time. rule to things like Saturday Live. We had Kamala Harris when she was running appear on Saturday Live and NBC then offered Donald Trump time on a NASCAR broadcast. A couple points here, though, the candidate has to request that equal time. Well, I'm not clear that that's happened here. And between what happened last week with the View and FCC Commissioner Brennan Carr pushing for

the View to provide equal time, it seems like this is of a piece with that. Again, it's just part of a very aggressive, very expansive understanding of the FCC's authority. And I think it should make all of us a little bit nervous. The FCC does not have the power to be the nation's editor-in-chief or the nation's censor-in-chief, but that's what they're increasingly acting like. I think the piece about the view is really important for people to understand. And for those who don't know, the FCC launched a probe last week into ABC's The View after an interview with James Tallerigo. And so, you know, part of the reason why they launch these probes or threaten these lawsuits is not just about that one media outlet or media property. It's so that other places like CBS and like Stephen

Colbert and the executives there say, oh, maybe this is too hot to touch. We are going to self-censor without even the FCC potentially even getting involved here because we see what happened over there on the view. That's exactly right. It's designed to send a message to, if you will, chill expression on our airwaves. You know, I am old enough to remember two years ago when Brennan Carr said it's not the job of the FCC to be intruding itself, making political decisions for our nation's broadcasters. But that Brennan Carr is long gone. And what we have now is something else. We have a FCC that's willing to push its authority to make broadcasters think twice about the airs that they view on their show. I just want to note that all this is wildly

unsuccessful. I logged on to the Stephen Colbert YouTube channel just before hopping on here, and it has something like 650,000 views overnight. They should ask Barbara Streisand how well it goes when you try and shut people up. Yeah, that's such a great point.

Last thought on this before we get to Bondi, Will, is, you know, I've interviewed Brendan Carr before, and I think one point he makes a persuasive case on is the underlying law here that does actually say broadcasters who are acting, or broadcasters have a duty to act in the public interest, and that's where all of this stems from.

He says, you know, and this is obviously, I don't want to say tongue in cheek, but because he would say it's totally sincere. He says he has the duty responsibility to enforce that. He's not making the rules. He's just enforcing them. But he has, you know, so before, it might be time to think whether or not that's just completely outdated. Is it, do you think, well, that's a fair case that even having this rule on the books seems like it's already putting the government in. in a precarious position? Absolutely, I do. And even if we take Chairman Carr, this word as to just calling balls and strikes per his existing legal authority, again, I want to make two points. First of all, that's different than what he said as commissioner when he said that, you know,

the FCC should and has to, per law, abide by its First Amendment responsibilities before any federal statutory authority. And second of all, Fire just submitted a comment just last year, arguing that the FCC should really go back and delete a number of its content-based regulations. They're outdated. They provide the opportunity for political mischief like we've seen in the past year with leveraging political messaging for merger approval. And they really reflect an era where we had scarcity, right? We had only a couple broadcasters in town. You know, I'm old enough to remember seeing just what I had on the three major networks in Fox. And those days are long gone. As I'm referenced, right, you can go to YouTube and, you know, see whatever political candidate you want as much as you want.

Those rules no longer make sense. And they provide the federal government with a cudgel to swing at folks they don't like. Right. Because we don't see this uniformly enforced. This happens in certain instances, you know, with candidates that they don't want to get a higher profile with certain commentary that they then pull out the hammer that they can wield here. All right, let's talk about this lawsuit that you, that your organization fire has filed. Let's let's. put F1 up on the screen. I think this is really significant. Fire sues Bondi and Noem for censoring Facebook group and app reporting ICE activity. So in this release, you say the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is suing Attorney General Pam Bondi and Secretary of Homeland Security,

Christy Noem on behalf of Kay Rosado and Mark Hodges, who respectively created a Facebook group and an app that hosted video footage of ICE operations to inform the public and hold our government accountable. Talk to us about what happened here and what you are alleging the government did to pressure these tech companies to censor these accounts. Sure thing. Well, Rosado had a Facebook group that allowed community members to report to each other on what was happening when ICE surged in Chicago. The idea was to let neighbors talk to each other about what they were seeing. So, you know, not just to quote-unquote evade ICE, but also just to give a heads up. You know, maybe maybe you your commute is going to be crazy.

Or maybe, you know, you don't want your kids walking past masked armed federal agents. You know, all kinds of reasons that you might want to be aware of what ICE is doing. And I should note right at the outset that is fully protected by the First Amendment. You have the right to comment on law enforcement movements. You've got the right to record police, including ICE. Those are public servants. They work for us. You have the First Amendment right to criticize them.

You have the First Amendment right to protest. You have the First Amendment right to record. I just want to be very clear. A lot of debate on Twitter about those points. A lot of Twitter lawyers telling me that that's actually impeding law enforcement. No, it's not. Can you break that down, actually? Well, like, what is the legal background of the definition of impede in that context?

Right, right. If I'm impeding somebody, I'm going in and obstructing them. Usually there's some kind of physical aspect. If I'm recording them across the street, I'm not impeding law enforcement operations. There's a Supreme Court case called Hill v. City of Houston, where a man is watching a Houston police department officer arresting another man. And he says something like, why don't you pick on someone your own size? And then he gets arrested for obstructing and interfering with that arrest. The court says, no, this is the difference between the United States and a police state.

We have the right to comment and criticize law enforcement, even while they're in the process of administering an arrest. In other words, kind of impede means what it says it means, right? It's more than just words. It's more than just recording. If a law enforcement officer tells you to back up, should probably back up. But if you're recording or certainly if you're on a Facebook group talking about what ICE is doing, that's fully protected by the First Amendment. We're not talking about some kind of secret police state yet. And that's what we're fighting to prevent. There was also some reporting I wanted to get your reaction to in the New York Times. We can put F2 up on the screen about how often the government is pressuring social media

companies, not only to take down content, but to reveal the identities of some of the people are trying to remain anonymous, for understandable reasons, frankly, behind accounts that are posting anti-ice content. The part of this reads, the Department of Homeland Security is expanding its efforts to identify Americans who oppose ICE by sending tech companies legal requests for the names, email addresses, telephone numbers, and other identifying data behind social media accounts that track or criticize the agency. One of the things that we have really appreciated here about fire is that you have stood for free speech regardless of partisanship. So under the Biden administration where there

abuses, you all were right there. And now under the Trump administration with extraordinary abuses, you continue to be on the side of the First Amendment. Can you put this in context in terms of what is happening here, how extensive it is, and what sort of a threat to free speech this ultimately represents. Yeah, this feels like a full court press from the administration to go after anybody who dares criticized, report upon, track what's happening with ICE in the Department of Homeland Security. So in our lawsuit, we're pushing back against pressure brought by the Attorney General and Secretary Nome on Facebook and Apple to remove the apps and the Facebook groups that report on

ICE. That's unconstitutional. That's jawboning. As you say, we've posed it under the Biden administration, and we're going to be. sure as hell oppose it here when it's being used by the Trump administration. It's a kind of indirect coercive censorship, trying to put the screws on a private actor to remove speech that's protected, but that the administration doesn't like. And here with this latest reporting from the New York Times and also a couple weeks before from the Washington Post, we're again seeing

this very aggressive, very expansive understanding of what constitutes some kind of criminal activity or some kind of suspicious activity that the federal government can track. So they're issuing these administrative subpoenas to social media companies and asking them to provide all the details about those users. And really what I think anybody can see just from a common sense standpoint is the intention is to chill speech. They want you to think twice before you say, you know, to hell with ice on social media because you don't want to get that knock on the door. That's not a free society. That's not the United States of America that we love. And I don't care what administration is doing that. That should outrage everybody. In this country, we have a right

to criticize police without worrying that you're going to get some knock on the door, as folks have been getting, because your social media company turned over all your information to the feds. I mean, what the hell are we even talking about? This is crazy. Yeah, and the broader question of the anti-ice activism, the legal, I'm genuinely curious, well, for the legal perspective on publicly available information. You know, if you've people following ICE agents in public and then communicating, coordinating in a signal group, saying, they're here, they're there, or these license plates are in the public domain, so using them for one reason or the other. Is there any legal standard that coordination constitutes it impeding

or obstructing? Because that's the argument that gets made. But it just, it seems like there aren't a lot of, there maybe isn't a lot of precedent on what that actually is or what it could be, but you'll probably know the existing precedent will. So explain the question. the question because it's an important one, right? There is speech integral to criminal conduct. If you are, you know, coordinating a bank robbery and then you go ahead and, you know, you try and execute the plan, at that point, the coordination, you know, is part of the eventual criminality. But the really important threshold is that there has to be that criminality, just talking with each other about where ICE is or where your next protest is going to be. That's all protected. You have to have the step from

just protected protests and protected speech as some kind of criminal activity. And that's a a high bar, and it should be a high bar in our free society. And that's not what I'm not seeing here. The federal government is pushing a very broad interpretation of doxing. Doxing is not a legal term of art. There's no crime against doxing. Just as you say, if the information is in the public, if law enforcement is walking around in public, you can report on them. You can, you know, call up your friend and text them on signal, whatever, and say, hey, they're over here. That's protected activity. If you say, hey, they're over here, let's jump them. Okay, now we're talking with something else. But we haven't seen any evidence of that. And you've got to be really wary of

the government blurring the lines between just talking about somebody and actually doing something. There's a big difference between speech and action. And we need to keep that secressing. Well, I think the administration themselves are not very confident in their legal standing here because according to this New York Times piece, they say in September, they sent meta, these administrative subpoenas, which are just basically like pieces of paper that they're like, yeah, we think we should be able to do this to identify the people behind Instagram accounts, that posted about ice raids in California, according to ACLU,

the subpoenas were challenged in court. DHS withdrew the request for information before a judge could rule. And I think there's another instance where they document the same tactic where when there's pushback and they say, you can't do this, we're going to court.

They're like, never mind, we're good because they don't feel that they are on solid legal ground here and they don't want an actual judge's ruling because now they can live in this sort of amorphous, like, well, we think we have this power. But if you get an actual legal decision, then you can no longer live in that state of ambiguity. And, you know, you have to decide whether you're going to listen to the

courts or whether you're going to flagrantly violate their orders, which, of course, they've done thousands of times as well. That's exactly right. You know, they seem like habitual line steppers. You know, you've got to push back a little bit and then, you know, maybe we'll get some space to operate. Let me plug right now, if any of your viewers are dealing with one of these administrative subpoenas or think you might be, please get in touch with us at fire. org we'd love to hear from you because just as you say, the only way to really win here is to fight back. You have a first man right, but it doesn't mean much if you don't fight to exercise it. That's why we're so proud of our brave plaintiffs in our ice cases and our lawsuit against

Nome and Bondi. It takes a lot of guts to stand up and fight, and that's what we're here to help you do. Yeah, and that's why we're, you know, so grateful for the work that you guys do because a lot of people out there on their own as individuals would have, would be, you know, it would be terrifying to go up against the federal government. I'm sure it's still terrifying to go up against the federal government. but at least they have some great allies and people like yourself. Will, thank you so much for joining us today.

We're really grateful for your time. Yeah, thank you. It's been my pleasure. Thank you both. All right, guys, that does it for us. Make sure to check out Sager's episode with Andrew Schultz. I believe that will come out tomorrow. And Emily and Ryan will be in for the show previously known as Counterpoints tomorrow.

Oh, is it not a bro show? Oh, I don't know. We should check and see if it's a bro show. Okay. I'll check and see. It doesn't matter for you. Mystery show. Yeah, mystery shows.

You know, little packages the kids get in the inboxes. You won't know until you unbox the episode. Remember the candy, like the Wonderball? It was like, what's in the Wonderball? No, I know. But that sounds fun. This might be a younger millennial thing. You're an elder millennial.

My daughter's very into these, like, unboxing and the mystery, like, you know, stuffy plushies that are inside the boxes or whatever. So that's where my brain is. Oh, so this is the version of that. Yes. I love it. All right. In any case, someone will see you here tomorrow. And have a great day.

See, everyone. 1969 Malcolm and Martin are gone America is in crisis and at a Morehouse college the students make their move These students including a young Samuel L. Jackson locked up the members of the board of trustees

including Martin Luther King's senior It's the true story of protests and rebellion in black American history that you'll never forget. I'm Hans Charles. I'm in a lick Lamoma. Listen to the A building on the IHeart Radio app Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

I'm Bowen Yang. And I'm Matt Rogers. During this season of the Two Guys Five Rings podcast, in the lead-up to the Milan Quartina-26 Winter Olympic Games, we've been joined by some of our friends. Hi, Boen, hi, Matt, hey, Elmo. Hey, Matt, hey, Bowen. Hi, Cookie. Hi. Now, the Winter Olympic Games are underway, and we are in Italy to give you experiences

from our hearts to your ears. Listen to Two Guys Five Rings on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Talking to your kids about the dangers of vaping can be hard. Getting them to listen to hot gossip is easy. So here's some drama you could share with your kid. Dude, did you hear about Cassie and Jake? No, but did you hear that vaping can cause irreversible lung damage and nicotine effects brain development? No, uh.

You don't need to gossip if you want to have an open conversation about vaping. So if you want to get tips on when and how to talk to your kids, visit talk about vaping.org. Brought to you by the American Lung Association and the Ad Council. This is an IHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.